The future of Ottawa's Transit

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Brown has made pro-infrastructure spending part of his pitch. He spends a lot of time criticizing the Liberals for not having built GO RER; while that does show ignorance in that it ignores the fact that projects have lead times in design and planning, it does show commitment to transit.

While I can see a future government not making new promises, I have a hard time seeing a post-2018 government scrapping things already promised.

I predict it will go like this. There will be shock "surprise" at how bad the books are. At that point they will need to make drastic cuts to bring things into balance and also pay for their tax cuts which will be nccessary to stimulate the weak economy.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Brown has made pro-infrastructure spending part of his pitch. He spends a lot of time criticizing the Liberals for not having built GO RER; while that does show ignorance in that it ignores the fact that projects have lead times in design and planning, it does show commitment to transit.

While I can see a future government not making new promises, I have a hard time seeing a post-2018 government scrapping things already promised.

I would be more worried about a municipal backlash. Cost estimates are certain to rise by the time the bids come in and municipalities are usually stuck holding the bag when costs go up. When council gets told what kind of a tax increase is necessary to cover the borrowing costs on 1.something billion there may be some cold feet in the room.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Capital Shaun

I've known about the protected area for some time but come on, just build the station. If it's not done with Phase 2 it'll take 10, 20, or even 30 years more before someone else gets to it. Seems like a no-brainer to build a station there but politicians and planners are in their own world.

It is like everything not included in the original project, it will either be cancelled, forgotten or will take decades to be built. This station is not — enough to be given priority. Cyrville is much less useful station but is getting built because it existed before. This is why the airport authority is so anxious to be included now. Even though it is not very useful, they realize that money may be available now, that may not be available in years to come. And the airport station has that — appeal no matter how few will actually use it.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I would be more worried about a municipal backlash. Cost estimates are certain to rise by the time the bids come in and municipalities are usually stuck holding the bag when costs go up. When council gets told what kind of a tax increase is necessary to cover the borrowing costs on 1.something billion there may be some cold feet in the room.

Just like the Confederation Line Phase 1, when costs kept escalating, they went searching for ways to save.

Even without a provincial austerity government, Ottawa city council will likely look for cuts once we have a better feel on how enormous the actual cost will be. I would bet that the Highway 174 rebuild is underestimated, which brings me back to the wisdom of choosing that route instead of a more greenfield route in South Orleans, which is where Orleans commercial activity has moved and future growth potential is greatest.

But this is all about politics and not about transit planning that will generate the greatest transit ridership growth in the future.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I predict it will go like this. There will be shock "surprise" at how bad the books are. At that point they will need to make drastic cuts to bring things into balance and also pay for their tax cuts which will be nccessary to stimulate the weak economy.

Except the provincial budget will be balanced by 2018 (cooking books is way harder now what will all the oversight agencies we have now--witness the latest spat over pension surpluses, for example) and the provincial economy is doing well. There's really no need for "drastic cuts" and seeing as how the public hate cuts non government will ever make them unless they have to.

[Buggys]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Except the provincial budget will be balanced by 2018 (cooking books is way harder now what will all the oversight agencies we have now--witness the latest spat over pension surpluses, for example) and the provincial economy is doing well. There's really no need for "drastic cuts" and seeing as how the public hate cuts non government will ever make them unless they have to.

Why do you think that the Ontario economy is doing well? Hydro fees (especially in the rural areas near Toronto) have shot up the roof.

[Aylmer]

What do Hydro rates have to do with the economy?

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

What do Hydro rates have to do with the economy?

A lot of manufacturers are packing up because hydro is cheaper elsewhere. See: Quebec attracting data centres

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Except the provincial budget will be balanced by 2018 (cooking books is way harder now what will all the oversight agencies we have now--witness the latest spat over pension surpluses, for example) and the provincial economy is doing well. There's really no need for "drastic cuts" and seeing as how the public hate cuts non government will ever make them unless they have to.

Growth projections for Ontario aren't terrible but aren't particularly good either.

http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/ont.pdf

Certainly the big risk is that borrowing costs will go up, at which point the 200,000,000,000 wynne/mcguinty added to the provincial debt will lead to huge budget cuts.

http://www.fao-on.org/en/Blog/Publications/Ont_Prov_Debt

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Athens

A lot of manufacturers are packing up because hydro is cheaper elsewhere. See: Quebec attracting data centres

Modern data centres create very few jobs for their economic value as their operations are largely automated.

Provincial GDP grew by 2.5% in 2016 and about 100,000 jobs created in the last 12 months, over two-thirds of them full time. High-tech and advanced manufacturing are the key drivers of this, which is significant as average salaries are fairly high in these sectors.

There is a strong geographic inequity here, as the GTA & Ottawa grow while the rest of the province stagnates or declines, and while this presents a whole host of various issues, from a provincial revenue perspective it's irrelevant.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

[url]Certainly the big risk is that borrowing costs will go up, at which point the 200,000,000,000 wynne/mcguinty added to the provincial debt will lead to huge budget cuts.

http://www.fao-on.org/en/Blog/Publications/Ont_Prov_Debt

This is always a perennial risk, however as public debt is held in fixed rate bonds with term lengths in the decades, any increase in interest rates will take a long time to fully reflect itself in debt service costs. Plus in the market for sovereign debt bonds interest rates continue to decline (it's actually reached very close to zero in many European countries) even as interest rates generally cease their slide. The debt-to-GDP ratio, which is a key measurement in this respect, is projected to decline in the next 5 years.. in fact, it's already peaked last year.

The austerity age is over.

[swimmer_spe]

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/3-6b-rail-package-includes-lrt-to-moodie-drive

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...r-highways-because-we-cant-resist-a-deal

"When Mayor Jim Watson and city staff showed off the latest news on the next stage of their light-rail plans Friday morning, the presentation included a revelation that the city intends to rebuild Highway 174 east of Montreal Road to turn dedicated bus lanes into car lanes. It’ll “bundle” the job with laying the tracks and building the stations that will extend light-rail service from Blair station to Trim Road by 2022.

“Can it undercut ridership? Yeah, it can,” said John Manconi, the city’s general manager of transit and transportation, after the presentation. “It can attract people who say, hey, it’s flowing better, so I’ll take my car.” "

Reading both of these, I want to slap people.

Widening a highway won't remove riders. If it did, GO Trainsit and the TTC would be at a all time low. They have been building lots of highway extensions and widenings.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/3-6b-rail-package-includes-lrt-to-moodie-drive

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...r-highways-because-we-cant-resist-a-deal

"When Mayor Jim Watson and city staff showed off the latest news on the next stage of their light-rail plans Friday morning, the presentation included a revelation that the city intends to rebuild Highway 174 east of Montreal Road to turn dedicated bus lanes into car lanes. It’ll “bundle” the job with laying the tracks and building the stations that will extend light-rail service from Blair station to Trim Road by 2022.

“Can it undercut ridership? Yeah, it can,” said John Manconi, the city’s general manager of transit and transportation, after the presentation. “It can attract people who say, hey, it’s flowing better, so I’ll take my car.” "

Reading both of these, I want to slap people.

Widening a highway won't remove riders. If it did, GO Trainsit and the TTC would be at a all time low. They have been building lots of highway extensions and widenings.

Of course it does! Most users will take the shortest route. If the highways are packed, people turn to transit cause it's shorter. That's transit planning 101.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Of course it does! Most users will take the shortest route. If the highways are packed, people turn to transit cause it's shorter. That's transit planning 101.

Then why do people take GO trains from far places where the highway is not packed?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Then why do people take GO trains from far places where the highway is not packed?

Where do GO trains go where the highway is not packed?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Where do GO trains go where the highway is not packed?

For starters.... Barrie. Traffic heading south does not usually pick up til Newmarket, some 40km away. There is talks of making the whole GO train system 15 minute headway daily.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

For starters.... Barrie. Traffic heading south does not usually pick up til Newmarket, some 40km away. There is talks of making the whole GO train system 15 minute headway daily.

Does anybody take the GO train from Barrie to Newmarket? I am pretty sure most taking the GO train from Barrie are avoiding traffic in the GTA.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Does anybody take the GO train from Barrie to Newmarket? I am pretty sure most taking the GO train from Barrie are avoiding traffic in the GTA.

Wait, wha? Say it ain't so. Someone looking further down their commute takes transit to avoid part of it? No, that can't be....

They could double the lanes now and people in the Ottawa area would do the same thing. They would look at the whole commute including traffic, parking and costs, and if it is worth it, they would switch to the O. Otherwise, they will drive. No different than any city.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Just Bank, Rideau and a small segments of Beechwood and Elgin.

Bronson: Many trip pairs have the choice of the Bronson bus (whatever number it has now), or crossing buses at Somerset, Gladstone, or for now the diverted Transitway.

Somerset: As above, only in reverse, Bronson or Preston.

Preston, Holland, Parkdale, Montreal, Gladstone: Etc., etc.: For example, on portions of Montreal Road, the 5, 14, or 18 are also viable alternatives for many trip-pairs.

Main: 5 + 16 = 2.

St Patrick, Scott (normally) and Laurier are mostly served by a single route (or no routes), as are the local routes in neighbourhoods such as Sandy Hill, Carlington, Vanier, Overbrook, OOS, OOE, the Glebe.

Every single one of those neighbourhoods has multiple routes serving them, offering multiple central neighbourhood trip-pairings.

That's what is being destroyed in the rush to truncate and "rationalize" downtown routes and stops. It is eliminating the flexibility people used to have with their time and itineraries. Cf. the dumbfuqri that the councillors inflicted on Beechwood last year, which broke up connections at Crichton, and transfers to/from the 1 on Beechwood.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I don't see these kind of core to core trips being very common. There is very little employment in either location. The cost of running such a service is prohibitive.

These core-to-core trips are one of the primary functions of local transit within the city centre.

Also, not everyone works.

Not everyone who works uses transit to travel to and from work.

Transit should serve as wide a variety of daily functions for as wide a cross-section of the public as possible. The LRT fixation, and the idiotic idea that is infesting Ottawa's transit planning that the purpose of local buses, espeically in the core (but also in the suburbs) should only be to get people to and from the LRT portion of their trip, needs to be killed with fire. Instead, it's getting fertilized with bullcrap.