Props to The Great Canadian Talk Show for pointing out how the meaning of the word "philanthropist" has changed here in the city of Winnipeg, to seemingly wanting to draw attention for their latest charitable act.
Oftentimes when I discuss something with my parents, they are quick to point out that my criticism is unjust because of the "many charitable acts that go unnoticed an unannounced."
Which, is true...but one cannot ignore the two running projects of epicly shameless proportions.
1) Upper Fort Garry
2) Canadian Museum For Human Rights
Two mostly useless projects which do little to benefit everyone, get hyped to no end, and in which the media would have us believe we are shockingly stupid and uncaring to say anything against these projects.
phi·lan·thro·py (f-lnthr-p)
n. pl. phi·lan·thro·pies
1. The effort or inclination to increase the well-being of humankind, as by charitable aid or donations.
2. Love of humankind in general.
3. Something, such as an activity or institution, intended to promote human welfare.
By any of these definitions, neither UFG or the Museum fit. They do not increase our well-being, they aren't done out of the love of humankind, and they do not directly promote human welfare. The only thing that even comes close is that the Museum educates people about human welfare.
Maybe these people are philanthropists, but if the subject of UFG or the Museum comes up, that part should be (conveniently) left out.
There are many ways to increase well-being and promote human welfare via charitable acts or donations in this city. So many in fact, that it's not worth my time to even begin a list here.
UFG and the Museum. Prime examples of "progress."
Friday, May 30, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Rush....
Selling out? To The Man?
Rush donates cash to human rights museum.
I don't know what to say. No comment.
Rush donates cash to human rights museum.
I don't know what to say. No comment.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Wheeeeeeeeee.....in...Fargo. Yeah. Fargo.
My my did Bartley Kives' article ever wake me up this morning.
So it turns out Fargo has the commitment and DESIRE to avoid things that kill downtown. Glass box monstrosities, parking lots, and no place to live? Noooo problem. In Fargo.
Desire.
"Desire" is a verb that describes what many politicians in Manitoba lack. And "commitment" is a term that I often wonder the aformentioned desire-less politicians even have in their vocabulary. Both "Desire" and "commitment," when used mutually, yield often phenomenal results.
In Winnipeg, "desire" and "commitment" are mutually exclusive.
Nobody here has the desire to revive downtown and make it an important place, because nobody has an attachment to downtown, because nobody lives there. Maybe we'll have a Mayor one day who actually lives downtown.
Nobody here has commitment for a downtown revival because people here are too conservative. They're scared of failing, of appearing like a failure while the masses revolt against their vision. So they half-ass it. They order more studies, more reports. They make public statements saying they care.
"Desire" and "commitment" are two words that don't even make a vague crossing of the mind....they are replaced by "avoid."
Avoiding is done by doing things like appointing other people to do their thinking for them. Things like CentreVenture and Heritage Winnipeg. Such organizations would work wonders, if they had the backing of someone with both desire and commitment.
Desire and commitment don't only go for downtown. These mutually exclusive terms happen to pop up everywhere there is diddling and dawdling. Transit is another blatantly obvious example.
I love this part in Kives' article. I think I re-read it 3 or 4 times:
The project-by-project revitalization of downtown Fargo has accomplished more in eight years than any government megaproject, Gilmour says.
Government megaproject.
Isn't that what our downtown IS? A collection of government megaprojects?
Portage Place, which had expropriated my grandfather's music store, Lowes Music, which never recovered, along with many many many others. MTS Centre which saw the demolition of an iconic Winnipeg building. A new Manitoba Hydro building. The demolition of not one but two historic buildings to make way for a box known as the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, complete with a parking lot of course.
Downtown has "the man" written all over it. Nobody likes The Man.
The picture in the print edition of the Freep shows condo housing being built atop already-existing retail space. Crickey we can't even get that to happen along Graham Mall. There's single-storey buidlings opposite of Portage Place!
While researching things that happened before my time, I somehow ended up on Bill Norrie's Wikipedia page. While deciding how to end this post, I decided that the killshot of a last line in that article was a good way to do it.
"Downtown Winnipeg is now a model of the American style doughnut-city, with a moribund downtown and wealthier suburbanites shopping in local suburban malls."
Desire and commitment can change that.
So it turns out Fargo has the commitment and DESIRE to avoid things that kill downtown. Glass box monstrosities, parking lots, and no place to live? Noooo problem. In Fargo.
Desire.
"Desire" is a verb that describes what many politicians in Manitoba lack. And "commitment" is a term that I often wonder the aformentioned desire-less politicians even have in their vocabulary. Both "Desire" and "commitment," when used mutually, yield often phenomenal results.
In Winnipeg, "desire" and "commitment" are mutually exclusive.
Nobody here has the desire to revive downtown and make it an important place, because nobody has an attachment to downtown, because nobody lives there. Maybe we'll have a Mayor one day who actually lives downtown.
Nobody here has commitment for a downtown revival because people here are too conservative. They're scared of failing, of appearing like a failure while the masses revolt against their vision. So they half-ass it. They order more studies, more reports. They make public statements saying they care.
"Desire" and "commitment" are two words that don't even make a vague crossing of the mind....they are replaced by "avoid."
Avoiding is done by doing things like appointing other people to do their thinking for them. Things like CentreVenture and Heritage Winnipeg. Such organizations would work wonders, if they had the backing of someone with both desire and commitment.
Desire and commitment don't only go for downtown. These mutually exclusive terms happen to pop up everywhere there is diddling and dawdling. Transit is another blatantly obvious example.
I love this part in Kives' article. I think I re-read it 3 or 4 times:
The project-by-project revitalization of downtown Fargo has accomplished more in eight years than any government megaproject, Gilmour says.
Government megaproject.
Isn't that what our downtown IS? A collection of government megaprojects?
Portage Place, which had expropriated my grandfather's music store, Lowes Music, which never recovered, along with many many many others. MTS Centre which saw the demolition of an iconic Winnipeg building. A new Manitoba Hydro building. The demolition of not one but two historic buildings to make way for a box known as the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, complete with a parking lot of course.
Downtown has "the man" written all over it. Nobody likes The Man.
The picture in the print edition of the Freep shows condo housing being built atop already-existing retail space. Crickey we can't even get that to happen along Graham Mall. There's single-storey buidlings opposite of Portage Place!
While researching things that happened before my time, I somehow ended up on Bill Norrie's Wikipedia page. While deciding how to end this post, I decided that the killshot of a last line in that article was a good way to do it.
"Downtown Winnipeg is now a model of the American style doughnut-city, with a moribund downtown and wealthier suburbanites shopping in local suburban malls."
Desire and commitment can change that.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Did Someone Listen To Me?
*As-Promised Update*
Turns out I don't have to go and do some research, Policy Frog did it all for us. And a killer last paragraph/point there too:
"But to be truly effective, Winnipeg Transit must have the testicular fortitude to recommend that lanes go where they’re really needed, even if that means regular traffic might be slowed down by a light cycle or two. Taking a half-assed approach to implementation will only make riders cynical about the alleged improvements."
Great, great, great point. My thoughts exactly.
*End of as-promised update*
...Probably not, but wishful thinking nonetheless.
Henderson Diamond Lane.
A diamond lane on southbound Henderson Highway, between Hespeler Avenue and Riverton Avenue, would be in effect 24 hours a day.
Sounds pretty good to me. A start anyways..I know I said I would take pictures earlier but I'm pretty hard-pressed for time around the rush hour. But again, personal observation, that during rush hour traffic, southbound traffic is much much much heavier than northbound. This is probably due to people returning to the 'burbs from downtown.
This article also states possible lanes on Regent and McPhillips. I don't have time to look at where exactly those areas are and maybe go check them out right now, but I'll update this post later.
Also in this article:
The city would also make changes to traffic signals and implement queue jumps -- short right-turn lanes that allow buses to bypass traffic at congested intersections -- in other areas of east Winnipeg.
About. Damn. Time.
This is the EASIEST and SIMPLEST way to improve Transit. Those short right turn lanes allow buses to get out of the way and wait for a break in traffic to get back in. Transit Priority lights have the same function.
It's a start. A long way to go yet before a "Rapid" Transit corridor is effective at all. But, still a start.
Turns out I don't have to go and do some research, Policy Frog did it all for us. And a killer last paragraph/point there too:
"But to be truly effective, Winnipeg Transit must have the testicular fortitude to recommend that lanes go where they’re really needed, even if that means regular traffic might be slowed down by a light cycle or two. Taking a half-assed approach to implementation will only make riders cynical about the alleged improvements."
Great, great, great point. My thoughts exactly.
*End of as-promised update*
...Probably not, but wishful thinking nonetheless.
Henderson Diamond Lane.
A diamond lane on southbound Henderson Highway, between Hespeler Avenue and Riverton Avenue, would be in effect 24 hours a day.
Sounds pretty good to me. A start anyways..I know I said I would take pictures earlier but I'm pretty hard-pressed for time around the rush hour. But again, personal observation, that during rush hour traffic, southbound traffic is much much much heavier than northbound. This is probably due to people returning to the 'burbs from downtown.
This article also states possible lanes on Regent and McPhillips. I don't have time to look at where exactly those areas are and maybe go check them out right now, but I'll update this post later.
Also in this article:
The city would also make changes to traffic signals and implement queue jumps -- short right-turn lanes that allow buses to bypass traffic at congested intersections -- in other areas of east Winnipeg.
About. Damn. Time.
This is the EASIEST and SIMPLEST way to improve Transit. Those short right turn lanes allow buses to get out of the way and wait for a break in traffic to get back in. Transit Priority lights have the same function.
It's a start. A long way to go yet before a "Rapid" Transit corridor is effective at all. But, still a start.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Use It Wisely
*Edit* May 22 at bottom of post
Federal funding for Transit isn't exactly icing on the cake, after all.
But it probably should be. Not here, though, we can't even decide what kind of Transit system we want. It gets debated and re-studied, when we get a new Mayor he'll have some other idea and it'll all get studied all over again. Do we have "rapid" Transit? How bout rails? Subway? Don't forget about school bus Tranit.
18 million dollars is all the feds want to give us, then shouldn't it be used for other initiatives?
Again, I really do not understand how this one little leg of a transit corridor from downtown to Jubilee is going to magically fix our transit system. Oh I know what you're thinking...but it's the start of a network of transit corridors. That won't see any kind of fruition, if one 70 million dollar leg takes this long (30 years if you believe the headline) how long will 4 or 5 additional 70 million dollar legs take?
So, we could blow our 18 mil from the feds on this corridor (one other thing...why is this corridor the only one we ever, ever, ever, ever hear of? Is it special?) which means the city still has to fork up another 50 mil or so.
Crickey, you can see why the (current) Mayor deemed this plan too expensive. Expensive because, there is no infrastructure in place for it. You have to start from scratch.
Transit corridors, we might as well build a subway....they're the same thing, they both cost a lot and they both have no current infrastructure in place.
And thus, I come back to the same point I have been hammering my readers over the head with on this blog. Whyyyyyyy are we wasting our time and money with all these Transit plans, as if our woes will go away once we build them. When they're only as good as the currently existing service.
And the currently existing service. Sucks.
It's like a paper mache ball. We'll make a paper mache ball out of newsprint. Then we'll take one tiny piece, colour it red, and slap it on top. Then we can say that our paper mache ball is better! Your eyes are drawn to the red piece because it stands out, while the rest faaaades away...going out of focus. But it doesn't change the fact that the entire ball is made of plain old, black and white newsprint.
I'd rather see the 18 mil spent entirely on bike paths. Like the one on the old rail line between Gateway and Raliegh, fantastic..and lots of people use it too. Would 18 mil pay for a few extra inches of curb lane over Disraeli? I don't know,just throwing things out there.
I'm jus' sayin. To put a measly 18 mil towards something that costs much, much, much more than that, seems like a waste.
And while I'm talking about this CBC article, I might as well point out that, yes, once again, "heated bus shelters" has gotten a place in the story, and in the same line references our "-40 winters." Wow are they ever building these things up, eh? First of all it only goes to -40 about 3 times a year (and it's an overnight low anyways, key word is "overnight," when no buses are running) and if it's heated at -40 people are going to expect heat at -20. Or -10. Or -5. HEAT! Heat I say!
Toasty warm, at the very least.
*EDIT
I realized while thinking about what I posted, that I didn't post what I actually wanted to. It was more of a rambling.
The above-linked article states that the Jubilee corridor is the cheapest and least ambitious one. If the feds give us 18 mil and we use it for that...
What about the other 4 or 5 corridors? Will the feds give us 18 mil for each of those too? Politicians and all kinds of people are already crying that "Rapid" Transit is too expensive. If Jubilee corridor is the least ambitious, what are the other ones worth? 80 mil? 100 mil? 120 mil?
Every time we want to build another one are we going to cry to Ottawa for money? If (read: when) they don't give us additional funding, will we ever see any kind of better Transit system?
30 years will become 40. Then 50. Then...whatever. And soon Winnipeg's "dream" of Transit will just be some kind of running joke.
"Transit? I live in Winnipeg, I have a car!"
Spend that 18 mil wisely. Transit corridors, not the answer IMO, and never will be unless a system is in place to support it.
Federal funding for Transit isn't exactly icing on the cake, after all.
But it probably should be. Not here, though, we can't even decide what kind of Transit system we want. It gets debated and re-studied, when we get a new Mayor he'll have some other idea and it'll all get studied all over again. Do we have "rapid" Transit? How bout rails? Subway? Don't forget about school bus Tranit.
18 million dollars is all the feds want to give us, then shouldn't it be used for other initiatives?
Again, I really do not understand how this one little leg of a transit corridor from downtown to Jubilee is going to magically fix our transit system. Oh I know what you're thinking...but it's the start of a network of transit corridors. That won't see any kind of fruition, if one 70 million dollar leg takes this long (30 years if you believe the headline) how long will 4 or 5 additional 70 million dollar legs take?
So, we could blow our 18 mil from the feds on this corridor (one other thing...why is this corridor the only one we ever, ever, ever, ever hear of? Is it special?) which means the city still has to fork up another 50 mil or so.
Crickey, you can see why the (current) Mayor deemed this plan too expensive. Expensive because, there is no infrastructure in place for it. You have to start from scratch.
Transit corridors, we might as well build a subway....they're the same thing, they both cost a lot and they both have no current infrastructure in place.
And thus, I come back to the same point I have been hammering my readers over the head with on this blog. Whyyyyyyy are we wasting our time and money with all these Transit plans, as if our woes will go away once we build them. When they're only as good as the currently existing service.
And the currently existing service. Sucks.
It's like a paper mache ball. We'll make a paper mache ball out of newsprint. Then we'll take one tiny piece, colour it red, and slap it on top. Then we can say that our paper mache ball is better! Your eyes are drawn to the red piece because it stands out, while the rest faaaades away...going out of focus. But it doesn't change the fact that the entire ball is made of plain old, black and white newsprint.
I'd rather see the 18 mil spent entirely on bike paths. Like the one on the old rail line between Gateway and Raliegh, fantastic..and lots of people use it too. Would 18 mil pay for a few extra inches of curb lane over Disraeli? I don't know,just throwing things out there.
I'm jus' sayin. To put a measly 18 mil towards something that costs much, much, much more than that, seems like a waste.
And while I'm talking about this CBC article, I might as well point out that, yes, once again, "heated bus shelters" has gotten a place in the story, and in the same line references our "-40 winters." Wow are they ever building these things up, eh? First of all it only goes to -40 about 3 times a year (and it's an overnight low anyways, key word is "overnight," when no buses are running) and if it's heated at -40 people are going to expect heat at -20. Or -10. Or -5. HEAT! Heat I say!
Toasty warm, at the very least.
*EDIT
I realized while thinking about what I posted, that I didn't post what I actually wanted to. It was more of a rambling.
The above-linked article states that the Jubilee corridor is the cheapest and least ambitious one. If the feds give us 18 mil and we use it for that...
What about the other 4 or 5 corridors? Will the feds give us 18 mil for each of those too? Politicians and all kinds of people are already crying that "Rapid" Transit is too expensive. If Jubilee corridor is the least ambitious, what are the other ones worth? 80 mil? 100 mil? 120 mil?
Every time we want to build another one are we going to cry to Ottawa for money? If (read: when) they don't give us additional funding, will we ever see any kind of better Transit system?
30 years will become 40. Then 50. Then...whatever. And soon Winnipeg's "dream" of Transit will just be some kind of running joke.
"Transit? I live in Winnipeg, I have a car!"
Spend that 18 mil wisely. Transit corridors, not the answer IMO, and never will be unless a system is in place to support it.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Kick In The Nuts
So I went to the LC today and, well, decided to venture from my usual Kokanee/Grasshopper/Keiths rotation and be a little adventurous.
So I got me some Half Pints.
Hooooooly crickey. I was not prepared for, nor expecting, such a strong flavour. Nevertheless a welcome departure from the norm. As of this far into my post I haven't even finished half of my first one.
Try some, sometime.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Disraeli Mixed Bag
Just a few notes on this hotly-debated topic.
I think 6 lanes is a little excessive, but a refurbished or new bridge needs to have some sort of curb or cycle lane, as well as at least one pedestrian sidewalk. Sidewalk on both sides maybe not, but one side for sure.
Pedestrian issues out of the way...
If it is to be rebuilt, the ridiculous two-hump design should go. This is not only anti pedestrian and anti cyclist, but just seems so inefficient. No other bridge is built like this. If we're going to re-hab this bridge, then do it properly.
Which brings me to cost. Usually associated with "properly" is a higher price tag. I think there's been quite the over-reaction to how much this project will cost, as if it's jaw-droppingly-surprising...this is a massive bridge. It's huge. And it's easily twice as long as any other bridge crossing the river, and in addition to that, it has this only-in-Winnipeg design. Add to that rising construction costs etc. 160 mil isn't that hard to see...
Twinning it makes a lot of sense. At least solve traffic woes during construction. But increases the price tag.
Lesser of two evils?
And finally in response to Sammy's "who's gunna pay" statement, here's a suggestion for that. The province can easily fork over several million dollars....take some from the coffers of the museum. Yet another example of "money better spent."
I think 6 lanes is a little excessive, but a refurbished or new bridge needs to have some sort of curb or cycle lane, as well as at least one pedestrian sidewalk. Sidewalk on both sides maybe not, but one side for sure.
Pedestrian issues out of the way...
If it is to be rebuilt, the ridiculous two-hump design should go. This is not only anti pedestrian and anti cyclist, but just seems so inefficient. No other bridge is built like this. If we're going to re-hab this bridge, then do it properly.
Which brings me to cost. Usually associated with "properly" is a higher price tag. I think there's been quite the over-reaction to how much this project will cost, as if it's jaw-droppingly-surprising...this is a massive bridge. It's huge. And it's easily twice as long as any other bridge crossing the river, and in addition to that, it has this only-in-Winnipeg design. Add to that rising construction costs etc. 160 mil isn't that hard to see...
Twinning it makes a lot of sense. At least solve traffic woes during construction. But increases the price tag.
Lesser of two evils?
And finally in response to Sammy's "who's gunna pay" statement, here's a suggestion for that. The province can easily fork over several million dollars....take some from the coffers of the museum. Yet another example of "money better spent."
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
"Hub-and-Spoke"
After JUST posting something POSITIVE, I have no choice but to go off on a major tirade about the latest and greatest in making Winnipeg even more backwards and home to even more dumbassery.
Isn't this just about the stupidest fucking thing you've ever heard.
This guy is a transit EXPERT? This is a possible solution to increasing ridership? ONLY in Winnipeg would this idea ever even be dreamed up. Nowhere else could think of this, because nowhere else is as BACKWARDS as we are! There are so many things wrong with this plan. I mean, you don't even have to have half an opinion about Winnipeg Transit to see all the garbage and stupidity.
Figures it's the suburbanites who won't abandon their cars, they aren't getting on the bus. And why aren't they? Well the article points out that a bus doesn't go where you want it to when you want it to. I can add to that. The buses are dirty. They're old. They aren't safe. The bus shelters aren't heated. The wait times are too long. Little or no late night buses. No air conditioning.
So what's the EXPERT'S plan to fix this? Pick the suburbanites up from their homes?
...WHAT?
Does this make sense to ANYBODY but our "expert?" Is this Winnipeg Transit, or the SCHOOL BUS?
And then where does this bus take Mr. Suburbanite? To another bus route? You mean they have to get on to the same bus system they don't want to take as it is ANYWAYS? This only ADDS to people's grievances. Not only do they ultimately have to ride on the same bus service, but they have to be tossed around to every Tom Dick and Harry's driveway who want to use the "hub-and-spoke" before they even GET to the bus system!
And all because as it is, Mr. Suburbanite doesn't want to walk a quarter mile or less to the bus stop, wait for 20 minutes and get on a sweltering hot, unsafe, dirty bus?
And Mr. Barry Prentice thinks ridership will SOAR?! ...SOAR?
It'll make ridership stay the same and our tax dollars will be wasted on new, useless, super-short SHUTTLE BUSSES instead of real, practicl, functional, BENDY BUSSES. Our tax dollars will be wasted on fuel with the useless junk miles these shuttle busses tack on every day to go pick up all 3 of you who will take "advantage" of them.
I think, after reading this, every citizen in Winnipeg can be a self-proclaimed Transit expert.
I will now briefly explain how to make ridership SOAR.
Think of Transit like a business.
How do you make your business attractive? Notice the word "attractive." It's a VISUAL thing. Visual, key word.
If thousands of commuters every day down Henderson saw a diamond lane and a rail, with buses whizzing by every several minutes, you might nod your head in approval. If thousands of commuters every day down Pembina saw nothing but brand spanking new bendy buses with air conditioning, they might think twice. If thousands of commuters down Bishop Grandin noticed a high-speed Transit corridor down the boulevard, they might think twice. If every single traffic light downtown had Transit Priority, when you're sitting in that gridlock, you might just contemplate taking that bus next time.
Those are visual. Those say "THIS SYSTEM WORKS!" Those say "this system is comfortable and EASY TO USE!" Those say "we've ridded ourselves of the problems that used to plague us!"
And you thought 160 mil on a bridge was bad. How about the millions of dollars that would be spent on totally useless shuttle buses. That's millions of dollars that could be used to buy new buses for already existing routes to IMPROVE SERVICE! Complaining of long wait times and no night service? That's too bad because instead of less wait times and night service, Mr. Suburbanite wants to get picked up AT HIS DRIVEWAY!
And it doesn't stop there, this "idea" is going to a conference in Fredericton. Even the Maritimers will wonder how we on the prairies survive.
Hub and Spoke. Pfffft. Rename it Winnipeg Transit School Bus.
Isn't this just about the stupidest fucking thing you've ever heard.
This guy is a transit EXPERT? This is a possible solution to increasing ridership? ONLY in Winnipeg would this idea ever even be dreamed up. Nowhere else could think of this, because nowhere else is as BACKWARDS as we are! There are so many things wrong with this plan. I mean, you don't even have to have half an opinion about Winnipeg Transit to see all the garbage and stupidity.
Figures it's the suburbanites who won't abandon their cars, they aren't getting on the bus. And why aren't they? Well the article points out that a bus doesn't go where you want it to when you want it to. I can add to that. The buses are dirty. They're old. They aren't safe. The bus shelters aren't heated. The wait times are too long. Little or no late night buses. No air conditioning.
So what's the EXPERT'S plan to fix this? Pick the suburbanites up from their homes?
...WHAT?
Does this make sense to ANYBODY but our "expert?" Is this Winnipeg Transit, or the SCHOOL BUS?
And then where does this bus take Mr. Suburbanite? To another bus route? You mean they have to get on to the same bus system they don't want to take as it is ANYWAYS? This only ADDS to people's grievances. Not only do they ultimately have to ride on the same bus service, but they have to be tossed around to every Tom Dick and Harry's driveway who want to use the "hub-and-spoke" before they even GET to the bus system!
And all because as it is, Mr. Suburbanite doesn't want to walk a quarter mile or less to the bus stop, wait for 20 minutes and get on a sweltering hot, unsafe, dirty bus?
And Mr. Barry Prentice thinks ridership will SOAR?! ...SOAR?
It'll make ridership stay the same and our tax dollars will be wasted on new, useless, super-short SHUTTLE BUSSES instead of real, practicl, functional, BENDY BUSSES. Our tax dollars will be wasted on fuel with the useless junk miles these shuttle busses tack on every day to go pick up all 3 of you who will take "advantage" of them.
I think, after reading this, every citizen in Winnipeg can be a self-proclaimed Transit expert.
I will now briefly explain how to make ridership SOAR.
Think of Transit like a business.
How do you make your business attractive? Notice the word "attractive." It's a VISUAL thing. Visual, key word.
If thousands of commuters every day down Henderson saw a diamond lane and a rail, with buses whizzing by every several minutes, you might nod your head in approval. If thousands of commuters every day down Pembina saw nothing but brand spanking new bendy buses with air conditioning, they might think twice. If thousands of commuters down Bishop Grandin noticed a high-speed Transit corridor down the boulevard, they might think twice. If every single traffic light downtown had Transit Priority, when you're sitting in that gridlock, you might just contemplate taking that bus next time.
Those are visual. Those say "THIS SYSTEM WORKS!" Those say "this system is comfortable and EASY TO USE!" Those say "we've ridded ourselves of the problems that used to plague us!"
And you thought 160 mil on a bridge was bad. How about the millions of dollars that would be spent on totally useless shuttle buses. That's millions of dollars that could be used to buy new buses for already existing routes to IMPROVE SERVICE! Complaining of long wait times and no night service? That's too bad because instead of less wait times and night service, Mr. Suburbanite wants to get picked up AT HIS DRIVEWAY!
And it doesn't stop there, this "idea" is going to a conference in Fredericton. Even the Maritimers will wonder how we on the prairies survive.
Hub and Spoke. Pfffft. Rename it Winnipeg Transit School Bus.
Progress!
..Yaaay! Red River College might be Winnipeg's downtown hero.
First of all I would like to say how happy I am about this announcement, as the Union Bank Tower is easily my favourite building in the city. I feared that it would meet the same fate as so many other iconic heritage buildings in this city (especially as of late) and become a parkade or something else equally as useless.
A lengthly conversation on this blog with an "anonymous" commenter a few posts ago got me to better realizing how valuable having post secondary education downtown is towards downtown revitilization.
An extra 100 apartments to the Exchange area? Bring it on! More students downtown at the Red River college and the Exchange, excellent. Even a new building...and you can damn well bet it won't have a bloody fucking parking lot like that regional health atrocity.
"We need to expand it anyway, so rather than do it on Notre Dame, we want to do this downtown, where it makes more sense for students and the industry."
So...what does the Red River College understand about downtown that CentreVenture and Heritage Winnipeg don't?
I'm not quite sure, but I do know that RRC and the U of W are doing more to "revitalize" downtown and bring more activity there than the aforementioned organizations are. Red River college is bringing students from a suburban campus to a downtown one. Everyone else does the opposite. Even Crystal Developers, when they almost seemed to be Winnipeg's downtown hero, turned tail and ran to the suburbs.
Red River College. Local heroes. Now I can finally say "now that's progressive," without the sarcasm.
First of all I would like to say how happy I am about this announcement, as the Union Bank Tower is easily my favourite building in the city. I feared that it would meet the same fate as so many other iconic heritage buildings in this city (especially as of late) and become a parkade or something else equally as useless.
A lengthly conversation on this blog with an "anonymous" commenter a few posts ago got me to better realizing how valuable having post secondary education downtown is towards downtown revitilization.
An extra 100 apartments to the Exchange area? Bring it on! More students downtown at the Red River college and the Exchange, excellent. Even a new building...and you can damn well bet it won't have a bloody fucking parking lot like that regional health atrocity.
"We need to expand it anyway, so rather than do it on Notre Dame, we want to do this downtown, where it makes more sense for students and the industry."
So...what does the Red River College understand about downtown that CentreVenture and Heritage Winnipeg don't?
I'm not quite sure, but I do know that RRC and the U of W are doing more to "revitalize" downtown and bring more activity there than the aforementioned organizations are. Red River college is bringing students from a suburban campus to a downtown one. Everyone else does the opposite. Even Crystal Developers, when they almost seemed to be Winnipeg's downtown hero, turned tail and ran to the suburbs.
Red River College. Local heroes. Now I can finally say "now that's progressive," without the sarcasm.
548
I did some math.
According to a new report (funny how these things always come out at such convenient times) the human rights museum will attract over 200 000 visitors a year, effectively putting it in the same league as this museum.
So here's the grade school math.
200 000 visitors by 365 days gives you 548 visitors to the museum per day. That's assuming they're open seven days a week all year.
That seems a little pie-in-the-sky for Winnipegers...doesn't it? That's a little less than one third of our population, will visit this museum every year. No wonder they wanted a parking lot.
According to a new report (funny how these things always come out at such convenient times) the human rights museum will attract over 200 000 visitors a year, effectively putting it in the same league as this museum.
So here's the grade school math.
200 000 visitors by 365 days gives you 548 visitors to the museum per day. That's assuming they're open seven days a week all year.
That seems a little pie-in-the-sky for Winnipegers...doesn't it? That's a little less than one third of our population, will visit this museum every year. No wonder they wanted a parking lot.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
If You Build It, They Will Come
That's the saying, right?
And with rising gas prices, some people think that if gas was at 1.50 a litre, they'd hop on the bus. But I don't think so. Not in Winnipeg, nobody here will be abandoning their cars anytime soon. Why should they....affinity to attract riders is the last thing on a very long list of what Winnipeg Transit doesn't do well.
But, noticeable only to people like me who read this stuff, somewhere there in the front section of the Saturday Free Press, was a piece about trading cars for alternate transit. (This is on A13, where there is an article on tailing ponds for the oil sands, something which I believe gets minimal coverage of the amount of impact the operations have.)
And I read this part...
Buses in Ottawa are already running at capacity and leaving passengers stranded at bus stops after ridership surged in February, when the transit service took on 5.8 per cent more passengers than at the same time the year before.
....and thought, "I guess there IS something to be said about an attractive transit service." As the saying goes, if you build it, they will come.
Ottawa is known for it's very effective transit system. Strait from their website, "Ottawa's award-winning Transitway forms the backbone of OC Transpo's current commuter system." Not only does it have a reputation but it's award winning! What kind of award, I don't know, but their bus tickets also cost 0.95 each.
**EDIT...I did not thoroughly read the OT fare page, bus tickets do cost .95, but you need two bus tickets for an adult fare (thus making it more expensive than Winnipeg Transit)**
And look at this, they even have a goal. On this page it shows two very effective pictures with the following statement:
For financial and environmental reasons the City of Ottawa cannot build its way out of congestion. For our transportation system to sustain future growth we must use road space and transit facilities more efficiently and we must become less car dependent.
And now I understand why other cities have so much better transit systems. They WORK on it. It's an ISSUE. With a kind of statement like this, I would expect that no issue would be too big for Ottawa Transit to handle.
Ottawa built it. Gas prices went up. Ridership went up.
Winnipeg didn't build it. Gas prices went up. Fares went up in a lame-ass attempt to increase ridership. Ridership did not go up.
Meanwhile, Winnipeg does the opposite...searching for ways to grow while building our way out of traffic congestion. Transit is some kind of afterthought. Fuck, our Transit people can't even wrap their heads around diamond lanes. At the end of the day, few if any politicians or anybody holding any sort of office are actually inclined to care. The only people who do care it seems, are those who ride the bus.
As far as I'm concerned the situation isn't out of reach in Winnipeg. It's just that this tug-of-war between ideas of rapid transit, transit corridors, diamond lanes, and whatever else one can dream up, has to end.
Put up a task force, a think-tank of sorts, some savvy traffic engineers, some transit people, maybe some students, city planners, man while you're at it throw in a couple architects, representatives from each area of the city. Put them in charge, tell them to come up with something. Get it over and done with, come up with a plan and put it into action.
And with rising gas prices, some people think that if gas was at 1.50 a litre, they'd hop on the bus. But I don't think so. Not in Winnipeg, nobody here will be abandoning their cars anytime soon. Why should they....affinity to attract riders is the last thing on a very long list of what Winnipeg Transit doesn't do well.
But, noticeable only to people like me who read this stuff, somewhere there in the front section of the Saturday Free Press, was a piece about trading cars for alternate transit. (This is on A13, where there is an article on tailing ponds for the oil sands, something which I believe gets minimal coverage of the amount of impact the operations have.)
And I read this part...
Buses in Ottawa are already running at capacity and leaving passengers stranded at bus stops after ridership surged in February, when the transit service took on 5.8 per cent more passengers than at the same time the year before.
....and thought, "I guess there IS something to be said about an attractive transit service." As the saying goes, if you build it, they will come.
Ottawa is known for it's very effective transit system. Strait from their website, "Ottawa's award-winning Transitway forms the backbone of OC Transpo's current commuter system." Not only does it have a reputation but it's award winning! What kind of award, I don't know, but their bus tickets also cost 0.95 each.
**EDIT...I did not thoroughly read the OT fare page, bus tickets do cost .95, but you need two bus tickets for an adult fare (thus making it more expensive than Winnipeg Transit)**
And look at this, they even have a goal. On this page it shows two very effective pictures with the following statement:
For financial and environmental reasons the City of Ottawa cannot build its way out of congestion. For our transportation system to sustain future growth we must use road space and transit facilities more efficiently and we must become less car dependent.
And now I understand why other cities have so much better transit systems. They WORK on it. It's an ISSUE. With a kind of statement like this, I would expect that no issue would be too big for Ottawa Transit to handle.
Ottawa built it. Gas prices went up. Ridership went up.
Winnipeg didn't build it. Gas prices went up. Fares went up in a lame-ass attempt to increase ridership. Ridership did not go up.
Meanwhile, Winnipeg does the opposite...searching for ways to grow while building our way out of traffic congestion. Transit is some kind of afterthought. Fuck, our Transit people can't even wrap their heads around diamond lanes. At the end of the day, few if any politicians or anybody holding any sort of office are actually inclined to care. The only people who do care it seems, are those who ride the bus.
As far as I'm concerned the situation isn't out of reach in Winnipeg. It's just that this tug-of-war between ideas of rapid transit, transit corridors, diamond lanes, and whatever else one can dream up, has to end.
Put up a task force, a think-tank of sorts, some savvy traffic engineers, some transit people, maybe some students, city planners, man while you're at it throw in a couple architects, representatives from each area of the city. Put them in charge, tell them to come up with something. Get it over and done with, come up with a plan and put it into action.
Friday, May 2, 2008
The Friends of [insert philanthropist project here]
Well well, what an interesting trend.
I thought that "Friends of the [whatever]" phrase meant that the "whatever" was in danger of something or other and there was a support group to get people behind it and save it.
But apparently that isn't the case....We've already seen the "Friends of Upper Fort Garry" episode pan out, campaigning to "save" something that was never in danger.
But now there is the (note who co-wrote this) Friends of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Wow. Was the museum ever in danger? Was the plug ever threatened to be pulled? Who's stopping the construction of this museum? It can't be the fish bones and ceramic shards...can it?
Oh, oh...wait, I know. It's in danger 'cause they don't have the money to get what they want and they think it should come from the taxpayer. (for related examples, see the "Friends of Upper Fort Garry)
Just hold on.
I'm waiting for the "FRIENDS OF THE ASPER BOMBER STADIUM."
I thought that "Friends of the [whatever]" phrase meant that the "whatever" was in danger of something or other and there was a support group to get people behind it and save it.
But apparently that isn't the case....We've already seen the "Friends of Upper Fort Garry" episode pan out, campaigning to "save" something that was never in danger.
But now there is the (note who co-wrote this) Friends of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Wow. Was the museum ever in danger? Was the plug ever threatened to be pulled? Who's stopping the construction of this museum? It can't be the fish bones and ceramic shards...can it?
Oh, oh...wait, I know. It's in danger 'cause they don't have the money to get what they want and they think it should come from the taxpayer. (for related examples, see the "Friends of Upper Fort Garry)
Just hold on.
I'm waiting for the "FRIENDS OF THE ASPER BOMBER STADIUM."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
