HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 1:03 PM
TimeFadesAway TimeFadesAway is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 719
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree View Post
Does anyone know if a true water bus system in Winnipeg is possible?
Physically possible or actually possible? There's all kinds of things that are physically possible here that would add greatly to our quality of life, but with a chronic lack of vision, NIMBYs, and people searching for 'Made in Manitoba' solutions for problems that were solved elsewhere long ago, very little actually happens. I'm still amazed that CMHR and the Forks came together.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 4:11 PM
oftheMoon's Avatar
oftheMoon oftheMoon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: East Exchanger
Posts: 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree View Post
Does anyone know if a true water bus system in Winnipeg is possible? I've wondered why that water bus service isn't expanded a bit to go a bit farther. I'd say make this another stop on that route.

I've used the waterbus to 'commute' once to work (though it doesn't go very far and I could have just walked I thought I would try it out) and thought it was an interesting concept for the summer.
We've used the water taxi to go from Stephen Juba to the Hugo stop just off Wellington Cres. to go for dinner on Corydon. Great experience! Highly recommend for a date night if you live in the Exchange!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 4:14 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Those water taxis are a lot nicer than they once were... I went on a ride last summer and I was impressed at how nice and comfy they are now. Definitely a better experience than that time a number of years back when Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip had to be rescued from a water taxi that stalled on the Red River
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 4:24 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 897
I think they would love to have a dock at Assiniboine Park, but I understand dredging would be needed. Imagine how cool that would be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 5:57 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
I think they would love to have a dock at Assiniboine Park, but I understand dredging would be needed. Imagine how cool that would be.
That would be very cool. A couple of years back we chartered a splash dash boat to take us as far up the Assiniboine toward the park as possible. This was during a summer of fairly high water. The boat was able to make it almost all the way, but the driver turned us around just short of the park because we were running out of time. During low water in some summer seasons, dredging would be required mainly around the St. James bridge to make it passable for smaller pontoon boats.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 7:19 PM
tree's Avatar
tree tree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeFadesAway View Post
Physically possible or actually possible? There's all kinds of things that are physically possible here that would add greatly to our quality of life, but with a chronic lack of vision, NIMBYs, and people searching for 'Made in Manitoba' solutions for problems that were solved elsewhere long ago, very little actually happens. I'm still amazed that CMHR and the Forks came together.

Thanks - in this case I meant 'physically' possible - and from others it sounds like the river is a bit too shallow at points maybe for it to be viable.

I grew up in St James and remember back when the Point Douglas Stadium proposal was shown I had visions of water busses coming all the way out to the West Perimeter (this was before all the new homes just west of the Perimeter and there was a big area that would have been the perfect 'Park and Ride') and taking people to a super cool waterbus station at Point Douglas lol. I was still a teenager so a bit more optimistic lol.

I really liked the stadium downtown idea but people seemed more caught up in the problems then the atmosphere it would create. I think there were some very valid concerns though with it. Wonder if they could do waterbusses to IGF ?

When I noticed the waterbus goes to that Hugo station I started wondering why in theory it could go further.

As others have mentioned Assiniboine Park would be a great West terminus for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2017, 7:35 PM
Gm0ney Gm0ney is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 221
The fluctuating river levels are a problem for water taxi service. Last summer the service was shut down for a few weeks because of high water flooding the docks. It all goes back to the ridiculous decision to not build the Floodway to completely control water levels in the city...if you had control, it would make this more feasible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 4:56 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
I think they would love to have a dock at Assiniboine Park, but I understand dredging would be needed. Imagine how cool that would be.
No, dredging would not help at all. In fact it would be a detriment to navigation. To make navigation possible between City Park and the Forks, a lock and spillway would be required due to the change in elevation. Not going to happen.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 5:02 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gm0ney View Post
The fluctuating river levels are a problem for water taxi service. Last summer the service was shut down for a few weeks because of high water flooding the docks. It all goes back to the ridiculous decision to not build the Floodway to completely control water levels in the city...if you had control, it would make this more feasible.
No. This is not the problem. The floodway was not designed to control city water levels because when the floodway was built city water levels were not a problem. Changes in agricultural drainage policy since then is what is causing the constant summer flooding.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 1:11 PM
Glenn99 Glenn99 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 183
The gravel parking lot is already in service.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 2:12 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
No, dredging would not help at all. In fact it would be a detriment to navigation. To make navigation possible between City Park and the Forks, a lock and spillway would be required due to the change in elevation. Not going to happen.
Never heard this before. Where exactly is the change in elevation that would require locks? Has there been a hydrological study?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 2:35 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
The change is constant and continual from the perimeter to the Red, hence the eastward flow. The river is ankle deep at many locations, especially near City park.

Presenty navigation is only possible up to about Aubry Street. Also, dredging is not possible because like the Red, the bottom is rock.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 3:22 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
The change is constant and continual from the perimeter to the Red, hence the eastward flow. The river is ankle deep at many locations, especially near City park.

Presenty navigation is only possible up to about Aubry Street. Also, dredging is not possible because like the Red, the bottom is rock.
I thought parts of the Red used to dredged before the Feds pulled their funding..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2017, 3:44 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacheguy View Post
I thought parts of the Red used to dredged before the Feds pulled their funding..
The funding wasn't "pulled". Dredging ceased after the CCGS Namao was decommissioned. The passage of the deep-draught Namao through the river mouth was the only reason dredging was done.

After Netley Creek the river begins to widen until it reaches the lake where it is about 15 miles wide. This slows current velocity which causes silt to fall out of solution. A short section (about 1/8 mile) of Centre Channel was dredged, that's it. Most work was done in the lake, out to the fairway buoy, (about 2 miles) to 3.5 metres deep.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 3:24 PM
NK59 NK59 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree View Post
I grew up in St James and remember back when the Point Douglas Stadium proposal was shown I had visions of water busses coming all the way out to the West Perimeter (this was before all the new homes just west of the Perimeter and there was a big area that would have been the perfect 'Park and Ride') and taking people to a super cool waterbus station at Point Douglas lol. I was still a teenager so a bit more optimistic lol.

I really liked the stadium downtown idea but people seemed more caught up in the problems then the atmosphere it would create. I think there were some very valid concerns though with it. Wonder if they could do waterbusses to IGF ?
An amazing opportunity missed for downtown. Would have created an amazing atmosphere and revitalized the area with the stadium being in Point Douglas. What could have been Instead were stuck with the awful current location that myself and many people I know have basically abandoned the idea of going to more than once a year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 3:46 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
^ I'm not convinced that Point Douglas would have been a better location for IGF. It would have run into some of the same traffic bottleneck issues, and it would have turned a good chunk of the area into a "stadium zone" instead of a residential area that it has the potential to be.

The U of M is a good location for the stadium... the only problem is that the City somehow failed to realize that putting a large stadium there without any new transportation infrastructure whatsoever to support the influx of crowds was a recipe for trouble.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:15 PM
tree's Avatar
tree tree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by NK59 View Post
An amazing opportunity missed for downtown. Would have created an amazing atmosphere and revitalized the area with the stadium being in Point Douglas. What could have been Instead were stuck with the awful current location that myself and many people I know have basically abandoned the idea of going to more than once a year.
I would have liked it but the most valid point I thought raised was the fact the stadium wouldn't be used enough all year round to take up such a large area downtown. If they made it with the retractable roof or in some other way that would allow it to be used during the winter and for other events it could have worked but with the new convention centre, MTS Centre, etc it seems the market may get a little thin.

That being said, the current location is a bit of a deal breaker for me and my friends too, and we go to one game at most a year (if that). I feel trapped out there once game is over and when I go and find a disproportionately large part of the night is spent getting to and from the stadium.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:23 PM
tree's Avatar
tree tree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
^ I'm not convinced that Point Douglas would have been a better location for IGF. It would have run into some of the same traffic bottleneck issues, and it would have turned a good chunk of the area into a "stadium zone" instead of a residential area that it has the potential to be.

The U of M is a good location for the stadium... the only problem is that the City somehow failed to realize that putting a large stadium there without any new transportation infrastructure whatsoever to support the influx of crowds was a recipe for trouble.
The bolded is especially true as without regular events the area could become quite empty. At least the University can use it where it is.

I never cared about the traffic - would get solved eventually and the influx of 20,000+ people would do nothing but make downtown better. Downtown still feels too empty at times in certain areas and the more down here the better. Probably an extreme point of view but it was the least of my concerns for the proposed location.

I don't agree the U of M is a good location for the stadium but can cede that it may have been the best location given the circumstances. The fact they have all the room in the world to have built sufficient infrastructure out there but didn't is a huge failure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:29 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
^ "best location given the circumstances" is probably a fair description. It isn't perfect but it's decent... however, it was hindered dramatically by the near-total absence of infrastructure upgrades in preparation for the new facility. We're starting to get those now, years later.

Getting back somewhat closer to the topic at hand, I'd prefer to see PD continue on its current course of development. Not having a giant stadium occupying a good chunk of it opens the door for that to happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 5:35 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
The change is constant and continual from the perimeter to the Red, hence the eastward flow. The river is ankle deep at many locations, especially near City park.

Presenty navigation is only possible up to about Aubry Street. Also, dredging is not possible because like the Red, the bottom is rock.
Hmmmm... don't all rivers change elevations continually - gravity is what keeps the water moving, right? It's only a sudden change in elevation that necessitates a lock (e.g. the Red drops 13 feet before Lister Rapids, where Lockport is now). There's no sudden drops on the Assininboine between the park and downtown Winnipeg. The river is already navigable (notice the old swing rail bridge at Rte. 90), just not in very low water in the summer. Even in summer, the only really shallow spots are around the St. James Bridge and Assiniboine Park (still quite a bit deeper than "ankle deep", however). It wouldn't take much to dredge a deeper channel, if money was no object.

The Assiniboine can be dredged. It's not solid rock on the bottom. In fact, in the late 1990s, a 420 meter stretch of the Assiniboine was dredged in Brandon (widened by 20 m to a depth of 2 m) to construct a waterski facility.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:23 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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