A series of articles ending on this page today examined the causes of the Metropolitan transit system's deepening crises. It also discussed one of the solutions — rail rapid transit — being applied by many U.S. and European cities which, in common with Metro Winnipeg, have found themselves faced with a traffic and public transit dilemma.
The articles reached three major conclusions: One: there is a growing awareness among city planners and traffic authorities of a need to shift the balance of emphasis from the movement of vehicles to the movement of people — that is, from facilities for cars to mass public transit. Second: too heavy reliance on expressways (the preferred traffic structure of the past 20 years) can aggravate a city's traffic problems instead of solving them. Three: the benefits already accruing to many American and European cities which have established rail rapid transit systems could be reaped by Greater Winnipeg.
This is not a new idea. The Norman D. Wilson commission, which reported to the city of Winnipeg in 1959, advocated such a system. Its recommendations were accepted in principle by the Greater Winnipeg Transit Commission. Unfortunately, that was all that happened.
Now the subject is to be reopened. The transportation planning branch of Metro's streets and transit division recently embarked on what will be a most searching study into all aspects of Metro's urban transportation. The object of the study is to develop a plan that will meet foreseeable transportation needs of the metropolitan area during the next 25 years. In view of Metro Winnipeg's essentially wheel-shaped layout, its pattern of lower density commercial and residential development radiating out from a central commercial hub, serious consideration of a rapid transit system is an obvious priority.
Public transit is the only hope of thinning the ever swelling stream of traffic funnelling from the radial arteries into the congested downtown area. Comfortable, efficient, rapid transit, as many other cities have discovered, is the only hope of persuading people not to bring their cars downtown. Evidence that Metro is aware of this is contained in its official announcement of the study released a few days ago. According to the announcement, every "applicable modern medium of transportation" will be investigated "so that a balanced transportation system can be developed to provide for the expeditious movement of goods and people . . ." A balanced system, according to Metro, might include several transportation media "such as expressways and rapid transit facilities."
* * *
Precisely what sort of plan will best serve Metro Winnipeg no one will be able to say with certainty until all the facts have been collected and analyzed. This job Metro hopes to complete in two or three years. The delay is unfortunate but it is absolutely necessary; transportation facilities such as rapid transit systems are too costly to rush into without adequate study of how they may accomplish the maximum good.
It is equally important that study no longer be used by politicians as an excuse for delay. Transit's critical situation today, plus the knowledge that, unless a way is found to move people without moving their cars as well, the expected growth in population will make Metro Winnipeg streets 15 years hence a traffic nightmare, makes the establishment of some form of rapid transit system imperative. Since the job must be done, it should be done as soon as possible.
Greater Winnipeg recently has seen some examples of how costly delay can be. For example, had expropriation for the St. James bridge complex been started when the project was first proposed in 1950, more than $400,000 cold have been saved on property acquisition costs alone. A further saving of almost $100,000 could have been made on construction costs.
Similarly, Metro taxpayers will be paying approximately 50 per cent more to construct the proposed Broadway extension (from Maryland to Portage) than the project would have cost had it been built in 1955 when cost estimates for the extension were first drawn up. Most significant about this increase is that it is wholly due to increased property values and higher construction costs. Unlike the St. James bridge area, absolutely no new construction has taken place on the land needed for the Maryland to Broadway arc. Twenty of the estimated 50 per cent increase occurred in the past three years.
There are many such examples. Although it is difficult to generalize, since costs of land acquisition and property values rise more quickly in one area than in another, the construction industry and public works engineers can arrive at "average range" estimates of how costs increase. According to this general formula, the costs of land acquisition and construction throughout the Metro area area rising between five and ten per cent each year. Thus, every additional year's delay on a project that sooner or later must be undertaken is an outright waste of money. Metro should keep this fact firmly in mind and complete the necessary studies with all possible speed. More than that, Metro council should begin now to marshal the necessary resources to begin with recommended subway construction as soon as the how and where of it have been established.