Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[The Unknown Poster]

An elderly woman had that happen some years back, if I recall, slipped under the bus while exiting the rear door and was dragged and run over.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Actually I thought allowing crappy Priuses in the diamond lane was a bone the city threw them for letting UBER come here, now there’s no UBER but we’re stuck with crappy Priuses and their crappy cab drivers in diamond lanes, what progress!

Any second Tache will pipe in that Skylar is racist against crappy cab drivers!

You aren't racist, you just hate everyone I thought

[Roger Strong]

Originally Posted by headhorse

what's with winnipeg transit riders exiting through the front door all the time?

Another reason I was just reminded of:

You need to go to the front anyway to check the little screen above the driver to see if the Arlington Sinclair bus you got on became an Arlington McPhillips at some random point along the route.

Usually they change it from one route to the other at Portage and Arlington or Portage and Burnell. But often after you board there. And sometimes further along the route.

There's also a couple times when I've asked to get off when the Sinclair Bus didn't turn onto Jarvis from McPhillips.... and the driver realized his mistake and did a U-turn.

[dmacc]

London just released their plan for city bus rapid transit. Looks like they just want to create dedicated center lanes for the most part. I don't know if it is the best way to do BRT but I'm sure if Winnipeg tried it it would be much cheaper than building up dedicated lanes with all these over passes.

http://flip.it/G1sTbF

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by dmacc

London just released their plan for city bus rapid transit. Looks like they just want to create dedicated center lanes for the most part. I don't know if it is the best way to do BRT but I'm sure if Winnipeg tried it it would be much cheaper than building up dedicated lanes with all these over passes.

http://flip.it/G1sTbF

It's a hell of a lot more urban, development supportive and transit-improving, that's for sure. Separated ROW transit gets people from point (downtown) to point (UofM) faster, but it bypasses much of the important stuff between them that helps drive ridership, drive urban development, and improve transit's utility for those already using it.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by dmacc

London just released their plan for city bus rapid transit. Looks like they just want to create dedicated center lanes for the most part. I don't know if it is the best way to do BRT but I'm sure if Winnipeg tried it it would be much cheaper than building up dedicated lanes with all these over passes.

http://flip.it/G1sTbF

It's funny that none of the photos released show the setup of centre-lane BRT. It's curb lanes in every photo.

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's a hell of a lot more urban, development supportive and transit-improving, that's for sure. Separated ROW transit gets people from point (downtown) to point (UofM) faster, but it bypasses much of the important stuff between them that helps drive ridership, drive urban development, and improve transit's utility for those already using it.

Well the original SWBRT plan had stations most of the way along Pembina... lol.

[buzzg]

According to the Eastern Corridor Study documents, the development of route options is happening now with public input time coming in spring. Hopefully we hear about the study options soon.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by buzzg

According to the Eastern Corridor Study documents, the development of route options is happening now with public input time coming in spring. Hopefully we hear about the study options soon.

Just my two cents but I think they need to put a station at the Ballpark in the parking lot on the other side of the tracks. From there have an underground tunnel to Winnipeg Square. You could essentially make that the main station for downtown because it links you as far as The bay without having to go outside. SWBRT, East Corridor and potentially the Henderson and Main BRT's could link to it and all of DT.

[esquire]

^ I like that idea. All you would need to do is stretch the underground concourse to Westbrook and then run it up to grade where it would connect with a BRT station. It would be a very convenient access point for much of downtown.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by dmacc

London just released their plan for city bus rapid transit. Looks like they just want to create dedicated center lanes for the most part. I don't know if it is the best way to do BRT but I'm sure if Winnipeg tried it it would be much cheaper than building up dedicated lanes with all these over passes.

http://flip.it/G1sTbF

Winnipeg is frustratingly content with managed decline. As late as the 70s this city still played with the big boys, in the 80s and even early 90s Winnipeg was certainly thought of in the same league as Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa, now Winnipeggers are overly resigned to measure the city against London, Saskatoon and Regina. I wonder if by 2030 our role models will be Moose Jaw, Sarnia or Red Deer?

If estimates are to be believed, Winnipeg with its environs will top 1,000,000 population within the next 15 years, I believe the region is pushing 900,000 already if all of the commuter towns are included, but here we are still debating second-rate BRT lines that will not increase ridership nor encourage transit oriented development to anywhere near to extent that rail based transit would, and for only very marginal cost savings.

It's depressing.

[Curmudgeon]

Marginal cost savings only in initial capital outlay, and those are negated over time by increased ridership and tax revenues from development.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Winnipeg is frustratingly content with managed decline. As late as the 70s this city still played with the big boys, in the 80s and even early 90s Winnipeg was certainly thought of in the same league as Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa, now Winnipeggers are overly resigned to measure the city against London, Saskatoon and Regina. I wonder if by 2030 our role models will be Moose Jaw, Sarnia or Red Deer?

If estimates are to be believed, Winnipeg with its environs will top 1,000,000 population within the next 15 years, I believe the region is pushing 900,000 already if all of the commuter towns are included, but here we are still debating second-rate BRT lines that will not increase ridership nor encourage transit oriented development to anywhere near to extent that rail based transit would, and for only very marginal cost savings.

It's depressing.

haha, look at us arguing on two threads. let's take this to the outside to the roads & construction thread.

I always preferred rail to BRT, however if we tried this system for BRT then we wouldn't need the large investment for dedicated BRT corridors and would be relatively easy to implement, maybe 10 years for all the routes to be complete. This would then free up a lot of capital to begin working on a rail system/convert SWBRT to rail. I feel that would be a win win. What do you think?

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by dmacc

haha, look at us arguing on two threads. let's take this to the outside to the roads & construction thread.

I always preferred rail to BRT, however if we tried this system for BRT then we wouldn't need the large investment for dedicated BRT corridors and would be relatively easy to implement, maybe 10 years for all the routes to be complete. This would then free up a lot of capital to begin working on a rail system/convert SWBRT to rail. I feel that would be a win win. What do you think?

I am of course in favour of the SWBRT being completed, but future lines should be rail based and built down corridors where there is already density and high ridership.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by dmacc

Just my two cents but I think they need to put a station at the Ballpark in the parking lot on the other side of the tracks. From there have an underground tunnel to Winnipeg Square. You could essentially make that the main station for downtown because it links you as far as The bay without having to go outside. SWBRT, East Corridor and potentially the Henderson and Main BRT's could link to it and all of DT.

I've been pushing that since the study started. Great potential for development east of P&M.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I've been pushing that since the study started. Great potential for development east of P&M.

If anyone asks I'm still taking full credit.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Winnipeg is frustratingly content with managed decline. As late as the 70s this city still played with the big boys, in the 80s and even early 90s Winnipeg was certainly thought of in the same league as Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa, now Winnipeggers are overly resigned to measure the city against London, Saskatoon and Regina. I wonder if by 2030 our role models will be Moose Jaw, Sarnia or Red Deer?

If estimates are to be believed, Winnipeg with its environs will top 1,000,000 population within the next 15 years, I believe the region is pushing 900,000 already if all of the commuter towns are included, but here we are still debating second-rate BRT lines that will not increase ridership nor encourage transit oriented development to anywhere near to extent that rail based transit would, and for only very marginal cost savings.

It's depressing.

Rail doesn't increase ridership or TOD as much as speed, accessibility, frequency and reliability do. Running a rapid transit line along an old rail right of way and then through empty fields would achieve minimal results, whether it's bus or rail.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Rail doesn't increase ridership or TOD as much as speed, accessibility, frequency and reliability do. Running a rapid transit line along an old rail right of way and then through empty fields would achieve minimal results, whether it's bus or rail.

I think because the busiest systems tend to be rail-based, people tend to conflate rail with good service even though it isn't necessarily so.

I can tell you there was some cognitive dissonance on my part when I was a student in Edmonton and I had my first experience waiting 20 minutes for a LRT on Sunday evening... it messed with my assumption that rail-based transit was pretty well automatically frequent.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by esquire

I think because the busiest systems tend to be rail-based, people tend to conflate rail with good service even though it isn't necessarily so.

I can tell you there was some cognitive dissonance on my part when I was a student in Edmonton and I had my first experience waiting 20 minutes for a LRT on Sunday evening... it messed with my assumption that rail-based transit was pretty well automatically frequent.

Definitely. Because governments often put more investment into rail, it creates the impression that rail is inherently higher service, when it doesn't have to be. There are plenty of very high quality BRT systems, and plenty of extremely inconvenient rail systems.

Not to say that you can't prefer one technology over another, but if you're trying to grow transit's modal share, frequency, speed and destinations are likely more important. I'll reserve judgment until the Southwest Transitway is finished, but if it's not successful, it'll be because of its routing, lack of all-door boarding, etc. Not because it's a bus.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by dmacc

If anyone asks I'm still taking full credit.

Maybe we split the royalties?

[LilZebra]

Just trying to clear up a possible misunderstanding.

In the new year was an announcement about a Review of Transit Operations and some timeline including March 2018.

Is March the Start (gathering of ideas and Council funding) or Final Report stage of this "project"?

This Report should include at least a proposal for a Frequent Service Network.

If also a Low Income Transit Pass will be included in this New and Improved Winnipeg Transit, when will that go to Council for a Vote?