Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by RTD

Light Rail Transit option recommended to Council
Comparative costs show LRT as viable option for City
Released: 2:35 p.m.

NEWS @ A GLANCE:

Committed to providing Winnipeg with a sustainable long term rapid transit option, Executive Policy Committee will consider a recommendation from the City of Winnipeg public service next week to endorse Light Rail Transit (LRT) as a preferred rapid-transit option.
(for more details, please read the full media release below)

Winnipeg, July 2, 2010 – Committed to providing Winnipeg with a sustainable long term rapid transit option, Executive Policy Committee will consider a recommendation from the City of Winnipeg public service next week to endorse Light Rail Transit (LRT) as a preferred rapid-transit option.

“Winnipeg needs a long term sustainable rapid transit system that will get people out of their cars and thinking seriously about alternative forms of transportation,” said Mayor Sam Katz. “Light Rail provides the best long term life cycle benefits in terms of increased ridership, increased residential and commercial development density, and reductions in green house gas emissions. We know there is potential Federal funding available through P3 Canada, and we need to ensure we are advocating strongly on behalf of Winnipeggers to make the right decision for the future of Winnipeg.”

Comparative costs of $38 million per kilometer for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and $50 million per kilometer for Light Rail Transit have been independently validated by IBI Group and HDR Decision Economics, and most recently in follow up with discussion with HDR, indicating that an LRT option is more affordable than previously indicated.

As the city moves forward with rapid transit, the first phase of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is currently being built and will be completed from downtown to the Jubilee Overpass.

Also in April 2010, City Council voted to endorse the following infrastructure projects as City of Winnipeg priorities for intergovernmental funding through the Building Canada Fund:

* Kenaston Boulevard widening between Taylor Avenue and Academy Road
* Polo Park Area street and intersection improvements
* Plessis Road Twinning with grade separation at CNR Rail Line
* Regional Streets major rehabilitation
* Chief Peguis West extension from Main Street to McPhillips Avenue
* St. Anne’s Road twinning from Aldgate to the Perimeter
* Keewatin Street north of Inkster Boulevard expansion to four lanes
* Pembina Highway underpass at Jubilee Avenue
* Inkster Boulevard road reconstruction from Keewatin Street to Brookside Boulevard
* Community Centre Investment Fund Contribution
* extension of the Pembina Highway active transportation network from Jubilee Avenue to the University of Manitoba, with a transit hub at the University of Manitoba.

“With the potential of a new Federal funding source for LRT, I believe Winnipeggers deserve both a viable rapid transit system and our existing infrastructure priorities addressed,” added Katz.

As part of the City’s Transportation Master Plan, the public service also is recommending to further investigate the five preliminary rapid transit corridors identified in the OurWinnipeg process, to identify preferred routes for consideration to implement light rail technology in the City of Winnipeg.

Executive Policy Committee will consider the recommendations on Wednesday, July 7th.

Source: http://www.winnipeg.ca/cao/media/new...20100702.stm#1

Finally, some common sense and vision for our great city

That's great news, except...

* Chief Peguis West extension from Main Street to McPhillips Avenue

Except there is no such thing as McPhillips Avenue.

[Reed Solomon]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Except there is no such thing as McPhillips Avenue.

by the time its finished there might be.

[JayM]

Originally Posted by Reed Solomon

by the time its finished there might be.

"Might be"

[Boreal]

Classic Winnipeg. Champagne taste on a collective beer salary. I like LRT, I really do, but at roughly $12 million more per kilometre, or whatever the projected cost is, relative to BRT multiplied by how many kilometres for how many projected lines, plus the depot cost is nothing short of crazy. BRT might not have sex appeal, but it is effective (moves people faster from point A to point B - rapid transit in its most utilitarian definition) and is realistic on a beer salary.

In a community where everyone wants property taxes frozen until time immemorial, pared down project costs are critical. BRT is most appropriate for our means. Mayor Katz is a goof for not going forward with BRT as both the Feds and the Provincial representatives have indicated. It's time to shit or get off the pot. LRT doesn't make sense, because it costs too much money. Whether that cost is 20% more, 50% more, or 300% more is irrelevant. In a city which is strapped for cash, in a province which is strapped for cash, in a country that is rolling in red ink, it's time to start making smart economic decisions.

People who want LRT, want LRT based on all things being equal. That's great, I would too. Except all things aren't equal. Not even close. I wonder if for example, the most boisterous proponents of LRT would be so enthusiastic if say property taxes had to be raised by X percent to cover the cost differential. Would they still be feeling LRT? I doubt it.

[Reed Solomon]

Originally Posted by Boreal

People who want LRT, want LRT based on all things being equal. That's great, I would too. Except all things aren't equal. Not even close. I wonder if for example, the most boisterous proponents of LRT would be so enthusiastic if say property taxes had to be raised by X percent to cover the cost differential. Would they still be feeling LRT? I doubt it.

no, I expect LRT to cost more, but I also expect LRT to increase property values along the lines and thus increase property taxes at some point. Property Taxes city wide will go up regardless if we build LRT or BRT, might as well build LRT then. I want LRT because LRT is just more appealing to most people than the bus. The city is "strapped for cash" to be sure, but there are a number of public transit funding options available to the city right now whether BRT or LRT so might as well do LRT in my opinion. And our country can't be doing that poorly if we can afford to spend a billion dollars to protect a bunch of ultimately replaceable politicians at a useless summit. Again, might as well take some of that money and spend it here, cause if we don't, Quebec or Ontario will surely take it to shove down some g-strings. Screw making tough economic decisions. We need to spend our fair share of that money to make Winnipeg a better place to live. BRT doesn't really make things better. IMHO.

[Conrad]

Winnipeg is a sprawling city and without a car you are f--ked, especially in the winter. I lived the 'Peg's public transit nightmare for years and it was a shit show all the way. I got tired of the city doing study after study and moaning about how expensive LRT is while the rest of the world moved on. A high-speed bus corridor is not a solution, it's a cheap, half-assed gesture and nothing more. Winnipeg needs and deserves LRT.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Boreal

People who want LRT, want LRT based on all things being equal. That's great, I would too. Except all things aren't equal. Not even close. I wonder if for example, the most boisterous proponents of LRT would be so enthusiastic if say property taxes had to be raised by X percent to cover the cost differential. Would they still be feeling LRT? I doubt it.

BRT seems much better to me, because buses can move on and off the busway so that you don't need to transfer. With LRT, unless you are right next to the line, you'd have to take a bus to the LRT and then get off and wait for the "train". Given the short distances at play in Winnipeg, this seems quite unappealing and unlikely to be a superior option to driving. LRT would only make life better for the small minority of Winnipeggers who are going where the LRT goes. Under any realistic scenario, most of the city would never have access to LRT and would never get a chance to use it. Meanwhile their bus service won't improve because the gold-plated LRT line will be sucking up all available transit cash forever.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by Conrad

Winnipeg is a sprawling city and without a car you are f--ked, especially in the winter. I lived the 'Peg's public transit nightmare for years and it was a shit show all the way. I got tired of the city doing study after study and moaning about how expensive LRT is while the rest of the world moved on. A high-speed bus corridor is not a solution, it's a cheap, half-assed gesture and nothing more. Winnipeg needs and deserves LRT.

I take the bus everyday from the burbs to downtown.

I have found that the bus is on time regardless of the weather and not much slower than taking a car when on express routes.

What I find ironic about Winnipeg however is the people that complain about transit are the people that never use transit.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by Andy6

BRT seems much better to me, because buses can move on and off the busway so that you don't need to transfer. With LRT, unless you are right next to the line, you'd have to take a bus to the LRT and then get off and wait for the "train"..

The BRT buses will remain on the busway. You will still have to transfer just as you would with an LRT bases service along the same route.

Transferring from a bus to an LRT run isn't a problem as long as the LRT is frequent enough. When I was living in Calgary transferring was never a problem as the trains run every 3-5 minutes during peak times.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by h0twired

I take the bus everyday from the burbs to downtown.

I have found that the bus is on time regardless of the weather and not much slower than taking a car when on express routes.

My recent experience was different. I drive everyday to work and in the morning it takes me 20 minutes from near Lagimodiere and the north Perimeter. A few weeks ago i had to take the bus for two days because the car was getting serviced. We have a downtown express 1 block from our house and i had to take one transfer at Portage and Fort to get to the Polo Park area (i took another express). It was an easy trip with the stop so close to our house.

It took 45 to 50 min at 6:30 am. Now i understand that LRT isn't going to improve that any, but bus is not near as fast as a car. Needless to say i think i will continue to take my own vehicle.

[1ajs]

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Streetcar financing plan panned

Use stimulus cash, mayor told

By: Bartley Kives
7/07/2010 1:00 AM |
http://media.winnipegfreepress.com/image/2289753.jpg

SUPPLIED PHOTO Enlarge Image
Bombardier prefers stimulus cash for streetcars; mayor wants public-private partnership


THE head of the company that makes the streetcar Sam Katz desires has panned the method Winnipeg's mayor wants to use to pay for the vehicles.
City council's executive policy committee will meet this morning to approve a plan to endorse light rail as Winnipeg's preferred mode of transportation, incorporate light rail into the city's new transportation strategy and continue to explore ways to pay for light rail by accessing a pot of federal money dedicated to public-private partnerships.
The plan is ambitious because Ottawa and Manitoba have offered to use a different pot of cash -- the Building Canada Fund -- to funnel $130 million toward the $220-million second phase of the Southwest Rapid Transit Corridor, a busway that will eventually extend from Queen Elizabeth Way near The Forks to the University of Manitoba.
The mayor would rather see the Building Canada cash pay for road and bridge projects and use P3 Canada to help build an ultra-light rail corridor for flexible streetcars that can run on city streets as well as dedicated transitways.
But in an unusual twist, the president of one of the best-known manufacturers of flexible streetcars recently denounced public-private partnerships as a means of building public transportation.
Speaking at a California conference in May, the president and CEO of Quebec manufacturer Bombardier said public-private partnerships are not the best way to finance public transit, especially during tough economic times.
"I believe the private sector is well-placed to manage the costs of a project and to respect the books, but I am not convinced it is best placed to finance projects," Pierre Beaudoin said in a Los Angeles speech covered by The Canadian Press.
Bombardier lost approximately US$164 million following the collapse of a public-private partnership to maintain the London subway system and has pulled out of another partnership in Denver. In his speech, Beaudoin urged governments to use more of their stimulus cash to invest in public transit.
Katz has so far snubbed the use of stimulus money for transit, partly because projects such as traffic improvements at Polo Park and the western extension of Chief Peguis Trail are higher up the city's priority list. Beaudoin's comments about public-private partnerships are irrelevant, he said.
"If you're manufacturing a product, your goal is to sell the product. You don't care who pays for it," Katz said. "Our situation could be a simple design-build P3, which is (close to) what we're doing right now with the first phase of bus rapid transit."
Partnering up with private firms to design or build projects does not force the city to rely on private financing, he explained.
The city is in the midst of completing the $138-million first leg of the Southwest Rapid Transit Corridor, a 3.6-kilometre leg from Queen Elizabeth Way to Jubilee Avenue. The project is expected to wrap up in 2011.
The absence of a deal to start building the six-kilometre second leg of the corridor in 2012 has prompted transit proponents on council to accuse Katz of placing the future of rapid transit in jeopardy.
Fort Rouge Coun. Jenny Gerbasi said Winnipeg is in danger of winding up with no federal or provincial money for transit, as this year's deadline for P3 Canada funding closed on June 30 and future applications won't be accepted until 2011, according to the P3 Canada website.
"He's putting us in a very dangerous situation, because we could lose $130 million. We're risking big money," she said.
Transcona Coun. Russ Wyatt, meanwhile, said it's foolhardy for Katz to ask city council to endorse light rail before he has a plan to complete a light rail network. The city's new $1.15-million transportation strategy is not due to be finished until 2011.
Both the provincial Selinger government and the federal government have used strong language to urge Katz to complete Phase Two of the southwest corridor as a busway. A city-commissioned study suggests there are no significant obstacles to upgrading busways to rail corridors in the future.
bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition July 7, 2010 A3

[Reed Solomon]

Originally Posted by Andy6

BRT seems much better to me, because buses can move on and off the busway so that you don't need to transfer.

because on a dedicated busway thats going to happen just for the convenience of not needing a transfer. not likely.

however, there is a case to be said for when or if the LRT line goes down, it can't just be replaced with another bus. Still, I don't believe it will be an issue, presumably an LRT line has a solution to that scenario as well

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Reed Solomon

because on a dedicated busway thats going to happen just for the convenience of not needing a transfer. not likely.

Presumably a route could start off the busway and then use the busway. The routes clearly envisage having buses drive off the busway at the downtown end (or is the plan to force everyone to get off at "Harkness" and wait around for yet another transfer to the non-busway buses that will take them the last few blocks downtown?)

Not forcing people to transfer is a fairly big issue in planning public transport, so it's likely to have some influence on how the system is designed. This is particularly true in a place as small as Winnipeg, where on a good day you could be halfway downtown in your car in the time you're sitting around waiting to transfer to the LRT.

[GORDBO]

Originally Posted by Reed Solomon

no, I expect LRT to cost more, but I also expect LRT to increase property values along the lines and thus increase property taxes at some point. Property Taxes city wide will go up regardless if we build LRT or BRT, might as well build LRT then. I want LRT because LRT is just more appealing to most people than the bus. The city is "strapped for cash" to be sure, but there are a number of public transit funding options available to the city right now whether BRT or LRT so might as well do LRT in my opinion. And our country can't be doing that poorly if we can afford to spend a billion dollars to protect a bunch of ultimately replaceable politicians at a useless summit. Again, might as well take some of that money and spend it here, cause if we don't, Quebec or Ontario will surely take it to shove down some g-strings. Screw making tough economic decisions. We need to spend our fair share of that money to make Winnipeg a better place to live. BRT doesn't really make things better. IMHO.

I agree, if Winnipeg doesn't take advantage of federal transit funds, other cities will take whatever is available. Leaving Winnipeg again, to settle for the spare change left in the Federal grant kitty. The Feds paid for most of the RAV. line, a portion of Calgary's agressive c-train expansion, a ton of money for Toronto, 600 mil. for Ottawa. also some for Edmonton and Montreal. Weve already settled for an arena that is too small, a stadium that will also be outgrown in a short time. It's time we got something more than just adequete for a change!

[Reed Solomon]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Not forcing people to transfer is a fairly big issue in planning public transport, so it's likely to have some influence on how the system is designed. This is particularly true in a place as small as Winnipeg, where on a good day you could be halfway downtown in your car in the time you're sitting around waiting to transfer to the LRT.

once you get off the rapid transit line you start introducing random elements into your trip planning, creating potential lateness, thus reducing the effectiveness of the rapid transit line.

presumably there will be less of a need for 60/62/70 buses with the introduction of the rapid transit line, and from whatever the stations will be there will be feeder routes servicing the area.

Eventually, the LRT line will have a stabilizing effect and new businesses and residences will emerge along the line to take advantage.

there are few times where you can get away with taking the bus and not transferring in this city. I should know, I take it every day. and if you take a 77 or 75 or crosstown route, you'll be wasting about an hour of time from point A to point B rather than a more direct route.

that said, I don't think its completely out of the question for the LRT lines not to go off the expressway at some point in the future when we have rail lines going down the street.

again, buses in the end only go where the roads go anyways. if you build the rail lines, you get to the same point in the end.

[vid]

Thunder Bay's transit system is set up so that you don't have to transfer 80% of the time and trust me, it isn't that much better. If anything we should be looking into ways to improve transfers, because they will still happened no matter what kind of system you have.

[h0twired]

Transferring bus > bus is much different than transferring from bus > lrt.

Generally LRT stations are set up as transit hubs and buses arrive so that people can immediately catch the next train.

[BigG]

I was watching the late news last night, and Sam Katz vision of "LRT" is that of streetcars similar to Toronto's. That's asenine! IMHO.

[Jets4Life]

Sam Katz should just stick with one plan and follow through with it. I keep wondering if he is delibertely trying to kill any kind of rapid transit system in Winnipeg.

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by BigG

I was watching the late news last night, and Sam Katz vision of "LRT" is that of streetcars similar to Toronto's.

CTV news tend to be inaccurate. The "streetcars" would be similar to what was used in Vancouver suing the Olympics. 32m long and able to carry 50 seated passenger plus 128 standing passengers. On the dedicated right of way they would be able to travel at 80kph.

However, as grandstanding as Judy Wasylycia-Leis is right now, she is right that converting what's being done right now to LRT would have considerable extra cost over BRT for the simple fact that infrastructure would need to be added to get these "streetcars" into downtown proper.

Love to see it happen, and I know it will at some point, but we never build for the future in Winnipeg. Everything is palnned as needed and then done 10 years too late.

I haven't seen any evidence of Winnipeg Transit planning for anything other than BRT so don't hold your breath for LRT. Then again, maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised?