$2-B mega-fix for WPG

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by Albertaboy

But I do believe that the portions set aside for BRT are also set out in mind to accomodate for LRT in the future.

I don't know why anyone would do that anymore. They'll never switch BRT to LRT.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by BlackRedGold

I don't know why anyone would do that anymore. They'll never switch BRT to LRT.

gota start some were... winnipeg started out with house drawn transit.. then they built electric street cars then we got bus's whats next?

[skrish]

^ flying DeLorean's

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by skrish

^ flying DeLorean's

flying what now?

[skrish]

I guess your not a fan of Back to the Future

[m0nkyman]

Or fine Canadian made ottomobeels!

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by skrish

I guess your not a fan of Back to the Future

o lol ya i have seen all thoughs movies like 100 times.......

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by skrish

^ flying DeLorean's

You know you can pick one of those up for around $25 grand. It would be a blast to drive up to Grand Beach in one of those...

[rgalston]

That $2-B will really go a long way in adding value to our city, and shaking its shameful national reputation...

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

gota start some were... winnipeg started out with house drawn transit.. then they built electric street cars then we got bus's whats next?

True but claiming that your BRT can be converted to LRT at a later date is misleading. Cities don't switch BRT to LRT since converting it causes problems for the people using BRT and the money spent won't significantly increase ridership compared to creating a brand new LRT line for similiar money.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by BlackRedGold

True but claiming that your BRT can be converted to LRT at a later date is misleading. Cities don't switch BRT to LRT since converting it causes problems for the people using BRT and the money spent won't significantly increase ridership compared to creating a brand new LRT line for similiar money.

Man, I'm not trying to mislead anyone. That is what was stated in the BRT conception plan, and BTW, there were no guarentees that an LRT would be created; all it said was that the design has this possiblility in mind. I made a correction in my origional post.

[IntotheWest]

$35m for Chief Peguis tr extension to Lag Blvd?? Is that really necessary? Springfield Rd is just south of that, and the Perimeter is just north. What path will it take to make it more direct?

I think the city could find a better way to use $35m...

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by IntotheWest

$35m for Chief Peguis tr extension to Lag Blvd?? Is that really necessary? Springfield Rd is just south of that, and the Perimeter is just north. What path will it take to make it more direct?

I think the city could find a better way to use $35m...

ya by puting it into the river banks for shoring them up....

[flatlander]

How exactly is the City contributing to all this? We've made good strides in getting our debt under control over the last few years. Is a P3 a way of getting a project built, or a way of financing it, or both?

[rgalston]

Originally Posted by flatlander

Is a P3 a way of getting a project built, or a way of financing it, or both?

Essentially, private buildiers builds it now; and the public pays them back later.

For example, the City excitedly announced (though I don't think it was picked up in the papers) in Autumn 2005, that the developer of a new strip mall on St. Anne's Rd. paid $3-M for the widening of a one kilometre stretch of St. Anne's out in the sticks somewhere. As a P3, the City is paying back the developer the $3-M in 2008. (Presumably we'll be less broke next year than we are this year?)

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by rgalston

Essentially, private buildiers builds it now; and the public pays them back later.

For example, the City excitedly announced (though I don't think it was picked up in the papers) in Autumn 2005, that the developer of a new strip mall on St. Anne's Rd. paid $3-M for the widening of a one kilometre stretch of St. Anne's out in the sticks somewhere. As a P3, the City is paying back the developer the $3-M in 2008. (Presumably we'll be less broke next year than we are this year?)

Among other advantages, the city gets cost and budgeting certainty and the ability to proceed with necessary major projects without having to save up for years beforehand.

[rgalston]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Among other advantages, the city gets cost and budgeting certainty and the ability to proceed with necessary major projects without having to save up for years beforehand.

But it will have to save sometime.

[flatlander]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Among other advantages, the city gets cost and budgeting certainty and the ability to proceed with necessary major projects without having to save up for years beforehand.

Right - but I think we're in a pay-as-you-go position regarding infrastructure. I appreciate the cost certainty issue but this sounds like debt to me. Unless this can be accommodated within the existing capital budget but I'm not clear on that.

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by Albertaboy

Man, I'm not trying to mislead anyone. That is what was stated in the BRT conception plan, and BTW, there were no guarentees that an LRT would be created; all it said was that the design has this possiblility in mind. I made a correction in my origional post.

I didn't mean that you were trying to mislead anyone. It is the people who are trying to get BRT implemented that are misleading people, possibly unintentionally.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by rgalston

But it will have to save sometime.

True, but this way you get the project and the economic benefits it brings at the beginning of the saving process, rather than at the end. You also get the benefit of private-sector efficiency which should lower the overall costs as well.