Ward 24 · Ottawa · Councillor: Wilson Lo
Barrhaven East
Barrhaven East: 77.7% of predictions within five minutes.
- ᑕᓪᓕᒪ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ
- 77.7%
- ᓂᕈᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑕᕐᕖᑦ
- 187
- ᐊᖅᑯᑏᑦ ᐅᕗᖓ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᑦ
- 21
- Cancelled trips
- ᓱᓕ ᐱᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᙱᑦᑐᖅ
- ᓱᓕ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᐅᕐᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᓂᕈᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂ.
ᓇᐅᓂ ᓱᑲᐃᓂᖅᐹᖑᔪᖅ
- 80% ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓗ 4
- 60 ᐊᒻᒪ 80% ᐊᑯᓐᖓᓂ 4
- 60%-ᒥᑦ ᒥᑭᓐᓂᖅᓴᖅ 0
- ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᙱᑦᑐᑦ 13
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 70 | 71.6% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 110 | 71.6% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 80 | 74.2% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 73 | 75.8% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 74 | 83.1% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 99 | 83.5% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 75 | 87.8% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
| 173 | 93.5% | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ | ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ |
Cancellations and crowding are not published per route yet. 13 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 Barrhaven East?
ᑎᑭᕐᕕᒃᓴᖏᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ, ᐊᐅᓪᓚᕐᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖏᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑐᕇᓐ ᐱᓗᒍ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᑦ. ᐊᑐᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓇᑭᓐᖓᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ.
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᔨᐅᑉ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᖏᑦ
77.7%
of eligible predictions within five minutes of schedule
- ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ
- Rank 14 of 22 · median 78.4%
ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᐅᑎ, ᐱᕕᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒡᓗᒋᑦ
- Scheduled trips at ward stops
- ᓱᓕ ᐱᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᙱᑦᑐᖅ
- ᐊᖁᑏᑦ
- 21
- 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
77.7% within five minutes of the timetable across 230,484 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.
- 67719 of 20 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 70614 of 623 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
- 110341 of 346 scheduled trips had a matched vehicle positionInspect days
Scheduled calls, sources and limits
21 routes · 187 stops. Timetable inventory, not trips delivered.
Cancellations at stops in this ward
Local count unavailable
The exact stop-call lookup did not finish within this page’s time budget. No zero, cancellation, or missed call is inferred.
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.
6 of 8 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 70, predictions later than timetable 15:00 to 19:00, 3.9 min late.
Best here: route 173, predictions consistently close to timetable, 96%.
8 of 8 routes here had something measurable to report.
- 00:00: 95.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 3,805 predictions, typically 0.1 min late
- 01:00: 92.8% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,782 predictions, typically 0.8 min late
- 02:00: 81.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,626 predictions, typically 0.7 min late
- 03:00: 90% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 1,726 predictions, typically 0.4 min late
- 04:00: 90.3% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 3,989 predictions, typically 1.1 min late
- 05:00: 86.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 11,917 predictions, typically 1 min late
- 06:00: 87.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 21,111 predictions, typically 1.3 min late
- 07:00: 82.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 27,232 predictions, typically 1.4 min late
- 08:00: 78.2% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 26,017 predictions, typically 1.7 min late
- 09:00: 82.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,771 predictions, typically 1.4 min late
- 10:00: 84.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,810 predictions, typically 1.1 min late
- 11:00: 81.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,615 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 12:00: 82% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,772 predictions, typically 1.5 min late
- 13:00: 79.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,112 predictions, typically 1.9 min late
- 14:00: 78.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 23,860 predictions, typically 1.7 min late
- 15:00: 68.4% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 24,059 predictions, typically 3 min late
- 16:00: 66.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 27,892 predictions, typically 3 min late
- 17:00: 67.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 28,839 predictions, typically 2.8 min late
- 18:00: 68.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 28,044 predictions, typically 2.8 min late
- 19:00: 80.8% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 22,322 predictions, typically 1.7 min late
- 20:00: 80.7% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 19,030 predictions, typically 1.8 min late
- 21:00: 80.9% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 15,741 predictions, typically 1.9 min late
- 22:00: 80.5% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 10,995 predictions, typically 1.9 min late
- 23:00: 88.6% of final predictions within five minutes of the timetable, 8,032 predictions, typically 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 | ᖃᖓ | ᐅᑦᑐᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ | Scenario or next investigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProblemPredictions later than timetable70110807473996 routes | 15:00 to 19:00 … 23:00 | 3.9 min late … 3 min late | More running time |
| StrengthPredictions consistently close to timetable1731 routes | 04:00 to 00:00 | 96% | Keep what works |
| ProblemOne hour has a lower prediction match7074733 routes | 15:00 … 18:00 | 52% … 47% | Operations, not the timetable |
| ProblemPredictions earlier than timetable1101 routes | 21:00 | 1.6 min early | Less running time, or holding points |
| ProblemWide prediction spread801 routes | 04:00 | 33 min swing | Overnight operations |
| StrengthObserved-position lower bound7599173734 routes | All measured hours | 100% | Keep what works |
| CaveatCoverage gap7074110804 routes | All measured hours | 99% · 100% | More observation, not a service change |
How BARRHAVEN EAST 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 162 route-hours. 2 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
87%
Route-hours where the median eligible arrival prediction is less than one minute early and less than three minutes late.
ᐊᖅᑯᑎᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ
20of 162
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᑎᑭᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᐊᓂ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᒃ ᒥᓂᑦᓂᒃ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᖓᑕ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓗᒍ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓴᓂᐊᓂᒃ.
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐃᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᐸᔅ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ
1of 162
ᐊᖁᑎ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ, ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ ᑎᑭᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᐊᓂ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᒥᓂᑦᒥᒃ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓘᓃᑦ. ᐅᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᙱᑦᑐᖅ ᐸᓯᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᐅᓪᓚᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ.
ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᑦᑕᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ
3.6min
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
99.4%
ᐊᖁᑎ-ᐃᑲᕐᕋᐃᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ: 95-ᐳᓴᓐᑎ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᑐᐃᓐᑎ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᕿᑎᐊᓃᑦᑐᒥᑦ.
ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕝᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᓯᓂᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑑᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ
1of 162
ᐊᖁᑦ-ᐃᑲᕐᕋᐃᑦ, 95-ᐳᓴᓐᑎᐊᓪ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑭᖑᕙᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᐃᓐᑎ ᒥᓂᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᓪᓗ. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ.
ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᓐᓂᖓ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ
33min
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
77.7% of eligible provider predictions were within five minutes of the timetable. 179,079 of 230,484 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
- 179,079
- Eligible trip-stop predictions
- 230,484
- Observed days
- 20 weekdays
ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ
Ranked 14 of 22 measured wards. 0.7 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
8 of the 21 routes serving this ward have enough provider-prediction evidence to compare. Lowest timetable agreement first.
- 70Open route 71.6%Predictions within five minutes
150,278 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
- 73Open route 75.8%Predictions within five minutes
39,126 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 74Open route 83.1%Predictions within five minutes
83,010 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 99Open route 83.5%Predictions within five minutes
41,425 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 75Open route 87.8%Predictions within five minutes
147,656 eligible predictions across the whole route
- 173Open route 93.5%Predictions within five minutes
49,389 eligible predictions across the whole route
13 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.
| ᐊᖁᑎ | ᐸᕐᓇᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᐅᔪᑦ | With a position | Without a matched position | ᐃᓚᐅᔪᑦ | ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 677 | 20 | 19 | 1 | 95.0% | |
| 70 | 623 | 614 | 9 | 98.6% | |
| 110 | 346 | 341 | 5 | 98.6% | |
| 74 | 712 | 703 | 9 | 98.7% | |
| 80 | 772 | 768 | 4 | 99.5% | |
| 75 | 1,283 | 1,278 | 5 | 99.6% | |
| 73 | 335 | 334 | 1 | 99.7% | |
| 99 | 501 | 500 | 1 | 99.8% | |
| 173 | 477 | 476 | 1 | 99.8% | |
| 275 | 70 | 70 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 277 | 70 | 70 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 659 | 45 | 45 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 283 | 35 | 35 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 279 | 35 | 35 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 680 | 35 | 35 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 696 | 30 | 30 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 673 | 30 | 30 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 690 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 676 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 684 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 100.0% | |
| 305 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
Routes serving the ward
21 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 · 33 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) 1
The public ward snapshot publishes the count but not the individual locations for this ward. No locations are being invented.
Drinking water (City data) 0
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/24
- 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 24: BARRHAVEN EAST
- Boundary and vintage
- City ward layer · effective ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ · imported August 4, 2026
- Official civic contacts
- Wilson Lo · 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
- 21 public route records with a stop inside this boundary · operators: OC Transpo
- Transit evidence vintage
- Timetable import: ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ · 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.
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
- 230,484 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:acdd814897551d80424ac4e9eaf4e7270a332db4917be162b2496c4cddd91a34
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.