HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #901  
Old Posted May 16, 2012, 2:43 PM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,656
The CP Transcona lead on Hwy 59 services the Star Building ready to move homes factory. You see a few of the center beam flat cars filled with lumber in their compound from time to time each month.

There is also going to be a NEW crossing on HWY 15 between the East Perimeter and HWY 207 to service the new hydro station at the end of bipole 3 next to the floodway.

The environmental impact report for the project stated that the tracks will be left on both sides of highway 15 but the crossing will be removed once the new transformers have been delivered and accepted as working. The crossing would go back in if and when the transformers have to be taken back out for service in the future years.

The reason for the removal is the Highways department is requiring the crossing to be signaled if it was to be left in and Manitoba Hydro / CN did not want to pay the monthly cost for that as it would be only used a few times a century. I think Highway were willing to allow the crossing to be "flagged" during the delivery period instead of signals.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #902  
Old Posted May 17, 2012, 4:59 AM
GORDBO GORDBO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by cllew View Post
The CP Transcona lead on Hwy 59 services the Star Building ready to move homes factory. You see a few of the center beam flat cars filled with lumber in their compound from time to time each month.

There is also going to be a NEW crossing on HWY 15 between the East Perimeter and HWY 207 to service the new hydro station at the end of bipole 3 next to the floodway.

The environmental impact report for the project stated that the tracks will be left on both sides of highway 15 but the crossing will be removed once the new transformers have been delivered and accepted as working. The crossing would go back in if and when the transformers have to be taken back out for service in the future years.

The reason for the removal is the Highways department is requiring the crossing to be signaled if it was to be left in and Manitoba Hydro / CN did not want to pay the monthly cost for that as it would be only used a few times a century. I think Highway were willing to allow the crossing to be "flagged" during the delivery period instead of signals.


was wondering why they'd put a crossing there. only thing south of hwy 15 in that area is the water resevoirs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #903  
Old Posted May 17, 2012, 5:42 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by GORDBO View Post
was wondering why they'd put a crossing there. only thing south of hwy 15 in that area is the water resevoirs
And, the GWWDRR has there own railway cars and a bridge across the floodway, but, it is not the same gauge as the CN tracks.

Hydro in its wisdom, doesn't think trucks can haul the transformers from the CN line, so they built their own rail line to be used once or twice a century. The extra 10 bucks will be added each month to your Hydro bill for the next 10 years. Manitoba Hydro, the wizards of wire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #904  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 4:47 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,630
Got stuck turning (trying to turn) from the CP Trail extension onto Gateway north once again, wonder who the brainiac was that thought eliminating two lanes of Raleigh and leaving two lanes on Gateway to Sun Valley was adequate for that amount of traffic. Winnipeg transportation motto should be " building it half-assed the first time so that we can re-do it three years later"!

As I mentioned before, have also seen traffic routinely backed up from the CP Trail extension to Grassie on Lag., where exactly did city traffic planners expect this substantial increase in traffic think the added cars would go?
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.

Last edited by rrskylar; May 18, 2012 at 4:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #905  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 5:24 AM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,656
[QUOTE=alittle1;5704221]And, the GWWDRR has there own railway cars and a bridge across the floodway, but, it is not the same gauge as the CN tracks.


GWWD is standard gauge rail, they interchange off of Dawson Road tank cars full of chemicals for the Deacon treatment plant with CN and CP .

The reason Hydro is not using GWWD is the track and bridge over the floodway can not take the weight of the new transformers. The railway was designed to branch line standards not main line ones.

I tried to find the report that was filed about the rail delivery options but it has expired off of the Manitoba Conservation web site.

As for the rail spur costs, I bet it would cost as much if not more to construct a proper concrete road to hold the weight of the transformers from the CN Transcona main line into the station. PR 207 was only upgraded (paid for by the city of Winnipeg) in load capacity from Highway #1 to the water treatment plant entrance to allow it to be built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #906  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 5:30 AM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,656
As for the Peguis extension now that Canada One RV is gone the city should buy the building and land as it runs from Ravelston to Regent and it runs right beside where it was suppose to go before that block of land was turned into a tall grass nature reserve.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #907  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 3:04 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by cllew View Post
As for the Peguis extension now that Canada One RV is gone the city should buy the building and land as it runs from Ravelston to Regent and it runs right beside where it was suppose to go before that block of land was turned into a tall grass nature reserve.
The City is planning to use that exact right of way (Bradley St) to connect the Edward Schreyer Parkway to Regent. Apparently there is enough room - i would imagine eliminating the ditches, to run 4 lanes into Regent.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #908  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 4:34 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 437
[QUOTE=cllew;5705064]
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
And, the GWWDRR has there own railway cars and a bridge across the floodway, but, it is not the same gauge as the CN tracks.


GWWD is standard gauge rail, they interchange off of Dawson Road tank cars full of chemicals for the Deacon treatment plant with CN and CP .

The reason Hydro is not using GWWD is the track and bridge over the floodway can not take the weight of the new transformers. The railway was designed to branch line standards not main line ones.

Balderdash! That railway bridge was built to the same standards as every other bridge built over the floodway in 1964 to 1966. I have watched a 100 loaded gravel cars pass over that bridge and its still standing. Who is to say that ALL the transformers have to be brought over the bridge at the same time? In your opinion, what weighs more, a transformer or a grain elevator? Ever hear of multi-tired trucks with up to 72 tires per truck.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJEWHNh-R4I & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqPoQ...eature=related
I tried to find the report that was filed about the rail delivery options but it has expired off of the Manitoba Conservation web site.

As for the rail spur costs, I bet it would cost as much if not more to construct a proper concrete road to hold the weight of the transformers from the CN Transcona main line into the station. PR 207 was only upgraded (paid for by the city of Winnipeg) in load capacity from Highway #1 to the water treatment plant entrance to allow it to be built.

And, the Northern half of PR207 from GWWD tracks to Dugald Rd. was paid for by me and every other tax paying Manitoban, which was used 99% of the time by trucks, cranes, and machinery that went to the Hydro property. I fact, the Chabot trucks that hauled rip-rap to Hydro, used the Municipal road one mile east, turned on to Southwyn Rd. and crossed 207 to get there, because of road restrictions on 207. In the process, they cut up the unpaved side road so bad that the RM had to rebuild the corners and re-gravel them at Taxpayers expense.
Just for argument's sake, Hydro hauled in limestone from Stonewall for TWO years and covered over 1000 acres of farm land with a layer SIX FEET thick of rip-rap and limestone (3" and down) to make the area in question suitable for their transfer station. Why didn't they just build the f'ing thing at Stonewall and save the gas, haulage and raw materials. The short answer: Hydro thinks it is King Shit and can do no wrong. Your great-grandchildren will be paying for this project.

Okay, rant over. And how was your day?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #909  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 5:07 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by cllew View Post
As for the Peguis extension now that Canada One RV is gone the city should buy the building and land as it runs from Ravelston to Regent and it runs right beside where it was suppose to go before that block of land was turned into a tall grass nature reserve.
The tall grass prairie located on the east side of (Constant Macaroni, Uncle Ben's Brewery, Coldstream, and other noteable businesses) Canada One is a Councillor Rick Boychuk felicity of misinformation and bullscript. When the Bradley property was acquired in the early 1960's by Metro, it was filled and leveled to grade from sources in the area. In the mid-60's, it was used for test plots by the Weed Control Branch to test soil sterilents and weed control compounds. First testing was done by Sam Hutchings, a weed inspector, the last testing was done by myself in 1974. The only original part of the property not used was a patch about 10 X 100 feet on the NW corner.

The property is no more tall grass prairie then the cricket field at City Park or the Saskatchewan Avenue dump at Westview service yard. So, have at 'er, boys, build a road there as you see fit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #910  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 6:23 PM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
The City is planning to use that exact right of way (Bradley St) to connect the Edward Schreyer Parkway to Regent. Apparently there is enough room - i would imagine eliminating the ditches, to run 4 lanes into Regent.
Thanks for the information.

For some reason I was thinking the Schreyer Parkway was connecting into Plessis by the MPI compound because the original ROW had been lost to the tall grass reserve.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #911  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 6:44 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by cllew View Post
Thanks for the information.

For some reason I was thinking the Schreyer Parkway was connecting into Plessis by the MPI compound because the original ROW had been lost to the tall grass reserve.

Hey, if you ask me your idea makes more sense. They have just finished upgrading Plessis to a 4 lane divided roadway and it actually connects to something - a new Plessis Underpass. The Edward Schreyer Parkway will run parallel to Plessis no more than 3/4 of a km away dead ending at Regent.

.......good old City planning for ya.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #912  
Old Posted May 18, 2012, 7:58 PM
cllew cllew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,656
I was wrong and Alittle1 was right, Hydro and Highways partnered to improve 207 north of the Deacon treatment plant.

I found a one line reference to highway 207 infrastructure improvement partnership in an environment report that was still online.

They sure don't make it easy to find things like this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #913  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 1:38 AM
original original is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 95
Those lights that CPT added to Lag made the NB flow of traffic just awful.

I was traveling NB and the traffic at the Grassie lights was backed up almost all the way to the Concordia overpass. This was Thursday afternoon at about 1:30pm. During rush hour, the traffic backs up to the Concordia overpass. Not to mention causes gridlock at Grassie when the short stretch between Grassie and CPT gets full of traffic.

Is anything going to be done about this? It took 5 or 6 red lights to get thru on Thursday afternoon. Does this amount of traffic not permit an overpass? What were they thinking putting a new at grade intersection so close to Springfield and Grassie?

I know I'm just ranting, and the reality is nothing will get done about this major traffic issue for many many years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #914  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 3:50 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by original View Post
Those lights that CPT added to Lag made the NB flow of traffic just awful.

I was traveling NB and the traffic at the Grassie lights was backed up almost all the way to the Concordia overpass. This was Thursday afternoon at about 1:30pm. During rush hour, the traffic backs up to the Concordia overpass. Not to mention causes gridlock at Grassie when the short stretch between Grassie and CPT gets full of traffic.

Is anything going to be done about this? It took 5 or 6 red lights to get thru on Thursday afternoon. Does this amount of traffic not permit an overpass? What were they thinking putting a new at grade intersection so close to Springfield and Grassie?

I know I'm just ranting, and the reality is nothing will get done about this major traffic issue for many many years.
Your preaching to the choir here, not only is Lag. a clusterfuck, so is Gateway now (traffic reduced from 4 lanes N and S down to two with the elmination of Raleigh betweem Springfield and McIvor) Gateway now heavily congested , traffic turning off Lag. to Grassie now backs up to the CPT extension, poor planning at it's best brought to you by the city of Winnipeg traffic dept.


Lag. was fine with four lanes when it was built back in the mid 1960's unfortunatly it can no longer handle the volume of traffic at peak times now, stretches of Lag. should have been built to 6 lanes long ago. Maybe the city of Winnipeg could hire some traffic engineers from Fargo or Saskatoon to help us improve our current
roadways to at least 1990 standards.
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #915  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 3:18 PM
original original is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Lag. was fine with four lanes when it was built back in the mid 1960's unfortunatly it can no longer handle the volume of traffic at peak times now, stretches of Lag. should have been built to 6 lanes long ago. Maybe the city of Winnipeg could hire some traffic engineers from Fargo or Saskatoon to help us improve our current
roadways to at least 1990 standards.
From what I can tell, the CPR overpass by Regent has 6 lanes right over the bridge. It cuts out to 2 right after the bridge ends. Was this done intentionally to somewhat future-proof for a 6 lane Lag? I think another lane in each direction would be great start for improving Lag.

Speaking of improvements, their finally resurfacing Lag from the Concordia overpass to Reenders Dr. They got rid of that left handed fault in the road surface that caused your vehicle to veer in and out of the center median. That was so awful for so many years... Unfortunately, it seems to be taking them forever to do this small stretch.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #916  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 6:55 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
The tall grass prairie located on the east side of (Constant Macaroni, Uncle Ben's Brewery, Coldstream, and other noteable businesses) Canada One is a Councillor Rick Boychuk felicity of misinformation and bullscript. When the Bradley property was acquired in the early 1960's by Metro, it was filled and leveled to grade from sources in the area. In the mid-60's, it was used for test plots by the Weed Control Branch to test soil sterilents and weed control compounds. First testing was done by Sam Hutchings, a weed inspector, the last testing was done by myself in 1974. The only original part of the property not used was a patch about 10 X 100 feet on the NW corner.

The property is no more tall grass prairie then the cricket field at City Park or the Saskatchewan Avenue dump at Westview service yard. So, have at 'er, boys, build a road there as you see fit.
You know , it's funny that you point this out because I've always thought it was exceptionally strange that this little patch of land somehow managed to go completely unutilized despite being surround by heavy industrial for years .

I remember years ago when they first announced that this parcel of grass basically tossed the city's long term traffic plan out the window and thinking to myself "If it's so special , why does it look exactly like every other unused plot of land ?"

Unfortunately , the city has sold off a rather important plot south of Regent that makes a direct extension of the ESP somewhat pointless . The city rejigged the whole thing and seems to have settled on rerouting the E. S. Parkway eastward to join up with Panet . Unless they've changed the plan again and decided there's no need for a south-eastern leg of the inner beltway .
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #917  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 10:05 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Maybe the city of Winnipeg could hire some traffic engineers from Fargo or Saskatoon to help us improve our current
roadways to at least 1990 standards.
I feel bad for anyone who comes out of school with a civil engineering degree hoping to become a traffic engineer. rrskylar I'm sure they know how to properly design city streets an highways. It musy be the most frustrating job in the world to design an intersection properly (grade separated) only to be told tha we don't have the money for that, now go back and design it with as many stop lights as you can.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #918  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 11:42 PM
The Jabroni's Avatar
The Jabroni The Jabroni is offline
Go kicky fast, okay!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Winnipeg, Kingdom of Skeletor
Posts: 2,388
Just to get a handle on what everybody is talking about so far... (and as previously posted many pages back, albeit slightly different)



The purple line is the proposed route of Chief Peguis Trail, extending towards the Perimeter.

The yellow line is Ed Schreyer Parkway.

The red area is the so-called "protected area" with that rare species of... whatever.

The blue area is the Vickar Chevrolet/Mitsubishi dealership.

The orange area is the in-filled housing.

The yellow area are apartments.

Had those areas not been occupied, ESP would have extended all the way down south through those areas and realign with Plessis. Now that those areas have been occupied, ESP could either realign with Ravelston Ave. West, just north of the red protected area which would eventually terminate at Plessis, or Bradley St., directly west of the protected area, and then ESP would terminate at Regent. The problem with that is justifying the ESP route when Plessis is not too far away.

So yes, it's quite a mess on how our transportation network is less-than-stellar.

As for the traffic northbound Lagimodiere on Grassie, it's a major mess. The lights on Grassie are far too short with the amount of volume traffic tossed around. Then you have Gateway and McLeod being a mess on its own.

...and this again brings up a wider, broader, and bigger issue on money. It's agreed that our roads need to be fixed, but that obviously comes at a cost. Then you have people who complain that our taxes are too high. Yes, that is true to some extent as well. It's another topic to discuss, but it's these clashing mindsets that make everything here a deadlock, or at the very least, progress at a snails pace.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #919  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2012, 3:23 PM
EastK EastK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Jabroni View Post
Just to get a handle on what everybody is talking about so far... (and as previously posted many pages back, albeit slightly different)



The purple line is the proposed route of Chief Peguis Trail, extending towards the Perimeter.

The yellow line is Ed Schreyer Parkway.

The red area is the so-called "protected area" with that rare species of... whatever.

The blue area is the Vickar Chevrolet/Mitsubishi dealership.

The orange area is the in-filled housing.

The yellow area are apartments.

Had those areas not been occupied, ESP would have extended all the way down south through those areas and realign with Plessis. Now that those areas have been occupied, ESP could either realign with Ravelston Ave. West, just north of the red protected area which would eventually terminate at Plessis, or Bradley St., directly west of the protected area, and then ESP would terminate at Regent. The problem with that is justifying the ESP route when Plessis is not too far away.

So yes, it's quite a mess on how our transportation network is less-than-stellar.

As for the traffic northbound Lagimodiere on Grassie, it's a major mess. The lights on Grassie are far too short with the amount of volume traffic tossed around. Then you have Gateway and McLeod being a mess on its own.

...and this again brings up a wider, broader, and bigger issue on money. It's agreed that our roads need to be fixed, but that obviously comes at a cost. Then you have people who complain that our taxes are too high. Yes, that is true to some extent as well. It's another topic to discuss, but it's these clashing mindsets that make everything here a deadlock, or at the very least, progress at a snails pace.
I still am trying to comprehend why the city thinks it is necessary to build the ESP when Lag is still such a gong show. I am no engineer but wouldn't 2 or 3 diamond interchanges on Lag cost around the same amount as building (as your map shows) a road which will end in front of a car dealership?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #920  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2012, 3:35 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
I feel bad for anyone who comes out of school with a civil engineering degree hoping to become a traffic engineer. rrskylar I'm sure they know how to properly design city streets an highways. It musy be the most frustrating job in the world to design an intersection properly (grade separated) only to be told tha we don't have the money for that, now go back and design it with as many stop lights as you can.
I hear you, obviously city engineers are hampered by a lack of funding and the political will to do things the right way the first time. I just find it astonishing that city planners have allowed Lag. to become such a shit show, leaving the intersection with traffic signals intact at Lag. and Springfield was proof at just how inept our city planners (or politicians) truly are.
__________________
I'm sober enough to know what I'm doing, and drunk enough to really enjoy it.
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 6:06 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.