Showing posts with label winnipeg transit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label winnipeg transit. Show all posts
Monday, June 8, 2009
It is your job to improve bus service!
In the Winnipeg Free Press' June 8th, 2009 article about the Commuter Challenge Councillor Bill Clement comments that, "Anybody that would be thinking clearly would understand very quickly that nobody representing that ward can travel it by bus and do it justice,”; perhaps then Councillor Clement should be working on doing his ward justice by ensuring that they have bus service that can accommodate the needs of all. If bus service is inadequate in his ward, then it is Councillor Clement`s job to see that is improved. This flippant behaviour is simply unacceptable from a elected official from any level of government.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Celebrating St. Patrick's Day with the Cyclists!
I attended the Bike To The Future's (BTTF) open-house on the Disraeli cycling/pedestrian crossing on St. Patricks's day. I was surprised that none of the other Elmwood candidates attended, since the Disraeli Bridge Rehabilitation has been such a hot topic of the campaign. I suppose that active transportation is really not on their radar. It seems that most of the talk on the Disraeli bridge has centered around personal vehicular traffic. I am merely speculating here, but my understanding is that the other three candidates typically commute by car, which explains why they might be less empathetic to cyclists, pedestrians, or bus riders (read my previous post below "Politicians: Priorities Please!" or "Time for Politicians to take the bus?" for further opinion) .
It is unfortunate that the candidates missed this meeting because the one presenter hit the exact problem underlying the Disraeli Bridge closure right on the head, stating: "There is no coherent plan to decrease the amount of traffic going over the Disraeli Bridge."
It is not that I do not sympathize with the inconvenience that any bridge closure will cause (regardless of whether that is a full or a partial closure). Nobody likes to be stuck in traffic, whether you are in a car, on a bus, or on your bike. As a business owner myself I can sympathize with the business owners in the area who will more than see a decline in there profits. I know how hard fluctuations in income can be for entrepreneurs and business people.
Having knocked on the doors of many residents of Elmwood I am keenly aware how upset and divided the residents of Elmwood are about this issue! It is clear that the less time the bridge is ultimately closed the better it will be. Right now the City of Winnipeg is in the process of receiving proposals for the project, which will include details such as whether an attached or separate pedestrian bridge will be built, how long the bridge will be closed and whether this will be a full or partial closure. One of the interesting things that came from the meeting is how fast the entire process is moving and therefore how little time is allowed for public discussion from the residents of Elmwood, other surrounding communities and concerned groups. While this is ultimately a civic issue, it seems to me that the decision-making process should be opened up to the public, especially the people of Elmwood so that the community can choose the repair tender that best meets their needs.
Unlike the other candidates I do not think that adding more lanes for automobile traffic is the cure This is nothing more than a temporary treatment that will alleviate the pain. Fellow blogger David Watson has a great quote on his blog Waverly West and beyond:
"Adding lanes to solve traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to solve obesity." - Glen Hemistra
The answer is to slim down!
According to Winnipeg Transit, 20% of Winnipeggers travel by bus and 2 buses can replace as many as a hundred cars, thereby reducing traffic congestion by 90%. Therefore if we improved bus frequency and service the transit ridership rate would increase and this would decrease traffic congestion not only during the Disraeli Closure (whether that be a partial or full closure), but beyond as well.
Promoting cycling is another way to slim down traffic congestion. For cyclists and pedestrians the Disraeli Rehabilitation process cannot be completed fast enough as many are looking forward to the new segregated bike lane across the Disraeli. The high pitch of the Disraeli Bridge and the high speed of traffic on Henderson Highway make the Disraeli Bridge in its present form one of the least bike friendly locations in the city.
It is key to recognize that Winnipeg's active transportation network do not connect to each other, and this historic lack of investment in active transportation is one of the reasons that inhibit people from riding their bikes. Can you imagine if our paved roads suddenly ended and motor vehicles were forced to cross mud paths to get to the next paved road? That is the situation that cyclists currently face.
Cycling and transit need to be our priorities. They should not be merely afterthoughts, to be incorporated if it is convenient to do so. This is exactly why we presently have an incoherent bike infrastructure system across the city. At the BTTF meeting numerous residents from Elmwood and Point Douglas indicated that they would like active transportation crossings at both the Disraeli and Louise bridges. They worry the construction of a Disraeli active transportation corridor will inhibit the conversion of the Louise into an active transportation corridor as well. It is too bad that none of the other candidates were present to hear this concern.
Sources:
http://waverleywest.blogspot.com/
http://myride.winnipegtransit.com/en/inside-transit/interestingtransitfacts/
Authorized by the Official Agent for James Beddome
It is unfortunate that the candidates missed this meeting because the one presenter hit the exact problem underlying the Disraeli Bridge closure right on the head, stating: "There is no coherent plan to decrease the amount of traffic going over the Disraeli Bridge."
It is not that I do not sympathize with the inconvenience that any bridge closure will cause (regardless of whether that is a full or a partial closure). Nobody likes to be stuck in traffic, whether you are in a car, on a bus, or on your bike. As a business owner myself I can sympathize with the business owners in the area who will more than see a decline in there profits. I know how hard fluctuations in income can be for entrepreneurs and business people.
Having knocked on the doors of many residents of Elmwood I am keenly aware how upset and divided the residents of Elmwood are about this issue! It is clear that the less time the bridge is ultimately closed the better it will be. Right now the City of Winnipeg is in the process of receiving proposals for the project, which will include details such as whether an attached or separate pedestrian bridge will be built, how long the bridge will be closed and whether this will be a full or partial closure. One of the interesting things that came from the meeting is how fast the entire process is moving and therefore how little time is allowed for public discussion from the residents of Elmwood, other surrounding communities and concerned groups. While this is ultimately a civic issue, it seems to me that the decision-making process should be opened up to the public, especially the people of Elmwood so that the community can choose the repair tender that best meets their needs.
Unlike the other candidates I do not think that adding more lanes for automobile traffic is the cure This is nothing more than a temporary treatment that will alleviate the pain. Fellow blogger David Watson has a great quote on his blog Waverly West and beyond:
"Adding lanes to solve traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to solve obesity." - Glen Hemistra
The answer is to slim down!
According to Winnipeg Transit, 20% of Winnipeggers travel by bus and 2 buses can replace as many as a hundred cars, thereby reducing traffic congestion by 90%. Therefore if we improved bus frequency and service the transit ridership rate would increase and this would decrease traffic congestion not only during the Disraeli Closure (whether that be a partial or full closure), but beyond as well.
Promoting cycling is another way to slim down traffic congestion. For cyclists and pedestrians the Disraeli Rehabilitation process cannot be completed fast enough as many are looking forward to the new segregated bike lane across the Disraeli. The high pitch of the Disraeli Bridge and the high speed of traffic on Henderson Highway make the Disraeli Bridge in its present form one of the least bike friendly locations in the city.
It is key to recognize that Winnipeg's active transportation network do not connect to each other, and this historic lack of investment in active transportation is one of the reasons that inhibit people from riding their bikes. Can you imagine if our paved roads suddenly ended and motor vehicles were forced to cross mud paths to get to the next paved road? That is the situation that cyclists currently face.
Cycling and transit need to be our priorities. They should not be merely afterthoughts, to be incorporated if it is convenient to do so. This is exactly why we presently have an incoherent bike infrastructure system across the city. At the BTTF meeting numerous residents from Elmwood and Point Douglas indicated that they would like active transportation crossings at both the Disraeli and Louise bridges. They worry the construction of a Disraeli active transportation corridor will inhibit the conversion of the Louise into an active transportation corridor as well. It is too bad that none of the other candidates were present to hear this concern.
Sources:
http://waverleywest.blogspot.com/
http://myride.winnipegtransit.com/en/inside-transit/interestingtransitfacts/
Authorized by the Official Agent for James Beddome
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Time for Politicians to take the bus?
Although I am sure some people do take issue with the idea of being surveilled, I personally do not oppose the installation of cameras on buses (they began installing cameras on buses years ago). I do, however, take real issue with the governments' claim that this will somehow improve transit service within Winnipeg.
Transit has been my primary means of transportation for the seven and a half years that I have lived in Winnipeg, and I have travelled the city extensively on various different routes. I have seen unruly and rambunctious people creating problems while riding on the bus. In these situations, it was not the presence of a camera, but the actions of a fellow bus-rider or bus-driver that resolved the issue. Therefore, I question Vic Toews' assumption that the presence of cameras will “deter potential criminal activity.”, although that footage may be a useful source of evidence for the criminal justice system after the fact. They began adding cameras on buses years ago and for the average bus rider the installation of cameras has had little effect on their transit riding experience; I doubt that adding a few more cameras will make much of a difference.
Yet according to the politicians the installation of the cameras will incite the public to clamber onto the Transit buses, possibly exclaiming: "I'm on T.V.!"
Steve Ashton boasted this was part of "...the province’s vision for a clean and green economy by providing Manitobans with alternative transportation choices." Likewise Gord Steeves proclaimed: "With increased ridership, we must continue to improve our existing transit system to capture that increase and provide positive transportation alternatives to our citizens."
Wait a minute guys...I'm a little confused? How does placing cameras on the transit buses already in operation 'provide Manitobans with alternative transportation choices'? If our ridership is increasing, (or if you would like it to increase as part of the plan for a greener Manitoba), would it not be more logical to improve our transit system by running more buses, more frequently, rather than installing more cameras on the buses already in operation?
The key to getting more people to ride the bus is to provide good service at a fair cost. If the buses in Winnipeg had attractive fares and the bus came every five minutes, ridership rates would skyrocket. But all too often bus-riders are stuck waiting in the blistering cold 10-40 minutes for the next ride. I wonder how often Ashton, Steeves, or Toews have faced the daily challenge of waiting for their bus in the deep chill of Winnipeg winter?
Transit has been my primary means of transportation for the seven and a half years that I have lived in Winnipeg, and I have travelled the city extensively on various different routes. I have seen unruly and rambunctious people creating problems while riding on the bus. In these situations, it was not the presence of a camera, but the actions of a fellow bus-rider or bus-driver that resolved the issue. Therefore, I question Vic Toews' assumption that the presence of cameras will “deter potential criminal activity.”, although that footage may be a useful source of evidence for the criminal justice system after the fact. They began adding cameras on buses years ago and for the average bus rider the installation of cameras has had little effect on their transit riding experience; I doubt that adding a few more cameras will make much of a difference.
Yet according to the politicians the installation of the cameras will incite the public to clamber onto the Transit buses, possibly exclaiming: "I'm on T.V.!"
Steve Ashton boasted this was part of "...the province’s vision for a clean and green economy by providing Manitobans with alternative transportation choices." Likewise Gord Steeves proclaimed: "With increased ridership, we must continue to improve our existing transit system to capture that increase and provide positive transportation alternatives to our citizens."
Wait a minute guys...I'm a little confused? How does placing cameras on the transit buses already in operation 'provide Manitobans with alternative transportation choices'? If our ridership is increasing, (or if you would like it to increase as part of the plan for a greener Manitoba), would it not be more logical to improve our transit system by running more buses, more frequently, rather than installing more cameras on the buses already in operation?
The key to getting more people to ride the bus is to provide good service at a fair cost. If the buses in Winnipeg had attractive fares and the bus came every five minutes, ridership rates would skyrocket. But all too often bus-riders are stuck waiting in the blistering cold 10-40 minutes for the next ride. I wonder how often Ashton, Steeves, or Toews have faced the daily challenge of waiting for their bus in the deep chill of Winnipeg winter?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)