View Poll Results: Is this the best plan for 23rd ave?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    40 43.48%
  • No

    14 15.22%
  • 38 41.30%
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 1237

Thread: 23rd Ave. / Gateway Blvd. / Calgary Tr. | Interchange | Completed

  1. #101

    Default

    Well, I wrote to city council on this topic when it was first announced that Mandel wants to spend the money elsewhere. I ofcourse am in favour of building the 23rd Ave Interchange immediately because it will only cost more if we wait.

    I got a response from the Mayor today. Here's a quote from his letter to me:

    "I understand that there is a significant traffic issue at 23rd Avenue and we must find a solution. I am not comfortable with the idea that spending upwards of $140 million is the only way to solve this problem, and it takes a significant amount of resources away from addressing other very significant problems across the City. I would like us to look for some creative, effective ways to both solve this issue and to have some resources left to tackle other critical issues as well.

    blah blah blah...

    Stephen Mandel
    Mayor
    "

    It doesn't sound like our letters to city hall have changed his mind ... yet.

  2. #102

    Default

    ^ I got the same thing in the mail too.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  3. #103

    Default

    so did i....very creative stephen

  4. #104

    Default

    One thing i will compliment Stephen on is the fact that he has an official link for this site on the city of Edmonton website. He's not afraid of the attention, but thats probably only because we don't have enough people on here to make a real difference yet.

  5. #105
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Actually, Mayor Mandel welcomes the comments. As a citizen, he has the right to agree or disagree. As the leader of a "corporation" that is fully behind C2E, they know the intrinsic value of this forum, and many read this.

    To address one comment in the form letter sent out, Mayor Mandel, if you want to know the crucial transportation issues, take a look at what members think are the most important ones...

    After we do our Dream Big event, I think we will gain substancial mass in members. They notice a bit now, they will really notice then. What is the Dream Big event with C2E??? ...stay tuned...
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  6. #106
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Has anyone heard anything from other councilors. I too have heard from Mayor Mandel, Mike Nickel, Ron Haytor and Dave Thiele. I'm still waiting to hear from a councilor from the north side.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  7. #107
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default And they say 23 ave's overpass is not needed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton Journal
    Tuesday December 12 2006

    23rd Ave., Gateway Blvd. accident prone
    Construction on $125 million intersection overpass to begin next summer

    Duncan Thorne
    The Edmonton Journal


    Tuesday, December 12, 2006



    CREDIT: Rick MacWilliam, The Journal, File
    Traffic at 23rd Avenue and Gateway Blvd. is some of the heaviest in the city.

    EDMONTON -- The high-traffic intersection at Gateway Boulevard and 23rd Avenue is the city's top collision spot, latest results show.

    The intersection, the main entry point to South Edmonton Common, had 100 accidents in the first seven months of the year, adding to the case for an overpass, says an official.

    Construction is set to start next summer, at an estimated cost of $125 million.

    Craig Walbaum, senior traffic engineer, says there are other intersections where the collision rate -- as opposed to the total number of crashes -- is higher. The traffic circle at 107th Avenue and 142nd Street, for instance, has about four accidents per million vehicles.

    Gateway at 23rd Avenue has about half that rate but leads in accident totals because of its shear volume of traffic, Walbaum said Monday. And a rate of two collisions per million vehicles is still high, even if not the highest.

    "At peak periods of the day there's no more capacity to handle the cars that are there," he said. "When you have that high a number of vehicles entering through an intersection there's a tendency to see a higher number of collisions."

    Further, crashes at the Gateway intersection often produce injuries. Up to the end of July, it was the site of 43 injury collisions, trailing only the 137th Avenue and 97th Street crossroad, which had a tally of 45.

    Walbaum said an overpass at Gateway and 23rd Avenue will give the intersection more capacity and improve safety.

    Transportation staff are reviewing the causes behind the number of injury accidents at 137th Avenue and 97th Street. One reason is 97th Street has several lanes, and traffic from the north is travelling at higher speeds before the intersection. He said there's no plan for an overpass but options include changes in lane design, street signs and timing traffic lights.

    The traffic circle at 107th Avenue and 142nd Street leads with its collision rate, but its accidents tend to be at lower speeds, Walbaum said. "There's a lot of fender benders or rear-end type collisions, bumper to bumper."

    The transportation department normally produces accident numbers in the spring, for the previous calendar year. Its latest numbers, for the first seven months of 2006, are at the request of council.

    [email protected]

    The Edmonton Journal 2006








    Copyright 2006 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  8. #108
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Thank you for pointing out that high volumes leads to accidents and potentially to injury and occasionally to death. 23rd ave is extremly important and I bet that once it's complete all councillors and all opposed to the project will say that they couldn't image how we did without the interchange.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  9. #109
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    It just goes to show you that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics....you can make any argument with the right numbers.

    Sure 149th has more accidents per car, but it has significantly less VOLUME. ...and less of a volume of jittery "Iz gots to gets to IKEA" shoppers who see the big blue box and LOSE THEIR MINDS.... You don't know how many times I am almost T-Boned trying to get into that SEC nightmare as folks race across lanes to get to IKEA.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  10. #110
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    and to think it was originally suppose to be complete by 2007.....jesus.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  11. #111

    Default

    What was the 1st price tag? and the 2nd when they turned it down as too expensive?
    Shameless Urbanophile

  12. #112
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onishenko
    What was the 1st price tag? and the 2nd when they turned it down as too expensive?
    75 mil and 100mil ish if i recall....
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  13. #113
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,234

    Default

    About time too, shame it took so long for the elected bods to make a decision which should have been a "no-brainer".
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  14. #114
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,401

    Default

    Clearly 23rd and Gateway is fine as is.

    Clearly...

    *cough*

  15. #115
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,413

    Default

    Clearly, which is why during the past week of budget deliberations, council has decided to drag its feet further on this issue...put it up for tender (why didn't they do this before?), no increased funding, no further commitment, etc.

  16. #116
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    It's too bad some members of council are too afraid of making the smart decision. They would rather kill the project, prolong the problem, and say that they are fiscally responsible than stand up and say, "yes I know the project is needed and I'm brave enough to vote that we procede with it"
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  17. #117
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    It's too bad some members of council are too afraid of making the smart decision. They would rather kill the project, prolong the problem, and say that they are fiscally responsible than stand up and say, "yes I know the project is needed and I'm brave enough to vote that we procede with it"
    Yea, why not, postpone and then pay double 5 years from now. Add in the few upgrades here and there, the increased costs due to collisions, debating and viola, $250 million!!

    Waiting ISNT the answer. Even if the construction industry 'cools off' and the costs decrease, the overall costs will still be higher in the future due to inflation.

  18. #118
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default 23 Avenue

    The City of Edmonton has retained Team ISL, led by ISL Engineering and Land Services, to provide the engineering and related professional services for the preliminary design, detailed design and construction administration of the 23 Avenue/Gateway Boulevard Interchange project. The interchange configuration will be based on the recommendations presented in the Concept Planning Study that began in 2001.


    Preliminary design is complete. Detailed design is nearing completion and will be complete by late 2006. Construction is scheduled to begin summer of 2007.


    ============================


    lets start a dedicated topic for all things 23ave.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  19. #119
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default









    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  20. #120
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Unless the City plans on delaying or downscaling this project, there is nothing left to discuss in my humble opinion. Let's get it done already!

  21. #121

    Default

    Are the South Common folks chipping in for the overpass into their little shopping Mecca? If not, why is the extra overpass required. Seems the new 23rd ave flyover should address the left turn problems there. No?

  22. #122
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snakes on a blog
    Unless the City plans on delaying or downscaling this project, there is nothing left to discuss in my humble opinion. Let's get it done already!
    more to track this thing, watch its development, and post pics.

    Im curious to see this project go in stages.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  23. #123
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,413

    Default Re: 23 Avenue

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    Construction is scheduled to begin summer of 2007.
    I'll believe it when I see it.

  24. #124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    Are the South Common folks chipping in for the overpass into their little shopping Mecca? If not, why is the extra overpass required. Seems the new 23rd ave flyover should address the left turn problems there. No?
    They're called property taxes. And all the people in the cars going to that mecca pay them as well. Including me, on my way to Ikea...

  25. #125
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    I so much hope that they do start construction this year. The sooner they get it done the better. Anyone hear if there is any allowance for possible future LRT?
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  26. #126

    Default

    Well I'll leave the property tax issue alone but is this extra flyover really necessary? will this uber intersection not provide enough, without the extra expense of the second?

  27. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    I so much hope that they do start construction this year. The sooner they get it done the better. Anyone hear if there is any allowance for possible future LRT?
    I would hope so. Its prolly a good sign seeing 23 ave having each direction with quite a seperation in between them, as seen in this pic posted

    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  28. #128
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The Big E
    Posts
    1,205

    Default Re: 23 Avenue

    I'm a little surprised this thread topic hadn't cropped up until now. IanO - thanks for bringing something like this up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    Construction is scheduled to begin summer of 2007.
    I'll believe it when I see it.
    I second that!

  29. #129

    Default

    Last I heard the fate of this project would be decided during budget deliberations. Anyone know when that is?

  30. #130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    I so much hope that they do start construction this year. The sooner they get it done the better. Anyone hear if there is any allowance for possible future LRT?
    A rep at the city told me that there is an allowance, but I have yet to see a schematic of this project that actually shows "future LRT" on it.

  31. #131

    Default

    Me neither but I'd bet they plan to put a separate bridge in the middle of the east west roadway bridges. Similar to what they have planned to cross Whitemud on the sLRT.

  32. #132
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    edmonton, alberta
    Posts
    2,305

    Default

    This will be a major improvement into our city. It needs to be done ASAP. No more studies or consulting...just do it.

  33. #133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    Well I'll leave the property tax issue alone but is this extra flyover really necessary? will this uber intersection not provide enough, without the extra expense of the second?
    Yes. No.
    Let's not do the typical Edmonton "underbuild so it'll cost us double over the long run" shall we?

  34. #134
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug
    This will be a major improvement into our city. It needs to be done ASAP. No more studies or consulting...just do it.
    bingo...this is one of the biggest headaches in this city and affects time to downtown, time to YEG, time to calgary, 1st impression, and booming southside logistics.


    DO IT
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  35. #135
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Perhaps someone with some inside knowledge can verify this....isn't the project being hindered by the pipeline ROW that crosses 23rd Ave east of the RR tracks? I heard that the u/g lines need to be replaced prior to construction (+/- 20 years old) and there is a battle going on as to who is going to foot that bill.

  36. #136
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    ^ I wouldn't doubt that is another roadblock we are facing for this project. Although a lot of it is where I think you have some councillors not seeing th importance of this project. Hopefully though that with them making the decision to kick in more money for the art gallery they will stay in that mind set and approve the project so we can get started already. Common city council make the right decision and let's do it.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  37. #137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    Perhaps someone with some inside knowledge can verify this....isn't the project being hindered by the pipeline ROW that crosses 23rd Ave east of the RR tracks? I heard that the u/g lines need to be replaced prior to construction (+/- 20 years old) and there is a battle going on as to who is going to foot that bill.
    This is an issue, but I would expect that it's already been dealt with. You could go to http://www.23ave-interchange.com and enquire from there.

  38. #138
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murman
    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    Perhaps someone with some inside knowledge can verify this....isn't the project being hindered by the pipeline ROW that crosses 23rd Ave east of the RR tracks? I heard that the u/g lines need to be replaced prior to construction (+/- 20 years old) and there is a battle going on as to who is going to foot that bill.
    This is an issue, but I would expect that it's already been dealt with. You could go to http://www.23ave-interchange.com/ and enquire from there.
    bingo, thanks murman
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  39. #139
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    Me neither but I'd bet they plan to put a separate bridge in the middle of the east west roadway bridges. Similar to what they have planned to cross Whitemud on the sLRT.
    Bingo...that is exactly the way the LRT will cross Gateway.

    FYI - the pipelines will be relocated this spring / summer to make way for the construction of the rail underpass and interchange.

  40. #140
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    This project just kills me. The concept planning study started in 2001, they expect construction to start in 2007, thats six years of studying and the detailed design is just finished now. (supposedly)
    They have studied this project for longer than it took to fight World War 2.
    Thank God we had a different government back then or we would all be speaking German and paying taxes to Tokyo.

  41. #141
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Wll I look forward to the rails to be out of the way finally, it's amazing how much traffic is tied up by that.

    Well hopefully work will start very soon because SEC and the research park are getting bigger and bigger. SEC will be adding at least 1 new restaurant near IKEA and there are 2 more businesses going in south of the theater, in particular Sam's Club will be opening there which will bring tons more traffic in the area
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  42. #142
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    This project just kills me. The concept planning study started in 2001, they expect construction to start in 2007, thats six years of studying and the detailed design is just finished now. (supposedly)
    They have studied this project for longer than it took to fight World War 2.
    Thank God we had a different government back then or we would all be speaking German and paying taxes to Tokyo.
    We would've had better roads, too


  43. #143
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    509

    Default

    From what i've been told, the City of Edmonton was told about the problems associated with SEC in terms of traffic congestion but they still approved the development. Now they're paying for it. The city wants opinions, studies, assurances of what the results will be after a particular development and when they get the answers, the City makes their own decisions anyways. This is what happens when you get guys on council that used to own a tire and lube shop.

    23 Avenue is just part of the SEC snowball in terms of delays and problems. As far as the LRT, i have never seen plans that show the LRT in the 23 Avenue median. The word on the other forums is that the NLRT then the WLRT will take precedence over anything further to the south. Of course, logic is not something this city is known for. Mr. Spock would have a brain aneurism if he lived here.

  44. #144
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    This project just kills me. The concept planning study started in 2001, they expect construction to start in 2007, thats six years of studying and the detailed design is just finished now. (supposedly)
    They have studied this project for longer than it took to fight World War 2.
    Thank God we had a different government back then or we would all be speaking German and paying taxes to Tokyo.
    Well actually, the 23 Avenue interchange was originally planned in 1977....before my time.

  45. #145
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    When I read that the City has been "planning" this interchange for 30 years, I was tempted to compare the transportation planners to the kid from Deliverance, but that would be unfair to in-bred banjo pickers everywhere.

  46. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LO 044
    As far as the LRT, i have never seen plans that show the LRT in the 23 Avenue median. The word on the other forums is that the NLRT then the WLRT will take precedence over anything further to the south. Of course, logic is not something this city is known for. Mr. Spock would have a brain aneurism if he lived here.
    Yes, of course WLRT and NLRT would take precendence, but thats not to say this city isn't planning for the future. Obviously, You've not done much research, as you can clearly see here, the LRT would run along 23 ave, across GWB/CT, and past SEC, and then up to 28ave and into millwoods. This information is easily, and readily available on the COE website.

    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  47. #147
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    today....i went to SEC at 2:30 ish and it must have taken 2-3 lights to get through...prob 5-7min, and this was not in rush hour.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  48. #148
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    "The City of Edmonton has retained Team ISL, led by ISL Engineering and Land Services, to provide the engineering and related professional services for the preliminary design, detailed design and construction administration of the 23 Avenue/Gateway Boulevard Interchange project. The interchange configuration will be based on the recommendations presented in the Concept Planning Study that began in 2001. "

    I would love to see the details of this contract and whether it was tendered or just given to ISL. (I never saw an invitation to tender in any of the engineering trade magazines that I read.)
    How I read this is that the city has handed over management responsibilities to ISL but has retained all the risk for cost over-runs.
    I wonder what kind of cost control incentives, if any, does this deal include, or even if ISL is paid a percentage of the overall cost? ISL has managed numerous jobs for the city, have any of them come in under budget?
    Why? if the city is willing to give up management of this project, wouldn't the city advertise for a general contractor to design and build the whole thing and accept the risk involved.
    I am in the industrial construction business, currently working on projects for CNRL, Ainsworth, Weyerhaeuser, Petro Canada, Suncor and others. All of these projects are more complicated than a highway interchange and all of them are done on a fixed price basis for a general contractor. Prices are escalating but competition is still fierce and once a contract is signed, the price is fixed. The customer knows what he is going to pay and the suppliers take all of the risk.
    I wonder if there is any relation to this announcement being made the week after Edmonton's Transportation Manager announced his resignation after only four months on the job?????

  49. #149
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    I wonder what kind of cost control incentives, if any, does this deal include, or even if ISL is paid a percentage of the overall cost? ISL has managed numerous jobs for the city, have any of them come in under budget?
    Given the out-of-control construction costs, I would like to know what other projects are coming in under budget. I am guessing very, very few.

    Why? if the city is willing to give up management of this project, wouldn't the city advertise for a general contractor to design and build the whole thing and accept the risk involved.
    Most large public works projects are no longer managed by the municipalities. This is quite commonplace.

    I wonder if there is any relation to this announcement being made the week after Edmonton's Transportation Manager announced his resignation after only four months on the job?????
    /\ If I am not mistaken, Ducharme was Transit not Transportation.

  50. #150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisD
    /\ If I am not mistaken, Ducharme was Transit not Transportation.
    You are mistaken. Ducharme was head of Transportation for 4 months. In Toronto, he was only head of the TTC.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  51. #151
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    I do fixed price contracts all of the time, my company nearly always does better than our budgetted cost, (even in this economy) and if we don't, it is our problem, not the customers.
    As far as large projects being managed by municipalities, it only makes sense that they don't manage them. What they should do is contract out all of it. The way the city did this, they don't manage the job but they retain all the risk. Where is the advantage?
    As far as Ducharme being manager of Transit not Transportation that was my mistake, but it was only idle speculation anyway.

  52. #152
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    I don't see what the hold up is! You put it out for tender, if the price comes in unacceptable, you cancel it. Right now all they have is an estimate. The actual price can't be determined until you tender the damn thing. It could cost more than they think, it could cost less.....the only way to truly find out is just to put it out to tender. Enough all ready...jeeeeez!

  53. #153
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Welcome to the loops that are civic politics....
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  54. #154
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Isn't this out for tender already? I thought council delayed decision on building it until this March because that is when the tender closes.

  55. #155
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    FYI....

    23rd Avenue Interchange Pipeline Relocation Project - Contract 0735

    Tender closes April 05, 2007 (4:00 pm)

    This tender will NOT be publicly open and read.

  56. #156
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    FYI....

    23rd Avenue Interchange Pipeline Relocation Project - Contract 0735

    Tender closes April 05, 2007 (4:00 pm)

    This tender will NOT be publicly open and read.
    Please explain why a Tender (from a public entity - OUR City) is not being read aloud in Public.

  57. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker
    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    FYI....

    23rd Avenue Interchange Pipeline Relocation Project - Contract 0735

    Tender closes April 05, 2007 (4:00 pm)

    This tender will NOT be publicly open and read.
    Please explain why a Tender (from a public entity - OUR City) is not being read aloud in Public.
    ^ Things that make me go hum, very interesting....

  58. #158
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker
    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    FYI....

    23rd Avenue Interchange Pipeline Relocation Project - Contract 0735

    Tender closes April 05, 2007 (4:00 pm)

    This tender will NOT be publicly open and read.
    Please explain why a Tender (from a public entity - OUR City) is not being read aloud in Public.
    Because the Municipal Government Act allows them to do so.....

  59. #159
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Has the issue of the sidewalks been settled, or is this a built-in excuse for a cost over-run?

  60. #160
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker
    Please explain why a Tender (from a public entity - OUR City) is not being read aloud in Public.
    *shakes head*

    I have no idea why they aren't publicly opening the bids. I just copied that from my daily roadbuilders reports.

    Interesting though, eh?

  61. #161
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Well I look at it that at least they are moving forward with the project. And good or bad once the pipelines are moved that should mean that that field next to Home Depot might get develleped. I know this is not in the plans right now but how about allocating some space for an LRT station?
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  62. #162

    Default

    I don't see the point of an LRT station serving the, built exclusively for car mobility, SEC.

  63. #163
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    I don't see the point of an LRT station serving the, built exclusively for car mobility, SEC.
    bingo...at least not right now...there are more important areas to serve, but we should plan ROWs and "potential future stations" in key areas such as that.


    23 avenue overpass is going to do SO MUCH for this city and I dont think many people realize this.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  64. #164
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    I don't think SEC should have a station, ever.

  65. #165
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    414

    Default

    ^ funniest typo of all time!!

    Picqued my interest though...

  66. #166
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default


  67. #167
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    There should be a restraining order againt "x".

  68. #168
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    GATEWAY BOULEVARD / 23 AVENUE INTERCHANGE

    Supply labour, materials equipment and services to complete the upgrading of the intersection at 23 Avenue and Gateway Blvd/Calgary Tr. to a split diamond interchange and the construction of an overpass at 19th Avenue.

    Bid Closing: 2007-May-01 2:00 PM

    Ref#: 904019

    Pre-qualified general contractors:

    - Graham Industrial Services Ltd.
    - Kiewit Management Co.
    - PCL Construction Management Inc.
    - Sureway Construction Management Ltd.

  69. #169
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    GATEWAY BOULEVARD / 23 AVENUE INTERCHANGE

    Supply labour, materials equipment and services to complete the upgrading of the intersection at 23 Avenue and Gateway Blvd/Calgary Tr. to a split diamond interchange and the construction of an overpass at 19th Avenue.

    Bid Closing: 2007-May-01 2:00 PM

    Ref#: 904019

    Pre-qualified general contractors:

    - Graham Industrial Services Ltd.
    - Kiewit Management Co.
    - PCL Construction Management Inc.
    - Sureway Construction Management Ltd.
    all good GC's...id like kiewit to get more involved in Edmonton's infrastructure plans...they are HUGE.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  70. #170
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    all good GC's...id like kiewit to get more involved in Edmonton's infrastructure plans...they are HUGE.
    Pfffft. American company.

    I'll place my money on a local EDMONTON contractor: PCL.

    Get this guy IanO off this Edmonton site with his skewed views!!!

    *wink* :]

  71. #171
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Where is kiewit Western Canadian Head Office (assuming they have one).

  72. #172
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by travis
    Where is kiewit Western Canadian Head Office (assuming they have one).
    Peter Kiewit & Sons

  73. #173
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Apparently they did the Ellerslie/Calgary Trail interchange.

  74. #174
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    all good GC's...id like kiewit to get more involved in Edmonton's infrastructure plans...they are HUGE.
    Pfffft. American company. I'll place my money on a local EDMONTON contractor: PCL. Get this guy IanO off this Edmonton site with his skewed views!!!*wink* :]
    As a taxpayer I am ONLY interested in getting it built (all of it built) on time, getting the performance standards and quality specified in the construction documents at lowest cost. WHO builds it is of no importance to me Joe Taxpayer. I have no interest in paying a premium to any firm - whether their Head Office is in Edmonton, Drumheller, Toronto or Tokyo. But this job appears to be a Construction Manager - meaning they are bring "management services" to the table. If so - then the capabilities of the contenders will be a factor - but the objectives should be the same: getting it built (all of it built) on time, getting the performance standards and quality specified in the construction documents at lowest cost non of which have any thing to do with where a company is headquartered.

  75. #175
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    I guess I'm getting impatient cause I so much can imagine what 23 ave will look like once everything is done. Between that, a completed AHD, LRT to Century Park, possible overpass added south on Calgary Trail. I agree that as long as the quality is top notch and the price tag is resonable it don't matter who does the work.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  76. #176
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    I still can't understand why the city is doing this project so haphazardly. So far on this forum there are three seperate contracts discussed for this work. ISL got one for design and management services, there is a seperate contract for pipeline relocation and now one for construction of the interchange itself. Part of this project is the storm sewer upgrade work as well, they have been working on that for a couple of years.
    Why on earth can't the city just advertise for a contractor to do the whole thing? By splitting up the contracts you lessen your bargaining power and open yourself to a lot more uncertainty. There is also the cost involved in writing and evaluating each tender and administering each contract.
    This is a glaring example of the city blowing money out the window and a prime reason why things cost so much to build here.

  77. #177
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    I still can't understand why the city is doing this project so haphazardly. So far on this forum there are three seperate contracts discussed for this work. ISL got one for design and management services, there is a seperate contract for pipeline relocation and now one for construction of the interchange itself. Part of this project is the storm sewer upgrade work as well, they have been working on that for a couple of years.
    Contrary to what you may think, this isn't haphazard whatsoever.

    1. design/engineering
    2. underground
    3. surface

    It's common practice to break up a large project into smaller bite-sized pieces as they have done here.


    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    Why on earth can't the city just advertise for a contractor to do the whole thing? By splitting up the contracts you lessen your bargaining power and open yourself to a lot more uncertainty. There is also the cost involved in writing and evaluating each tender and administering each contract.
    This is a glaring example of the city blowing money out the window and a prime reason why things cost so much to build here.
    There is no "bargaining power" to be gained by lumping the contracts together. What is this "uncertainty" you speak of?

    The costs of contract admin is a small drop in the bucket and rather insignificant as compared to the whole overall project.

    Things cost more to build here? Please elaborate! :]

  78. #178
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    It may be common practice for the City to break projects down into smaller pieces and that is exactly my point.
    Bargaining power is derived from the attractiveness of what you have to offer. Uncertainty is derived from the number of variables in a plan.
    By breaking up the contract you have a number of smaller contracts, thus decreasing the attractiveness of each of them and by adding to the number of contracts you have less control of the whole picture.
    As far as things costing more to build here, just go to The City of Calgary's website and compare what they spend on LRT to us, or explore this site. I have posted countless examples of cost comparisons between jurisdictions and Edmonton is always at or near the bottom.

  79. #179
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    It's common practice to break up a large project into smaller bite-sized pieces as they have done here.
    History is full of common practices that were subsequently deemed to be bad practice. Most don't apply to this thread, but only serve to prove that common practice is not always the best practice.

  80. #180
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    It may be common practice for the City to break projects down into smaller pieces and that is exactly my point.
    Bargaining power is derived from the attractiveness of what you have to offer. Uncertainty is derived from the number of variables in a plan.
    I still don't understand how there can be any bargaining power or leverage gained by lumping these contracts together. The pipeline relocation project is going to be bid by pipeline companies as opposed to underground outfits (unfortunately I haven't secured a bidders list yet - and with this one I might not). This is specialized work that SHOULD be bid separate from the interchange tender. There is no advantage to tie the 2 contracts together.

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    By breaking up the contract you have a number of smaller contracts, thus decreasing the attractiveness of each of them and by adding to the number of contracts you have less control of the whole picture.
    On the contrary. A pipeline company isn't going to want to be a sub to a General Contractor. They will want to get in, get out and get paid and then turn the site over to the GC who will have his flock of subs to build the interchange. The GC isn't going to want to babysit a pipeline company either where the work really doesn't have anything to do with his scope of work.

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    As far as things costing more to build here, just go to The City of Calgary's website and compare what they spend on LRT to us, or explore this site. I have posted countless examples of cost comparisons between jurisdictions and Edmonton is always at or near the bottom.
    Comparing apples to apples in these examples, are you? I'm sure you investigated site conditions, scope of work, warranty and maintenance to list just a few variables and found them all to be equal. You have, haven't you?

    Please provide these links - I'd love to check them out!

    Also (from one of your earlier posts).....

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    This is a glaring example of the city blowing money out the window and a prime reason why things cost so much to build here.
    What you have tried to explain regarding the City of Calgary vs. City of Edmonton and LRT spending validates this claim of the City of Edmonton "blowing money out the window" how?

  81. #181
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    History is full of common practices that were subsequently deemed to be bad practice. Most don't apply to this thread, but only serve to prove that common practice is not always the best practice.
    If they don't apply to this thread then why are you bringing it up?

  82. #182
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soycd
    Quote Originally Posted by dwells
    History is full of common practices that were subsequently deemed to be bad practice. Most don't apply to this thread, but only serve to prove that common practice is not always the best practice.
    If they don't apply to this thread then why are you bringing it up?
    I didn't want to introduce off topic examples that might set us off on a tangent, but I'm sure you can also think of some widely accepted common practices in a variety of fields that were ultimately proven to be inefficient or just plain wrong.

    Obviously you are an expert in this field and I appreciate your answers and your patience. If our questions strike a nerve, I apologize, but we're trying to understand and to offer what in our minds might be reasonable improvements to the process.

  83. #183
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    Soycd wrote:
    "Comparing apples to apples in these examples, are you? I'm sure you investigated site conditions, scope of work, warranty and maintenance to list just a few variables and found them all to be equal. You have, haven't you?

    Please provide these links - I'd love to check them out"

    No Soycd I haven't checked out all of the variables but I have done my research.
    Check this link to start; http://www.calgarytransit.com/Calgar...tilization.pdf

    It shows Calgary has spent an average of $24.5 million per mile while Edmonton has spent $41.7 million per mile to construct LRT. (constant U.S. $ 2000)
    Before you start to snivel about ours being underground, compare this figure to the $100 million per mile (C$ 2007) we are spending on the south LRT. Our above ground portion raises our average cost per mile.
    Capital cost per weekday rider is $8900 in Edmonton compared to $2900 in Calgary.
    But you are right, these aren't apples to apples as Calgary is obviously a much cheaper place to build than Edmonton. Right???
    Or we can compare roadway construction, how about two projects in Edmonton?
    23 ave interchange- cost $150 million (we guess)
    or the province building the Henday, the link I wanted is no longer active but in 2003 the province saved $28 million on the SW Henday bidding. They used this money to fund the 111st and the Terwilligar interchanges. But these must be totally different right? Soil conditions and economic conditions are totally different when you go the 1 1/2 kilometers between these projects.
    So if you want to get all uppity about doing research etc. do your own first. Since my guess is you work for the city, I am sure you have plenty of time to do it.
    I could go on but I have posted numerous examples on this forum, take a look yourself.

  84. #184

    Default

    Ralph - you well know that we have yet to see a break down of the SLRT costs. I'm very sceptical that actual LRT costs that much/km. I think it is time they started reporting breaking LRT budgets into LRT construction costs and other associated costs. We already know that SLRT includes the cost of constructing a busway bridge and new bus station at South Campus. I'm also pretty sure they are including the cost of constructing 7.5km bike trail, the entire length of the LRT, which includes not just the trail but also the cost of planting numerous trees for a 'linear park'. All this done to placate residents along the route. Take all of these things out and I'd bet you'd see a rate similar to Calgary and other centres.

  85. #185
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    2,090

    Default

    Mick, Calgary's cost is about half of ours, if we are spending the difference on trees and a bike path our problems are worse than I thought. There have also been numerous requests both on this forum and letters I have written asking for such a breakdown but none have been forthcoming.
    As far as associated costs, Calgary's website shows that pedestrian overpasses, landscaping, parking lots and bus bays are all included in their projects. I doubt very much that Edmonton's accounting principals are so dramatically different that such a huge difference is possible.

  86. #186
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    So if you want to get all uppity about doing research etc. do your own first. Since my guess is you work for the city, I am sure you have plenty of time to do it.
    I could go on but I have posted numerous examples on this forum, take a look yourself.
    If YOU make a claim then YOU should back it up (by providing sources) - that's just proper netiquette. I don't have time to dig around a forum looking for old posts you have submitted. I will look at the link(s) you have provided.

    FTR, I don't work for the City.

  87. #187
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60
    Mick, Calgary's cost is about half of ours, if we are spending the difference on trees and a bike path our problems are worse than I thought. There have also been numerous requests both on this forum and letters I have written asking for such a breakdown but none have been forthcoming.
    As far as associated costs, Calgary's website shows that pedestrian overpasses, landscaping, parking lots and bus bays are all included in their projects. I doubt very much that Edmonton's accounting principals are so dramatically different that such a huge difference is possible.
    Here's the deal and I've stated this before, the costs for the sLRT includes EVERYTHING!!! This was quoted to me by a source that was heavily involved in the sLRT construction programme.

  88. #188
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Including the cost of burrowing through sand.

  89. #189

    Default

    Chris, I know you've stated that before but I don't see how it justifies anything unless it means: we include everything, others don't. Ralph - I have looked in vain on Calgary's website for the numbers on their latest and planned expansions.

  90. #190
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,413

    Default

    According to the new city construction schedule, the overpass is finally going to get done!

  91. #191
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    According to the new city construction schedule, the overpass is finally going to get done!

    confirmed and thank god.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  92. #192
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Sorry but which overpass are you referring to?
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  93. #193
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    Sorry but which overpass are you referring to?
    Read the thread title.

  94. #194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    Sorry but which overpass are you referring to?
    Read the thread title.
    23 Ave & Gateway/Calgary Trail.

  95. #195
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,489

    Default

    Ok sorry, I know we're talking about 23 ave overpass, but for some reason I thought you were referring to some other overpass that was additional to the main one
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  96. #196
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,797

    Default

    once this overpass is complete...watch how night and day it will be at that intersection. Id bet it shaves 5min off a trip to the airport.

    Next up - underpass at 34ave.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  97. #197
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    St Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    192

    Default

    does anyone know exactly how the traffic flow is going to work after 23 ave is completed? what i mean is like for southbound on calgary trail is that flyover to the east going to replace 19 ave? also will there be any changes made to accomodate people wanting to exit 19 ave to be southbound onto calgary trail so they can access routes such as the anthony henday instead of now having to travel thru south edmonton common on 99 Street and then wait for 5-6 light cycles at 23ave/calgarytrail/gatewayblvd??

    just the diagrams show 23 ave clearly just they dont really specify what the flyover will be accomodating or what will be done with 19 ave since its a relatively key location for that area.

    i heard about 19 ave possibly being re-routed under gateway/calgary trail??? was that just a rumour?

  98. #198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Topher
    does anyone know exactly how the traffic flow is going to work after 23 ave is completed? what i mean is like for southbound on calgary trail is that flyover to the east going to replace 19 ave? also will there be any changes made to accomodate people wanting to exit 19 ave to be southbound onto calgary trail so they can access routes such as the anthony henday instead of now having to travel thru south edmonton common on 99 Street and then wait for 5-6 light cycles at 23ave/calgarytrail/gatewayblvd??

    just the diagrams show 23 ave clearly just they dont really specify what the flyover will be accomodating or what will be done with 19 ave since its a relatively key location for that area.

    i heard about 19 ave possibly being re-routed under gateway/calgary trail??? was that just a rumour?
    19 ave will be a fly over, not under. You will not be able to go southbound from 19 ave, just like you can't now. to use the flyover, you'll have to take the 23 rd ave exit, and then continue south
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  99. #199
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,413

    Default

    I thought 19 Ave was supposed to go under Gateway.

  100. #200
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    St Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    192

    Default

    all is great for 23 ave but the 19 ave thing is really inconvient and poorly planned so that people that want to jump onto the freeway not even 100m away have to reroute and extra 10-15 minutes onto their trip waiting at the lights. especially gonna be worse until they open SE Anthony Henday and construction starts on 23 Ave this summer.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •