Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[Auror]

Originally Posted by esquire

How will it be any worse than Broadway and Main, Portage and Memorial, Broadway and Osborne, Portage and Donald or any number of other downtown intersections with lots of cars and pedestrians?

How much of a delay do you think a dozen people crossing a street can generate?

THIS. Like I said before, that intersection is controlled by left and right turn signals. If it's not, then yes it would be.

Broadway is way worse with pedestrain but traffic went just fine and pedestrians weren't in the way, thanks to LEFT TURN and RIGHT TURN ARROW SIGNALS. Something P and M already has.

Pedestrian traffic will be in the way and slow drivers down, if there's no LEFT or RIGHT TURN ARROW signals and traffic is free to turn left and right during a typical solid green.

So far, in here, people who said it will slow down traffic, have yet to explain how or why. Only said: Yes it will. Yes it will. Yes it will slow down.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Why would opening P&M mean drivers work longer for no pay? Surely Transit has the ability to forecast drive times to make sure employees are back. its not like opening one intersection adds 8 hours to someone's drive time.

Based on my experience on Graham Ave at afternoon rush, they do not have this expertise...

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's a 1 minute delay. I don't see this significantly impacting transit operations, or the time worked by the drivers.

If, as a transit driver, you are running a loop route that is scheduled to take you through P&M every 30 minutes, over an 8 hour shift that "1 minute" actually means 16 extra minutes of work. That is also assuming the "1 minute delay" is accurate and the reality is not deeper than that.

[Auror]

Originally Posted by CoryB

If, as a transit driver, you are running a loop route that is scheduled to take you through P&M every 30 minutes, over an 8 hour shift that "1 minute" actually means 16 extra minutes of work. That is also assuming the "1 minute delay" is accurate and the reality is not deeper than that.

Sure, except P and M isn't rush hour for 8 hours. And the routes on the opposite side of P and M won't be that busy 8 hours so the drivers can catch up, no?

[bomberjet]

And then when the eastern corridor (and northern) bypass P&M completely, the issue won't even be an issue for a large number of routes that cross P&M.

ATU and bus drivers should then complain because it will take a shorter time to get through their routes, so they'll lose payable hours from their shift!!

Rapid transit tuk r jobbbbs!

[esquire]

Bus drivers must be the only municipal employees opposed to working overtime.

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Why would opening P&M mean drivers work longer for no pay? Surely Transit has the ability to forecast drive times to make sure employees are back. its not like opening one intersection adds 8 hours to someone's drive time.

Makes a good case for eliminating Transit Unions.

[joshlemer]

Don't you guys think that Transit is woefully unprioritized in this city? For example, the new waverly underpass I hear is going to cost at least $155-million, while the entire operating budget of the Winnipeg Transit system is only around $207.5-million. That is, one single project providing a minor convenience for suburban motorists gets nearly as much priority as the entire city's public transportation system.

And looking at the map of what kinds of new developments are being made, the city seems to only being getting less dense rather than more. Looking for examplee at the new Bridgewater development in Kenaston South, the development is so single-use and sprawling that it is literally one hour of walking just to get to the very closest store (Superstore on Bison).

Is this city just eagerly doubling down on a 1950s car-dependent vision of the future!?

[bomberjet]

Welcome to the forum Josh.

You're 100% correct. There is much debate about underpasses vs rail relocation, as one example. Rapid Transit is where the big dollars for transit are being spent.

Speaking of funding for Transit, the Province will not be providing funding to the City for transit anymore. Huge deal. Transit does not seem to be of top priority for them. On the cities side, they could be spending more on transit, instead of underpasses such as Waverley. No doubt about that.

[robertocarlos]

There are parts of the Broadway and Main intersection that I will not cross as they are too dangerous. It's like people in cars turning left onto Main don't even see you.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

Bus drivers must be the only municipal employees opposed to working overtime.

Try working a split shift like most drivers, ie 6 am to 10 am and 2 pm to 6 pm for example and then face the prospect of overtime on both parts of the shift.

Also, keep in mind lots of transit drivers work split shifts to cover both the morning and evening rush hours so saying P&M isn't under rush hour conditions for 8 hours continuously is missing a keep aspect of the transit position.

--

I have said from the start, if opening P&M is to be done, separate from my thoughts on that, before anything is changed the impact to transit needs to be addressed. The current plans seem to be ignoring that. Making an already despised transit system worse by opening P&M is going to do nothing to encourage people to give up their vehicle and take transit.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by joshlemer

Don't you guys think that Transit is woefully unprioritized in this city? For example, the new waverly underpass I hear is going to cost at least $155-million, while the entire operating budget of the Winnipeg Transit system is only around $207.5-million. That is, one single project providing a minor convenience for suburban motorists gets nearly as much priority as the entire city's public transportation system.

And looking at the map of what kinds of new developments are being made, the city seems to only being getting less dense rather than more. Looking for examplee at the new Bridgewater development in Kenaston South, the development is so single-use and sprawling that it is literally one hour of walking just to get to the very closest store (Superstore on Bison).

Is this city just eagerly doubling down on a 1950s car-dependent vision of the future!?

There is a SaveOn Foods right in the neighbourhood.

And, sorry, it doesn't work that way. The overpass will last 50 years. So 155/50 is 3.1 million/year versus 207.5/year for transit. No comparison.

[joshlemer]

How do regular citizens like you and I press for a more forward thinking urban development strategy for the city in addition to voting on the basis of those issues? Show up to planning meetings and press grilling questions in the Q&A sections?

Maybe Winnipeg is just too conservative of a town, and people just are not interested in transitioning from a 100% car-only lifestyle. Ah well I guess the upshot is that if you are a person who wants to live in the city (not the suburbs) it is incredibly cheap to do so, I guess because most people here don't want to.

[Riverman]

Hyperbole much?

Lots of people live in this city without a car. Some can't afford one, some don't want one, some are trying to prove a point. If you don't want a car, don't get one. Easy as that.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by joshlemer

Maybe Winnipeg is just too conservative of a town, and people just are not interested in transitioning from a 100% car-only lifestyle. Ah well I guess the upshot is that if you are a person who wants to live in the city (not the suburbs) it is incredibly cheap to do so, I guess because most people here don't want to.

It is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. I want to have a single family home in an inner city neighbourhood, but I also demand a certain level of material comfort...I don't want to be dealing with crime or social issues or run down housing, etc. I want my kids to grow up in a stable, calm sort of setting. Unfortunately, not many inner city neighbourhoods can really deliver that. And of the ones that can, not many of them are really that compatible with a car free lifestyle. I've lived downtown (Bro-Ass) and in the inner city (Riverview) and neither location was truly car free in that I had a good 15 minute walk to reach any significant level of amenities. The end result was that unless I was setting out for a leisurely walk, I ended up driving most of the time.

It's a total contrast from, for example, European cities where quite often inner cities have as much social order as anywhere in town and they are truly car free where you walk a block or two and there you are, surrounded by shops, restaurants, etc. Only Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are even in the ballpark when it comes to providing that sort of lifestyle in Canada... and two of those three cities are debilitatingly expensive.

I think downtown/inner city Winnipeg has reached the point where it's desirable for young people to live there, but it's not really at the point where it has mass appeal for families.

[joshlemer]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Hyperbole much?

Lots of people live in this city without a car. Some can't afford one, some don't want one, some are trying to prove a point. If you don't want a car, don't get one. Easy as that.

Except it is not easy as that. What projects the city / province / federal government back has a real impact on what modes of transport and lifestyles are favored, and continuing to go down the path of building far out suburbs and dedicating big dollars to major infrastructure projects that enable them constitutes a subsidy, or at least an encouragement to that lifestyle over others IMO

[robertocarlos]

Originally Posted by CoryB

I have said from the start, if opening P&M is to be done, separate from my thoughts on that, before anything is changed the impact to transit needs to be addressed. The current plans seem to be ignoring that. Making an already despised transit system worse by opening P&M is going to do nothing to encourage people to give up their vehicle and take transit.

Would adding a diamond lane from Memorial to Main help?

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

It's a total contrast from, for example, European cities where quite often inner cities have as much social order as anywhere in town and they are truly car free where you walk a block or two and there you are, surrounded by shops, restaurants, etc. Only Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are even in the ballpark when it comes to providing that sort of lifestyle in Canada... and two of those three cities are debilitatingly expensive.

I think downtown/inner city Winnipeg has reached the point where it's desirable for young people to live there, but it's not really at the point where it has mass appeal for families.

Not only can you live without a car in many old city centres in Europe, it is also quite common to find entire districts of cities where cars are totally prohibited. Not only does this make the street scape more appealing but it also removes the noise associated to traffic. Picture the exchange without having to worry about traffic. That would be pretty nice.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by joshlemer

Except it is not easy as that. What projects the city / province / federal government back has a real impact on what modes of transport and lifestyles are favored, and continuing to go down the path of building far out suburbs and dedicating big dollars to major infrastructure projects that enable them constitutes a subsidy, or at least an encouragement to that lifestyle over others IMO

First off, you can't tell people where to live. This is a free country. Secondly like Esq. mentioned people want a certain lifestyle, be near certain schools etc. To most an urbanist ideology means nothing - they just want what's best for their families.

Also, remember if Sage Creek and Waverly West were not built, those same developments would happen outside the perimeter.

[buzzg]

You can't tell people exacty where to live, but you can 100% control their options. That's what zoning is for, that's why developments and construction have to be approved. We can't blame the people for sprawl, it's the government's fault that allowed it to happen.