Well, the creativity of the Infrastructure Manager Mr. Gutek must be acknowledged. In one report he managed to bring the Traffic Bridge reconstruction budget back on track and at the same time indirectly announce that the historic bridge will not be rehabilitated, but reconstructed (SP Nov. 16/10.) I think it is safe to assume the construction of the mini Mount Blackstrap that is suggested for Saskatchewan Crescent will not be included in the overall bridge project budget.
I will be curious to see what the engineers have to say regarding the stability of the riverbank for the proposed road realignment on Saskatchewan Crescent. It wasn't that long ago that a portion of the riverbank and MVA trail, adjacent to the roadway, collapsed due to a sinkhole. And then there is the ongoing issue of the exit ramp from the University bridge onto Saskatchewan Crescent East that has been years in the making and well over budget because of the ground instability.
I expect any impact on Rotary Park will not be considered. Since the city saw fit to move the lift station from River Landing into Nutana's one and only city park, and enhance the parking lot to accommodate those who wish to avoid paying for downtown parking, I am going to assume that this park is of little or no consequence to the city.
In fact, I am going to assume the the residents in this area are of little or no consequence to the city.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
That's what the area gets for electing a candidate more concerned with his political career and pushing an agenda on Council than with representing his ward. Just saying...
ReplyDeleteNot to mention require ripping up the completely rehabilitated, oops reconstructed, tennis courts that the city put in this summer at tax payer's expense.
ReplyDeleteWhat a joke of an idea, your point about the University bridge is bang on. We've been hearing about problems with the river bank there forever, no we have the city proposing to do a similar operation a kilometer down the road. Do these people not learn?
At what point does Mike Gutek have to go? I mean I understand that he probably isn't the only incompetent worker at City Hall, but at some point the public has to (if it already hasn't for the majority) lose faith in his ability to do his job. Every time he speaks it is to cover his ass for poor work or to offer some asinine solution that will only make problems worse.
Re the lift station, sorry Mistress but that was the best place to put it. Nothing against the park there, but securing as strong as possible River Landing site was job 1.
It is so refreshing to hear from so many knowledable professional engineers with so much information on "slumping". That the current commentors would be expert at "slumping" should come as no surprise to anyone. Also,it is no surprise that said commentors would be experts at recognizing incompotence as most of you exude that very trait. What Mr. Gutek is recommending is in fact a return to what was at the top of the bridge for fifty+ years with no problems with "slumping" but considerable traffic flow problems. Speaking of flow problems the Civic Mistress and the rest of Saskatchewan Cresent seem to have had no problem with letting their shit and it's inherant odor flow to the west side to be vented, even though it was through a deteriorating sewer pipe under the river.
ReplyDeleteDid you read the story Anon 9:24? Or are you simply one of the Mistress enemies out there to criticize every word she writes?
ReplyDeletePlease enlighten us to the "slumping". Also explain, how this volatile riverbank that Gutek himself has warned about with reference to the University bridge will not impact the current design?
Also, as a professional engineer, will the "slumping" pose no problems when modifications to the bridge are needed to suit today's needs? I can only guess that different standards apply than did 50 years ago, we know more about erosion and environmental effects on the river bank. I can't imagine building a new bridge that is going to be used for the next 80 years or so will be done with the same specs as one that was forced to be altered some 50 years ago.
So please tell us all about "slumping" and enlighten us why a design flaw that cause traffic headaches 50 years ago would make any more sense today.
Anon 11:31
ReplyDeleteIf the dreaded slump was a danger in this area would not Nutana (100 years old) and Victoria Place (45 years old) aready be in the river? Mr Gutek was not even in his present position when the slump first occurred on Sask Cresent by the University Bridge. The slumping at the Broadway Bridge occurred after a plugged storm sewer released a torrent of water in the wrong place during a large rainfall incident. As for the intersection I merely stated it was there for a long time and didn't fall away in any slump plus I did mention the traffic flow problem. As for your own problem with verbal diarea could you please answer me while standing closer to the new lift station.
Herein lies my point, that "slumping" has occurred at University Bridge and Broadway Bridge (I didn't know about the Broadway until you pointed it out). Why should it be any different further down the river? Even more interesting is that Broadway was caused from a sewer back up, assuming laws of gravity apply I would think that the Traffic Bridge area would be as likely, or more likely to be susceptible to such a problem.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, never said Gutek was in charge when the slump first occurred. I was simply saying as someone who has dealt with this problem since he has been in his position, and commented to the media on it (which he has), you would think (hope?) he has an understanding of the issue.
And since, you apparently aren't a professional engineer, no the slump near the river bank would not necessarily affect the Victoria Place or Nutana. It could, but not necessarily would.
But, yes continue defending the actions of an incompetent civic employee. After all, nothing that has gone wrong in this city is Gutek's fault, at least if you listen to his contrived excuses blaming everything but himself.
At what point, and after how many project failures/delays/cost overruns does Gutek become responsible? Or does he just deserve a pat on the back and raise from tax payers and a job well done!!!
I take it you are also not an engineer or you might twig to the fact the Traffic Bridge is UP stream from the Broadway Bridge. The slump at the Broadway was because of the amount of water accumulated in a concentrated area and at least partially due to the Meewasin Trail being built up in that area improperly dispite warnings. I honestly don't know but I don't think there has ever been a problem with instability in that area and with several new large homes having been built in the area I would guess there has been some engineering studies done there. I wouldn't worry about Mr. Gutek's involvement to much because if the Ciyt does go ahead with anything there they will hire real engineers not the boobs they employ.
ReplyDelete