HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 6:17 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reignman View Post
Alittle I hope you aren't serious. This project is actually in jeopardy? If it's cancelled this would be a huge embarassment for the city.

Then again, as you mentioned, could be a positive development in the long run if the project is eventually redesigned into a rail overpass incorporated into an interchange at Dugald. But *gasp*, building an interchange at that location may mean the city would have to twin Dugald further east
If Federal funding is only available to Dec., 2014, can you see it being completed? It takes the City that long just to put a culvert in.

And, you know very well Dugald east of Plessis will NEVER be four laned to any success due to the bottle neck at the Malt plant. Any chance of four laning went out the window when they allowed construction of the new house at Copeland. Exception would be if the Malt plant joined the 'Fire of the Week Club' and it was razed to the ground. (Highly unlikely, with those new 10 " mains they installed 3 or 4 years ago.) Furthermore, the City wouldn't 'have to' do anything, because of the wonderful three-lane-bridgethat sits over the floodway on the highway to Never-never Land outlined in PC Blue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 6:56 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
I am not usually out that way so I can't personally vouch visually, but i recently spoke to a person high-up with the project and they said that lots of underground work has been occurring. Lots of people have been complaining at the apparent lack of work as well. Yes the project is significantly over budget. The major gas line that runs through the site has been causing huge headaches.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 7:55 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
The major gas line that runs through the site has been causing huge headaches.
To throw a little more gas on the fire, so to speak, that gas line has been a known fact since the early '50's, what else don't they know?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 8:17 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
alittle1 Just a question, why are you so against this thing? Or are you just against the process? I don't really know what you're trying to get at here with all the comments...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 8:33 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
To throw a little more gas on the fire, so to speak, that gas line has been a known fact since the early '50's, what else don't they know?
No one said they didn't know about it, it is just a major headache to relocate.....lots of regulations, rules and restrictions. I don't know the details on it but was told it was a trouble spot.

The planners looked at doing and overpass but the cost was astronomical. The underpass was significantly less expensive if you can believe that).
__________________
"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
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2013, 8:43 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
No one said they didn't know about it, it is just a major headache to relocate.....lots of regulations, rules and restrictions. I don't know the details on it but was told it was a trouble spot.

The planners looked at doing and overpass but the cost was astronomical. The underpass was significantly less expensive if you can believe that).
From what I've heard is that the overpass included a parclo for Dugald when it was looked at. I don't know if one was ever looked at in detail to have an at grade intersection. I think with the overpass it would require a large raising of the Dugald intersection. I've heard it was a 10' raising or a 10' lowering of that intersection, as mentioned before. The designers made it work fairly nicely without the significant lowering for the underpass.

In regards to the utilities. There's old wooden stave sewers, multiple gas and oil pipelines, water and waste lines. Just about anything there is. Pretty sure when the railway was built, they used some large rock for a base. This is also causing issues with the horizontal drilling.

The kicker is Russ Wyatt slamming it down on city hall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2013, 8:00 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
The point of my posts are this, is it better to go under or over?

Hind site has shown me that digging in the ground most always results in an unknown. As you have already attested to, Quote: There's old wooden stave sewers, multiple gas and oil pipelines, water and waste lines. Just about anything there is. Pretty sure when the railway was built, they used some large rock for a base. This is also causing issues with the horizontal drilling. and that is only the tip of the ice berg.

Why would you want to go into the unknown, when there is such a nice clear sky to place an over pass, thus eliminating another set of lights and traffic stoppage. You must be a product of a traffic engineer that believes a four way stop sign is better than one or two people having to wait a few extra seconds while thru traffic clears and then pull out (equal rights of a sort).

The reason why an overpass should be placed at this intersection and railway crossing is this simple. An overpass creates an uninterrupted flow of traffic over an obstacle (ie. railway tracks, Dugald Rd. ). A underpass only goes under one obstacle (railway tracks) and then stops at Dugald Rd. , so what was the point? By crossing both obstacles, you are allowing a free flow of traffic from North to South and are not impeding East to West cross traffic.

The City owns the property at the S/E corner known as the Country Club, as well as the Golf Course. Bishop Grandin will eventually be pulled through to Hwy #1 (Fermor). Plessis Road will be widened from Hwy 1 to Dugald Rd. Marion/Goulet will join into Dugald Rd. Plessis Road north will join into CPT (Chief Peguis Trail) and a new inner beltway will be formed. Four to eight thousand acres sits on the S/E quadrant of Winnipeg awaiting future development with sewer, water and hydro close at hand. The only thing not in place is roadways to get to the property and place of business and industry. Does this complete the picture for you?

The City says that it can not afford to build overpasses at main arteries. What the City does not understand is, if you talk to the man who pays the bills, which is you and me, I say, 'Give me an overpass because I'm tired of waiting in stop 'N go traffic while waiting for someone to turn, tired of spending money on brake pads and extra gas'. Therefore my answer is, the City cannot afford NOT to build overpasses. If Winnipeg and Manitoba wants to attract business and people, it has to get into the 21st Century and build an infrastructure that is second to none in Canada.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2013, 8:22 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
^^^ Believe me, the planners and the designers both recognized that an overpass was the best method for this project but were TOLD to design the cheaper underpass option and to make it work, no matter how ugly (the alignment with Dugald Rd, apparently pushes the limit for road incline).
__________________
"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
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2013, 8:42 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
^^^ Believe me, the planners and the designers both recognized that an overpass was the best method for this project but were TOLD to design the cheaper underpass option and to make it work, no matter how ugly (the alignment with Dugald Rd, apparently pushes the limit for road incline).
Biff,

Isn't it ironic that TWO former city councilors live or have an interest in property that are on the Corner of Dugald and Plessis?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2013, 8:57 PM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 302
Alittle...I don't think anybody on here is disagreeing with you that an overpass is the better option, and that grade separations over at-grade intersections are preferable. I feel the same way, that if we don't invest the money now....we won't reap any possible rewards in the future. We unfortunately have very short sighted civic and provincial governments who can't see past the next election. They need to understand that the further we put these improvements off, the further we will fall behind. It may be easy and cheap to toss up a traffic light now, but 10-20 years from now when the city has grown by 100000+ people, and we all of a sudden need 47 grade separations all at once its simply not going to be possible. It's not only my personal interests and convenience at stake...I want Winnipeg to be well positioned to attract businesses and jobs so that my children won't need to move away to find them. And at the rate we are going, in a province where putting up one interchange is seemingly an insurmountable task, in a city where we simply extend roads instead of improving the current road infrastructure first...I truly worry that may end up being the case.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2013, 12:05 AM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
The point of my posts are this, is it better to go under or over?

Hind site has shown me that digging in the ground most always results in an unknown. As you have already attested to, Quote: There's old wooden stave sewers, multiple gas and oil pipelines, water and waste lines. Just about anything there is. Pretty sure when the railway was built, they used some large rock for a base. This is also causing issues with the horizontal drilling. and that is only the tip of the ice berg.

Why would you want to go into the unknown, when there is such a nice clear sky to place an over pass, thus eliminating another set of lights and traffic stoppage. You must be a product of a traffic engineer that believes a four way stop sign is better than one or two people having to wait a few extra seconds while thru traffic clears and then pull out (equal rights of a sort).

The reason why an overpass should be placed at this intersection and railway crossing is this simple. An overpass creates an uninterrupted flow of traffic over an obstacle (ie. railway tracks, Dugald Rd. ). A underpass only goes under one obstacle (railway tracks) and then stops at Dugald Rd. , so what was the point? By crossing both obstacles, you are allowing a free flow of traffic from North to South and are not impeding East to West cross traffic.

The City owns the property at the S/E corner known as the Country Club, as well as the Golf Course. Bishop Grandin will eventually be pulled through to Hwy #1 (Fermor). Plessis Road will be widened from Hwy 1 to Dugald Rd. Marion/Goulet will join into Dugald Rd. Plessis Road north will join into CPT (Chief Peguis Trail) and a new inner beltway will be formed. Four to eight thousand acres sits on the S/E quadrant of Winnipeg awaiting future development with sewer, water and hydro close at hand. The only thing not in place is roadways to get to the property and place of business and industry. Does this complete the picture for you?

The City says that it can not afford to build overpasses at main arteries. What the City does not understand is, if you talk to the man who pays the bills, which is you and me, I say, 'Give me an overpass because I'm tired of waiting in stop 'N go traffic while waiting for someone to turn, tired of spending money on brake pads and extra gas'. Therefore my answer is, the City cannot afford NOT to build overpasses. If Winnipeg and Manitoba wants to attract business and people, it has to get into the 21st Century and build an infrastructure that is second to none in Canada.
Four to Eight Thousand acres in SE Winnipeg? Maybe you're thinking of Springfield...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2013, 1:29 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
Biff,

Isn't it ironic that TWO former city councilors live or have an interest in property that are on the Corner of Dugald and Plessis?
Hey, I hear you. I think that lots of questionable stuff happens all the time at city hall and is likely a major headache here. Having Al Golden own one of the corner properties is likely the issue as well.

All I am trying to say is don't be too quick to blame planners and designers. Believe me, they know the right things to do, it is just the people that pay their wages and contracts have the final say.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2013, 4:29 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Reignman,

I totally agree with you. Our grandchildren will end up paying for the stupidity of short-sighted politicians. One of my pet peeves is the Three lane bridge on Hwy 15. The next person killed on it should sue the ass off of the provincial government that allowed it to be built.

Biff,

The people that pay they're wages are, you and I.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2013, 8:00 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
So what's going on there today? I hear some grading work is going on for the railway shoofly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2013, 8:41 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
Reignman,

I totally agree with you. Our grandchildren will end up paying for the stupidity of short-sighted politicians. One of my pet peeves is the Three lane bridge on Hwy 15. The next person killed on it should sue the ass off of the provincial government that allowed it to be built.
The three lane bridge only makes sense if you look at it as the first phase of a project that involves the construction of two three-lane bridges to cross the floodway (like you see a bit further south at the TCH East where it crosses the floodway).

Surely the next phase must be to twin PTH 15 and build a second span next to the existing one?!?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2013, 2:50 AM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
The three lane bridge only makes sense if you look at it as the first phase of a project that involves the construction of two three-lane bridges to cross the floodway (like you see a bit further south at the TCH East where it crosses the floodway).

Surely the next phase must be to twin PTH 15 and build a second span next to the existing one?!?
Unfortunately the recently revealed plan for an Oakbank Corridor lays to rest any hope of a twinned Dugald Road (east of the perimeter anyways).

The explanation I had heard for the three lane bridge at the time of construction was that the middle lane was to alternate between east and westbound traffic depending on time of day. I know how stupid that sounds, and I don't have the slightest idea how that would work, or if it's even accurate...just stating what I heard. Even if such a plan could work, what's the benefit anyways as Dugald bottlenecks back to one lane on either side of the bridge!

Either way, just another example of an infrastructure project being done half-assed around here. There are so many...so so many...and we never seem to learn. Sometimes when I drive through Winnipeg and on the perimeter, it amazes me that the few grade separations that we do have ever came to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2013, 1:33 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reignman View Post
The explanation I had heard for the three lane bridge at the time of construction was that the middle lane was to alternate between east and westbound traffic depending on time of day. I know how stupid that sounds, and I don't have the slightest idea how that would work, or if it's even accurate.
Lion's Gate bridge uses that arrangement and it works quite well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2013, 4:03 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
The three lane bridge only makes sense if you look at it as the first phase of a project that involves the construction of two three-lane bridges to cross the floodway (like you see a bit further south at the TCH East where it crosses the floodway).

Surely the next phase must be to twin PTH 15 and build a second span next to the existing one?!?
Here's the skinny on the 'twinning' of the three lane bridge.

If there was any chance of twinning the bridge, that should have been done before they tore down the old bridge. The only problem with the old bridge was, it was six feet to short to endear a 700 year flood. They took the old railway bridge to the north of it, built a temporary bridge beside it, trimmed off the existing footings and piles, added six feet on to it, tore down the temporary bridge, and called it done. You the taxpayer, paid for that and CN picked up the old girders a dropped them in the East yards.

The old two lane car bridge was disassembled, the girders were last seen heading North, the balance was knocked down to the footings. A new gas line, fiber optics cable, telephone lines and what not were dug in to the south of the new bridge span. You can see the green consoles and manhole covers sitting on the south side. If there was any chance for a twin span, all that work, equipment and money would be gone. ( You paid for that too, Mr. Taxpayer )

So, if you think that those socialistic bastards that are in power know anything about bridgework and saving money, you'd be wrong.

Also, there are two lane roads on either end bottlenecking an serious traffic flow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2013, 4:33 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 13,708
So you're expecting CN, who was there long before the floodway, to sacrifice their operations to save you money? There's a reason why shoofly's are required when doing underpasses. See Plessis Road for a prime example. There's no way CN will accept having their track alignment on a permanent shoofly. Hence the need for the temp bridge.

Nobody cares about old girders. Some salvage value and that's about it. How do you know that the value of those girders wasn't worked into the deal with CN? You know who got all the salvage value of the old rail from the Fort Rouge Tunnel project? The City of Winnipeg. In the 7 figure range there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2013, 5:40 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
So you're expecting CN, who was there long before the floodway, to sacrifice their operations to save you money? There's a reason why shoofly's are required when doing underpasses. See Plessis Road for a prime example. There's no way CN will accept having their track alignment on a permanent shoofly. Hence the need for the temp bridge.

Nobody cares about old girders. Some salvage value and that's about it. How do you know that the value of those girders wasn't worked into the deal with CN? You know who got all the salvage value of the old rail from the Fort Rouge Tunnel project? The City of Winnipeg. In the 7 figure range there.
Let's get this all in proper perspective. The first time those girders were put in place, CN was owned by Canada and Canadians and the Floodway was paid for by taxpayers of Canada. The second time around, CN said, 'we don't really need that track, so we may not be interested in participating in the project', then, when CN found out the Canadian taxpayer were going to front the whole deal, they said, 'go ahead, suckers' and then the line was renewed to 700 years flood standards. CN shareholders must have really enjoyed their dividends paid for my the Canadian taxpayers.

If no ones cares about the old girders, how come CN took them and used them on their rail lines in the States, except for two, one which they cut in half in the East yard and the other that went north on the Perimeter on a low bed. I for one, know at least sixteen of them on the first name basis, because I built them at Dominion bridge in '63/64.
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 9:57 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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