Winnipeg Construction VIII

[esquire]

Originally Posted by lilwayne

parkade perhaps

That was the first thing that came to my mind, but then, that strikes me as a fairly small space for a parkade.

[BigG]

Perhaps a thin, tall tower of 50 storeys?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by BigG

Perhaps a thin, tall tower of 50 storeys?

The long awaited Medical Arts Building II?

EDIT: I kid, there's no such thing... at least not that I'm aware of.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Wpg transit 163-1

i hope the city takes this in to account for the Southwest RT and for the future Eastern RT so in the future we could have a direct line from say SW Wpg to east winnipeg.

It should be possible to run the northeast spur between Gateway and Raleigh off the Eastern RT line. You could then basically go from the north Perimeter to almost the south Perimeter on rapid transit.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by esquire

The long awaited Medical Arts Building II?

I heard possible residential. It is fairly secretive though so tough to know for sure.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by CoryB

It should be possible to run the northeast spur between Gateway and Raleigh off the Eastern RT line. You could then basically go from the north Perimeter to almost the south Perimeter on rapid transit.

That NE line will be sweet. What would one think. Have grade separations at the various crossings (Chalmers, Munroe, Concordia/Kimberly, McLeod, Springfield, Chief) Or go at grade.

The old rail bed is already 1m-2m higher than the roads on either side. You could dig that down probably 3m-4m from where it is now, without requiring a pump. So would seem feasible to have grade separations without too much work required. And with the relatively low cost for the rest of the corridor (basically just a road and a new path), wouldn't blow the budget. It would then get the AT path out of the intersections. I find cyclists will try to blow through the intersections without even stopping. Some of the more pro cyclist ones. Then give you a nasty look when you slam on the brakes.

[BigG]

Originally Posted by Biff

I heard possible residential. It is fairly secretive though so tough to know for sure.

Do tell.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

I heard possible residential. It is fairly secretive though so tough to know for sure.

Now that you mention it, didn't the Downtown BIZ or someone else allude it to something possibly going there recently with a drawing that showed a building on that site? My memory is a bit foggy but I seem to recall something like that maybe a year or two ago.

It does seem like an appealing place to live for students or those without cars... there are a good number of amenities nearby and the bus service can't be beat. It's surprising that other than the one tiny apartment building next to Subway, there are no residences on Graham right now.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The old rail bed is already 1m-2m higher than the roads on either side. You could dig that down probably 3m-4m from where it is now, without requiring a pump. So would seem feasible to have grade separations without too much work required.

Great point BJ.

And yes, enthusiast cyclists are for the most part assholes.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

That NE line will be sweet. What would one think. Have grade separations at the various crossings (Chalmers, Munroe, Concordia/Kimberly, McLeod, Springfield, Chief) Or go at grade.

The old rail bed is already 1m-2m higher than the roads on either side. You could dig that down probably 3m-4m from where it is now, without requiring a pump. So would seem feasible to have grade separations without too much work required. And with the relatively low cost for the rest of the corridor (basically just a road and a new path), wouldn't blow the budget. It would then get the AT path out of the intersections. I find cyclists will try to blow through the intersections without even stopping. Some of the more pro cyclist ones. Then give you a nasty look when you slam on the brakes.

Couldn't they just use rail crossing arms? It wouldn't be much to stop traffic for ten seconds every 7 minutes or whatever. Just thinking out loud.

[headhorse]

is this TV's mystery downtown project? re: Graham and Kennedy

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by headhorse

is this TV's mystery downtown project? re: Graham and Kennedy

This is exactly what I thought of.

[lilwayne]

Originally Posted by buzzg

This is exactly what I thought of.

why are they so secretive about it

is this going to be an apartment building because i doubt they would build a condo project wihout anouncements or presales

im assuming it would include a parkade on the lower levels.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by plrh

Couldn't they just use rail crossing arms? It wouldn't be much to stop traffic for ten seconds every 7 minutes or whatever. Just thinking out loud.

Yup, they could. I was just thinking out loud as well.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

That NE line will be sweet. What would one think. Have grade separations at the various crossings (Chalmers, Munroe, Concordia/Kimberly, McLeod, Springfield, Chief) Or go at grade.

The old rail bed is already 1m-2m higher than the roads on either side. You could dig that down probably 3m-4m from where it is now, without requiring a pump. So would seem feasible to have grade separations without too much work required. And with the relatively low cost for the rest of the corridor (basically just a road and a new path), wouldn't blow the budget. It would then get the AT path out of the intersections. I find cyclists will try to blow through the intersections without even stopping. Some of the more pro cyclist ones. Then give you a nasty look when you slam on the brakes.

Is there enough room between Raleigh and Gateway for both an AT path and a BRT line? I'd say the ROW is somewhere between 80 and 100 feet... With the space needed for stations, accessability ramps, and bus exit ramps at major cross streets I don't know if that's enough room.

But if it is, that would be fantastic... I would be pretty happy with something like the midtown greenway along that path to take the bikes off the street.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Great point BJ.

And yes, enthusiast cyclists are for the most part assholes.

Hope your not talking about the cyclists who feel the need to take up a whole lane, peddle 5 KMPH in rush hour in January. Of course their not selfish at all, after all they are saving the environment and the cars and buses forced to idle behind them, well then they should have taken their bikes instead as well....sound about right for some of the dip shit cyclist types?

[Riverman]

Don't get me started.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Is there enough room between Raleigh and Gateway for both an AT path and a BRT line? I'd say the ROW is somewhere between 80 and 100 feet... With the space needed for stations, accessability ramps, and bus exit ramps at major cross streets I don't know if that's enough room.

But if it is, that would be fantastic... I would be pretty happy with something like the midtown greenway along that path to take the bikes off the street.

We're currently jamming a BRT line, AT path, a rail line AND CN access roadway down a 99' corridor south of Bishop Grandin! Somehow needing to keep everything drained properly, with the cheapest possible solution.

So there should be no problem getting the BRT and AT path to fit down the old 99' corridor. It appears to be a cake walk compared to the plan currently being brewed up for the southwest leg.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

We're currently jamming a BRT line, AT path, a rail line AND CN access roadway down a 99' corridor south of Bishop Grandin! Somehow needing to keep everything drained properly, with the cheapest possible solution.

So there should be no problem getting the BRT and AT path to fit down the old 99' corridor. It appears to be a cake walk compared to the plan currently being brewed up for the southwest leg.

I think the difference comes with the on and off ramps for bikes and buses. If we sunk the RT to seperate the grade we would still need to move buses on and off the RT line somewhere along it. I doubt we would do anything sane like have people transfer from a local route to the RT route at stations along the line.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Hope your not talking about the cyclists who feel the need to take up a whole lane, peddle 5 KMPH in rush hour in January. Of course their not selfish at all, after all they are saving the environment and the cars and buses forced to idle behind them, well then they should have taken their bikes instead as well....sound about right for some of the dip shit cyclist types?

I hope you're not talking from the perspective of an automobile commuter who feels the need to change lanes every 100 feet, cutting people off just to save themselves 5 seconds. Of course they're not selfish at all, even though the projects we build to save them a few more seconds are forcing everyones taxes up... Sounds about right some dip shit "my time is more important than sustainable government" automobile types?