Umm...Rapid Transit (Would it be a Winnipeg forum without this thread?)

Subways often run on the surface.

JTF wrote:Ya. Great idea. Live ground rails.

Gee. I wonder how much it would cost to make sure no one stepped on one?

I was wondering how much it would cost to ensure that the right people "accidentally" stepped on them

Uhm, yeah.
Like, how are we gonna keep people off the busways???
Just roll them over and use them as fresh asphalt?

Look to the right, you'll see where the trains get their power from.

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Toews to Katz: Get on the bus
Mayor insists on holding out for light rail

By: Bartley Kives

26/06/2010 1:00 AM
| Comments: 15

SeniorManitoba MP Vic Toews says it's time for Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz "to
fish or cut bait" on the second phase of the Southwest Rapid Transit
Corridor, which the province wants to build as a busway.But the federal minister left the door open a crack for Katz to find a way to complete the project as a light-rail corridor.For the past six months, the city and province have been mired in a dispute
over the completion of a rapid-transit corridor that will eventually
extend from Queen Elizabeth Way near The Forks to Bison Drive near the
University of Manitoba.The $138-million first phase of the
corridor, which runs 3.6 kilometres from Queen Elizabeth Way to Jubilee
Avenue, is under construction and is expected to be completed in late
2011.The province and Ottawa have offered Winnipeg $130 million
toward the $220-million second phase, a six-kilometre extension that
would run parallel to Pembina Highway.Katz has refused to sign
on to the plan, partly because it's less than two-thirds of the total
cost, but mostly because he'd rather upgrade the entire corridor --
Winnipeg's first rapid-transit line -- to a form of light rail
involving flexible streetcars that can ride on both roads and tracks.The
mayor wants Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger to agree to lobby Ottawa to
fund light rail through a pot of money set aside for public-private
partnerships.Katz wants Selinger to agree to redirect existing infrastructure cash to road and bridge projects instead.On
Thursday, Toews reiterated he stands with the province in the
rapid-transit dispute. "I've made my position very clear. There comes a
point where you have to fish or cut bait and I think all the decisions
have been made here," Toews said. "I've been very supportive of what
the province and the city have been doing here. I want to see the
province and the city get along, but I also want to make sure this
project moves ahead."Manitoba Local Government Minister Ron
Lemieux has also told Katz "to get on with it" with regards to the
southwest corridor. But the mayor said he believes Selinger will change
his mind once the city is able to hand him a light-rail report, which
is expected in July.The report should demonstrate it is not as
expensive as previously thought to switch to light rail that employs
flexible streetcars, Katz said.The mayor said he has already started speaking to the administrators of a federal fund for public-private partnerships."They're
very interested," said Katz, adding Ottawa may even split the cost of a
business plan. "The opportunity is definitely there."Toews confirmed rapid transit is an approved category for public-private partnership funding.If
Katz is successful, Ottawa could fund 25 per cent of a light-rail route
built as a public-private partnership, over and above any
infrastructure commitments using the Building Canada Fund.This
would allow all three levels of government to redirect $130 million
worth of infrastructure money to traffic improvements at Polo Park, the
extension of Chief Peguis Trail west to McPhillips Street or other
road-and-bridge upgrades on an 11-project city wish list, Katz said."Why
would they say no to that?" Katz asked, referring to the province.
"People aren't going to stick to an idea after they realize it's not
what's best for Winnipeg or for the taxpayers."There's no doubt in my mind that LRT is not only light, but right."bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca


Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition June 26, 2010 B1



Source: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/toews-to-katz-get-on-the-bus-97217364.html?viewAllComments=y

Excellent news!!!!

Council approves switch to light rail for rapid transit

By: Bartley Kives

21/07/2010 3:08 PM | Comments: 0

WINNIPEG - City council has approved a plan to designate light rail as Winnipeg's preferred mode of rapid transit.

Council voted 10-4 today to approve a plan to incorporate flexible streetcars into the city's long-term transportation plan and continue to seek federal funds to complete the Southwest Rapid Transit Corridor as a streetcar corridor.

The widely expected move further escalates the city-provincial dispute over the corridor, which the province wants to complete as a busway.

The $138-million first phase of the corridor - a 3.6-kilometre busway that extends from Queen Elizabeth Way near The Forks to Jubillee Avenue at Pembina Highway - is under construction and expected to be completed in late 2011.

Ottawa and Manitoba have offered the city $126 million in infrastructure-stimulus funds to complete phase two, a six-kilometre extension to Bison Drive near the University of Manitoba.

Phase Two originally came with a price of $189 million, but the city adjusted that up to $220 million this winter.

Mayor Sam Katz says it will probably cost more like $270 million by the time construction would start in 2012. This is part of the reason why he would prefer to spend more - likely well above $500 million - to complete the corridor for streetcars also capable of riding on tracks on city streets.

Evoking late former Manitoba premier Duff Roblin's drive to build the Red River Floodway, Katz said Winnipeg should not be afraid to be ambitious.

Katz wants to use stimulus funds to pay for road and bridge projects such as traffic improvements around Polo Park and a western extension of Chief Peguis Trail.

He said council should fight to get both light rail and road projects.

Opposition councillors, who have spent months trying in vain to block Katz's move, argued Winnipeg is in danger of losing out on federal money and could wind up with no rapid-transit project.

"Every time we wait, it costs us more," said Fort Rouge Coun. Jenny Gerbasi, who voted against the LRT plan along with Lillian Thomas (Elmwood), Dan Vandal (St. Boniface) and Harvey Smith (Daniel McIntyre).

St. Vital Coun. Gord Steeves, attempting to play peacemaker, says council has achieved a huge victory because members are arguing about which mode of rapid transit is right for Winnipeg - not whether rapid transit should be built.

Soooo.....this thing starts/ends at the Norwood Bridge/Main Street Bridge area, which is pretty much isolated from everything....and does the same at Jubilee....wtf were / are they thinking how people will get to those spots?
What do people do....walk from downtown to the Norwood Bridge to catch a streetcar??? Good luck with that.

It seems the appeal of this is that there is a stretch of land with rails that can be easily transformed in to a "rapid route". That there are no people living or having businesses near the route is not of much concern. This is imperative to the "let's just do it" attitude.

Agreed. "Let's get this thing started before people come out of the ether" kind of thing.....and once it's started, you can't turn back eh.

And maybe we can stop the endless debate of this simple subject. decide do it and quit pissing around .

they will take a bus to get to the ends of the rapid transit.. duh...

Deank wrote:they will take a bus to get to the ends of the rapid transit.. duh...

Exactly!! Was in Minneapolis last week, and there have Transit Stations around the suburbs, some with pretty extensive parking structures, such as Maple Grove and Blaine. The idea is to drive there and use transit to get downtown.

See everyone tries to use things like Minniapolis to compare to. We cant compare to them. We simply cant. Minniapolis is set up different. VASTLY different in the structure of its communities. Coupled with the population difference its difficult at best to draw comparisons. The main stretch of their LRT runs 14 kms Mall to downtown. 14kms is about the distance from north perimeter to south perimeter in Winnipeg. That takes 34000 commuters a day. They have another stretch that runs 40 miles. You know.. about the distance from downtown Winnipeg to Morris. Its distances like that, where rail actually starts to make sense and make a difference.

That's an excellent point Deank. GoTransit in Toronto does not just deal with Toronto and surrounding suburbs. It goes well beyond. As for their subway while great distances are not the issue great population is.

Will Winnipeggers drive to a suburban park-n-ride to commute downtown? Maybe if we make parking scare and expensive...

I still believe that if rapid transit catches on, more dense residential communities should develop around each station, providing greater critical mass.

take 30% or more off the vehicle traffic off the streets and put them on freeways and all the bus routes will become faster

how do you do that?

Freeways direct to downtown

Deank wrote:take 30% or more off the vehicle traffic off the streets and put them on freeways and all the bus routes will become faster

how do you do that?

Freeways direct to downtown

How am I supposed to drive on a freeway and text at the same time?

use your knees on the steering wheel.. duh.

Freeways? Really Dean?

If you think the North End is bad...adding freeways to the mix in Winnipeg would create new crime pockets scattered around the city.
Look at cities that HAVE freeways running through them, in Canada OR the US.
With freeways comes increased speed, pollution, garbage.
The housing along those roads become unwanted, and thus values drop and the only people who will live in them is low-income or criminal.

Rapid Transit IS a good thing...IF it's planned correctly, and does NOT interfere with traffic and is actually faster and efficient.

Even the new rails proposal from Katz is a joke. The rails need to get OFF the ground, out of traffic, away from interfering with current infrastructure.

Building depots on the outskirts of town would be a good thing as well. Perhaps take advantage of the low development around most the perimeter points...and put depots around there.

It would encourage development of housing, retail, services in those areas too, as people would start looking to live out there to commute into the city for work.

Reducing parking, or limiting it to specific targets (convention centre, mts centre) would help as well.

Having SOME downtown parking is always necessary, for delivery/service vehicles...and for visitors...but the cost of transit for the average person should be cheaper per month than the cost of parking daily for work.

A prime example is that there should be NO parking on Portage or Main (at least not from Sherbrook East or River (off Main) North to Inkster)

Take the current parking areas for those roads and create "transit runs" which have curbs to keep cars out and buses & bikes in. A bike lane inside there with buses running (wide enough so they both could share a lane comfortably).

Plus...it will help reduce the number of idiots who stop along those roads during "NO Stopping" hours...as they'd be less likely to stop in the middle of an active lane.

But...it would mean the city planners would have to stand up to business and naysayers and get it done, instead of talking about it for 20 years.

people already dont want to come downtown, eliminate the onstreet parking and there will be even less.

yes AA really... Free ways. Done properly they will not increase crime.

but you have to ask WHY people don't want to come downtown?

if it's crime...that has little to do with transit

if it's parking...that's too bad...but you have to give them a viable alternative...which is NOT the bus, and NOT a trolley car on rails.

It needs to be fast, quiet and clean...with stations placed where people go the most...and easy access from most anywhere.

Deank wrote:yes AA really... Free ways. Done properly they will not increase crime.

so how would you propose freeways to be done "properly"?

I've been enough cities and enough freeways to see about every option currently in use.

you'd think 1 of the hundreds of cities would've gotten it right? So what do you see that would be different?

we are building our first free way right now. the B/LRT transit thing. it is done right.

Deank wrote:we are building our first free way right now. the B/LRT transit thing. it is done right.

that's NOT a freeway...far from it.

Because it's not designed for the "average" driver.
The road markings and signage will not be as extreme.
The protection of the public will be lower...as there won't be vehicles traveling at 100km/hour.

No...it's definitely NOT a freeway...nor could it be without another $100M spent on the items I listed.

Crime and not enough attractions (shopping/theater) and not enough residents are the major probs with downtown.

the speed will be set to 70.. not 100. Which is what the buses would be travelling at as well.

What road markings and signage do you think it needs?

protection of what public?


You are over thinking things. Its people who continually overthink everything in the city that are the exact reason nothing ever gets done.