Winnipeg Construction

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Riverman

I explained that. I guess you never are in that area.

If you want to make this a transportation street, get rid of the 10000 egresses off it. It should either be a street (ie. for the neighbourhood) or a road (ie. for transportation), not both. It can't be everything to everyone.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I'm not saying that they don't deserve a proper road... Everyone deserves a proper road. But building the street wider will fix absolutely nothing.

Fixing the street is an operational budget item, twinning the street is a capital project. Fix the street. But why twin it?

Doing projects like this is a quick way for the city to become more in debt.

They are twinning it because, for one they are adding an underpass, and that stretch of road has the most vehicle traffic for a two lane street in the entire city. With the expansion of Kildonan Green and future expansion of Transona west, the problem will just be exasperated as there will be more cars travelling to Plesis from downtown.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Riverman

one lane each way (meaning any turns on or off the street stop traffic)

We actually have an example of how doing this doesn't really fix the traffic problems, it just moves them -- Chief Peguis.

Chief Peguis bridge was done partly because there was too much traffic on Springfield and it was a residential street. The bigger street did decrease the traffic on Springfield, but now Gateway is a cluster-f***. Building bigger is just going to move the problem to one of the other streets.


After Panet/Molson are twinned, Golden Eagle and/or Tu Pelo will need to be twinned because there's too much traffic on it because of the twinning of Molson. After that?

It's not going to fix the problem.

[chrisallard5454]

How does such a high profile development go unannounced? Does that happen often? They have begun Geothermal studies of the sight which generally means that construction is not far behind, does it not.

I figured he was saying bingo to the Westin Response, but wanted to let the others have a shot of figuring it out. I don't know anything about Westin, is it a high end chain?

[chrisallard5454]

Re: Some of the Asian hotels from the chain are pretty glamourous.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

How does such a high profile development go unannounced? Does that happen often? They have begun Geothermal studies of the sight which generally means that construction is not far behind, does it not.

I figured he was saying bingo to the Westin Response, but wanted to let the others have a shot of figuring it out. I don't know anything about Westin, is it a high end chain?

I don't think anything has been officially announced yet, hence the low profile.

Westin is a favourite of business travellers and is a fairly high end hotel chain... solidly 4 stars much like Fairmont. The only tier above that would be the luxury 5 star hotels like Ritz-Carlton, Four Seasons, Conrad and Inter-Continental that we probably won't see in Winnipeg for a long time. By virtue of its newness, a new Westin would likely become the best hotel in the city. Some solid competition might force the Fairmont to step up its game a little.

Incidentally, the Fairmont actually used to be a Westin from the early 80s to the mid 90s.

[1ajs]

i gues the queen will have a new place to stay?

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Sorry for not being literal enough... A road or street should increase the city's ability to make money.

And on the point of the 407, I have asked before, but why doesn't the city create tolls for getting inside the perimeter during peak hour? Speaking about the north because thats what i know best, put a toll at Main, Henderson, Lag, McPhillips and Brookside.

Because , as has been explained before , nobody will stand for it. Secondly , it would cost you more to create such a system than you'd ever get back from it. Remember , you'd have to cut off every single access point into the city while at the same time providing the people who used those roads alternate (free) routes around it.

If you simply want to put a toll booth at every single access point into the city then fine , go ahead. You may even make some money in that case since booths are a lot cheaper than overpasses and access roads. Again though , you'd NEVER be able to get anybody either inside or outside of the city to agree to it. This nonsense idea that the people just outside of the city are acting as pariahs on civic infrastructure is ridiculous. The last thing you ever want to do when trying to make money is put up any sort of barrier to trade and setting up toll booths is exactly that.

I would raise hell if I was told that I'd have to pay a toll to travel on roads I'd already paid for through taxes. People outside the Perimeter pay taxes and they get the services they pay for. You don't have to pay a toll every time you travel through St. Andrews nor should they have to pay a toll just to enter a city where they spend virtually all of their disposable income.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

We actually have an example of how doing this doesn't really fix the traffic problems, it just moves them -- Chief Peguis.

Chief Peguis bridge was done partly because there was too much traffic on Springfield and it was a residential street. The bigger street did decrease the traffic on Springfield, but now Gateway is a cluster-f***. Building bigger is just going to move the problem to one of the other streets.


After Panet/Molson are twinned, Golden Eagle and/or Tu Pelo will need to be twinned because there's too much traffic on it because of the twinning of Molson. After that?

It's not going to fix the problem.

Uh...no.
CPT bridge was built to provide people in North Winnipeg access to communities across the river. Prior to its construction people could either go all the way down to the Redwood or all the way up to the Perimeter. Nobody would have ever suggested that a bridge was somehow going to remedy traffic issues on either side of the bridge where it concerned through traffic along residential streets.

The second reason it was built was because it was the first stage of the city's inner perimeter plan in the north. The corridor was reserved decades ago and it was simply a matter of time until it was built.

The latest extension of the CPT has been on the books for decades. It was pushed ahead to some degree because traffic along the secondary routes going through the neighbourhoods in question was too heavy. As was explained before , those regional roads were never meant to handle the traffic they were loaded with. Once there's too much traffic on those routes , it costs a lot less to build one large arterial rather than have to replace four or five regional roads at double the rate they were designed to be in operation. It's simple math in the long run : One four lane arterial versus 4 or 5 regional roads at at least two lanes apiece.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

i gues the queen will have a new place to stay?

The Queen already has a place to stay. It's called Government House.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Because , as has been explained before , nobody will stand for it. Secondly , it would cost you more to create such a system than you'd ever get back from it. Remember , you'd have to cut off every single access point into the city while at the same time providing the people who used those roads alternate (free) routes around it.

If you simply want to put a toll booth at every single access point into the city then fine , go ahead. You may even make some money in that case since booths are a lot cheaper than overpasses and access roads. Again though , you'd NEVER be able to get anybody either inside or outside of the city to agree to it. This nonsense idea that the people just outside of the city are acting as pariahs on civic infrastructure is ridiculous. The last thing you ever want to do when trying to make money is put up any sort of barrier to trade and setting up toll booths is exactly that.

I would raise hell if I was told that I'd have to pay a toll to travel on roads I'd already paid for through taxes. People outside the Perimeter pay taxes and they get the services they pay for. You don't have to pay a toll every time you travel through St. Andrews nor should they have to pay a toll just to enter a city where they spend virtually all of their disposable income.

Please note, I know most about the north end of the City, so I will continue to use this as an example.

1) You wouldn't have to cut off all access... if you look at places like Toronto, people can get into and out of the City without the 407, but it would take longer. This is also true for places like New York, Dallas/Fort Worth, Brisbane, and Sydney. It also works in places like Stockholm (not that much larger than Winnipeg). If people want to take streets like pipeline and line up for 40 minutes instead of paying $2.00 (just arbitrary numbers) then let them. Further, it would prompt people to at least think about car-pooling.

2) The city is currently trying to put together a regional transportation group, but none of the suburban municipalities want in because they currently don't have a reason. They don't want to because it would be more costly than the alternative (because people currently commute for "free").

3) To say that people in East St. Paul and West St. Paul, Stonewall et al. pay for the City of Winnipeg infrastructure by paying their provincial (or federal) taxes isn't accurate. The percentage of total income the province spends on infrastructure for 2012: 5.6%, and that includes funding projects in other cities and highway projects. While this is still a lot of money, the people of the City of Winnipeg pay this as well.

I really don't want to talk about more transportation issues in the Construction thread anymore though. If you actually want to debate the merits of a system like this PM me and I'll go for a beer some time.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by drew

^I know.

Viking is clearly trying to say something with that picture, it certainly seems like it is "bingo", but well, that lady quite clearly only has one or two spots in any of the rows I can see on her sheets. No bingo there.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Spocket

The latest extension of the CPT has been on the books for decades. It was pushed ahead to some degree because traffic along the secondary routes going through the neighbourhoods in question was too heavy. As was explained before , those regional roads were never meant to handle the traffic they were loaded with. Once there's too much traffic on those routes , it costs a lot less to build one large arterial rather than have to replace four or five regional roads at double the rate they were designed to be in operation. It's simple math in the long run : One four lane arterial versus 4 or 5 regional roads at at least two lanes apiece.

First, sorry, I should have stated the extension was what I was referring to, not the original bridge. I wasn't around much before the bridge was in place, so I can't really comment on things from before then.

Second, you missed something. It should read "It's simple math in the long run: the original fixed capital costs for a four lane arterial, one four lane arterial, and 4 or 5 regional roads with a longer lifespan vs 4 or 5 regional roads at at least two lanes apiece with a shorter lifespan."

Third, opportunity costs. That land could have been sold off and developed for extra revenue to the city.

[trueviking]

noticed demolition fences going up at confusion corner....maybe construction starting on that office building?....for better or for worse.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by esquire

True enough, I guess my lame joke is closer to reality than I thought!

But seriously... a Westin Hotel at Portage and Main would be an excellent development for that site for at least a few reasons I can think of:

-It would fill in perhaps the most visible, gaping eyesore in town when it comes to surface parking lots.

-It would be the first new, full-service business hotel downtown in decades. Considering how dated many of Winnipeg's downtown hotels are, this is something that business travellers would appreciate and help the city's image a bit in that at least one of the business hotels won't be badly behind the times.

-It will add some more people to the P&M area. I know that some might think question what that's worth given that the plaza at Lombard Place is always dead despite having two massive office towers and a huge hotel on it, but remember that many of the people staying at the Westin will be business travellers on expense accounts and a good many of them will be eating and drinking at nearby establishments. A big new hotel nearby will help keep those storefront restaurants and lounges going.

-It'll be the first real change to the P&M cluster since the TD Centre opened nearly 25 years ago which should at least create some visual interest.

In any event, I hope the hotel proceeds. I think it would be a nice boost for the symbolic centre of the city.

Well said; though hopefully the hotel fits in and adds to its locale

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I'm not saying that they don't deserve a proper road... Everyone deserves a proper road. But building the street wider will fix absolutely nothing.

Fixing the street is an operational budget item, twinning the street is a capital project. Fix the street. But why twin it?

Doing projects like this is a quick way fo the city to become more in debt.

---

Perhaps I should elaborate more.

This is a neighbourhood street and shouldn't be twinned. Instead they should find more efficient ways to move people from this street to Lagimodiere. Houses and stores front this street, crescents come off it, a old-folks home and a few churches egresses from it.

Twinning this street will make this neighbourhood less attractive and turn it into another commuter neighbourhood. Something that might work is to keep this street 2 lanes, move the street over to the East closer to the sidewalk and sell the land on the west side that is currently reserved for street widening for street-level business. Some of the project costs would be offset from the property sale, and it would increase the tax base in the area.

In looking at street view, it seems there is bad drainage (ditches on both sides of molson), so this project might be expensive, but at least it has a way of recouping some of the costs.

Let's get something straight here, they're not widening this to expressway status like the Plessis Underpass. They're widening it to four lanes of traffic. Just like Panet already is from Munroe to Nairn. Just like many, many other streets in the city already are.

Give a proper way for traffic to get to and from Lag?! Helllooo, Panet/Molson! Provides access to Reenders (which connects to Lag). Concordia overpass is right there, currently without proper traffic lanes. Molson/Panet is actually the old highway 59 and basically serves as a service road to Lag in the north east. Why widen it? So traffic can flow, people can turn properly, cars can drive. Properly. There's also a hospital right there.

You're correct that it should be widened all the way to Grassie. But from what I've been hearing, the city won't do it because of the roundabout. There was little to no interaction between the two projects. How are you supposed to blend four lanes of traffic into a roundabout designed for two lanes only.

[Riverman]

Post deleted

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

But seriously... a Westin Hotel at Portage and Main would be an excellent development for that site for at least a few reasons I can think of:

-It would fill in perhaps the most visible, gaping eyesore in town when it comes to surface parking lots.

I think something that may be overlooked in terms of that location is that it was originally planned to be part of the complex at 201 Portage Ave. This suggests there is a relatively easy way to tie into the weather protected walkway system from the site, likely via 201 Portage Ave. Being able to access the walkway has to add value to a potentinal site.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

We actually have an example of how doing this doesn't really fix the traffic problems, it just moves them -- Chief Peguis.

Chief Peguis bridge was done partly because there was too much traffic on Springfield and it was a residential street. The bigger street did decrease the traffic on Springfield, but now Gateway is a cluster-f***.

The issue with Gateway is not that CPT exists but rahter that there should have been a grade seperated intersection. Instead of doing the proper thing we got the cheap compromise.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by CoryB

I think something that may be overlooked in terms of that location is that it was originally planned to be part of the complex at 201 Portage Ave. This suggests there is a relatively easy way to tie into the weather protected walkway system from the site, likely via 201 Portage Ave. Being able to access the walkway has to add value to a potentinal site.

I would expect that a hotel on that site would connect with the underground walkway system. It would probably be quite easy to add a short link to the 201 Portage leg, or perhaps tap right into Portage and Main Circus (does anyone actually call it that beside the signs?). I don't think it would make much of a difference for most people though, as an underground connection would only allow you to get at most another 300 feet up Main Street without having to go outside.

I wonder what the plan is for Whiskey Dix? I'm not sure that it is an ideal next-door neighbour for a business hotel with the constant patio noise on most summer nights along with the occasional commotion.