Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Wpgstvsouth94]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

They will most definitely not be replacing the entire concrete roadway on South Perimeter anytime soon.

By 2040, with the rest of the planned projects, the pavement will have then been replaced.

Oh no I’m talking about the north perimeter concrete!

[bomberjet]

Swap out north for south in my post. And timeline will be the same maybe longer lol

[Biff]

I was on the north Perimeter yesterday at 3:30....wow, it definitely needs to be expanded to 6 lanes between Brookside and Lagimodiere. It was bumper to bumper the whole way, east and west.

[esquire]

There are several pinch points that could use expansion to 6 lanes on the Perimeter now that it has evolved from being a highway running around the city to, effectively, a route for intra-city travel around Winnipeg.

-101 from McPhillips to Lagimodiere
-100 from Kenaston to Lagimodiere (this part desperately needs new interchanges... St. Mary's is getting one but there really should others added at Kenaston, St. Anne's and arguably Waverley)
-100/101 from Wilkes to CCW

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by Biff

I was on the north Perimeter yesterday at 3:30....wow, it definitely needs to be expanded to 6 lanes between Brookside and Lagimodiere. It was bumper to bumper the whole way, east and west.

Yup… go through there at least once a week now Because it’s the only bridge to cross the red other than at lockport which is a gong show because of the dam bridge being down to one lane. Most of the time you can’t even get up to 100kph. People stopped at the exits unable to merge because the lanes dead end at a bridge railing. So dangerous. The increase in traffic levels in the area in the past decade is insane. Same with lagimodière/59 The traffic levels have greatly increased in the area. Should be six lanes all the way to 44 now.

It’s really sad how poor our infrastructure is compared to other cities across Canada.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by esquire

There are several pinch points that could use expansion to 6 lanes on the Perimeter now that it has evolved from being a highway running around the city to, effectively, a route for intra-city travel around Winnipeg.

-101 from McPhillips to Lagimodiere
-100 from Kenaston to Lagimodiere (this part desperately needs new interchanges... St. Mary's is getting one but there really should others added at Kenaston, St. Anne's and arguably Waverley)
-100/101 from Wilkes to CCW

Waverley needs to be rerouted it’s too close to Kenaston as is and the apartment buildings will make it very hard too put any interchange on it anyway. Unless you’re referring to extend Waverley at Prairie Pointe to the Perimeter then that’s a different story.

Imo the most laughable intersection in the perimeter besides St. Mary’s is McGillivray. They need to expropriate whatever land possible too make a viable interchange because it’s a key industrial corridor for the city.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Waverley needs to be rerouted it’s too close to Kenaston as is and the apartment buildings will make it very hard too put any interchange on it anyway. Unless you’re referring to extend Waverley at Prairie Pointe to the Perimeter then that’s a different story.

Imo the most laughable intersection in the perimeter besides St. Mary’s is McGillivray. They need to expropriate whatever land possible too make a viable interchange because it’s a key industrial corridor for the city.

Agree re: Waverley, it is kind of dumb the way it's laid out right now. Why not align it with Kenaston so you only have to plan for one grade separation? Or does the province have other plans (terminate Waverley before 100, or something else altogether).

The McGillivray situation is getting to the point of being dangerous. It's been nearly a decade since the province announced plans for a diamond there, and still nothing.

[harls]

Originally Posted by esquire

The McGillivray situation is getting to the point of being dangerous. It's been nearly a decade since the province announced plans for a diamond there, and still nothing.

Humpty's ain't going quietly, apparently.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by esquire

Agree re: Waverley, it is kind of dumb the way it's laid out right now. Why not align it with Kenaston so you only have to plan for one grade separation? Or does the province have other plans (terminate Waverley before 100, or something else altogether).

The McGillivray situation is getting to the point of being dangerous. It's been nearly a decade since the province announced plans for a diamond there, and still nothing.

Waverley will be disconnected from Perimeter once the Kenaston/100 interchange is built. Not sure why they didn't run Waverley right to Kenaston when Kenaston was first joined to Perimeter to make one intersection rather than 2 but it is what it is for now.

See slides 8 and 9

https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/hpd/pth100...e_segment3.pdf

[esquire]

^ OK, that makes sense. So now we just have to wait for the Kenaston interchange to get built. That alone will improve the situation significantly as one interchange eliminates two sets of lights, and combined with the new St. Mary's interchange there will be a somewhat decent length of road between traffic lights.

[dmacc]

Yes, will be nice to get Kenaston interchange built. I think the plan was for the McGilvary interchange after St. Mary's, so Kenaston will take quite some time. Though when it is finished you will be able to travel from St. Anne's to maybe as far as Hwy 6 (?) without lights.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by dmacc

Yes, will be nice to get Kenaston interchange built. I think the plan was for the McGilvary interchange after St. Mary's, so Kenaston will take quite some time. Though when it is finished you will be able to travel from St. Anne's to maybe as far as Hwy 6 (?) without lights.

Hopefully an election promise will take care of Kenaston and/or St Annes, by the time those are done the North Perimeter safety study should be complete and they'll have a better idea on prioritizing the remaining at-grade intersections.

[prairiedog007]

The first thing they need to do one North Perimeter is to widen Red River bridge by a few lanes, especially going East, very scary in winter with cars merging from main and cars turning onto Henderson

[esquire]

Originally Posted by prairiedog007

The first thing they need to do one North Perimeter is to widen Red River bridge by a few lanes, especially going East, very scary in winter with cars merging from main and cars turning onto Henderson

Agreed completely, it's the same thing with the south Perimeter over the Red River. Very short merge lanes and lots of high-speed traffic. Both of those bridges needed to be 6 lanes yesterday, with the new lanes providing some breathing room for traffic coming on and off the highway.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by esquire

Agreed completely, it's the same thing with the south Perimeter over the Red River. Very short merge lanes and lots of high-speed traffic. Both of those bridges needed to be 6 lanes yesterday, with the new lanes providing some breathing room for traffic coming on and off the highway.

Even if bridge widening isn't an option yet, wasn't there talks of lengthening the ramps on/off the perimeter for Henderon? Seems like a medium hanging fruit that's just slightly more expensive than cutting off the dirt roads accesses. Could do Wilkes and Rosser while they're at it too.

They could also look at reconfiguring the interchange at Main to a folded diamond, essentially mirror-imaging the henderson one (but with ramps on the west side instead of east). Main/Hwy 9 doesn't need free flow anyways since there's no chance in hell that ever gets "freewayed" in our lifetimes, based on the number of light-controlled intersections just north and south of the interchange.

With those two changes you could probably add 500-600 m of extra merge distance for Main and 200-400m for Henderson

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by esquire

Agreed completely, it's the same thing with the south Perimeter over the Red River. Very short merge lanes and lots of high-speed traffic. Both of those bridges needed to be 6 lanes yesterday, with the new lanes providing some breathing room for traffic coming on and off the highway.

At least for the South Perimeter you have a longer distance to make your lane changes before hitting Pembina or St Mary's. Once St Mary's interchange is complete, you also (should) lose the slow traffic in the left lane that wants to exit, and they should all be in the right lane.

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by dmacc

Yes, will be nice to get Kenaston interchange built. I think the plan was for the McGilvary interchange after St. Mary's, so Kenaston will take quite some time. Though when it is finished you will be able to travel from St. Anne's to maybe as far as Hwy 6 (?) without lights.

Still have 330 lights and the rail crossing right after. So it will be decades before no lights.

[CoryB]

The challenge with the Kenaston interchange at the Perimeter is the project is the same one as the interchange for the proposed St Norbert By Pass. The plan is essentially Kenaston would continue south past the Perimeter and hook into HWY 75 somewhere south of the floodway inlet. The exact route is definitely part of the issue. They also no doubt want to get some of the other parts of the south Perimeter built out to the proposed 6 lane standard before building what will likely be 8-10 lanes of Perimeter traffic at the new Kenaston interchange. And based on the sheer number of lanes the Perimeter will need at that point it seems almost certain that Kennaston will be the over road.

[Spocket]

There'll be no interchange at Kenaston until the whole of the St. Norbert bypass is constructed. It's more expensive than the normal interchanges (extra overpass structure and an interchange at the south end where it meets 75. The odds the province will pony up that cash any time soon are slim to none. In other words, it'll be decades before you can go from 330 to Dugald/15 without having to stop for a light.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by Spocket

There'll be no interchange at Kenaston until the whole of the St. Norbert bypass is constructed. It's more expensive than the normal interchanges (extra overpass structure and an interchange at the south end where it meets 75. The odds the province will pony up that cash any time soon are slim to none. In other words, it'll be decades before you can go from 330 to Dugald/15 without having to stop for a light.

Im not sure why it’s absolutely necessary for the bypass to happen at the same time. People keep repeating that but so far I know of no official word that confirms that.