Jump to content

History of Winnipeg Transit


armorand

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, Taylorover9001 said:

Recently I've collected a whole bunch of Winnipeg Transit PDF maps and other related documents, new and old. Believe it or not, but the Winnipeg Transit website hosts a ton of outdated route map PDF's, including defunct routes like 39, and older versions of routes like 62, that they've never deleted, though they're not easily accessible. The only reason I'm able to access these is because route pages have archives on the Wayback Machine, and these pages have links to PDF maps that are still alive. There are also other old documents, found with clkapps.winnipeg.ca, that I extracted old maps from. I couldn't find a full-sized map for Route 27 and Route 52, but a document that detailed how they would be merged had their downtown portions. Using that info, I made an unofficial Route 27 PDF, by modifying a Route 19 map. I haven't done it for 52, but I'll probably do it at some point. None of these are older than 2002 (some of them may have been pre-2002, but I extracted them from newer documents) and a lot are from 2006 and onwards, but I'm sure people will still have interest in them, especially younger people like me (I was 3 years old in 2002...), or those who are less aware of certain history in general. Regardless, there are still significant changes to various routes in this time frame.

TL;DR: The Winnipeg Transit/City of Winnipeg sites have old/outdated map/document PDF's (2002 onwards) that I downloaded. I also created PDF's based on other information/incomplete maps.

My collection isn't finished, but a link to what I currently have is below. I hope people enjoy this little slice of 21st century transit history.
https://mega.nz/#!dIFlBKbC!kZeRBiV7dSdU9pYuQGmetIsD8OpgzEbT1LEGEiTyIAU


BTW, if anybody knows what the 73 Bishop Grandin and 74 Crosstown South would've been, I'd love to know. I know these routes never saw the light of day, but they must've gotten pretty deep into planning if they spent money to make rollsigns that included them.

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bus Platform Layout

IYkR7eY.png

When all elements of bus platforms are amalgamated, the area should be well-ordered, accessible, with a visible travel path for those walking past, a waiting area for passengers which may or may not include a shelter, and zones for boarding and alighting.

Because the available area, neighbourhood characteristics and rider demographics change from area to area, there are a large variety of layouts, and each platform will be unique. The following pages contain examples of typical bus stop platforms for Winnipeg, showing the areas required for buses, travel paths, seating, waiting, embarking and alighting, shelters and other street furniture and amenities.

 

Reading WT report of 2006 Designing for Sustainable Transportation. I remember that big sign at Confusion Corner. They took it down when they replaced the shelter. Why would they replace it? That could be a model for high frequency bus stops, would be a sort of "branding" of sorts.

No, each platform doesn't have to be 'unique' from the last one or others. There should be some commonality, a "brand", a certain stylesheet if you will. I think in this decade WT has learned to do that with the (supposed to be) lit oval blue and white signs, but  I think there are spaces where a mishmash of design still goes one.

One thing that really bothered me in 2017-18 was the small size and too high placement of the telebus stop number at this location. At the time I had a cataract in the right eye and could not see the stop number. I could not see the printed schedule at the stop either because it was either dirty or my eyesight couldn't see the times in winter early evening light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I love how you can see old route numbers that transit decided to just cover up, poking through the stickers on top of it. For example, 95 in Wildwood, 97 on Cambridge and on Shaftesbury, and 84/86 on Taylor, among others. There's also an example on Plaza Drive (either 72 or 76, I think 76). They're interesting pieces of hidden history.

 

95 in Wildwood (discontinued in 2004):

20200107_153519.jpg

 

97 on Cambridge (discontinued in 2004):

20200107_161532.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier today, I uncovered info on Route 52 "Southeastern", which would've served St. Vital, Royalwood, Island Lakes, Sage Creek and Southland Park, and was proposed in 2015, but was canceled. I assume it was cancelled because the 14, 16, 50, 96 and 102, among others, already serve these areas. Do you think it should've been implemented, implemented with some changes, or are you glad it was scrapped?

52Southeastern.png

 

EDIT: I just realized that there are a few mentions of Route 52 on the forum, though still not much, and I hadn't seen them until now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Glasnost (Russian for new thinking) of WT, with still an open Transit Master Plan in the making, this 52 would not work because just like the 16 Osborne route with 5 branches, it would confuse riders/passengers. Its also too zig zaggy, which WT and a lot of transit dept's/agencies/authorities are trying tl get away from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Taylorover9001 said:

Earlier today, I uncovered info on Route 52 "Southeastern", which would've served St. Vital, Royalwood, Island Lakes, Sage Creek and Southland Park, and was proposed in 2015, but was canceled. I assume it was cancelled because the 14, 16, 50, 96 and 102, among others, already serve these areas. Do you think it should've been implemented, implemented with some changes, or are you glad it was scrapped?

52Southeastern.png

 

EDIT: I just realized that there are a few mentions of Route 52 on the forum, though still not much, and I hadn't seen them until now.

Winnipeg Transit spent (spends?) a lot of effort stringing together feeder segments to make a long enough route (that it needed multiple buses to serve) so that it could reduce frequency. (It's hard to schedule a service reduction on a route served by one bus). I use the word "pretzellization" as a short-hand for the technique. The 95 is another example of pretzellization. It's terrible practice, and a symptom of Winnipeg Transit losing all sense of customer service. The customer convenient path from point "A" to point "B" is, oddly enough, never a pretzel.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DavidW said:

Winnipeg Transit spent (spends?) a lot of effort stringing together feeder segments to make a long enough route (that it needed multiple buses to serve) so that it could reduce frequency. (It's hard to schedule a service reduction on a route served by one bus). I use the word "pretzellization" as a short-hand for the technique. The 95 is another example of pretzellization. It's terrible practice, and a symptom of Winnipeg Transit losing all sense of customer service. The customer convenient path from point "A" to point "B" is, oddly enough, never a pretzel.

 

Are you talking about when the 95 and 97 were combined, and routed though Corydon, Edgeland and Tuxedo (instead of the original 97 route straight through Kenaston)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DavidW said:

Winnipeg Transit spent (spends?) a lot of effort stringing together feeder segments to make a long enough route (that it needed multiple buses to serve) so that it could reduce frequency. (It's hard to schedule a service reduction on a route served by one bus). I use the word "pretzellization" as a short-hand for the technique. The 95 is another example of pretzellization. It's terrible practice, and a symptom of Winnipeg Transit losing all sense of customer service. The customer convenient path from point "A" to point "B" is, oddly enough, never a pretzel.

 

It wouldn't be *as* bad, if the 52 connected with the 19, 50 and 75 at Speers (Downtown/St. B/Transcona/U of M connections). But on this version, just connecting with anything major at St. Vital? I do agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, armorand said:

It wouldn't be *as* bad, if the 52 connected with the 19, 50 and 75 at Speers (Downtown/St. B/Transcona/U of M connections). But on this version, just connecting with anything major at St. Vital? I do agree.

If Warde was completed over the railway tracks in Royalwood then the extra jaunt to/from Bishop wouldn’t be needed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MMP15 said:

If Warde was completed over the railway tracks in Royalwood then the extra jaunt to/from Bishop wouldn’t be needed

I see what you mean. It is bizarre how segmented Warde is, including that sad section in south Royalwood. Connecting them all together seems so obvious. Then the 52 could've used Warde instead of Shorehill. Additionally it could pass through Sage Creek, instead of a loop in and out, which would also add 2-way service in Sage Creek.

I made a little map showing how the 52 could've been, if Warde was finished. This would be a lot better than what they were originally planning IMO.
1098175495_52Maps.thumb.png.762b2fc1a2f29a394fa30da089bfb606.png
Without the original version:
677351580_52Maps2.thumb.png.dd10c2155dbdbf72c6c53a8d098cc0d6.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Taylorover9001 said:

I see what you mean. It is bizarre how segmented Warde is, including that sad section in south Royalwood. Connecting them all together seems so obvious. Then the 52 could've used Warde instead of Shorehill. Additionally it could pass through Sage Creek, instead of a loop in and out, which would also add 2-way service in Sage Creek.

I made a little map showing how the 52 could've been, if Warde was finished. This would be a lot better than what they were originally planning IMO.
1098175495_52Maps.thumb.png.762b2fc1a2f29a394fa30da089bfb606.png
Without the original version:
677351580_52Maps2.thumb.png.dd10c2155dbdbf72c6c53a8d098cc0d6.png

The section of Warde between island lakes and sage creek was finished years ago. Weird that they didn’t draft the 52 as a “sage creek pass through” as the loop (same as the 50 currently follows) is atrocious. Also would be interesting if the 50 archibald was amended to pass through sage creek, and return to lag via island lakes. Heading south there could be a “via island lakes” and “via sage creek” branches, similar to the way the route 14 currently operates. 
 

Its also interesting that the draft TMP implements a route 52 that uses the not finished section of Warde. It’s kind of funny how the numbering system with the quadrants of the city still produced the number 52. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MMP15 said:

The section of Warde between island lakes and sage creek was finished years ago. Weird that they didn’t draft the 52 as a “sage creek pass through” as the loop (same as the 50 currently follows) is atrocious. Also would be interesting if the 50 archibald was amended to pass through sage creek, and return to lag via island lakes. Heading south there could be a “via island lakes” and “via sage creek” branches, similar to the way the route 14 currently operates. 
 

Its also interesting that the draft TMP implements a route 52 that uses the not finished section of Warde. It’s kind of funny how the numbering system with the quadrants of the city still produced the number 52. 

But the Warde section between Island Lakes and Southglen remains unfinished. So if the 52 made a comeback, it would still have to go up to Bishop Grandin. Unless they finally finish it of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Taylorover9001 said:

But the Warde section between Island Lakes and Southglen remains unfinished. So if the 52 made a comeback, it would still have to go up to Bishop Grandin. Unless they finally finish it of course.

I do wonder what the feasibility of a one-lane bi-directional bus only connection across the railway tracks would be...

 

Also other cities might consider splitting the 52 into two routes (One for either side of the railway track) and utilizing the walking path across the railway tracks at John Bruce/Pamela. To get from Southglen to Sage Creek you would take route 52A to John Bruce and walk to Pamela drive to catch route 52B. However this would require a forced transfer and a timed connection, which is beyond WT’s capabilities. (Also would make buses go down residential roads) However, it would avoid the trip up to bishop and could be a potential (although flawed) interm solution as Warde is completed. 

As an aside: Warde was initially designed to be a twinned road running from UofM to Sage Creek, with bridges at the Red and Seine Rivers. This can currently be seen between St Mary’s/St Anne’s, as the trees/fire hydrants are set wayyy back to accomodate a future twinning. This is also why Warde is a P1 road with a 60kph limit, even though it is a two-way street which is normally classified as P2. With the bridge at Shorehill being built at Shorhill and not Warde, this plan fell by the wayside. However, with the space being preserved for an eventual twinning, this could be a potential east-west bus only corridor many years down the road...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggested the mint before, a year or two ago, when this proposed route initially came out.

David, since then, has basically told me that Winnipeg Transit isn't interested in ideas.

Even if the 52 extension to Speers (where the 19 lays over in Windsor Park, and 50/75 stop around - not the Mint itself) would theoretically drive up ridership SIGNIFICANTLY, as people on the opposite end of Route 52 could just go to Windsor Park for connections to Downtown/St. B (19), employment (50) or U of M/Transcona (75)... Winnipeg Transit apparently does not want to hear it, sadly. Even if it drastically boosts Route 52 efficiency & passenger counts on three different routes as well, particularly the 19 and 50. 

I'd hope on just the extension to Windsor Park, to drive up ridership to that 22 passengers per hour, or whatever is needed to make it breakeven for Winnipeg Transit to operate. If we're lucky, Winnipeg Transit would at least, maybe, take a look at that if it breaks even. But Mint? It would be nice for tourism and recreation (do they still do tours?), but the route itself is pretzeling itself quite a bit, so any extension potentially to Speers loop, might need to justify the routes existence... and financial self-sufficiency.

Screenshot_20200109-020933_Maps.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just sub'd to the University of Manitoba Library and Archives channel. Yesterday I found a talk by Dona Harvey, former Editor-in-Chief of the Winnipeg Tribune, posted to SSP.

Too bad this B&W film from 1939 didn't record the sound. Inside of it a short minute or so of WECo. streetcar 276 partaking in the May 24, 1939 Royal visit by King George VI to Winnipeg.

My Mom, who grew up in the North End (Pol.-Ukr.), was too young to see the procession, as she was 2, while my Dad would have turned 9 in about 3 weeks from the Royal visit, besides the point that my Dad had to work on the farm in Gimli. No time for Royal visits.

The film shows the WECo. barn in the background, or the Electric Railway Chambers building?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm working on a program which uses GTFS data to display bus related information. But not just in the present, but in the past too. The earliest I currently have is dated from February 2011, a year before the RT started. The program is not finished, but a version of it can be found below, as well as screenshots. So if you're interested in what the schedules and trips were like in the past, here you go. (Note: Program is designed for Windows PC's, with 1920x1080 or 2256x1504 (or higher) resolution monitors.)


https://mega.nz/#!IMdWiIjQ!q8quIhT3p3qMMtqRV5oWHQ03e_-ZH5Fy9HEWKHLvQxI
Edit: Updated March 30th 2020 at 18:16.

CPTDB1.thumb.png.7be1d20644b6c2136ef734d4a05d1f86.pngCPTDB2.thumb.png.255edb442941384970b3dfd0c5bff7bd.pngCPTDB3.thumb.png.0348c517f4a56a07981c96746c4de8fc.pngCPTDB5.thumb.png.5373ffc5e6bf44bce459395f580eb85b.pngCPTDB4.thumb.png.b442113d9804aa4efe018f70c0f05daa.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
22 hours ago, LilZebra said:

In looking at things this morning, I found online the 1908 map of Winnipeg, including streetcar routings.

winnipeg1908.jpg

The interesting thing is that some of those tracks were not dug up but rather covered by pavement. Recent projects at Osborne and Broadway and Notre Dame and Garry proved that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...