Ward 16 · Ottawa · Councillor: Riley Brockington
River
River: 78.2% of predictions within five minutes.
- Within five minutes
- 78.2%
- Stops in the ward
- 328
- Routes serving it
- 31
- Cancelled trips
- Not available yet
- Not counted per ward yet
Where it is slowest
- 80% and up 10
- 60 to 80% 10
- Under 60% 0
- Too little data 9
Routes serving the ward, by their share of predictions within five minutes. Each route result covers the whole route.
Routes in this ward
| Route | Within 5 min | Cancelled | Crowding |
|---|---|---|---|
| 198 | 65.0% | Not published | Not published |
| 53 | 65.8% | Not published | Not published |
| 56 | 67.8% | Not published | Not published |
| 6 | 69.4% | Not published | Not published |
| 81 | 70.6% | Not published | Not published |
| 110 | 71.6% | Not published | Not published |
| 80 | 74.2% | Not published | Not published |
| 111 | 75.5% | Not published | Not published |
Cancellations and crowding are not published per route yet. 9 routes with too little data or a different service purpose are left out.
All routes and their sourcesOne-page brief
A printable summary of this ward for council and community meetings, with the same numbers, the method in plain words and dated sources.
What can be verified in River?
Arrival predictions, the imported timetable and train notices. Each is shown with its own source.
Provider prediction agreement
78.2%
of eligible predictions within five minutes of schedule
- How this compares
- Rank 12 of 22 · median 78.4%
Service, per the imported timetable
- Scheduled trips at ward stops
- Not available yet
- Routes
- 29
- Train lines
- 2
Current service inside this boundary
The live buses inside this boundary are on the Map tab.
Prediction measure, timetable inventory and methods
Service delivery · evidence state
Cancellations at stops in this ward
Not publishableNo zero or missed trip is inferred when exact stop calls cannot be published.
Predictions at stops inside the ward
78.2% within five minutes of the timetable across 463,127 eligible final provider predictions and 20 weekdays. These are not verified physical arrivals.
Predictions do not prove physical arrival.
Routes to inspect
Oct 28, 2026 – Nov 3, 2026If available, these are route-wide vehicle-position matches for routes serving the ward. They do not locate a missed trip inside this ward or prove a cancellation. Each comparison uses scheduled trips for that same route and window.
- 11743 of 45 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 69724 of 25 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 105662 of 682 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
Scheduled calls, sources and limits
31 routes · 328 stops. Timetable inventory, not trips delivered.
Cancellations at stops in this ward
Local count cannot be published
Exact stop-call evidence could not be read for Oct 28, 2026 – Nov 3, 2026. No zero is assumed.
Dates, source versions and limits
Method: retained-pre-service-exact-trip-stop-call-v1. Cancellation-feed completeness and position coverage are unverified.
The retained timetables were fetched, imported and first activated before the service day. The archive does not prove they remained the active timetables throughout that period. Comparisons between places remain unavailable.
Verdict
What would fix transit here
Worked out from the routes that serve this ward. Each item names the route, when it happens, and what would change it.
12 of 20 show repeated provider predictions later than the timetable, consistent with a possible scheduled running-time shortfall. A scheduler should test that scenario against operations; labour, fleet, recovery and transfer impacts are not established here.
Worst here: route 53, predictions later than timetable 14:00 to 19:00, 4.9 min late.
Best here: route 98, observed-position lower bound, 100%.
20 of 20 routes here had something measurable to report.
- 00:00: 90.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 18,184 predictions, typically 0.7 min late
- 01:00: 85% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 5,802 predictions, typically 0.8 min late
- 02:00: 92.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,652 predictions, typically 0.9 min late
- 03:00: 89.1% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,418 predictions, typically 0.3 min late
- 04:00: 90.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 5,926 predictions, typically 1 min late
- 05:00: 88.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 23,003 predictions, typically 1.2 min late
- 06:00: 88.2% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 50,525 predictions, typically 1.2 min late
- 07:00: 82.1% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 67,304 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 08:00: 74.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 67,793 predictions, typically 2.1 min late
- 09:00: 81.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 66,221 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 10:00: 82.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 63,013 predictions, typically 1.3 min late
- 11:00: 79% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 61,372 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 12:00: 77.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 61,919 predictions, typically 1.9 min late
- 13:00: 78.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 62,774 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 14:00: 77% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 64,292 predictions, typically 1.7 min late
- 15:00: 68.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 67,909 predictions, typically 2.7 min late
- 16:00: 65.1% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 70,357 predictions, typically 3 min late
- 17:00: 65.1% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 72,743 predictions, typically 2.9 min late
- 18:00: 70.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 65,816 predictions, typically 2.4 min late
- 19:00: 77.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 51,731 predictions, typically 1.8 min late
- 20:00: 81.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 47,132 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 21:00: 82.2% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 42,054 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 22:00: 84.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 37,352 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 23:00: 87.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 29,990 predictions, typically 1.1 min late
- 90% or more of predictions within five minutes
- 80 to 90% of predictions within five minutes
- under 80% of predictions within five minutes
- not enough data
| What | When | Measured | Scenario or next investigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProblemPredictions later than timetable53681110809256441111988611712 routes | 14:00 to 19:00 … 01:00 | 4.9 min late … 7.2 min late | More running time |
| ProblemOne hour has a lower prediction match6539244861111121051981175611 routes | 17:00 … 01:00 | 46% … 33% | Operations, not the timetable |
| ProblemWide prediction spread1056198801175 routes | 17:00 … 02:00 | 25.1 min swing … 37.9 min swing | Operations, not the timetable |
| ProblemPredictions earlier than timetable110442 routes | 21:00 · 01:00 | 1.6 min early · 2.7 min early | Less running time, or holding points |
| StrengthObserved-position lower bound98116921984 routes | All measured hours | 100% | Keep what works |
| CaveatCoverage gap10553566108644881118511090808111211716 routes | All measured hours | 97% … 96% | More observation, not a service change |
O-Train evidence
What we know about train service here
Trains are not in the public data feed
The bus punctuality reports compare archived arrival predictions with published schedules. They do not count independently measured physical arrivals. Otranspo has no comparable public train-position dataset for these reports, so those bus figures cannot show where a train is or whether Lines 1, 2 and 4 run on time.
Publishing train positions, their timestamps, and the measurement method would help build a separate, verifiable record of rail service. The missing dataset does not establish how the trains performed.
Recent shared train observations
These are rider sightings approved by a moderator. They show a reported time and place. They are not official train positions, a complete train count, or proof of a cause.
No approved rider observation matches this place or line in the last 31 days. That does not mean no train ran or no problem occurred.
How RIVER is doing
These indicators separate repeated delay from variation in the operator’s arrival predictions. They suggest questions for planners and operations staff; they do not establish the cause or prove when buses arrived. Each figure shows its route-hour sample.
Measured over 388 route-hours. 4 more were observed too thinly to count, and are excluded rather than assumed good.
Scheduling
Repeated late predictions can point to a timetable worth reviewing. Check actual arrival and dispatch records before deciding whether running time needs to change.
- Who can fix it
- A service planner
- What it costs
- Cost unavailable until fleet, labour, recovery and transfer effects are tested.
Predictions close to the timetable
86.9%
Route-hours where the median eligible arrival prediction is less than one minute early and less than three minutes late.
Route-hours with repeated late predictions
49of 388
Route-hours where the median eligible arrival prediction is at least three minutes late. Review running time against actual operating records.
Route-hours with early predictions
2of 388
Route-hours where the median eligible arrival prediction is at least one minute early. This does not establish that buses departed early.
Typical predicted delay
3.7min
The typical median predicted delay in flagged route-hours; not a validated amount to add to the timetable.
Operations
Wide variation in arrival predictions calls for an operational review. Traffic, dispatch, boarding and timetable design may contribute; these predictions alone cannot identify the cause or the remedy.
- Who can fix it
- Operations, and often the road itself
- What it costs
- Cost unavailable until the operational cause and remedy are established.
Prediction gap below twenty minutes
98.5%
Route-hours where the 95th-percentile eligible prediction is less than twenty minutes later than the median.
Route-hours with wide prediction gaps
6of 388
Route-hours where the 95th-percentile eligible prediction is at least twenty minutes later than the median. The cause needs investigation.
Typical prediction gap
29min
The typical gap between the 95th-percentile eligible prediction and the median in flagged route-hours.
Service, per the imported timetable
Scheduled transit, provider prediction agreement with the timetable, and public services in this ward.
Provider prediction agreement
78.2% of eligible provider predictions were within five minutes of the timetable. 361,965 of 463,127 settled trip-stop predictions at stops inside this ward matched that range across 20 weekdays with feed evidence, from Oct 3, 2026 to Nov 3, 2026. These are provider predictions, not independently observed arrivals.
2 partial-capture days not counted.
- Predictions within five minutes
- 361,965
- Eligible trip-stop predictions
- 463,127
- Observed days
- 20 weekdays
How this compares
Ranked 12 of 22 measured wards. 0.2 points below the city median of 78.4%.
Highest: ward 22 at 85.1%. Lowest: ward 21 at 60.3%.
Only wards whose evidence meets the publication threshold are ranked. Same window and same method for each.
Which routes need closer review
20 of the 29 routes serving this ward have enough provider-prediction evidence to compare. Lowest timetable agreement first.
- 198Open route 65.0%Predictions within five minutes
6,081 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 53Open route 65.8%Predictions within five minutes
132,043 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 56Open route 67.8%Predictions within five minutes
59,469 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 6Open route 69.4%Predictions within five minutes
191,599 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 81Open route 70.6%Predictions within five minutes
146,779 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 110Open route 71.6%Predictions within five minutes
113,377 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 80Open route 74.2%Predictions within five minutes
181,776 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 111Open route 75.5%Predictions within five minutes
114,122 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 92Open route 76.6%Predictions within five minutes
28,608 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 10Open route 77.5%Predictions within five minutes
110,602 eligible predictions across the whole route
9 more routes here are not ranked: school, express, shopper or event service, whose schedule result does not compare the same way.
Vehicle visibility to investigate
Vehicle visibility to investigate
The current summary uses seven days. For every route, you can also open yesterday, the last 7 days, or the last 30 days and inspect the day, scheduled trip, excluded feed gaps, and every observed public vehicle ID. An absence does not prove a vehicle fault or operator decision.
| Route | Scheduled trips | With a position | Without a matched position | Coverage | History |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 117 | 45 | 43 | 2 | 95.6% | |
| 697 | 25 | 24 | 1 | 96.0% | |
| 105 | 682 | 662 | 20 | 97.1% | |
| 56 | 637 | 621 | 16 | 97.5% | |
| 53 | 635 | 619 | 16 | 97.5% | |
| 86 | 619 | 607 | 12 | 98.1% | |
| 10 | 759 | 746 | 13 | 98.3% | |
| 6 | 1,007 | 992 | 15 | 98.5% | |
| 44 | 802 | 791 | 11 | 98.6% | |
| 110 | 346 | 341 | 5 | 98.6% | |
| 88 | 1,043 | 1,034 | 9 | 99.1% | |
| 81 | 468 | 464 | 4 | 99.1% | |
| 111 | 868 | 861 | 7 | 99.2% | |
| 85 | 894 | 888 | 6 | 99.3% | |
| 90 | 767 | 762 | 5 | 99.3% | |
| 112 | 482 | 479 | 3 | 99.4% | |
| 80 | 772 | 768 | 4 | 99.5% | |
| 98 | 889 | 886 | 3 | 99.7% | |
| 116 | 287 | 286 | 1 | 99.7% | |
| 92 | 200 | 200 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 198 | 55 | 55 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 698 | 50 | 50 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 646 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 689 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 640 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 617 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 670 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 610 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 304 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
Routes serving the ward
31 scheduled routesMap & current service
Current service inside this boundary
Scheduled lines, stops, and observed buses share one map. Select a route or vehicle for details.
Evidence & sources
Imported municipal polygon · 40 boundary vertices · City of Ottawa ward boundaries · imported Aug 4, 2026
Public amenity record for this ward
Public washrooms and drinking water
Choose a category to check which location details are available.Public washrooms (City data) 10
The public ward snapshot publishes the count but not the individual locations for this ward. No locations are being invented.
Drinking water (City data) 8
The public ward snapshot publishes the count but not the individual locations for this ward. No locations are being invented.
Prepare an email for City Hall
Choose one current office or enter one other recipient, edit the neutral draft, then review it in your own email app.
Otranspo never sends this message and cannot see whether it was sent, received, or answered.
Send only to the relevant office. Avoid mass email, harassment, report receipts, account details, health information, phone numbers, or an exact personal location. Remove anything you do not want the recipient or email provider to retain.
If no email app opens, copy the draft below and paste it into the email service you choose.
Evidence included with the draft
- Canonical Otranspo evidence link
- https://otranspo.ca/en/city/wards/16
- Sources and time
- Sources and time: open the linked report for its source records and published or imported timestamps.
- Limitations
- Limitations: Otranspo is independent and may show unknown, suppressed, delayed, or corrected values. Confirm urgent or current service matters with the official agency.
Rate or report an issue
Rider evidence
Community reports
Signals below are moderated community aggregates, not official operator notices or reliability scores.
You can report without signing in. Anonymous reports count a little less when we calculate public patterns. You can add an account after submitting.
Report a specific problem
- Graffiti
- Cleanliness
- Lighting
- Snow or ice
- Washroom unavailable
- Water unavailable
- Accessibility barrier
- Other issue
Emergency: call 9-1-1. Check official OC Transpo or STO notices before travelling.
Civic evidence brief
The identity, boundary, contacts, service scope and evidence dates behind this ward report, kept together so the page can be cited without losing its qualifications.
- Municipality
- City of Ottawa, Ontario
- Geographic unit
- Official City of Ottawa municipal ward 16: RIVER
- Boundary and vintage
- City ward layer · effective not published · imported August 4, 2026
- Official civic contacts
- Riley Brockington · Councillor · source check is older than the publication threshold · source checked August 4, 2026 · official City contact source
- Mark Sutcliffe · Mayor · source check is older than the publication threshold · source checked August 4, 2026 · official City contact source
- Relevant scheduled service
- 31 public route records with a stop inside this boundary · operators: OC Transpo
- Transit evidence vintage
- Timetable import: not published · reliability window: Oct 3, 2026 – Nov 3, 2026
A ward boundary, route inventory, destination list, population count or employment count supplies civic context. None of those values alone measures passenger demand, household trip effects, transfers or daily attendance.
Ottawa wards are municipal wards. They are not Gatineau electoral districts, and results from the two boundary systems are not interchangeable.
Evidence behind this pageOpen the definition, method, sources, dates, coverage, and known limits.
What is being shown
A ward-level inventory of scheduled transit, public washrooms, drinking-water locations, and eligible final OC Transpo provider predictions at stops inside the ward.
How it was produced
Current imported records are assigned by point-in-polygon to the sourced ward boundary. Reliability uses one eligible final provider prediction per trip, stop, and service date in the latest 28 completed service days. Within five minutes is measured against the timetable, not a physical arrival. Publication requires 20 weekdays with prediction evidence and 500 eligible predictions.
Evidence dates
- Imported
- Computed or assembled
- Sample
- 463,127 eligible settled provider predictions across 20 weekdays with prediction evidence support the reliability result.
- Method or data version
- ward-counts-v1 + ward-stop-settled-arrivals-purpose-aware-v3
- Source checksum
- ward-reliability:6fd57abd138503d0bbc9995608f77fbcdb2b1a54a27312c7717c2c283ca175b3
Sources
Limits to keep in mind
- Counts describe the published inventory inside the boundary, not service quality or access from every address.
- Reliability covers final OC Transpo provider predictions at geographically assigned stops; physical arrivals are not independently measured. Rail and trips without eligible prediction evidence are not represented.
- An unavailable count remains unavailable. It is not changed to zero.
How we measure this
For each trip, stop and service date at stops inside the ward, we keep the last eligible OC Transpo prediction and compare it with the timetable. It counts as within five minutes when the two are no more than five minutes apart. This is not a physical arrival.
The window is the latest 28 completed service days. A result is published only with 20 weekdays of prediction evidence and 500 eligible predictions. Route results cover each whole route, not only the part inside the ward.
Read the full methodContains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – City of Ottawa.