HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #881  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 1:25 AM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoryB View Post
I am not the least bit surprised to hear that the western leg of the Chief Peguis Trail will be done before an eastern extension. The one I am a little confused with is why they are stopping 3-5 km short of the Centreport Way road. Perhaps the province will be funding that piece along with the southern extension to bring Highway 6 into the Centreport Way/Chief Peguis/Inskter/Sturgeon/Highway 6 intersection that is confussing showning on the Centerport website. I am still trying to figure out how you have two east-west routes meet at a four way intersection....
The reason the City cannot connect up the Chief Peguis to CentrePort Canada Way is, the small section where Chief Peguis ends (around Route 90 and Jefferson) and the terminus of CentrePort at the western edge of Players Golf Course is not City property. I believe that is in the RM of Rosser. They need to connect inbetween Little Mountain Sports Park and north of the golf course.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #882  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 3:37 AM
Techman224 Techman224 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
The reason the City cannot connect up the Chief Peguis to CentrePort Canada Way is, the small section where Chief Peguis ends (around Route 90 and Jefferson) and the terminus of CentrePort at the western edge of Players Golf Course is not City property. I believe that is in the RM of Rosser. They need to connect inbetween Little Mountain Sports Park and north of the golf course.
The city limit is on the west side of Brookside. Any extension beyond that would have to be done by the province as a highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #883  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 3:59 AM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,228
I'm interested to find out where the city gets the money to do these projects within 4 years. Assuming there is no inflation and the projects don't go over-budget, $300 M is almost an entire year's capital budget. And I'm pretty sure the city has limits on the amount of projects they can build as P3s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #884  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 2:30 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
I'm interested to find out where the city gets the money to do these projects within 4 years. Assuming there is no inflation and the projects don't go over-budget, $300 M is almost an entire year's capital budget. And I'm pretty sure the city has limits on the amount of projects they can build as P3s.
Well, if they can show a net benefit to the 'national economy' by 'supporting development at CentrePort Canada' then they could make a pitch to the feds...

Besides, didn't the city receive money from the Federal "Building Canada" infrastructure fund; that money was supposed to go towards phase II of the rapid transit line, but is now instead being funneled toward roads. Further to that, the mayor said that the city could go after "new federal funding" for the rapid transit line.

(story is a bit dated, but shows what I'm talking about).
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opi...116641668.html

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
What will the city do with $189 million?
Infrastructure bucks could go a few ways

By: Dan Lett

Posted: 02/22/2011 1:00 AM | Comments: 1 (including replies)
BORIS MINKEVICH / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS ARCHIVES Enlarge Image


...
Bus rapid transit. Recreation centres. CentrePort. Roads and bridges. And now the Winnipeg Convention Centre.

Which project will be the beneficiary of $189 million of unspent infrastructure funding from the three levels of government that remains, on paper at least, sitting on the table collecting dust? Each week, new rumours arise about what it will be spent on, but officially, officials from the city, province and federal government refuse to confirm any of what, for now, is just talk.

The money in question, assembled as part of Ottawa's tripartite Building Canada Fund, was originally targeted for Phase 2 of the Southwest Transit Corridor, the bus rapid transit line that will eventually connect Main Street to the University of Manitoba's Fort Garry campus.

...

Last edited by Mininari; Apr 27, 2012 at 2:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #885  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 3:12 PM
EastK EastK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
Has anyone seen the master plan for the CPT? When they extend the CPT to McPhillips will it actually be a freeway with an interchange at each major road for once or will it be filled with traffic lights like the rest of it is? There is nothing but open field for the whole route so if they wanted to they could.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #886  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 3:18 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 7,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastK View Post
Has anyone seen the master plan for the CPT? When they extend the CPT to McPhillips will it actually be a freeway with an interchange at each major road for once or will it be filled with traffic lights like the rest of it is? There is nothing but open field for the whole route so if they wanted to they could.
LOL! Interchange at each intersection! LOL! ....Sorry but your in Winnipeg son.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #887  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 3:43 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
LOL! Interchange at each intersection! LOL! ....Sorry but your in Winnipeg son.
They could always just go a la South Perimeter Highway and leave those dirt road crossings as openings in the median, and include no left turn or merge lanes of any kind.

Hey, at least there won't be a traffic light...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #888  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 10:29 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post
They could always just go a la South Perimeter Highway and leave those dirt road crossings as openings in the median, and include no left turn or merge lanes of any kind.

Hey, at least there won't be a traffic light...
Those are far more dangerous than any at grade light controlled intersections. What Winnipeg needs is proper fiscal management as well as some proper help from feds and Provincial government. Kitchener Ontario has an abundance of Freeways, and I wouldn't believe for a second it is all municipally funded.
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #889  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 10:38 PM
Techman224 Techman224 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisallard5454 View Post
Those are far more dangerous than any at grade light controlled intersections. What Winnipeg needs is proper fiscal management as well as some proper help from feds and Provincial government. Kitchener Ontario has an abundance of Freeways, and I wouldn't believe for a second it is all municipally funded.
Kitchener's freeways are provincial highways. We should have major roads in the city maintained by the province (ex. Route 90, Bishop Grandon, Lag. , Chief Peguis) and have some of them upgraded to freeway standards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #890  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 10:44 PM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,284
The provincial government is finally catching up with the provincial highways....the last thing they need ATM is more of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #891  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2012, 10:52 PM
roccerfeller's Avatar
roccerfeller roccerfeller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post
They could always just go a la South Perimeter Highway and leave those dirt road crossings as openings in the median, and include no left turn or merge lanes of any kind.

Hey, at least there won't be a traffic light...
lol haha ... I think you may be on to something! We should do that within the city too. Imagine Bishop...saved from traffic lights and all left turns converted into dirt roads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisallard5454 View Post
Those are far more dangerous than any at grade light controlled intersections. What Winnipeg needs is proper fiscal management as well as some proper help from feds and Provincial government. Kitchener Ontario has an abundance of Freeways, and I wouldn't believe for a second it is all municipally funded.
definitely should be made a priority, that I agree. The Perimeter as it is could be much safer. Problem is $ and bad planning. (not sure if you caught Mini's joke or not but if you didn't, he was joking )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Techman224 View Post
Kitchener's freeways are provincial highways. We should have major roads in the city maintained by the province (ex. Route 90, Bishop Grandon, Lag. , Chief Peguis) and have some of them upgraded to freeway standards.
Would be nice, but they still have to catch up on the ones that are actually Provincial! (such as the Peri)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #892  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 3:01 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,441

Heh,
Yeah, it just amazes me that there are still said dangerous intersections on the perimeter highway, especially along the oft busy southern section. I had a close call with someone who almost "missed" their left turn at one of these intersections, and decided to slow down and stop in the left-hand (fast?) lane of a 100km/hr roadway to make his/her turn.
Yikes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #893  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 7:39 PM
roccerfeller's Avatar
roccerfeller roccerfeller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post

Heh,
Yeah, it just amazes me that there are still said dangerous intersections on the perimeter highway, especially along the oft busy southern section. I had a close call with someone who almost "missed" their left turn at one of these intersections, and decided to slow down and stop in the left-hand (fast?) lane of a 100km/hr roadway to make his/her turn.
Yikes.
Considering this has happened to me to (almost identically to you) at a different intersection along the Perimeter, I doubt we're the only two drivers who've had this


I know people who have been in accidents (some very serious) simply because of this type of planning. I like to think what could be prevented with some proper interchanges and upgrades to the highway.

I think if the city annexed all land up to the Perimeter Highway, this might make the PTHWY a bigger priority to the Government (because now more city traffic might use it in the future as Winnipeg expands) similar to what happened in Edmonton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #894  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 11:26 PM
armorand93's Avatar
armorand93 armorand93 is offline
Transit Nerd
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Calgary (former Winnipegger)
Posts: 2,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by roccerfeller View Post
Considering this has happened to me to (almost identically to you) at a different intersection along the Perimeter, I doubt we're the only two drivers who've had this


I know people who have been in accidents (some very serious) simply because of this type of planning. I like to think what could be prevented with some proper interchanges and upgrades to the highway.

I think if the city annexed all land up to the Perimeter Highway, this might make the PTHWY a bigger priority to the Government (because now more city traffic might use it in the future as Winnipeg expands) similar to what happened in Edmonton
...so we're going to make suburban sprawl all the way out to Oak Bank, without any rapid transit of any kind?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #895  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 11:36 PM
chrisallard5454's Avatar
chrisallard5454 chrisallard5454 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by armorand93 View Post
...so we're going to make suburban sprawl all the way out to Oak Bank, without any rapid transit of any kind?
Not if a proper Mayor and City Council is voted in.
__________________
2017 Tryout for DEL 2 Kassel Huskies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #896  
Old Posted May 11, 2012, 8:46 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 7,641
The CP Trail extension should have continued at least until Plessis (the distance from Lag. to Plessis being only about 1-2 KM) traffic turning onto Grassie is now backed up almost to the CP Trail at times. This was very poor planning in that more people now travel the CP Trail into east Winnipeg and hit a bottleneck at Lag. and Grassie. The Springfield intersection is now redundant and should have been rerouted onto a new frontage road.
__________________
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #897  
Old Posted May 11, 2012, 11:26 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
Just to continue our conversation from the Marion & Goulet thread......

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post

The CP Trail extension should have continued at least until Plessis (the distance from Lag. to Plessis being only about 1-2 KM) traffic turning onto Grassie is now backed up almost to the CP Trail at times. This was very poor planning in that more people now travel the CP Trail into east Winnipeg and hit a bottleneck at Lag.
...Oh, but no, no, rrskylar, the City has this all planned out. Their solution, you will see in about a week or so......wait for it........wait for it.............double turn lanes on Lagimodiere at Grassie.

This is the way the City plans it's highways and fixes it's problems.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #898  
Old Posted May 12, 2012, 4:21 AM
Reed Solomon's Avatar
Reed Solomon Reed Solomon is offline
Celebrating 50 Years
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WIN A PIG, MAN A TUBA
Posts: 783


I wonder why they don't do floralscape type advertising along these roads. Is it expensive? Lack of winter options make it unfeasible? Do car exhaust fumes kill the flowers?

I was going down Chief Peguis and it was all mud. Seemed like a waste.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #899  
Old Posted May 12, 2012, 4:53 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 7,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reed Solomon View Post


I wonder why they don't do floralscape type advertising along these roads. Is it expensive? Lack of winter options make it unfeasible? Do car exhaust fumes kill the flowers?

I was going down Chief Peguis and it was all mud. Seemed like a waste.
But no, Chief Peguis green space will soon be a wall of yellow flowers, I believe called dandelions!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #900  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 5:32 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
The CP Trail extension should have continued at least until Plessis (the distance from Lag. to Plessis being only about 1-2 KM) traffic turning onto Grassie is now backed up almost to the CP Trail at times. This was very poor planning in that more people now travel the CP Trail into east Winnipeg and hit a bottleneck at Lag. and Grassie. The Springfield intersection is now redundant and should have been rerouted onto a new frontage road.
__________________
Is there any reason to keep the CPR tracks at Springfield?
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 10:58 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.