Safety for the pylons?

Construction radar boosts safety: Police

The use of photo radar for speed enforcement in construction zones has dramatically increased safety conditions at roadway construction zones according to Winnipeg police.

The evidence:

Police started using photo enforcement because of ongoing safety concerns at the Bishop Grand Boulevard bridge construction work ... During the first three days of use in both directions on the bridge (April 29 to May 1) a total of 1,967 citations were issued to motorists speeding through the construction zone. During the last three days of available data (June 18 to 20), a total of 532 citations were issued.

So based on stats from one (of many) construction zones, using two different periods of time -- one on the spring and one in the summer -- they have concluded that workers are safer! Safety = β(1 / citations) + ε. I wonder what the t-value is on that coefficient?

Aside from drawing conclusions based on data with no statistical value, there's the small little additional concern that THERE ARE NO CONSTRUCTION WORKERS PRESENT!! I drive through there all the time and there are never construction workers around. If they are working at all, they are over on the other span of the bridge -- you know, the one that is closed down? But most often when I see those photo radar traps, it is in the evening or the weekend when construction workers are no where to be seen at all.

These radar traps are total bullshit. This is not exactly breaking news though. Take for example the radar trap on Route 90 and Corydon. The stretch that has a limit of 50 km/h, and a camera, even though Public Works presented a report to the City council back in Jan 03 that stated it should be higher? Or how about the report that shows that the city used misleading statistics in an attempt to cover-up the program's failure to reduce accidents.

Funny how the "When Passing Workers" part of the speed limit signs have disappeared from most construction sites. Makes one suspect that perhaps protecting the workers is not top priority.

Beyond Asperdome: Thinking Big

My first thought after seeing the conceptual drawings of Asper's vision last Saturday was: "well, you can't accuse him of not thinking big." (My second thought was "I wonder if there are more jobs for conceptual artists in Winnipeg than Architects"). Turns out he's not just building a stadium: he's building a stadium, moving roads, building bridges and underpasses, destroying buildings, renovating buildings, building a "Disney-esque" waterpark, building a hotel, building an underground lair (oops, I think I was supposed to keep that one to myself).

If you don't like the plan, don't blame Asper. You can't fault him for this. In fact, I could argue that Winnipeg needs more visionaries and big thinkers with big ideas. We live in a province that loves the status quo, and in a city who's idea of development is building neighbourhoods of stucco houses adjacent to big box stores, connected by traffic lights. Not a lot of big thinking going on there.

I think Asper should be commended for putting forth this plan. At the very least, it got us thinking and talking about a neighbourhood that is largely underdeveloped and under-utilized.

That doesn't mean that we have to accept his vision of course. I still have serious concerns about it, and I am not sure it is necessarily the best way to develop Point Douglas. I have concerns about the cost. He is ostensibly asking for less money, but after you expropriate the land and do the environmental impact studies and riverbank stabilization and decontamination, and infrastructure changes and archiving of the artifacts that are dug up, etc etc. it is going to cost a big bundle of money. I also am suspicious of the so-called "fair market value" that Asper will pay for the existing stadium site. How do you know if it's fair market value if you don't put the land on the market? That's something to keep a close eye on.

As for what's best for Point Douglas, the opinion of the residents is much more important than my own. But if the objective is to create a friendly or vibrant neighbourhood, then acres of parking lots and a seldom-used sports facility is not the solution. I don't care how many well-dressed white people they put in the conceptual drawings. Maybe there are other visionaries out there with better ideas. Or maybe it's just a matter of rezoning some lots, cleaning up the derelict properties and encouraging small-scale development with TIFs and tax breaks. TIFs could be used for more than just stadiums, you know.

Pork roast

Hmmm.

• Bill 17

• 3 fires killing 15,000 hogs in just over a month; 22,000 this year in four fires? (1 2 3 4)

coincidence?

Turning the screws on an industry already hit by a high Canadian dollar....

update: I just realized I ripped off the title of this post from a NewWinnipeg thread (pretty much). Tip of the hat to StBPegger

update #2: much more on this over at PITT

Happy Canada Day

Sorry ...

I have to apologize. That last post was even worse than the one before. I'm taking myself far too seriously as a blogger. I'm going to take a break and read Hot Chicks with Douchebags until I come to my senses.

there's more good stuff where that came from. Go check it out!

Beyond Asperdome: bottom line

After writing my last eloquent post about the tight fit of a stadium in Point Douglas, I have since heard that Asper is in fact planning a 30-40,000 seat stadium. I suppose it might work if it were more of a bowl design, with smaller side grandstands and more end zone seating.

But really, who the hell knows what's going on? There are so many theories and suggestions out there on the internet that I don't even want to try to keep track, or add further speculation to the pile of speculation that's already filling up cyberspace. Instead, I'm going to lie low on this issue for a while, except to say this:

Whatever the plan is, it should not be forced on us. We shouldn't compromise for the sake of getting a deal done or compelling David Asper to quit smoking. If the terms and conditions are not right -- if the stadium is not what we need it to be, or if Asper ("Asker" as they're saying on NewWinnipeg) makes out like a bandit while the tax payers get screwed -- then there needs to be a way to stop the deal. Unfortunately I am not confident that we'll see that. Doer, while pretending to be responsible with the purse strings, will ultimately cave in to anything; Sammy would love nothing more than to leave a stadium as a legacy, especially as he has done very little else to be remembered by; David wants his empire; and Vic Toews ... I don't know if we can count on Vic.

There is only one entity that can give this proposal -- whatever it ends up being -- the sanity check it needs: you and me - the people of Winnipeg.

Beyond Asperdome: Ouch, that's tight!

Stop it -- it hurts! Ouch ouch ouch ouch!

... that's that downtown Winnipeg will be saying after we stuff a stadium up it's ass.

A 24,000 seat stadium is not big enough. It's a non-starter. If we build a stadium it should be somewhere in the 35,000 seat range, and have space to expand to host a Grey Cup. So, lets have a look at McMahon stadium (37,000) and see how that fits in downtown Winnipeg.

Just for fun. I'll be careful. I promise...

First, Point Douglas:


d'oh! Are we allowed to build a grandstand over a river? And what's that north of the tracks? A park? Are we destroying a park to build a parking lot? Just asking.

Ok, so let's check out the other location -- south of the Convention Centre:

Jesus, did anybody bother looking at a map before coming up with this one? The field barely fits in there, never mind the grandstands.

This is stupid. I don't know how this is going to turn out, but I have a feeling that once Sammy, Vic and David are done with us, we're all going to be reaching for the aloe vera cream.