Would you support Winnipeg getting rail transit?

[esquire]

A recent tweet by a guy named Bell Brentamy or something like that regarding yesterday's federal transit funding announcement:

"Forgive me for reserving my excitement. Three years ago Manitoba signed an agreement to give Winnipeg Transit half a billion federal dollars. $200 million is still sitting there. The rest is going to build a sewage plant. Hope this ends differently."

So yes, it does in fact sound like federal transit money is being left on the table. Probasbly not due to stupidity so much as a cynically calculated decision to not prioritize transit.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

A recent tweet by a guy named Bell Brentamy or something like that regarding yesterday's federal transit funding announcement:

"Forgive me for reserving my excitement. Three years ago Manitoba signed an agreement to give Winnipeg Transit half a billion federal dollars. $200 million is still sitting there. The rest is going to build a sewage plant. Hope this ends differently."

So yes, it does in fact sound like federal transit money is being left on the table. Probasbly not due to stupidity so much as a cynically calculated decision to not prioritize transit.

That's wild if the cynical bit is true. A true asshole move.

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by esquire

A recent tweet by a guy named Bell Brentamy or something like that regarding yesterday's federal transit funding announcement:

Brent Bellamy?

[esquire]

^ I think that was it

[borkborkbork]

my daughter would support getting a pony, but she's not getting one

[Doady]

Is there a corridor in Winnipeg that is in need of conversion from bus to rail? One particular trunk route that the buses and riders are concentrated in, that is getting too much for the corridor and buses to handle?

In Waterloo Region, there was King St corridor that connected the downtowns of Waterloo, Kitchener, and Cambridge. There isn't one strong downtown that dominates the region, it's a multi-nodal region and this one corridor connected all of those downtowns together and carried around 30,000 riders per weekday, almost half of the system's ridership.

In Mississauga/Brampton, the Hurontario/Main buses were carrying close to 40,000 per weekday, with 4 different local and express buses overlapping at various points, and the combined frequency at the busiest section was approximately 3 minutes.

Obviously, Ottawa had well-documented its transitway, and the amount of buses was getting way out of hand there.

Going from bus to rail not a matter of attracting ridership, otherwise Ottawa wouldn't be third ranked in Canada. And of course Winnipeg wouldn't have better ridership than every US city except NYC, Washington and San Francisco either. I've said before, rail is not for solving the problem of too low ridership but for solving the problem of too high ridership. It's not whether rail is worth it for Winnipeg, it's whether rail is worth it for a particular corridor.

[optimusREIM]

^ I dont think most proponents of rail here think it's solving the problem of too much congestion or anything like that. To me, it's about setting winnipeg up for success in the future and encouraging growth and densification. It also increases convenience and quality of life. I prefer to see transit as a proactive measure and not a reactive one. You can never divine future demand, but you can set yourself up to have a solid base to operate from. In a way, you can induce demand. Think of transit as an instrument of urban and public policy and it becomes easier to justify.

[OTA in Winnipeg]

*

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Doady

Is there a corridor in Winnipeg that is in need of conversion from bus to rail? One particular trunk route that the buses and riders are concentrated in, that is getting too much for the corridor and buses to handle?

In Waterloo Region, there was King St corridor that connected the downtowns of Waterloo, Kitchener, and Cambridge. There isn't one strong downtown that dominates the region, it's a multi-nodal region and this one corridor connected all of those downtowns together and carried around 30,000 riders per weekday, almost half of the system's ridership.

In Mississauga/Brampton, the Hurontario/Main buses were carrying close to 40,000 per weekday, with 4 different local and express buses overlapping at various points, and the combined frequency at the busiest section was approximately 3 minutes.

Obviously, Ottawa had well-documented its transitway, and the amount of buses was getting way out of hand there.

Going from bus to rail not a matter of attracting ridership, otherwise Ottawa wouldn't be third ranked in Canada. And of course Winnipeg wouldn't have better ridership than every US city except NYC, Washington and San Francisco either. I've said before, rail is not for solving the problem of too low ridership but for solving the problem of too high ridership. It's not whether rail is worth it for Winnipeg, it's whether rail is worth it for a particular corridor.

This is what makes rail for Winnipeg so challenging, hence why I asked about where it would run.

It's one thing if your city has a spine of population - Ottawa runs mostly east-west with branches southwards. Most of the motion on the city is along that axis, so planning a rail route works.

Calgary had pre-existing rail that kind of worked with where its population was located. They could do it cheaply.

Winnipeg is harder. The pre-existing rail lines don't serve the population nodes of Winnipeg well and CN and CP would be loath to give them up. That eliminates the cheap option. The population is dispersed in a sprawl fashion with no 'spine' to make rail work. You have to end up building many lines to the many suburbs ($$$). Downtown - the natural node - doesn't really have good corridor access, so you have to tunnel. Again, bucks.

I guess one could eventually convert the SW Transitway to rail - downtown and U of M seem like natural high-volume ridership nodes.

[Biff]

Looks like the Premier is at it again:

Hands off city money, mayor tells province

By: Joyanne Pursaga Posted: 3:00 AM CST Friday, Feb. 12, 2021

Mayor Brian Bowman is lashing out against a provincial push to divert millions earmarked for Winnipeg Transit into green projects throughout the province, deeming the move "offensive" and urging the senior government to back off the plan.
"For the provincial government to now be attempting to redirect funds intended specifically for Winnipeg, so that they can distribute to ridings outside of Winnipeg is, frankly, offensive. I’m not sure what this provincial government has against public transit, but it’d be great to have their support," said Bowman.

The province has confirmed it wants the city to approve a $204-million transfer of potential federal funding to free up that cash for green projects around the province. The money has been earmarked for Winnipeg Transit as part of the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP).

If left in ICIP’s public transit stream, that funding could trigger about $534 million of total transit funding, should all three governments agree to an ICIP deal.
Bowman says that cash is needed to support a Winnipeg Transit master plan, which is expected next month, but the province has confirmed within the past week that it’s still seeking the transfer.

In an emailed statement, a Manitoba Municipal Relations spokesperson said the funds should be transferred to help meet a federal deadline to allocate all ICIP funds by December. Otherwise, the transit funding could lapse before the city can claim it, the statement indicated.

"It is important to note that no submissions for funding under the public transit infrastructure stream of ICIP were submitted to the province by the City of Winnipeg… ICIP submissions of the dollar value contemplated by Mayor Bowman would require both provincial and federal Treasury Board approval, processes which require an appropriate level of review and due diligence," the statement said.

The spokesperson added that the mayor wrote to the province about his concerns on Thursday and "can expect a full, formal response through the proper channels in due course."

Joyanne.pursaga@freepress.mb.ca
Twitter: @joyanne_pursaga

[Arts]

What is the goal of rail transit? A regional commuter train (not necessary or worth the investment IMO, since there is already well utilized highways) vs rapid transit system (where the money should be spent IMO). Or is it just to be able to brag that you have a rail system?

If a rapid transit system, why commit to rail, it requires several billions of dollars of upfront capital (likely $10B+, optimistically), not until after that funding is dedicated will take 5-10 years to BEGIN actual implementation since the amount of planning, land acquisition, design of routes, trains, tracks, platforms/stations etc is a huge undertaking - you have to have the entire network plotted out and being built synchronously. And the construction phase would be a huge inconvenience for many years. You can't really build it piecemeal because it would never be able to provide ROI fast enough to make it feasible and the benefits would be too slow to come in.

Building a RT system should be about attracting users based on convenience and user cost-savings then developing urban amenities and commercial opportunities around that supply of new pedestrian consumer traffic. A BRT system has already been started, can start achieve those shorter term goals with minimal additional investment, is already planned out, can be built piecemeal and could much easier achieve the critical mass in terms of coverage needed to be sustainable and develop the urban corridor.

And when the usage is appropriate converting/upgrading the corridor to actual rail for high demand routes is simply a matter of throwing the money at the particular line and re-jigging the other BRT routes to function around the rail backbone better. So in that regard I'd support "rail transit" in Winnipeg, I'm just spelling out how I feel it should happen.

[YWG-RO]

This discussion reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer gets to drive the monorail. It didn’t end well.

[bomberjet]

This thread is a microcosm of the Transit planning department for the last 100 years.

Used to have street cars.
Got rid of those so we could go heavy on the new flyer buses.
Then started realizing Winnipeg needs a better transit system and started planning Southwest busway in the 60's/70's.
Then debated LRT.
Then went back to just buses. Then debated LRT again.
And decided on buses to finally build the SW route.
And are still continually debating merits of LRT.
When our BRT system is hardly functional.
And we are still not sure what the current planning process will spit out.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Doady

Is there a corridor in Winnipeg that is in need of conversion from bus to rail?

Right now, no. But if the connection to downtown from Harkness station proceeds exactly as envisioned by the city (below) then Winnipeg is setting up the SW transitway along with the downtown route to become a viable corridor for rail conversion in the future.

The reason for this is because the current system isn't set up as a convenient alternative to using your private vehicle. I wish anyone the best of luck to try and convince a vehicle owner to wait for a bus in these temperatures instead of driving to their destination.

Originally Posted by Doady

One particular trunk route that the buses and riders are concentrated in, that is getting too much for the corridor and buses to handle?

I would argue that Winnipeg has never constructed a true transit spine to its network until the phase 2 of the BRT was opened... which opened during a pandemic. The city officials did set up the BRT spine quite well with a bunch of smaller bus lines feeding into it as per the transit map. They had all of the right ideas, it's just that it was opened during a pandemic so the stats will only be comparable to a year without a pandemic.

Don't get me wrong though, I don't think that we would be seeing record-breaking transit ridership numbers within the first year of operation but this overall system, with the opened phase 2, is light years ahead of phase 1's configuration. And I personally lament that phase 2 wasn't incorporated into phase 1 since phase 1 was a complete joke of a system that did nothing for transit in Winnipeg.

Originally Posted by Doady

In Waterloo Region, there was King St corridor that connected the downtowns of Waterloo, Kitchener, and Cambridge. There isn't one strong downtown that dominates the region, it's a multi-nodal region and this one corridor connected all of those downtowns together and carried around 30,000 riders per weekday, almost half of the system's ridership.

Does anyone have a 2019 stat that shows Winnipeg's total ridership? I would be curious as to how that compares to the Waterloo region since they are significantly smaller than us population-wise.

Originally Posted by Doady

In Mississauga/Brampton, the Hurontario/Main buses were carrying close to 40,000 per weekday, with 4 different local and express buses overlapping at various points, and the combined frequency at the busiest section was approximately 3 minutes.

Obviously, Ottawa had well-documented its transitway, and the amount of buses was getting way out of hand there.

Going from bus to rail not a matter of attracting ridership, otherwise Ottawa wouldn't be third ranked in Canada. And of course Winnipeg wouldn't have better ridership than every US city except NYC, Washington and San Francisco either. I've said before, rail is not for solving the problem of too low ridership but for solving the problem of too high ridership. It's not whether rail is worth it for Winnipeg, it's whether rail is worth it for a particular corridor.

I agree. But we also haven't given our transit spine a true chance to flex since it only opened this year, and it was hit with a pandemic. I honestly believe that once the SW transitway connects to downtown as rendered above that we'll certainly get much closer to getting a real rail solution in the city. Until then, I would highly encourage options that prioritize grade separation at all costs. It's much easier to convert to rail down the road with a grade-separated system AND it would also open up more options than a street-integrated LRT system.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by LilZebra

Markham Stn. was a disappointment to see. It needs to be larger, more prominent, feature a protected shelter. Maybe redevelop the Shoppers site. for a larger station with some trains continuing on to St. Norbert and commuter rail to Steinbach and the other branch to the U of M and St. Vital Centre.

Not sure commuter rail would be viable to Steinbach until that city's population reaches at least 50,000 plus additional population growth in the towns between, but at current growth rates that is possible within about 30 or 40 years.

The Capital Region should have a bus network for the areas surrounding Winnipeg, which have many M-F commuters. Not sure why the Winnipeg-Selkirk service failed, whether it was a poor schedule, the cost or the equipment. The system could be modeled on the SouthWest Transit in Minnesota which serves the Twin Cities' southwestern suburbs and is independent of Metro Transit. It is a public system and is funded by a group of municipalities. If you combine the populations of the areas that could be served: MacDonald, Rockwood, St. Andrews, St. Clements, the St. Pauls, Springfield, Tache, Richot and Hanover, plus Selkirk and Steinbach, there are close to 150,000 people and some locations are rapidly growing.

Like SW Transit, the buses would feature comfortable cloth seating with recline, wifi, charging ports, cup holders, overhead lighting, air conditioning, and would run super express with very limited stops. Fares could be based loosely on zones, so for example a bit cheaper to go to Lorette than to Steinbach. Here's a blurb from SW Transit's web page. Something like this would appeal to exurbanites who simply wouldn't ride a dirty city bus and have to worry about dealing with city issues even if they save money on gas and parking. Sounds civilized:

Sit back and enjoy the ride. Our coach buses offer cup holders, foot rests and reading lights.
No eating on the buses.
Beverages are allowed in covered containers only.
No loud music is allowed on the bus – use headphones.

Cell Phones
Cell phone calls are a distraction to the driver and other riders.
The Rider Committee has designated the highway portion of any trip as a “Quiet Zone”. Please refrain from making or receiving calls once the bus has entered the highway (either eastbound or westbound).
Drivers will periodically make announcements as a reminder of this program.

Listen for stop announcements and exit the bus at your stop.

That’s all there is to it and your driver is there to help you along the way!

Some potential routes from Winnipeg:

La Salle - Sanford
LaBroquerie via Lorette and Ste. Anne
Steinbach via Saint Adolphe, Niverville and Mitchell
Steinbach via Grande Pointe, Ile de Chenes and Landmark
Stonewall via Stony Mountain
Selkirk
Oakbank via Bird's Hill and Garven Rd.
Beausejour

[optimusREIM]

Agreed. It would definitely feed into reducing road usage and being more environmentally sensitive. I bet that it would be reasonably popular even if the service was frequent enough