Transit Committee - 10 April, 2025

Introduction

On Thursday, the 10th of April 2025, Transit Committee held its third meeting of the year. Video link here, the meeting begins at 20:45. 

This meeting was a head-turner, and featured some good discussion of OC Transpo's reliability problems, and the hard questions needed to turn the service around. Unfortunately, there were no hard answers - but this is the closest they have gotten in a while, and I hope future meetings continue to push on this front. 

Though they could stand to be a little shorter!  

And a documents list, all linked to the City of Ottawa's website. I provide no guarantees this stuff won't link rot over time ... 

Staff update presentation (PDF) 

Light rail monitoring and compliance (PDF) 
Five-year roadmap update (PDF)

Update

The first item on the agenda was the staff update. Timestamp at 23:45. 

Renée Amilcar presented this month's updates. 

New Ways to Bus, a major bus network redesign/cut, will enter service on Sunday, the 27th of April. This has been in the works since 2023, and represents the final stage of the Bus Route Review initiative. 

The marketing campaign is ongoing, and will continue after the 27 April launch date. Mail has been sent to every household in the city; school trips have been posted to the OC Transpo website; and staff will be placed at transit stations during the first week of New Ways to Bus. 

Amilcar has announced a "Customer Appreciation Weekend." The transit system will be fare-free during that weekend, to "celebrate the successful opening of O-Train Lines 2/4, the New Ways to Bus network, and to encourage operators and visitors to come out and try transit." 

No word on whether a poor quality of service might drive potential riders away from transit, nor on the revenue impacts to a service with a $36 million shortfall. 

The date has yet to be announced, but Amilcar said the date should be announced next week; it may be out by the time this article comes out. 

OC Transpo plans to (resume) post KPIs monthly, on the OC Transpo website. If you're skeptical, then you're not alone. 

At least as early as September 2021, OC Transpo created and updated a "performance measures" page on their website. This included key performance indicators, but as time went on, the page was forgotten, possibly because the staff who updated it left. 

The last update was in December 2022. 

The Transit Advisory Working Group (TAWG), a group of regular people talking transit, took place the evening after the meeting. The results of that have not been posted as of writing. 

The TAWG initiative began in 2023, with an advertisement for members to join it. Since then, we have gotten the names of the seven members, who can be found on the Commitment to Transparency page. Otherwise, there has been no news on it. 

Staff said that significant discussions would be brought by staff to Transit Committee. 

Sabrina Pasian, OC Transpo's chief safety officer, presented KPIs. "Employee Occurances" increased 19.3% in the first two months. 

There were fewer buses caught by automated speed traps, but she noted that this is not a comprehensive review of speeding across the network, only where buses drive past speed cameras. The customer injury rate is somewhat lower than at this time last year. The most common injuries related to braking, slips and falls, and buses in motion. The preventable collision rate decreased in January and increased in February; part of this was due to the extraordinary snow, but is above OC Transpo's goal. 

She also presented mitigation measures. There is a safety observation program and safety data review working group. They gather data and identify corrective actions to be implemented on the OC Transpo network, in collaboration with other municipal agencies. 

In February, OC Transpo reported 5.9 million trips, a decrease to February 2024; January 2025 2024 ridership was 6.5 million, higher than the same month of 2024. 

OC Transpo also reported their reliability statistics. 

March saw a 96.9% service delivery rate, or a 3.1% cancellation rate. This was presented, as always, with their hilariously terrible chart with a hilarious y-axis. The 12-month average was 97.6% service delivery, or 2.4% cancellations. 

The February 2025 figure was not presented, but using averages, I interpolated a 6.3% cancellation rate that month, partly due to the snowstorms. 

"Regularity," a statistic whose parameter I have never seen, was 82%, the same as the twelve average. For less frequent routes, on-time performance was 74%, with 16% of trips being more than five minutes late and 10% of trips being more than one minutes early. 

Staff also presented statistics on cancellations. The three worst performing routes in March were routes 11, 6, and 88, with 13.4%, 12.1%, and 9.3% cancellations, respectively. 

Overall, of the 3.1% trips not delivered, 32% were due to a lack of buses; 29% were due to "on-street adjustments," 23% were due to a lack of operators, and 16% were due to mechanical breakdowns.  

The O-Train service metrics were presented. Line 1 delivery was 98.6% in February, and 99.5% in March. On Lines 2/4, delivery was 97.9% on Lines 2/4. In response to a question from Wilson Lo, staff said that the biggest challenges were "incidents" (see: passenger(s) causing problems), and noted a problem with the sanders on the Alstom LINTs.  

Para Transpo information was presented. There were 858 thousand trips in the past twelve months, while on-time performance rolling average remained at 93%; March performance moved to 95%. You can see the slide here: 

I plan to write about how we measure reliability soon. This data, while welcome, can obscure both good and bad trends on the network; more granular data needs to be presented to get a true picture of what OC Transpo's reliability looks like. 

Absenteeism data was presented. The slide is here: 

Staff also presented media communication information. There were 28 "media events" in 2024, and 98 media inquiries in Q1 this year. They have also found an increase in visits to the OC Transpo website. 

During the question period, Steve Desroches asked for a conversation with OSTA, the student transportation authority, on school trips, noting that OC Transpo is facing its own problems. The OSTA has been facing its own problems related to staffing and management, including, rather unamusingly, a shortfall due to OC Transpo fare increases. 

Wilson Lo noted that a poor schedule design contributed to speeding and safety problems, especially if schedules are inadequately timed. 

This is particularly relevant with the inquest for 2019 Westboro crash ongoing. One union lawyer suggested that a poorly designed schedule contributed to the speeding which led to that crash. Three people were killed. 

He also asked about more granular data on cancellations and on-time performance, a very good ask to truly see OC Transpo's statistics. I will write more about this soon. 

Jeff Leiper asked about Route 11's consistently poor reliability, noting that there are no imminent transit priority measures planned. There is no short-term plan, but staff said the completion of construction for Stage 2 West would help; there are "small transit priority measures" that could be implemented, and a staff review of the route to be presented to the councilors for that route. 

He also said that the maintenance plan is "short term pain, long term gain," but this requires a long-term gain. OC Transpo's maintenance plan is to stop drowning and start treading water, maybe perhaps soon. (sigh) 

Bus Maintenance

A bus maintenance plan was presented as part of the staff update. Timestamp 45:40. 

To the shock of nobody, OC Transpo has a lack of functioning buses. We currently have 735 buses, of which the Inveros are long past retirement age; the 2010 order of three hundred articulated buses, nearly half the bus fleet, will also reach retirement age this year. 

The retirement age is based on the passage of time since the purchase of buses. Unfortunately, the passage of time is impossible to predict given its uncertainty, and shockingly we now have a shortage of usable buses after we cut the spare fleet, fleet replacement, and maintenance to find money for cuts and short-sighted tax rate controls ... I mean, to show respect for the taxpayer. 

No words on whether the taxpayer whose bus is late or cancelled feels respected. 

Bus replacements have also been pushed back eighteen months due to ZEB delays, I will have more on that later. 

OC Transpo, like I said, has 735 buses. New Ways to Bus requires 540 peak period buses; extrapolating from their stated 3.5% cut, this means that the current network requires 560 buses for service. 

The chart shows how many buses are broken on a given day. There are about 60 buses on long-term work orders; 25 being inspected; 10 being cleaned, which I suggest be "optimized" (ie. cut) to save money and increase the available fleet, because who needs a good customer experience?; and 120 are breaking down for one reason or another, every day.  

We currently have about 520 buses available on an "average" day; OC Transpo does not report a more granular number. With a fleet requirement of 560, this gives a spare ratio (the number of buses needed:number of spares) of 31%, while a fleet requirement of 540 buses has a spare ratio of 35%. 

The industry standard spare ratio is around 20-25%. 

The past winter forced buses out of service due to "defects" and corrosion damage to the fleet. This illustrates Ottawa's salt problem, as we continue to use more salt than any other city in the province. 

OC Transpo currently operates around 250 new Nova Buses. The long-term plan is to run these 65000 kilometres every year, to keep them running for their lifespan. However, with the current bus reliability problems, they are running an extra 20000 km to cover for an unreliable fleet. This increases maintenance needs, and shortens their lifespan. 

The maintenance plan includes moving to fix the buses with a long-term problem; using resources, including third-parties; improving retention (no word on the results) for mechanics; decommissioning the worst buses; and searching for used buses on the international market. Apparently, OC Transpo has had no success in Canada. 

OC Transpo is also aiming to hire fifty mechanics, including some vacancies. 

Para Transpo's minibus delivery program will see most buses arrive in Q3 and Q4 this year, with delivery of the seven-metre buses continuing into spring of next year. Para Transpo's buses are also nearing end of life, and the entire fleet is to be replaced with this delivery. 

Note that there will be 92 buses delivered, compared with eighty in the fleet. Seventy six are seven-metre Para Transpo buses; six are pilot six-metre buses; and ten will be used for on-demand transit. 

There was one delegation on Para Transpo. There are continued problems with customer communication; and a new booking and scheduling system continues to be a demand. 

I do not have the background or knowledge required to deeply analyze Para Transpo service. I would appreciate someone with the knowledge who might chime in and provide context to the Para Transpo service. 

Electric Buses

As part of the maintenance plan, staff also presented an update on the electric bus program. Timestamp 55:10. 

There have been delays with the ZEB program. Of the thirty buses expected to be in service at the end of March, there were twelve still not ready; seven are in Ottawa for post-delivery inspection, and five were at the manufacturers' factory still. 

After this delivery, we expect one bus delivery by Q3, and then 36 buses in Q4; many more buses are planned for delivery next year and in the first half of 2027. 

At St. Laurent Garage, the ZEB program has encountered timeline changes since the February update (updated in November 2024). 

Construction at the South Garage, anticipated for completion in June, is now slated for October, though the fit up is now one month ahead of schedule; the substation has been pushed from October to December. The North Garage completion has been pushed from May of next year to October, with teh fit up now expected to be complete in March 2026 instead of December this year. The West Garage has also encountered a minor delay of one month, from the original completion of August 2027. 

You can see the comparison to last November here: 

The West Garage will look like this: 

Light Rail Regulatory Compliance

Timestamp 2:52:10. 

I do not have the technical knowledge to analyze this document; it is posted at the top of the article in the documents section. If you wish to follow the presentation yourself, follow link to the video. 

The monitor's job is to ensure that all laws and regulations related to the operation of the rail lines are properly implemented, and to provide oversight to both the contractors and the city itself.  

The monitor found two critical areas to monitor: inspection of bridges and structures, and the "hours of service regulations," which relates to labour rules. 

Of the forty-two bridges on the network, sixteen are the responsibility of Rideau Transit Group (RTG, the operator of Line 1), and twenty-six are the responsibility of the City of Ottawa's Infrastructure and Water Services Department (IWSD). OC Transpo is only responsible for oversight of the contract with RTG. 

At the level of the IWSD, the monitor found this result: 

Apparently, repairs are not always being completed, and this may have to do with record keeping. IWSD does have latitude to defer repairs for, say, a comprehensive repair a few years down the road.  

OC Transpo itself received these results: 

According to the monitor, the Bayview MUP bridge was not included in the project agreement (PA), and deliberations on the bridge are ongoing. There are 12 FTEs assigned to oversight, with their job being mostly done, except for RTG's non-performance. 

RTG's conformance to their contractual obligations look like this: 

Repairs are not being performed on a timely basis. Apparently, this has to do with a process issue with a lack of follow-up from oversight. 

The report also showed some recommended actions, or "opportunities." 

The monitor also analyzed on hours of service, or labour, regulations. The focus was on "safety-critical" roles. This includes EROs (electric rail operators), ERCs (electric rail controllers, operated by OC Transpo), an RTM control centre in the maintenance facility, and Alstom employees in the maintenance facility. It should be obvious why we want train drivers to be alert during their working shifts. 

The monitor noted that the CBTC (communications-based train control) can help, but not always, prevent safety risks by automatically making decisions that enhance safety. 

OC Transpo is responsible for implementing regulations on operations on the line, but RTG is responsible for the implemenation at the maintenance facility. 

Here are the monitor findings. They are compliant with the regulations, except for their oversight over RTG. According to the monitor, the work-rest rules were developed during the construction phase in coordination with RTG, but the group is not in compliance with them. 

Apparently, direction was not provided by RTG to subcontractors, though RTG itself uses the Canada Labour Code (which is stricter than the HOS standard used by OC Transpo). 

Thus, the monitor found this did not present a safety risk. However, that there is no oversight for a theoretical violation remains concerning, another chapter in the project management book at the City. 

Menard asked staff about the St. Laurent tunnel, which has caused problems before. The bridge was monitored in 2022, but improvements were deferred without a formal process. At the end of October, inspections and immediate repairs were carried out. There were additional remedies recommended at St. Laurent tunnel, which will be implemented this year. 

The Five-Year Roadmap

Timestamp 4:10:30. 

Staff presented an update on the Five-Year Roadmap. The roadmap presents five "pillars" to the agency, with some tangible goals and some less ... tangible goals. 

These are a lot of KPIs, all of which can be found in the documents section up top. 

Marty Carr asked about Para Transpo service goals. Staff said that some of the asks from the delegate Kyle Humphrey, see above, were being studied or included in the roadmap; others were raised at the Para Transpo Talk events, with staff looking into them. 

Wilson Lo asked about the fare enforcement strategy, which I talked about last month, and asked about expanding the program outside of Line 1. Staff said that fare enforcement is not a "revenue generator," although indirect enforcement (ie. people paying because of the fear of inspection) was a part of the program. 

Jeff Leiper gave a great question, telling the committee that the goal, "proud to be your choice" is a long way away, a rare honest question about OC Transpo's problems with reliability and useability, and telling them to ask council for help on transit priority. OC Transpo does interface with other departments, but any transit rider can tell you about their journey today. Amilcar also told council about transit priority, telling council that they need to give more priority to transit, and explaining the congestion charge in DC [sic], saying that she believed in transit (note: Amilcar meant the congestion charge in New York City, which entered service in January). 

Leiper also said that if we match service to ridership, then we will never see a return to ridership. A rare admission from council. 

It's unclear how much of the rest of council wants to have this conversation.  

Amilcar admitted that the RTO3 order did not increase transit ridership, with the office workers mostly returning on the roads instead. 

Riley Brockington's Reliability Motion

Timestamp at 4:47:15. 

Councilor Brockington presented a motion, which can be found here, asking for staff to provide a detailed plan this year, on achieving our reliability targets by 2027. 

Three delegations presented on this motion. The first, Nick Grover from Ecology Ottawa, asked council to consider more aggressive. The second, Aiden Kallioinen from CUSA, endorsed the motion. The  third delegate, Marko Miljusevic, also supported the motion. 

Glen Gower said that OC Transpo has a plan, but a consolidated report would be helpful. As for myself, I think it will depend on the actual content of the report - if it says "New Ways to Bus," I will probably have to scream at the nearest wildlife. If it contains actual, tangible details, it will be a good start in finally improving reliability on OC Transpo. 

Ultimately, the committee passed the motion unanimously. It remains to be seen if they will want to hear the truth, or whether it is yet another demand from council to wring $1.1 of service from $1. 

Slow Zones and More

David Hill presented a motion to be voted on at the 12 June meeting that would, if passed, direct staff to present the root causes of the 2021 derailments that started in motion (or, rather, stopped in motion!) the implementation of slow zones on the LRT network. 

There were three inquiries submitted this month. Two were submitted by Hill, asking for clarification on fire safety with the ZEB program; the second asked for clarification on the framework with which the LRT system, both Lines 1/2 (which are regulated differently), are regulated. 

The third, submitted by Tierney, asked for clarification on the savings from the elimination of the carbon tax. 

Two motions remain active; Brockington's motion that staff submit a report on non-fare revenue opportunities, and Lo's motion to clarify the UTA status of one property on Rideau Valley Drive. 

Thoughts

This meeting featured lots of discussion on service reliability, a key component (one might even say, downside!) to OC Transpo service. While few solutions were presented, even the suburban councilors are beginning to reckon with the erratic service that has persisted across the network for years. 

Whether they want to hear the truth is a different question. 

At the budget deliberations for this year, the transit file was presented as a "hard truth" that would need hard decisions. It was rather impressive that we managed to avoid those hard decisions, but they will come up again every year until council decides to slash-and-burn transit, or to provide the reform and funding needed to improve OC Transpo. 

I eagerly await more discussion of this type from Transit Committee and from City Council. 

Until next time.