Winnipeg | 2026 Civic election & City affairs

[rivercity]

If I recall, a very large component of the Kenaston widening project was replacing one of the St. James bridges which was going to be required in the near future due to scouring of the piers? and using the old one and turning it into a pedestrian/active transportation

[rivercity]

TBH, if they are going to spend a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 load of money on Kenaston, I'd almost prefer they do it like the Yellowhead through Edmonton with tight SPUI's at Grant, Taylor, Corydon and it excavated down. No idea on that feasibility though.. or price tag.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by rivercity

TBH, if they are going to spend a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 load of money on Kenaston, I'd almost prefer they do it like the Yellowhead through Edmonton with tight SPUI's at Grant, Taylor, Corydon and it excavated down. No idea on that feasibility though.. or price tag.

I think it could be done that way, without disrupting the flow at grade. I would even advocate that local streets which have access could simply cross with no access to retain neighbourhood cohesion.

[trueviking]

think about what we could do with a billion (likely a billion and a half) dollars....my 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 are in a knot about it because we could make transformational change to our city with that kind of money....if I think of all the things that we need to make Winnipeg a better place to live, adding a lane to each side of a road for 3kms is very low on my list....especially since it won't solve the congestion problem....

we add 1% more vehicles to our city's roads every 8 months!...we are not building our way out of that.

[WestEndWander]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

I know this is a "skyscrapper" forum filled with people who want to see denser downtowns, but I don't get why most people here have their 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 in a knot with Gillingham's commitment to widen Keneston and extend Chief Peguis? Take a look at the post history in any infrastructure or road-related thread and you will see everyone complaining about the city's lack of proper ring road network and roads with capacity built for 1970s population. And now a candidate comes and proposes some fixes to this and everyone decries the initiative because it's not "urban" enough? You guys can't have your cake and eat it too.

I get that just adding lanes doesn't fix problems and the whole "induced demand" yada yada, but that doesn't detract from the need for those road projects. While mode shift, public transit, and active transit are all important initiatives we need to advance, that doesn't change the fact that many of the goods and services we use everyday are delivered via our road network - you're not going to see intermodal containers going from Symington Yard to Canadian Tire being transported by a bike in the bike lane anytime soon. Like it or not, these trade corridors are strategic, and do pose a competitiveness issue for the region as a whole. If goods and services can get to market faster and more efficiently, both businesses and consumers win. No one benefits from being stuck in traffic, and adding two lanes to a road or another section of regional ring road does alleviate this to some extent compared to doing nothing. And to add, buses also use roads. Buses stuck in traffic hurts transit ridership just as much as making it more convenient to take a car by adding lanes, so pick your poison.

Also, we have to stop acting like other cities have stopped building roads. Other cities like Calgary, Edmonton, Mississauga, Ottawa, and Halifax are expanding just like we are and have to make hard choices about upgrading existing infrastructure and accommodating growth. The main different in those cities is that funding for these projects isn't as difficult to come by thanks to their higher tax rates and development charges, which allow major road projects to get competed sooner with less financial trade-off, meaning less controversy and quicker accommodation of growth.

So everyone needs to chill out about Keneston and CPT extensions, because they are needed, are a part of the long-term transportation master plan, have been on the city's infrastructure priority list for quite some time, and will be used directly or indirectly by almost everyone in the city - whether you drive on the road, take the bus, or buy stuff at the store that gets shipped via truck.

Needed? I would hardly call them needed.

The perimeter highway is no more than 1km away from the proposed C.P extension at any point. It would be more prudent and ultimately beneficial to increase the perimeter to 6 lanes between Route 90 and Lagimodiere/Gunn than it would be to extend C.P. through an open field of nothing (sorry, what will ultimately be a suburban sprawl nightmare combination between Winnipeg and East/West St. Paul. C.P shouldn't be seen as a "trade corridor". Its not. Its a two lane urban roadway. One that is not even used to capacity as is because people use the perimeter. Sure if one day the area out there becomes built up and we use growth fees from the development to pay for an extension then that discussion should be had. As of now its nothing but vote buying for the suburban crowds.

Widening Kenaston will do nothing but further exacerbate the already existing problems. Everyone knows this. Saying that its expansion is essential is a stretch. Essential so people can get to Ikea faster? Lux BBQ faster? Spend the money on turning it into a proper "interior ring road" with major intersection improvement and light reductions. Widening it will do nothing. Again, it is not a trade corridor. Its a two lane urban roadways predominantly surrounded by single family and commercial neighborhoods.

Saying we need road expansion in a City where we can't afford to maintain the roads we have, that aren't ever remotely close to being at capacity as is, aside from 2 hours a day, is laughable and ridiculously short sighted. We need creative solutions to the problems we already have, not a further heightening of them thought the further development of car based infrastructure.

[(sub)urban]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

I know this is a "skyscrapper" forum filled with people who want to see denser downtowns, but I don't get why most people here have their 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 in a knot with Gillingham's commitment to widen Keneston and extend Chief Peguis?.

I can only speak for myself but my lack of enthusiasm for Gillingham doesn't mean I'm against these two policy measures. I'm definitely in favour of both for all the reasons you listed. BUT. They have already been clearly identified as city goals for the near future. I think that anyone elected would be or is in favour of going forward with doing both, which makes Gillingham's declaration just in line with everything else he's said -- a continuation of the WPG status quo.

He's Mr. "promise low expectations and deliver low expectations". Him promising to proceed with two things that nobody is against and the city has already developed plans for is moreso a promise to not get in the way and prevent development than it is a promise to try and create some sort of new development.

Of course, there is value in a candidate who is seemingly trustworthy in that he will reliably follow through with his promises, but Winnipeg is kind of in shambles right now. I'd much rather take on a little more risk in a candidate (Loney, Ouellette) and potentially get far superior outcomes for the city. With Murray it's a more difficult risk-reward trade-off for me... still leaning towards Murray if its him vs Gillingham but that ones not far from a toss-up for me. He really couldn't have run a worse campaign if he'd tried. Apparently all his staffers are Poilleivre supporters too, which only adds to his weirdness (take with a grain of salt, not sure how reliable my source is on this one).

Maybe if the polls end up clearly being Gillingham/Murray in a toss-up I'll just write-in vote for Bellamy

[trueviking]

the whole 'trade corridor' argument makes me laugh....like saving truckers five minutes on their cross-continental drives should be a priority for how we build our city....use the perimeter, not a street cutting through two residential neighbourhoods.

[GreyGarden]

Originally Posted by WestEndWander

Saying we need road expansion in a City where we can't afford to maintain the roads we have, that aren't ever remotely close to being at capacity as is, aside from 2 hours a day, is laughable and ridiculously short sighted.

Well said, go visit other cities to see just how overbuilt Winnipeg’s roads are. The speed that cars are able to get up to on regular streets in Winnipeg is insane.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Gillingham's downtown announcement yesterday was basically, "Downton is important'.

In a city of 850K when you only have 10-15K living downtown maybe some politicians realize that not everything is all about downtown all the time 24-7!

A vibrant downtown is essential but it isn't the end all like some here believe!

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by GreyGarden

Well said, go visit other cities to see just how overbuilt Winnipeg’s roads are. The speed that cars are able to get up to on regular streets in Winnipeg is insane.

What cities are you talking about? Just about every city I've been to has functional arterial roadways or freeways that take a huge volume of traffic off residential streets, something that Winnipeg lacks!

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

In a city of 850K when you only have 10-15K living downtown maybe some politicians realize that not everything is all about downtown all the time 24-7!

A vibrant downtown is essential but it isn't the end all like some here believe!

strawman argument.

[esquire]

Gillingham strikes me as similar to Bowman. A fiscally conservative suburbanite who tries to pass himself off as being progressive in some respects. Basically in all the ways that don't have a price tag attached. The trouble with that is Bowman was a letdown of a mayor and I do not care to repeat the last 8 years.

I'm still leaning towards Murray in spite of his shortcomings because I think at the end of the day he has a firmer grasp on where this city should go than anyone else. He really needs to walk back this stupid property tax freeze/beg for provincial money idea which is burning his campaign down. It's not 1998 anymore.

[trueviking]

^yup...Gillingham is Bowman 2.0....we will fill a lot of potholes in the next 8 years with him.

The tax freeze is not only ridiculous, it is impossible....my guess is he tries to negotiate for more provincial money, they say no and he says, well I tried but we will have to raise taxes to cover them being mean.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by trueviking

^yup...Gillingham is Bowman 2.0....we will fill a lot of potholes in the next 8 years with him.

The tax freeze is not only ridiculous, it is impossible....my guess is he tries to negotiate for more provincial money, they say no and he says, well I tried but we will have to raise taxes to cover them being mean.

The silly thing about it is that there was no pressure to commit to a property tax freeze. This isn't 1998 when that was a real issue. As someone else said, when even Klein is prepared to raise taxes then you shouldn't have an issue doing the same, you aren't going to beat Klein at his own game.

Murray kind of stepped into it, which does make me wonder a little about how finely tuned his political radar is these days.

[pacman]

Originally Posted by trueviking

^yup...Gillingham is Bowman 2.0....we will fill a lot of potholes in the next 8 years with him.

The tax freeze is not only ridiculous, it is impossible....my guess is he tries to negotiate for more provincial money, they say no and he says, well I tried but we will have to raise taxes to cover them being mean.

The tax freeze question was such a layup considering everyone else is on board and it isn't even really an election issue, the issue is how much to increase it as opposed to will you increase it. For him to hide behind the PST just makes his campaign seem so disingenuous. It makes him come across as trying to act like he's smarter than the rest of the room when the whole room can see right through it.

[trueviking]

agreed.

portage and main was the same....just give the answer Klein did.

[trueviking]

Honestly. The media smear campaign is making me want Murray to win just for spite. Broadbeck every day with his ‘he’s not fit to be mayor’ 🞵🞵🞵🞵 and Kives looking for gossip from Murray’s former employees is brutal. I kind of want them to eat it.

[bomberjet]

Man I love driving fancy freeways and all. But what I also really live is riding subways and trains that we don't have in Winnipeg. We could easily build an LRT system with the money being proposed for Chief, Kenaston, and the funding for transit we'll need to start the frequent/rapid networks.

I love having that more than I would driving an extra couple km's down Chief Peguis. Which I drive regularly, twice a week, down Chief and do the turn on main to Leila.

[WestEndWander]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Honestly. The media smear campaign is making me want Murray to win just for spite. Broadbeck every day with his ‘he’s not fit to be mayor’ 🞵🞵🞵🞵 and Kives looking for gossip from Murray’s former employees is brutal. I kind of want them to eat it.

Are they not just doing their jobs though? It's a journalists job to keep the public informed of matters like this, and those in potential positions of power on their toes. I don't see it as a smear campaign. There are just no other credible candidates with the somewhat questionable actions of late, like Glen Murray has. For that reason it gets reported on.

Is it all crucial to the election? No, not all of it. It is nice however to know some of the issues that may be caused by putting certain people in positions of power. Dirt gets dug up and reported on. It's not the first time it has happened in any election, and it won't be the last. He's not bland milquetoast like Gillingham and that sells.

He could have held a press conference, cleared the air and left it at that. Instead he has ducked the issue at every turn. Just seems odd to me. Had his campaign not been so drastically underwhelming and all over the map it may have pushed matters like this to this background. Unfortunately to this point in time his biggest platform has been a tax freeze. Is he trying to out Katz Sam Katz?

The bottom line is he has done himself no favors in this election. As a returning former mayor again running after numerous failed ventures in other provinces he is going to be subject to heightened scrutiny. Do you not want that for elected officials?

[drew]

That whole Pembina Institute story seems dubious at best. Nothing official from the Institute, everything just based on emails and disgruntled ex-staff comments. It's basically a collection of very whiny people from what has been presented so far. It seems like it was a bit of an odd place to work.

Kives must have an ax to grind with Murray, because he could probably do his journalistic due diligence and "investigate" anyone of these candidates and dig up he said she said stuff from their past.