Quote:
Originally Posted by grumpy old man
Why the blinkered view on South Winnipeg alone? It is growing to be sure. But folks in other areas of the city travel TO south Winnipeg to work. Folks travel TO south Winnipeg to shop and play. Ikea will be a huge traffic driver on weekends and evenings. Traffic along Kenaston now is heavy day and evenings and weekends alike.
Then there is this claim that most people will be traveling downtown. There may be a growth of new jobs downtown but I don't see it as the only place employment will grow.
Again, I ask, when should we build the infrastructure to deal with the growth of the city? Transit is great, but I don't see it being the panacea to future traffic flow problems. Not in Winnipeg. Not as long as we enjoy -30c and ton's of snow to contend with.
BTW Waverly West is projected to have a population of 40k~ when completed. If no other area of south Winnipeg grows during that time there will be at least that new population growth to consider...
|
I see what you're saying for sure. But, I think Winnipeg is in a great position to learn from the mistakes of others. We didn't build a freeway system (which would have dramatically changed a landscape of this city) like most other cities did in the 50s - 70s did. I see that as a positive. Many other cities are facing enormous problems as it becomes time to repair/maintain their free-way infrastructure. As you know, bridges/overpasses/flyovers cost a lot more to repair. For these reasons, cities all over north america are seriously discussing dismantling their networks, and bringing back at-grade intersections. I think that in 2010, with all that we know about rising oil prices/ huge infrastructure deficits/ the benefits of compact development, that we should seriously be looking at alternatives to the "freeway solution"... In 40 years from now, when driving could be MUCH more expensive than it is now, do we want to be stuck with a crumbling, auto-centred infrastructure that may very well be unnecessary? Just a thought...