Winnipeg - Cycling/Infrastructure

[Biff]

Here is a cycling and infrastructure thread.

Get ready for a long winded bit of Biff...

It comes up often enough in other threads so here we go. I am not the guy who should be starting the thread as I am a passing cyclist at best. I am, however strongly on the fence in favor of both new cycling infrastructure and new road infrastructure.

I get annoyed and quite frankly tune out when having to read continually strong, one sided views from either side - cyclists that say fuck cars, they ruin our society and the other camp feeling bicycles should be banished from all roads and sidewalks and relegated to just kids.

We need a happy medium for both. Cars are and will continue to be the major part of our infrastructure for long after I'm gone....that's still some time hopefully. I am a major proponent of good highway infrastructure and quite frankly, Winnipeg doesn't have any. We have a hodge podge of 1960's era major highways that become choked due to intersections. There are lots of examples on here of European cities and how great they are for cycling and what they do to discourage car use. My issue with this and how it is related to Winnipeg does not hold water for me.

One of the things that every developed city in the world has (except Winnipeg) even the ancient cities (London, Rome, Venice, Barcelona) are good expressways/freeways that connect and move people around the cities. This can help to keep the congestion out of the cores. I agree that freeways are not needed downtown but there needs to be a better way to get crosstown in this city than go straight through it. Upgrading Lagimodiere, Bishop Grandin, Kenaston and King Edward/Brookside would be a start. This could possibly lead to the reduction in size of some of the Stroads through and around downtown. Beautification and cycling infrastructure could ensue if we removed some of the traffic through town.

Enough on highways...

I love the cycling infrastructure that has been built around town and my family and I use a lot of it here in NE Winnipeg. We need more of it. What needs to happen though is much like what Winnipeg Transit has done with their new master plan. They need to step back with a map of the city and essentially draw a network that works regardless of obstacles. Then fine tune it to the streets and right of ways to ensure connectivity. I do not cycle downtown, nor am I likely to ever really need to. But I do hear a lot of complaints regarding connectivity. I’m not entirely sure why the city has taken this approach of piecemeal construction of the network but…I am 100% behind trying to make the cycling network through downtown better.

I would love to be able to take the Pioneers Greenway south to get access to The Forks but it ends somewhere around the Nairn overpass where you have to then navigate the city streets, which I agree are no fun as a cyclist. These are the connections that need to be put in place. I guess it is all the expensive infrastructure that is missing – bridges and overpasses/tunnels.

I guess there need to be a happy medium on infrastructure spending with a master plan for both so citizens can see the end goal and what it takes to get there.

Anyway…end of my mind dump. Flame away if you must.

[buzzg]

There is already a thread for this.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=229531

[optimusREIM]

Thanks for taking the initiative Biff. I too hope that all infrastructure needs are addressed. I had the opportunity to live in a city in Germany for a while that had excellent cycling trails and infrastructure through most of the city (not a big one at that either). I think to reduce the cost of this infrastructure, it wouldn't be that hard to pick several high priority corridors into downtown and do it properly (think expressways for bikes). Where I was living had plenty of paths but only a few tunnels or bridges over major roadways and under rail lines, but it sufficed for getting between different parts of the city. We could easily start with two or three proper corridors into the core and expand as needed. I don't think it's really useful to put in dedicated lanes in residential areas like they do in some parts of corydon/osborne, but focus rather on the major arteries where people are likely to want to be anyways.

In any case, those are my two cents.

[Peggerino]

I'll just add my two cents...

Bicycling is better for cities, the environment and ourselves compared to cars. They take up less space, are less noisy, contribute to street lift (when on-street), are less dangerous, don't pollute, contribute to a healthy lifestyle, have infrastructure cheap to build and maintain (think how much a Ford F150 tears up the road compared to a cyclist and provide an inexpensive and fun way of getting around for people of all ages and abilities. Knowing this (and still probably leaving a few other major benefits out), our city should be encouraging more people to live a car-free lifestyle. I agree with Biff that a network approach would be helpful. Montreal, I believe, has something like this with their REV.

Winnipeg has the potential to be a great cycling city. It's flat, fairly dense, and has a large tree canopy. There's no real good excuse why we can't be as bike-friendly as somewhere like Portland, Vancouver or Montreal.

I agree with Optimus also on the arteries point. Bike lanes on Corydon and Osborne would improve those two streets so much. Also there'd be more customers from all the cyclists going through I'd imagine the businesses would benefit financially as well.

[Biff]

I didn't see that Everything Cycling thread (last post 2 months ago). If there is a moderator or someone with the ability to delete this one, then have at-er.

Just trying to relieve the pressure on some of the other active threads.

[Bdog]

Great post Biff. Your point about Europe, it's very true. I think when most people visit Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and the great cycling capitals of Europe, they spend time within a few mile radius of the historic central square and that's it. Not many people realize that once you get 3 4 5 miles outside, you see expressways, stroads, and leap frog towns. It would be like if someone from Hamburg visited Winnipeg and spent their weekend in Osborne and the Exchange only, and based their whole perception on a 1 percent of the city form.

[esquire]

Interesting comments by Biff at the top of this thread. Just going to add in a few random thoughts of my own in response:

-I can see the merit to the argument that Winnipeg could benefit from routing traffic around the inner city and downtown areas. The unfortunate reality is that the City Routes through downtown are busy thoroughfares with lots of cars and even semi-trailer through traffic. The big 18-wheeler grain trucks pounding through downtown every day do not make for a pleasant cycling environment. But that said, I'm not sure how you fix this problem without throwing down billions of dollars... you could probably get much better bang for the buck from a cycling standpoint by making targeted improvements to cycling infrastructure for a lot less money.

-I agree that the cycling/AT network is pretty piecemeal, but I would have to imagine that this is because it's so new... it's only in recent years that the City has seriously started building a network (as compared to a few paths here and there). I suppose it's natural to go after the low hanging fruit to start, although at some point, if the City wants to make the network truly useful, it will have to build the more complicated, more expensive parts (bridges, tunnels, etc.) that link the various components together. As it stands right now, I can ride my bike around my neighbourhood quite easily, but if I want to go into another part of town, I have to ride on narrow bridges or underpasses and that is not a pleasant experience... it effectively limits my range.

-To BDog's point, interesting that you mention the cycling capitals of Europe. No question that they generally have their share of suburban sprawl, but they also do a good job of making sure that even their suburban stroads make room for cyclists to ride safely. Here's a random example of a suburban intersection in Copenhagen... it still has clearly marked and in at least one direction I see here, fully separated cycling lanes. https://goo.gl/maps/EqNceQPxQ9RwRWsZ7

[Biff]

^^^But to my point, if you zoom out of that intersection you will notice a ring of 6 lane freeways that keep significant traffic off of those Stroads. Take away those highways and you likely have the same traffic you have here in Winnipeg. We need both and have neither.

...and this is in a City with amazing cycling infrastructure.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by Biff

^^^But to my point, if you zoom out of that intersection you will notice a ring of 6 lane freeways that keep significant traffic off of those Stroads. Take away those highways and you likely have the same traffic you have here in Winnipeg. We need both and have neither.

...and this is in a City with amazing cycling infrastructure.

I don't really know what you expect to change, though. Winnipeg is already built out. We don't have urban expressways. That's the city we've got. And even if we spent billions to upgrade Route 90/Bishop/Lag to a full expressway, I don't see how it would divert much traffic from Portage & Main.

Compare LA and Vancouver. LA has a massive expressway network, Vancouver has very little. Is traffic in LA really better? Is LA really the model we want to emulate rather than Vancouver?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

I don't really know what you expect to change, though. Winnipeg is already built out. We don't have urban expressways. That's the city we've got. And even if we spent billions to upgrade Route 90/Bishop/Lag to a full expressway, I don't see how it would divert much traffic from Portage & Main.

Yeah, I think we're stuck with what we have at this point. Even if we wanted to, I'm not sure how we can really push expressways into the inner city now.

IMO there is still a lot of room for improvement when it comes to adding cycling infrastructure without having to get into building new roads to bypass downtown. I'd rather see new bridges get built for cycling/AT than for a new highway around the inner city.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

I don't really know what you expect to change, though. Winnipeg is already built out. We don't have urban expressways. That's the city we've got. And even if we spent billions to upgrade Route 90/Bishop/Lag to a full expressway, I don't see how it would divert much traffic from Portage & Main.

Compare LA and Vancouver. LA has a massive expressway network, Vancouver has very little. Is traffic in LA really better? Is LA really the model we want to emulate rather than Vancouver?

I agree with you, and no LA isn't better or the model we should follow. My point is we have neither of what most cities have. Unfortunately, I am not sure what the solution is. I whole heartedly think we need to proceed with our cycling infrastructure...100%. My concern is with all of the people who say - lets remove/reduce traffic from these streets and the pedestrian environment will be better. Sure it will, but where does that traffic go? Improved transit will help for sure, but like roads, that costs a shit ton of money. Again we need a balance of both and we are doing little of either.

[buzzg]

I don't think we really need that many more urban expressways or whatever we want to call them – we just need to upgrade some of the ones now that are wholly inadequate. Lag is a perfect example – it should absolutely be a free flowing grade separated expressway, that one alone would make a world of difference and would likely pull a good chunk of heavy truck traffic off Main Street. A widening of Archibald could also be good, especially of that whole area is going to get a ton of new residential development.

The city can also change the restrictions for weights on certain roads – but they obviously need other, better options for them before they do that.

[bussche]

I'm a die hard, year round cyclist but I think presenting this as a cars vs bikes thing is a false dichotomy.

It's really a cars vs public transit thing. Continuing to prioritize private automobile usage over public transit will only make things worse. Suggestions of improving traffic flow, adding lanes, etc in this thread will only encourage more people to drive, thereby negating any improvements. (Induced demand.)

The only way to solve future traffic issues is by creating a frequent and reliable transit system now.

[Ando]

Speaking of cars, article in the FP on Peg City Car Co-op.
https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bu...574448302.html

[bomberjet]

Check out the opposition to Wellington Crescent being part of open street.

Specifically whom some of the opposition is and their roles in the City.

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/View...ctionId=606936

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Check out the opposition to Wellington Crescent being part of open street.

Specifically whom some of the opposition is and their roles in the City.

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/View...ctionId=606936

Good Lord. I have to admit, even if I was the most idealistic councillor I don't think I'd want to pick a fight with that bunch!

[plrh]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Check out the opposition to Wellington Crescent being part of open street.

Specifically whom some of the opposition is and their roles in the City.

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/DMIS/View...ctionId=606936

I miss the way it used to be on Wellington. Maybe add a few bump-outs to prevent cars from passing on the right, but that's it. I primarily run and cycle on Wellington, and I never run on the gravel path, that's for dog-walkers. The new users are more of a nuisance than the cars ever were. It's nice to having something so frivolous to complain about.

I don't like how people feel they have more of an entitlement to a street because they live on it. Not just in this case, but generally. The street is up for grabs, it's public.

[esquire]

I do have to admit, some of the points they raise sound convincing. But it really boils down to the not-insignificant inconvenience to them in not being able to drive down their street. Some of the interactions described with people yelling at residents driving to their homes are pretty believable too... that would not be pleasant.

I seldom ever go down Wellington so I have no dog in this fight, but putting myself in their shoes, I'm not sure how crazy I'd be about having that arrangement in place on the street that I live on.

[Ando]

Well they can always use their choppers to land on their helipads. Seriously this is about entitlement. As for yelling matches, you never see anyone in those giant Wellington crescent front yards, they must be having arguments with Leo Mol sculptures or something.

[Peggerino]

NIMBYs gonna NIMBY what else is new.