HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #8401  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2010, 10:05 PM
kgc087's Avatar
kgc087 kgc087 is offline
Urban Dreamer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country View Post
From City of Saskatoon Website. Great "Questions and Answers" section -

Traffic Bridge Needs Assessment

The Traffic Bridge connecting the Nutana neighbourhood to Saskatoon’s downtown is over 100 years old. It currently serves a minor traffic role on a daily basis, however acts as a vital bypass route when other bridges are closed. It is also a well-used pedestrian and cyclist crossing of the South Saskatchewan River.

Regular inspections have determined that the superstructure (steel componenets and deck) of the Traffic Bridge is reaching the end of its natural life. With this aging Bridge, decisions need to be made about its future.

The public is invited to a come-and-go Open House on Tuesday, June 22 at Nutana Collegiate, to duscuss what is important to residents, what you value and what your priorities are for the future of the Traffic Bridge.

Traffic Bridge Open House
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. (come-and-go)
Nutana Collegiate - auditorium
411 - 11th Street East


Civic staff and the Consultant will be present to provide information, answer questions and gather public input.

Public opinion will also be gathered on an on-line Traffic Bridge Forum starting on June 23 and continuing until mid-July, 2010. Check back here for information.

Additional open houses will be held in September and October to present alternate concepts and the recommended option(s), and to getehr final public feedback to be incorporated into any future design.

In May 2010, the City hired a Contractor to conduct a transportation needs assessment for the Bridge. The project will be completed in teh late fall and includes:
• public consultation (three open houses and an on-line forum);
• the assessment of current traffic, pedestrian and cycling usage;
• recommendations for the number of lanes required if it is to remain a traffic bridge;
• what changes would be necessary to increase its utility as a traffic bridge;
• an evaluation of structural requirements to retain the existing bridge; and,
• how the bridge might be configured as a transit-only or pedestrian/cyclist-only facility.

Background

The Traffic Bridge officially opened on October 10, 1907. As Saskatoon’s first bridge specifically designed for foot and vehicle traffic, it was built to provide a safe and reliable way for vehicles, pedestrians and freight to cross the river. Although it has been known by several names over its long history, it is most correctly called by its original name: the “Traffic Bridge”.

Questions and Answers

Is the Traffic Bridge safe?
Yes. The most recent inspection (fall of 2009) determined that only minor repairs are required at this time and that there is no immediate concern with the capacity of the bridge to handle the current five tonne load limit. The inspection also noted that corrosion is continuing to advance. The Bridge is inspected annually to ensure public safety due to uncertainties in the rate of deterioration.

The repair in 2006 was expected to extend the life of the Bridge. What happened?
The interim repair allowed the aging bridge to re-open to traffic and to be serviceable for up to 20 years, however there is the possibility that a future annual inspection may reveal a deficiency which would require immediate closure of the Bridge.

Would keeping motor vehicles off of the Bridge and allowing only pedestrians and cyclists extend its life?
Decreasing the load limit will not extend the life of the Traffic Bridge as almost 75% of the total load on the bridge is its own weight. As the bridge continues to deteriorate, more of its remaining capacity will be required to support its own weight.

Can the Bridge be saved?
The concrete river piers are adequate for the current five tonne load limit for approximately 20 years, however it’s too soon to be sure about the superstructure. We’ll know more after we study the contractor’s report detailing the feasibility of completely rehabilitating the existing Traffic Bridge.

What is the environmental impact of completely rehabilitating or removing the superstructure?
The original protective coating on the Bridge’s steel superstructure was lead-based paint. While much of the coating has long been oxidized (i.e. turned to rust), complete rehabilitation or replacement would require a containment system to properly collect and dispose of the paint and rust flakes.

The Traffic Bridge has historical significance as our city’s first bridge for use by pedestrians and vehicles, and it is also the site of the province’s only maritime disaster. Will that be recognized?
The City is reviewing the process for having a City-owned property declared a Municipal, Provincial and/or Federal Heritage Site. Also, the consultation process will help us understand community attitudes, values, and the needs to be addressed when potential options for the Traffic Bridge are considered.

What are some options for the Traffic Bridge?
Options for the Bridge will be determined based on public input, traffic analysis and a structural assessment, and could include complete rehabilitation, construction of a new superstructure on the existing concrete piers or construction of a completely new bridge. Options may include:

· Re-use the existing bridge or components of the existing bridge

· Two-lane or four-lane bridge with wide pedestrian/cyclist paths

· Transit-only bridge with wide pedestrian/cyclist paths

· No replacement (i.e. demolition)

· Pedestrian/cyclist only structure

· Two-lane bridge with capacity for streetcars, with wide pedestrian/cyclist paths

What about the lights on the Traffic Bridge?
The lights could be removed and reused.

How many pedestrians use the Traffic Bridge?
On a typical weekday (in March 2010), we counted:

151 pedestrians, cyclists and skateboarders between 7am and 9am
107 pedestrians and cyclists between 11:30am and 13:30pm
184 pedestrians and cyclists between 4 pm and 6 pm
Has the volume of traffic using the bridge changed?
Yes, for instance, the opening of the Senator Sid Buckwold Bridge in 1966 removed almost 7,000 vehicles a day from the Traffic Bridge.

Why start this study now?
The limited service life of the Traffic Bridge means that decisions will need to be made about its future. We need to prepare for those discussions now.

Traffic Bridge Facts
Weight Restriction - 5 tonnes
Height Restriction - 2.6 metres (8’-6”)
Driving Lanes - 2 narrow driving lanes, 2.9 metres wide/each, no shoulder
Pedestrian Walkway - 1.8 metres wide, on the westside of the superstructure only
Average Weekday Use - 7,493 vehicles in 2008 (3,472 northbound and 4,021 southbound)

Source
This is such a difficult one, the traffic bridge is a beautiful piece of heritage that helped form Saskatoon as well it is just as iconic for the city as the Bess. At the same time if we are demolishing it, the opportunity for a SPECTACULAR bridge designed by some of the worlds leading architects could be built. There probably will never be another opportunity like this again seeing as pedestrian oriented bridges lead themselves to be aesthetically embellished. Maybe the April fools joke of relocating the bridge onto a large portion of the riverbank to be a heritage sculpture isnt a bad idea THEN the bridge can be kept and we can make way for a juicy, modern sculpture to span the river!
__________________
Just be.
     
     
  #8402  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2010, 10:47 PM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 4,518
June 14th Council meeting agenda is up on the City's site.

Pg 22: Recommendation that Parcel 'Y' be sold to Lake Placid for $5,240,494.00.

- It does not state the results of the Deloitte & Touche review, but a condition to the sale agreement is that Lake Placid provide documentation no later than November 1, 2010 confirming "that it has financing in place to complete the footings, foundation and parking structure of the development to grade level." Is this gonna be another one of those nail biter deadlines?!? And when can sit prep/excavation begin?
- I counted a list of about 90 letters received by Council on the matter, and 11 persons requesting to address Council personally, including Mr. Nasser and Mr. Lobsinger.

http://www.saskatoon.ca/CITY%20COUNCIL/Pages/MinutesandAgendas.aspx
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016] | [2022-25]
     
     
  #8403  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 12:50 AM
milanboy milanboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country View Post
...Good news. I was hoping it would be at RUH... more visible, accessible location. Would love to see it have a riverbank perch (aka - above the parkade).
Sorry, no such luck. According to the news item on the radio this afternoon the idea is to tear down the old parking structure next to RUH that was ironically just repaired last summer and build the new children's hospital there right next to the existing newer RUH building. Then they would build a new parking structure next to the newer one right on the riverbank. I just hope that Meewasin would say no to another parking structure on the riverbank, but they already approved the ugly newer one that is there.

Why not put the childern's hospital on top of the newer parking structure and have it wrap over the front onto the riverbank similar to the new mental health facility next door?
     
     
  #8404  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 5:17 AM
Crisis's Avatar
Crisis Crisis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,329
Another Deadline for River Landing Village???

Why not just build the Chidren's Hospital on Parcel Y? Because it's gonna be a cold day in Hell before Lake Placid gets River Landing Village built.

Now the deadline is November 1, 2010 - a full year after the last "deadline"? Give me a break!!! Part of the justification for continuing on with Lake Placid was that it would take too long for a new developer to complete their plans and get in the ground (3 years was the stated time frame, as I recall). So now, after we piss away another year or two with Lake Placid, we'll be back at square one waiting 3 years for a new developer to get their program to the point of mobilizing on site.

What needs to happen is the COS should re-visit their RFP requirements for the property and send the land to the marketplace with a more palatable set of development conditions (e.g. no requirement for a "public space" - the City just spent $75M building one along the riverbank in front of Parcel Y). Then evaluate the proposals and select the most attractive one received from qualified (financing-secured) proponents.

That's my rant for this evening.
     
     
  #8405  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 7:22 AM
Temperance Temperance is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by milanboy View Post
I just hope that Meewasin would say no to another parking structure on the riverbank, but they already approved the ugly newer one that is there.
Yes, for sure there should not be another ugly parkade on the riverbank.
     
     
  #8406  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 7:24 AM
Temperance Temperance is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisis View Post
Why not just build the Chidren's Hospital on Parcel Y? Because it's gonna be a cold day in Hell before Lake Placid gets River Landing Village built.

Now the deadline is November 1, 2010 - a full year after the last "deadline"? Give me a break!!! Part of the justification for continuing on with Lake Placid was that it would take too long for a new developer to complete their plans and get in the ground (3 years was the stated time frame, as I recall). So now, after we piss away another year or two with Lake Placid, we'll be back at square one waiting 3 years for a new developer to get their program to the point of mobilizing on site.

What needs to happen is the COS should re-visit their RFP requirements for the property and send the land to the marketplace with a more palatable set of development conditions (e.g. no requirement for a "public space" - the City just spent $75M building one along the riverbank in front of Parcel Y). Then evaluate the proposals and select the most attractive one received from qualified (financing-secured) proponents.

That's my rant for this evening.
I think there's nothing wrong with having a public space component. I don't see why the land would not be attractive to developers.

Having said that I can't believe they are giving Lake Placid another deadline. I like the project but enough is enough. They have had plenty of opportunity to get their money together and if they haven't done it yet (as the reports seem to indicate) then it is time to move on. Who knows? Maybe an even better proposal will come along?
     
     
  #8407  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 2:18 PM
Wyku Wyku is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisis View Post
Why not just build the Chidren's Hospital on Parcel Y? Because it's gonna be a cold day in Hell before Lake Placid gets River Landing Village built.

Now the deadline is November 1, 2010 - a full year after the last "deadline"? Give me a break!!! Part of the justification for continuing on with Lake Placid was that it would take too long for a new developer to complete their plans and get in the ground (3 years was the stated time frame, as I recall). So now, after we piss away another year or two with Lake Placid, we'll be back at square one waiting 3 years for a new developer to get their program to the point of mobilizing on site.

What needs to happen is the COS should re-visit their RFP requirements for the property and send the land to the marketplace with a more palatable set of development conditions (e.g. no requirement for a "public space" - the City just spent $75M building one along the riverbank in front of Parcel Y). Then evaluate the proposals and select the most attractive one received from qualified (financing-secured) proponents.

That's my rant for this evening.
From what Atch has said in interviews, it sounds like parking is the real reason why they're keeping with Lake Placid/not really entertaining other options. Lake Placid is willing to build the underground parking on their own dime where none of the other developers that have shown interest will and want the city to put up the coin for it. I think if it wasn't for this requirement we'd have more than just the one real plan on the table right now.
     
     
  #8408  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 3:34 PM
Jerry's Avatar
Jerry Jerry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country View Post
The street trees have now been planted up and down most of the 21st-22nd block of 3rd Ave. It's great to see trees on that block for the first time since.... Ever?!

Can't wait for the heritage lighting and street furniture to be installed and the median planted. It's gonna look sharp!
I have to agree, can't wait for completion.


^^ Newly planted trees looking south on 3rd Ave. between 21st & 22nd st.


^^ Newly planted trees looking north on 3rd Ave. between 21st & 22nd st.
     
     
  #8409  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 5:06 PM
Jerry's Avatar
Jerry Jerry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country View Post
June 14th Council meeting agenda is up on the City's site.

Pg 22: Recommendation that Parcel 'Y' be sold to Lake Placid for $5,240,494.00.

- It does not state the results of the Deloitte & Touche review, but a condition to the sale agreement is that Lake Placid provide documentation no later than November 1, 2010 confirming "that it has financing in place to complete the footings, foundation and parking structure of the development to grade level." Is this gonna be another one of those nail biter deadlines?!? And when can sit prep/excavation begin?
- I counted a list of about 90 letters received by Council on the matter, and 11 persons requesting to address Council personally, including Mr. Nasser and Mr. Lobsinger.

http://www.saskatoon.ca/CITY%20COUNCIL/Pages/MinutesandAgendas.aspx
I had a chance to go through all the letters and the vast majority are in support of the project going ahead. Letters from private citizens to business people and even from our Minster of Enterprise Ken Cheveldayoff encouraging council to support the deal. If any one wants to check out the letters then download the full agenda.

Fingers crossed as always.
     
     
  #8410  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 5:48 PM
prairieguy prairieguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,567
I just popped over to the Regina Skyscraper page and there is a lot of construction projects happening or scheduled for Regina! Several major towers are in the works and a similar project to Lake Placid called Capital Pointe (but without the public space amenity).

What caught my interest in a recent post was word that Regina has put in a proposal for a pro soccer team (appears to be somewhat linked to potential new stadium). I think a pro-soccer team would do great in Saskatchewan, but being played in a 35,000 seat stadium would be a stretch and would not provide for a very exciting environment. Maybe Saskatoon should be putting in a bid and look at upgrading either Griffith Stadium (seating 15,000) or Gordie Howe Park??

Not to take away from the Regina bid, but it may be a more feasible option in a smaller stadium in Saskatoon. And lets face it...Saskatoon will never have a large pro stadium like Regina.
     
     
  #8411  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 5:59 PM
midnightrambler's Avatar
midnightrambler midnightrambler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 264


Oh boy not the stadium talk again.

In my honest, humble opinion. The government would be better served to invest all that money in renewable energy as opposed to blowing it on a stadium for a B league team in a B league.

75% of our power is still generated by heavy polluting coal at boundry dam.

But a Stadium for a football team is obviously more important.

Government's and people need to get their priorities in order.
     
     
  #8412  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 6:06 PM
prairieguy prairieguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,567
No, no, no....I don't want this to get into the stadium debate in Regina. I am just curious as to opinions as to upgrading Saskatoon's current facilities to possibly entertain the notion of having a pro soccer team here. I would think a facility of 10,000-15,000 would likely make this viable. May also open up opportunities to host other mid-size national or international sporting events (i.e. World Jr. Track, National Track, perhaps some outdoor concert opportunities, etc.)
     
     
  #8413  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 9:45 PM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 4,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
I had a chance to go through all the letters and the vast majority are in support of the project going ahead. Letters from private citizens to business people and even from our Minster of Enterprise Ken Cheveldayoff encouraging council to support the deal. If any one wants to check out the letters then download the full agenda.

Fingers crossed as always.
Wow Jerry, you weren't kidding... I just read through the letters. For once the yay-sayers outnumber the nay-sayers (they're probably still grumbling over on The StarPhoenix comments section)

Saskatoon wants this built!!
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016] | [2022-25]
     
     
  #8414  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2010, 10:57 PM
Jerry's Avatar
Jerry Jerry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 798
Unveiling of fire vessel river landing phase 1

Global News: Thursday, June 10, 2010 3:32 PM


UNVEILING OF FIRE VESSEL RIVER LANDING PHASE I RIVERFRONT

Officials from the provincial and civic governments took part in the unveiling of the fire vessel at River Landing Phase I Riverfront today. Participating in the ceremony were; Joceline Schriemer, MLA Saskatoon Sutherland, on behalf of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport Minister Dustin Duncan and His Worship Mayor Donald Atchison.


The fire vessel, located along the riverfront on Phase I of River Landing, is a stunning art piece created by Saskatchewan renowned artist, Douglas Bentham. This piece has a natural gas flame which is usable during all four seasons of the year. The fire pit area has a seating node for all age groups to gather and enjoy at any time of day. The Meewasin Valley Authority managed the installation of the fire vessel.


Partial funding for the fire vessel, landscape and seating node was provided by the Provincial Government through its Olympic Torch Legacy funding and the Saskatoon Olympic Torch Relay Committee. The local Olympic Torch Relay Committee unanimously voted to make the fire vessel its legacy, commemorating the 2010 Olympic Torch Relay with a $5,000 contribution. The Olympic Torch went through Saskatoon on January 11, 2010, on its cross-Canada journey to the 2010 Olympic and Paralympics Winter Games in Vancouver, British Columbia. The Province provided $45,000 to each of the nine of Saskatchewan Celebration Communities, as designated by the Vancouver Olympic Committee (VANOC), along the Torch route to use for both celebration activities and legacy pieces.


“Our provincial government is pleased to contribute to this marvellous legacy for the people of Saskatoon. It demonstrates how Saskatchewan got the Olympic spirit and how that spirit will be visible for years to come,” Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport Minister Dustin Duncan said. “The location is also in a welcoming spot. It invites people to gather and to take in the beauty of the area and it will encourage further tourism in Saskatoon.”


“The fire pit enclave will be a focus of late evening and year-round activities. It is the perfect gathering place for groups and people of all ages” Mayor Atchison said. “It enhances the area’s natural beauty and provides people the opportunity to sit around the fire and enjoy the spectacular view of the river.”


Construction on the fire vessel area started in August of 2009. The overall cost of the fire vessel, landscaping, and seating node is $215,000 with the fire vessel valued at $20,000.


Booking of the fire vessel can be done through the City of Saskatoon’s Allocations Office at (306) 975-3366. Due to the use of natural gas piping to light the flame, a commissionaire is needed to unlock and safely ignite the flame, at a minimal cost of $40. Close proximity to the Pavilion Building will allow access to concessions and washrooms.


© Copyright (c) CW Media Inc.

Source
     
     
  #8415  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 2:12 AM
EarlyByrdProductions's Avatar
EarlyByrdProductions EarlyByrdProductions is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The S'toon & Marsella, Nicaragua
Posts: 283

sweet.
anyone have any pics?

---

did anyone attend the waterpark talks?
__________________
www.viyarte.com
     
     
  #8416  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 2:34 AM
dsim249's Avatar
dsim249 dsim249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 946
^^^

I saw it on the news, but I still can't figure out exactly where it is located.

Anyway, it's pretty neat, but not anything to write home about. Just a simple circular design.
     
     
  #8417  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 3:18 AM
blueboots blueboots is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 13
Jumbo Bus

Can someone explain to me the logic behind the Jumbo Bus. Sure the Feds are behind this but that does not mean it is right. The energy used to power this thing must be 1.5 times the power a regular bus would use. Is Transit going to extend these Dart routes into the burbs just to fill these road Monsters. I can see it already, these buses are going to try to pickup every one they can and every other bus in the city is going to run empty.

I think this is another two steps back for Saskatoon Transit. We don't need bigger buses we (transit riders) want a system were anyone from downtown has two options to get east or west and every route only takes 15 minutes.
     
     
  #8418  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 4:16 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 14,948
any bets on who will get the new art gallery design?

word might be KPMB.
     
     
  #8419  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 4:17 AM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 4,518
blueboots - I live on the DART 50/60 route to which the new articulated buses will be assigned. I can assure you that during peak hours when U of S students are either going to, or coming home from classes on campus, these larger buses are badly needed. When I catch the bus in the morning it has only done a loop around the Lakeview neighbourhood picking people up, and by the time it gets to me it is either standing room only, or very close to that.

I think they're definitely justified on the 50/60 route, which is a well-established, well-used route. Then some of the new-ish buses that currently run that route can be assigned to others. Not saying this alone is reason enough to have them, but from my experience on this particular route, more capacity is needed.
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016] | [2022-25]
     
     
  #8420  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 4:22 AM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 4,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
any bets on who will get the new art gallery design?

word might be KPMB.
Tell me more. Where's this word coming from?
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016] | [2022-25]
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:09 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.