Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[EspionNoir]

Some time ago when Wpg Guy posted that public art about 1919 strike in one of the Canada thread, I said that a subway for Winnipeg was not feasible due to this and that. A guy told me that engineers could solve everything and not to worry

[Wpg_Guy]

Originally Posted by EspionNoir

Some time ago when Wpg Guy posted that public art about 1919 strike in one of the Canada thread, I said that a subway for Winnipeg was not feasible due to this and that. A guy told me that engineers could solve everything and not to worry

Today it’s possible to engineer almost anything but like mentioned before the more difficult the engineering job the more cost prohibitive it becomes. If we had the wealth of China or the Middle East it could be done!

[EspionNoir]

Originally Posted by Wpg_Guy

Today it’s possible to engineer almost anything but like mentioned before the more difficult the engineering job the more cost prohibitive it becomes. If we had the wealth of China or the Middle East it could be done!

I agree. Glad that we have better gdp per capita though (not sure about UAE)

I wonder if building sky rail on top of Portage would make it look too crowded

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by EspionNoir

I wonder if building sky rail on top of Portage would make it look too crowded

I think it would be a non-starter downtown, but for the rest of Portage I don't really see a problem.

Regarding the Wilson subway plan, it would be wonderful to have it, but even Wilson didn't recommend building the whole thing. He suggested building just the Portage-Main portion and leaving the rest to a very hypothetical future. I believe a transportation study in the 1980s(?) also called for a subway just from Polo Park to Elmwood. It's hard to imagine any other corridor even coming close to the level of ridership that would warrant a subway.

I think the most realistic development path for Winnipeg's transit would have been to retain the original streetcar lines in the medians of wide roads like Portage, Main, Henderson, St. Mary's, and Pembina, but feed them into a tunnel through downtown, as was done in Boston, Philly, and SF (and originally planned for Queen Street in Toronto). It wouldn't have costed much relative to a complete subway and we would have ended up with a pretty amazing light rail system.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

I think the most realistic development path for Winnipeg's transit would have been to retain the original streetcar lines in the medians of wide roads like Portage, Main, Henderson, St. Mary's, and Pembina, but feed them into a tunnel through downtown, as was done in Boston, Philly, and SF (and originally planned for Queen Street in Toronto). It wouldn't have costed much relative to a complete subway and we would have ended up with a pretty amazing light rail system.

I agree. You see this in a lot of tier 2 or 3 European cities that aren't quite big and dense enough to have subway systems... they tend to rely on some form of streetcar/light rail that provide relatively fast, frequent service and provide a generally high standard of infrastructure and amenities. It occupies a pretty good sweet spot that offers improved service compared to just on-street buses, but obviously far less expensive than a grade separated system. I just don't see how a subway would have been sustainable. Toronto is many times Winnipeg's size and even they had a fairly bare-bones network for decades that is only now starting to reach the next level in terms of scale.

For what it's worth the planned Winnipeg BRT system is also pretty good when it comes to quality, the problem is we barely have any of it... one half of one leg isn't much of a system.

[dmacc]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Anything can be solved with engineering, but at what cost?

Every few threads there are comments about underground parking being infeasible past the first basement because of the high water table. The subway would be a lot deeper than that.

If engineers can design and build a subway crossing the strait that separates European Istanbul and Asian Istanbul, which experiences earthquakes then I'm sure they can solve Winnipeg's water table... at a cost of course.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by esquire

For what it's worth the planned Winnipeg BRT system is also pretty good when it comes to quality, the problem is we barely have any of it... one half of one leg isn't much of a system.

I mean, if the BRT plan is the most we can hope for, then I'm on board with it, but I think the "quality" part remains to be determined. The southwest RT is being built to a high technical standard, but it bypasses many of the densest and most transit-supportive areas along its path. We don't yet know what routing will be chosen for the east RT, and the north and west RTs are still just hypothetical lines on a map with no indication of what kind of infrastructure will be built. At least they seem to have gotten past the laughable idea of building the west RT along Wilkes, which was a prime example of building transit where it's easy to build rather than where it's needed.

[buzzg]

It's interesting to me that Bowman's platform was all lines by 2030 (which I would personally support) yet he hasn't even tasked the city, let alone even talked about, pushing forward on any of them aside from a half-assed east route that was already in talks.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

It's interesting to me that Bowman's platform was all lines by 2030 (which I would personally support) yet he hasn't even tasked the city, let alone even talked about, pushing forward on any of them aside from a half-assed east route that was already in talks.

It's as though a politician made a promise and then forgot about it promptly once elected!

Kidding aside, every mayor in living memory (well, at least my living memory) has done pretty well the same thing. Make big promises, get elected, and then come to the realization that the city has zero fiscal capacity for big initiatives or undertakings beyond what is absolutely 100% essential. At that point the public campaign to get more money from the province and feds begins.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

I mean, if the BRT plan is the most we can hope for, then I'm on board with it, but I think the "quality" part remains to be determined. The southwest RT is being built to a high technical standard, but it bypasses many of the densest and most transit-supportive areas along its path. We don't yet know what routing will be chosen for the east RT, and the north and west RTs are still just hypothetical lines on a map with no indication of what kind of infrastructure will be built. At least they seem to have gotten past the laughable idea of building the west RT along Wilkes, which was a prime example of building transit where it's easy to build rather than where it's needed.

Obviously it’s vastly more expensive to build something like this through an area that is already built up. That’s why it essentially ends at Harkness.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by esquire

It's as though a politician made a promise and then forgot about it promptly once elected!

Kidding aside, every mayor in living memory (well, at least my living memory) has done pretty well the same thing. Make big promises, get elected, and then come to the realization that the city has zero fiscal capacity for big initiatives or undertakings beyond what is absolutely 100% essential. At that point the public campaign to get more money from the province and feds begins.

There's a big difference between trying to do something and getting rejected or not having money, and not even mentioning your major platform ever again.

[esquire]

^ Good point.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by esquire

I agree. You see this in a lot of tier 2 or 3 European cities that aren't quite big and dense enough to have subway systems... they tend to rely on some form of streetcar/light rail that provide relatively fast, frequent service and provide a generally high standard of infrastructure and amenities. It occupies a pretty good sweet spot that offers improved service compared to just on-street buses, but obviously far less expensive than a grade separated system. I just don't see how a subway would have been sustainable. Toronto is many times Winnipeg's size and even they had a fairly bare-bones network for decades that is only now starting to reach the next level in terms of scale.....

Population projections never materialized, not even close. In the late 1950s Winnipeg was forecast to have 850,000 population by 1981; the city is just reaching that number now almost 40 years later. Population growth slowed from 3% annually in the 1950s to just over 1% in the 60s and to near zero by the late 70s.

Relatively too Winnipeg declined compared with other Canadian cities. In the 50s Winnipeg grew more slowly than Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver but not markedly. Beginning in the 1960s Winnipeg's growth rate dropped well below Toronto and Vancouver. Montreal slightly outpaced Winnipeg for the entire period. If Winnipeg had sustained the same population growth rate as Toronto or Vancouver between 1961 and 2016, the city would have a population of over 1.5 million today. If Winnipeg had experienced the same growth as Calgary (an outlier, yes) during the same period, the city would have 2.4 million.

In hindsight, the plan was far too ambitious. Keep in mind that the smallest city in North America with a metro system (until Ottawa's Confederation Line opens in the fall) is Cleveland, with a metro pop. of about 2 million.

Hard to say whether or not a single Portage-Main line would have been considered a while elephant and a liability by the late 90s. Though it certainly would have mitigated the urban decline we have seen in the North and West Ends it would have needed expensive re-investment by the early 2000s, requiring full replacement of rolling stock and massive refurbishment of the stations, including making them accessible.

A tramway (light-rail) on mainly dedicated rights-of-way represents the best investment for Winnipeg.

[Wpg_Guy]

Beaumont Station




McGillivray Station



Chevrier Station



Transitway RT phase II construction



Plaza Drive Station




Chancellor Station




Stadium Station
The entire station features massive amounts of space for staging, queuing, and crowd control for events.







Source: J. Mc.https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetransitcamera/

Video footage from the top of Investors Group Field of bus passengers arriving at Stadium Station for the 2017 Banjo Bowl. The footage has been sped up for viewing.
• Video Link
Video footage from the top of Investors Group Field of bus passengers using Stadium Station to leave the 2017 Banjo Bowl. The footage has been sped up for viewing.
• Video Link

[dmacc]

Great pictures, the Clarence and Chevrier stations already have most of the paths completed. They just don't connect to the overpasses yet, obviously.

[optimusREIM]

Thanks for the photos. But man, it drives me nuts to see so-called 'rapid transit' stations in the middle of nowhere. The only thing that can possibly drive the success of this line is basically the fact that it ends at the UofM, otherwise it would serve next to nobody. I have my fingers crossed that with the whole blue line transit spine concept it will function properly but I'm not holding my breath

[esquire]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Thanks for the photos. But man, it drives me nuts to see so-called 'rapid transit' stations in the middle of nowhere. The only thing that can possibly drive the success of this line is basically the fact that it ends at the UofM, otherwise it would serve next to nobody. I have my fingers crossed that with the whole blue line transit spine concept it will function properly but I'm not holding my breath

Yeah, I have to admit I was getting impatient with the constant delays so I just wanted to see it get built. But it somehow seems like a waste to see the routes with next to nothing within walking distance (bearing in mind that walking distances are generally much shorter for the coldest 1/3 of the year).

At the end of the day the route will still serve pretty well the same amount of downtown-UM traffic, but the lost opportunity to build up and densify Pembina is regrettable. I guess it's possible that we could see more TOD emerge along the corridor itself, but that could take decades...

[dmacc]

^ My station will have at least one rider per day, I feel so blessed that the city prioritized my transit needs. I admit my station is one of the ones that likely wasn't needed. I don't think the Chevrier and Clarence stations will be particularly busy and only one of them was needed.

The Beaumont station could get much busier if Parker Lands ever gets built out. I've noticed much more usage on the Fort Rouge and Jubilee stations of late. I believe they already have buses feeding to them. Hopefully the routes that travels throughout Fort Garry and Linden Woods to feed RT see an uptick in activity. We won't have a real idea for at least a couple years if it's gaining traction.

[DonaldSmith]

Originally Posted by dmacc

^ My station will have at least one rider per day, I feel so blessed that the city prioritized my transit needs. I admit my station is one of the ones that likely wasn't needed. I don't think the Chevrier and Clarence stations will be particularly busy and only one of them was needed.

These are located close to major employers. I think they might be busier than a lot of people think. Not to mention the park and ride opportunities.

[plrh]

Think of how much faster it will be with fewer riders!