Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,898 profile views

horseman's Achievements

  1. Bartley Kives says the old Wilson plan is flawed, that it isn’t possible to dig tunnels for transit (be they subway, LRT, or BRT) under Winnipeg because of the geology — that there isn’t solid bedrock to tunnel through. Actually though he says the tunnels would need to be lined with concrete and steel (https://mobile.twitter.com/bkives/status/1005976603703193600) this doesn’t sound like it is impossible to build though, just that it would be more expensive. I’m assuming that at least some cities with subways have lousy geology that’s made doing this more difficult... Can someone with a geology background comment on this? Is it impossible to build tunnels underground in Winnipeg, or simply an engineering question. The more detail the better... Thanks in advance!
  2. There's new information on the Eastern Corridor Study website, they are now talking about potential corridor options and looking for feedback on the alternatives. http://winnipegtransit.com/en/major-projects/rapid-transit/eastern-corridor-study/ is the page on Transit's website for the project, the feedback webpage that includes a map showing route options is here: https://easterncorridor.mysocialpinpoint.com/potential-route-options#/
  3. The story in the news about Transit being saddled with the carbon tax is a concern. The mayor says he won’t consider a fare hike to respond to the additional cost, so service cuts seem likely in the future. The unproductive routes will have to go.
  4. Car/bus crash very close to 421 Osborne (Winnipeg Transit's main facility) early this morning (January 5, 2018). Police still investigating as of 8 AM. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/osborne-closed-crash-bus-vehicle-injury-1.4474261 Police were allowing transit employees to access 421 Osborne via the transitway, Osborne was closed to traffic immediately north of 421 Osborne at the traffic light leading to MTS/McDonalds.
  5. Ugly? *gasp* to me they're a much more classic design than the newer buses and I like how they look. But that's just my opinion since I grew up riding buses that looked more like these boxy transit workhorses than the newer sleeker New Flyer offerings. Probably though, I just like older buses because they remind me of being young. Like when I went to school on "fishbowl" buses: http://www.busdrawings.com/Transit/ontario/oakville/1972t6h5306/index.htm Heh, as long as the bus is relatively clean, warm, not too stinky, doesn't pass my stop by because it's full, and gets me there on-time, I don't mind what model it is.
  6. That's true, Alexander Dennis has taken it over. (https://www.newflyer.com/2017/05/new-flyer-and-alexander-dennis-agree-to-transition-midi-bus-to-north-american-based-alexander-dennis-inc/) New Flyer did just acquire Arboc though, maybe their Spirit of Liberty (http://www.arbocsv.com/liberty.php) or Spirit of Equess (http://www.arbocsv.com/equess.php) would do the trick.
  7. Do you think the general public would find these vehicles appealing for something like microtransit if Winnipeg Transit had more DART/dial-a-ride areas?
  8. It’s a challenge when you want frequent and reliable but also need/want to dipsy-doodle to serve every destination on side streets, that’s why I’m starting to favour a combination of both on-demand micro-transit feeding a limited-stop frequent network. The frequent network might have to make more use of the less pedestrian friendly streets. Ideally there’s be sidewalks everywhere to fix up the less friendly streets. WT doesn’t have (will never have) the resources to make low-density-serving routes high frequency. It would be nice to have but a recipe for empty buses.
  9. The Rapid Transit network map from the 2011 Transportation Master Plan might be another way to think about what would make sense for use in Winnipeg for a Frequent Transit Network. If you look at the combination of both the BRT routes, and routes identified as "quality corridors", it creates a grid network over the city. If these were frequent, reliable service with high-capacity vehicles and ideally had upgraded protected lanes (above and beyond the current implementation of diamond lanes) and signal priority throughout, then we'd be getting somewhere. Right now we are far from this. Some additional segments would need to be created, I could see Chief Peguis for one being added, regional service towards CentrePort once that develops, etc. Other service could then provide feeders / microtransit to link people to stops along these routes from lower density areas. This would be more like Calgary's system.
  10. Enjoy the taxis in your diamond lanes, transit riders. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-taxis-uber-regulations-1.4443475
  11. I'm glad there's discussion going on, I think you're right too -- that this map is intended to be a conversation starter. It is time that an overhaul was contemplated. I wasn't trying to imply less service to the downtown. Like you say, the downtown would need a very frequent service and likely a higher order of service. However, what would be different to now is that less transfers would take place in the downtown between routes, less people would have to travel downtown if their final destination isn't the downtown. Right now the downtown feels like it is overloaded at times, too many buses doing a slow elephant walk down Portage and down Graham. Right now, Winnipeg's service is somewhat a radial system. The issue is in the downtown, where all those converging routes and transfers between routes overload the setup that is in place. A grid is less prone to this problem, but the downtown segment does need to keep the buses moving because a lot of travel in Winnipeg is destined to the downtown. Winnipeg could be a grid -- it's not a perfect rectangle, but it's perhaps better for grid operation than some cities, like most cities, it could be somewhat a blend of a grid, feeder routes and maintain some radial service. With things like provincial commitments, it is one thing to say it is going to happen, but it will take co-ordination between the Province and the City to make it happen. A lot of details have to be resolved before 100 electric buses will be rolling along city streets. Transit's looking at how to start making use of the VISUM network. Note though that a city-wide overhaul is a big project for a VISUM model, it could take some time to look at the iterative work that would be needed to complete this. Realize this isn't a thorough response to your notes, DavidW. I enjoy thinking about what the network could look like. It will be a challenge though to implement it. I look forward to continuing to discuss with you, and Curt (the author of this map.)
  12. Rapid transit, be it light rail or bus rapid transit often doesn't entirely fit the concept of a frequent transit network. Different considerations. This was somewhat discussed in the documentation for Houston's network update. It's not ideal when these aren't aligned with one another obviously. feeder/local, (coverage service, connects to frequent network, low volumes) frequent network (high volumes, backbone of the system, frequent service and ideally optimized to travel on the road network efficiently and reliabily) rapid transit. (carrying the highest volumes, similar in many ways to frequent service network but highest level of service, highest capacity, dedicated corridors, limited disruption from other modes.)
  13. There's a lot less service through the downtown with this grid network. That's good for people who don't need to go through the downtown, but a lot of people do travel to the downtown for work, so that would mean a lot of capacity would need to be provided on the routes operating through the downtown. Some of the routes would be better as feeders, I question Red #1 for instance, that links Charleswood to the Murray Industrial area. A network of feeder routes (to deliver people in low density areas to the line-haul routes shown in the map) are needed. The routes, as noted by others need to extend further out, they ignore areas at the edges of the map. I don't think this was intentional, just the result of not using the best map as a starting point. (To serve areas like St. Norbert that look to have been missed out, like LilZebra noted.) A tool like REMIX (https://www.remix.com/) could be used to assess the coverage area of the proposed changes to service. The City's VISUM traffic model should be used to determine what level of service is needed on each of these corridors. Some will need more service (shorter headways) than others to handle the passenger demand. Simply gridding the entire city with frequent service is a starting point for a revisit to service, but it needs to take into consideration other details, such as where people actually live and work (the density maps Jarrett Walker used in his exercise.) Simply covering the city with frequent service is resource-intensive - we will have some areas with frequent service but few passengers on the buses (if the buses are travelling between locations that aren't resulting in a lot of trips) and other areas will be overloaded (as they are today) if we do not consider this. For this reason I question some of the routes (Blue #2, #20, #13), I think some of these may have just been included to ensure the entire city is covered in routes. I'm concerned about the length of some of the routes. I don't know if there are a lot of people wanting to travel across the entire city north to south or east to west (Red #5, Red #11, Blue #14) and long routes can suffer from delay. It might be best to break these long routes up into two smaller routes if they can't be made reliable along their entire length. (Which is another problem WT suffers from at the moment. There are some places where routes are very close together (Blue 10 and 12 west of the downtown. This is good because these areas have high transit use and are high density, so this is justified. I like how this routing is less like Winnipeg's current service that puts lots of service onto corridors, but does so without rhyme or reason from a scheduling standpoint (like all the buses on Pembina, all the buses on Portage) It's good to have ideas put out for consideration like this map, I hope people will think about the concepts and continue to fine-tune them and not be cynical. The fact that this is being discussed in Winnipeg should be seen as a glimmer of hope.
  14. Don’t know if anyone has seen the recent A&W commercial where the A&W guy is driving around in a food truck telling people that we can get a bacon and egg breakfast sandwich all day at A&W. I mention it because although blurred out it’s clear that some of the locations are Winnipeg bus stops.
  15. Perhaps of interest to those who follow such things. Today Winnipeg received word of Federal funding for a Rapid Transit Master Plan and Prioritization Study (amongst other projects in Manitoba): http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/manitobans-to-benefit-from-greener-more-sustainable-transit-options-and-water-services-650279963.html Such a study will be useful because it should answer questions as to which rapid transit corridor to construct next, if the concept of the six-spoke rapid transit system in the 2011 Transportation Master Plan still makes sense, etc.
  • Create New...