- AT-Network - University of Manitoba Mailing Lists

WFP: Free transit for youth: NDP (Mar24'26)
by Beth McKechnie 24 Mar '26

24 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Free transit for youth: NDP Plan to help students get to school, work in today’s budget https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/2026/03/23/provincial-budget… MANITOBA’S NDP government will make it more affordable for youths as young as 12 to get to school, jobs and activities with free transit passes. The details will be announced in today’s budget. “We have money set aside in the budget to work with municipalities to cover the cost of transit for high school-aged youth,” a spokesperson for the province said Monday. Winnipeg and four other municipalities in the province — Brandon, Selkirk, Flin Flon and Thompson — offer fixed-route public transit. “The rollout and delivery will look different depending on the city,” the spokesperson said. The plan is expected to cost $10 million. A single Winnipeg Transit youth fare — riders 16 and under and high school students 17-21 with a GoCARD and photo ID shown to the driver when boarding — is $2.95 and a monthly bus pass is $88.55. An adult fare is $3.45 and a monthly adult pass is $119.35. Children aged 11 and under are able to ride free when accompanied by a fare-paying customer. “I think it’s a great idea,” said Bram Strain, president and CEO of the Manitoba Business Council and co-chair of the Premier’s Business and Jobs Council’s green committee. “It creates a bus-riding culture for youth, which, hopefully, will continue on as they move into commuting to work. It should help increase the amount of riders, which obviously adds to security — a full bus is a secure bus.” Winnipeg Transit data shows ridership remains below 2019 pre-pandemic levels. Strain said he expects the province may announce more funding for transit security in Tuesday’s budget. “I think it will also help youth enter the workforce because it gives them an ability to get to and from their employment with a system that they know, trust and understand,” he said. In January, Manitoba’s youth (aged 15 to 24) unemployment rate was 14.1 per cent, a 2.5 per cent increase from December, the province’s labour force survey said. Strain said he will be watching for an uptick in ridership, workforce participation and school attendance. Fewer cars means less wear and tear on the roads and benefits the environment, he said. Winnipeg School Division superintendent Matt Henderson welcomed the news, which he hopes will make it easier for students to attend class. “One of the obstacles that we constantly hear ... is always around transportation. Transportation is a significant barrier and does contribute to kids missing school,” Henderson said. High schools in the city sometimes provide transit tokens for teens in need, but the economic burden of doing that for every student would be too much for the division to bear, Henderson said. The change will reduce the strain on families, particularly those with multiple children who rely on the transit service, he added. Henderson said he was not aware of the new transit funding before the Free Press contacted him for comment Monday. “If this is the case that the province has put some funds away for this, that would be very much welcome by the division, but also our families,” he said. Providing free transit for youth is timely, University of Winnipeg economics professor Philippe Cyrenne said. “Households are under lots of stress right now. Lots of people are struggling,” Cyrenne said. Families are dealing with rising food costs, Manitoba Hydro rates and education property taxes, he noted. The province has two ways of dealing with affordability challenges — by providing tax relief, usually at the lower end of the income spectrum, or by increasing services, he said. “What would the average person prefer — more money in their pocket, or more services? This government seems interested in providing services and spending,” he said. On Friday, Finance Minister Adrien Sala announced more funding for child care, and Justice Minister Matt Wiebe announced $14 million more for Manitoba Justice correctional services. The province has also pledged more money for cardiac care and affordability measures. Cyrenne said he sees an “intergenerational tension” right now that’s influencing policy. Older, more established Manitobans are on firmer financial ground than younger people struggling with high housing and living costs, trying to gain an economic foothold. “We have to start thinking, how can policy be directed toward helping young people getting started?” said Cyrenne, who considers himself an “older” Manitoban. Helping high school-aged youth with transit may fit the bill, he said. “My sense is probably high school students are still dependent on family.” It’s also a way of helping transit systems that have been underfunded, said Cyrenne. Spending on transit systems isn’t popular with taxpayers who don’t use it and don’t see it as a way to reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gases, he said. “With better transit you take traffic off the road, and it’s better social policy.” Covering transit fares for high school-aged kids comes at a time when Manitoba is projecting a $1.6 billion deficit — more than double what the 2025 budget expected. Premier Wab Kinew has signalled recently that Manitoba’s deficit will be less than $1.6 billion and that the province is on track to balance its books by the next election, due to take place by Oct. 5, 2027. “Presumably their revenues are pretty flat and expenses haven’t been cut. In terms of the projection of a lower deficit — either expenditures are lower or revenues are higher,” Cyrenne said. “Canada’s economy has not grown in any substantive sense. We’re close to — if not in — a recession.” carol.sanders(a)freepress.mb.ca<mailto:carol.sanders@freepress.mb.ca>

1 0

WFP: Up to Province for speed change (Mar18'26)
by Beth McKechnie 18 Mar '26

18 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. UP TO PROVINCE FOR SPEED CHANGE https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/2026/03/17/around-city-hall-… A PROPOSAL to reduce Winnipeg’s default driving speed to 40 kilometres per hour from 50 km/h will move forward to a council vote next year, provided the province gets on board. Council’s executive policy committee voted Tuesday in favour of asking the provincial government to change the Highway Traffic Act to give the city the power to change the default speed limit in the city. With that approval, city staff recommend council reduce the default speed limit to 40 km/h for residential streets and “minor collector” streets. The public service will be asked to report back in one year with an update on the request to the province. While the proposal moved forward, councillors were mixed on the possibility of reducing speeds on Winnipeg streets at Tuesday’s meeting. “I don’t believe the province will support this, but prove me wrong,” Coun. Evan Duncan (Charleswood-Tuxedo-Westwood) said.

1 0

WFP OpEd: Putting the cart before the planning horse (Mar18'26)
by Beth McKechnie 18 Mar '26

18 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Putting the cart before the planning horse RICHARD MILGROM, SARAH COOPER AND JOE CURNOW https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/18/putting-the-c… IT is rare to find a planning project in Winnipeg that generates as much passionate support as the proposal for infrastructure improvements for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers on Wellington Crescent. The consistent public participation over the course of the Wellington consultation makes it particularly disappointing to witness committees of city council undervalue public input and ignore the advice of planners in the public service. At the March 4 meeting of the public works committee, the chair, Coun. Janice Lukes, said, “Until you put the bulldozer out on the street, there is so much noise in the world that it is really hard for people to grasp what is going on.” In this, she is right; it is difficult for the city to generate interest and communicate the impacts of changes to the general public. This makes the decision of the committee to move ahead with unrealistic timelines to design and construct the permanent installations, while cancelling the pilot that would have increased awareness, all the more baffling. Lukes introduced the call for “enhanced” awareness as part of the consultation process, but her suggestion that the city post more signs, for example, falls short on any proven enhancement — most people don’t read signs about planning proposals. On the other hand, the pilot project would directly engage road users, and much like Lukes’s bulldozers, make people very aware that something is happening. It would be, by design, an “enhanced” awareness tool. Nevertheless, the committee is unwilling to recommend its implementation. The original report from the public service in the spring of 2025 recommended the installation of the relatively inexpensive temporary project from Academy to Stradbrook. It would address immediate safety concerns and, importantly, allow the city to gather more detailed input about the street’s design from the local community and commuters who use the corridor. Had this recommendation been followed, the city would now be ready to evaluate the performance of the pilot project, and make plans for more permanent changes to the street. But in July 2025, the public works committee, against the advice from planners, instead directed the public service to engage in a consultation process before installing the pilot project. Some argued that the city wouldn’t want to get it wrong and have to rip it out later. The point of a pilot project, though, is that it will be removed or changed — after lessons have been learned from its successes and shortcomings. The relative low cost of a pilot project greatly increases the chance of success for the much more expensive permanent installation — which we truly wouldn’t want to rip out. This atypical pre-pilot consultation process has delayed the possibility of any intervention on Wellington by at least nine months. However, the consultation did gather significant feedback and lead to minor alterations to the design, which the public service brought to this month’s public works meeting. The engagement team gathered feedback based on an online simulation of the proposed installation. The response numbers were strong — there were more than 8,500 visits to the website and almost 2,700 people took the time to respond to the survey. More than 50 per cent of the responses came from people who lived on or near Wellington Crescent. After processing the feedback, active transportation planners have recommended, again, installation of the pilot project. However, members of the public works committee argue there was not enough response to the pilot project survey. For comparison, the immediately adjacent River/Stradbrook bike lanes were installed after 312 survey responses, 29 attendees at an open house, and stakeholder meetings with just four responding property owners out of 104 invited. For the Wellington pilot project, though, nearly nine times that response rate is still deemed insufficient. As city planning and community development researchers, we regularly see what a lay person might interpret as low levels of participation, but in fact the Wellington engagement has been well above the norm of what we would expect, certainly enough to provide valuable input to the public service. We would also expect more and better-informed engagement in response to a pilot project. Simply gathering feedback again, immediately following a consultation where public input was ignored, is unlikely to result in higher levels of engagement. Part of the reason why public engagement often struggles with low participation is that people have lost faith that governments will meaningfully consider their feedback. From a city planning perspective, there is a good tool to enhance awareness — a pilot project. If city council wants to pursue a strategy for Wellington that can engage in robust discussion about what the community wants, the best way to do that is by reinstating the pilot which has taken feedback into account, and not rushing a new round of consultation that they have already undermined. Richard Milgrom and Sarah Cooper are associate professors in the department of city planning at the University of Manitoba. Joe Curnow is an associate professor in the faculty of education at the University of Manitoba.

1 0

The Wolseley Leaf: Why we aren’t getting there… on buses, bikes, or sidewalks
by Beth McKechnie 17 Mar '26

17 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Nice article in The Leaf featuring highlights from the Todd Litman presentation held at The Forks on Feb 25th. https://theleafnews.ca/2026/multimodal-transportation-explained/

1 0

WFP OpEd: Speed limits and safety: follow the science (Mar17'26)
by Beth McKechnie 17 Mar '26

17 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Speed limits and safety: follow the science BRENT BELLAMY https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/16/speed-limits-… THE premier of Manitoba recently appeared hesitant about collaborating with Winnipeg City Council on a public works proposal to lower the city’s default residential speed limit from 50 km/h to 40 km/h. Without a provincial amendment to the Highway Traffic Act, the city says implementing the change would require installing signs on hundreds of streets, at a cost of up to $10 million to taxpayers. The province’s apparent reluctance to explore solutions may reflect a desire to avoid a controversial issue. The city’s approach, however, aligns with emerging best practices across Canada, as cities nationwide work to improve road safety and neighbourhood livability. In recent years, Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa have reduced residential speed limits to 40 km/h, while Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Victoria have gone even further, lowering them to 30 km/h. As a large, densely populated city, Winnipeg faces unique vehicle safety challenges compared with the rest of Manitoba. Approximately three-quarters of all injury related vehicle collisions in the province occur within Winnipeg, along with nearly 90 per cent of cyclist collisions and around 80 per cent of pedestrian collisions. As a government responsible for representing the needs of Winnipeggers, it’s reasonable to expect the province’s help in addressing these challenges and supporting the implementation of solutions. The city’s recommendation to lower residential speed limits followed the 2023 Reduced-Speed Neighbourhood Pilot, which tested the safety and livability impacts of lower speed limits in selected communities. The study found that drivers already travel well below the 50 km/h limit, averaging about 36 km/h on residential streets. Reducing the posted limit lowered average speeds slightly (other Canadian cities have experienced an average decrease of 3 to 5 km/h) and made drivers significantly more aware of their speed as they approached the maximum, where most collisions occur. The study concluded that lowering residential speed limits could reduce fatal collisions by up to 20 per cent and crashes causing serious injuries by as much as 12 per cent. The study indicated that lower posted limits are most effective when they are part of a broader strategy to improve road safety, one that includes enforcement and, most importantly, physical changes to street design that intuitively slow vehicle speeds and create clearer separation between different types of road users. This largely aligns with the experience of cities across the country. Edmonton lowered residential speed limits to 40 km/h in 2021 as part of Vision Zero, a strategy that aims to eliminate all traffic deaths and serious injuries by designing transportation systems that anticipate human mistakes and reduces their consequences. Since implementation, the number of pedestrian collisions has declined by about 25 per cent, with injuries and fatalities falling by 30 per cent. When Montreal and Toronto moved from 40 to 30 km/h, they realized a further drop in both metrics by a similar amount. These findings show that even a modest reduction in average speeds on local streets can significantly decrease pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Crash severity is largely determined by vehicle mass and speed, which together dictate the energy released in a collision. A vehicle striking a pedestrian at 40 km/h carries about 35 per cent less impact energy than one at 50 km/h, while at 30 km/h the energy is reduced by 65 per cent. These reductions translate into dramatic improvements in survival rates, with the chance of a pedestrian surviving a collision rising from about 10 per cent at 50 km/h to 60 per cent at 40 km/h and 90 per cent at 30 km/h. The amount of energy in a collision is compounded by the increasing size and weight of the vehicles people are choosing to drive. In Manitoba, the trend to larger trucks and SUV’s has coincided with a 50 per cent increase in collisions resulting in injury over the past decade. Slower speeds also make roads safer by reducing vehicle stopping distances, from an average of 28 metres at 50 km/h to 20 metres at 40 km/h and 13 metres at 30 km/h. This improves the ability of drivers to avoid collisions altogether. The push for slower traffic on residential streets aims not only to improve safety but also to enhance neighbourhood livability. When vehicles travel at lower speeds, residents often report that streets feel quieter and more comfortable, creating spaces where people are more willing to walk, bike or socialize. This strengthens community connections, encourages social interaction and supports local businesses. Such changes are especially meaningful for children, older adults and people with limited mobility, who are far more likely to walk or bike when streets feel safe and inviting. When many people hear proposals to reduce residential speed limits, they imagine crawling around the city at a snail’s pace. However, after experiencing Winnipeg’s pilot project, 60 per cent of surveyed residents supported the lower limits, with 20 per cent even calling for a reduction to 30 km/h. Research in other cities shows a similar pattern. Before implementation, residents tend to greatly overestimate how much time they spend driving on residential streets, and after the changes are made, they typically find the impact on their overall trip time is minimal. It seems illogical that Grant Avenue has the same speed limit as a cul-de-sac where neighbourhood kids play street hockey, or that Route 90 has the same allowable speed as the street at the end of your driveway. Residential streets are where children ride bikes, neighbours walk dogs and communities gather. Lowering speed limits would align Winnipeg with other Canadian cities that recognize this reality. The benefits are clear. What remains is the willingness of the province and city to work together to make Winnipeg’s neighbourhood streets safer and more livable for everyone who uses them. Brent Bellamy is creative director at Number Ten Architectural Group.

1 0

WFP OpEd: Safe speeds, big savings: slow pays off (Mar17'26)
by Beth McKechnie 17 Mar '26

17 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Safe speeds, big savings: slow pays off IAN WALKER https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/17/safe-speeds-b… IN 2019, a group of concerned Winnipeggers came together to form Safe Speeds Winnipeg, a grassroots effort dedicated to making our streets safer by lowering the default speed limit in Winnipeg to 30 km/h. One of our founding members, Dave Elmore, has written recently about how safer speeds make it easier and far more inviting for people, especially children, to move through their neighbourhoods with confidence. As a parent, teacher and community leader, I wholeheartedly agree that getting more kids walking and biking to school is one of the simplest, most meaningful ways we can support their mental and physical well-being. And it isn’t just children who benefit; pedestrian fatality rates rise sharply with age, and seniors 70 and older are the most at risk, underscoring how vital safer speeds are for all members of our community. Last week, the City of Winnipeg released its long-awaited report on lowering speeds in our communities. It recommends establishing a default 40 km/h speed limit wherever no other speed limit is posted. While 40 km/h is still not truly a safe speed for residential streets, it represents an important step in the right direction. Lowering speed limits isn’t just about safety; it is also a significant cost saver for Manitoba’s health-care system. Speed is a major contributor to fatal and serious collisions, each of which places enormous strain on our publicly funded system. Over the past decade, collisions have resulted in thousands of pedestrian injuries and well over a hundred deaths in our province. At the Children’s Hospital, dozens of young pedestrians and cyclists are admitted each year with moderate to severe injuries, all requiring medical attention that our public system must absorb. Preventing even one serious injury or death saves the health-care system hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. In a publicly funded model like ours, preventing trauma is one of the most effective forms of cost control. Simply put, slowing down saves lives and saves Manitoba millions. For the City of Winnipeg, reduced speed limits lead to substantial municipal savings, both direct and indirect. Fewer and less severe crashes mean fewer calls for emergency response, fewer investigations and less demand on city resources that must be deployed every time an incident occurs. Lower speeds also reduce emissions and noise, ease wear on infrastructure and improve neighbourhood livability. Small reductions in vehicle speed can add up across a large city such as Winnipeg, extending the lifespan of roads and reducing maintenance requirements. Lower speeds reduce the force of pothole impacts, helping roads last longer and lowering the city’s maintenance costs. Safer, calmer streets encourage more walking and cycling, which lowers vehicle dependence, supports better health and eases pressure to maintain existing roads and build expensive new ones. In short, lower speeds help make Winnipeg safer, quieter, cleaner and more cost-efficient. Lower speed limits also help individual Winnipeggers save money at a time when transportation costs are rising sharply. Global conflict and supply chain instability have driven up the cost of fuel, leaving many families struggling with unpredictable and often rising energy prices. Slowing down even slightly improves fuel efficiency, meaning drivers spend less each month on gas. Lower speeds also reduce wear and tear on vehicles by easing strain on engines, brakes and suspension systems — an important benefit when the cost of purchasing a vehicle has surged due to global shortages and manufacturing delays. On top of these savings, calmer streets make it easier for people to choose more affordable transportation options. Walking, cycling and transit become more appealing when streets feel safe, and shifting even a portion of household trips away from driving can significantly reduce overall transportation expenses. At a time when the cost of living is climbing, giving people safer alternatives to driving is one of the simplest and most effective ways people can keep more money in their pockets. As this report winds its way through city hall and eventually to our provincial government, we hope decision-makers consider not just the safety benefits, but also the economic ones. Lower speed limits protect our most vulnerable road users, but also reduce pressure on our health-care system, cut municipal spending and save families money. As life gets more expensive for everyone, making our streets safer is a cost-effective and commonsense way to support both public wellbeing and the financial health of our province. Sometimes the simplest solutions really do make the biggest difference, and slowing down is one of them. Ian Walker is a parent, a Grade 1 and 2 teacher and a trustee representing Ward 1 of the Louis Riel School Division.

1 0

WFP: Choose safety over convenience (Mar13'26)
by Beth McKechnie 13 Mar '26

13 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Choose safety over convenience DAVE ELMORE https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/13/choose-safety… WHY not choose safety first? At the recent City of Winnipeg public works committee meeting, the decision was made to request the Province of Manitoba to amend the Highway Traffic Act to permit the City of Winnipeg to change the default speed limit in our city from 50 km/h and 40 km/h. It needs to be made clear this would only apply to residential streets and some feeder routes, not the main thoroughfares. While this is being regarded as a win by some for safer streets, it needs as well to be made clear that it is only a half measure, and to some degree, a compromise on safety. Assuming that the province agrees to allow the default speed limit to be changed — which the premier has already balked at — a default speed limit of 40 km/h is not the truly “safe speed.” Study after study and report after report clearly show that 30 km/h is a significantly safer speed. It is why we adopt it in school zones. If 30 km/h is the safe speed in school zones, why would it not also be the safe speed on residential streets where we hope to make them calmer, safer and more livable? Study after study and report after report clearly show that 30 km/h is a significantly safer speed. It is why we adopt it in school zones There are certainly variations in the multiple studies, however most agree that there is at least a 20 per cent increase in death or serious injury between 30 and 40 km/h. The difference between one versus four deaths/serious injuries should be enough for the city to rethink their recommendation of a default 40 km/h limit. The fact is that one death is too many. The City of Winnipeg has a goal to reach 50 per cent of trips taken by transit, bike, foot, carpool and ride-share by 2050. To do this, we need to provide Winnipeggers with safer streets to walk and bike. This especially holds true for giving school age children the freedom and independence of being able to walk or bike to school. The report indicates that the 40 km/h half measure recommendation is both more acceptable to Winnipeggers and will promote better compliance. The Neighbourhood Pilot Executive Summary contradicts this indicating “speeds dropped significantly in most areas, especially in neighbourhoods with a 30 km/h limit. Richmond West did not see much change, even after the speed limit was reduced to 40.” A reduction to 40 km/h does not represent a significant change, and clearly it will result in at best, marginal compliance, which in turn means unsafe speeds on our streets. The executive summary also indicates that “when asked if they would accept longer travel times due to the speed limit changes, most people were unwilling to deal with even a 60-second increase in travel time” and “most people in the survey said Winnipeg should keep the speed limit for residential streets at 50 km/h.” While it is no surprise that people don’t like change, it’s equally clear that most people do not understand or accept that the delay to their travel time would be measured in mere seconds. This represents a failure on the part of the city to truly educate people on the actual impacts and even more importantly, the safety and neighbourhood benefits of slower speeds. We elect our mayor and councillors to make decisions that are in the best interests of all Winnipeggers, not to simply try to find middle ground between drivers and vulnerable road users. Assuming the province agrees, it will take quite some time and effort to get approval of a revised default speed limit. Why would we not use that time to promote the benefits and make that request for the truly safe speed of 30 km/h? Dave Elmore is with Safe Speeds Winnipeg.

1 0

WFP OpEd: The city and ‘extremists’ (Mar12'26)
by Beth McKechnie 12 Mar '26

12 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. The city and ‘extremists’ ADAM CARROLL https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/12/the-city-and-… IN Winnipeg, asking for safer streets can get you a label. Some councillors have begun describing residents who support lower speeds or protected bike routes as “extremists” or members of a “radical bike lobby.” It is a strange way to talk about people who simply want to get home safely. The rhetoric suggests an adversarial relationship between city hall and the public it serves. Instead of treating residents as partners in solving a public safety problem, some elected officials frame them as political opponents. That attitude was on display at the March 4 public works committee meeting, where 56 Winnipeggers registered in advance, followed the rules, took time off work and waited hours for their five minutes at the microphone. They were there to ask the city to honour its Vision Zero commitment. The principle is simple: no loss of life on our roads is acceptable. For their trouble, they were told they were the problem. The hypocrisy was hard to miss. While the public was framed as a “lobby” trying to pressure council, Couns. Russ Wyatt and Jeff Browaty, neither of whom had registered to delegate, were ushered to the front of the line ahead of citizens who had followed the proper process. The councillors most vocal about outside groups trying to bully the city couldn’t be bothered to follow the same rules they were demanding of the public. This pattern runs deeper than one meeting. Rather than treating road safety as a citywide responsibility, councillors frequently reduce it to a competition between wards, arguing about which neighbourhood gets improvements first rather than whether those improvements happen at all. Contempt will not save lives. Leadership will. Delegate Robyn Dyck spoke directly to this: “We don’t want this to be a competition between neighbourhoods. We want to finish networks so that this can save lives in your neighbourhood.” A member of the public had to explain to elected officials how safety infrastructure works. That mindset was put into plain words when Coun. Jeff Browaty warned that if Winnipeg were granted the authority to lower default speed limits, “we will fold to the radical bike lobby and lower speed limits. Let’s be clear, this change would not make our city safer.” To call a proven safety measure a political surrender is to admit that winning the argument matters more than keeping people alive. It is also simply false. A pedestrian struck at 50 km/h faces roughly an 85 per cent chance of death or serious injury. At 30 km/h, that risk drops below 10 per cent. Hoboken, New Jersey adopted Vision Zero policies, including lower speed limits and redesigned streets, and has not recorded a single traffic death in over seven years. The evidence is not a lobby. It is physics. Browaty also acknowledged that many of Winnipeg’s roads are designed in ways that encourage speeds above the posted limit. If the city builds infrastructure that kills people, it is the city’s responsibility to fix it, not the public’s responsibility to take on the risk. Most drivers want the same thing everyone else does: to get where they are going safely. Designing streets that reduce speeds protects drivers as much as it protects pedestrians and cyclists. It removes the design traps that lead to human error and tragedy. Rob Jenner was killed on June 6, 2024, while biking to work on Wellington Crescent by a speeding driver. His death has become a rallying point for safety advocates, and Coun. Wyatt’s response was to accuse them of using a “coffin as a political battering ram.” The response from some councillors and their supporters has been to point out that a bike lane might not have saved Jenner in that specific instance, as though the only valid reason to build safer streets is to have prevented one particular death. That is not the argument. People raising Jenner’s story are not asking for a single infrastructure fix. They are asking the city to confront a pattern of neglect that makes tragedies like his inevitable, and to ensure his death becomes the catalyst for long-overdue change. If Winnipeg truly wants to reach Vision Zero, the culture at city hall must change. Contempt will not save lives. Leadership will. Adam Carroll is a resident of St. James.

1 0

WFP: More bus shelters to get panel upgrades (Mar11'26)
by Beth McKechnie 11 Mar '26

11 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. Moving to shatter-proof material after pilot project More bus shelters to get panel upgrades https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/2026/03/10/city-replacing-mo… THE city is installing more shatter- proof bus shelters after a pilot project proved to be a smashing success. By the end of 2026, more than 70 shelters will have their glass panels replaced with polycarbonate panels. The city is receiving a large shipment of the material in April to equip 47 regular-sized shelters and three large shelters by the end of the year. “This went better than we could have ever imagined,” said Coun. Janice Lukes, chair of the public works committee. In the fall, the city installed the polycarbonate material, which is 250 times more impact-resistant than safety glass, at 22 transit shelters in locations chosen based on high rates of vandalism. Of that number, the polycarbonate panels were left intact in 14 shelters, panels were popped out of place in six locations and one had its panels replaced after a motor vehicle collision. The panels survived the vehicle’s impact but they were stolen before crews arrived. The 22nd pilot shelter is owned by Astral Media Outdoor and has not sustained any damage, Winnipeg Transit spokesperson Brandon Logan said. The material cost for polycarbonate per shelter is about $4,000 — about 15 per cent more than glass — but Lukes (Waverley West) said the initial cost is worth it when factoring in the cost of labour and replacement glass for damaged shelters. Because of the success of the pilot, the city also installed double-layered panels on all 24 of its display signs along the rapid transit system, and the city is in the process of replacing the screens. “So now they won’t be broken and they’ll actually work,” Lukes said. The city’s long-term goal is to continue replacing the glass shelters with polycarbonate panels, Lukes said. The city installed the polycarbonate panels at “high-use” bus stops but keeps their exact locations under wraps to prevent anyone from purposely testing their strength. Polycarbonate is used by several other Canadian transit systems. The city opted to test polycarbonate for its bus shelters, in part, due to the increasing frequency of replacing glass panels due to vandalism. The city spent $23,873.84 in 2025 to replace glass in bus shelters in 2025, way down from the $147,593.90 spent in 2024. Logan attributed the decrease in cost to Winnipeg Transit removing about 150 shelters from stops as part of the city’s transit network overhaul. Glass from those shelters were put back into inventory for use in repairs. Of the shelters removed as part of the transit overhaul, 54 were deemed to be at the end of their useful lives and 37 were relocated to existing stops that previously did not have shelters. Fourteen of the shelters removed during will be moved to new stop locations, Logan said. Vandalism at bus shelters has grown in recent years, city data shows. Between Jan. 1 and Dec. 28, 2025 the city repaired 349 glass shelters — the second-highest number over the past five years. City data shows 267 bus shelters were impacted by broken glass in 2021, followed by 361 in 2022, 305 in 2023 and 237 in 2024. As of Tuesday, 19 shelters across Winnipeg are still missing glass panels. Winnipeg Transit is also exploring the option of replacing its driver shields to partial or full enclosures made of the polycarbonate material, said Lukes, who is also a member of the city’s transit advisory committee. James Van Gerwen, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1505, was not available for comment Tuesday. The city has about 735 shelters across Winnipeg. Of those, 534 are owned and maintained by Winnipeg Transit and 60 are owned by Winnipeg Transit but maintained by other organizations. Astral, the city’s advertising contractor, has approximately 141 shelters across the city that it maintains. Once the contract expires, ownership of the shelters is transferred to the city, Logan said. nicole.buffie(a)freepress.mb.ca<mailto:nicole.buffie@freepress.mb.ca>

1 0

WFP OpEd: Safety on Wellington delayed again (Mar9'26)
by Beth McKechnie 09 Mar '26

09 Mar '26

Caution! This message was sent from outside the University of Manitoba. LILA ASHER, MARTY DONKERVOORT AND COLIN BONNYCASTLE Safety on Wellington delayed again https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/03/09/safety-on-wel… THE City of Winnipeg Public Works Committee voted on March 4 to delay infrastructure improvements on Wellington Crescent again. The recommendation to initiate the pilot was on the agenda, with a design and consultation report prepared by the public service. Nine hours into the meeting, after hearing 50 delegations supporting the implementation of the pilot project in 2026, Councillor Janice Lukes introduced an amendment to the motion that deleted all elements of the pilot. She instead proposed that consultation and design work begin for permanent infrastructure, with funds that would be moved to 2027 from 2029, which was when Wellington would be up for permanent upgrades. Although the amendment initially did not pass, Councillor Ross Eadie introduced a motion that was substantively the same, which passed with three of the four councillors’ support. A press release issued by Councillor Lukes shortly before the meeting made reference to having “permanent bike lanes sooner,” implying that her plan would be better than the plan developed by the city staff. To anyone listening to the discussion in the meeting, it is abundantly clear that it is not, and here’s why. First, as public service staff explained, installing the interim safety infrastructure is a vital part of gathering data and feedback to inform a permanent design. The purpose of pilot projects is to test what works and gather feedback in small, inexpensive ways, to optimize permanent plans for everyone. The amended plan does not provide the opportunity to collect this vital information. Second, it seems unlikely that the amended plan is feasible. The public service was not given a chance to comment on whether traffic studies and consultation could be completed for 2027 installation. The possibility of borrowing $5.47 million from the general capital fund, to be repaid in 2029, to fund the permanent project ahead of schedule is also not confirmed. Two councillors have already accused the permanent solution of “jumping the queue” ahead of other much-needed projects, raising doubts as to whether the amended plan will pass at council. The third and most important reason why the amended motion is not better is that we desperately need safety improvements on Wellington Crescent now. We needed them in 2024 before Rob Jenner was killed by a driver while cycling on Wellington. We needed them last summer when they were originally promised. Neighbours are already aware of at least one serious injury collision in the past year. We need them every day, when we experience close calls with cars as we walk, drive, and cycle around our neighbourhood. Wellington Crescent is not safe. The wide lanes encourage drivers to exceed the 50 km/h speed limit without even meaning to. The slip lanes and confusing left turn options create many areas where pedestrians must look in multiple directions for vehicles, and drivers may not think to look for pedestrians at all. The lack of bike lanes forces cyclists to risk their lives riding in the street next to cars or to annoy pedestrians by riding on the sidewalk. This is a recognized gap in the city’s cycling network that is already marked for permanent improvement, but we need interim measures now before anyone else is injured or killed in a collision. We do not understand why the interim safety measures that are already funded in current year budgets, already designed, and already recommended by the public service based on consultation, cannot be implemented this spring. There is still time for city council to reverse course on the decision made on March 4 and revive the plans for the interim safety measures and pilot project. This issue will come before the Executive Policy Committee on March 17, and to full council on March 26. Wellington neighbourhood residents will be watching and hoping, not for any special treatment, but for the common sense and cost-effective interim measures that could save our lives. Lila Asher, Marty Donkervoort and Colin Bonnycastle write from Winnipeg.

1 0