OC Transpo

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The taxpayer and pensioner are the same person. It's just a shell game here. CDPQ provides the capital to build. And in exchange the government provides them a guaranteed, above-market return (with a per rider subsidy and minimum revenue guarantees). The government is avoiding a large one time bill and instead opting to pay out even more over time.

Yes though the 8% guarantee isn't as generous in 2024 as it was when signed. It is a good model as you get some of the pros of PPP without the leakage to the private sector. They seem to have run it as a private partner would which make sense as they are a huge investor. So overall win-win no? CPP could do well to make similar investments instead of shopping malls in China that are probably going to get expropriated at some point anyway.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes though the 8% guarantee isn't as generous in 2024 as it was when signed. It is a good model as you get some of the pros of PPP without the leakage to the private sector. They seem to have run it as a private partner would which make sense as they are a huge investor. So overall win-win no? CPP could do well to make similar investments instead of shopping malls in China that are probably going to get expropriated at some point anyway.

The Liberals wouldn't sell the airports to the pension plan. Zero chance they get the kind of deals that CDPQ got.

I'm not worried about expropriation. That's just FUD. Not sure that's legally easy to do. They have fiduciary duties that judges won't just overlook. Aside from political blowback.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

He is right to do that. Diminishing returns in Ottawa don't justify any further rail investment. Maybe some BRT. But that's it. Show me a single rail idea in Ottawa that dollar for dollar will have a better BCR than the GTA. I think you'd be hard-pressed to do that. Should they help us with some funding to fix current issues? Sure. Spending on Stage 3. Not justifiable beyond any of sort of local bias.

This doesn't hold for Stage 3 where we want to pay 0%.

And if you want to play the comparison game, what other city of this size has this small a bus fleet? Mississauga has just under 800k and fields a bus fleet of over 600 buses. They are mostly growing investment in their feeder services. Ottawa is going the other direction. Why waste capital on a city that won't invest in the feeder services to actually make that rail investment useful?

How does Hamilton factor into this rationale? Didn't they refuse to pay a dime for the proposed LRT and even wanted guarantees from the province that they wouldn't have to pay for any cost overruns? I remember them being staunchly opposed to committing any funds whatsoever. And despite that reluctance to invest, the province and feds agreed to jointly fund the project to the tune of $1.7B each; Hamilton taxpayers are paying $0.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ottawa saw the Hamilton deal and thought, "why not us?", especially since the City already forked over around $3B for Stages 1 and 2.

Either way, I doubt Stage 3 gets funded in its current form, but I'm cautiously optimistic a scaled back version with extensions to Terry Fox and Fallowfield gets funded in the not-too-distant future.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

How does Hamilton factor into this rationale? Didn't they refuse to pay a dime for the proposed LRT and even wanted guarantees from the province that they wouldn't have to pay for any cost overruns? I remember them being staunchly opposed to committing any funds whatsoever. And despite that reluctance to invest, the province and feds agreed to jointly fund the project to the tune of $1.7B each; Hamilton taxpayers are paying $0.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ottawa saw the Hamilton deal and thought, "why not us?", especially since the City already forked over around $3B for Stages 1 and 2.

Ottawa peeps really struggle with this idea. But the GTA/GGH is always going to be treated differently. In no small part, that is because the demand for transit doesn't scale linearly with population growth. It's exponential, since modal share itself rises as population grows. A city that is 10x larger won't have 10x the ridership. It might have 20x or 30x the ridership.

Next, for all the politicking, Hamilton isn't a city that is all by itself. It's part of a wider region and needs to be viewed in that context. Ford eventually came around to this understanding. They can't build a multi-billion dollar regional rail network and then not have the local buses and trams that feed it.

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Either way, I doubt Stage 3 gets funded in its current form, but I'm cautiously optimistic a scaled back version with extensions to Terry Fox and Fallowfield gets funded in the not-too-distant future.

I really hope those get funded too. But it's really hard to make a business case for them. All you save is a few minutes and kms vs the bus. I can't see it being funded anytime soon. But happy to be proven wrong.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

How does Hamilton factor into this rationale? Didn't they refuse to pay a dime for the proposed LRT and even wanted guarantees from the province that they wouldn't have to pay for any cost overruns? I remember them being staunchly opposed to committing any funds whatsoever. And despite that reluctance to invest, the province and feds agreed to jointly fund the project to the tune of $1.7B each; Hamilton taxpayers are paying $0.

.

That was also the deal Toronto got for several of its lines. McGuinty screwed over Ottawa badly.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That was also the deal Toronto got for several of its lines. McGuinty screwed over Ottawa badly.

I hate how people have memory-holed how McGuinty, and his Ottawa cabinet minister of the time whose name escapes me, screwed over their own city as part of their suburban pander.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That was also the deal Toronto got for several of its lines. McGuinty screwed over Ottawa badly.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I hate how people have memory-holed how McGuinty, and his Ottawa cabinet minister of the time whose name escapes me, screwed over their own city as part of their suburban pander.

Whatever the case in the past, it's not going to work as justification for getting billions more in the future. Especially, if we're doing a terrible job with the funds given.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

He is right to do that. Diminishing returns in Ottawa don't justify any further rail investment. Maybe some BRT. But that's it. Show me a single rail idea in Ottawa that dollar for dollar will have a better BCR than the GTA. I think you'd be hard-pressed to do that. Should they help us with some funding to fix current issues? Sure. Spending on Stage 3. Not justifiable beyond any of sort of local bias.

I agree Stage 3's a no-go. Give us funds for the BRTs. Obviously we won't get the same as the GTA, but we should get something close to proportional. At the moment, we're getting a big fat zero from Ford on transit. I don't know what's so controversial with me and others being frustrated we've gotten no new money from Queen's Park since Stage 2 six+ years ago.

If you want a TO-OT rail line battle, I give you Sheppard vs. Trillium. Sheppard has a higher ridership, but Trillium gave us WAY more bang for our buck. Toronto also has cathedrals of transit like Downsview and Bassarion that have very little ridership compared to our relatively cramped Downtown stations. There are plenty of areas where smaller stations, or trenched/elevated would have worked in Toronto, but they instead went underground. At least with the Ontario Line, there's a better balance.

This doesn't hold for Stage 3 where we want to pay 0%.

After paying around 50% for Stage 1 and 2, we're allowed to ask for 100% on the next expansions, not just to compensate the last two phases, but because most other municipalities have gotten that deal over the last decade+.

And if you want to play the comparison game, what other city of this size has this small a bus fleet? Mississauga has just under 800k and fields a bus fleet of over 600 buses. They are mostly growing investment in their feeder services. Ottawa is going the other direction. Why waste capital on a city that won't invest in the feeder services to actually make that rail investment useful?

Mississauga is getting more support than Ottawa, so they have those extra funds to prop-up bus service.

The taxpayer and pensioner are the same person. It's just a shell game here. CDPQ provides the capital to build. And in exchange the government provides them a guaranteed, above-market return (with a per rider subsidy and minimum revenue guarantees). The government is avoiding a large one time bill and instead opting to pay out even more over time.

It's a classic, politicians prefer saving now even if it costs more later when they are no longer in office, because it won't be there problem.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I hate how people have memory-holed how McGuinty, and his Ottawa cabinet minister of the time whose name escapes me, screwed over their own city as part of their suburban pander.

McGuinty screwed us over, for sure, but not as much as Ford. we at least got some funding on transit, amongst other things. At the end of the day, we didn't get the same deals as the GTA.

[lrt's friend]

Don't forget John Baird and Larry O'Brien's role in losing money for Ottawa transit. The Liberal-Conservative feuds over Ottawa transit lost many million for Ottawa taxpayers. Fault is on both sides. Larry O'Brien has since admitted that he was wrong on cancelling an approved project with a signed contract. Everything that has happened since then regarding financing is a consequence. I know how the majority here feel, but the funding formula is connected to previous decisions. I said it years ago, that we will never recover financially. Don't expect special treatment in the future because of past slights. We already know how Ford feels about botched Phase 1 and his reluctance to invest further.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I agree Stage 3's a no-go. Give us funds for the BRTs. Obviously we won't get the same as the GTA, but we should get something close to proportional. At the moment, we're getting a big fat zero from Ford on transit. I don't know what's so controversial with me and others being frustrated we've gotten no new money from Queen's Park since Stage 2 six+ years ago.

What new projects has the Ford government launched in the GTA? They have simply continued what has been on deck. The only real change came with the end of the dithering on GO Electrification. Other than that they have simply continued with what was on deck. With that in mind, and with major transit and highway expansion already underway, over the last few years, why is there any surprise that they haven't committed to new projects in Ottawa? The city already has plenty on its plate. Now, if they don't commit to the Carling BRT before the next election, I'd say you have a valid grievance.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

If you want a TO-OT rail line battle, I give you Sheppard vs. Trillium. Sheppard has a higher ridership, but Trillium gave us WAY more bang for our buck. Toronto also has cathedrals of transit like Downsview and Bassarion that have very little ridership compared to our relatively cramped Downtown stations. There are plenty of areas where smaller stations, or trenched/elevated would have worked in Toronto, but they instead went underground. At least with the Ontario Line, there's a better balance.

These are just silly gripes. And you know it. Sheppard was gimped in ridership because it never reached the intended trip generator that was to anchor the line. And complaining about the size of stations? Toronto taxpayers pay for that and their large stations all come with large bus terminals attached.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

After paying around 50% for Stage 1 and 2, we're allowed to ask for 100% on the next expansions, not just to compensate the last two phases, but because most other municipalities have gotten that deal over the last decade+.

We can ask for whatever we want. But if our ask doesn't make for a reasonable value proposition for the province, they aren't going to support it. We aren't the only ones in this situation either. KWC and London aren't getting 100% of their RT upgrades paid for either. So really, we can be adamant on 100% for Stage 3 or maybe find a way to pitch in enough to move the province to consider it, or at least parts of it.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Mississauga is getting more support than Ottawa, so they have those extra funds to prop-up bus service.

What more are they getting that we are not? The province may be paying for the Hurontario Line, but it's not anything in function or capability like the Confederation Line here. It's a glorified streetcar. It's not grade separated. They aren't running the same kind of feeder bus network to the Hurontario Line like we are. And it doesn't cover a huge chunk of the city. Mississauga contributed to and built their transitway (inspired by Ottawa) few years ago and has built up and is maintaining a huge bus fleet. When they eventually ask for a GO Train diversion to Square One, they are going to get it, precisely because they have built a massive bus terminal at Square One and they can argue on ridership. What ridership gains do our Stage 3 plans offer?

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It's a classic, politicians prefer saving now even if it costs more later when they are no longer in office, because it won't be there problem.

Correct. Which is why it's very deceptive to say that the taxpayer or government isn't paying for the REM. They are. It's far less transparent or efficient.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

McGuinty screwed us over, for sure, but not as much as Ford. we at least got some funding on transit, amongst other things. At the end of the day, we didn't get the same deals as the GTA.

And we never will. Aside from politics itself, I gave you the ridership rationale on why that's case. We can be exceptionally bitter about this or be smart about pitching ideas which will win us funding. BRTs should be pushed now. And Stage 3 needs to be broken up into smaller pieces (extensions to just Terry Fox and Fallowfield) both to get the sticker shock down and to make whatever contribution we can afford more attractive.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

What new projects has the Ford government launched in the GTA?

Ontario Line, which is a pretty big one.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ottawa peeps really struggle with this idea. But the GTA/GGH is always going to be treated differently. In no small part, that is because the demand for transit doesn't scale linearly with population growth. It's exponential, since modal share itself rises as population grows. A city that is 10x larger won't have 10x the ridership. It might have 20x or 30x the ridership.

Yes, this is true in Canada, not so much in the US. The average Ottawan may not understand it, but I think most on this sub do.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Next, for all the politicking, Hamilton isn't a city that is all by itself. It's part of a wider region and needs to be viewed in that context. Ford eventually came around to this understanding. They can't build a multi-billion dollar regional rail network and then not have the local buses and trams that feed it.

I agree in principle with your last sentence, but I'm not convinced that Hamilton needed a $3.4B LRT to achieve this, nor that the BCR for that project was nearly as high as the BCRs for Stages 1 and 2 in Ottawa.

I took a peak at the 2015 business case summary for the Hamilton project, and the projected 2031 AM peak load wasn't even 2000. A BRT would've easily served that demand at a fraction of the cost while still meeting the goal of adequately feeding the Lakeshore West GO line.

For comparison, the projected 2031 AM peak load at Moodie station alone is 4,226, while Algonquin is projected at 4,881. These projections would be admittedly lower if they were done post-covid, but the same goes for Hamilton.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I really hope those get funded too. But it's really hard to make a business case for them. All you save is a few minutes and kms vs the bus. I can't see it being funded anytime soon. But happy to be proven wrong.

The biggest benefits I can see is with these extensions is that they would save a lot of buses from having to make long trips across the greenbelt, thereby freeing them up for other trips, and they would eliminate an extra transfer for many riders, which may incentivize greater transit use. I'm not sure if those benefits would be enough to justify the costs, but I think it warrants consideration, especially given the low bar for Hamilton's project getting 100% funding from upper tiers of government.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by TransitZilla

Ontario Line, which is a pretty big one.

The planning for that and even the budgeting had already started under the last government. They spent $150M on design starting in 2016. And even the TPAP started months before the election in 2018. Ford actually made that situation worse by stopping ongoing work, and then making a whole bunch of changes. If Ford wasn't elected, shovels would have been in the ground in 2020.

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Yes, this is true in Canada, not so much in the US. The average Ottawan may not understand it, but I think most on this sub do.

Given the complaints we're seeing here, I'm not sure people actually understand this. There's this constant appeal to proportionality. But transit demand is not proportional at all. And in Ottawa's case, given the workforce, even worse. Lower population growth only makes the investment case that much worse too.

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I agree in principle with your last sentence, but I'm not convinced that Hamilton needed a $3.4B LRT to achieve this, nor that the BCR for that project was nearly as high as the BCRs for Stages 1 and 2 in Ottawa.

I took a peak at the 2015 business case summary for the Hamilton project, and the projected 2031 AM peak load wasn't even 2000. A BRT would've easily served that demand at a fraction of the cost while still meeting the goal of adequately feeding the Lakeshore West GO line.

For comparison, the projected 2031 AM peak load at Moodie station alone is 4,226, while Algonquin is projected at 4,881. These projections would be admittedly lower if they were done post-covid, but the same goes for Hamilton.

Hamilton should have been a BRT. And I suspect if BEBs were more popular a few years ago that would have been more likely. In any event, Hamilton isn't up against Stage 1 and 2 in Ottawa. It's up against Stage 3. And on that front, my bet is that Hamilton would probably have a better BCR than Stage 3.

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

The biggest benefits I can see is with these extensions is that they would save a lot of buses from having to make long trips across the greenbelt, thereby freeing them up for other trips, and they would eliminate an extra transfer for many riders, which may incentivize greater transit use. I'm not sure if those benefits would be enough to justify the costs, but I think it warrants consideration, especially given the low bar for Hamilton's project getting 100% funding from upper tiers of government.

The thing is, those extra kms are covered fairly quickly. This isn't even Scarborough where moving the terminus of the SSE to McCowan/Sheppard saves something like 10 mins for every bus from north Scarborough because of traffic patterns in the area. Moodie to Eagleson is less than 4km on high speed bus lanes. The LRT might save a minute. Ultimately saving 4 km per bus route for a dozen routes is just not going to be worthwhile. From Fallowfield to Baseline, takes 11 mins today and that's with a few stops. It's 7 km. Arguably a better case, especially with growth in Barrhaven and possible HFR plans. But even here, a rail extension might save 4-5 mins. Not sure that's enough.

As for bus savings, they are just not going to be enough. Let's use some ridiculous numbers to illustrate. Let's say a bus leaves every 5 mins from Barrhaven for Baseline. Let's say service runs 20 hrs per day. And let's say each km costs a dollar to operate.

12 buses/hr x 20 hrs/day x 14 km/bus x $1/km x 365 days/yr = $1 226 400

You could 10x the cost per km and account for a century of bus service and it still wouldn't save enough to pay for the extension to Fallowfield.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Whatever the case in the past, it's not going to work as justification for getting billions more in the future. Especially, if we're doing a terrible job with the funds given.

Is our job any terribler than any other Ontario city's?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I took a peak at the 2015 business case summary for the Hamilton project, and the projected 2031 AM peak load wasn't even 2000. A BRT would've easily served that demand at a fraction of the cost while still meeting the goal of adequately feeding the Lakeshore West GO line.

BRT is, however, ultimately, still B.

Bs don't do anything to reshape a city the way rail transit - even a glorified streetcar - can.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Is our job any terribler than any other Ontario city's?

Only city to attempt a high capacity metro using trams.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Only city to attempt a high capacity metro using trams.

It isn't the type of train that is the problem, instead it was an untested new model and there is a problem with the interface between the rails and the wheels. You can still feel it, and when I used LRT on the LA Metro on similar curves, I did not experience the same amount of shaking and grinding. This model will be used in other Ontario cities soon. I am sure it will work well once all the kinks are worked out.

I would rather have tram-like vehicles on Line 2 as originally planned than diesel regional trains that have been selected. Tram-like trains would have been a better match to potential ridership. It is going to be interesting to see the performance of the Flirt trains moving off and on passing tracks so many times on every end to end trip. Then the acceleration and deacceleration of diesel trains is a negative in comparison to tram-like trains and why the trains selected were better suited for commuting longer distances with fewer stations.

So, I would argue that our Line 2 train selection is worse than our Line 1 selection especially now that rail ridership on Line 1 has fallen in half.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It isn't the type of train that is the problem, instead it was an untested new model and there is a problem with the interface between the rails and the wheels. You can still feel it, and when I used LRT on the LA Metro on similar curves, I did not experience the same amount of shaking and grinding. This model will be used in other Ontario cities soon. I am sure it will work well once all the kinks are worked out.

I would rather have tram-like vehicles on Line 2 as originally planned than diesel regional trains that have been selected. Tram-like trains would have been a better match to potential ridership. It is going to be interesting to see the performance of the Flirt trains moving off and on passing tracks so many times on every end to end trip. Then the acceleration and deacceleration of diesel trains is a negative in comparison to tram-like trains and why the trains selected were better suited for commuting longer distances with fewer stations.

So, I would argue that our Line 2 train selection is worse than our Line 1 selection especially now that rail ridership on Line 1 has fallen in half.

The LA tram lines aren’t under nearly as much stress from weather and ridership. The Santa Monica Line for example only gets 40k daily riders.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The LA tram lines aren’t under nearly as much stress from weather and ridership. The Santa Monica Line for example only gets 40k daily riders.

Hmmm. I don't get the connection. Low floor LRT works all over the world in cold climates. They have mostly replaced high floor LRT on new line construction. Higher ridership just means running longer trains, and/or more frequent trains. The Santa Monica trains (which I rode) are pretty long, but they only run every 15 minutes (or something like that). There is absolutely no reason that those trains can't run every 5 minutes if ridership required it.

It is true that more frequent trains increase the possibility of train breakdowns and line blockages, but that happens no matter the train technology.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Hmmm. I don't get the connection. Low floor LRT works all over the world in cold climates. They have mostly replaced high floor LRT on new line construction. Higher ridership just means running longer trains, and/or more frequent trains. The Santa Monica trains (which I rode) are pretty long, but they only run every 15 minutes (or something like that). There is absolutely no reason that those trains can't run every 5 minutes if ridership required it.

It is true that more frequent trains increase the possibility of train breakdowns and line blockages, but that happens no matter the train technology.

Trams elsewhere aren't run as fast, especially on tight bends. And other cities don't get the seasonal changes we do.