Manitoba Intercity Transportation Future

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

You're not wrong, I know that they'll never run a train to Hamiota, MB but you brought up what I was thinking, the North South line would actually be useful. Connecting the lines in E Selkirk and Selkirk and adding some track to Winkler would connect Winkler - Morden to Winnipeg, Winnipeg to Selkirk to the lake country around Winnipeg Beach and Gimli. That's a lion's share of the province using existing track. An East West to Brandon would be a lot harder to swallow but for now, if existing short runs could run passenger rail, that'd be a huge win for movement and connectivity in Manitoba and Canada writ large for a fraction of the cost of new rail. For rolling stock I'm sure it wouldnt be tough to find some cars and use the existing format of power on those tracks. Something like this might even incentivize people to spread out from Winnipeg. If I could live in Gimli on the lake with all the nature around it but I could commute to work on a 80-90 MPH train, I'd make that move, bringing my wages with me (bearing in mind I have no clue what the state of those tracks are like, to get them to 80-90 MPH/ Class 4 Class 5 ratings might be prohibitive.

Obviously a pipe dream but I can dream nonetheless haha.

I strongly agree with your notion of ruralization. It will happen over the next decade. High prices drive people outward.

As for logistics. Selkirk-Winnipeg is a high demand route. Steinbach-Winnipeg. And Lake-Winnipeg (Gimili, Grand, Kenora) on weekends is too.

There's nothing stopping you running market research on these highest demand routes and starting a limited bus line man. Nothing at all. On these routes, for commutes, there's likely a market. But user experience has to be forefront.

Check traffic volumes on these corridors and get more insight into endpoints on both ends. For example, a dedicated Selkirk bus line ending at a large Winnipeg Transit transfer station could link people into the Wpg Transit system. Or if many people endpoint in the same area, more of a direct route style. Run the numbers. You could have a play to buy a bus and run a line.

[bodaggin]

Honestly one of the most botched public transit initiatives is the Blue Bomber Park N Ride system. So close, yet so far.

They have 5 staging areas to "park n ride". Everyone drives halfway to the game, then stages, and busses to the game.

But I don't think anyone sat back and thought "wait a minute, there's 30,000 people going to a single endpoint, and busses seat 40 people."

"There's likely enough people going to the game from each given area of town, that we could almost fill each bus by picking people up at their door. In the least, their nearest bus stop. Skipping the PARK, and going full RIDE".

A direct door-to-game service. Eliminates all event traffic. Eliminates all transfers. Eliminates all drunk driving. Eliminates parking. And provides direct service. Win-Win.

It works only because it's "single-endpoint" and "fixed start-time". Take away either of these, it doesn't work.

The same logic could apply to Jets games. But Arena capacity is half of IG stadium, so neighborhood "attendee density" would be lower, negating the advantage of this.

Your bus line could maybe play into some of these events.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

Honestly one of the most botched public transit initiatives is the Blue Bomber Park N Ride system. So close, yet so far.

They have 5 staging areas to "park n ride". Everyone drives halfway to the game, then stages, and busses to the game.

But I don't think anyone sat back and thought "wait a minute, there's 30,000 people going to a single endpoint, and busses seat 40 people."

"There's likely enough people going to the game from each given area of town, that we could almost fill each bus by picking people up at their door. In the least, their nearest bus stop. Skipping the PARK, and going full RIDE".

A direct door-to-game service. Eliminates all event traffic. Eliminates all transfers. Eliminates all drunk driving. Eliminates parking. And provides direct service. Win-Win.

It works only because it's "single-endpoint" and "fixed start-time". Take away either of these, it doesn't work.

The same logic could apply to Jets games. But Arena capacity is half of IG stadium, so neighborhood "attendee density" would be lower, negating the advantage of this.

Your bus line could maybe play into some of these events.

But the regular bus already drives through neighbourhoods picking up people. Have you considered taking Winnipeg Transit to the game?

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by plrh

But the regular bus already drives through neighbourhoods picking up people. Have you considered taking Winnipeg Transit to the game?

You're missing the value proposition. The regular bus route feeds into the network, taking a long, indirect route to the game. With likely transfers.

In big events like these, there's enough neighborhood density to warrant a direct route. Like a school bus. Pickup a neighborhood, fill the bus, then straight to the stadium.

Regular route could take over an hour. Direct route could take 20mins. That's a value proposition that drives ridership.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

You're missing the value proposition. The regular bus route feeds into the network, taking a long, indirect route to the game. With likely transfers.

In big events like these, there's enough neighborhood density to warrant a direct route. Like a school bus. Pickup a neighborhood, fill the bus, then straight to the stadium.

Regular route could take over an hour. Direct route could take 20mins. That's a value proposition that drives ridership.

Interesting idea but idk how efficient it would be. Driving every cul de sac in for example Whyte Ridge or Canterbury Heights probably would take just as long as grabbing the 673 > Blue Line or the 47 direct or 47 > Blue Line. A hybrid system might function a bit better.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Interesting idea but idk how efficient it would be. Driving every cul de sac in for example Whyte Ridge or Canterbury Heights probably would take just as long as grabbing the 673 > Blue Line or the 47 direct or 47 > Blue Line. A hybrid system might function a bit better.

Sure and agree. Depends on the passenger density. In high passenger density, doorstep works. Or like I say, in lower density, nearest bus stop or walkable meeting place, end of cul-de-sac, park, school etc. Something walkable.

But 30k people is a lot of people. That's 3% of the city. They gotta come from somewhere. The density exists.

If you have a pre-game party you might have 10 people going together, that's a quarter of a bus right there. Even couples, that's only 20 couples per 40px bus. Or 10 families of 4. That's not a lot of pickups to eliminate the car entirely.

I just ran numbers from Charleswood. Existing bus network 86mins EACH WAY. Direct drive 22mins + pickup time. That's 2hr extra round trip. Good luck selling 2hr extra. Value proposition matters.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

Sure and agree. Depends on the passenger density. In high passenger density, doorstep works. Or like I say, in lower density, nearest bus stop or walkable meeting place, end of cul-de-sac, park, school etc. Something walkable.

But 30k people is a lot of people. That's 3% of the city. They gotta come from somewhere. The density exists.

If you have a pre-game party you might have 10 people going together, that's a quarter of a bus right there. Even couples, that's only 20 couples per 40px bus. Or 10 families of 4. That's not a lot of pickups to eliminate the car entirely.

I just ran numbers from Charleswood. Existing bus network 86mins EACH WAY. Direct drive 22mins + pickup time. That's 2hr extra round trip. Good luck selling 2hr extra. Value proposition matters.

That bus ride is exactly why the city needs to giddy up on the rest of the RT network as priority one. That is unacceptably long. Doesn't help that Charleswood probably never should have been rolled into Winnipeg but that's a different fact entirely.