SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Manitoba & Saskatchewan (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=129)
-   -   Portage and Main re-opening 2016 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=221028)

alittle1 Feb 12, 2016 6:04 PM

Portage and Main re-opening 2016
 
Well Gentlemen and Ladies, voice your concerns on whether or not this intersection should be re-opened to pedestrian traffic. There were good and valid reasons why it was closed years ago, perhaps things have changed in the passed 40 years....! I recall seeing a picture of a single COP standing in the center of the intersection directing traffic. I can remember there being, two COP's trying to control traffic back in the 50's, as well as a least two Transit officials putting trolley arms back on the overhead wires, to keep traffic moving during the Rush Hour. Perhaps the younger generation should experience this folly for themselves and then, maybe we will finally silence the subject, once and for all.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS GENTLEMEN AND LADIES.......

emeraldeyes Feb 12, 2016 6:16 PM

Not a gentleman
 
Do the ladies need our own thread for this discussion? I hope not as it will likely be quite dull with only ~3 of us...


Open the intersection. Try it, live a little. It can be closed again if it proves to be the unmanageable mess some have predicted.
As others have posted in the other thread, we are already dealing with the worst possible scenario.

Things have changed, we have traffic lights these days to control who gets their turn when.

alittle1 Feb 12, 2016 6:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emeraldeyes (Post 7333725)
Do the ladies need our own thread for this discussion? I hope not as it will likely be quite dull with only ~3 of us...


Open the intersection. Try it, live a little. It can be closed again if it proves to be the unmanageable mess some have predicted.
As others have posted in the other thread, we are already dealing with the worst possible scenario.

Things have changed, we have traffic lights these days to control who gets their turn when.

....my apologies, madame.

Festivus Feb 12, 2016 7:02 PM

Considering it's such a busy intersection, has the city considered building a 2nd-level pedestrian exchange on top? Or isn't there already an underground walkway?

cslusarc Feb 12, 2016 7:02 PM

IMHO, there isn't enough capacity as at ground level for both of today's vehicular and pedestrian traffic. I believe that if pedestrian traffic is returned to ground level, some vehicular traffic must be rerouted from ground level and either placed above ground level on a viaduct or below ground level in a tunnel.

esquire Feb 12, 2016 7:17 PM

^ It's not that busy.

rkspec Feb 12, 2016 8:10 PM

sort of off topic, but wasn't there talk of an above ground pedestrian bridge to go from the parking lot beside the goldeyes stadium, over the tracks/bridge and end at portage and main?

bomberjet Feb 12, 2016 8:13 PM

I think there's enough openings under the CN tracks for people to get through quite easily. I think as part of the forks development proposals, there was some kind of walkway along the CN tracks. Can't remember what they called it or if it went over top.

rkspec Feb 12, 2016 8:17 PM

over the bridge was always pictured in my head but then i always thought, man thats godda be caged off cause it'll be so high in the air.

prob a grand vision that never made it anywhere

esquire Feb 12, 2016 8:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkspec (Post 7333923)
sort of off topic, but wasn't there talk of an above ground pedestrian bridge to go from the parking lot beside the goldeyes stadium, over the tracks/bridge and end at portage and main?

I don't remember that at all... that would look really weird, this really tall (it would have to be to get over the elevated railway line) and skinny bridge from the ballpark to Portage and Main... I can't imagine that it would be very well used. I don't notice any significant numbers of people headed to P&M after Goldeyes games...

steveosnyder Feb 12, 2016 8:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire (Post 7333945)
I don't remember that at all... that would look really weird, this really tall (it would have to be to get over the elevated railway line) and skinny bridge from the ballpark to Portage and Main... I can't imagine that it would be very well used. I don't notice any significant numbers of people headed to P&M after Goldeyes games...

Since it would need to be accessible it would require either an elevator (expensive) or a ramp with a maximum slope of 1:12, according to the City (huge). I don't think this is possible.

esquire Feb 12, 2016 8:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveosnyder (Post 7333950)
Since it would need to be accessible it would require either an elevator (expensive) or a ramp with a maximum slope of 1:12, according to the City (huge). I don't think this is possible.

Possible? Yes.

Pointless? 100%.

emeraldeyes Feb 12, 2016 8:22 PM

Thank you alittle1. 😉

cheswick Feb 12, 2016 8:37 PM

Wouldn't it pretty easy to change the light cycle to what it would be if pedestrians were crossing and see what effects it would have?

esquire Feb 12, 2016 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheswick (Post 7333978)
Wouldn't it pretty easy to change the light cycle to what it would be if pedestrians were crossing and see what effects it would have?

http://1.media.dorkly.cvcdn.com/50/2...3b0f37ab1b.gif

rkspec Feb 12, 2016 9:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire (Post 7333945)
I don't remember that at all... that would look really weird, this really tall (it would have to be to get over the elevated railway line) and skinny bridge from the ballpark to Portage and Main... I can't imagine that it would be very well used. I don't notice any significant numbers of people headed to P&M after Goldeyes games...

yea its really bugging me where i read this?? i tried searching the forums and its like i must have day dreamed this. could have swear it was around the parcel 4 discussion and it was an effort to bring people to P&M.


aaannyyhoww.....:runaway:

esquire Feb 12, 2016 9:25 PM

^ Usually those kinds of hare-brained off the wall schemes tend to come from city council members, without any official weight behind them, so I'd bet it was some off the cuff remark by a councillor quoted in the paper once and never to be spoken of again. Kind of like Susan Thompson's laser pyramids.

http://storage.winnipegsun.com/v1/dy...y=80&size=420x

Festivus Feb 12, 2016 9:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire (Post 7334043)
^ Usually those kinds of hare-brained off the wall schemes tend to come from city council members, without any official weight behind them, so I'd bet it was some off the cuff remark by a councillor quoted in the paper once and never to be spoken of again. Kind of like Susan Thompson's laser pyramids.

http://storage.winnipegsun.com/v1/dy...y=80&size=420x

Someone proposed that? Were the lasers supposed to be on every night, or just as a special show? I mean, in the winter it might work, but in the summer they would be invisible unless it was misty.

Cyro Feb 12, 2016 9:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alittle1 (Post 7333708)
.Perhaps the younger generation should experience this folly for themselves and then, maybe we will finally silence the subject, once and for all.

Your making the assumtion it's the younger generation making all the noise about change. Will you silence the old timers as well who want it ? Maybe a poll is needed as well..

biguc Feb 12, 2016 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Festivus (Post 7334064)
Someone proposed that? Were the lasers supposed to be on every night, or just as a special show? I mean, in the winter it might work, but in the summer they would be invisible unless it was misty.

Susan Thompson. The idea fell dead like all the airplanes with pilots the lasers would blind.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.