Winnipeg | Transit | Rapid Transit

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by Bdog

- Many people work in jobs that require cars (for example, may dad is a tradesperson, and can't possibly take his equipment with him on the bus; many of my friends in construction can't get to various job sites on transit; etc).

That depends.

When I was living in Calgary I rode the train with hundreds of construction workers and tradespeople. Most had a lunch box in one hand and a toolbox in the other.

When downtown parking is $25-30/day, construction workers figure out how to work without needing their vehicle.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by h0twired

That depends.

When I was living in Calgary I rode the train with hundreds of construction workers and tradespeople. Most had a lunch box in one hand and a toolbox in the other.

When downtown parking is $25-30/day, construction workers figure out how to work without needing their vehicle.

Of course both our experiences are anecdotal, but I don't think your experience in Calgary is relevant to the experience of tradespeople here at all. I've also been on the C-Train, and although I wasn't paying specific attention to the makeup of people, I seem to recall most looking like business people/service workers, not blue collar workers.

1. Winnipeg does NOT have 25-30$ parking a day, nor do most other mid-sized cities. So, I don't think this is a consideration.

2. This is assuming that most tradespeople work downtown, where parking is maybe 10$ a day (assuming parking passes aren't given to the workers too). It's quite the opposite. Tradespeoples work is scattered throughout the city, almost everywhere which has free parking.

3. Out of the VAST amount of electricians, carpenters, painters and construction workers I know, NONE of them take the bus to work. First of all, job sites are scattered (i.e. airport, homes, etc.), and are hardly accessible by transit - they aren't going to walk 5 minutes with their tools, get on one bus, transfer somewhere, then walk another 5 minutes to the job site. Secondly, work hours often start before (and end after) rush hour, meaning that service is even worse then...

Next time you ride the bus, tell me how many tradespeople you see riding it. Next time you talk to your friends in the trades, ask them how they get to work...

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Of course both our experiences are anecdotal, but I don't think your experience in Calgary is relevant to the experience of tradespeople here at all. I've also been on the C-Train, and although I wasn't paying specific attention to the makeup of people, I seem to recall most looking like business people/service workers, not blue collar workers.

1. Winnipeg does NOT have 25-30$ parking a day, nor do most other mid-sized cities. So, I don't think this is a consideration.

All I am saying is that is isn't an excuse. Sure a subcontracting company will need a trailer with (in the case of an electrician) cables, boxes, connectors, specialty tool etc.

However the average level 1-4 apprentice will need little more than a well stocked toolbox/bag with their personal tools to do a job. Why would they need their truck at the jobsite or for that matter, parked a few blocks away in an Impark lot?

Originally Posted by Bdog

2. This is assuming that most tradespeople work downtown, where parking is maybe 10$ a day (assuming parking passes aren't given to the workers too). It's quite the opposite. Tradespeoples work is scattered throughout the city, almost everywhere which has free parking.

Granted. I was referring to tradespeople working downtown on downtown projects.

Originally Posted by Bdog

3. Out of the VAST amount of electricians, carpenters, painters and construction workers I know, NONE of them take the bus to work. First of all, job sites are scattered (i.e. airport, homes, etc.), and are hardly accessible by transit - they aren't going to walk 5 minutes with their tools, get on one bus, transfer somewhere, then walk another 5 minutes to the job site. Secondly, work hours often start before (and end after) rush hour, meaning that service is even worse then...

Next time you ride the bus, tell me how many tradespeople you see riding it. Next time you talk to your friends in the trades, ask them how they get to work...

I take the bus daily (route 11) and ride along with at least 5-6 tradespeople every morning. Possibly more given that I can really only identify those doing "outdoor" work based on the fact that they are wearing hardhats and wearing ToughDuck/Carhartt and the one guy who wears his Otis uniform.

[bicycles]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Not everyone can or wants to live in the centre of the city. Most people find the suburbs far more comfortable and are willing to put up with the congestion. You can't tell people where to live.

I agree the south side of the City is very congested. If you dislike it, move to the north side - very little congestion here.

except we can and should. the city should have parameters in place to limit sprawl, promote public transit and infill, and effectively solve a lot of this cities problems. limiting sprawl would see more investment in the inner city, less congestion, less crime, and public health benefits. what way have suburbs benefited our city and the citizens at all? we've become lazier, obese, and socially segregated.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by bicycles

except we can and should. the city should have parameters in place to limit sprawl, promote public transit and infill, and effectively solve a lot of this cities problems. limiting sprawl would see more investment in the inner city, less congestion, less crime, and public health benefits. what way have suburbs benefited our city and the citizens at all? we've become lazier, obese, and socially segregated.

at least we're not as spread out as say Edmonton or Calgary. The fact we have no freeway allows us to stay within the city too. Winnipeg is a neat balance.

[bicycles]

Originally Posted by roccerfeller

at least we're not as spread out as say Edmonton or Calgary. The fact we have no freeway allows us to stay within the city too. Winnipeg is a neat balance.

oh I agree, Winnipeg is much better off then many cities. We have way more fantastic inner city neighbourhoods, the lack of freeways is great, and we have good transit ridership. I just would like to see Winnipeg really become a an even greater urban center, and hopefully a model city that others would follow. big dreams.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by bicycles

except we can and should. the city should have parameters in place to limit sprawl, promote public transit and infill, and effectively solve a lot of this cities problems. limiting sprawl would see more investment in the inner city, less congestion, less crime, and public health benefits. what way have suburbs benefited our city and the citizens at all? we've become lazier, obese, and socially segregated.

I think forcing people to live based on one view of the city is definitely the wrong way to go about it - especially when that view is based on partly false assumptions. I'm also in favour of a more compact urban form, but I believe that the way to achieving that falls more on changing people's preferences than forcing it down their throats. When it becomes too costly, and too inconvenient to live in the boonies, the shift will eventually occur. I also feel that we need to put infill and sprawl on a more level playing field, so that people are paying the true costs of their lifestyle choice - however, it needs to remain that: A choice!

Finally, I think your views on the benefits of a higher density Winnipeg are slightly exaggerated. Suburbs breed social segregation? Some of the best "urban neighbourhoods" in cities like Toronto and Vancouver are so expensive that it is a VERY narrow demographic that can afford to live in them. Conversely, some of our suburbs (e.g. Fort Richmond) are quite diverse, in terms of both income and ethnicity...Higher densities actually bring about more congestion, unless complemented by a greatly improved transit system. And obesity often has more to do with poverty than urban form - you could live in a dense inner-city neighbourhood, but with no sobeys near by, you might have no choice but to eat junk all the time (see: food deserts in some American cities)...

[dpenner]

Originally Posted by Bdog

I think forcing people to live based on one view of the city is definitely the wrong way to go about it - especially when that view is based on partly false assumptions. I'm also in favour of a more compact urban form, but I believe that the way to achieving that falls more on changing people's preferences than forcing it down their throats. When it becomes too costly, and too inconvenient to live in the boonies, the shift will eventually occur. I also feel that we need to put infill and sprawl on a more level playing field, so that people are paying the true costs of their lifestyle choice - however, it needs to remain that: A choice!

Finally, I think your views on the benefits of a higher density Winnipeg are slightly exaggerated. Suburbs breed social segregation? Some of the best "urban neighbourhoods" in cities like Toronto and Vancouver are so expensive that it is a VERY narrow demographic that can afford to live in them. Conversely, some of our suburbs (e.g. Fort Richmond) are quite diverse, in terms of both income and ethnicity...Higher densities actually bring about more congestion, unless complemented by a greatly improved transit system. And obesity often has more to do with poverty than urban form - you could live in a dense inner-city neighbourhood, but with no sobeys near by, you might have no choice but to eat junk all the time (see: food deserts in some American cities)...

I agree with bicycles, it can lead to social segregation and isolation. I understand the Fort richmond is a quite diverse neighborhood but the layout of the area (as well as most suburbs) is one that is absolutely uninviting and unusable for pedestrians which is very important (creates social interaction, improves safety, and so on). This really minimizes the interaction between residents who spend that time they could be interacting with people on the sidewalk instead driving around (i know this a bit dramatic for a city like winnipeg). Also higher density does not mean more congestion necessarily. In good high density area residents rely on walking complimented with a good basic public transportation system. Another thing to look at is the grid road systems that exist in many dense urban areas which have proven to have less congestion then say your typical collector road system seen in many suburbs (not really in winnipeg though). I know both points are brief and not saying anyone is wrong just my opinion but we can always go into greater detail if needed

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by dpenner

I agree with bicycles, it can lead to social segregation and isolation. I understand the Fort richmond is a quite diverse neighborhood but the layout of the area (as well as most suburbs) is one that is absolutely uninviting and unusable for pedestrians which is very important (creates social interaction, improves safety, and so on). This really minimizes the interaction between residents who spend that time they could be interacting with people on the sidewalk instead driving around (i know this a bit dramatic for a city like winnipeg). Also higher density does not mean more congestion necessarily. In good high density area residents rely on walking complimented with a good basic public transportation system. Another thing to look at is the grid road systems that exist in many dense urban areas which have proven to have less congestion then say your typical collector road system seen in many suburbs (not really in winnipeg though). I know both points are brief and not saying anyone is wrong just my opinion but we can always go into greater detail if needed

I agree with you both that a compact urban form is generally desirable, and I'm a big proponent of intensification, mixed-use development, etc. My point was that the way to achieve this isn't necessarily by mandating it, and that the outcomes we may be looking for won't necessarily come to fruition...
Examples: Living in a dense apartment doesn't automatically make you more likely to know your neighbours than if you lived in a suburb - a lot of that depends on peoples' own personalities...
We mandated mixed-use, street-level retail on waterfront drive - it's largely been a failure so far, as the foot traffic isn't there yet to support shops/restaurants etc...
As for congestion, the suburbs aren't really congested - it's only the main arterials during rush hour that are congested, and that doesn't change with higher densities....

Pedestrian friendly landscapes are great, but it's a tough go to be a small, local retailer these days (regardless of the urban form)... The days of walking to the local home hardware to get a few items is over, since it's just as quick, and much cheaper, to go to the local home depot...

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by Bdog

We mandated mixed-use, street-level retail on waterfront drive - it's largely been a failure so far, as the foot traffic isn't there yet to support shops/restaurants etc...

Very true, I'm down there all the time and rarely see anyone. I actually thought about buying there and I'm glad I didn't - the area is essentially a suburb downtown because you pretty well have to take the car to do any grocery shopping as there are almost no services nearby.

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Very true, I'm down there all the time and rarely see anyone. I actually thought about buying there and I'm glad I didn't - the area is essentially a suburb downtown because you pretty well have to take the car to do any grocery shopping as there are almost no services nearby.

It's getting better each month though. I'm excited for the summer.

[dpenner]

i dont think there are enough people living in the area yet for it to be the pedestrian friendly neighborhood it should be. I think it will change a bit once the rental units on argyle st and the condo conversions on market st along with the james st parkade which will have commercial space (hopefully for a small grocery or something). Hopefully if the boutique hotel and restaurant go up on the harbor it will create another destination for people and increase traffic in the area, foot traffic that is.

[vid]

People don't choose suburbs because they want to. People choose suburbs because there are no developments with the kind of homes they want in the inner city.

If we created those they would buy the houses. It has worked very well in North Bay and Toronto--they built suburban style houses in parts of downtown and they sold better than similar houses in the suburbs, even with the higher price. In Thunder Bay, the suburbs that have the best sales are also the ones with the easiest access to downtown. The subdivision with no public transit has remained only 5% full since 1990, while the two with public transit have filled up and been granted expansions several times. One is almost finished, with no more room to expand.

People don't really want to be out there, they just don't have enough of a choice. There isn't enough inner city demand and things aren't structured to bring that about.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by vid

If we created those they would buy the houses. It has worked very well in North Bay and Toronto--they built suburban style houses in parts of downtown and they sold better than similar houses in the suburbs, even with the higher price.

Where in Toronto? I'll definitely go and have a look.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by vid

The subdivision with no public transit has remained only 5% full since 1990, while the two with public transit have filled up and been granted expansions several times. One is almost finished, with no more room to expand.

Which areas are you referring to?

[vid]

A large one here; Rowhouses near a rail line, not entirely suburban-type but similar to what is in suburban Toronto; I think there are a few others. This part of North Bay is being infilled after a railway line was removed.

Originally Posted by h0twired

Which areas are you referring to?

In Thunder Bay, Parkdale, Sherwood, and River Terrace, respectively. Parkdale was supposed to be a neighbourhood of 20,000 stretching from the Expressway to Mapleward Road. The other two were just little projects to round out the north end, but turned out to be the hotbed of residential activity until a couple years ago when they filled up and Parkdale became the only real choice. River Terrace just opened its last phase bordering the hospital, and Sherwood expanded so much that the city's urban service area has to be expanded to service it.

[jthor]

While its now been clarified that the original commenter was referring to the situation in Ottawa, I still thought that I'd add my two cents on the issue of busses vs. LRT. For years I took busses south to the U of M along the route which the first phase and possibly-never-going-happen-second phase of BRT will cover. For years I have also worked downtown and had to catch a bus southbound toward the Corydon. Anyhow, in both cases at least a dozen times busses were too full to pick me (multiple other people) up. I have taken RT in countless other cities (Chicago, Istanbul, Rome, Paris, Vancouver, London, Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Athens) and never has such a thing happened even in the very middle of rush hour in a downtown area. Combined with - yes - an already longer trip home than driving, this problem more than doubled trip time. It also communicated an obvious lack of care and resources allocated to those who take (and pay a fair amount to take) transit in this city - altogether making the taking of transit in this city into a deeply unpleasant and demoralizing venture. This is particularly true given that we are a winter city. Whether BRT, LRT or simply more busses is the solution, I don't know, but I know that it is false to say that public transit in Winnipeg is greatly effective. The Navigo system and 311 service are actually great compared to similar programs elsewhere, but its not enough - actual improvements need to made to the services offered. We need to make this a pleasant city which is easy and fun to live in. I actually disagree with some who have said here that Winnipeg is not a great place to visit. I have had others who have visited tell me quite the opposite - although clearly we need to work of making the urban core more inviting (that is lived in and not vacant) and in particular need to address the disgraceful and hostile space that is our famous main intersection. Regarding transit, perhaps some of the problem is also the cities sprawling character, which diverts some busses to difficult and costly areas to serve. But while densification of these areas and a moratorium on new sprawl would be helpful, it's not enough. Tax dollars must be spent on improving the service, especially on busy routes, and soon. Having worked for the city I also know that the complaints I voiced here are not simply my own.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by vid

A large one here; Rowhouses near a rail line, not entirely suburban-type but similar to what is in suburban Toronto; I think there are a few others. This part of North Bay is being infilled after a railway line was removed.



In Thunder Bay, Parkdale, Sherwood, and River Terrace, respectively. Parkdale was supposed to be a neighbourhood of 20,000 stretching from the Expressway to Mapleward Road. The other two were just little projects to round out the north end, but turned out to be the hotbed of residential activity until a couple years ago when they filled up and Parkdale became the only real choice. River Terrace just opened its last phase bordering the hospital, and Sherwood expanded so much that the city's urban service area has to be expanded to service it.

I'm very familiar with both of those areas in Toronto you pointed out, and neither of them are what I would call suburban - row houses, and very high density homes on narrow lots...

Anyway, back to your original post, people can't have it both ways (in terms of having suburban style homes in "urban" areas) - If you have the same monster homes in the inner city that you'd see in the suburbs, densities would be too low to support the "urban" lifestyle (i.e. the critical mass isn't there to support local shops and services, which is the goal, right?)...I also don't agree with your assertion that people don't want to live in the suburbs, and only do because that's where their prefered housing types are. Although I personally like living in an urban neighbourhood, plenty of people I know like the quiet streets, ample park space, and perception of safety that comes with the suburbs. Inner-city living isn't for everyone, but we need to strike a balance...

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Bdog

I'm very familiar with both of those areas in Toronto you pointed out, and neither of them are what I would call suburban - row houses, and very high density homes on narrow lots...

Anyway, back to your original post, people can't have it both ways (in terms of having suburban style homes in "urban" areas) - If you have the same monster homes in the inner city that you'd see in the suburbs, densities would be too low to support the "urban" lifestyle (i.e. the critical mass isn't there to support local shops and services, which is the goal, right?)...I also don't agree with your assertion that people don't want to live in the suburbs, and only do because that's where their prefered housing types are. Although I personally like living in an urban neighbourhood, plenty of people I know like the quiet streets, ample park space, and perception of safety that comes with the suburbs. Inner-city living isn't for everyone, but we need to strike a balance...

I grew up in St. Vital and we had (and have) all kinds of local shops and services. People are walking up and down the sidewalks all the time. Now I live in an extremely dense downtown Toronto neighbourhood where, generally speaking, no one knows anyone else and people barely even acknowledge one another. It isn't much of an aid to socializing when you see hundreds of people a day but hardly ever the same person twice. Also, this urge to socialize and to have crowds around is a feature of being a young, unattached male -- when you're older and/or have a family it isn't always such a huge attraction anymore. It's all biology.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Andy6

I grew up in St. Vital and we had (and have) all kinds of local shops and services. People are walking up and down the sidewalks all the time. Now I live in an extremely dense downtown Toronto neighbourhood where, generally speaking, no one knows anyone else and people barely even acknowledge one another. It isn't much of an aid to socializing when you see hundreds of people a day but hardly ever the same person twice. Also, this urge to socialize and to have crowds around is a feature of being a young, unattached male -- when you're older and/or have a family it isn't always such a huge attraction anymore. It's all biology.

This is basically my point (I guess I was kind of carrying on from the urban vs. suburban debate from the other thread as well, where I did make many of the points you just mentioned)...