Winnipeg Construction - Page 320

steveosnyder · #**6381** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 6:21 PM**

Does anyone think that Portage and Main could be completely closed off to traffic? That would take away from the pedestrian safety issue.

Mininari · #**6382** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by headhorse

unless they're upgrading transit and cycling connections, the money won't do anything.

I don't know about that. If they're able to add left turn bays at many of the intersections, that would help a lot with safety, preventing the old 'dart to the right' lane change. They're talking about extending St. Matthews (requiring one building demolition), and that would do wonders for taking a bit of the load off of St. James since everyone presently has to go left or right. I'm not looking forward to the construction period, but I am looking forward to the result.

Its such a messed up area since none of that infrastructure was built to handle heavy retail traffic.

headhorse · #**6383** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mininari

I don't know about that. If they're able to add left turn bays at many of the intersections, that would help a lot with safety, preventing the old 'dart to the right' lane change. They're talking about extending St. Matthews (requiring one building demolition), and that would do wonders for taking a bit of the load off of St. James since everyone presently has to go left or right. I'm not looking forward to the construction period, but I am looking forward to the result.

Its such a messed up area since none of that infrastructure was built to handle heavy retail traffic.

exactly, and to upgrade it sufficiently for it to be able to handle it's current automobile load they city would have to buy and bulldoze millions in property. I don't understand how making it easier, or at least giving the drivers the impression it's easier, to drive will help with traffic. traffic improvements for automobiles = more traffic.

steveosnyder · #**6384** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by headhorse

traffic improvements for automobiles = more traffic.

Catering to automobile doesn't create traffic relief, it promotes driving and if anything, causes more problems.

I have to agree with Headhorse, unless they use some of the spending to migrate people away from driving the changes won't help much. The problems might be displaced and traffic might flow smoother on the streets they upgrade (one must assume St. James), but what happens to the cross streets?

Traffic relief comes from: increasing the cost of driving and decreasing the barriers to other transportation methods.

JamieDavid Exchange · #**6385** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 9:43 PM**

Was down on Kenaston today. The city did an absolutely fantastic job of ruining the flow of traffic from Sterling Lion to Scurfield. WHAT A FRICKEN NIGHTMARE!!!!!!!
I'd LOVE to see how they're gonna get outta that mess when Waverly West is fully developed and more retail moves in. Let me guess..... they'll add another lane on Kenaston and perhaps more traffic signals!
We need a massive shake up at city hall and get some young blood in there to kick out the old school way of thinking/planning.

1ajs · #**6386** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 11:10 PM**

and the new blood will run into the same problem no money

JamieDavid Exchange · #**6387** Posted **Dec 6, 2012, 11:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs

and the new blood will run into the same problem no money

Throwing up a set of lights and widening a route may be cheap for a quick fix, but when the band-aid starts to peel off, surgery will cost a hell of a lot more.

Jeff · #**6388** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 12:10 AM**

throw in the new st. matthews and route 90 lights announced today

jmt18325 · #**6389** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 1:18 AM**

Those lights already exist, don't they?

Andy6 · #**6390** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 1:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpenner

the donald building looks fantastic, amazing what a set of clean new windows can do for a building. Im assuming that it is going to be strictly commercial. Can anyone confirm that?

Nice that they exactly replicated the original windows. That wouldn't have happened in the early years of heritage renos.

cllew · #**6391** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 2:15 AM**

Looks like the apartment block(s) at 70/90 Whellams Lane are now going ahead.

EK Transcona Meeting Dec 11 has an agenda item for Plan approval for the first of the two towers.

trueviking · #**6392** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 2:18 AM**

^ i thought their variance had expired.....

cllew · #**6393** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 2:37 AM**

So did I, unless there was some sort of administrative extension because the plan review was taking longer than normal.

Mininari · #**6394** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 3:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Those lights already exist, don't they?

Yeah, they do, but with the volume of turning traffic it'll have to handle (i.e. left-turns heading south), it will likely require a longer light cycle.

How Route 90 has a speed limit of 70 through there baffles me.

rrskylar · #**6395** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 4:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Does anyone think that Portage and Main could be completely closed off to traffic? That would take away from the pedestrian safety issue.

We have debated this more than a couple of times in this forum, closing Portage and Main to traffic makes about as much sense as making all of Winnipeg's bridges pedestrian only.

OntheMattack · #**6396** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 7:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrskylar

We have debated this more than a couple of times in this forum, closing Portage and Main to traffic makes about as much sense as making all of Winnipeg's bridges pedestrian only.

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic.

GORDBO · #**6397** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 1:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OntheMattack

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic.

Look at a map of downtown streets, going north-south would be a nightmare during rush hour.

JamieDavid Exchange · #**6398** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 4:00 PM**

I just got word from Fortress Developments that the project slated for Winnipeg will be of the same magnitude, if not larger, than Regina's Capital Pointe project. They are going over a few different design scenarios now.

Shinook · #**6399** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 6:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

I just got word from Fortress Developments that the project slated for Winnipeg will be of the same magnitude, if not larger, than Regina's Capital Pointe project. They are going over a few different design scenarios now.

I'm hoping for a similar design on this, instead of a Soviet Blockbox.

bomberjet · #**6400** Posted **Dec 7, 2012, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamieDavid Exchange

I just got word from Fortress Developments that the project slated for Winnipeg will be of the same magnitude, if not larger, than Regina's Capital Pointe project. They are going over a few different design scenarios now.

I'm thinking they're only referring to phase 1 of the project, as they said it would be two towers built in phases.