Portage & Main

[The Unknown Poster]

15 hours ago, Atomic said:

I will be voting to keep it closed simply because the "vote open" people have been so insufferable. I don't care either way, though, and frankly I think it's a joke that this is one of the central issues of the election.

Really?  I find the opposite.  Im really impressed with the vote open people, their organizing and the information they have brought forward.  The no people seem very angry as if its a personal affront and generally spread complete falsehoods.  If you compare Brent Bellamy to Tom Brodbeck, the former is far more professional and honest.

Broadbeck's gimmick this week is to beat back the "if we had a vote on everything we have, they'd never have happened" by claiming there was little opposition to things like the MTS Centre and Floodway.  Thats simply not true.  Im surprised he's on the no side since the money that will be spent regardless is going to be significant.

But regardless, I wouldn't vote on a major issue impacting my community simply because I didn't like someone who supported one side.  The vote is on the issue, not the people.

Ill be voting open.  I was surprised when my mom told me last night that she would vote open as well, but she told me stories of crossing before the barricades and what a pain it was when they went in.

I think people had their minds made up on day one and nothing was going to change it either way.  It will be a no and then when they rip all the cement up for much needed repairs, the citizenry will whine about the expense of putting those barricades back in.

[Brandon]

I'm not voting based on Brodbeck being a loud mouth.    

I do find overall the Yes people are much more "annoying" because they are doing the old shout louder to prove that they are correct.   I find a lot more close mindedness with the Yes folks who don't like hearing both sides of the argument.     The advertisements are also soooo lame on the radio ..  I'd be much more open to changing my mind if they were honest and wouldn't use terrible arguments to back them up.

Telling me my drive will only be 20 seconds longer ,   suggesting that their is an issue with handicap people crossing the intersection,   suggesting that people would go downtown because the intersection will be easier to cross,  suggesting that people will walk from the Forks all the way down to the intersection and then head to Portage place...  that crap instantly makes me roll my eyes and realize that it's all crap. 

I'd respect Bowman more if this was a part of a complete transformation of downtown such as zero-tolerance pan handling  & drunk in public ,  clean out the drug dealers,  new ideas for better traffic flow,  closing Portage Place mall, buy out the crappy drinking places for the bums etc....     

 

 

Edited October 18, 2018 by Brandon

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I'm not voting based on Brodbeck being a loud mouth.    

I do find overall the Yes people are much more "annoying" because they are doing the old shout louder to prove that they are correct.   I find a lot more close mindedness with the Yes folks who don't like hearing both sides of the argument.     The advertisements are also soooo lame on the radio ..  I'd be much more open to changing my mind if they were honest and wouldn't use terrible arguments to back them up.

Telling me my drive will only be 20 seconds longer ,   suggesting that their is an issue with handicap people crossing the intersection,   suggesting that people would go downtown because the intersection will be easier to cross,  suggesting that people will walk from the Forks all the way down to the intersection and then head to Portage place...  that crap instantly makes me roll my eyes and realize that it's all crap. 

I'd respect Bowman more if this was a part of a complete transformation of downtown such as zero-tolerance pan handling  & drunk in public ,  clean out the drug dealers,  new ideas for better traffic flow,  closing Portage Place mall, buy out the crappy drinking places for the bums etc....     

 

 

I see that perspective about the Yes people, I just dont understand why people feel that way.  I think its more to do with dug-in opinions creating a bias (for both sides).  

The thing to me, when looking at the Yes side....the yes side seems generally more educated about the finer points.  A lot of No people are "fix my roads, dont spend money, streets will run red with blood of dead pedestrians".   I honestly think most of the concerns are easily answered and thats why the yes side comes across perhaps arrogant because they think they have all the answers.  For the most part they do.

[Atomic]

The main issue for me is the Yes side making up unfounded claims.  Traffic won't be worse, costs won't be that bad, etc.  It's all assumptions passed off as fact.  Lies to get their way.

Another factor for me is that people will die as a result of opening it.  It's a huge intersection and people die at smaller ones, there is no reason to believe no one will die here.  I saw the aftermath of someone getting exploded by a transit bus on Graham and I'd prefer not to see that again.  And when someone dies, where will Team Open be?  Nowhere to be found.

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Atomic said:

The main issue for me is the Yes side making up unfounded claims.  Traffic won't be worse, costs won't be that bad, etc.  It's all assumptions passed off as fact.  Lies to get their way.

Another factor for me is that people will die as a result of opening it.  It's a huge intersection and people die at smaller ones, there is no reason to believe no one will die here.  I saw the aftermath of someone getting exploded by a transit bus on Graham and I'd prefer not to see that again.  And when someone dies, where will Team Open be?  Nowhere to be found.

Interesting conclusion but I haven't seen anyone on the Vote Open side saying traffic won't be worse. In fact, right on the Vote Open website: ...the conclusion was that some traffic would be delayed by up to 30 seconds during the morning rush hour, and up to 54 seconds during the afternoon rush hour. 

RE: Costs. UPDATE: October 15, 2018
New information concerning the state of repair of the concourse below Portage & Main suggests that repair and remediation will require the removal of everything above the concourse area: concrete, asphalt, and barriers. Since the barriers have to come down, there is no incremental cost to remove them, and it will likely be less expensive to leave them down. In addition, a proposal that removes transit bus traffic from Portage & Main should result in savings on the costs that the Dillon Report suggested were necessary to maintain transit service levels through Portage & Main.

All questions and answers available here: https://voteopenwpg.ca/

[Brandon]

30 seconds during rush hour is a bold face lie and embarrassing that they would try to pass it off that your commute would only extend 30 seconds.     It's stuff like that that immediately dismiss anything they say because if they are willing to lie about that then I can't take anything else they say seriously.  If they used real times such as 5 - 15 minutes extra then I'd at least respect them for being honest.     The real time will be closer to 10 - 15 minutes which for me is a massive deal since it already takes me 35 minutes to drive to pick up my children. 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

3 minutes ago, Brandon said:

30 seconds during rush hour is a bold face lie and embarrassing that they would try to pass it off that your commute would only extend 30 seconds.     It's stuff like that that immediately dismiss anything they say because if they are willing to lie about that then I can't take anything else they say seriously.  If they used real times such as 5 - 15 minutes extra then I'd at least respect them for being honest.     The real time will be closer to 10 - 15 minutes which for me is a massive deal since it already takes me 35 minutes to drive to pick up my children. 

 

Which study have you seen to come up with those numbers?

[Brandon]

2 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Which study have you seen to come up with those numbers?

My own which consists of me driving through the intersection every day.    I used common sense and 7 years of getting mad at buses running red lights to turn left onto Portage for them to only block the intersection and making us all miss the light.   Each bus that does this extends my drive 3 minutes.      I also used basic math...  on average when driving from Memorial to Main street via Portage I will sit at each set of lights and watch the light cycle from green to red and then back to green.     Factor in that only when I hit Main street is when traffic starts to flow.     About 12 sets of lights in total ...   I'd assume the crosswalk would be 45 seconds to cross at P& M.   I'll have to wait an extra 45 seconds for the left turn arrow to turn green....    45 seconds times 12 =  9 minutes.        Basic math.  

[The Unknown Poster]

21 minutes ago, Brandon said:

My own which consists of me driving through the intersection every day.    I used common sense and 7 years of getting mad at buses running red lights to turn left onto Portage for them to only block the intersection and making us all miss the light.   Each bus that does this extends my drive 3 minutes.      I also used basic math...  on average when driving from Memorial to Main street via Portage I will sit at each set of lights and watch the light cycle from green to red and then back to green.     Factor in that only when I hit Main street is when traffic starts to flow.     About 12 sets of lights in total ...   I'd assume the crosswalk would be 45 seconds to cross at P& M.   I'll have to wait an extra 45 seconds for the left turn arrow to turn green....    45 seconds times 12 =  9 minutes.        Basic math.  

So none. lol

[Brandon]

9 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

So none. lol

My own study !   Did you know at one time their was a study that made it seem like Portage Place was rejuvenate the downtown area... can't believe everything you read!

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Brandon said:

My own study !   Did you know at one time their was a study that made it seem like Portage Place was rejuvenate the downtown area... can't believe everything you read!

The Core Area Initiative that you're referencing indicated that it was a piece of a rejuvenation project. No single project, rejuvenates an entire area. 

30+ years ago, people thought that redeveloping The Forks was a terrible idea. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Also keep in mind that Portage Place was to have two buildings on site for residential.  Never happened.

In regards to the traffic study, I have no idea if its true but I tend to doubt they are maliciously lying.   But its a good example of what I noted earlier about bias.  Those who were always in favour say "look the study shows minor impact to drivers".  The ones who were always "no" say "I dont believe it."  

I "commute" a short way and sometimes Im home in 5 minutes, sometimes 25 minutes.  

[Atomic]

1 hour ago, JCon said:

Interesting conclusion but I haven't seen anyone on the Vote Open side saying traffic won't be worse. In fact, right on the Vote Open website: ...the conclusion was that some traffic would be delayed by up to 30 seconds during the morning rush hour, and up to 54 seconds during the afternoon rush hour. 

RE: Costs. UPDATE: October 15, 2018
New information concerning the state of repair of the concourse below Portage & Main suggests that repair and remediation will require the removal of everything above the concourse area: concrete, asphalt, and barriers. Since the barriers have to come down, there is no incremental cost to remove them, and it will likely be less expensive to leave them down. In addition, a proposal that removes transit bus traffic from Portage & Main should result in savings on the costs that the Dillon Report suggested were necessary to maintain transit service levels through Portage & Main.

All questions and answers available here: https://voteopenwpg.ca/

See, this is the issue.  I have the study open in front of me right now (it is publicly available online) and your claim is 100% false.  It's right in the chart.  Why lie?

[JCon]

Just now, Atomic said:

See, this is the issue.  I have the study open in front of me right now (it is publicly available online) and your claim is 100% false.  It's right in the chart.  Why lie?

I didn't lie, I quoted. I made no claims. Please show me where the study contradicts what's written on the Vote Open site. I rather have the evidence shared here. 

[Brandon]

34 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Also keep in mind that Portage Place was to have two buildings on site for residential.  Never happened.

In regards to the traffic study, I have no idea if its true but I tend to doubt they are maliciously lying.   But its a good example of what I noted earlier about bias.  Those who were always in favour say "look the study shows minor impact to drivers".  The ones who were always "no" say "I dont believe it."  

I "commute" a short way and sometimes Im home in 5 minutes, sometimes 25 minutes.  

I assumed it didn't happen because after 1 year Portage Place was deemed a colossal failure.    Those youtube videos that showed the day it opened and then the one year follow up really tell the story of how the idea really wasn't the true solution to fix downtown. 

Now so many years later with so many other shopping and dining options it really would be impossible for Portage Place at this point to becoming a destination.    

Regardless the ads and the Open propaganda is so far fetched that it makes it difficult to take them seriously.      Bowman can't be taken seriously at all since whenever anyone confronts him he resorts to dirty tactics and misdirection so it's hard to believe him.   

Perhaps the idea of opening the intersection can be revisited when the city has proper leadership and a clue on how to do it the right way. 

[JCon]

1 minute ago, Brandon said:

Regardless the ads and the Open propaganda is so far fetched that it makes it difficult to take them seriously.

This is exactly how I feel about the "Closed" side. 

[The Unknown Poster]

6 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I assumed it didn't happen because after 1 year Portage Place was deemed a colossal failure.    Those youtube videos that showed the day it opened and then the one year follow up really tell the story of how the idea really wasn't the true solution to fix downtown. 

Now so many years later with so many other shopping and dining options it really would be impossible for Portage Place at this point to becoming a destination.    

Regardless the ads and the Open propaganda is so far fetched that it makes it difficult to take them seriously.      Bowman can't be taken seriously at all since whenever anyone confronts him he resorts to dirty tactics and misdirection so it's hard to believe him.   

Perhaps the idea of opening the intersection can be revisited when the city has proper leadership and a clue on how to do it the right way. 

Again, you're ignoring the out and out lies from the "no" side and the chicken little panic that isnt warranted.  UIt comes down to people uneducated about it or they get it but they dont care as long as it doesnt cost them any more minutes in traffic.  And that last point is perfectly rational.  But its where the two sides disagree.

Also, in regards to downtown and portage place, as Jcon stated, no one single thing would fix downtown.  Everyone said the same thing about the arena and it didnt.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

When they rip it up and they will put in ******* yields.

 

[Atomic]

1 hour ago, JCon said:

I didn't lie, I quoted. I made no claims. Please show me where the study contradicts what's written on the Vote Open site. I rather have the evidence shared here. 

Yes, I meant, why do they lie.  Not you.  I am not around a computer anymore but I will return at my leisure to post my findings.

[Brandon]

I don't think people will die and that's a stretch. I look at it realistically.  People won't get hit by cars , however it will 100% slow down traffic flow and for me that alone is enough reason to leave it. 

They can build some patios bit it won't make a difference people still won't come downtown. Most downtown eateries near the arena only get business at night during events at the mts center.  

To many people are dreamers opening it won't draw anyone downtown and it also won't kill anyone. It will slow traffic and make it convenient for a few folks during lunch break trying to cross.  The meth crisis, panhandling epidemic, urban sprawl , water quality issues are a million times more important then this.

[The Unknown Poster]

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

I don't think people will die and that's a stretch. I look at it realistically.  People won't get hit by cars , however it will 100% slow down traffic flow and for me that alone is enough reason to leave it. 

They can build some patios bit it won't make a difference people still won't come downtown. Most downtown eateries near the arena only get business at night during events at the mts center.  

To many people are dreamers opening it won't draw anyone downtown and it also won't kill anyone. It will slow traffic and make it convenient for a few folks during lunch break trying to cross.  The meth crisis, panhandling epidemic, urban sprawl , water quality issues are a million times more important then this.

It’s not about drawing people downtown.  Neither the mall nor the arena were draws.   You have to get people working and living downtown and it’s undergone significant growth on both fronts and continues to do so. 

[nate007]

On 2018-10-18 at 10:03 AM, Brandon said:

suggesting that their is an issue with handicap people crossing the intersection

That's not a suggestion, it's a 100% verified fact. Whether that matters to you is a separate issue.

19 hours ago, Brandon said:

People won't get hit by cars , however it will 100% slow down traffic flow and for me that alone is enough reason to leave it. 

And this is exactly why city planning shouldn't be left to plebiscites. Despite everything we know about city planning (and the professionals we have hired to do it) that tells us we need to promote density in the urban core and prioritize multiple modes of transportation (especially active transportation), there are still a lot of people who think it's their God-given right to bomb through any area of the city they want at any time of the day in their personal vehicle. And if they face any congestion whatsoever, the system is broken and something should be done to accommodate them. 

God forbid the Brandon's of the world would have to look internally at the choices they've made of where to live, work, and educate their children and realize that distance equals time.

[Brandon]

Lol keep trying Nate that was a pitiful retort. 

TUP -  Totally agree...  unfortunately as a blue collar town with where most young educated professionals who move away for greener pastures and the ones who do stay usually stay because of families and cheaper housing...  I don't see a large community of people who would want to live downtown.   Perhaps they could attract a lot of immigrants to stay downtown but I'm not sure if that would really bring up the area.   WIth our crap climate also it doesn't help.    I think it's almost a no-win battle.  With the massive amount of condos being build around the city I don't see seniors wanting to move either.   

 

 

Edited October 19, 2018 by Brandon

[nate007]

50 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Lol keep trying Nate that was a pitiful retort. 

Or, it's so true that you have no response.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Brandon]

2 hours ago, nate007 said:

Or, it's so true that you have no response.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It goes back to my shout louder to try to prove that your argument is correct.   I'm more of a guy who takes interest in discussions that have a bit of common sense with them.    Common sense would dictate that most people would not find it normal to drive 30 minutes when with synchronized lights and proper traffic flow the same stretch can be done in 5 minutes.