Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by sledhead35

yep

and nice avitar

[madsad]

Hi All

I was just in the peg for the Planners Network conference and I thoroughly enjoyed my stay. Winnipeg is a tremendous city, warts and all, and was refreshing relief from the doldrums of Saskatoon. It has a far more active socially-progressive crew than in Stoon, and Edmonton, and Calgary, in particular. Stooners, Edmos, and Calgarians are mostly apathetic.

I enjoyed exploring all these little community/commercial/hipster enclaves spread around the city (Ozzy Osborne, Corydon, Wolesley, St. Boniface, Exchange, Forks, etc.), rather than being all concentrated in just one location (such as Old Strathcona in Edmonton, or Broadway in Stoon).

Winnipeg Transit was easy to use and pretty convenient. Albeit, it is summer. Transit service in February is probably a different beast. The new signage system currently being installed is a welcome improvement over the old one, and it made Winnipeg easier to navigate by bus. I dare say though, that Winnipeg is far too small for a heavy-rail subway, or even light rail. But the wide arterials such as Pembina, Main, and Portage have more than enough room for dedicated BRT lanes, and I think such a system, if done right, would be very successful.

EVERYONE was out cycling, and that was a joy to see: commuters, students, hipsters, seniors, couriers on ultra-sexy fixies, you name it. Spandex optional.

The most endearing part of the peg, however, was definitely the fish flies.

So if some Calgarian stumbles in off the "red-mile", or whatever the hell it is called, and spews some vitriol about how they rock this universe and Winnipeg doesn't, because they are so insecure about there own vapid, unintelligent, and sprawling pile of a city, either ignore them, or flip them off with a "whatever...". That's what Edmontonians do.

[LilZebra]

How far down (in feet) is the round and round concourse at Portage & Main?

If there is going to be an underground rapid transit in Winnipeg and a station nearby I would guess that it is deep enough at that point to add a subway platform and not have to dig deeper.

The Wilson plan quotes 52' as the "depth to hardpan" (bedrock).

[The Jabroni]

I heard from this forum a while back that there was some reserved space around the concourse and Winnipeg Square for a potential subway station, had the Wilson project had gone ahead.

I think those spaces are still there, but only as empty walls/alcoves along the way. Then again, I don't go to Winnipeg Square that often.

[flatlander]

Originally Posted by madsad

Hi All

I was just in the peg for the Planners Network conference and I thoroughly enjoyed my stay. Winnipeg is a tremendous city, warts and all, and was refreshing relief from the doldrums of Saskatoon. It has a far more active socially-progressive crew than in Stoon, and Edmonton, and Calgary, in particular. Stooners, Edmos, and Calgarians are mostly apathetic.

I enjoyed exploring all these little community/commercial/hipster enclaves spread around the city (Ozzy Osborne, Corydon, Wolesley, St. Boniface, Exchange, Forks, etc.), rather than being all concentrated in just one location (such as Old Strathcona in Edmonton, or Broadway in Stoon).

Winnipeg Transit was easy to use and pretty convenient. Albeit, it is summer. Transit service in February is probably a different beast. The new signage system currently being installed is a welcome improvement over the old one, and it made Winnipeg easier to navigate by bus. I dare say though, that Winnipeg is far too small for a heavy-rail subway, or even light rail. But the wide arterials such as Pembina, Main, and Portage have more than enough room for dedicated BRT lanes, and I think such a system, if done right, would be very successful.

EVERYONE was out cycling, and that was a joy to see: commuters, students, hipsters, seniors, couriers on ultra-sexy fixies, you name it. Spandex optional.

The most endearing part of the peg, however, was definitely the fish flies.

So if some Calgarian stumbles in off the "red-mile", or whatever the hell it is called, and spews some vitriol about how they rock this universe and Winnipeg doesn't, because they are so insecure about there own vapid, unintelligent, and sprawling pile of a city, either ignore them, or flip them off with a "whatever...". That's what Edmontonians do.

Glad you enjoyed your visit madsad. It was quite a week for planning conferences in Winnipeg. Any chance I poured you a beer at the Labour Temple on Saturday night?

[Spocket]

I don't think anybody is seriously entertaining the idea of a subway in Winnipeg. LRT is a reasonable possibility but for the costs and the realities of our city's budget. Dedicated lanes/corridors for buses though is something that we should be actively pursuing.

Glad you enjoyed your stay though Madsad and we hope you visit again.

[Greco Roman]

I don't think Winnipeg is large enough for a subway system, but LRT is far from being unrealistic in Winnipeg; far from being unrealistic. As I have said a million times, both Edmonton and Calgary implemented their systems back in a time when the population was smaller than Winnipeg's current population.

As for the cost, yes the pricetag is high, and will only get higher as time goes by. But don't forget, Winnipeg's population is growing faster than origionally thought. No, it's not a boom type of growth, but so what. We need to plan for the future now, and not another several decades down the road. Winnipeg should begin implementing LRT now, and build on the legs as the demand increases in time. If you start now, you will avoid higher START-UP costs in the future.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by madsad

It has a far more active socially-progressive crew than in Stoon, and Edmonton, and Calgary, in particular.

Pardon my ignorance, but what do you specifically mean by the term "socially-progressive"?

[supai]

[QUOTE=Greco Roman;3695476]I don't think Winnipeg is large enough for a subway system, but LRT is far from being unrealistic in Winnipeg; far from being unrealistic. As I have said a million times, both Edmonton and Calgary implemented their systems back in a time when the population was smaller than Winnipeg's current population.


There are a number of reasons why Edmonton started its system in 1978. The Commonwealth Games were a factor and financial support from the provincial govt. Also everyone believed that Edmonton would reach a million in population well before the year 2000. That did not happen and could be a factor why Lrt growth stalled for so many years. Although the real reason why LRT stalled was Edmonton's expensive decision to put LRT underground downtown. It is a real shame for Edmonton being the leader in 1978 is playing catchup with other cities on LRT growth. I don't think it is the best model to follow.

LRT would be viable in Winnipeg for sure. Although underground would be nice it could have the effect of stalling future phases for a long period of time due to the cost involved. This is what happened in Edmonton with underground downtown LRT.

I really think that LRT in Winnipeg would work well and enhance the city. I know that it will eventually be built. The City is gowing, environmental concerns are growing and there appears to be an outcry from the residents for rapid transit. I am hoping that Winnipeg will initiate a first phase of LRT rather than BRT. I think a great City like Winnipeg does not deserve anything less than LRT.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by supai

I am hoping that Winnipeg will initiate a first phase of LRT rather than BRT. I think a great City like Winnipeg does not deserve anything less than LRT.

100% agreed! I don't know why many Winnipeggers don't feel like they deserve better than just plain transit, or a shit BRT system. There really is a self-esteem issue with many peggers; we need to convince them that they are worth it.

Quit striving for "good enough", and let's go for "the best". Make Winnipeg shine and show the world that we are a modern and environmentally conscious city.

[Spocket]

Well there's a few reasons I don't think LRT is really a possibility for Winnipeg.
Firstly, we simply don't have the coin to build it. Even if we did though, we need plenty more to operate it and in a blue collar city like Winnipeg there's no way we could afford that kind of operation based on how the city is laid out.
Secondly (and this does tie-in to the first point but I'll get to that) there's no guaranteed ridership base that warrants trains to satisfy the needs of that many riders. In other words, for the money, trains just don't make sense : the capacity of LRT is much greater than we currently need.

The whole reason that this situation exists is because we're a low-density city. Certainly there are areas that have high population density but to connect them with LRT doesn't really make any more sense than to connect the regional malls with each other. We all know that it's about trips from point A to point B and in this city, there aren't necessarily any points to connect that require the kind of service that LRT provides. You could connect downtown to the U of M of course but we don't really need LRT for that. The population density along that corridor simply isn't high enough to make LRT a prudent investment.

So....the smart thing to do would be to connect downtown to the U of M via a bus-only corridor, allow high-density residential to be built near the stations as usually happens when transit corridors are built in other cities, and then when it becomes more feasible, re-format to LRT from BRT.

Having travelled along Ottawa's busway I can attest to the fact that it's efficient, fast, and would definitely do the job in Winnipeg. And for one quarter the cost of LRT it makes the most sense for this city. LRT would be nice and pretty and all that but it's not necessarily what we need nor can we really afford it. We can join the 21st century with BRT if we only had people in office with the slightest bit of foresight. That's really what the problem is, nothing more.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Well there's a few reasons I don't think LRT is really a possibility for Winnipeg.
Firstly, we simply don't have the coin to build it. Even if we did though, we need plenty more to operate it and in a blue collar city like Winnipeg there's no way we could afford that kind of operation based on how the city is laid out.
Secondly (and this does tie-in to the first point but I'll get to that) there's no guaranteed ridership base that warrants trains to satisfy the needs of that many riders. In other words, for the money, trains just don't make sense : the capacity of LRT is much greater than we currently need.

The whole reason that this situation exists is because we're a low-density city. Certainly there are areas that have high population density but to connect them with LRT doesn't really make any more sense than to connect the regional malls with each other. We all know that it's about trips from point A to point B and in this city, there aren't necessarily any points to connect that require the kind of service that LRT provides. You could connect downtown to the U of M of course but we don't really need LRT for that. The population density along that corridor simply isn't high enough to make LRT a prudent investment.

So....the smart thing to do would be to connect downtown to the U of M via a bus-only corridor, allow high-density residential to be built near the stations as usually happens when transit corridors are built in other cities, and then when it becomes more feasible, re-format to LRT from BRT.

Having travelled along Ottawa's busway I can attest to the fact that it's efficient, fast, and would definitely do the job in Winnipeg. And for one quarter the cost of LRT it makes the most sense for this city. LRT would be nice and pretty and all that but it's not necessarily what we need nor can we really afford it. We can join the 21st century with BRT if we only had people in office with the slightest bit of foresight. That's really what the problem is, nothing more.

I respectfully disagree, as I do think that an LRT system in Winnipeg would be a great fit and addition to the city. I continually point to Saskatoon (who is in the planning stages) and Spokane (who from what I understand will indeed be implementing LRT) as two smaller cities that are taking intiatives for rapid transit.

But you give good rational for your beliefs and I have to respect that

[Marc B.]

Transit lockout pending:

(from the Free Press)

Transit system could shut down
Drivers' strike, lockout threatened

By: Joe Paraskevas and Bartley Kives

Winnipeg could be headed for its first labour disruption of transit service in more than three decades after discussions between the city and its transit union ended after just an hour Friday.

Not since 1976 has this city seen a strike by bus drivers -- but Keith Scott, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union (Local 1505), suggested the city would lock drivers out and "shut the (transit) system down" within a week.

Winnipeg Transit director Dave Wardrop called that suggestion premature but wouldn't rule out the possiblity of a lockout if union job action escalated.

He said the city was prepared to set up barricades at transit facilities.

By the end of the day, each side in the increasingly tense contract dispute was trying to portray the other as the cause of a breakdown in talks and a shutdown of transit service.

"It's not good," Scott said, after a meeting with a negotiator representing the city at the ATU's offices in the Union Centre on Broadway. "They're wanting to lock us out."

Wardrop said a lockout "would not be our preferred course of action," adding the city wanted to keep buses running on time.

Union members rejected a city contract offer this week and refused to work overtime, forcing the city to reduce the number of buses on the road during Friday morning rush hour.

The union, which has gone without a contract since January, wants improvements to working conditions -- specifically scheduling requirements that demand drivers regularly work split shifts or stretches of seven consecutive days.

"I like the job. It's just the hours," said one driver waiting to start work at Garry Street and Portage Avenue on Friday.

The driver, 36, who wouldn't give his name but said he had worked for Transit for three years, is married with one child and works seven-day stretches twice a month.

"Family life is down," he said, giving a thumbs-down for emphasis.

"Our marriages are breaking down and our kids are going wild," said a female driver, a single mother in her 40s, walking to work on Graham Avenue.

The woman, who also chose not to identify herself, said she had driven buses for eight years. She said working 12-hour split shifts means driving in mornings and evenings but waiting idly during midday, hours when few drivers could return to their families.

The city does not have enough bus drivers to be able to run a full complement of buses during peak rush hours without asking some drivers to work overtime.

The service reductions Friday morning brought on by union members' refusal to work overtime were worse than the city had anticipated, Wardrop admitted.

"ATU is in the process of systematically withdrawing service," he said. "If we get into a situation where it gets impossible to deliver a reasonable level of service in a predictable manner, we will consider our options. ATU's actions have aggravated our ability to deliver service."

Scott met with other union executives Friday afternoon to plan the union's next move.

The union would continue to refuse overtime, limiting bus service, Scott said afterwards. But there would not be further job actions unless the city provoked the drivers, he said.

Transit drivers who spoke to the Free Press on the street said they would be prepared to further slow service through work-to-rule measures, meaning they would do no more than the minimum required to run their buses.

They said as examples drivers would not move buses if customers got on without exact change, or they would remain at a stop if people were standing in the aisles.

Scott acknowledged such actions were being discussed by rank-and-file members but the union executive would not authorize them "unless we're forced to do something else if the city reacts."

joe.paraskevas@freepress.mb.ca

bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

[The Jabroni]

Yeah, I was wondering how most transit drivers spend their day only working during rush hour, and then sit idle for a while during off peak hours, and then work the afternoon rush hour again.

[1ajs]

heres a question why don't we have enuff drivers?

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

heres a question why don't we have enuff drivers?

You should ask the 5 rookie drivers that quit last week. Hours of work, low starting wage, stress, hours of work. Nothing like being a rookie, starting at 5:25 and sometimes not being finished your day until close to 19:00. And then going in to work for 3:25 the next day. You can have weekends off after about 10 years if you don't mind having your day take 13 hours to complete for 7.5 hours pay. 15 or 16 years for a regular night shift with weekends off. 21 years plus for weekends off on day shift. Qualified people don't want the job.

[Pootkao]

Originally Posted by flatlander

Glad you enjoyed your visit madsad. It was quite a week for planning conferences in Winnipeg. Any chance I poured you a beer at the Labour Temple on Saturday night?

We may have tag-teamed his beer! That Labour Temple event was great.

Nice to shoot the breeze with you there Flatlander.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by Kinguni

You should ask the 5 rookie drivers that quit last week. Hours of work, low starting wage, stress, hours of work. Nothing like being a rookie, starting at 5:25 and sometimes not being finished your day until close to 19:00. And then going in to work for 3:25 the next day. You can have weekends off after about 10 years if you don't mind having your day take 13 hours to complete for 7.5 hours pay. 15 or 16 years for a regular night shift with weekends off. 21 years plus for weekends off on day shift. Qualified people don't want the job.

perhaps they need to revamp the system

is it different from other cities?

[Kinguni]

I think every city has something different, and it probably is time for a revamp. I'm not sure how to change it though. But there has to be willingness on the part of Transit management to investigate the possibilities, along with the Union. So far, however, Transit has shown no willingness to improve scheduling and working conditions to the point that they actually want to make things worse by increasing hours of Sunday work, and no, there was nothing about more drivers having Sundays off as Mr. Wardrop told the media. Sunday is the one day in a 7 day stretch that Transit drivers look forward to since it's a shorted day, and the one day that many can do a straight shift, and this contract would have changed that.

You should have seen what was in the first contract that got voted down.

They have a lot of work to do if they want to make being a bus driver an attractive job now, once which will attract quality employees who stay for a career. They are taking a step in that direction by increasing the starting pay, but they need more than that.

[viperred88]

Originally Posted by Kinguni

I think every city has something different, and it probably is time for a revamp. I'm not sure how to change it though. But there has to be willingness on the part of Transit management to investigate the possibilities, along with the Union. So far, however, Transit has shown no willingness to improve scheduling and working conditions to the point that they actually want to make things worse by increasing hours of Sunday work, and no, there was nothing about more drivers having Sundays off as Mr. Wardrop told the media. Sunday is the one day in a 7 day stretch that Transit drivers look forward to since it's a shorted day, and the one day that many can do a straight shift, and this contract would have changed that.

You should have seen what was in the first contract that got voted down.

They have a lot of work to do if they want to make being a bus driver an attractive job now, once which will attract quality employees who stay for a career. They are taking a step in that direction by increasing the starting pay, but they need more than that.

Thats why I am not in that profession.

If they had a dedicated lrt system like skytrain/ subway in vancouver they wouldn't need many drivers or any at all for some routes. But I guess we have to pay for the consequenses for our city inaction of rapid transit.