Portage & Main

[The Unknown Poster]

I’m surprised the mayor gave in.  Bad decision. 

 

[Brandon]

Bad decision in what way?  Portage and main should be closed off and I assume he is doing this to take away any kind of fringe voters between him and Jenny. 

[The Unknown Poster]

19 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Bad decision in what way?  Portage and main should be closed off and I assume he is doing this to take away any kind of fringe voters between him and Jenny. 

Ive yet to hear a reasonable argument for why P&M shouldn't be open.  It was closed as part of a deal to funnel people under-ground when Winnipeg Square was built.  The fact the owners of that mall are completely on-board with the re-opening (as if all stake-holders on site) is as good a reason as any to re-open.

But Bowman ran, partially on that issue and won.  It was already voted on by the public.  And if Bowman's opponent makes it an election issue this time, then its being run on.  In theory a referendum on every issue is wonderful.  In practice, not so much.  Although it likely wont mean a substantial increase in voters.  But you end up with the potential for too many people who dont get it and arent affected, influencing something they dont understand.

But I guess that's democracy.  However, now its a precedent.  What else should we referendum on?

[FrostyWinnipeg]

57 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I’m surprised the mayor gave in.  Bad decision. 

 

They could satisfy everyone and open it only on weekends.

[Brandon]

9 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Ive yet to hear a reasonable argument for why P&M shouldn't be open.  It was closed as part of a deal to funnel people under-ground when Winnipeg Square was built.  The fact the owners of that mall are completely on-board with the re-opening (as if all stake-holders on site) is as good a reason as any to re-open.

But Bowman ran, partially on that issue and won.  It was already voted on by the public.  And if Bowman's opponent makes it an election issue this time, then its being run on.  In theory a referendum on every issue is wonderful.  In practice, not so much.  Although it likely wont mean a substantial increase in voters.  But you end up with the potential for too many people who dont get it and arent affected, influencing something they dont understand.

But I guess that's democracy.  However, now its a precedent.  What else should we referendum on?

You've yet to hear a reasonable argument?  Have you not read anything posted on social media, reddit,  comment sections in papers?  Nearly everyone is against opening up the intersection.

If you want a reasonable argument the easiest and most vital issue is opening up the intersection will absolutely kill traffic flow during rush hours.  Unlike other cities we don't have a proper infrastructure of getting people from one end to the other without hitting dozens of lights.    For myself my commute absolutely requires for me to go through downtown and whenever a car stalls or any sort of even minor road repairs absolutely cripples the commute and it can take me up to 90 minutes to get home.   

Another reasonable argument is safety,  it's bad enough avoiding the "riff raff" going down Portage who jump between cars or jaywalk during green lights.

Another reasonable argument is the idea of having patios and people hanging out at that intersection is laughable...  the wind frequently is way to strong to sit down and enjoy anything.  I have to close my car windows so that my parking pass and anything in my car doesn't blow away...  I can't imagine trying to eat and drink with that wind.  

Lots of reasons to keep it close.   The idea that opening it will bring tourists or increase the popularity of downtown because it will be a gateway between the forks and Portage is such a far fetched dream it's ridiculous.  

Instead of investing millions in a pipe dream... why not focus on doing something that *may* actual increase downtown popularity such as banning pan handling,  stronger enforcement on drunks wandering around,   close down Portage Place ASAP and change it into something else that doesn't have a food court,  increase police presence etc....

The whole idea of opening the intersection is purely Bowman wanting to leave his legacy and all reports have shown it has been a bad idea and it's obvious on why he's trying to keep everything hidden from the public because if their was transparency he would of been absolutely blasted by all the voters for such a poor idea. 

Bowman won because Judy was a moron ,   the guy had the friendly looking smile (didnt' look like a con man like Katz) and people were duped into thinking he was a good guy.   Sadly nobody of any merit is running against him this election so he may win out of best out of the worst. 

If Browaty had decided to run for Mayor he would of won by a massive land slide... he actually has a track record of doing positive things for the community and the people.   He actually has trust from his voters. 

Edited July 19, 2018 by Brandon

[The Unknown Poster]

Nah. Not reasonable.  many cities hve major intersections with pedestrian crossings.  

This isn’t a world first. 

It doesn’t kill traffic flow. It will be fine.  

[FrostyWinnipeg]

2 hours ago, Brandon said:

You've yet to hear a reasonable argument?  Have you not read anything posted on social media, reddit,  comment sections in papers?  Nearly everyone is against opening up the intersection.om his voters. 

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/poll-results

[Brandon]

3 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Nah. Not reasonable.  many cities hve major intersections with pedestrian crossings.  

This isn’t a world first. 

It doesn’t kill traffic flow. It will be fine.  

Other cities have freeways and multiple routes to get around town.  Winnipeg only has 1.     As I stated before if one car stalls it absolutely kills the drive home and this isn't a debate as I experience it over and over again coming home from work.    

Adding a 30- 45 second walking light for pedestrians would be an absolute killer.  It's bad enough as it is right now and if anything the city should focus on finding ways to get through downtown faster. 

The only logical explanation for your posts is that you are attempting to troll?

[Brandon]

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/poll-results

87% against opening it...  most other polls have had it closer to 95%

[The Unknown Poster]

8 hours ago, Brandon said:

Other cities have freeways and multiple routes to get around town.  Winnipeg only has 1.     As I stated before if one car stalls it absolutely kills the drive home and this isn't a debate as I experience it over and over again coming home from work.    

Adding a 30- 45 second walking light for pedestrians would be an absolute killer.  It's bad enough as it is right now and if anything the city should focus on finding ways to get through downtown faster. 

The only logical explanation for your posts is that you are attempting to troll?

Its only trolling if you lack the insight to comprehend the topic.   So if that's the case, there is no point in reading any further 

Too many people are reacting emotionally and without an understanding of the issue.  As are the majority of naysayers.  Its the NIMBY effect.  And the referendum is an awful precedent.  If we allow the uneducated masses to dictate civic policy to this specific of a degree, then we must have a large list of things to vote on.  No MTSC.  No IGF.  No BRT.  Add a vote about whether Jim Bob's front street should be re-surfaced every year and I bet he votes in favour of it.

If you peruse areas of the internet that people who are well informed go, you see a vast majority support re-opening P&M.  Because they get it.  You'd have to agree the majority of people against re-opening are not well educated in the matter.  Its a reflex.  This is Winnipeg and when you suggest it might add 50 seconds to your commute, they would rather burn the city to the ground than support that.  Thats not a progressive attitude and the Mayor should not be pandering to the ill-informed narrow minded.

You have stake holders at P&M spending millions of dollars in support of this plan.  Its not just saying "Ok, on Monday you can cross".  Its a complete re-development of the area to encourage street-level commerce and create a connection between the down-town and the soon to be massively developed Forks (where's the referendum on that, which is of far greater interest to Winnipeggers than P&M).

Allowing this vote is like asking people from my area to vote about a street development in Transcona.  I dont care.  It doesnt impact me.  And Im not a real stake holder.

Opening P&M does not create death and carnage.  It does not add any egregious time to commute (50 seconds).  There is a hotel development happening on east portage directly tied to the fact P&M was slated to open.  There is literally no good argument to keep it closed once you accept there is no safety issue and no unreasonable increase in commute time.

Every time they add a pedestrian crossing on Pembina or Waverly or Kenaston (streets I travel daily), it adds to my travel time.  Of course it does.  To use a few seconds as an argument against progressive development is such a NIMBY-style view. 

Those polls are a great example of why you dont pander to the uneducated masses.  Thats what elections are for (and they're bad enough as we've seen).  Bowman ran on this issue and won.  And he's sucked for the most part but when his opponent has a presser at P&M to leverage a critical mass of people that are not informed and not impacted either way, its a grandstand attempt to make the civic election about ONE issue she thinks she can win.

And thats why Mayor Bowman, a chicken **** mayor pulled a chicken **** move and supported it because he'd rather win than keep his election promise.  Both candidates suck.

[Brandon]

It wouldn't be 50 seconds ... More like 15 minutes. When traffic is gridlocked it effects all the lights behind it.  You have to compound it all the way down Portage. 

When a dinkhead bus driver decides to run the red and turns left onto Portage and ends up blocking all three lanes causing everyone to miss a light. This alone adds five minutes to my commute and this happens all of the time.

The only people who think opening it up will bring life to downtown are all dreamers. The same people who thought that Portage Place was the saviour for downtown. 

Saying the mass is uneducated is silly. The minority are merely trying to outsmart themselves. Comparing Winnipeg to other cities is ridiculous. Unless the city somehow finds 100s of millions of dollars to completely redesign downtown , the whole idea of it being like a times square is ridiculous.

Experts that the city paid to do studies showed that it's a bad idea. They even paid a different company to seek a different answer.

As I said before it's ok to be wrong sometimes unknown poster. 

[The Unknown Poster]

15 minutes ago, Brandon said:

It wouldn't be 50 seconds ... More like 15 minutes. When traffic is gridlocked it effects all the lights behind it.  You have to compound it all the way down Portage. 

When a dinkhead bus driver decides to run the red and turns left onto Portage and ends up blocking all three lanes causing everyone to miss a light. This alone adds five minutes to my commute and this happens all of the time.

The only people who think opening it up will bring life to downtown are all dreamers. The same people who thought that Portage Place was the saviour for downtown. 

Saying the mass is uneducated is silly. The minority are merely trying to outsmart themselves. Comparing Winnipeg to other cities is ridiculous. Unless the city somehow finds 100s of millions of dollars to completely redesign downtown , the whole idea of it being like a times square is ridiculous.

Experts that the city paid to do studies showed that it's a bad idea. They even paid a different company to seek a different answer.

As I said before it's ok to be wrong sometimes unknown poster. 

You're making wild assumptions.  Im far too lazy to look up the study (it was in a CBC article I read) that its 50 seconds per direction (so if you consider an entire commute, it's 100 seconds a day).  I mean, lets be honest, a bit of rain, a bit of snow and its a lot longer.  15 minutes?  Good grief, when it snows in this city, the streets are chaos and it takes me 15 minutes to get down Kenaston.  It takes longer to get down Pembina.

If we're going to hinder development and progress to save a minority of the people a couple of minutes of their commute, that is entirely wrong-headed. 

I can tell you've heard some arguments against it and adopted them without thinking about them.  The idea other cities have large intersections is not about freeways.  Thats a silly argument.  Every city, including Winnipeg has large intersections.  And those other cities would give a flying fig about two minutes per commute when there are millions of dollars of development money at stake.

If you really think the majority of Winnipeggers understand the engineering factors involved, well, come on... the people making the "pedestrians will be killed" argument is foolish (they dont know stats on car/pedestrian deaths).

As for being wrong, is that an admission?   If P&M is opened and after one year, if its chaos, Ill gladly say I was wrong.   Dont turn this into your usual nonsense, please Brandon (which you do when you're losing a discussion).

[Brandon]

15 minute delay on a good day, on a bad day you're looking at way way longer. 

It's ok to be wrong and it will all be a distant memory once the elections are done. You are claiming that you are correct and the experts the city paid are wrong... That's silly.

I'm not a fan of Bowman for the most part but it's nice that he finally put his ego aside. Now his next step will be to stop trying to cater to the people who claim the citizens are all racists.

It's almost a guarantee that he will win now so maybe he can focus on more relevant issues.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Brandon

[FrostyWinnipeg]

I think we should start a group effort on Hitler Reacts to Portage & Main Opening Up.

[blue_gold_84]

What chaps my hide about the P&M thing is this ill-conceived notion opening it up will somehow breathe new life into the downtown area. I fail to see any correlation whatsoever. It isn't like pedestrians have to walk far to cross, anyway.

I can't see opening up that intersection as anything but problematic. And further, there are much bigger fish to fry for the mayor of this city as far as infrastructure goes.

[The Unknown Poster]

5 minutes ago, Brandon said:

15 minute delay on a good day, on a bad day you're looking at way way longer. 

It's ok to be wrong and it will all be a distant memory once the elections are done. You are claiming that you are correct and the experts the city paid are wrong... That's silly.

I'm not a fan of Bowman for the most part but it's nice that he finally put his ego aside. Now his next step will be to stop trying to cater to the people who claim the citizens are all racists.

It's almost a guarantee that he will win now so maybe he can focus on more relevant issues.

Brandon, you always start changing the discussion from the issue to the poster when you feel you're losing (or you get mad).

No one had suggested a 15 minute delay.  You made that up.  The study quoted by CBC said 50 seconds.  Is that reasonable?  I dont know.  I'd have guessed longer.  But then I'd be telling the experts they're wrong.  This is Winnipeg, I've sat in 15+minute traffic a million times (if you drive, so have you) for a variety of reasons.  There are crosswalks near P&M today.  They dont cause chaos.

You've got an extremely negative situation for disabled people wanting to get across now who are forced under ground. 

Let's be honest, this argument is ALL ABOUT DRIVERS. Look, I get it, I drive.  I wish every road was a freeway.  Kenaston was designed by a moron it seems.  It takes ages to get a block on some days.  To go nuts overr a few minutes drive time at P&M?  Totally an over-reaction.  If it opens, it will be cool, it will attract more people, there will be a major street level precence that isnt there today.  It will be fed by all the stake holders that own land there doing improvements and adding services for those people.  There will be development East of the intersection and it will tie The Forks to downtown.

All those things are vastly more important than you getting through one intersection a few minutes quicker.   How many angry NIMBY types complaining and voting in polls even ever drive through P&M?  Probably a lot less than are being vocal about an issue that doesnt impact them.

Bowman didnt put his ego aside at all.  He ran on this issue and won.  He's robbing his opponent of the one issue she has.  Its good strategy but chicken ****.

And yes, it is okay to be wrong.  Please remember that.

[Brandon]

I don't think you understand how the time works.  My drive will be increased 15 minutes easily. The 50 seconds only applies if you hit every green with zero traffic on the road and then only hit the red light at P &M.  

How many disabled people cross P&M a day? How many drivers cross? You want to convenience maybe a fraction of a percent of people to inconvenience 20000 vehicles. 

It's a huge deal for me to drive an extra 15 - 30 minutes a day when I have family and responsibilities to get to.  It's not NIMBY it's more practical.  

You need to look at the situation with an open mind and also realize that you are not like most of the general public.  

 

[Brandon]

Also Bowman didn't run using the p & m as his main platform. He won because he smiled and people trusted him more then an incompetent lady. 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

7 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I don't think you understand how the time works.  My drive will be increased 15 minutes easily. The 50 seconds only applies if you hit every green with zero traffic on the road and then only hit the red light at P &M.  

How many disabled people cross P&M a day? How many drivers cross? You want to convenience maybe a fraction of a percent of people to inconvenience 20000 vehicles. 

It's a huge deal for me to drive an extra 15 - 30 minutes a day when I have family and responsibilities to get to.  It's not NIMBY it's more practical.  

You need to look at the situation with an open mind and also realize that you are not like most of the general public.  

 

Open minds work both ways.   There are lights and cross walks right now that impact P&M. 

If you look at the actual result of opening the intersection, the development, the growth etc, you will see that the rather small inconvenience to you is off-set by a much greater good. 

If 15 minutes is so bad, can we put a question on the ballot about fixing Kenaston so I never get stuck in traffic on my "commute"? 

If they opened it, you'd be mad.  You'd wait 3 minutes and it would seem like an hour.  And after six months, you'd adapt and it would be same old same old.  And one day, you'd be downtown and enjoying a patio at P&M or walking from the ball park to Portage or spending the day at the Forks and heading to the arena and wonder why they didnt do this ages ago.

Or it will be chaos.  Neither of us really knows.  But I look at both sides and I see minor issues or flat out false ones (safety) and I much prefer the development/growth factors then being concerned about you spending an extra 15 minutes in traffic.  Sorry.

But be assured.  Bowman will win, P&M vote will be to remain closed.   And a whole lot of people who never leave the suburbs will be super happy.

[The Unknown Poster]

11 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Also Bowman didn't run using the p & m as his main platform. He won because he smiled and people trusted him more then an incompetent lady. 

 

It was a major aspect of his campaign.  He won.  They voted to open it.  Its only an issue because there is an election.  if the election was next year, its probably moot cause it would be open.  And there would be no desire to close it up again.  Its a gimmick campaign promise by a candidate running against an incumbent.  She beat Bowman up on this too.  He's very weak.

[Rich]

My issue with opening up Portage & Main is that it really can't be compared to other intersections in most major downtown cities.   

Most intersections are true 4 way intersections where the majority of traffic flows straight in all directions and you have some cars turning left and right that can be handled with turning lanes on busy streets to minimize the impact on the majority of the car flow as those turning cars wait for pedestrians to cross.

When Portage hits Main Street the majority of the traffic flow is turning either left or right onto Main with a smaller percent of traffic going straight on Portage Avenue East.   It is the opposite.  So having the majority of your car flow having to wait for pedestrians to cross will absolutely have a huge impact up Portage and probably Main if they make the green light longer to compensate for pedestrians.     

Does anyone really think opening up Portage & Main will revitalize the downtown?  I worked downtown for years and even if they made patios and whatever to try to make it compelling, I'm there to work most of the time during the day, so I'm not going to get a lot of use out of it.  

Seems to me, the motivation to open up Portage & Main is to revitalize it as a "meeting place" downtown for significant and special  events.  It is Winnipeg's most iconic intersection and people want it to be open to gather for special events.    Take down the permanent barricades, replace them with something that can be easily removed.   Keep the barricades up for rush hour and most days.  Take them down when you want to use the intersection as a "meeting place" for whatever event you want people to gather for.  

I don't work downtown anymore, nor do I need to go through it for my daily commute, so this doesn't really affect me one way or the other.   But I don't think the benefits of this outweigh what is already a horrible rush hour bottle neck.

[The Unknown Poster]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

My issue with opening up Portage & Main is that it really can't be compared to other intersections in most major downtown cities.   

Most intersections are true 4 way intersections where the majority of traffic flows straight in all directions and you have some cars turning left and right that can be handled with turning lanes on busy streets to minimize the impact on the majority of the car flow as those turning cars wait for pedestrians to cross.

When Portage hits Main Street the majority of the traffic flow is turning either left or right onto Main with a smaller percent of traffic going straight on Portage Avenue East.   It is the opposite.  So having the majority of your car flow having to wait for pedestrians to cross will absolutely have a huge impact up Portage and probably Main if they make the green light longer to compensate for pedestrians.     

Does anyone really think opening up Portage & Main will revitalize the downtown?  I worked downtown for years and even if they made patios and whatever to try to make it compelling, I'm there to work most of the time during the day, so I'm not going to get a lot of use out of it.  

Seems to me, the motivation to open up Portage & Main is to revitalize it as a "meeting place" downtown for significant and special  events.  It is Winnipeg's most iconic intersection and people want it to be open to gather for special events.    Take down the permanent barricades, replace them with something that can be easily removed.   Keep the barricades up for rush hour and most days.  Take them down when you want to use the intersection as a "meeting place" for whatever event you want people to gather for.  

I don't work downtown anymore, nor do I need to go through it for my daily commute, so this doesn't really affect me one way or the other.   But I don't think the benefits of this outweigh what is already a horrible rush hour bottle neck.

I think its makes a lot of sense that if you create a scenario where people gather at street level that it contributes to revitalization.  No single effort downtown will do the trick.  But we could defer to the companies that spend millions of dollars in the area and have a direct stake in whether people are above ground or below ground.  Surely, those companies didnt roll a dice.  They gave careful consideration.

One of those companies, which owns Winnipeg Square, wants P&M open.  They're also building a 40 story tower there.  They and the other property owners are committed to spending on re-development.  A hotel is being built on East Portage.  The Forks are planning a major development of retail and residential.  There are plans for BRT on the east side of P&M that will surely be more effective if people can cross there.

Every argument about "green light length" and whatnot...this isnt like the City is trying to cure Cancer or put a man on Mars.  These are traffic and engineering issues that every city on earth deals with every single day.  If we suggest that the intersection isnt very good for crossing (even though it used to be crossed all the time), we're pretending that these issues are insurmountable and that's inherently silly.

[Rich]

Why is everything you disagree with often labelled as silly.  Present your argument and let people decide what is silly and not  

Are you suggesting a corporation who wants to build a 40 story tower is going to support what is in the best interest of Winnipeg traffic or the best interest of their investment?

As for the solution, I gave you one I’d support that wouldn’t affect traffic and still have the ability to open it up.  

Also, from over 25 years of driving experience in this city, I have no confidence the city planners can “fix” traffic as simply as you imply it to be. 

It is great to say fixing traffic isn’t like curing cancer or going to Mars, but you still didn’t offer a solution. 

Also, the last time it was opened up was in the 70s.   How much has population density increased in 40 years and how many more cars per home do we have now as compared to then?

[The Unknown Poster]

44 minutes ago, Rich said:

Why is everything you disagree with often labelled as silly.  Present your argument and let people decide what is silly and not  

Are you suggesting a corporation who wants to build a 40 story tower is going to support what is in the best interest of Winnipeg traffic or the best interest of their investment?

As for the solution, I gave you one I’d support that wouldn’t affect traffic and still have the ability to open it up.  

Also, from over 25 years of driving experience in this city, I have no confidence the city planners can “fix” traffic as simply as you imply it to be. 

It is great to say fixing traffic isn’t like curing cancer or going to Mars, but you still didn’t offer a solution. 

Also, the last time it was opened up was in the 70s.   How much has population density increased in 40 years and how many more cars per home do we have now as compared to then?

lol Rich...well, I was called a troll right off the discussion.  And insulted.  But thanks for the support.

 I didnt say your opinion was silly.  I suggested that everyday traffic and engineering issues like how to time lights for pedestrian crossings being insurmountable are silly.  If that is offensive, I apologize but if we agree in principle about everything else but disagree on the technical feasibility of making the traffic lights work in a manner that makes crossing efficient, I'd say thats an easy solution.    but then again, we live in a city where they cant coordinate lights and have shorter than average Amber's so maybe you have a point.  But thats more likely a choice than a department of engineers without the ability to fix it.

Anyway, back on topic, as far as offering a solution...to what? The traffic light timing?  Im not sure if you're an engineer or traffic expert but Im not.  But those people exist.  Its not my job to offer a solution on that front.  In fact, Id suspect they've already looked at it.  But you raise a good point...are the vocal people outraged at possibly opening P&M experts in that? 

On your point about the corporation, i dont get your meaning.  Are you suggesting they believe opening P&M is a bad idea but believe it supports their tower?  I dont think thats the case but its an interesting perspective.

I can see that emotions are high here for some reason.  Weird.

Edited July 19, 2018 by The Unknown Poster

[bustamente]

Well if they have a referendum and the polls are to be believed then this discussion is moot,  Portage and Main will remain closed for the foreseeable future, that is if the politicians listen to the public.