Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[scryer]

Back in the Vancouver forums, we are currently discussing transit solutions to the metro area south of the Fraser river. I'm re-quoting something just because I think it somewhat applies here:

Originally Posted by Officedweller

Wiki says that C-Train was first built in 1981.
Google search shows that in 1981 Calgary's population was 592,743.

Edmonton's LRT line (tunnel) started operating in 1978.
Edmonton's population in 1978 was 478,066.

Take this with a grain of salt because Calgary and Edmonton have a whole different situation going on and it was a very different time back then.

But I just wanted to quote that from over in the western forums just to showcase that it's not just population that dictates whether or not you build a rapid-transit system. Heck, even Waterloo/Kitchener is getting an LRT system and Saskatoon is conducting studies about a BRT system within their city; these former cities are ALL smaller than us by a lot.

Personally I think that politics combined with a lack of vision for the past century has been a leading factor to Winnipeg's current state.

[Wpg_Guy]

Originally Posted by scryer

Back in the Vancouver forums, we are currently discussing transit solutions to the metro area south of the Fraser river. I'm re-quoting something just because I think it somewhat applies here:



Take this with a grain of salt because Calgary and Edmonton have a whole different situation going on and it was a very different time back then.

But I just wanted to quote that from over in the western forums just to showcase that it's not just population that dictates whether or not you build a rapid-transit system. Heck, even Waterloo/Kitchener is getting an LRT system and Saskatoon is conducting studies about a BRT system within their city; these former cities are ALL smaller than us by a lot.

Personally I think that politics combined with a lack of vision for the past century has been a leading factor to Winnipeg's current state.

This x 100

[buzzg]

It's the same reason we're voting on how to design an intersection: we tend to bow over to the loudest of the general population, regardless of their expertise in the matter or how practical and forward-thinking it is. "Win elections and move on" should be our motto.

[BuildUpWpg]

Originally Posted by headhorse

put it on pembina, where it always should have been...

Headhorse is beating a deadhorse!

[headhorse]

I just don't get it. it should be a direct route to the university with minimal stops to get people between there and the downtown as quickly as possible. instead it's a milk run route that serves a bunch of empty TOD's and barely shortens the time between downtown and the university.. and by not removing traffic lanes and running it on pembina, it adds more traffic on pembina, meaning more traffic into OV and downtown.

not to mention TOD development is going to capture huge market shares of people moving into new multi family dwellings... taking away possible residents from inner city infill sites, including downtown.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by headhorse

I just don't get it. it should be a direct route to the university with minimal stops to get people between there and the downtown as quickly as possible. instead it's a milk run route that serves a bunch of empty TOD's and barely shortens the time between downtown and the university.. and by not removing traffic lanes and running it on pembina, it adds more traffic on pembina, meaning more traffic into OV and downtown.

not to mention TOD development is going to capture huge market shares of people moving into new multi family dwellings... taking away possible residents from inner city infill sites, including downtown.

I think that IF the city has the patience to continue with this BRT project that we need to start pushing for a grade-separated connection to downtown areas before we actually start liking it and seeing good TODs. Right now the shit by Fort Rouge station (or whatever) is just terrible.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by headhorse

I just don't get it. it should be a direct route to the university with minimal stops to get people between there and the downtown as quickly as possible. instead it's a milk run route that serves a bunch of empty TOD's and barely shortens the time between downtown and the university.. and by not removing traffic lanes and running it on pembina, it adds more traffic on pembina, meaning more traffic into OV and downtown.

not to mention TOD development is going to capture huge market shares of people moving into new multi family dwellings... taking away possible residents from inner city infill sites, including downtown.

It's amazing that the city of Winnipeg managed to royally screw up what should have been a simple BRT route and proving beyond a doubt that no further BRT routes should even be studied until a cost/benefit analysis is done on the soon to be completed shit show that saves no time between DT and the U of M!

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by scryer

Back in the Vancouver forums, we are currently discussing transit solutions to the metro area south of the Fraser river. I'm re-quoting something just because I think it somewhat applies here:



Take this with a grain of salt because Calgary and Edmonton have a whole different situation going on and it was a very different time back then.

But I just wanted to quote that from over in the western forums just to showcase that it's not just population that dictates whether or not you build a rapid-transit system. Heck, even Waterloo/Kitchener is getting an LRT system and Saskatoon is conducting studies about a BRT system within their city; these former cities are ALL smaller than us by a lot.

Personally I think that politics combined with a lack of vision for the past century has been a leading factor to Winnipeg's current state.

Yep.

So much growth and positive momentum has happened in Winnipeg since the early 2000's after the very rough 90's the city went through, yet rapid transit is one area that has completely missed the mark.

Originally Posted by rrskylar

It's amazing that the city of Winnipeg managed to royally screw up what should have been a simple BRT route and proving beyond a doubt that no further BRT routes should even be studied until a cost/benefit analysis is done on the soon to be completed shit show that saves no time between DT and the U of M!

It may just be my impression, but seems to turn into a never ending "let's do another study" cycle. Was it Glen Murray who had an incredible BRT vision that could have worked? Imagine if that went through where the city could be now. We could be talking about covering that system into LRT or something.

[buzzg]

Ya, Katz cancelled it. Would be interesting to see if he didn’t impose the awful tax freeze, if we would be much further ahead by now.

An no, don’t study it again – just don’t let politics win over proper planning and engineering. We’ve already done studies, appliy those to new routes, use insights from numerous successful (B)RT projects all over the world, including North America.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Ya, Katz cancelled it. Would be interesting to see if he didn’t impose the awful tax freeze, if we would be much further ahead by now.

An no, don’t study it again – just don’t let politics win over proper planning and engineering. We’ve already done studies, appliy those to new routes, use insights from numerous successful (B)RT projects all over the world, including North America.

It was actually Glen Murray who imposed the tax freeze at the beginning of his first term, which Katz then continued. Agreed though, even a modest 2% increase a year over those 14 years would have our budget about a third higher than it is now.

[optimusREIM]

Here is my idea for what a built out rapid transit network should look like.

Quick legend:
- First Red Line: you can already see that the SW/BRT is included but I extended it along the route that actually keeps it rapid next to the rail ROW through North St B. I then commandeer part of Talbot to extend it to Kildonan Place Mall, potential to always go a little further towards Transcona if need be. Mode: BRT, Future conversion to LRT

Cost approx 1.1 B in total

- Second Red Line: West Terminus at Portage and Moray, along Portage, via Broadway, Union Station, Provencher @ Esplanade Riel, Point Douglas, Main St., to North Terminus at Kildonan Park. Mode: cut and cover subway along the majority of the route.
It's gonna be pricey, but this is a route that will be needed at some point in time (heck coulda used it 30 years ago).

Cost: approx. 1.5-2 B

- Third Red Line: Southern Terminus at St Anne's and Fermor, partially borrowing from the original Wilson plan. Runs along Fermor, then the length of Osborne, through the exchange, then up to Henderson, North Terminus near Henderson and Chief Peguis. Mode: Cut and cover subway except the exchange district portions.

Cost: approx. 2 B

- Fourth Red Line: Express Route on Northwestern Portion, Southeastern portion normal. Western Terminus at YWG, North to RRC, East under CPR yards, along Selkirk ave, south along Main then St Mary's Rd, Southern Terminus at St Vital Centre. Mode: Conventional subway for northwestern portion (above ground where possible), cut and cover along main and St Mary's.

Cost: approx 2-2.5 B

- Blue Line: Southern Terminus at Southdale (Archibald and Fermor), north along rail ROW then west along Marion, via Union Station, Graham Mall, along Sherbrook/maryland, via HSC, under CPR yards, along MacGregor, along Inkster, Northwest Terminus at Inkster and McPhillips. Mode: surface LRT except between CPR yards and Dominion Centre (bored tunnel).

Cost: approx. 2 B

- Green Line: Ring BRT utilizing existing infrastructure. Optimized by having the whole length as a free-flowing inner ring road (whatever that route may be).

Cost: whatever upgrading the inner ring to freeway standards costs (face it, we would want that anyways) plus 400 M for stations.

In addition the whole system will be a fare controlled zone, including a retrofit of the current line to bring it to those standards. Stations currently under construction or completed will be kept but new stations will attempt to not be too close together.

The philosophy is to be the least disruptive as possible, while also serving areas where density would permit the demand necessary to justify such an expense. It also serves all the major post-secondary institutions in Winnipeg with the exception of CMU, which accesses the system via a frequent bus to the western BRT running along Kenaston. Another goal was to make most of the main tourist attractions directly accessible by RT. Downtown will be almost perfectly integrated given the current skywalk system which connects to the RT at several points. The whole bus system would be reworked as to feed the main transit system and provide coverage to areas that do not have direct access to RT. Two main hub stations are used. One at Union, the other at the old CP station on Higgins.

The red lines are lines that would be part of the initial build phase (a helluva pile of money). Green and Blue are later on, based on need and funding availability.

The primary purpose is to enable the average Winnipegger to live without a car and have more or less convenient and frequent access. The system will inevitably promote density along established corridors, reduce congestion along major arteries, and alleviate downtown traffic, to allow for a more pedestrian focused approach to the core. It will allow tourists to more easily visit the city without a car, using a system that will be familiar to anyone who has used RT in any major world city. It will also facilitate development and be able to withstand population growth for years to come, and a solid base for future expansion should demand exist.

This proposed RT network makes transit sexy to use again, and more efficient and easy to understand than the current bus system.

Total Cost: 9-10 B - so my only comment here is if we get on it now it's sorta long term manageable. Think of it as an investment in the city, and an initiative that is both green and sustainable on the long term.

This is just one of my plans for transit, although it seems to be my favourite one so far. I apologize for the large image size.

[peg]

Thank you for the plan! Very neat.

I was just in Europe for a few weeks and using the metros there is so nice... made me really imagine what it would be like if we had one here. I've been fantasizing about it since I got back, so this is quite interesting!

[esquire]

Interesting concept. At first glance, here are the changes I'd make:

I'd scrap the fourth red line and replace it with airport service via a branch off the second red line. That line either provides coverage that is somewhat redundant or focuses on areas that are very close to downtown anyway.

I'd also stretch the blue line further NW up towards either The Maples or Tyndall Park. Transit ridership up around that area is relatively high, and providing a fast way to get downtown and beyond might boost it even higher.

The green line would be an audacious experiment... up to now we've had pretty ineffective crosstown routes. The focus has always been on in and out of downtown at rush hour. A good suburban ring crosstown route could really open the city up to transit users.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

Interesting concept. At first glance, here are the changes I'd make:

I'd scrap the fourth red line and replace it with airport service via a branch off the second red line. That line either provides coverage that is somewhat redundant or focuses on areas that are very close to downtown anyway.

I'd also stretch the blue line further NW up towards either The Maples or Tyndall Park. Transit ridership up around that area is relatively high, and providing a fast way to get downtown and beyond might boost it even higher.

The green line would be an audacious experiment... up to now we've had pretty ineffective crosstown routes. The focus has always been on in and out of downtown at rush hour. A good suburban ring crosstown route could really open the city up to transit users.

I appreciate the feedback. The reason I set up a separate line for the airport service would be make it "Express" (not that that might be necessary but it would generally have fewer stops on that leg, think around 4 ). I also thought that line would be necessary on the southern end to provide old st vital with a connection. St Mary's is a really good candidate for serious densification along its entire length and transformation along the more residential sections to a more mixed use street.

Agreed in principle for the blue and green lines though. I'd really love to see the city set up a crosstown ring. That would be feasible to test out almost immediately. It would be a two way service so you didn't have to go all the way around to go in a particular direction obviously.

[Wpg_Guy]

That looks awesome, if only that existed today...one can dream.

[BrickJunkie]

That's a really cool map, thanks for sharing.

I'm not sure if my attempt to share this jazz will work (technology ain't my friend) but here's a fantasy 6 line system for Winnipeg circa 2243 ha. It's not perfect and there's things I would already change but hey, it's still a neat idea:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?m...513027344&z=12



I also have a mental map of a streetcar system to incorporate (Graham, Ellice, Westminister, Arlington yards after redevelopment etc.) but it gets a bit messy to include all that stuff on one map. Anyway there 'tis.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

I appreciate the feedback. The reason I set up a separate line for the airport service would be make it "Express" (not that that might be necessary but it would generally have fewer stops on that leg, think around 4 ). I also thought that line would be necessary on the southern end to provide old st vital with a connection. St Mary's is a really good candidate for serious densification along its entire length and transformation along the more residential sections to a more mixed use street.......

Some great ideas and it's time to start thinking ahead, esp. as Winnipeg's population is expected to top 1 million in less than 20 years. Such a plan would really add additional density along all of these corridors.

I think Portage West has sufficient density for your west line to run through to Portage and Cavalier. It would require three additional stations, Booth, Kirkfield Park and Crestwood. Moray Station should certainly be a major transit centre though, with buses from Charleswood feeding into this station. Some trains could even terminate there during peak (and even off-peak) periods.

How do feel about branch lining?, such that is used on the London Underground (re: Northern Line, Piccadilly Line, etc.), in that the inner and more heavily travelled portions of the lines have greater service than the outlying branches? So, just as a hypothetical, trains to the southeast would serve densely populated Norwood and north St. Vital and then split at St. Anne's and Fermor with trains alternating, one branch proceeding east (perhaps as far as Beaverhill given anticipated population growth) to serve Southdale, Windsor Park (and by extension Sage Creek and Southland Park) and another branch continuing south to Bishop and then a quick spur west to St. Vital Centre. I'm agreeing with you that the St. Anne's corridor is the one to utilize vs. one on St. Mary's as it is already has a considerably higher density of population.

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by roccerfeller

It may just be my impression, but seems to turn into a never ending "let's do another study" cycle. Was it Glen Murray who had an incredible BRT vision that could have worked? Imagine if that went through where the city could be now. We could be talking about covering that system into LRT or something.

You fail to recognize that it was WT's Planner, Bill Menzies (now retired, but working at an engineering firm) that promoted BRT.

Glen just listened to the "experts" at WT instead of rational people such as myself, Jeff Lowe, Nick Ternette, Dallas Deschatres (nee Hansen) and others that BRT is not the mode we should have pursued, but rather rail-based solutions instead. Some of these people such as Jeff Lowe studied Transit in several other cities (usually Amer.) and studied at the Univ. City Planning course. Dallas Hansen has similar "lived" experience of other cities' mass transit (Chicago, New York, Montreal, Toronto, Los Angeles, St. Louis) and wrote a regular urbanist column in the Free Press more than 10 years ago.

Glen's idea of a magnetic guideway along Pembina that would "guide" buses along, so they don't stray away from the curbs at the bus stops would not work here, due to our Wintery climate 6 mos. of the year. No brains that Mr. Murray, I tell ya.

And see how much a failure Murray has been at Ont. Provincial politics. The media out there just laughs at him!

[WolselyMan]

If anybody, for future reference, is interested in what you get when you ask rational adults who actually know what it's like to take the bus "what would a transit system for Winnipeg that's actually competitive with driving look like?" let me direct you no further than to a group called Functional Transit Winnipeg (FTW) http://functionaltransit.com/about/

This is a group that's actively out there trying to educate as many Winnipeggers as possible about the massive advantages of a Frequent Transit System (FTS) where transferring between buses isn't headache inducing because each of your consecutive buses only comes every 35 minutes and your only shelter is a glass booth that's fit for nothing less than Florida weather. These people are saying what everyone already knows but don't know they do and they need all the support we can give them! Don't let Winnipeg be totally flattened by a river of molten stupidity that's slowly opening up below our feet!

[rrskylar]

So the deep thinkers at city hall are already coming up with ideas and solutions for the traffic congestion problems that will occur if/when Portage and Main is opened to...you guessed it: pedestrian traffic.

2500 buses through the P & M intersection daily with 250 at peak hours alone, and yeah let's open it so that the equivalent of two or three busloads of people can cross the corridor and make everyone else wait ten minutes longer on their commutes in....buses!