Weekly newsletter: August 6, 2024
Hi everyone!
Welcome back to reality. I hope you enjoyed your long weekend.
Every week I write the newsletter, I keep thinking “it’s okay, the longer ones are quite rare,” but then I look back and realise most of them are quite long.
I hope you enjoy them (or at least find them helpful/informative) as much as I enjoy writing them!
Changes to traffic signals
In the coming weeks, the traffic signals at Strandherd/Beatrice and Strandherd/Riocan will be changed to include protected lefts for traffic turning off Strandherd Drive.
In order to warrant a protected left signal at an intersection, all of the following criteria must be met/exceeded (an advance left requires the first three to be met/exceeded):
An average of two or more vehicles turning left per signal cycle
More than half the vehicles turning left wait through more than one cycle to complete their turn
There is enough capacity at the intersection for the traffic waiting to turn left
Number of reported collisions involving left-turning vehicles as a percentage of total collisions at the intersection and compared to the number of left-turn collisions at other intersections across the city
An advance left still permits vehicles to turn left during the main green cycle, while a protected left restricts all left-turning movements except during the turn cycle.
Both intersections exceeded all four criteria, particularly in the reported collision data, with 10 collisions involving left-turning vehicles at Strandherd/Beatrice and 19 at Riocan over the last few years (2020 and 2021 not counted).
At Strandherd/Beatrice, the new signals will also help residents south of Strandherd who have shared concerns about accessing their community.
Strandherd/Greenbank and Greenbank/Highbury Park are two other intersections highlighted by residents with a need for advance or protected left turn signals. Unfortunately, both intersections did not meet all the criteria for either measure.
At Strandherd/Greenbank, intersection modifications (eg. doubling up the left-turning lanes) will be needed to store the traffic waiting to turn left, while Greenbank/Highbury Park met acceptable levels of service.
However, I am aware the change to the Catholic high school boundaries for St. Mother Teresa and St. Joseph for the coming school year will bring additional left-turning traffic to Greenbank/Highbury Park. As such, staff will be re-evaluating that intersection in the autumn.
Transit funding
Cuts to service and increases to fares and the transit levy aren’t enough, but we know continuing both isn’t sustainable. Let’s get creative!
By now, you may be aware of the service cut coming to O-Train Line 1 coinciding with the autumn service change on August 26.
Service frequency on the line will be halved from a train every five minutes to a train every 10 minutes weekdays from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm and 6:30 pm to 9:30 pm. Peak period, late-evening, and weekend service frequencies and span of service remain unchanged.
Transit is facing an extraordinary circumstance that necessitated the service reduction.
A decade of underinvestment, poor decisions leading up to and since the LRT launch, a hesitant attitude to change and dynamism, and the lingering effects of the pandemic have led us to Ottawa’s transit death spiral.
Declining ridership leads to fare increases and service decreases, which leads to diminished service quality, which brings us back to declining ridership. The transit levy in our property taxes also hasn’t kept up with the increasing cost of operating OC Transpo.
I’m not perfect in all this, though—I voted to keep the transit levy increase capped with the property tax increase, because I don’t think taxpayers should be on the hook for what I believe to be an institutional problem, especially with so many other financial pressures you and I are facing in our daily lives.
For decades, the institutional reliance on the taxpayer and fare-paying customers as the primary sources of transit revenue has worked, especially with Ottawa’s stable commuter base.
There were gaps, but they were reliably covered by non-fare revenue like special products, advertising, rental agreements (I miss the Jamaican patties at Hurdman Station), and the gas tax.
But the world has changed. That change has arguably become a stable new reality since 2022, but we have not adapted, most evident in transit staff’s continued belief the provincial and federal governments will come through with top-up funding, which never materialised despite budgeting for it in the last two budgets.
To be fair, OC Transpo is not the only transit system in North America facing similar challenges—most large systems have not recovered to pre-pandemic ridership, but we certainly are unique in our laggard progress.
So, how do we get out of this transit funk?
First, we need to acknowledge (but not necessarily embrace) the reality of our transit situation. I would argue this has been done.
Whether or not it was the right decision, the LRT was planned to replace the central Transitway, so the service, resources, and funding were adjusted leading up to 2019 to account for that. Obviously, there were assumptions about the LRT's performance which were never realised, but that's how we got here.
The vehicles, operators, and funding needed to re-extend every route (even if it’s just the expresses) into the downtown would be prohibitively expensive and unsustainable, not to mention unattainable, even if the lead time to purchase buses and hire operators was not an issue.
Second, OC Transpo needs to adapt its services to our new reality—the reality that our core ridership is no longer the downtown 9-to-5 commute (admittedly, the federal government’s announcement of three days a week at the office threw a wrench in that).
The route realignment exercise, due to be deployed after Line 2’s launch, recognises that and focuses the service on travel within communities and to less traditional trip generators like universities, colleges, and other employment nodes (though it misses the mark for some employment areas, like the hospitals).
One can make the argument the realignment really was geared to Line 2, and we’re just marketing it as an overall shift, and they’d be partly correct. But as higher order transit, Line 2 will be a common denominator to capture as many trips for as many people as possible.
Third, and last for now, we need institutional change, perhaps even a seismic shift in mentality towards how public transit generates revenue.
Transit is unique in that it has many capital assets with varying levels of usage (and usefulness) we can leverage. In Barrhaven East, transit indirectly “owns” almost 75 acres of land on which sit our park and rides and space set aside for future projects.
While the park and rides at Fallowfield and Strandherd are used well (but not fully), Nepean Woods has been severely underused since it opened in 2012, and with a larger park and ride opening at Bowesville Station with Line 2, I see no future for Nepean Woods.
We also need to take a good hard look at what’s in the realm of possible in terms of planned capital projects.
For example, we know the incredibly expensive Stage 3 LRT won’t happen unless it’s 100 per cent funded by the upper levels of government, yet it remains in our books as a multi-billion-dollar long-term budget pressure. I believe that project should be shelved until there’s more certainty around the funding.
Additionally, there are other types of administrative structures used for public transit around the world, which allows it to diversify its portfolio and give it some real and sustainable revenue generators. Some of those structures are already used here in Ottawa, but not for transit.
The bottom line is while the transit levy and fares are decent sources of revenue, our institutional over-reliance on them has led us to believe we don’t need to be creative. The current situation says otherwise.
As my related work and research matures over the coming weeks and months, I will share more about what I hope to bring.
There is light at the end of the tunnel, but we must be willing to get out of that tunnel.
Note: I’m not saying there’s no creativity or dynamism at all in the bureaucracy. Having been a part of it myself for almost 10 years, I know there is a lot of creativity and dynamism at the City of Ottawa. Unfortunately, it gets trapped within the bureaucracy, which in many cases has led to disillusionment or an unwillingness to try again.
New apartment buildings
Public consultations next Monday. Details of the developer’s application here.
A developer is looking to rezone the parcel of land at 1034 McGarry Terrace, behind the Walmart, to permit the construction of two residential apartment towers. The buildings will total 592 units in a 26-storey and a 35-storey building.
The development is just over the boundary in Councillor Hill’s Barrhaven West, but it will have an impact on Barrhaven East as well. We are both supportive of the rezoning and development.
I also requested a bigger-picture look at Marketplace Avenue as a whole as the area continues to intensify, especially the intersection at Marketplace/Longfields.
The site is a part of the future Barrhaven “Downtown,” which is a secondary plan within the city’s Official Plan that was approved by the previous councillor and includes the area bounded by Strandherd, Longfields, the Jock River, and the future Greenbank realignment.
Accordingly, the entire area is upzoned for more density, but also more mixed uses to keep residents and amenities close together. It’s also along a transit corridor, so the type of development is considered appropriate.
Combined with changes by the province to planning legislation over the last two years, it means we have very little means to oppose development anyway, especially if it meets all the planning criteria of the parcel and the area’s secondary plan.
If the city rejected the rezoning application, the developer could appeal the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal, where the outcome would be based purely on planning criteria, including secondary plans, requisite studies, and due process, etc.
We will be hosting a public virtual consultation next week as part of the rezoning process, taking place Monday August 12, 2024 starting at 7:00 pm. A Zoom link is available further down in the newsletter.
Sprung structure shelter
Not much to share this week in terms of updates, as staff are still working on the items we have requested after our meeting last week.
There are a few factual items I’d like to clarify about the proposal, based on some emails I’ve received from residents over the last week.
The proposed sprung structure shelter is intended to be a reception centre/temporary accommodation for single asylum seekers until proper housing is found for them and includes on-site wrap-around services.
It will be fully funded by the federal government through their Interim Housing Assistance Programme (IHAP), provided the city’s application for that funding is successful. IHAP is already used by the City of Ottawa to house those asylum seekers in hotels and the two recreation centres currently used for that purpose.
Minimal traffic will be generated, coming from a few regular supply deliveries and staff providing those on-site services, all of which will be accommodated in an adjoining parking/loading area as part of the proposed development.
Each of the structures is planned to house up to 150 asylum seekers, totalling 300 individuals in two structures located in separate communities.
Though there’s been much discussion in the media and in what Councillor Hill and I have been broadcasting through our newsletters, nothing is proceeding right now. Staff’s operational readiness timeline is 12 to 18 months away, but it’s likely a decision will be made by the autumn (again, based on the outcome of the funding application).
The only example of a sprung structure I’m aware of in Ottawa is the addition to the Civic Hospital, which was added as part of its Covid response, but has since become permanent patient overflow.
For what I’ve written previously about the topic, please see my newsletters from July 9, July 23, and July 30, 2024.
I will keep you informed through the newsletter and social media as the item progresses.
Depending on how far it gets in the process, Councillor Hill and I will organise public information and engagement sessions once it’s certain Barrhaven will be impacted by the sprung structure shelters. Additionally, if it gets there, the rezoning process also has its own mandatory public input component.
—
Have a great week!
Wilson