HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2041  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 2:36 AM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: north Exchange wpg
Posts: 21,791
on a random note anyone herd of the midnight choir? got 2 friends in it i know of it kind cool idea if none of u guys herd of it

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2042  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 7:05 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Middle
Posts: 1,983
Tired of Manitoba's and Winnipeg's infrustructure problems?
Worried about the CPT and population threads?
Tired of the NDP governement and the Never ending Winter and Snowfall?
Thinking about Shindico and Sammie's shady deals .....

Well this is for you...

Enjoy and.......

Video Link
__________________
☮ ☮
⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2043  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 11:55 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: north Exchange wpg
Posts: 21,791
aww monty python
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2044  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2014, 3:39 PM
micheal micheal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 295
Enbridge to upgrade pipeline through Saskatchewan
majority of the $5 billion project runs through Saskatchewan

by:Courtney mintenko
March 10th 2014
newstalk 980

http://cjme.com/story/enbridge-upgra...tchewan/278293
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2045  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 5:06 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
Heard the following on Adler this morning regarding opening P&M to foot traffic.

"There is no difference in traffic on Portage and Main compared to say, Portage and Fort."

Stefano Grande: "Winnipeg has a lot of pedestrian traffic downtown due to the thriving retail sector there."

These are either NDP-calibre lies or neither of these people have been downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2046  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 5:15 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
demotorization
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 49.8955° N, 97.1384° W
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Heard the following on Adler this morning regarding opening P&M to foot traffic.

"There is no difference in traffic on Portage and Main compared to say, Portage and Fort."

Stefano Grande: "Winnipeg has a lot of pedestrian traffic downtown due to the thriving retail sector there."

These are either NDP-calibre lies or neither of these people have been downtown.
I won't defend Grande's alleged statement (although I have my doubts as to the accuracy of that quote), but the other one is bang-on.

If you accept the logic that opening P&M to foot traffic would cause traffic armageddon, then in theory there should be no traffic moving through downtown Winnipeg given that there intersections with very similar vehicle counts that allow ped crossings, like Broadway and Main or Portage and Memorial. So that idea is obviously and demonstrably wrong.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2047  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 5:30 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
I won't defend Grande's alleged statement (although I have my doubts as to the accuracy of that quote), but the other one is bang-on.
First, Grande's statement is word for word and I don't care if you don't believe it. I heard it, in my truck this morning on the way to Home Depot to buy a hot water heater.

No, that statement is far from bang on. You are comparing one of Winnipeg's major commuter routes with a hardly-used one-way street.

Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
If you accept the logic that opening P&M to foot traffic would cause traffic armageddon, then in theory there should be no traffic moving through downtown Winnipeg given that there intersections with very similar vehicle counts that allow ped crossings, like Broadway and Main or Portage and Memorial. So that idea is obviously and demonstrably wrong.
That's quite a stretch, seeing that you have no idea what my opinion is on the subject.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2048  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 5:32 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is online now
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 3,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
That's quite a stretch, seeing that you have no idea what my opinion is on the subject.
How about you enlighten us then?

I will start: I would support opening up Portage and Main to pedestrian traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2049  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 6:09 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
I would certainly support a trial opening to see how well it works and to see how people like it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2050  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 6:16 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: north Exchange wpg
Posts: 21,791
would be nice when out and about on foot to zip across though in dead of winter i am guna go underground to warm up as its blutty cold in that wind
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2051  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 6:22 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
How about you enlighten us then?

I will start: I would support opening up Portage and Main to pedestrian traffic.
I support opening Portage and Main to pedestrian traffic. But I still find a problem with Esquire's analysis. And it's the same problem I have with most analysis when we talk about traffic, we don't consider the volume of pedestrian traffic.

Sure the other 2 intersections have similar traffic volumes coming in and out, but we don't have accurate pedestrian counts at either of these intersections because no one ever bothers to measure. We also are only estimating the pedestrian count at P&M. We don't actually know how many pedestrians would cross.

Taking this into account, I don't know if it will cause gridlock or not, but I still support it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2052  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 6:46 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
demotorization
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 49.8955° N, 97.1384° W
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveosnyder View Post
I support opening Portage and Main to pedestrian traffic. But I still find a problem with Esquire's analysis. And it's the same problem I have with most analysis when we talk about traffic, we don't consider the volume of pedestrian traffic.

Sure the other 2 intersections have similar traffic volumes coming in and out, but we don't have accurate pedestrian counts at either of these intersections because no one ever bothers to measure. We also are only estimating the pedestrian count at P&M. We don't actually know how many pedestrians would cross.

Taking this into account, I don't know if it will cause gridlock or not, but I still support it.
There are a number of ped xings near P&M, and looking at them you can get a pretty clear idea of what the ped traffic levels would be like if the corner is reopened, e.g. Portage & Fort, Main and William Stephenson, Main and McDermot, Main and Graham.

It's not as though the pedestrian traffic at P&M will be higher by orders of magnitude. Besides, in the unlikely event that things spin out of control the corner could always be closed back up to pedestrian traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2053  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 6:56 PM
steveosnyder steveosnyder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YWG
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
There are a number of ped xings near P&M, and looking at them you can get a pretty clear idea of what the ped traffic levels would be like if the corner is reopened, e.g. Portage & Fort, Main and William Stephenson, Main and McDermot, Main and Graham.

It's not as though the pedestrian traffic at P&M will be higher by orders of magnitude. Besides, in the unlikely event that things spin out of control the corner could always be closed back up to pedestrian traffic.
Can you show me what the numbers are? Have they ever done a "traffic" study for pedestrians at these locations? I would love to see those numbers.

I kinda follow the Jan Gehl model -- incrimental "improvements" (I use quotes because it might not be an improvement, in which case you can move back), then reassessment. Open the least busy crossing first (East side), if that works, open the next busy one, etc. etc. and after each, you reassess the conditions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2054  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:09 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveosnyder View Post
I kinda follow the Jan Gehl model -- incremental "improvements" (I use quotes because it might not be an improvement, in which case you can move back), then reassessment. Open the least busy crossing first (East side), if that works, open the next busy one, etc. etc. and after each, you reassess the conditions.

Yes! An engineer I used to work with at GEAE used to call it anal-izing.

In any dynamic system (and this certainly is a system) one can not accurately predict what will happen with different levels of implementation. You can estimate and model but you also have to test and tune the system at each level. It certainly could work but you have to remember this "system" also involves all other intersections in four directions for some distance.

Of course, any true scientific process is screwed when politics are thrown into the mix.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2055  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:13 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
demotorization
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 49.8955° N, 97.1384° W
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
Yes! An engineer I used to work with at GEAE used to call it anal-izing.

In any dynamic system (and this certainly is a system) one can not accurately predict what will happen with different levels of implementation. You can estimate and model but you also have to test and tune the system at each level. It certainly could work but you have to remember this "system" also involves all other intersections in four directions for some distance.

Of course, any true scientific process is screwed when politics are thrown into the mix.
Good Lord, it's an intersection, not a space mission. It was closed so that the property owners could force pedestrians into their underground malls. I don't know that we need the achingly slow BRT-style increments for this minor project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2056  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:22 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
Yes but changes to it affect people, why not do it properly? It is not just an intersection, it is the intersection. It would make a terrific masters or PhD thesis.

Why would anybody be against doing this properly?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2057  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:33 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Middle
Posts: 1,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Good Lord, it's an intersection, not a space mission. It was closed so that the property owners could force pedestrians into their underground malls. I don't know that we need the achingly slow BRT-style increments for this minor project.
lol, you have a way with words, love it, but in all seriousness.

We're discussing traffic/pedestrian issues to no end. Very important indeed and must be taken into consideration as well.

The major problem is in BOLD, as Esquire posted.

NOTHING I repeat NOTHING will change if the business owners ,who have a major financial interest/stake in this intersection, above ground but most importantly below, cannot be convinced it is in their best interest financially, to allow pedestrians to cross above ground, rather than by pass all the investment they have added below ground.

All business parties who entered into this original contract must agree it is in "Their", best interest to reduce the foot traffic flowing below ground and let it flow away from their business.

I'd open the intersection this summer if I could, but it's the legality of the issue that is the major hurdle here.
__________________
☮ ☮
⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2058  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:42 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 1,598
As it is now, Main is very congested during rush hour. If it is made worse, other streets will take more of the load - like Waterfront.

When Waterfront opened I could putt-putt down the street and enjoy the landscape (it really is nice in the summer) but now if you try to do that you are met with horn honking and road rage. If Main Street is restricted more than it is now because of a poor effort at P&M Waterfront be become somewhat less desirable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2059  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:52 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 3,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Good Lord, it's an intersection, not a space mission.
......holy shit Esquire...........that is some funny stuff right there.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2060  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 7:54 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
demotorization
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 49.8955° N, 97.1384° W
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
All business parties who entered into this original contract must agree it is in "Their", best interest to reduce the foot traffic flowing below ground and let it flow away from their business.

I'd open the intersection this summer if I could, but it's the legality of the issue that is the major hurdle here.
Yeah, there are several hurdles and this one is the biggest. It's possible that the owners might not be persuaded to back down from the contract. But it's certainly worth exploring... It's not as though the Portage and Main concourses are all of a sudden going to become devoid of people if you can cross at street level...
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:19 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.