Winnipeg Construction

[bomberjet]

I think someone previously said this. But they're using the old bridge as a working area. Once they get to a point where the cranes aren't needed, it'll all come down.

http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/DisraeliBridges/

Looks like the concrete will be left as is, with some fancy lights or somethiing.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I think someone previously said this. But they're using the old bridge as a working area. Once they get to a point where the cranes aren't needed, it'll all come down.

http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/DisraeliBridges/

Looks like the concrete will be left as is, with some fancy lights or somethiing.

Cool Thanks. I was really surprised by those pictures, because I take the bus over the Disraeli multiple times a week, and make sure to look at the progress. But from the angle of the vehicle bridge I didn't even realize that the pedestrian bridge was to the East of the old green bridge. I thought the old green one was to be the pedestrian bridge.

I agree with most regarding the Disraeli construction though. Kind of disappointing especially coming from the standpoint of someone on the bus. The fact that there isn't even a designated diamond lane shows the shortsightedness of the planners on this one. The lanes seem kind of small, I only say that because the bus's pretty much have to merge into middle lane of traffic right after turning off of main, because the ass ends of other vehicles stick out half way into the third lane.

Had there been a diamond lane, there could have been a major incentive for people to take transit (at least during the summer for those who don't like the cold). As it is, there is no advantage to taking the bus Northward. On Main there is designated diamond lanes, Henderson also has three lanes, allowing the bus's to flow smoothly. But having to sit in rush hour traffic when on the bus is pretty shitty, because under most circumstances elsewhere in the city the traffic can be bypassed.

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

I thought the old green one was to be the pedestrian bridge.

It is, well the pillars from the green bridge are for the AT bridge. They've removed the east (northbound) roadway, cut down the concrete, and are building the path. Then they'll remove the west side, I assume cut down the concrete a little, and use the remainder for decoration.

Look at the video that on the page that bomberjet links to.

[1ajs]

u of w sports center

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Great photos! Didn't realize how low the At bridge was compared to the vehicle bridge. I assume our great floodway will keep it above water!

if they fit under the lious they will fit under it... also if that bridge is under water it will mean my house will also be under water............

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Riverman

It is within the "new" minimum height, as opposed to the "old" minimum height that the new traffic bridge was built to. Up until 1994 any bridge lower than the minimum height had to open to allow for commercial navigation.

That pedestrian bridge is too narrow, bike riders handlebars will hit as they pass, can't the city get anything right!

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

The fact that there isn't even a designated diamond lane shows the shortsightedness of the planners on this one.

That's just silly.

The purpose of a diamond lane is to provide a through passage for buses on a street while stopping to pick up passengers. On a through road where there are no bus stops what good would a diamond lane do? The bus is just crossing the bridge anyway and there is a bay for the bus to pull over between the spans.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Riverman

That's just silly.

The purpose of a diamond lane is to provide a through passage for buses on a street while stopping to pick up passengers. On a through road where there are no bus stops what good would a diamond lane do? The bus is just crossing the bridge anyway and there is a bay for the bus to pull over between the spans.

Because on either side of the bridge there is a diamond lane. So while crossing the bridge the bus has to merge with traffic that can be the equivalent to the 401 on a Friday night. There are 3 stops along the Disraeli. And my biggest problem isn't necessarily the merging it is the fact that where there is 3 lanes they are too narrow for a bus to even use without having to stop for middle lane traffic. That is simply frustrating in and of itself.

Don't get me wrong, it is nice that there is no longer a rickety old bridge now, but at the same time, other than being new what does this new bridge bring to the 21st century that the old bridge didn't have transportation wise? It wasn't an improvement (except for maybe aesthetically). It was just a replacement, which to me makes no sense. This is especially true when regarding the fact that we will have this bridge for over half a century. Do you really believe that there won't be any upgrade needed within the next 60 years to account for either traffic flow or Rapid Transit demands?

Remember, I am just stating my opinion on the matter, just like others have stated theres. When on the bus traffic can be especially frustrating. Maybe I am spoiled in hoping to be able to bypass rush hour traffic when going from point A to point B while using transit, but I think not considering there is already a delay in that when taking the bus there is the added point C, D, E etc before I can get to my desired location.

My biggest problem is that the bridge provides absolutely no incentive to take the bus, and in fact, it does quite the opposite. I am a dedicated transit user, and I could own a car, (and have in the past) but I choose to bike and take the bus. However, during my time on the Disraeli when I am sitting still for 10-20 minutes, with the inevitable lack of personal space shared with the occasional most-undesirable person pushed right against me, I begin to wonder why it is that I don't drive.

Cities today are striving to make themselves more AT, and Transit friendly. Though they did provide an AT bridge, they really dropped the ball on providing optimum transit service.

[1ajs]

because people made a fuss about the closing of the bridge for 18months

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Because on either side of the bridge there is a diamond lane.

There are no diamond lanes on the north side of the bridge. There is no room for them. There is a diamond lane on the south side of the bridge (northbound) for one block and it really isn't a diamond lane. They stuck a couple of signs up on the merge lane, no one uses that lane anyway. I live on the north side of the bridge and I just went and looked.

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Don't get me wrong, it is nice that there is no longer a rickety old bridge now, but at the same time, other than being new what does this new bridge bring to the 21st century that the old bridge didn't have transportation wise? It wasn't an improvement (except for maybe aesthetically). It was just a replacement, which to me makes no sense. This is especially true when regarding the fact that we will have this bridge for over half a century. Do you really believe that there won't be any upgrade needed within the next 60 years to account for either traffic flow or Rapid Transit demands?

This has been discussed at length here. A three lane bridge would not have aided traffic flow in either direction.

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Remember, I am just stating my opinion on the matter, just like others have stated theirs. When on the bus traffic can be especially frustrating. Maybe I am spoiled in hoping to be able to bypass rush hour traffic when going from point A to point B while using transit, but I think not considering there is already a delay in that when taking the bus there is the added point C, D, E etc before I can get to my desired location.

My biggest problem is that the bridge provides absolutely no incentive to take the bus, and in fact, it does quite the opposite. I am a dedicated transit user, and I could own a car, (and have in the past) but I choose to bike and take the bus. However, during my time on the Disraeli when I am sitting still for 10-20 minutes, with the inevitable lack of personal space shared with the occasional most-undesirable person pushed right against me, I begin to wonder why it is that I don't drive.

You are stuck on the Disraeli because of the bottlenecks at either end, not because of the size of the bridge. It is a free-flowing expressway that ends at a traffic light. What do you expect? If it was 5 lanes in either direction there would be no change in traffic flow at all. It is not bad planning that causes this flow restriction, it is physical limitation.

Remember too that the roadway on the north end of the bridge is unfinished and is due to be completed in June.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Riverman

It is within the "new" minimum height, as opposed to the "old" minimum height that the new traffic bridge was built to. Up until 1994 any bridge lower than the minimum height had to open to allow for commercial navigation.

Something like the Old decomissioned swinging rail bridge in North Kidonan :taken 2009..

[Riverman]

Nice pic! At one time the Redwood, Louise, Provencher, and several railway bridges opened for navigation.



Photo credit

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Riverman

There are no diamond lanes on the north side of the bridge. There is no room for them. There is a diamond lane on the south side of the bridge (northbound) for one block and it really isn't a diamond lane. They stuck a couple of signs up on the merge lane, no one uses that lane anyway. I live on the north side of the bridge and I just went and looked.



This has been discussed at length here. A three lane bridge would not have aided traffic flow in either direction.




You are stuck on the Disraeli because of the bottlenecks at either end, not because of the size of the bridge. It is a free-flowing expressway that ends at a traffic light. What do you expect? If it was 5 lanes in either direction there would be no change in traffic flow at all. It is not bad planning that causes this flow restriction, it is physical limitation.

Remember too that the roadway on the north end of the bridge is unfinished and is due to be completed in June.

You're right, in the conventional sense of there being signs, no, the lane North of the Disraeli is technically not a diamond lane. However, to the south there is. The right lane on Henderson is usually only occupied by buses unless a) there is a parked car or b) the car is turning.

As soon as the buses pass the construction zone (Hespeler) they wiz past traffic, because it has become a general rule of thumb that you only use the right lane if you are turning.

To the south of the Disraeli the buses wiz past (is it passed or past?) traffic as well. The Diamond lane stretches all the way past Portage and Main, past the Norwood Bridge, until it turns into St. Mary's. It continues east however all the way down Marion.

I would also be willing to wage a bet that before long they turn Henderson's right lane to a Diamond Lane.

My problem is not with traffic flow -which is going to be an inherent problem none the less. I lived and drove through Toronto for 8 years, I can say with complete confidence that the theory of more lanes bringing less traffic is completely false. But with the missed opportunity to allow the buses to bypass the bottled traffic on the bridge, as they do on either end, I am frustrated.

You are asserting that I would prefer more lanes so traffic is no longer snarled. Not at all, I would have preferred only 1 extra lane designated for buses, which is a completely different principle.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Nice pic! At one time the Redwood, Louise, Provencher, and several railway bridges opened for navigation.



Photo credit

That would have been cool to see.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

You're right, in the conventional sense of there being signs, no, the lane North of the Disraeli is technically not a diamond lane. However, to the south there is. The right lane on Henderson is usually only occupied by buses unless a) there is a parked car or b) the car is turning.

I drove over there this morning to check. There is no diamond lane southbound on the south side. Only northbound.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

You are asserting that I would prefer more lanes so traffic is no longer snarled. Not at all, I would have preferred only 1 extra lane designated for buses, which is a completely different principle.

Which would make absolutely no sense. Refer to my post above about the reason for diamond lanes.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Which would make absolutely no sense. Refer to my post above about the reason for diamond lanes.

Your point is moot. There is no disputing the fact that on either side of the Freeway that the flow of bus's continues at a normal speed.

On the South Side of the bridge there are three lanes, 1 of which is a diamond lane spanning all the way to Marion East. The bus's flow at a fast rate on this side of the bridge.

On the North Side there are 3 lanes, one of which might as well be a diamond lane, and probably will be in due time. The bus's flow at a fast rate on this side of the Disraeli, and they are only interrupted by parked vehicles. As soon as the bus's pass Hespeler the rate is efficient.

The only problem with the bus's rate of flow is the fact that the lanes are reduced to two on the Disraeli. I can attest to this from personal experience. As I said, I use the #11, and or the #40 on the Disraeli 6 to 8 (half of which are through rush hour traffic) times a week. This subjective point is not disputable.

We are both free to believe what we will, and I personally would have liked to see an extra lane for bus's. I personally believe this would have allowed them to flow properly on the bridge up to the points where they are bypassing traffic normally, being Main at Disraeli and Henderson at Hespeler.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

On the North Side there are 3 lanes,

There are two lanes both northbound and southbound. The third lane either direction has been closed for almost three years. This is what is presently causing the congestion. This is what you are missing.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

The bus's flow

The buses flow. No apostrophe.

[rypinion]

Just a few shots from the rooftop patio at Sky, taken yesterday morning (click for larger, but they were just taken with my older BB phone - no Z10 yet ):


Sky 2 Condominium Construction by Robert Young, on Flickr


Sunstone Boutique Hotel Construction by Robert Young, on Flickr


Sunstone Boutique Hotel Construction by Robert Young, on Flickr