Winnipeg | 109 Mayfair | 15F | U/C - Page 9

Unbending · #**161** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 12:57 PM**

bomberjet · #**162** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 2:34 PM**

Gru's next lair?

drew · #**163** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 2:37 PM**

keeps in the tradition of Winnipeg's developments giving the river front a giant middle finger.

bomberjet · #**164** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 3:19 PM**

Well at least the wall is blank so they can add something latter with little hindrance to the parkade lmao.

Going back to the river walk discussion. The city should add a riverwalk to that side and have them both raised up as to not flood every year. But alas we have no money for any of that riverfront stuff.

optimusREIM · #**165** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Well at least the wall is blank so they can add something latter with little hindrance to the parkade lmao.

Going back to the river walk discussion. The city should add a riverwalk to that side and have them both raised up as to not flood every year. But alas we have no money for any of that riverfront stuff.

Do like Chicago and come up with design standards for riverwalk, then make it part of development conditions. Riverfront property connected to their riverwalk is highly sought after, and there are constantly new projects going up there.

rebl · #**166** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 4:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Do like Chicago and come up with design standards for riverwalk, then make it part of development conditions. Riverfront property connected to their riverwalk is highly sought after, and there are constantly new projects going up there.

That's a fantastic idea. Do you know what street that is in Chicago...I'd like to learn more. Could it be Wacker Drive?

optimusREIM · #**167** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 4:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rebl

That's a fantastic idea. Do you know what street that is in Chicago...I'd like to learn more. Could it be Wacker Drive?

It's basically anywhere downtown with riverfront property. Wacker drive for the most part already has its riverwalk fully built out. Everything from the mouth of the river to the fork on both sides is complete. It then extends north and south from the fork in varying stages of completion for some distance.

optimusREIM · #**168** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 4:54 PM**

I should add that the river is one thing, but the lakefront is fully developped in both directions from the mouth of the river for several miles and is fully accessible to the public.

Biff · #**169** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 5:53 PM**

As an example, one of the newer sections of River Walk in Chicago. It is probably 4 feet from the water line. The walk down there is beautiful.

trueviking · #**170** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 6:13 PM**

trueviking · #**171** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 6:15 PM**

It blows me away that developers feel like they need to build that much parking in urban areas. They will learn a difficult lesson.

If we controlled the river levels in the city, would this design change?

Biff · #**172** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 6:36 PM**

Hey, at least that 3 storey concrete wall has a curve in it. Curves are a design.

trueviking · #**173** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 6:44 PM**

oh really?....fancy!

optimusREIM · #**174** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

As an example, one of the newer sections of River Walk in Chicago. It is probably 4 feet from the water line. The walk down there is beautiful.

Doing that would be nice, but I fear the political will would never materialize to create such a beautiful built riverbank. We'd have all the environmental types and nimbys join together saying that it would be devastating environmentally etc.

Authentic_City · #**175** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 8:41 PM**

I'm guessing the river level in Chicago is well controlled?

bomberjet · #**176** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 8:56 PM**

The Chicago river is highly engineered by humans and drains water away from the lake to the Mississippi. The flow was reversed in the 1800's. There are structures to control flows form the lake.

Wikipedia tells me so lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River

optimusREIM · #**177** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The Chicago river is highly engineered by humans and drains water away from the lake to the Mississippi. The flow was reversed in the 1800's. There are structures to control flows form the lake.

Wikipedia tells me so lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River

True, it is very different from the Red for many reasons beyond just its high degree of engineering. That said, I don't understand how it is that we have a floodway that is engineered to only really be of use a) during emergencies, and b) that its use is only possible by creating property damage upstream. Surely there must have been a way to design it to be able to maintain a consistent water level year round without causing upstream damage??

bomberjet · #**178** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 9:06 PM**

That is what the license for the floodway dictates.

During the floodway project, they had talked about putting in a control structure on the floodway inlet itself for nuisance flooding in the summer. Ie: to keep the riverwalk above water. It was decided not to move forward with that.

IIRC it had to do with risk created by having the new control structure below water during the high flow flood events. It could wash out completely and then leave a hole in the floodway inlet dike. Which would allow the red to flow unimpeded into the floodway channel during normal water levels. They would have to install a full on proper control structure that would duplicate what is already in place in the Red river channel to divert the water.

optimusREIM · #**179** Posted **Jul 15, 2024, 9:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

That is what the license for the floodway dictates.

During the floodway project, they had talked about putting in a control structure on the floodway inlet itself for nuisance flooding in the summer. Ie: to keep the riverwalk above water. It was decided not to move forward with that.

IIRC it had to do with risk created by having the new control structure below water during the high flow flood events. It could wash out completely and then leave a hole in the floodway inlet dike. Which would allow the red to flow unimpeded into the floodway channel during normal water levels. They would have to install a full on proper control structure that would duplicate what is already in place in the Red river channel to divert the water.

Yikes. Okay, so instead of making an investment in the city's quality of life, we decided to cheap out, checks out.

bomberjet · #**180** Posted **Jul 16, 2024, 2:23 PM**

The current set-up could do the same thing, in terms of controlling water levels, which is the whole purpose haha. I'm just not up to speed on exactly to what level. The license does allow for operations to minimize sewer backups in Winnipeg. At the time of the floodway expansion, it was mentioned that a control structure on the inlet dike would be better suited to control river walk levels IIRC.

Link below to ops guidelines.
https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/wms/rrf/guidelines.html