Portage and Main re-opening 2016

[ediger]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Im getting beat up pretty good (though not effectively) on another forum I visit by the people wanting it kept closed. Its sort of an uphill argument with people who believe opening it will create massive gridlock, death and carnage. And have no impact on development or growth.

Bowman could always win and then ignore the vote (which in Winnipeg, land of NIMBY's will assuredly be a "keep it closed"). Its non-binding.

He'd more likely try to wait for a third mandate, hope its not an election issue, and then open it. But really, he ran on this already.

He's a weak chicken Sh!t mayor.

And the vocal majority of angry "what about my front street" people who probably never go downtown will push Winnipeg back a few years.

That's what annoys me the most about the whole scenario. Why should people who's only interactions with the intersection last about 30-120 seconds (if they go there at all) dictate how it operates? The people who are complaining have absolutely no vision whatsoever. Completely lack the capability to imagine something they can't see right in front of them.

And yes, Bowman certainly is a chickenshit mayor. You get elected into that position to lead. I haven't seen any leadership on this issue at all. If he truly believes it's in the city's best interests he should be promoting that and educating people instead of caving to the NIMBY crowd.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by oftheMoon

It's official. Council passed the P&M vote motion 14 - 1. Gerbasy was the 1.

I don't entirely follow. Was this council vote to put the issue to a referendum?

[Wpg_Guy]

Every mayor has backed off this issue in the past 20 years, Murray, Katz, Bowman. Dumb.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Wpg_Guy

Every mayor has backed off this issue in the past 20 years, Murray, Katz, Bowman. Dumb.

The big difference in the past was that the property owners objected... now they all support opening up the intersection.

Bowman couldn't get the job done and his political opponents (who probably don't give a crap one way or the other about whether the barriers stay up) have successfully commandeered the issue and they've weaponized the issue against him.

Weak, soft, Bowman. The best we can hope for now is electing someone capable of demonstrating political leadership to replace him.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by plrh

I hate how Global News keeps calling it a plebiscite when it is not. A plebiscite is legally binding.

It's the opposite. Referendums are legally binding, plebiscites are not. At least that's how it was used in BC for our transit tax proposal and electoral reform proposals. I just looked it up though, and it says the two terms are used in many different ways relating to each other in different places.

[windypeg]

Originally Posted by esquire

The big difference in the past was that the property owners objected... now they all support opening up the intersection.

Bowman couldn't get the job done and his political opponents (who probably don't give a crap one way or the other about whether the barriers stay up) have successfully commandeered the issue and they've weaponized the issue against him.

Weak, soft, Bowman. The best we can hope for now is electing someone capable of demonstrating political leadership to replace him.

I'm not impressed at all with how the mayor handled this but ultimately it is Browaty and Lukes who brought this silliness on us by just shamelessly exploiting a populist mob mentality to score some political points. Stirring up enough outrage to have our first referendum in 25 years over a damn crosswalk, it's embarrassing. Not that I expect any better from Browaty.

Bowman did really drop the ball though, no effort to sell any benefits or to calm any fears over the project. Cars already stop at lights there for petes sake, it's not like we're tearing down a freeway interchange. CBC interviewed a guy in a wheelchair today and I think that was more positive PR for the project than the mayor's done this whole time.

[buzzg]

When's the last time there was a referendum on something here? I hope if this actually happens, that every future street widening, underpass, bridge, and god damn curb repair goes to a vote.

Someone smart should organize a legal human rights challenge to keeping it closed. If the traffic engineers proved it won't have a major affect on "traffic flow," and the business owners (who it was closed for in the first place) don't want it to remain closed, then there's definitely a case against it from an accessibility standpoint.

The thing to me that's dumb about all this is that we're essentially being fed a story that it's either closed forever or open forever. The reality is no matter what, the barricades have to be torn down and street/underground repaired ASAP. Can't wait anymore. Why don't we tear them down and TRIAL it with pedestrians for a bit, then assess it, and either decorate and keep it open, or redesign new barricades from there.

Even if it ends up staying closed, the barricades HAVE TO be completely rebuilt very soon, so why commit to that expensive cost without knowing true implications?

[The Unknown Poster]

I believe all Winnipeggers should have a say but the majority against this are not informed on it. And they are impacted by it. Its an irrational sense of "there will be carnage in the streets and six hour gridlock".

But a referendum? Puhleeeze. Can we have one for Forks redevelopment? How about any deals for downtown development? Can we do it retroactively so there is an empty Eatons building instead of the Jets? Pure idiocy.

Now...assuming Bowman wins and the "get off my lawn" types win the "keep it closed" vote, can the stakeholders and city still commence to improving the intersection to an extent up to but not including opening it? Creating more street level activity and beautifying the corner while creating a routine sense of wanting to be there and *gasp* wishing they could cross....

[The Jabroni]

Thank God it's only a plebescite, and not a referendum. Right guys?

Guys?

[robertocarlos]

This is pretty much why democracy doesn't work.

[CoryB]

I am glad this will be on the ballot.

1. This might actually be the stick needed to get more people out and voting in the civic election.

2. It will give a definitive direction to the incoming council on if there is support for this to move forward without incumbents needing to risk their own position.

It would be unfortunate to see candidates win or lose based slowly on their support/opposition to opening Portage and Main.

The final take away here is Bowman had originally promised to open P&M by 2016 and in time for the Canada Summer Games. Both long distant memories now.

[borkborkbork]

I can't imagine the developers behind the Hyatt are happy with this. 138 Portage is pretty horribly cut off by P&M.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

I believe all Winnipeggers should have a say but the majority against this are not informed on it. And they are impacted by it. Its an irrational sense of "there will be carnage in the streets and six hour gridlock".

But a referendum? Puhleeeze. Can we have one for Forks redevelopment? How about any deals for downtown development? Can we do it retroactively so there is an empty Eatons building instead of the Jets? Pure idiocy.

Now...assuming Bowman wins and the "get off my lawn" types win the "keep it closed" vote, can the stakeholders and city still commence to improving the intersection to an extent up to but not including opening it? Creating more street level activity and beautifying the corner while creating a routine sense of wanting to be there and *gasp* wishing they could cross....

Why not just make it easier and more pleasant to cross underground? That seems like the obvious win-win on this one.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Why not just make it easier and more pleasant to cross underground? That seems like the obvious win-win on this one.

This is not a bad idea on its face, but considering the atrocious state of the concourse entrances that lead directly to the street and the many security/CPTED and accessibility issues that plague the underground concourse, it would probably cost a fortune. Just fixing up the concourse entrances would probably cost into the millions of dollars.

But then, if we insist on keeping the concourse open, it should probably happen anyway.

(I will say, the property owners on the corners have done a decent job maintaining the concourse entrances through private buildings. The problem is really the city-owned component.)

[The Unknown Poster]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Why not just make it easier and more pleasant to cross underground? That seems like the obvious win-win on this one.

Well that should end the argument against re-opening P&M of "it costs too much" if the alternative is spending the money anyway.

That leaves us with safety and traffic. We already know safety isnt a real issue and the real safety issue is in going underground now.

The decision will be based on the manufactured outrage of a whole lot of people who dont drive through P&M during rush hour being so upset with the idea that if they ever do, they'd have to wait an extra two minutes...

[borkborkbork]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Why not just make it easier and more pleasant to cross underground? That seems like the obvious win-win on this one.

Adding publicly-accessible handicap access to P&M (without the private buildings with limited hours, string of detours, ramps, lifts, etc.) would be a huge job. The average cost of the TTC's "easier access" program for making subway stations accessible in Toronto is $12 million per station. I'm guessing that's not a bad comparison point in terms of scope when trying to guesstimate the cost of making P&M properly accessible. And that would be just to make the existing shitty P&M concourse properly and easily accessible -- not to make it "pleasant".

[bomberjet]

Hopefully this isn't precendent setting. I don't want to be voting on every issue the City has.

If we're voting on issues that are only $10M, what about $500M dollar transit projects, or $1B dollar sewer projects??

[BigG]

Your rhetorical question is what scares me. That's why I am so pissed about this whole thing. It may set a @#!%ing precedent. Civic leaders should grow some balls and do what they set out to do - good, bad or indifferent.

[Kronos]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

There is a study that's shows all of the options for opening, with a recommended plan. Options included only opening sidewalks at certain corners.

The point being is that a significant number of people who are eligible to vote on this question, in addition to those who are discussing this via social media, have not read this report, or have been only told of parts of the reports from others who have cherry picked certain details from the report to support which ever argument they are putting forth (which happens in many arguments right or wrong)

[OTA in Winnipeg]

This isn't directed at anyone here specifically. But fucking seriously? Can't any of you naysayers not see what this could become? Portage and Main is known worldwide to anyone who follows hockey. And not only them. It's genuinely an iconic intersection, And that is a word I seldom use. Why don't you think this could not turn into a world class Times Square? No one thought that would happen there did they?

https://www.google.ca/search?q=old+t...4uwnAIl1JHkoM:

But it did, didn't it. It's like there's so many children here who have never looked at a book or investigated recent history.

Wake up.