DOCSLIB.ORG

LTC Performed Against Each of the Strategic Outcomes Identified in the Business Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LTC Performed Against Each of the Strategic Outcomes Identified in the Business Plan 2015 Annual Report INDEX CHAIR’S LETTER OF SUBMITTAL TO CITY COUNCIL COMMISSIONERS AND SENIOR MANAGEMENT STAFF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 AN INTEGRATED, AFFORDABLE AND VALUED MOBILITY CHOICE 3 DEMONSTRATED FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY 10 BEING OPEN, TRANSPARENT AND UNDERSTOOD 14 EFFECTIVE UTILIZATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE 15 AN ENGAGED, DIVERSE AND RESPECTFUL WORKPLACE 17 LOOKING FORWARD - TRANSFORMATIONAL INITIATIVES 18 THE LONDON TRANSIT COMMISSION COMMISSION - CURRENT SHERYL ROOTH CHAIR DEAN SHEPPARD VICE CHAIR JESSE HELMER COMMISSIONER ERIC SOUTHERN COMMISSIONER PHIL SQUIRE COMMISSIONER SENIOR MANAGEMENT - CURRENT KELLY PALECZNY GENERAL MANAGER MIKE GREGOR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE JOHN FORD DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION & PLANNING CRAIG MORNEAU DIRECTOR OF FLEET & FACILITIES JOANNE GALLOWAY DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY London Transit‟s vision in the 2015-2018 Business Plan is to be the valued and trusted mobility choice for Londoners. The vision is supported by the mission statement which is moving Londoners – progressively, reliably and affordably. The vision and mission are supported by five linked and, in certain respects, competing strategic outcomes, namely: An integrated, affordable and valued mobility choice Demonstrated fiscal accountability Being open, transparent and understood Effective utilization of infrastructure An engaged, diverse and respectful workplace Consistent with the Business Planning Process, each year an annual report is completed and shared publicly. The report provides an overview of how the LTC performed against each of the strategic outcomes identified in the Business Plan. The table below sets out the performance against the outcomes for the 2015 fiscal year. Strategic Outcome Grade Comments An integrated, Needs Implementation of 5 year service plan is affordable and valued Improvement anticipated to address the majority of service mobility choice concerns relating to both service quality and levels of service provided. Demonstrated fiscal Excellent Overall effective cost management including a accountability flat-line of both City of London investment and rider investment (fares). Being open, Satisfactory Communications in all areas continues to be a transparent and work in progress. understood Effective utilization of Excellent Assets are considered to be „very good – fit for infrastructure the future‟. An engaged, diverse The complete re-development and and respectful implementation of training programs relating to workplace Good the areas of customer service, human rights, diversity in the workplace, driver certification and health and safety in 2015 has provided a solid foundation going forward. The grades of „needs improvement‟ in the area of „integrated, affordable and valued mobility choice‟ and „satisfactory‟ in the area of „being open, transparent and understood‟, highlight the two areas of focus going forward. 1 With respect to „an integrated, affordable and valued mobility choice‟, combined ridership on London‟s conventional and specialized transit services declined in 2015 to 22.7 million rides, eliminating the gains in ridership made from 2012 through 2014. The decline in ridership was isolated to the conventional service, and is directly related to a program change with Ontario Works that now sees clients issued funds directly for transportation versus the historic approach of issuing a monthly transit pass. Isolating the decline associated with the Ontario Works change from the ridership analysis indicates that conventional ridership levels in 2015 were consistent with those achieved in 2014, notwithstanding the introduction of approximately 17,500 annual service hours in 2015. The additional service hours were targeted to result in a moderate 1.5% increase in ridership, which did not occur. Ridership on the specialized service continued the trend of growth in 2015, reaching total ridership of 273,000, the highest in the service history. The flat-lining of conventional transit ridership is not isolated to London, transit systems across the country have experienced the same trends, some even declining notwithstanding the ongoing and continued investment in public transit services. History demonstrates that conventional transit ridership is influenced by factors both internal and external to the transit system. Internal factors, those within the control of the transit system, include service design (hours, frequency and coverage), service quality (safety, reliability, comfort) and service pricing. The implementation of the 5 Year Service Plan over the period 2015-2019 is intended to address the longstanding issues relating to service design and quality. Factors that influence transit ridership that are considered external to the transit system (not within the system‟s control), include population and demographics, urban form, economy, employment, transportation options and emerging technologies within the local service area. Gaining a better understanding of the impacts of these factors on London‟s ridership will be key going forward to ensure that the system continues to operate at or near the top of Ontario transit systems in key service efficiency and effectiveness measures. The objective of „being open, transparent and understood‟, which received a „satisfactory‟ score, will also be the focus of work programs going forward. 2015 saw the launch of an LTC Service Plan Twitter account and Facebook page as well as the growing use of electronic messaging for internal communications, all of which were well received. The focus for 2016 will be ensuring that decision making includes not only the view from a business perspective, but also from the customer‟s perspective, resulting in an improved customer experience. A number of the programs planned for 2016 will provide the opportunity for increased customer input with respect to what they want from their transit service, feedback which may provide insight into the external factors impacting ridership and opportunities to address same. 2 AN INTEGRATED, AFFORDABLE AND VALUED MOBILITY CHOICE The strategic objective calls for the continued development and delivery of accessible public transit services that are integrated with other modes of transportation, dynamic in nature and considered a valued investment to all stakeholders. The following table sets out an assessment of the 2015 performance against key elements of this strategy. Key Elements Grade Reviewing the transit service to ensure it meets the needs of a growing, competing and changing market (includes service design, Excellent routing, frequency and accessibility) Delivering the service consistent with defined schedules and Needs standards Improvement Developing and implementing proven technology in support of an Good effective, efficient and evolving transit service Progressing in the development and delivery of integrated, Needs Significant accessible public transit services Improvement Conventional Transit Services As noted in the following chart which compares actual 2015 ridership and related measures to 2015 budget, expectations were not met for any of the three key efficiency measures. 2015 Ridership Performance Actual vs. Budget -2.3% Actual -1.6% Budget -2.3% Ridership Rides per capita Rides per rev. (millions) service hour The „ridership‟ and related „rides per capita‟1 measures were negatively impacted by a change in the Ontario Works program that took effect in late 2014. The program now provides clients with funding to cover transportation needs versus the historic issuance of a monthly public transit pass, leaving the choice of transportation option to the user. Eliminating the impact of the 3 program change, ridership for 2015 was level with that in 2014, which is concerning given the significant service level improvements that have been implemented beginning in 2014. The „rides per revenue service hour‟2 measure can be viewed from two perspectives, in that the higher it is, the more efficiently the service is operating (i.e. buses are full), and the lower it is, the more quality the service is from a customer perspective, in that the buses will be less crowded and customers will, more often, be able to get a seat. This measure is one that requires a delicate balance in order to ensure efficiency and offer quality at the same time. The 2015 results for this measure are directly reflective of the decline in overall ridership notwithstanding the increase in service hours. The ridership and service hour performance over the period of 2012-2015 is set out in the following chart. Over the period of 2012-2014, ridership growth was occurring at an average rate of approximately 1.9% per year, but declined by 5.9% in 2015, resulting in ridership levels consistent with those achieved in 2012. Conversely, service hours over the period have increased by an average rate of approximately 1.5% per year. The positive for 2015 with respect to these measures, is the impact the combined decline in ridership and increase in service hours has had on service quality issues including overcrowding. Conventional Ridership and Service Hours 24.0 0.585 23.5 0.575 23.0 0.565 Rides 22.5 0.555 Hours 22.0 0.545 21.5 0.535 2012 2013 2014 2015 Ridership(millions) 23.5 23.6 23.8 22.4 Rev Service Hrs (millions) 0.553 0.560 0.571 0.581 Conventional Service Performance Indicators 70.0 60.0 50.0 Rides 40.0 30.0 20.0 2012 2013 2014 2015 Rides per capita 63.5 63.1 63.1 58.7 Rides per rev. service hr. 42.5 42.1 41.7 38.5 1Rides per capita: total rides divided by population – provides for comparison
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Bid for Better Transit Improving Service with Contracted Operations Transitcenter Is a Foundation That Works to Improve Urban Mobility
    A Bid for Better Transit Improving service with contracted operations TransitCenter is a foundation that works to improve urban mobility. We believe that fresh thinking can change the transportation landscape and improve the overall livability of cities. We commission and conduct research, convene events, and produce publications that inform and improve public transit and urban transportation. For more information, please visit www.transitcenter.org. The Eno Center for Transportation is an independent, nonpartisan think tank that promotes policy innovation and leads professional development in the transportation industry. As part of its mission, Eno seeks continuous improvement in transportation and its public and private leadership in order to improve the system’s mobility, safety, and sustainability. For more information please visit: www.enotrans.org. TransitCenter Board of Trustees Rosemary Scanlon, Chair Eric S. Lee Darryl Young Emily Youssouf Jennifer Dill Clare Newman Christof Spieler A Bid for Better Transit Improving service with contracted operations TransitCenter + Eno Center for Transportation September 2017 Acknowledgments A Bid for Better Transit was written by Stephanie Lotshaw, Paul Lewis, David Bragdon, and Zak Accuardi. The authors thank Emily Han, Joshua Schank (now at LA Metro), and Rob Puentes of the Eno Center for their contributions to this paper’s research and writing. This report would not be possible without the dozens of case study interviewees who contributed their time and knowledge to the study and reviewed the report’s case studies (see report appendices). The authors are also indebted to Don Cohen, Didier van de Velde, Darnell Grisby, Neil Smith, Kent Woodman, Dottie Watkins, Ed Wytkind, and Jeff Pavlak for their detailed and insightful comments during peer review.
    [Show full text]
  • University Students' Perceptions of the Relationship Between Bus Pass Ownership and Physical Activity Levels
    Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 4-23-2015 12:00 AM University Students' Perceptions of the Relationship between Bus Pass Ownership and Physical Activity Levels Hieu Ly The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Dr. Jennifer D. Irwin The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Health and Rehabilitation Sciences A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Master of Science © Hieu Ly 2015 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Community Health and Preventive Medicine Commons Recommended Citation Ly, Hieu, "University Students' Perceptions of the Relationship between Bus Pass Ownership and Physical Activity Levels" (2015). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 2805. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/2805 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BUS PASS OWNERSHIP AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY LEVELS (Thesis format: Monograph) by Hieu Ly Graduate Program in Health and Rehabilitation Sciences A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © Hieu Ly 2015 Abstract The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between university students’: (a) perceptions of having a discounted bus pass and transit-related physical activity; (b) perceptions of having a discounted bus pass and weekly physical activity levels; and (c) transit-related physical activity and weekly physical activity levels.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to London Transit
    CONTACT INFORMATION A Guide to London London Transit Commission Transit 450 Highbury Avenue North London, Ontario N5W 5L2 Website: www.ltconline.ca Customer Service: 519-451-1347 Hours of Operation: Monday-Friday 8:00am-10:00pm Saturday, Sunday & Holidays 8:30am-12:00pm, and 1:00pm-4:30pm Specialized Transit Booking Line: 519-453-3444 For real-time bus information, visit https://realtime.londontransit.ca or call 519-451-1347 and follow the instructions for up-to-date schedule information. The information contained herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. This document is for informational purposes only. London Transit has not endorsed or approved this document. London Transit accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained herein, or any loss or damage as a result This Document was of its use. created by the Age Friendly London N e t w o r k i n This booklet was last updated: Collaboration with Students at W e s t e r n April 2019 U n i v e r s i t y 22 SUPPORT PERSON PASS What Is A Support Person? Any person who assists a specialized transit registrant when travelling on a London Transit bus. Who Qualifies For A Support Person Pass? Riders that are specialized transit registrants who require the assistance of a support person when travelling on the bus. What Is The Purpose Of The Support Person Pass? The pass allows the attendant to accompany the specialized transit registrant rider without the support person paying a fee. 21 CONTENTS 2 ACCESSIBLITY INFORMATION Introduction Page 3 Specialized Transit Services Why Take The Bus? What is “Specialized Transit”? Bus Basics Page 4 Specialized transit provides an even more accessible option for people who cannot use the standard LTC Identifying Bus Stops buses.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to London Transit
    CONTACT INFORMATION AGE FRIENDLY LONDON NETWORK London Transit Commission 450 Highbury Avenue North London, Ontario N5W 5L2 Website: www.ltconline.ca Customer Service: 519-451-1347 Hours of Operation: Monday-Friday 8:00am-10:00pm Saturday, Sunday & Holidays 8:30am-12:00pm, and 1:00pm-4:30pm Specialized Transit Booking Line: 519-453-3444 Please visit www.ltconline.ca/webwatch for real time bus information. The information contained herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. This document is for informational purposes only. London Transit has not endorsed or approved this document. London Transit accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained herein, or any loss or damage as a result of its use. A GUIDE TO This booklet was last updated: LONDON TRANSIT January 2016 In Collaboration with Western University 16 ATTENDANT PASS What Is An Attendant? Any person who assists a Specialized Transit Registrant when travelling on a London Transit bus. Who Qualifies For An Attendant Pass? Riders that are specialized Transit Registrants who require an attendant’s assistance when travelling on the bus. What Is The Purpose Of The Attendant Pass? The pass allows the attendant to accompany the Specialized Transit Registrant rider without the attendant paying a fee. 15 2 ACCESSIBLITY INFORMATION CONTENTS Accessible Transit What is an “Accessible Bus”? Introduction All LTC buses are accessible for passengers who may have a Page 3 disability, in accordance with The Accessibility for Ontarians Why Take The Bus? with Disabilities Act, 2005. Features of the accessible buses Bus Basics include: Page 4 Has a low floor: no stairs to climb while getting on and Identifying Bus Stops off the bus Page 5 Has a ramp for easy access for walker, scooter and Trip Planning wheelchair users Page 6 Important: accessible buses on regular transit routes Paying Bus Fares only have restraints for TWO wheelchairs and/or Page 8 scooters on board at one time.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices and Key Considerations For
    BEST PRACTICES AND KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR TRANSIT ELECTRIFICATION AND CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT TO DELIVER PREDICTABLE, RELIABLE, AND COST-EFFECTIVE FLEET SYSTEMS First Published JUNE 2020 Edition 2.0 SEPTEMBER 2020 AUTHORS Dr.Josipa Petrunic, President & CEO Dr. Elnaz Abotalebi, Researcher & Project Lead Dr. Abhishek Raj, Researcher c 2 COPYRIGHT © 2020 Information in this document is to be considered the intellectual property of the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium in accordance with Canadian copyright law. This report was prepared by the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium for the account of Natural Resources Canada. The material in it reflects the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium’s best judgment in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation. Any use that a third party makes of this report or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it are the responsibility of such third parties. The Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium accepts no responsibility of such third parties. The Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report. UPDATE: COVID-19 PUBLICATION IMPACT The publication of this report has been delayed by three months due to the COVID-19 global pandemic. This report, and the majority of research included within it, was completed primarily between September 2019 and March 2020 – prior to the novel coronavirus pandemic affecting local economies and transit revenue across Canada. While efforts have been made to include relevant announcements by Canadian transit agencies since that time, specifically as they relate to electric buses, many investment decisions and funding programs related to municipal green infrastructure deployments may change this year as a result of the financial crisis unfolding in cities across the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Accessible Transit Services in Ontario
    Accessible transit services in Ontario Discussion paper ISBN – 0-7794-0652-4 Approved by the Commission: January 16, 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 5 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 5 PART I. TRANSIT AND HUMAN RIGHTS...................................................................... 7 1.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 7 1.2 THE ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS CODE.......................................................... 8 1.3 THE PROPOSED "ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT" AND OTHER LEGISLATION ........................................................................................................... 10 1.4 CASE LAW ..................................................................................................... 11 1.5 THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 1990 (ADA)............................ 12 1.5.1 The ADA: Title II ...................................................................................... 13 PART II. METHODS OF ACHIEVING ACCESSIBILITY ............................................ 14 2.1 COMMUNITY BUSES AND SERVICE ROUTES............................................ 15 2.2 LOW FLOOR BUSES ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transit and a Green, Inclusive Recovery 2 3
    COVID19 PUBLIC TRANSIT AND A GREEN, INCLUSIVE RECOVERY 2 3 CANADIAN PUBLIC TRANSIT RECOVERY STRATEGY CANADIAN PUBLIC TRANSIT RECOVERY STRATEGY INTRODUCTION Some may say that public transit doesn’t need ongoing investment. Perhaps, the office won’t come back. Maybe the virus won’t go away. That Covid-induced ridership declines are permanent. We disagree. e have a choice to make. There will be a recovery. We don’t know when, but one will happen. And the question before us is what Do we want a future with more congestion, transport for those who can afford it, and higher W emissions? kind of recovery it will be. As we contemplate that question, we should focus on what will happen if the reason transit’s economics have been upended is left unaddressed. Or do we want a future with better connected communities, more equitable cities, and real action on More than half of transit’s operating costs traditionally came from the farebox. As ridership plummeted climate change? by about 90% when the pandemic first hit, transit systems suffered steep—in some cases, total—revenue No issue affects mobility, equity, and climate change more than public transit. It is integral to declines. And while ridership has increased in the months since, it’s still only about 40% of pre-pandemic a greener and socially inclusive economic recovery—post-Covid and long into the future. levels and unlikely to fully return for some time. But building that future requires recognizing the pandemic has turned public transit’s economics on If the revenue that used to come from the farebox is not replaced, a downward spiral is almost their head.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Report: Human Rights and Public Transit Services in Ontario
    HUMAN RIGHTS AND PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES IN ONTARIO Consultation Report ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Approved by the Commission: Marcy 27, 2002 Available in various formats: IBM compatible computer disk, audio tape, large print Also available on Internet: www.ohrc.on.ca Disponible en français Transit Consultation Report I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................3 II. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................4 III. SCOPE OF REPORT...............................................................................6 IV. KEY THEMES...............................................................................................7 V. TRANSIT SURVEY UPDATE..............................................................8 1. Background...........................................................................................................8 2. Plans and Standards ...........................................................................................8 3. Conventional Transit Systems ...........................................................................9 4. Paratransit Systems ..........................................................................................11 VI. CONVENTIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEMS...................................12 1. Conventional Transit Systems and Human Rights Law............................12 2. Accessible Conventional Transit Services in Ontario................................13 3. General Issues ..................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • On-Board Surveillance System for Transit
    On-Board Surveillance System for Transit Transit Commission June 19, 2013 Background • OC Tranpso is committed to providing a safe and reliable transit system • Wide range of safety and security initiatives currently in place as part of overall program: - Transecure; - Night Stop; - Taxi Link; - Passenger Assistance Alarms; and, - Emergency Phones. • Department identified the need to explore the feasibility and costs associated with the use of cameras on its fleet in its 2012 Departmental Priorities and report back to the Transit Commission on the findings. 2 Key Findings • Studies have shown that the introduction of enhanced surveillance systems has a modest impact on crime prevention; • Studies also suggest that surveillance systems by themselves do not contribute to a sense of increased safety and security; • The majority of jurisdictions that have implemented video surveillance capabilities find it to be an invaluable investigative tool (administrative, criminal and civil) within a broader safety and security program; • Surveillance systems should form part of our overall comprehensive safety program; • A solution to meet OC Transpo’s stated requirements is feasible and can be supported by established vendors with current technologies; 3 Key Findings (Cont’d) • Cost for a comprehensive OC Transpo onboard surveillance system over a 6 year aggregated cost are approximately: - Full OC Transpo fleet $16.32 M - Double Decker bus fleet only $ 2.35 M - PARA Transpo bus fleet only $ 2.42 M - Articulated bus fleet only $ 6.83 M - 40 foot bus fleet only $ 8.45 M • Any expansion of surveillance systems will complement the current surveillance system for and budgeted in the O-Train expansion and Confederation Line; • Implementation of a program can be phased in according to budget availability; and, • The current wireless bus network infrastructure used by OC Transpo is available and has capacity and reduces overall costs4 .
    [Show full text]
  • U-Pass Toolkit
    The complete guide to universal transit pass programs at Canadian colleges and universities May 2004 Prepared by Noxon Associates Limited © Canadian Urban Transit Association, 2004 55 York St., Suite 1401 Toronto, ON M5J 1R7 Telephone: (416) 365-9800 Fax: (416) 365-1295 Web: www.cutaactu.ca Table of contents Acknowledgements Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................................. 1 1.1 The challenges of campus transportation ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The U-Pass response ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 U-Pass benefits ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 U-Pass challenges.................................................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 2: The basics................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Where is it happening? ......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 What’s involved? How long does it take?.......................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Who
    [Show full text]
  • LONDON TRANSIT COMMISSION Industrial Service Industry Review Draft Report
    LONDON TRANSIT COMMISSION Industrial Service Industry Review Draft Report April 2018 – 18-7254 iii Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Service Delivery Options 1 2.1 Common Industrial Area Service Delivery Models ................................................................ 1 2.2 On-Demand Service Delivery Models ................................................................................... 2 2.3 Service Delivery Responsibilities .......................................................................................... 5 3.0 Preliminary Industry Scan 6 Q2: Do you currently operate transit service to an Industrial Park Area? .............................................. 2 Q3: If yes, what type of service do you provide? (select all that apply) ................................................. 2 Q4: Is your industrial service strategy working for you? ........................................................................ 3 Q5: Do you operate any alternative service delivery models that may be applicable in a low- density area such as an Industrial Park? (select all that apply) ............................................. 3 Q6: If you are willing to participate in a short interview to elaborate on the service, please list the name, phone number, and email address of an individual we can contact for further information below: .................................................................................................. 4 4.0 Telephone Survey Case Studies 5 4.1 Bancroft Community Transit (BCT) ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT - RAPPORT ANNUEL 2018-2019 CANADIAN URBAN TRANSIT RESEARCH & INNOVATION CONSORTIUM (CUTRIC) - CONSORTIUM DE RECHERCHE ET D'INNOVATION EN TRANSPORT URBAIN AU CANADA (CRITUC) http://cutric-crituc.org/ 1 Yonge Street, Suite 1801 [email protected] Toronto, ON, M5E 1W7 CUTRIC-CRITUC Annual Report 2018-2019 Rapport annuel 2018-2019 http://cutric-crituc.org/ Main Office: Suite 1801, 1 Yonge Street, Toronto, ON, M5E 1W7 2 CUTRIC-CRITUC Annual Report 2018-2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Message from the Executive Director and CEO...............................................................5 Board of Directors...............................................................................................................6 Organizational Structure.....................................................................................................7 About CUTRIC......................................................................................................................8 Projects................................................................................................................................12 1. CUTRIC Funded R&D Projects Approved (TRL 2-6) • PROJECT 160009: Pre-commercialization Development Project of Induction Heated Catalyst (IHC)........................................................................................13 • PROJECT 160015b: Pan-Canadian Electric Vehicle Energy Consumption, State of Charge, & Vehicle Simulation Modelling for Heavy Duty Powertrain Systems and High-Powered Charging ..........................................................14
    [Show full text]