Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The thing about the dog leg. There are still bus routes that run on Pembina. So if you want to go to Pembina at McGillivray, you take a route that gets you there. You could take a BRT route that runs on transitway until Jubilee and exits there.

If you want to bypass that stretch of Pembina, you take a route that stays on the transitway through to the end. There should be no need to walk a mile from the McGillivray station (which is not called McGillivray anymore, possibly Seal Station).

This is the way it's going to work, yes, but splitting the service over two separate corridors is really not optimal from the perspective of both operational efficiency and customer convenience. Especially in off-peak times when the service frequencies are likely to be pretty poor (as they currently are). Simpler is always better. It's easier to provide frequent service if all your buses are operating on one corridor than if they are split across two parallel corridors.

Originally Posted by bomberjet

While again I agree having stations out in fields is silly, the idea of a bus highway, as one poster put it, is still there and valid. The transitway is not there so someone can go 2 stops down to the grocery store. It's for moving people long distances.

Again, that's the way it's going to work, but it's not optimal. Ordinarily rapid transit is used for both long trips and short trips (see e.g. the subway in any city -- people do indeed use it to go 2 stops to the grocery store, in addition to using it to commute long distances to work). We've built the transitway in a location where it's only useful for long trips. If we had built it in the rail corridor, it would still serve the long "bus highway" function equally well, but it would also be useful for local trips. More bang for the buck, and a simpler transit network too, which is always a good thing.

To be clear, I don't think the dogleg route is a disaster, but it definitely makes the transitway less useful and beneficial than it could have been. I'm not sure if the ability to have park-and-ride lots really makes up for it.

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

This is the way it's going to work, yes, but splitting the service over two separate corridors is really not optimal from the perspective of both operational efficiency and customer convenience. Especially in off-peak times when the service frequencies are likely to be pretty poor (as they currently are). Simpler is always better. It's easier to provide frequent service if all your buses are operating on one corridor than if they are split across two parallel corridors.



Again, that's the way it's going to work, but it's not optimal. Ordinarily rapid transit is used for both long trips and short trips (see e.g. the subway in any city -- people do indeed use it to go 2 stops to the grocery store, in addition to using it to commute long distances to work). We've built the transitway in a location where it's only useful for long trips. If we had built it in the rail corridor, it would still serve the long "bus highway" function equally well, but it would also be useful for local trips. More bang for the buck, and a simpler transit network too, which is always a good thing.

To be clear, I don't think the dogleg route is a disaster, but it definitely makes the transitway less useful and beneficial than it could have been. I'm not sure if the ability to have park-and-ride lots really makes up for it.

Well said but the dog leg route is a disaster. We can build the BRT along Wilkes south to Charles wood, but it would be inferior to a route built along Grant or Robin/Corydon. Not sure why some are downplaying the importance of population density when it comes to transit.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

I think the poster uses public transit in Winnipeg a heck of a lot more than you, if you ever have. I highly doubt a story like that would be fabricated. Your ad hominem attack is not only rude and inappropriate, but entirely unnecessary.

Time for you to grow a sense of humour Curmie.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The thing about the dog leg. There are still bus routes that run on Pembina. So if you want to go to Pembina at McGillivray, you take a route that gets you there. You could take a BRT route that runs on transitway until Jubilee and exits there.

If you want to bypass that stretch of Pembina, you take a route that stays on the transitway through to the end. There should be no need to walk a mile from the McGillivray station (which is not called McGillivray anymore, possibly Seal Station).

While again I agree having stations out in fields is silly, the idea of a bus highway, as one poster put it, is still there and valid. The transitway is not there so someone can go 2 stops down to the grocery store. It's for moving people long distances.

The problem with this is you have now added more routes, which either means more busses and drivers, or having to lower frequency on the existing/both routes. If it would have followed Pembina we would have been able to find efficiencies and increase service with less or equal resources.

You've essentially just split the routes up, with one of them servicing way less people in the immediate vicinity for the entire dogleg.

[bomberjet]

^ Ya it's something like that. I'll try and find the map the City has with the proposed routing for the SW. It has duplicate routes that split off like I mentioned. I don't know if duplicate is the right term, it's more express routes that skip all the on street stuff closer to downtown. To me that's exactly what BRT in Winnipeg is. Just a bypass freeway, not a core route.

A similar discussion is ongoing in the Construction thread.

Putting BRT down Henderson or Nairn is great and all. But it's just diamond lanes. It's not 'rapid transit'. Having centre median bus lanes on Henderson would be cool and all. Just like my opinion for Provencher in the eastern corridor. It's great, but not BRT. It's quality improvements for sure. Not BRT. And the City planners will agree. They don't like the BRT term for any of the future corridors cause they know it's not BRT. They keep saying it's about improving efficiency, which is fine if it actually improves things.

[dmacc]

I'm hoping once they complete SWRT that they do away with these branching bus routes and treat it as a single route with feeder routes.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by dmacc

I'm hoping once they complete SWRT that they do away with these branching bus routes and treat it as a single route with feeder routes.

Well, you're hoping in vain because that's not the plan. The branching service model is called an "open busway" and it is touted as one of the advantages of BRT over LRT. Ottawa's BRT works the same way.

[bomberjet]

That's just it. You can get on a bus on your local route and not need to transfer to get on the transitway. That's what I've been trying to explain by having different routes do different things.

If you lived on Pembina between Jubilee and Plaza, you'd take a different route than if you lived in Waverley heights. Both would use the transitway, just differently. These routes already exist today.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

Well, you're hoping in vain because that's not the plan. The branching service model is called an "open busway" and it is touted as one of the advantages of BRT over LRT. Ottawa's BRT works the same way.

Shhhh...be careful, you're not toeing the party line.

Osborne Station is absolutely gleaming and the amount of transit oriented development at Harkness, Osborne and Fort Rouge stations in the past six and half years has been simply remarkable. In Kitchener, residential towers started popping up along the ION Line (opening this spring) several years ago but they ain't got nothin' on us, because smart cities do BRT, it's a bit cheaper too! . I just hate flying into YVR now, the bus was so much better than the Canada Line. And nobody uses rapid transit for short trips. Everybody taking the subway in Toronto goes from Union Station to Downsview and in Vancouver all of the people are going from downtown to Surrey. No one uses Commerical or Metrotown or New West stations, total dead zones.

I can't contain my excitement let me tell you about the proposals for the East BRT. Can you imagine a line running through Whittier Park and adjacent to Mission St.? Fantabulous. Oh my gosh, there is going to be such a choice of restaurants at Mission and Plinguet. And you just wait and see how vibrant the corner of Munroe and Gateway will be. And think of the savings! The 11 km SW BRT will come in at a paltry half a billion dollars compared with $800 million for the 19 km ION Line. Now you tell me who the smart folk are!

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

Well, you're hoping in vain because that's not the plan. The branching service model is called an "open busway" and it is touted as one of the advantages of BRT over LRT. Ottawa's BRT works the same way.

My reason for not liking it is that you can't just get on any RT bus to get further down the line. I feel like it limits full RT service as a bus from downtown to the U of M may come once every half an hour because we have all these routes branching off. I would rather RT have great service every 5-10 minutes and local routes more sparatic. You can always wait at a heated bus shack. Consistent full RT service promotes TOD and Park and ride to take hold and increases the values of the property near the stations. I feel those benefits outweigh the somewhat convenience of connecting out lying neighbourhoods.

[asher__jo]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Shhhh...be careful, you're not toeing the party line.

Osborne Station is absolutely gleaming and the amount of transit oriented development at Harkness, Osborne and Fort Rouge stations in the past six and half years has been simply remarkable. In Kitchener, residential towers started popping up along the ION Line (opening this spring) several years ago but they ain't got nothin' on us, because smart cities do BRT, it's a bit cheaper too! . I just hate flying into YVR now, the bus was so much better than the Canada Line. And nobody uses rapid transit for short trips. Everybody taking the subway in Toronto goes from Union Station to Downsview and in Vancouver all of the people are going from downtown to Surrey. No one uses Commerical or Metrotown or New West stations, total dead zones.

I can't contain my excitement let me tell you about the proposals for the East BRT. Can you imagine a line running through Whittier Park and adjacent to Mission St.? Fantabulous. Oh my gosh, there is going to be such a choice of restaurants at Mission and Plinguet. And you just wait and see how vibrant the corner of Munroe and Gateway will be. And think of the savings! The 11 km SW BRT will come in at a paltry half a billion dollars compared with $800 million for the 19 km ION Line. Now you tell me who the smart folk are!

You really need to do your research before spouting misinformation....or did April fool's jokes come early?
Commercial-Broadway is the busiest station in Vancouver, and Metrotown was just expanded. I have plenty of other facts to rebute your post, but I'll stop there.

[StNorberter]

Originally Posted by buzzg

If it would have followed Pembina we would have been able to find efficiencies and increase service with less or equal resources.

I doubt it. WT is way underserved on Pembina as is an needs more resources. Diverting passengers onto a TW that aren't getting off until south of the University means that instead of buses not stopping because they are packed full, you'll see buses going to specific areas and not stopping in between ( which is good).

There is already a glaring issue like this with the 162 Turnbull bus. It runs 2x in the morning and 2x in the evening, but by the time it hits Fort and Garry, it's SRO and sometimes even too full to get on. What happens if you live down Turnbull drive and can't get on because the bus is full of people getting off at U. Crescent or Pembina and Bairdmore? It's probably an hour walk from the most southern stop on the St. Norbert bus to the most southern stop on the Turnbull route. WT needs to turn some 137s into Turnbull buses with no stops between Jubilee and Pembina and Killarney.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by dmacc

My reason for not liking it is that you can't just get on any RT bus to get further down the line. I feel like it limits full RT service as a bus from downtown to the U of M may come once every half an hour because we have all these routes branching off.

This is inaccurate. Outside of rush hour, there are only three RT routes: 160 Pembina, 162 Richmond, and 66 Grant. That's not complicated at all, and I don't think any of those routes should be truncated before reaching downtown. All three are important mainline routes.

In rush hour there are many more routes branching off, but the core service is also very frequent, so your comment about having to wait half an hour for a bus to the UofM is totally baseless. I commute to the UofM and there is a steady stream of buses headed there in rush hour.

Outside of rush hour the service frequencies are indeed poor, but that's a very general problem with Winnipeg Transit, nothing unique to the RT routes.

[ywgwalk]

The city is undertaking a full operational review of transit routes so presumably all routes are up for grabs in the next decade.

Originally Posted by bomberjet

https://www.winnipeg.ca/MatMgt/Folde...2018&YEAR=2018

RFP out for Winnipeg Transit Master Plan. Common sense prevails.

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by asher__jo

You really need to do your research before spouting misinformation....or did April fool's jokes come early?
Commercial-Broadway is the busiest station in Vancouver, and Metrotown was just expanded. I have plenty of other facts to rebute your post, but I'll stop there.

I think your sarcasm detector must be broken. You may want to take it into a shop, and get it re-calibrated

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

The city is undertaking a full operational review of transit routes so presumably all routes are up for grabs in the next decade.

B11.4

the team’s understanding of current and future transit and transportation issues within the
City of Winnipeg;

I wish they included very nearby municipalities and had written "Winnipeg Metropolitan Region" instead of "City of Winnipeg" or "...and beyond".


I guess not much is gonna change in whomever writes the "Final Report" due whenever (Summer 2019?).

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

The city is undertaking a full operational review of transit routes so presumably all routes are up for grabs in the next decade.

"good coverage: transit will be within a 5-minute walk for all Winnipeggers at
most times"

Right there there will be no improvements. An efficient, frequent service model would have that at 10 minutes. It's set up to fail.

[asher__jo]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

I think your sarcasm detector must be broken. You may want to take it into a shop, and get it re-calibrated

Honestly couldn't tell. Plenty of people on this forum that have said stuff as crazy as that and actually believe it.

[bomberjet]

According to today's public works committee meeting.

https://twitter.com/bkives/status/1082690359153573889

Public works committee also approves plan to consider granting more powers to transit supervisors. City has six months to figure out the regulatory issues of allowing them to detain passengers who cause disturbances.

[LilZebra]

https://globalnews.ca/news/4928278/w...come-bus-pass/


Browaty is always playing the part of the contrarian. North Kildonan deserves better.