Winnipeg | Portage and Main

[Urban recluse]

Anyone who wants to find a job closer to home to avoid an extra minute in traffic can do so.

Opening P&M is a step in making downtown more pedestrian friendly, and encouraging storefronts to open around the intersection. To have Earl's (potentially) moving so close to P&M is a step in the right direction.

Replace the concourse with a tunnel to funnel traffic through the area. A large stretch of Main can become an urban oasis.

[pspeid]

A fact sheet from CJOB:

https://www.scribd.com/document/387253919/Portage-and-Main-Fact-Sheet

[optimusREIM]

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/civice...-regardless-of-referendum-497288121.html

Firewalled press article with obvious information but still worth the read. It talks about the fact that the barriers have to be ripped out for structural integrity reasons and not necessarily for urbanist hippie reasons.

[pspeid]

This looks like a good suggestion from the "open" side. Accommodation can work for both sides, if we can all just work towards a common solution instead of simply trying for the "zero-sum" win by denying the opposition anything they want.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4549635/vote-...flow-if-portage-main-barriers-come-down/

[robertocarlos]

I like the tunnel idea. Malls are all dead soon anyways.

[bomberjet]

What will happen is the vote will be 'no' for the election. The Mayor will honour that. The City will go back and look again at all this stuff. Over his term, it will drag out endlessly.. Best case it'll be a couple years with more studies that were put off for the election.

Re-routing transit is a good idea. Same with the Fort transit mall IMO. Maybe not a full on Graham Ave mall, but something with buses and public vehicles. Or something completely different on Fort. The highline BRT through union station would be another. Also doing things like eliminating right turn from Main onto Portage E. Turn back at Pioneer instead. Will make the intersection more efficient and are both things that should be done now anyways.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

What will happen is the vote will be 'no' for the election. The Mayor will honour that. The City will go back and look again at all this stuff. Over his term, it will drag out endlessly.. Best case it'll be a couple years with more studies that were put off for the election.

Re-routing transit is a good idea. Same with the Fort transit mall IMO. Maybe not a full on Graham Ave mall, but something with buses and public vehicles. Or something completely different on Fort. The highline BRT through union station would be another. Also doing things like eliminating right turn from Main onto Portage E. Turn back at Pioneer instead. Will make the intersection more efficient and are both things that should be done now anyways.

If that can be all done sooner, along with adding this interesting second Transit Mall proposal, then this can be a good compromise for opening Portage and Main eventually.

The West Exchange has seen progress here and there, and this proposal would further bolster that progress, among other things of course.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

If that can be all done sooner, along with adding this interesting second Transit Mall proposal, then this can be a good compromise for opening Portage and Main eventually.

The West Exchange has seen progress here and there, and this proposal would further bolster that progress, among other things of course.

I agree. It's too bad this proposal came so late in the discussion, but it can be a game changer. If the "no" vote happens, as we appear to expect at this point, it will give Bowman and the "open" side a better chance to develop attractive ideas for P & M while the barricades come down for the remedial maintenance that is happening. Combine the Fort Transit Mall/two-way traffic proposal, a visually exciting P & M proposal and the fact that the barricades will already be down, and Bowman should have enough political justification to go ahead with the P & M opening (I hope!).

[esquire]

Originally Posted by pspeid

I agree. It's too bad this proposal came so late in the discussion, but it can be a game changer. If the "no" vote happens, as we appear to expect at this point, it will give Bowman and the "open" side a better chance to develop attractive ideas for P & M while the barricades come down for the remedial maintenance that is happening. Combine the Fort Transit Mall/two-way traffic proposal, a visually exciting P & M proposal and the fact that the barricades will already be down, and Bowman should have enough political justification to go ahead with the P & M opening (I hope!).

This is precisely the kind of leadership that Bowman failed to deliver. Bowman could have built a case for open P&M that would have changed minds... Glen Murray did just that, he got people excited about the idea back at a time when the property owners did not want to open the intersection. Instead, Bowman folded like a cheap tent.

[oftheMoon]

Originally Posted by esquire

This is precisely the kind of leadership that Bowman failed to deliver. Bowman could have built a case for open P&M that would have changed minds... Glen Murray did just that, he got people excited about the idea back at a time when the property owners did not want to open the intersection. Instead, Bowman folded like a cheap tent.

It seems that in a snap, Murray changed the game. He had his faults as Mayor for sure, but it's clear how desperately this city needs a Glenn Murray.

[Wolf13]

I kinda think re-routing transit is pretty much just giving the whiners something to cheer for. Buses aren't the cause of any traffic delays here. Well, there are few, if any, delays anyway.

[ywgwalk]

Originally Posted by esquire

This is precisely the kind of leadership that Bowman failed to deliver. Bowman could have built a case for open P&M that would have changed minds... Glen Murray did just that, he got people excited about the idea back at a time when the property owners did not want to open the intersection. Instead, Bowman folded like a cheap tent.

Except he had no need to "change minds" - it was scheduled to happen this November, before Browaty and Lukes came around.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by ywgwalk

Except he had no need to "change minds" - it was scheduled to happen this November, before Browaty and Lukes came around.

He threw in the towel at the slightest sign of controversy. Instead of building a case for it he just went along with the referendum.

No question it was the politically expedient thing to do... I doubt P&M is the hill that Bowman wants to do die on, but at the same time it demonstrates a lack of ability to move his agenda forward. Similarly, his rapid transit promises from 2014 might just as well never have been made.

[wardlow]

Whatever merits this idea does or does not have, it's a little surprising and disappointing Vote Open is running with this as it completely obliterates what have been its two biggest messages so far: 'Opening P&M will hardly cost a thing' and 'Opening P&M will hardly have an impact on traffic movement.' It gives up on the idea that opening Portage and Main is a thing that can happen on its own, without a costly solution. Now apparently it does: a kilometre-long transit mall that will turn the West Exchange into a glorified bus loop.

I guess the only way you can get anywhere in Winnipeg is pitch a cool-looking physical project and hope it catches. You can't just open an intersection because it's the right thing to do, you need to throw in world class transit malls and lazer pyramids and world-class farmers markets and scrambled crossings. Maybe just open the damn thing and leave the big schemes for another day.

[Ando]

Originally Posted by esquire

This is precisely the kind of leadership that Bowman failed to deliver. Bowman could have built a case for open P&M that would have changed minds... Glen Murray did just that, he got people excited about the idea back at a time when the property owners did not want to open the intersection. Instead, Bowman folded like a cheap tent.

Exactly, Murray has done more to contribute to this debate than all the mayoral candidates in total and all the thoughts of Bowman over his tenure. This sort of out-of-the-box thinking should be the norm at city hall. Unfortunately, it exposes what a drip Bowman is and he’ll be in for another 4 years. Murray in 2222!

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by Ando

Exactly, Murray has done more to contribute to this debate than all the mayoral candidates in total and all the thoughts of Bowman over his tenure. This sort of out-of-the-box thinking should be the norm at city hall. Unfortunately, it exposes what a drip Bowman is and he’ll be in for another 4 years. Murray in 2222!

Seeing Murray run again in the future is certainly an inspiring notion! It's probably good that he's not running now, as Bowman, for all his faults, appears to the the closest thing we have to a pro-development candidate this race has. The presence of Murray might have split the "development" vote and allowed Motkaluk a greater chance to make some gains.

On the other hand, his presence as a pro "open" voice over the next few years may benefit from his standing as a private citizen without any political axe to grind or political debts to pay. He is able to speak uniquely as a private citizen who has detailed knowledge of the workings of city hall, and a desire to improve the city for the benefit of everyone.

But.....yeah....Murray in 2222!

[esquire]

^ Maybe a little sooner than that?

[drew]

I really liked Murray while he was mayor - he had great and forward thinking ideas.

My issue with him was the way he left. His abrupt exit (mid second term?) and failed attempt to get into Federal politics (to me) seemed then and still now to be his personal aspirations at the expense of Municipal governance in Winnipeg, more or less since.

Obviously it is his right to further his career, but the way it went down (and left us Katz to pick up the pieces) just put this City back for so many years.

Had he remained to close out his second term, and even gone through a third one, I can only hazard a guess that this City would have been much better off. Certainly in terms of rapid transit, and likely this ridiculous P&M "issue".

[esquire]

^ I agree. It was unfortunate the way that Murray left office with the job pretty much only half done. He was making great strides, and as I've pointed out, so many of the good things that have happened in the last 25 years have their roots in his tenure. Legacies matter, and Murray's is a damn good one for 6 years in office.

That said, I can't imagine that Murray would ever want to run for mayor again. I can very much see him wanting to inject himself into the discussion, but that's about it.

[1ajs]

so aww theres a big party going on on the 20th at portage and main on the surface and underground..