Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

A half a billion dollar bus roadway to nowhere is certainly not in the best interests of the province.

Exactly which end of the busway do you consider to be 'nowhere', downtown Winnipeg or the University of Manitoba/Investors Group Field/Fort Richmond area?

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by esquire

Exactly which end of the busway do you consider to be 'nowhere', downtown Winnipeg or the University of Manitoba/Investors Group Field/Fort Richmond area?

I was referring to the proposed eastern BRT. As I have stated before, too much has already been invested in the SW Transitway and it should be completed.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

I was referring to the proposed eastern BRT. As I have stated before, too much has already been invested in the SW Transitway and it should be completed.

Unfortunately, I think the East Corridor is the only one that really requires a dedicated route as there is no direct route between transcona and downtown. The rest could be completed at a fraction of the cost by just having a dedicated transit lane.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

I was referring to the proposed eastern BRT. As I have stated before, too much has already been invested in the SW Transitway and it should be completed.

If we're going to have a rapid transit network across the city then you need to build it out across the city.

But if that's what you believe, are you calling your councillor to demand the cancellation of road projects such as the Chief Peguis Trail extension which will end up in farmland north of the airport? Now that is truly a roadway to nowhere.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by esquire

If we're going to have a rapid transit network across the city then you need to build it out across the city.

But if that's what you believe, are you calling your councillor to demand the cancellation of road projects such as the Chief Peguis Trail extension which will end up in farmland north of the airport? Now that is truly a roadway to nowhere.

A rapid transit network should be built where existing ridership and the potential for increased ridership would justify the investment. There is insufficient demand for a half a billion dollar plus bus roadway to Peguis Street and Canterbury Park with not a lot in between, esp. south of Nairn and Regent. If I was for example to live near Talbot and Kent, it would be quicker to use the existing Route 45 - Talbot than to get to Kildonan Place or a station someone south of Nairn and transfer to the BRT. All the while, many of the more densely populated areas of the city are woefully under serviced. Resources should be allocated to a rail-based system along major arteries where ridership is already high and where the transit using demographic already resides. Improvements in these areas would result in a far greater increase in ridership that could be achieved by improving journey times to distant suburbs by a few minutes. There is a reason why the two rapid transit lines in Minnesota's Twin Cities have been successful far beyond expectations.

As for Chief Peguis Trail, it is part of the very long-planned inner ring road and the extension at least to McPhillips is very much needed. It is neither being built as a result of nor to facilitate sprawl.

Like every other city, Winnipeg has to spend money on both public transport and road infrastructure. It's not a question of if one gets the other doesn't, but rather a question of what is the best use of the resources.

[Curmudgeon]

I think the delays that are caused to bus traffic to and from Transcona due to the mess that is the KP area could be easily remedied by designating the middle two lanes of Nairn/Regent for roughly 1 km from just west of Panet to Peguis as bus only with separation from the remaining roadway for boarding/alighting and using priority signalling. This would not interfere with traffic turning right from Regent into the retail areas which is half the cause of the back-up. Regent east of Peguis flows very well even during peak periods.

The existing roadway is wide enough to accommodate this.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

A half a billion dollar bus roadway to nowhere is certainly not in the best interests of the province.

Unclear to me what this has to do with what we were talking about - cities everywhere are developing rapid transit units, even ones smaller than Winnipeg. Ottawa for example is about 50 years ahead of Winnipeg in terms of its rapid transit strategy. Smart provincial governments are leveraging federal funds to develop their systems. Electric buses are made in Winnipeg. The carbon tax is designed to produce funds that can be reinvested in clean technology such as electric buses, which provides a multiplier effect for the local economy and improves quality of life for citizens. Playing politics isn't about making good decisions, it's about making inefficient decisions to play to a particular constituency.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by esquire

Exactly which end of the busway do you consider to be 'nowhere', downtown Winnipeg or the University of Manitoba/Investors Group Field/Fort Richmond area?

$500 M + to save five minutes going from downtown to the U of M, 9-10 events a year at Investors Group Field and to serve students for eight months of the year! Improved frequency and an increase in the number of buses along the routes when needed would have been a better and cheaper solution!

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

$500 M + to save five minutes going from downtown to the U of M, 9-10 events a year at Investors Group Field and to serve students for eight months of the year! Improved frequency and an increase in the number of buses along the routes when needed would have been a better and cheaper solution!

Those 5 minutes saved could be the difference between someone taking the buse or just driving instead. * months of to serve students amounts to 172 school days, 40,000 students is the potential for 6,882,857 riders a year in just students. those 1 events is another 300,000 potential users. Granted you will only get a fraction of that potentially but that corridor could barely accommodate that much anyways. oh yeah, don't forget that the buses run both ways. Tens of thousands of people work and go to school downtown along with events that happen over 100 times per year at Bell MTS alone. You could easily double that potential ridership number to 13 million people.

Also $500 million includes the widening of the Pembina Underpass at jubilee which isn't just a RT cost. That's a general street repair and is a big factor in the large price tag.

The potential growth and property tax revenue generated from developments near transit stations could prove to be a positive to revenue in the long run.

[CoryB]

The other important piece of the southwest transit way people keep losing site of is it is not just a time saving for transit passengers but it is in effect an expansion of the vehicle traffic capacity of Pembina HWY by removing the frequent bus service from there. If it was possible and done I don't think there were be any argument about adding two lanes to Pembina for $500+ million.

[windypeg]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

$500 M + to save five minutes going from downtown to the U of M, 9-10 events a year at Investors Group Field and to serve students for eight months of the year! Improved frequency and an increase in the number of buses along the routes when needed would have been a better and cheaper solution!

At rush hour the half-built transitway already saves 10 minutes by not crawling through osborne village. The completed transitway will likely save 15-20 mins travel time in rush hour. Also there are plenty of students and staff on campus in the summer. Increasing the frequency of buses doesn't really do anything if those buses just have to sit in gridlock anyway and Pembina can't handle all the growth in the SW all by itself. But by your logic, maybe we should just abandon all the main traffic arteries into downtown because they only get used 5/7 days a week (minus holidays) and thus aren't worth it.

[bomberjet]

Also it's not $500M +. But they tuk r jooobbbss!

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

$500 M + to save five minutes going from downtown to the U of M, 9-10 events a year at Investors Group Field and to serve students for eight months of the year! Improved frequency and an increase in the number of buses along the routes when needed would have been a better and cheaper solution!

To pile on with the other points already raised here, the SW Transitway serves a lot more than just the U of M. Routes that service basically all of Winnipeg south of Grant Avenue and west of the Red feed into the Transitway. These areas of the city, as you may be aware, are set to continue to grow and densify over time.

[Biff]

The same supertall crane PCL used to remove the tower crane from True North Square is now at the BRT crossing of Bishop Grandin.....not with all the tall attachments but the base extension crane in collapsed form. It's very stubby and obviously a heavy lift boom to lift the girders for the bridge in place.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Biff

The same supertall crane PCL used to remove the tower crane from True North Square is now at the BRT crossing of Bishop Grandin.....not with all the tall attachments but the base extension crane in collapsed form. It's very stubby and obviously a heavy lift boom to lift the girders for the bridge in place.

I think it's making its way down the BRT, I saw it at McGilvary just last week.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

The same supertall crane PCL used to remove the tower crane from True North Square is now at the BRT crossing of Bishop Grandin.....not with all the tall attachments but the base extension crane in collapsed form. It's very stubby and obviously a heavy lift boom to lift the girders for the bridge in place.

The way the crane parts were positioned over the weekend, when you drove east on Bishop Grandin it looked like a giant robot overlord stretching its arms out over the people. My kids were impressed.

Anyway, it feels like there haven't been many tangible signs of progress around that crossing lately. I'm looking forward to seeing something new go up around there.

[bomberjet]

There's also work going on for the Letellier Overpass between Chevrier and Bishop Grandin. Not a high visible location, so you won't really see anything happening. Bishop and McGillivray are doing well schedule wise, so may seem to be moving slowly. Both bridges will be finished up this season.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by esquire

Anyway, it feels like there haven't been many tangible signs of progress around that crossing lately. I'm looking forward to seeing something new go up around there.

Well, when you only have 1 person working on it for the past 6 months progress is slow.

I would have thought that the Bishop crossing would have been a higher priority due to the traffic volumes on that artery. I know they have kept all 4 lanes open during construction but they are thin and less than ideal for a 6 mth period over winter.

I guess it is just me griping since I travel through there every morning.

[bomberjet]

As long as there's 4 lanes open, there's no penalties. So you have 4 lanes, with cones run over and all spread around.. Pembina and Jubilee is where everything is time critical. The rest of the project is generally not on the critical path.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

As long as there's 4 lanes open, there's no penalties. So you have 4 lanes, with cones run over and all spread around.. Pembina and Jubilee is where everything is time critical. The rest of the project is generally not on the critical path.

Would be nice to see them start working on the BRT overpass section on the west side. I assume they need to finish the Train over pass before hand so they can demo the old one and fix the collapsed retention wall.