The Week That Was In Transit

Did any of you happen to notice that the week of September 14^th marked an interesting confluence of events in Winnipeg? First up was the mayoral debate on public transit. Second was an announcement that the city would be undertaking a survey to determine whether their citizens’ “transportation needs” are being met.

The debate on our public bus system, from which our current Mayor Scott Gillingham was tellingly absent, focused primarily on safety rather than the efficiency of the system.

Which, on one level, is no great surprise.

After all unlawful incidents on buses and at transit stops have increased by 280% compared to levels recorded around 2016. Moreover, the candidates were primarily speaking to the bus drivers’ union that organized the event, and it’s bus drivers who are often the victims of violent episodes.

That said it’s a bit of a puzzle as to why more time wasn’t spent on a detailed discussion of how the new transit system might be improved, not just to retain regular riders but to attract hundreds, possibly thousands of new ones.

I mean, given the current state of our carbon-addicted culture, getting drivers out of their cars and on to an efficient, and yes, safe public transit system should be the goal, right?

So colour me frustrated when I then discover that city council, in its wisdom is now doing a survey to improve the world for people who drive cars. Or at least that’s how it sounds after reading the statements of councillors like Janice Lukes and Jeff Browaty in a recent Free Press article.

Their interest appears to be focused on things like congested intersections and whether or not the Chief Peguis extension should take precedence over the replacement of the Arlington Bridge.

This, when the chief aim of the survey should be to see whether or not the city’s commitment to a mode shift – that is, getting people out of their carbon-belching cars and onto buses, bikes and their feet has been, in any way, successful. Information that’s critical to make evidence-based choices on how to reach the goals laid out in the city’s Transit Master Plan and Pedestrian and Cycling Strategy.

Because, after all, reducing traffic emissions should be the order of the day, right?

Well, maybe not, given that the survey will quiz Winnipeggers on how many cars they have, what routes they drive and what complaints they have about rush hour traffic jams caused by thousands of cars that are mostly empty save for the person in the drivers’ seat.

Jeff Browaty of “Joe Lunchbox” fame made a major misstep in dismissing delegates who take time off work to speak to council about important issues like public transit and climate change as “not relevant.”

A survey that will also tally up the bitter complaints of bus riders, and the concerns of cyclists, who, in some areas, contend with a haphazard network of bike paths squeezed onto the furthest edges of 3 to 5 lane roads designed for automobiles going 50 to 60K an hour.

Bike paths which, in my neck of the woods, sometimes abruptly end only to reappear half a block down, because, heaven forbid, the city actually take up more road space for bikes and pedestrians and a little less for traffic.

Better to cut down trees and cut into boulevards than piss off a car and its driver.

I can almost see one particular male councillor waving the survey results, shouting, “Look! Here’s the evidence! Winnipeg is a car city. Public transit sucks and bike lanes are a pain in the butt, so let’s spend more money on high-speed roads!”

Okay, okay, so maybe I am over-stating the case. Maybe I’m unduly cynical about the motivations of a mayor and council who, despite the evidence and significant public opposition, ram through projects like the widening of Kenaston and Chief Peguis extension.

Members of the Manitoba Climate Action Team are lobbying the province for the restoration of its 50/50 capital cost-sharing deal with the city.

A council that also rolled out a new, more flexible bus system too quickly, without a sufficient number of buses and drivers to ensure efficiency or the designated bus lanes needed to guarantee a speedy ride.

A council that has failed to convince the province to restore its 50-50 cost share deal that would help to put more buses on the road, then denigrates a citizens’ coalition that is actually trying to help them improve the system by doing some evidence based research.

Yup, that’s right, there is a Transportation and Land Use Coalition (TLUC) right here in river city, that has teams of people riding public transit to assess what works, what doesn’t and how it can be improved.

So, will council engage with that coalition – or even better, consider collaborating with them - to accrue the evidence needed to improve public transit and active transportation? Will they spend the money needed to improve the speed and efficiency of public transit?

I don’t know. If I were you, I’d ask them.

Erna Buffie is writer. Check out the TLUC @  https://www.anatomyofapothole.ca/