Disraeli Bridge Reconstruction

[1ajs]

someone musta jumped

[1ajs]

Planning Continues On Disraeli Bridges

12/1/2008

With construction on the Disraeli Bridges project scheduled to get underway in 2010, planning is progressing quickly.

Monday, the city announced the first phase of the project's procurement process. Three short-listed respondents have been identified. The city's manager of capital projects calls this the largest-ever bridge project.

The original bridges were built in 1959 and 1960

[rrskylar]

^ Too the bad the city is so short sighted to be building the bridges with same traffic capacity as the old 1959 and 1960 bridges. What you get in this city depends on which quadrant of the city you are building it for!

[metonymy]

Three big players are going to go at it for the contract: Kiewit, PCL and SNC-Lavalin. It isn't a big job for any of them.

[Only The Lonely..]

Residents say Louise more of a priority than Disraeli

By Jolie Toews | The Herald


Dec. 11, 2008



Residents, businesses and a local civic politician say they want the city to begin work on replacing the Louise Bridge before work begins on rehabilitating the Disraeli Bridge.

The city’s proposed 2009 capital budget and five-year capital spending estimates indicate that the two-lane Louise Bridge over the Red River between Elmwood and Point Douglas should be replaced with a four-lane span.

However, work on the estimated $100-million project likely wouldn’t take place until five or six years after the Disraeli Bridge undergoes repairs beginning in 2010.

“I question the order,” said North Kildonan Coun. Jeff Browaty.

“To me, it makes infinite more sense to do Louise first with four lanes and have that ready for when the Disraeli closure comes on board.”

Browaty said city engineers told him that it would not be feasible to replace the Louise prior to repairing the Disraeli because it would cost too much money to maintain the Disraeli during that time.

“Their argument is we spend X number of million dollars to maintain it and we’d have to tear it down anyways when we rebuild it,” Browaty said.

“Yeah, there’s a cost. I’d like to know what that cost is.”

Members of the East Kildonan-Transcona residents’ advisory group don’t agree with the city’s plans either. They argue it would make more sense to have an expanded Louise Bridge while the four-lane Disraeli is closed for repairs for up to 16 months.

Members of the advisory group — which makes recommendations to the East Kildonan-Transcona community committee — say a new Louise Bridge is long overdue.

“A new bridge should have been built a long time ago. However, having said that, better late than never,” said John Kubi, chair of the advisory group.

Elmwood business owner Jan Stuyck hopes the existing Louise Bridge will be able to handle the increased volume of vehicles that will use it while the Disraeli Bridge is being repaired.

Approximately 40,000 drivers that currently use the Disraeli on a daily basis will have to be re-routed if it closes.

“I’ve been on the Louise during rush hour, and it’s a nightmare. Traffic is backed up,”said Stuyck, who is also a member of the advisory group.

Public works spokesperson Ken Allen said the city doesn’t need to replace the 97-year-old Louise Bridge immediately.

“That bridge still has some service life in it. It would be inappropriate to do repairs to a bridge when it’s not needed,” said Allen, adding that he couldn’t elaborate on the plan because it’s still in the early stages.

“It would not be good use of public funds to replace it prematurely.”

Traffic studies conducted by the city show that if the Disraeli is completely shut down during rehabilitation, increases in travel times along main routes will be approximately five to 10 minutes during peak periods.

Browaty said if the city doesn’t begin replacing the Louise for another few years, it will provide an opportunity to look at development plans for Point Douglas, including realigning Higgins Avenue and changing the location of the Louise Bridge.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

Residents say Louise more of a priority than Disraeli

By Jolie Toews | The Herald


Dec. 11, 2008



Residents, businesses and a local civic politician say they want the city to begin work on replacing the Louise Bridge before work begins on rehabilitating the Disraeli Bridge.

The city’s proposed 2009 capital budget and five-year capital spending estimates indicate that the two-lane Louise Bridge over the Red River between Elmwood and Point Douglas should be replaced with a four-lane span.

However, work on the estimated $100-million project likely wouldn’t take place until five or six years after the Disraeli Bridge undergoes repairs beginning in 2010.

“I question the order,” said North Kildonan Coun. Jeff Browaty.

“To me, it makes infinite more sense to do Louise first with four lanes and have that ready for when the Disraeli closure comes on board.”

Browaty said city engineers told him that it would not be feasible to replace the Louise prior to repairing the Disraeli because it would cost too much money to maintain the Disraeli during that time.

“Their argument is we spend X number of million dollars to maintain it and we’d have to tear it down anyways when we rebuild it,” Browaty said.

“Yeah, there’s a cost. I’d like to know what that cost is.”

Members of the East Kildonan-Transcona residents’ advisory group don’t agree with the city’s plans either. They argue it would make more sense to have an expanded Louise Bridge while the four-lane Disraeli is closed for repairs for up to 16 months.

Members of the advisory group — which makes recommendations to the East Kildonan-Transcona community committee — say a new Louise Bridge is long overdue.

“A new bridge should have been built a long time ago. However, having said that, better late than never,” said John Kubi, chair of the advisory group.

Elmwood business owner Jan Stuyck hopes the existing Louise Bridge will be able to handle the increased volume of vehicles that will use it while the Disraeli Bridge is being repaired.

Approximately 40,000 drivers that currently use the Disraeli on a daily basis will have to be re-routed if it closes.

“I’ve been on the Louise during rush hour, and it’s a nightmare. Traffic is backed up,”said Stuyck, who is also a member of the advisory group.

Public works spokesperson Ken Allen said the city doesn’t need to replace the 97-year-old Louise Bridge immediately.

“That bridge still has some service life in it. It would be inappropriate to do repairs to a bridge when it’s not needed,” said Allen, adding that he couldn’t elaborate on the plan because it’s still in the early stages.

“It would not be good use of public funds to replace it prematurely.”

Traffic studies conducted by the city show that if the Disraeli is completely shut down during rehabilitation, increases in travel times along main routes will be approximately five to 10 minutes during peak periods.

Browaty said if the city doesn’t begin replacing the Louise for another few years, it will provide an opportunity to look at development plans for Point Douglas, including realigning Higgins Avenue and changing the location of the Louise Bridge.

How about we all just agree that they are both a priority, because really, they are

[1ajs]

yes they are but the city has a biger issue and thats spd if they do it right it means more tax money in their coffers in the long run... the liouse yes shoulda been done a long time ago but hey maybe we can keep it and get another bridge a the point that has higgins running threw the old paper mill witch

[The Jabroni]

Why can't they just replace both bridges at the same time? Yes, it would definitely screw over Northeast Winnipeg, but you have a bridge long overdue that's in need of replacing, and you have another pair of bridges in which it desperately is in need of replacing.

I can see the traffic headache already. >_>

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Why can't they just replace both bridges at the same time? Yes, it would definitely screw over Northeast Winnipeg, but you have a bridge long overdue that's in need of replacing, and you have another pair of bridges in which it desperately is in need of replacing.

I can see the traffic headache already. >_>

Your going to be fine. Don't you live in West K?

If so we should really go to the Brier sometime or the Big K if your nostalgic for the 70's.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by Only The Lonely..

Your going to be fine. Don't you live in West K?

If so we should really go to the Brier sometime or the Big K if your nostalgic for the 70's.

I do actually. To be honest, I sometimes use that bridge for errands.

Maybe we should hangout, but I've never been into the Brier, and I think I prefer it that way.

As for the Big K, I'm not familiar with it.

I guess this would call for a next SSP Winnipeg meetup, but that's a whole other topic to discuss.

[Riverman]

I have talked to the project engineer in charge of the Disraeli reconstruction a few times. In a nutshell, a three lane bridge is of no use due to restriction of traffic at the Elmwood end.

Just like electricians, plumbers or aircraft mechanics, traffic engineers have a set of codes and practices that they have to work in accordance with. Standards are set by national or international organizations through discussion and agreement and these standards are used to develop a set of codes that engineers must adhere to. In this case, a three lane, limited access roadway funnelling into a three lane artery through a residential area is a no-go and would not be considered unless further widening of Henderson up to Johnson or even Munroe is completed. (This is not an option as it would eliminate all of “downtown Elmwood”.)

The reason lies in the difference between a limited access roadway and a residential artery. A limited access roadway is all flowing traffic, where the artery has left and right turns, uncontrolled cross traffic, pedestrian crossings, storefronts and the like. Merging three lanes of the former into three lanes of the latter is something an engineer wouldn’t consider, much like you wouldn’t consider making toast in the bathtub.

As it is now the two lanes entering Elmwood are never congested, all the congestion occurs after the road turns to three lanes.

The closure of the Disraeli will be horrible, worse than the closure of the Redwood was. We will all have to find a way to deal with the difficulty. I’m going to ride my bike a whole bunch more.

[Riverman]

"Residents, businesses and a local civic politician say they want the city to begin work on replacing the Louise Bridge before work begins on rehabilitating the Disraeli Bridge."

Great idea. Trouble is, the Disraeli is in very, very poor condition, actually approaching unsafe, while the Louise, while very old, is still in very good condition.

[RAFS]

Originally Posted by Riverman

I have talked to the project engineer in charge of the Disraeli reconstruction a few times. In a nutshell, a three lane bridge is of no use due to restriction of traffic at the Elmwood end.

Just like electricians, plumbers or aircraft mechanics, traffic engineers have a set of codes and practices that they have to work in accordance with. Standards are set by national or international organizations through discussion and agreement and these standards are used to develop a set of codes that engineers must adhere to. In this case, a three lane, limited access roadway funnelling into a three lane artery through a residential area is a no-go and would not be considered unless further widening of Henderson up to Johnson or even Munroe is completed. (This is not an option as it would eliminate all of “downtown Elmwood”.)

The reason lies in the difference between a limited access roadway and a residential artery. A limited access roadway is all flowing traffic, where the artery has left and right turns, uncontrolled cross traffic, pedestrian crossings, storefronts and the like. Merging three lanes of the former into three lanes of the latter is something an engineer wouldn’t consider, much like you wouldn’t consider making toast in the bathtub.

As it is now the two lanes entering Elmwood are never congested, all the congestion occurs after the road turns to three lanes.

The closure of the Disraeli will be horrible, worse than the closure of the Redwood was. We will all have to find a way to deal with the difficulty. I’m going to ride my bike a whole bunch more.

Henderson has 3 lanes on either side all the way to Chief Peguis. They would just have to eliminate parking in the right lane during rush hour (and probably not all the way to CP).

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by Riverman

"Residents, businesses and a local civic politician say they want the city to begin work on replacing the Louise Bridge before work begins on rehabilitating the Disraeli Bridge."

Great idea. Trouble is, the Disraeli is in very, very poor condition, actually approaching unsafe, while the Louise, while very old, is still in very good condition.

the land bridge is the one thats in bad shape the river bidge is doing not to bad...

i don't think i will be taking the disrealie short cut anymore its gotten more sketchy and my spidy sens go nuts when i am on it

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by RAFS

They would just have to eliminate parking in the right lane during rush hour.

There has never been parking allowed during rush hour. That's not the point anyway. Try reading my post again.

[RAFS]

Originally Posted by Riverman

There has never been parking allowed during rush hour. That's not the point anyway. Try reading my post again.

Trust me. I did try reading it several times.

Yes, one of the biggest problems is people heading from Talbot to Redwood. That should be addressed. But there is no reason why the bridge shouldn't be 3 lanes.

Orrrr, I wonder how difficult it would be for people to adapt to having a lane reversal on the bridge. Maybe that is not even feasible.

[1ajs]

its the lights that back that bridge up.. go and watch it some time...

it gets all full then a min ut later its empty then its full again then its empty

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by RAFS

But there is no reason why the bridge shouldn't be 3 lanes.

Yes, there is a reason. The third lane is unneeded because the intersection north of the bridge can't handle any more traffic. Plus the (unneeded) second span would cost the taxpayer $150 million.
Oh wait, that's two reasons!

[newflyer]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Yes, there is a reason. The third lane is unneeded because the intersection north of the bridge can't handle any more traffic. Plus the (unneeded) second span would cost the taxpayer $150 million.
Oh wait, that's two reasons!

Hey .. don't hog all the reasons to yourself.

.... but if there is a congestion issue north of the current bridge, which presently can't handle the traffic, isn't that an arguement for more lanes?

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by newflyer

isn't that an arguement for more lanes?

Do you mean from MBCI north? There ain't no room! That is unless the businesses on either side of Henderson are expropriated.