[roccerfeller]

Hypothetically, yes. Future RT plans all follow rail or abandoned rail lines, except for on street operations of course. To be determined will be the river crossing to Transcona, either following the route of the CNR high line, or more likely as part of a realigned Higgins river crossing to replace the Louis Bridge. Once across the river there can be 3 branches, east north and south.

This summer's Jubilee Overpass refurbishing had little to do with RT, other than ensuring it would be ready for use by RT buses. It was planned for the near future though. The BRT overpass will be separate.

Ah, thanks.

Yes, I agree with the note re: the east side of the city...that is one hypothetical future line that they gotta get right simply because of how the red river separates it from downtown in a way the west side isn't separated

Yes they did, but I think that they will eventually turn that into a rapid transit line, alongside the bike path. I mean, it's the only sensible and logical thing to place a line there, and use the bike path to reserve land for it.

yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if they we have to re-adjust the bike path though, to make room for both...cause there has to be space for a north and south RT section

[Biff]

You have to remember that the Kildonan Greenway bike path only cost slightly over a million dollars. Not that much if you had to tear it out to put in a $500 million dollar LRT line and realign the bike path afterwords. I think of it as a inexpensive, well used, much better looking than grungy rail tracks, placeholder for future LRT.

[MalcolmTucker]

People will scream and wail when you propose to remove their precious bike path (even if it will be replaced)

[h0twired]

People will scream and wail when you propose to remove their precious bike path (even if it will be replaced)

I would actually propose to get rid of Raleigh in its entirety.

Other than being a shortcut for some areas, it is not really necessary for the majority of the businesses and neighbourhoods adjacent to it. The few businesses that have no other access other than along Raleigh could easily be expropriated or have a driveway built in as a part of the larger plan.

There really is no need to touch much of the current bike path.

[roccerfeller]

Yeah those two roads always confused me when i would travel there.

Then again im not too familiar with that area. If Raleigh can be removed easily, then that would really help potential RT corridors.

The one thing I always think about though, is that RT corridors need to be as isolated from the road as possible, with underpsases or overpasses at intersections. If RT followed intersections, there wouldnt be much of a point

but then this goes back to what we already talked about a few pages ago

[h0twired]

The only major issues I see would be the loading dock access to Polar Windows (Raleigh at Kimberley) and access to Royal Sports.

That said, they both could be bought out and you would have an ideal location for a park-and-ride station.

[wpgcityone]

Remember that Raleigh will be closed down on either side of the Chief Peguis Trail.

[h0twired]

Remember that Raleigh will be closed down on either side of the Chief Peguis Trail.

Yes. However that is only a small section on the far north portion.

I am saying the entire street should be removed and replaced with an LRT right of way.

[roccerfeller]

^Yeah. The added benefit is removing those extremely confusing intersections.

What would be cheaper for RT? And overpass or and underpass for an intersection?

[GORDBO]

:previous: I would think overpasses would be more logical. Just look at how existing underpasses flood during rain storms,

[Spocket]

Sorry about not putting it on the thread, but 382 pages is too long for me to read.

http://l14.sphotos.l3.fbcdn.net/hphotos-l3-snc6/hs048.snc6/167859_171553459547722_100000792081288_302696_119715_n.jpg


Any additional thoughts? Go ahead and comment haha. Could use others opinions! :)

Not bad really .
The green line to Transcona would be a waste of money though since it doesn't go to any particular destination (nobody lives along most of the route and it ends before actually reaching Transcona)
The line to Headingley isn't feasible either to be honest ... at least not if it actually goes to Headingley .
There's no service in East Kildonan too which , really , is one of the best potential routes in the city .

[roccerfeller]

http://transportation.speakupwinnipeg.com/

if you read their projection there, they have a "preliminary" phase 1 & 2 RT plan set up...

since speakupwinnipeg is accessed from the city's official website (Its how I found it) although it is notthing official, they have some great studies and stuff to give people a general idea

[armorand93]

Not bad really .
The green line to Transcona would be a waste of money though since it doesn't go to any particular destination (nobody lives along most of the route and it ends before actually reaching Transcona)
The line to Headingley isn't feasible either to be honest ... at least not if it actually goes to Headingley .
There's no service in East Kildonan too which , really , is one of the best potential routes in the city .

I should re-edit my map a little bit, actually. Will upload a new one later

[roccerfeller]

I should re-edit my map a little bit, actually. Will upload a new one later

yeah, maybe check out the transport pdf @ speakup winnipeg (i linked it above) and use that as a template

[Kitty Surprise]

yeah, maybe check out the transport pdf @ speakup winnipeg (i linked it above) and use that as a template

If this is what we have to look forward to (good lord they didn't even define the alignment of routes!) then start getting used to Quality Corridors. Gotta love how that sounds... Quality Corridors. 3 Cheers for mediocrity!

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/6403/image1uc.jpg

[roccerfeller]

^ LOL I know what you mean.

Wishful thinking, would wish that this city just went all out for RT and just did something, did it once, and never worry about it again

[Kitty Surprise]

^ LOL I know what you mean.

Wishful thinking, would wish that this city just went all out for RT and just did something, did it once, and never worry about it again

anyhow since we have nothing to lose but Quality Corridors, here's another option. Loops to maximize coverage and capture most heavy hitting employment centres (e.g. hospitals, shopping malls). This plan also eliminates some roads; making them transit & pedestrian & cyclist malls. Cheers!

http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=206942817590323604188.00047cbd33b58f0d27a41&z=11

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1825/image2fa.jpg

[armorand93]

anyhow since we have nothing to lose but Quality Corridors, here's another option. Loops to maximize coverage and capture most heavy hitting employment centres (e.g. hospitals, shopping malls). This plan also eliminates some roads; making them transit & pedestrian & cyclist malls. Cheers!

http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=206942817590323604188.00047cbd33b58f0d27a41&z=11

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1825/image2fa.jpg

if only we could afford that. i'd like lrt all over, but knowing winnipeg, the cost of that would make shit hit the financial fan

[armorand93]

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs1364.snc4/163633_174392965930438_100000792081288_318656_6065094_n.jpg

Blue BRT 2017 - Moray thru Downtown to Transcona

LRT - Phase I (Jubilee to Downtown), Phase II (South Extension to Bison), Phase III 2017 (West Expansion to the Airport) and Phase IV 2022 (South Extension to Waverley West)

Green BRT 2016 - St Vital thru Downtown to East Kildolnan

- Abolish current 60, 62 and University routes, redistributing buses to St James and Maples
- Service to CentrePort?
- Headingley to Unicity shuttle
- Waverley West bus routes
- Fare Free Zone for Downtown BRT and LRT, honor system enforced by transit officers with huge fines!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs1334.snc4/162654_174393012597100_100000792081288_318657_4414914_n.jpg

RED LRT - Tunnel to Balmoral/U of W (2013), with stations at: Portage Place/HBC, Hydro, Cityplace, Winnipeg Square and Union Station. Tunnel ending at St. Matthews, which becomes surface LRT towards the Airport (2017).

BLUE BRT: Up Academy, with stations along Maryland/Sherbrooke. Up Broadway with a station at Balmoral. Up Memorial, with a Legislature stop. Then use St. Marys (Eastbound) and York (Westbound). Two stations with one at the Convention Centre. Driveby Union Station, with a CMHR stop, which would then go on into St. Boniface with a stop at Rue St. Joseph

GREEN BRT: Combined stop at Osborne, going on to Hargrave station, then going down Broadway to Main. Union Station, Richardson Station, Exchange Station and City Hall station.

ALL OF DOWNTOWN SECTION FREEFARE!

[Rabbitson]

However, I'm sort of disappointed how most of these plans absolutely avoid the bulk of the North End.

Maybe it's nicer to think of endless loops clustered in the exchange, but some decent coverage for potential peak uses has to be considered.

[The Jabroni]

if only we could afford that. i'd like lrt all over, but knowing winnipeg, the cost of that would make shit hit the financial fan

That, and then public backlash on why the money should have been better spent on roads. :rolleyes:

[armorand93]

However, I'm sort of disappointed how most of these plans absolutely avoid the bulk of the North End.

Could still sneak an LRT thru the North End, but it'd be kind of scary to have nothing but gang wars on an LRV 24/7

[Kitty Surprise]

if only we could afford that. i'd like lrt all over, but knowing winnipeg, the cost of that would make shit hit the financial fan

Nobody said this was LRT

My plan envisions a BRT 'web' across our radial city using existing street medians, dedicated transit-only streets, and/or rail ROW. It wouldn't cost much to implement, other than some minor steet modifications and of course new roadways along rail alignments.

All major hospitals, schools, and shopping centres are connected to the system, i.e. system has built-in ridership of employees, patients, students, shoppers, etc who would all use the system daily and during peak/non-peak times.

Along major arterials the Median BRT would 'veer into' each stop (e.g Portage & Arlington Shoppers Drug Mart) The Bus would enter a fully enclosed station where passengers would be warm in the winter. These stations would be TOD incubators. The bus then 'veers back out' onto the dedicated median.

The loop or 'web' alignment further maximizes accessibility to/from those above 'nodes' - thereby increasing potential ridership and utility of the entire system.

For example the Airport Route tracks along McDermot Ave (dedicated transit route) to Health Sciences Centre (a huge employment and daily visit centre) but it doesn't stop there, it spurs off a route along mcphillips (picking up & dropping off passengers) and continues to Tec Voc. Then it proceeds to a connection to RRC (again a huge transit stop) before hitting the airport. Then it continues on to either Polo Park or further to St James and potential CentrePort stations.

This BRT layout while at first glance appears too large and ambitious to implement, really is quite simple and cost effective. It's an elegant solutions to a complex problem - how to adequately serve all areas of a radial city with extreme climate while maintaining overall system utility. By capturing all 'heavy hitters' (e.g. shopping malls, hospitals, schools) we ensure we have a built in ridership. It's a 'made-for-Winnipeg' solution.

[vid]

Could still sneak an LRT thru the North End, but it'd be kind of scary to have nothing but gang wars on an LRV 24/7

Gang wars 24/7? Really?

[armorand93]

Gang wars 24/7? Really?

I was exaggerating, but lets put BRT or LRT down lets say Burrows, and i'm pretty sure we'd be hearing transit assaults alot more on the news

[Bdog]

I was exaggerating, but lets put BRT or LRT down lets say Burrows, and i'm pretty sure we'd be hearing transit assaults alot more on the news

Why would LRT or BRT experience more "transit assaults" than the various routes of regular bus service that go through the North End today...?

[Rabbitson]

Personally, I was thinking of driving the route down Mountain from Main street So it could take more load from the suburbs and neighbourhoods north of there

[Rabbitson]

http://www.truwinnipeg.org/

I thought that this site might be interesting, and I apologize if it's been posted before.

[1ajs]

a couple members on here were involved with that site at some point or another but thanks for reminding us of its existance

[g35]

Sign displaying an interesting message tonight:

http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg618/scaled.php?tn=0&server=618&filename=ga7v.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640

[1ajs]

lol thats a fail

[roccerfeller]

lol thats a fail

haha indeed

[roccerfeller]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2010/07/21/winnipeg-city-council-lrt.html

looking back at some of this stuff in interesting...

the Phase 1 corridor is coming along nicely, but this article points out something interesting (its an old article from last summer)

...

Katz has said Phase 1 would remain a bus rapid transit route and not be turfed in favour of light rail. However, light rail will be pursued for Phase 2 and all other expansions of the rapid transit system. The Manitoba government has already committed money for a bus-based Phase 2.

...


And, the article also mentions that Phase 1 is from the Forks to Jubilee

but I always though it ended on Main/Queen Elizabeth Way

http://www.winnipegtransit.com/assets/52/7_-_Project_Plan.pdf

The official plan supports this

http://www.winnipegtransit.com/en/rapid-transit/southwest-rapid-transit-corridor-stage-1-project/



So....my questions raised from this are:

1) did CBC mis-report this? Did they assume "The Forks" was the same thing as "Queen Elizabeth Way"?

2) How will Traffic flow work from Queen Elizabeth way...the bus lane is going in the opposite direction to downtown?

3) Is Phase 2 in limbo at all? If the committed funds have had no comment of as recent...then whats the deal with it? Was it redirected to CP Extension? Re-reading over everything from last summer then considering the RT stuff @ the Mayoral debates got me more confused on this

4) If Phase 2 will be pursued as LRT, if it were along with other expansions to become LRT, and Phase 1 will be BRT, then how the heck does that work if they will be connected?

[Kinguni]

1) did CBC mis-report this? Did they assume "The Forks" was the same thing as "Queen Elizabeth Way"?

2) How will Traffic flow work from Queen Elizabeth way...the bus lane is going in the opposite direction to downtown?

3) Is Phase 2 in limbo at all? If the committed funds have had no comment of as recent...then whats the deal with it? Was it redirected to CP Extension? Re-reading over everything from last summer then considering the RT stuff @ the Mayoral debates got me more confused on this

4) If Phase 2 will be pursued as LRT, if it were along with other expansions to become LRT, and Phase 1 will be BRT, then how the heck does that work if they will be connected?

1) QEII way is pretty much at the forks.

2) Buses enter the BRT roadway from QEII Way @ Stradbrook, but they exit at Harkness using Harkness and Mayfair to Main.

3) and 4) Anything beyond what's being built right now is in limbo. What the Mayor said meant they weren't planning to stop building phase 1 of BRT. IF, and that's a big IF, it is decided and funded to build LRT for future phases, phase 1 will be converted to LRT as well.

[armorand93]

We should just go like Edmonton. Build one line of LRT (Red River College - Polo - Downtown - U of M) and use NOTHING but BRT for the rest of the city. :)

[j.online]

Expansion coming to Winnipeg Transit
CJOB News Team reporting (http://www.cjob.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1371460)
2/28/2011

Ridership continues to climb on Winnipeg Transit buses, outpacing the city's growth.

It means more buses on the streets in the years to come beginning with a major expansion to Transit's main Osborne Street headquarters this spring.

Transit director Dave Wardrop tells CJOB once the new garage is built more buses and routes will be added.

A new transit corridor from Main Street to Jubilee Avenue will open in the fall of 2012.

Wardrop says the Fort Rouge maintenance facility will also expand and there will be a major renovation to the 80-year-old Main Street Transit garage.

[1ajs]

sweet i wonder if this had anything to do with the idea i kepted droping at various open houses about the lack of expansion room for new bus's

[rypinion]

sweet i wonder if this had anything to do with the idea i kepted droping at various open houses about the lack of expansion room for new bus's

I'm pretty sure Transit always has and always will be well aware of how much capacity they have for new buses, routes and service.

[Bdog]

sweet i wonder if this had anything to do with the idea i kepted droping at various open houses about the lack of expansion room for new bus's

1ajs, not only are you running these here forums - but, you're running the city subconciously too! :D

[Kinguni]

A new transit corridor from Main Street to Jubilee Avenue will open in the fall of 2012.


That's a typo. It's on track for 2011 opening. The new barn has been planned for a while. Nice to see the construction date moved up.

[1ajs]

1ajs, not only are you running these here forums - but, you're running the city subconciously too! :D

no i just bring idea though i honestly don't know if they had actualy been talking about it for yrs or not i do remember the transit union filing law suits over some ventalation issues causing lung cancer 7yrs ago? witch could have more to do with it

[Kinguni]

It's been planned for years and it's needed for 3 reasons: so there's somewhere to park buses when the north barn is closed for a year for renovations, to provide extra capacity to expand service and to have a facility which can handle articulated buses. Originally planned for construction in 2013 or 2014 it's been bumped up, mostly due to the deteriorating condition of north garage. North garage handle around 125 buses, so the new garage will take that on, and once north garage is renovated, they will then be able to expand service.

[1ajs]

figured it was on the books long over due to silly.. plus the city has a nice track of land called domion bridge they could use.........

[Riverman]

I don't think the Dominion Bridge site will be used for some time, I understand it's pretty contaminated.

[Biff]

I heard on the radio this morning that the City is spending money on a study to build a pedestrian bridge from the UofM to St Vital. I believe this is a good idea. This is not related to the proposal a couple of years ago to build a gondola system to the UofM, this is an actual study.

.....they are also studying what to do with the Arlington St Bridge - decommission the bridge and tear down with no replacement and improve the McPhillips St underpass (which needs to be done regardless) or tear it down and build a modern replacement.

I personally feel they should keep a link there.

[Boreal]

I don't think the Dominion Bridge site will be used for some time, I understand it's pretty contaminated.

I would guess that the city couldn't give it away. Very costly for anyone to do anything with it. I just don't see a lot of upside to the location. It's a decent industrial location, but nobody is going to front the costs to be in that part of town. Unfortunately. It will be our small plot of 'Little Hamilton on the Prairies' for the foreseeable future, in my opinion.

[flatlander]

Expansion coming to Winnipeg Transit
CJOB News Team reporting (http://www.cjob.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1371460)
2/28/2011

Ridership continues to climb on Winnipeg Transit buses, outpacing the city's growth.

It means more buses on the streets in the years to come beginning with a major expansion to Transit's main Osborne Street headquarters this spring.

Transit director Dave Wardrop tells CJOB once the new garage is built more buses and routes will be added.

A new transit corridor from Main Street to Jubilee Avenue will open in the fall of 2012.

Wardrop says the Fort Rouge maintenance facility will also expand and there will be a major renovation to the 80-year-old Main Street Transit garage.

Anybody know if the expansion will be just on existing lands or new lands? There's a vacant piece of land in front of the office building that needs some love. Not necessarily a garage mind you.

[roccerfeller]

I heard on the radio this morning that the City is spending money on a study to build a pedestrian bridge from the UofM to St Vital. I believe this is a good idea. This is not related to the proposal a couple of years ago to build a gondola system to the UofM, this is an actual study.

.....they are also studying what to do with the Arlington St Bridge - decommission the bridge and tear down with no replacement and improve the McPhillips St underpass (which needs to be done regardless) or tear it down and build a modern replacement.

I personally feel they should keep a link there.

this is awesome

they need that bridge, imo its long overdue

[Riverman]

A bus ride to the U of M from just across the river is a long affair. A bridge would be very beneficial to S. St. Vital.

[h0twired]

It would be neat if bridges like the Arlington Bridge, Louise Bridge and proposed bridge from St.V to the U of M could be used for transit and ped/bike only.

It would reduce the maintenance required and create a potentially attractive traffic free route for buses and cyclists.

[Andy6]

A bus ride to the U of M from just across the river is a long affair. A bridge would be very beneficial to S. St. Vital.

I used to walk to the U of M every day from St. Vital ... wish there'd been a nice bridge then. In the dead of winter the trek across the Fort Garry Bridge sidewalk and its surrounding windswept wastelands made me feel like Scott of the Antarctic.

Of course it used to be there was not even the Fort Garry Bridge and you had to go up to Jubilee or down to the Perimeter to get to the U of M (it made for an incredibly long ride on the 'Unibus' ... anyone else remember the Unibus?)

[The Jabroni]

It would be neat if bridges like the Arlington Bridge, Louise Bridge and proposed bridge from St.V to the U of M could be used for transit and ped/bike only.

It would reduce the maintenance required and create a potentially attractive traffic free route for buses and cyclists.

For Arlington Bridge, it would be nice, but there are reasons why buses don't use that bridge, mainly because it's steep on both sides of the bridge.

I'm not sure if tearing down the bridge would be the right call. Yes, it is understandable that it is old, and has its fair share of various problems over the years, but severing Arlington St for the long term would be annoying for those who frequent the bridge. It's either those people will have to take the Salter Bridge or the McPhillips underpass.

Speaking on the latter, that underpass should be worked on as well, but I think the higher priority underpass on that same CPR line is the one on Main Street. That one needs to be worked on big time, because every time I drive under that thing, I get nervous, especially when looking at the concrete columns that support that underpass.

[1ajs]

the main st bridge is a steel structure covered in a concreat finish they did a bunch of work on the top of it during the summer prolly bunch more to be done but cpr owns the bridge and it falls under the railways act the city has no juristiction

as for the arlington bridge it should be fixed up not torn down its will cut the north end off even more then it is if removed............ its a gem if they close it do something like the highline park in ny with it

[Andy6]

Are they going to consider reviving the Sherbrook-McGregor overpass idea, I wonder?

In the mid-to-late 1970s, Sherbrook-McGregor was probably the #1 "infrastructure" issue in civic politics (next to the Trizec parking garage, maybe). Eventually it was shelved, but maybe it would make more sense now than rebuilding Arlington.

It would be a shame to lose Arlington -- it is a fantastic example of a golden age of engineering and railway history as well.

[Riverman]

Are they going to consider reviving the Sherbrook-McGregor overpass idea, I wonder? Quite brilliant, I remember that. It would make sense from a perspective of connecting arteries.

It would be a shame to lose Arlington -- it is a fantastic example of a golden age of engineering and railway history as well.The railway has clearance issues with the bridge, it has to go. I agree about it's beauty though. I love the old bridges.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/river_57/redwood.jpg

[Bdog]

Quite brilliant, I remember that. It would make sense from a perspective of connecting arteries.

The railway has clearance issues with the bridge, it has to go. I agree about it's beauty though. I love the old bridges.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/river_57/redwood.jpg

Speaking of the old Sherbrook-Mcgregor bridge proposal, I was looking over the old WATS Winnipeg freeway plans the other day... Really interesting stuff in there (would have fundamentally altered the way our city grew in the past half century), and a lot of neighbourhoods would have been completely bisected...

Potential freeways included:
Out to Tcona, south of Nairn
Through the north-end (between Mcgregor and Mckenzie, and south over the tracks)
One that essentially follows the same path as the South-west BRT corridor
One following the CP yards then around the airport
One near Wilkes (essentially like the Sterling Lyon, but all the way to Jubilee)

[Kinguni]

Anybody know if the expansion will be just on existing lands or new lands? There's a vacant piece of land in front of the office building that needs some love. Not necessarily a garage mind you.

Transit owns that lot out front. Imagine it will be turned into parking. Maintenance shop expansion will likely be added to the rear of the current maintenance facility. The new storage facility is to be built on land the City acquired along the BRT line between Brandon Ave. and Arnold Ave.

[flatlander]

Riverman, what sort of clearance issues?

Kinguni, are you sure it's not owned by imperial oil?

[1ajs]

doesn't anyone think its funny that the building at arlington and logan was only demolished a month or so ago and their now talking about demolishing the arlington bridge to replace it?

[Kinguni]

Kinguni, are you sure it's not owned by imperial oil?

Yes. The city acquired it a couple of years ago, same time they were expropriating other property for rapid transit.

[Riverman]

Riverman, what sort of clearance issues?

I don't remember where I read this, but what I understand the clearance is too low in some areas for some of the double stacked container cars.

EDIT: This a big concern for the railway as these cars are their top revenue stream.

[rypinion]

I don't remember where I read this, but what I understand the clearance is too low in some areas for some of the double stacked container cars.

I also read this in some of the recent news articles.

[trebor204]

Just check the images on Google Street View, along Jarvis (north of the tracks)

[rypinion]

Just check the images on Google Street View, along Jarvis (north of the tracks)

Ya, totally no room for a double stacked container car:

http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Winnipeg,+Division+No.+11,+Manitoba&ll=49.915572,-97.158923&spn=0.009382,0.022724&z=16&layer=c&cbll=49.915608,-97.158978&panoid=5VS-JB0N6NHUP96jQLZHBw&cbp=12,232.14,,0,1.01

[The Jabroni]

Ya, totally no room for a double stacked container car:

http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Winnipeg,+Division+No.+11,+Manitoba&ll=49.915572,-97.158923&spn=0.009382,0.022724&z=16&layer=c&cbll=49.915608,-97.158978&panoid=5VS-JB0N6NHUP96jQLZHBw&cbp=12,232.14,,0,1.01

Oh there is enough room for most double stacked container cars. It's just that the few of them for sure will not get under that bridge.

I remember witnessing a train passing through with double stacked containers, and I was wondering if it would make it under the bridge. Surely enough, it did. The kicker was it passed underneath the ramp part of the bridge.

[rypinion]

Oh there is enough room for most double stacked container cars. It's just that the few of them for sure will not get under that bridge.

I remember witnessing a train passing through with double stacked containers, and I was wondering if it would make it under the bridge. Surely enough, it did. The kicker was it passed underneath the ramp part of the bridge.

Interesting, from that angle it looks like it wouldn't work, although the Salter bridge doesn't look much better and I assume it is fine.

[1ajs]

yea i've biked passed and seen them pass fine what i think cpr is more woried about is the insurance costs having this bridge there as they have taking hunks outa it in the past because of a train tiping and such

[cslusarc]

Speaking of the old Sherbrook-Mcgregor bridge proposal, ...

I like the idea of a bridge linking Sherbrooke and McGregor. If they do it they can extend the #17 bus down Sherbrooke to Misericordia Health Centre replacing the #29 bus connecting also connecting the Health Sciences Centre to Seven Oaks Hospital. Sherbrooke is a wider street than Arlington (south of Notre Dame Ave) and would be a better corridor to have connected. The bridge could be 3 lanes with the middle lane as a reversible lane during the morning/afternoon peak to save money.

[Mininari]

Considering that Arlington Street is NOT WIDE ENOUGH FOR FOUR LANES between Portage and Notre Dame, this would be a welcome "downgrade" for the road. I am sick and tired of people honking at me because they want to pass me on the right, when in order to make room for them, I'd have to drive down the centre line (or over it). Proof of this? A lane should be able to hold the width of a bus... hence, two lanes would allow two buses to travel side-by-side. This cannot be done on Arlington Street without the second bus leaning over into oncoming traffic.

Nevermind the complete lack of a white lane line anywhere.
Why do people think it is 4-lanes?
I'll give them the benefit of side-stepping left-turners at intersections...
And I plan to keep beating this one until something is done about it. Its a serious safety hazard. (just like those people who flip on the left turn light in the left lane on the Perimeter highway, and slow down to make their turn where there is no left turn lane -- seriously, this city needs to fix some of these blatant sub-standard road safety hazards).

[Kinguni]

Considering that Arlington Street is NOT WIDE ENOUGH FOR FOUR LANES between Portage and Notre Dame, this would be a welcome "downgrade" for the road. I am sick and tired of people honking at me because they want to pass me on the right, when in order to make room for them, I'd have to drive down the centre line (or over it). Proof of this? A lane should be able to hold the width of a bus... hence, two lanes would allow two buses to travel side-by-side. This cannot be done on Arlington Street without the second bus leaning over into oncoming traffic.

Nevermind the complete lack of a white lane line anywhere.
Why do people think it is 4-lanes?
I'll give them the benefit of side-stepping left-turners at intersections...
And I plan to keep beating this one until something is done about it. Its a serious safety hazard. (just like those people who flip on the left turn light in the left lane on the Perimeter highway, and slow down to make their turn where there is no left turn lane -- seriously, this city needs to fix some of these blatant sub-standard road safety hazards).

Arlington from Portage to Notre Dame is only 2 lanes (this coming from a bus driver).

[Mininari]

Arlington from Portage to Notre Dame is only 2 lanes (this coming from a bus driver).

Thank you for backing me up on the fact that is only 2 lanes.

So why do people treat it like a 4-lane road then? Its not quite as apparent during the winter, but spring - fall.. it can be real squeeze, especially when macho Joe in his F350 wants to squeeze by me on the right... again to be clear, this is people treating it like a 4-lane road as having 4 TRAVEL lanes. I am ok with people squeezing around the left-turners at intersections since the car making the left turn is usually stationary, or making the turn.

I emailed the city about this a while back, and they acknowledged that this stretch is a "problem" for them, but apparently they have no money (or urgency) to do something about it. Its wide enough for 3 1/2 standard width lanes, and needs about 1m of widening to (barely) be a 4-lane road. I can dig that email up if you want... but perhaps this isn't the right thread to continue this discussion.

[Andy6]

I guess (I'm not sure) that Sherbrook-McGregor was supposed to be the replacement for the old Salter Street Bridge, but in the end they built the Slaw Rebchuk Bridge on Salter to replace it instead. Or maybe it was supposed to replace both bridges. They planned to convert McGregor into a major arterial, with that extension to join McPhillips that is still shown as "projected" on a lot of street maps. It would certainly make a lot more sense from a traffic-flow viewpoint than having the bridge on Arlington, which isn't much of a street south of the tracks and doesn't connect to a bridge over the Assiniboine. I don't remember why the Sherbrook-McGregor plan was so controversial, other than that it was very expensive.

[jimj_wpg]

Gang wars 24/7? Really?

Yeah, sounds a bit over the top to me.

[rrskylar]

Activists want BRT finished
No budget cash for project, project backer laments

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/activists-want-brt-finished-117892274.html

[bicycles]

must.. avoid.. comments section...

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Parking-authority-wants-to-increase-rates-117945779.html

this is an interesting piece about free public transit:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/how-about-free-public-transit-117920169.html

[Bdog]

must.. avoid.. comments section...

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Parking-authority-wants-to-increase-rates-117945779.html

this is an interesting piece about free public transit:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/how-about-free-public-transit-117920169.html

1ajs, feel free to move this to the transit section if necessary...

I wonder where the author of the second article gets his numbers - $2,400 a year will cure transit woes? Based on what assumptions... Also, I don't think that free transit is going to necessarily spike usage all of a sudden - generally, the demand for transit tends to be price inelastic... 5 minute frequency along major routes all hours of the day??? That would be nice, of course, but even a city like Toronto doesn't have that. There is nowhere near the critical mass to support such frequency in Winnipeg. Buses running every 5 minutes at 7PM in Winnipeg would be empty, running at a tremendous cost (financial, and environmental).. Finally, I think we have to be realistic. I know you despise the car, bicycles - but the reality is, they are a necessary part of many people's lives, regardless of how good transit service might be. I'm a huge supporter of rapid transit, so don't get me wrong, but here's the reality:
- 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).
- There are some trips that need to be chained, and couldn't possibly be done reasonibly with transit (i.e. A parent dropping off a child at day care, another at school, and then getting a coffee before work).
- When you have kids one day, try juggling hockey practice, a game at the other end of the city, piano lessons, etc. etc. etc. - These are the realities faced by parents all over the city...

Of course we need to improve our transit system. However, the only way to get the public on board is with realistic, gradual proposals (and increased federal/provincial funding)...

[bicycles]

1ajs, feel free to move this to the transit section if necessary...

I wonder where the author of the second article gets his numbers - $2,400 a year will cure transit woes? Based on what assumptions... Also, I don't think that free transit is going to necessarily spike usage all of a sudden - generally, the demand for transit tends to be price inelastic... 5 minute frequency along major routes all hours of the day??? That would be nice, of course, but even a city like Toronto doesn't have that. There is nowhere near the critical mass to support such frequency in Winnipeg. Buses running every 5 minutes at 7PM in Winnipeg would be empty, running at a tremendous cost (financial, and environmental).. Finally, I think we have to be realistic. I know you despise the car, bicycles - but the reality is, they are a necessary part of many people's lives, regardless of how good transit service might be. I'm a huge supporter of rapid transit, so don't get me wrong, but here's the reality:
- 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).
- There are some trips that need to be chained, and couldn't possibly be done reasonibly with transit (i.e. A parent dropping off a child at day care, another at school, and then getting a coffee before work).
- When you have kids one day, try juggling hockey practice, a game at the other end of the city, piano lessons, etc. etc. etc. - These are the realities faced by parents all over the city...

Of course we need to improve our transit system. However, the only way to get the public on board is with realistic, gradual proposals (and increased federal/provincial funding)...

I don't mind someone needed a utility vehicle (tradesperson, ambulance, etc) I have a problem wtih the suburbanites who live in south Winnipeg and clog the roads between there and downtown for no apparent reason.

in regards to your other points, if we start to build smart communities, we'd never need to go to other ends of the city to do tasks - they would all be walking distance/a short bus ride. cars have led to us sprawling out so far that they have continue to multiply the problems they cause. the more we sprawl, the more people that live out there need to drive, etc.

[Riverman]

I have a problem wtih the suburbanites who live in south Winnipeg and clog the roads between there and downtown for no apparent reason.

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.

[1ajs]

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.

we need to look back into winnipegs past and reinvest in the other downtowns we have they all can be hubs that feed off one another we have all these peaces to become a sustainable city yet we ignore them

[Spocket]

we need to look back into winnipegs past and reinvest in the other downtowns we have they all can be hubs that feed off one another we have all these peaces to become a sustainable city yet we ignore them

I understand what you're saying but , frankly , that's part of the problem . The clock simply can't be turned back and trying to do so is inevitably a waste of time , effort , and money .

If anything , it's those "other" downtowns that have worked to destroy the most important one . We may not think of Polo Park or St. Vital Center as "downtowns" but that's exactly what they are in the modern city . A hub and spoke model for city planning works just fine provided the hub itself is healthy and vibrant . In our case , it simply isn't . The first thing we need to do , which I've been saying for about twenty years now I think , is move people back downtown . The services will follow .

[h0twired]

- 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]

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]

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?

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.

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]

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]

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]

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. :notacrook:

[Bdog]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=43.665963,-79.309603&spn=0.008584,0.017359&t=k&z=16); Rowhouses near a rail line (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=43.640866,-79.423202&spn=0.004294,0.00868&t=k&z=17), not entirely suburban-type but similar to what is in suburban Toronto; I think there are a few others. This part of North Bay (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=46.319582,-79.472399&spn=0.004098,0.00868&t=k&z=17&layer=c&cbll=46.319582,-79.472399&panoid=x_1Ordo_u6vPIhApLeXq8Q&cbp=12,331.74,,0,7) is being infilled after a railway line was removed.

Which areas are you referring to?

In Thunder Bay, Parkdale (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.391427,-89.321852&spn=0.03129,0.069437&z=14), Sherwood (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.450354,-89.278207&spn=0.015627,0.034719&z=15), and River Terrace (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.432247,-89.264603&spn=0.015633,0.034719&z=15), 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]

A large one here (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=43.665963,-79.309603&spn=0.008584,0.017359&t=k&z=16); Rowhouses near a rail line (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=43.640866,-79.423202&spn=0.004294,0.00868&t=k&z=17), not entirely suburban-type but similar to what is in suburban Toronto; I think there are a few others. This part of North Bay (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=46.319582,-79.472399&spn=0.004098,0.00868&t=k&z=17&layer=c&cbll=46.319582,-79.472399&panoid=x_1Ordo_u6vPIhApLeXq8Q&cbp=12,331.74,,0,7) is being infilled after a railway line was removed.



In Thunder Bay, Parkdale (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.391427,-89.321852&spn=0.03129,0.069437&z=14), Sherwood (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.450354,-89.278207&spn=0.015627,0.034719&z=15), and River Terrace (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=48.432247,-89.264603&spn=0.015633,0.034719&z=15), 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]

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]

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)...