Ward 21 · Ottawa · Councillor: David Brown
Rideau-Jock
Rideau-Jock: 60.3% of predictions within five minutes.
- ᑕᓪᓕᒪ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ
- 60.3%
- ᓂᕈᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑕᕐᕖᑦ
- 160
- ᐊᖅᑯᑏᑦ ᐅᕗᖓ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᑦ
- 8
- Cancelled trips
- ᓱᓕ ᐱᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᙱᑦᑐᖅ
- ᓱᓕ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᐅᕐᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᓂᕈᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂ.
ᓇᐅᓂ ᓱᑲᐃᓂᖅᐹᖑᔪᖅ
- 80% ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓗ 1
- 60 ᐊᒻᒪ 80% ᐊᑯᓐᖓᓂ 1
- 60%-ᒥᑦ ᒥᑭᓐᓂᖅᓴᖅ 0
- ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᙱᑦᑐᑦ 6
ᐊᖁᑏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᑉ ᐃᓚᖓᓂ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᔪᑦ, ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓂ ᒥᓂᑦᓯᓂ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖓᓂ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᑦ ᖃᔅᓰᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒡᓗᒋᑦ. ᐊᖁᑦ ᐊᑐᓂ ᐊᖁᑎᒥ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᐳᖅ.
Routes in this ward
| ᐊᖁᑎ | 5 ᒥᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ | Cancelled | ᐃᓄᒋᓐᓂᖓ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 110 | 72.1% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 168 | 83.1% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
Cancellations and crowding are not published per route yet. 6 routes with too little data or a different service purpose are left out.
ᐊᖅᑯᑏᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓇᑭᙶᕐᓂᖏᑦOne-page brief
ᓇᐃᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᓇᖏᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᓇ ᓂᕈᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᒧᑦ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᐊᔾᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᓈᓴᐅᑏᑦ, ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᓯᒪᓂᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂ ᐱᑐᙱᑦᑐᓂ, ᓇᑭᙶᕐᓂᖏᓪᓗ ᐅᓪᓗᖃᖅᑐᑦ.
What can be verified in Rideau-Jock?
ᑎᑭᕐᕕᒃᓴᖏᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ, ᐊᐅᓪᓚᕐᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖏᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑐᕇᓐ ᐱᓗᒍ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᑦ. ᐊᑐᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓇᑭᓐᖓᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ.
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᔨᐅᑉ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᖏᑦ
60.3%
of eligible predictions within five minutes of schedule
- ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ
- Rank 22 of 22 · median 78.4%
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᐅᑎ, ᐱᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒡᓗᒋᑦ
- Scheduled trips at ward stops
- ᓱᓕ ᐱᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᙱᑦᑐᖅ
- ᐊᖁᑏᑦ
- 8
- ᑐᕇᓐ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᖏᑦ
- 0
ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᐅᑦ ᑭᒡᓕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ
ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᔪᑦ ᐳᓯᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒪ ᑭᒡᓕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑕᑯᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᙳᐊᖅ ᒪᒃᐱᒐᖓᓂ.
ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒋᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ, ᐃᓕᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑏᑦ
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
60.3% within five minutes of the timetable across 4,768 eligible final provider predictions and 20 weekdays. These are not verified physical arrivals.
Predictions do not prove physical arrival.
Routes to inspect
Oct 27, 2026 – Nov 2, 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.
- 3011 of 2 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 29949 of 50 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 110340 of 346 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
Scheduled calls, sources and limits
8 routes · 160 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 27, 2026 – Nov 2, 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.
ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑎᓂᖅ
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.
2 of 2 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 110, predictions later than timetable 15:00 to 18:00, 3.7 min late.
2 of 2 routes here had something measurable to report.
- 00:00: 88.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 871 predictions, typically 0.8 min late
- 01:00: not enough data
- 02:00: not enough data
- 03:00: not enough data
- 04:00: 79.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 493 predictions, typically 2.7 min late
- 05:00: 76.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 5,086 predictions, typically 1.2 min late
- 06:00: 89.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,721 predictions, typically 0.3 min late
- 07:00: 84.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,380 predictions, typically 1.3 min late
- 08:00: 76.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,759 predictions, typically 2 min late
- 09:00: 80.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,376 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 10:00: 82.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,263 predictions, typically 1 min late
- 11:00: 78.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,032 predictions, typically 1.6 min late
- 12:00: 79.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,117 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 13:00: 79% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,093 predictions, typically 2 min late
- 14:00: 82.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,799 predictions, typically 1 min late
- 15:00: 70.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,151 predictions, typically 2.7 min late
- 16:00: 62.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,883 predictions, typically 3.3 min late
- 17:00: 56.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,858 predictions, typically 3.7 min late
- 18:00: 62.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 8,280 predictions, typically 2.8 min late
- 19:00: 80.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 7,626 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 20:00: 80.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 6,715 predictions, typically 1.4 min late
- 21:00: 82.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 3,745 predictions, typically 0.9 min late
- 22:00: 87.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,928 predictions, typically 0.5 min late
- 23:00: 94.1% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,461 predictions, typically 0.7 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 | ᖃᖓ | ᐅᑦᑐᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ | Scenario or next investigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProblemPredictions later than timetable1101682 routes | 15:00 to 18:00 · 17:00 | 3.7 min late · 4.3 min late | More running time |
| ProblemWide prediction spread1101 routes | 17:00 | 20.1 min swing | Operations, not the timetable |
| ProblemOne hour has a lower prediction match1681 routes | 17:00 | 56% | Operations, not the timetable |
| ProblemPredictions earlier than timetable1101 routes | 21:00 | 1.6 min early | Less running time, or holding points |
| CaveatCoverage gap1101682 routes | All measured hours | 98% · 99% | More observation, not a service change |
How RIDEAU-JOCK is doing
ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑕᐃᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᐃᔪᑦ ᐅᑎᖅᑕᖅᐸᒃᑐᒥᒃ ᑭᖑᕙᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐅᑉ ᑎᑭᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖏᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᐸᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐊᐱᖁᑎᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᖏᑦᑐᑦ. ᐱᐊᓯᑦ ᖃᖓ ᑎᑭᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᖏᑦᑐᑦ. ᓈᓴᐅᑎ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂ ᑕᑯᒃᓴᐅᑎᑦᑎᔪᖅ ᖃᑦᓯᓂᒃ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᒃ-ᐃᑲᕐᕋᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᑦ.
Measured over 38 route-hours. 0 more were observed too thinly to count, and are excluded rather than assumed good.
ᐃᑲᕐᕋᓄᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᓂᖅ
ᐊᑯᓂ ᑭᖑᕙᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᑕᑯᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᓕᐊᖑᔪᖅ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᒃᓴᐅᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓗᒋᑦ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᐅᓪᓚᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᕕᒃ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ.
- ᑭᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᐸ
- ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᔨ
- ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᑭᖃᖅᐸ
- ᐊᑭᖏᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᖅᐳᑦ ᓱᓕ. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᑦ ᐊᖅᑲᐅᑏᑦ, ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ, ᐊᑭᓕᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᓯᓂᖏᑦ.
ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᐃᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᓂᒋᔭᖃᖅᑐᑦ
86.8%
Route-hours where the median eligible arrival prediction is less than one minute early and less than three minutes late.
ᐊᖅᑯᑎᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ
4of 38
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᑎᑭᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᐊᓂ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᒃ ᒥᓂᑦᓂᒃ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᖓᑕ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓗᒍ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓴᓂᐊᓂᒃ.
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐃᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᐸᔅ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ
1of 38
ᐊᖁᑎ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ ᑎᑭᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᐊᓂ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᒥᓂᑦᒥᒃ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓘᓃᑦ. ᐅᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᙱᑦᑐᖅ ᐸᓯᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᐅᓪᓚᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ.
ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᑦᑕᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ
3.8min
ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓂᖅᐹᖅ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᓐᓂ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂ. ᐅᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓚᓗᒍ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᓄᑦ.
ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ
ᑎᑭᑉᐸᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᐊᓘᒐᐃ, ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᖅ. ᐊᖅᑯᑎᒥ ᐅᓄᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᔪᑦ, ᐊᐅᓪᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ, ᐃᑭᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᐅᑉ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒍᓐᓇᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒥᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᒥᒡᓘᓐᓃᑦ.
- ᑭᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᐸ
- ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᑦ. ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᖅᑯᓯᓂᖅ ᓇᒻᒥᓂᖅ.
- ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᑭᖃᖅᐸ
- ᐊᑭᖓ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᖅᑐᖅ. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᖓᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᐸᑦ, ᐊᑭᖓ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ.
ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓ ᑐᐌᓐᑎ-ᒥᓂᑦ ᐊᑖᓂ
97.4%
ᐊᖁᑎ-ᐃᑲᕐᕋᐃᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ: 95-ᐳᓴᓐᑎ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᑐᐃᓐᑎ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᕿᑎᐊᓃᑦᑐᒥᑦ.
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᓯᓂᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑑᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ
1of 38
ᐊᖁᑦ-ᐃᑲᕐᕋᐃᑦ, 95-ᐳᓴᓐᑎᐊᓪ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑭᖑᕙᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᐃᓐᑎ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓗ. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ.
ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᓐᓂᖓ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ
20.1min
ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓ 95-ᒥ ᐳᓴᓐᑎᒥ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᐅᑎᐅᑉ ᖃᑎᒻᒥᓗ, ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᓂ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᓂ.
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᐅᑎ, ᐱᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒡᓗᒋᑦ
Scheduled transit, provider prediction agreement with the timetable, and public services in this ward.
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᔨᐅᑉ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᖏᑦ
60.3% of eligible provider predictions were within five minutes of the timetable. 2,876 of 4,768 settled trip-stop predictions at stops inside this ward matched that range across 20 weekdays with feed evidence, from Oct 1, 2026 to Nov 2, 2026. These are provider predictions, not independently observed arrivals.
3 partial-capture days not counted.
- Predictions within five minutes
- 2,876
- Eligible trip-stop predictions
- 4,768
- Observed days
- 20 weekdays
ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ
Ranked 22 of 22 measured wards. 18.1 points below the city median of 78.4%.
Highest: ward 22 at 84.9%. 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
2 of the 8 routes serving this ward have enough provider-prediction evidence to compare. Lowest timetable agreement first.
- 110Open route 72.1%Predictions within five minutes
113,317 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 168Open route 83.1%Predictions within five minutes
110,462 eligible predictions across the whole route
6 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.
Routes serving the ward
8 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 · 153 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) 12
The public ward snapshot publishes the count but not the individual locations for this ward. No locations are being invented.
Drinking water (City data) 3
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/iu/city/wards/21
- 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 21: RIDEAU-JOCK
- Boundary and vintage
- City ward layer · effective ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ · imported August 4, 2026
- Official civic contacts
- David Brown · Councillor · source check is older than the publication threshold · source checked August 4, 2026 · official City contact source
- Mark Sutcliffe · ᒪᐃᔭ · source check is older than the publication threshold · source checked August 4, 2026 · official City contact source
- Relevant scheduled service
- 8 public route records with a stop inside this boundary · operators: OC Transpo
- Transit evidence vintage
- Timetable import: ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ · reliability window: Oct 1, 2026 – Nov 2, 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.
ᑖᑦᓱᒪ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᐅᑉ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᖏᑦᐅᒃᑯᐃᓗᒍ ᑐᑭᖓ, ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᓯᒪᓂᖅ, ᓇᑭᙶᕐᓂᖏᑦ, ᐅᓪᓗᖏᑦ, ᓇᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᖏᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑭᒡᓕᖏᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᔪᑦ.
ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ
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.
ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒍᑏᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖏᑦ
- ᐃᓯᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ
- ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᐅᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ
- ᐆᒃᑐᕋᐅᑎ
- 4,768 eligible settled provider predictions across 20 weekdays with prediction evidence support the reliability result.
- ᐱᓕᕆᓯᐊ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑦ ᓄᑖᓕᐊᖏᑦ
- ward-counts-v1 + ward-stop-settled-arrivals-purpose-aware-v3
- ᓇᑭᙶᕐᓂᖓᑕ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑕᖓ
- ward-reliability:36a36f055d00e8fcc700cd44ac3dcd7c712e50e04e043d73a3aac2e62975e9a9
ᓇᑭᑦ ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ
ᑭᒡᓕᖏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᐅᒪᔭᐅᑎᐊᕆᐊᓖᑦ
- ᓈᓴᐅᑏᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔪᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑭᒡᓕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᐅᑎᐅᑉ ᐱᐅᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᓂ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ.
- ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖓᓂ ᑎᑭᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᖅᐳᖅ OC Transpo ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖑᔪᓂᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᖃᖅᑕᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐃᓂᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᑦᑐᒋᑦ. ᑎᑭᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓱᓕᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᒍᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᙱᑦᑐᑦ. O-Train ᐃᓗᓕᐅᙱᑦᑐᖅ. ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᐅᔪᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᐅᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ.
- An unavailable count remains unavailable. It is not changed to zero.
ᖃᓄᖅ ᓈᓴᐃᕙᒻᒪᖔᑦᑕ
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᓂ, ᓄᖅᑲᖓᕝᕕᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᓪᓗᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᓂ, ᓄᖅᑲᖓᕝᕕᓂ ᓂᕈᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ, ᑐᖓᓕᖅᐹᖅ OC Transpo-ᑯᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᑎᑭᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᑕᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥᒃ. ᑕᓪᓕᒪ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐱᔪᖅ ᐅᑯᐊ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᑕᓪᓕᒪ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓂ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᓐᓂᐅᙱᑉᐸᑕ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᓐᓃᑦᑐᖅ ᑕᑯᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐅᙱᑦᑐᖅ.
ᐱᕝᕕᒃ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᑦ 28 ᐅᓪᓗᐃᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᖅ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ. ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᓂᖅ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ 20 ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕐᕕᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᑦ ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᖃᕈᓂ, 500-ᓗ ᓯᕗᓂᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᕆᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓂᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᐊᖅᑯᑎᓄᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᓂᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᖅᑯᑎ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖓ ᐱᔭᐅᕗᖅ. ᓂᕈᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐃᓚᖓ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐱᔭᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ.
Read the full methodContains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – City of Ottawa.