Wpg: Chief Peguis Trail Extension

[Kinguni]

I thought this was the Chief Peguis Trail thread?

[Biff]

^^^ Good point - both projects are so quiet right now i guess i figured it wasn't worth it digging up the other thread. It is just idle chat.

[Only The Lonely..]

I wouldn't get my hopes up for the CPT.

After spending the day printing the plans for Centreport way i'm dumbfounded by the total lack of long term planning in this city.

Lets just say there's going to be another traffic light on the Perimeter Hwy in Winnipeg's near future.

[when in doubt, grout]

A little birdy told me that Kiewit was sort of forced to throw a bid together for Chief Peguis... The city said something like "If you want Desraeli, throw us a bone with Chief Peguis..."

If I had to bet, I would put money on the Nelson River/MD Steele/AECOM joint venture getting that job... MD are pretty hard to beat for bridges in this city. Nelson River is competitive with the roadworks... But who knows, Kiewit might surprise us... They have officially announced they are opening a Winnipeg office... It will be a part of their highly successful Western Canada district. They might want to establish themselves by bidding on a ton of Winnipeg work... I know they must be salivating over Centreport Way and the P3 sewage treatment plants... Desraeli is a good job for them, but PCL has the local manpower that Kiewit lacks... For Wuskwatim (round 2) Kiewit approached PCL to form a joint venture for that very reason.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

Lets just say there's going to be another traffic light on the Perimeter Hwy in Winnipeg's near future.

I take it the plans for CCW have changed?

[rrskylar]

Why can't the city have a company like Flatiron Constructors bidding on the CP Trail and Disraeli projects?

[when in doubt, grout]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Why can't the city have a company like Flatiron Constructors bidding on the CP Trail and Disraeli projects?

The city invited them to the first meeting for Disraeli. CP Trail isn't even remotely big enough for them to be interested in. Throw in 9 interchanges, 4 flyovers and a couple rail underpasses and you've got something they'd bid on.

[rrskylar]

^ There building the new bridge in Fort Mc. and I highly doubt that it's any bigger than the Disraeli project!

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I take it the plans for CCW have changed?

In addition to a cloverleaf for Centreport @ the Perimeter there will be another traffic light added just before Saskatchewan avenue.

This at-grade crossing will of course be transitioned to a flyover at some unknown future date (read: Never).

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

In addition to a cloverleaf for Centreport @ the Perimeter there will be another traffic light added just before Saskatchewan avenue.

This at-grade crossing will of course be transitioned to a flyover at some unknown future date (read: Never).

How half-assed is that ? It would be cheaper to do the whole thing at once wouldn't it ? Besides , most people who ultimately wind up using the Headingley Bypass are going to head south at the Perimeter...kinda defeats the purpose of having a grade seperation there if the first thing they do is stop once the ramps are merged. Mind you , before we dive too far down the negativity path , it's possible that the project must be staged this way. I don't know of course , just thinking out loud there.

[when in doubt, grout]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

^ There building the new bridge in Fort Mc. and I highly doubt that it's any bigger than the Disraeli project!

Well I didn't say they weren't interested in Disraeli, (They showed up to the meeting didn't they.) I said that CP trail wasn't their thing. Besides, that bridge in Ft. Mac is a totally different type of bridge job than Disraeli.

Profit margins are a lot different in Fort Mac then Winnipeg as well.

[rrskylar]

^ Actually you said that the Disraeli Bridge and CP extension project were not big enough for flatiron and I pointed out that they were doing a similarly sized project in Fort McM.

[when in doubt, grout]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

^ Actually you said that the Disraeli Bridge and CP extension project were not big enough for flatiron and I pointed out that they were doing a similarly sized project in Fort McM.

Well then, you obviously misunderstood what I typed.

Originally Posted by when in doubt, grout

The city invited them to the first meeting for Disraeli. CP Trail isn't even remotely big enough for them to be interested in. Throw in 9 interchanges, 4 flyovers and a couple rail underpasses and you've got something they'd bid on.

I emboldened the text that you originally had trouble understanding.

I wouldn't doubt for a second that they would be somewhat interested in the Disraeli project.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

This at-grade crossing will of course be transitioned to a flyover at some unknown future date (read: Never).

Ah, it'll get done. Patients is a virtue I suppose.

[hexrae]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

In addition to a cloverleaf for Centreport @ the Perimeter there will be another traffic light added just before Saskatchewan avenue.

This at-grade crossing will of course be transitioned to a flyover at some unknown future date (read: Never).

HA! I commented on that in the plans that were posted on here awhile back. Something to the effect of, "the purpose of an interchange is defeated if a traffic light is placed so close to it".

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

In addition to a cloverleaf for Centreport @ the Perimeter there will be another traffic light added just before Saskatchewan avenue.

This at-grade crossing will of course be transitioned to a flyover at some unknown future date (read: Never).

not meaning to argue because you never know but i was just told today by the top dog on the project that the overpass at Saskatchewan was still in the plan.

[jmt18325]

I think he means a new traffic light.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Biff

not meaning to argue because you never know but i was just told today by the top dog on the project that the overpass at Saskatchewan was still in the plan.

Oh , I'm sure it's still in the plan it's just that interchanges all along the Perimeter are in the plan too and it's been what , sixty years ? If slow and steady wins the race , I wonder if "never actually do anything" qualifies for an automatic gold medal.

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by Biff

not meaning to argue because you never know but i was just told today by the top dog on the project that the overpass at Saskatchewan was still in the plan.

I'm just skeptical based on what i've seen.

Both the city and province have a distinguished history of doing things half assed.

Just look at the sad state of affairs on Kenaston. They build the underpass, which we waited 30 years for, only to add a new traffic light a few yards over to accomodate IKEA.

Think Regent & Lag..You have at least 4 to 5 lanes of traffic each way crossing an intersection at-grade where one street has posted limits of 80 km/hr..

This is one city that was definitely planned on a cocktail napkin if planned at all.

[grumpy old man]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

Just look at the sad state of affairs on Kenaston. They build the underpass, which we waited 30 years for, only to add a new traffic light a few yards over to accomodate IKEA.

Agreed. 'Cept that intersection was build c/w traffic lights well before Ikea was ever dreamed of. But your point in general? Bang on.

If I've said it once I've said it a mazillion times: Winnipeg city planners ONLY method of traffic management is to install more traffic lights.

Want to improve traffic flow in this city? Take out HALF the traffic lights.