Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Meanwhile at Bishop and Kenaston, the first trapezoidal box girder is going into place. They built a temporary pier for it to sit on yesterday. But it was still on the ground when I went by this evening, with the crane in position and cables hooked up. Also will be closing Kenaston over the weekend. Likely to install more girders over the roadway. This one was off to the side on the east.

Is there a diagram of this grade separation showing how the traffic will flow when completed? I know there's a light mixed in somewhere but not sure where it will fit in...

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Is there a diagram of this grade separation showing how the traffic will flow when completed? I know there's a light mixed in somewhere but not sure where it will fit in...

Gotta go back a few pages. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...7&postcount=87

http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/M...hop-phase2.pdf

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Kinguni

Gotta go back a few pages. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...7&postcount=87

http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/M...hop-phase2.pdf

I always thought that flyover was for a bike trail.

[bomberjet]

This is what the bridge will look like. And Kinguini's link is to the overall plan showing how the lights will work. Basically only left turns will have to wait at the lights. You can also see in the drawing it shows the future Bishop extension passing under the fly-over. So whenever that goes ahead, the lights will disappear and some form of interchange will need to be completed. Following up to my post yesterday, the box girder was still on the ground this morning. But I did notice there was another long section of girder on site. Must have come overnight. It was on one of those trailers, or not really a trailer. Where one end of the girder was on the back of the truck, and the other end was on a separate dolly, with nothing in the middle.

Originally Posted by bomberjet

[northern_hoser]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

This is what the bridge will look like. And Kinguini's link is to the overall plan showing how the lights will work. Basically only left turns will have to wait at the lights. You can also see in the drawing it shows the future Bishop extension passing under the fly-over. So whenever that goes ahead, the lights will disappear and some form of interchange will need to be completed. Following up to my post yesterday, the box girder was still on the ground this morning. But I did notice there was another long section of girder on site. Must have come overnight. It was on one of those trailers, or not really a trailer. Where one end of the girder was on the back of the truck, and the other end was on a separate dolly, with nothing in the middle.

Could the future Bishop Grandin extension actually go underneath Kenaston or would there not be enough room for that? It almost seems like the city is painting themselves into a corner by building this fly-over and planning to plan for an interchange which seems to be their m.o.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by northern_hoser

Could the future Bishop Grandin extension actually go underneath Kenaston or would there not be enough room for that? It almost seems like the city is painting themselves into a corner by building this fly-over and planning to plan for an interchange which seems to be their m.o.

If you look carefully at the drawing, it actually indicates where the future Bishop Grandin extension will go. It isn't clear how the interchange would be configured once that happened, though.

[bomberjet]

Seems to me a full interchange would fit. I haven't seen the full interchange design myself. But based on how this fly-over is placed, it all seems to work. Not sure if you can see the faded out linework on that image, but it shows both directions of Bishop going underneath the fly-over.

Below is the concept I sketched up one day. The fly-over i noted is the one being built now. And the existing lanes are the right turn from WB Bishop to NB Kenaston that's been there for years. Gives you an idea of what it could look like. But it's just my interpretation. One change I'd make is the NB Kenaston to EB Bishop ramp should go under the new fly-over instead of connecting to the fly-over ramp itself. You can see it as future on that one drawing.

[bomberjet]

A few photos from Friday. First section in place, at least two more girder sections on site when I went by.

[yellowghost]

Off topic..but has any mayor candidate ever adresses the need for completing this so-called inner ring road? Or at least a plan to make what exists traffic light free..or should I say "road improvement"free.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

Off topic..but has any mayor candidate ever adresses the need for completing this so-called inner ring road? Or at least a plan to make what exists traffic light free..or should I say "road improvement"free.

Specific road projects seldom become political issues... it's always about potholes and roads in the broadest of terms.

For what it's worth, the inner ring will never become traffic-light free... that ship sailed long, long ago. But for what it's worth it doesn't have to become a 100% freeway to be a better, more effective route. Even just 10 grade separations/interchanges scattered along Bishop Grandin/Lagimodiere/Chief Peguis would probably make a big difference in eliminating the worst bottlenecks and most dangerous intersections.

[bomberjet]

Drove WB Bishop approaching the flyover this morning and they have 4 sections of girder up, with what looks like 2 more sections to go on the northwest end. You can definitely see how Bishop will go straight underneath, maybe with a little bit of a curve. As you're getting past Waverley, it's looks like the bridge is going over Bishop.

[yellowghost]

Not sure what adding only a handfull of interchanges will do. You just end with HUGE bottlenecks at the remaining intersections.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

Not sure what adding only a handfull of interchanges will do. You just end with HUGE bottlenecks at the remaining intersections.

I agree with esquire that it's too late now, especially for Lagimodiere. This cheap-ass city has screwed these routes up so badly now that they would literally go broke trying to make them completely free flow. I wonder if the city would have even approved the huge Pembina/Bishop parclo expenditure back in the 80's if they knew how little of an impact it really has now during peak traffic - considering eastbound traffic on Bishop is often lined up all the way back under the overpass because of that light on River. What a waste.

What could be done to improve the situation however, is to add grade separations at specific intersections and then remove lights where intersections with minor roads exist (Bishop & River, Lagimodiere & Headmaster as examples) and/or program the remaining lights to give priority to the route meant to be the expressway. As is seen in the US. Right now seeing Bishop have a 30 second green cycle at streets like Island Shore is just a complete joke.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Reignman

What could be done to improve the situation however, is to add grade separations at specific intersections and then remove lights where intersections with minor roads exist (Bishop & River, Lagimodiere & Headmaster as examples) and/or program the remaining lights to give priority to the route meant to be the expressway. As is seen in the US.

Exactly. A handful of interchanges won't turn Bishop and Lag into the 407, but it will definitely speed things up on the inner ring, and just as importantly, get traffic moving a lot more quickly on the streets that intersect it. Quite often you see traffic backed up badly on Regent, St. Mary's, St. Anne's, Waverley, etc. waiting to get across - so a grade separation could have an impact on both routes.

Right now seeing Bishop have a 30 second green cycle at streets like Island Shore is just a complete joke.

Is there any particular reason that Winnipeg streets have such comically short light cycles? In the winter when there is snow and ice to contend with, traffic barely gets moving on a green before the light turns amber.

In Winnipeg, our egalitarian spirit means that Chevrier or whatever gets nearly the same green light time as Pembina.... compare with virtually any city in the US where the main drag gets much longer greens. Sure it's annoying for people waiting to make a turn off a side street, but people adjust their patterns accordingly, and bonus, it gets traffic moving on the main drag... you can actually hit three green lights in a row.

With our snow and ice you would think that if anything, our greens would be longer. By my experience there are longer almost anywhere else.

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Drove WB Bishop approaching the flyover this morning and they have 4 sections of girder up, with what looks like 2 more sections to go on the northwest end. You can definitely see how Bishop will go straight underneath, maybe with a little bit of a curve. As you're getting past Waverley, it's looks like the bridge is going over Bishop.

Awesome, thanks for the pics and description bomberjet keep it coming

Originally Posted by Reignman

I agree with esquire that it's too late now, especially for Lagimodiere. This cheap-ass city has screwed these routes up so badly now that they would literally go broke trying to make them completely free flow. I wonder if the city would have even approved the huge Pembina/Bishop parclo expenditure back in the 80's if they knew how little of an impact it really has now during peak traffic - considering eastbound traffic on Bishop is often lined up all the way back under the overpass because of that light on River. What a waste.

What could be done to improve the situation however, is to add grade separations at specific intersections and then remove lights where intersections with minor roads exist (Bishop & River, Lagimodiere & Headmaster as examples) and/or program the remaining lights to give priority to the route meant to be the expressway. As is seen in the US. Right now seeing Bishop have a 30 second green cycle at streets like Island Shore is just a complete joke.

Originally Posted by esquire

Exactly. A handful of interchanges won't turn Bishop and Lag into the 407, but it will definitely speed things up on the inner ring, and just as importantly, get traffic moving a lot more quickly on the streets that intersect it. Quite often you see traffic backed up badly on Regent, St. Mary's, St. Anne's, Waverley, etc. waiting to get across - so a grade separation could have an impact on both routes.

Agreed, some serious consideration could be made for improving flow on Bishop and Lag.

Bishop as it currently stands is about the same length as what is considered the freeway portion of Glenmore trail in Calgary, and that portion went through a serious upgrade to become free-flow for that length. It was a huge project for the city at the time and cost a ton of money. But it has certainly improved traffic flow and safety even though there are lights a bit after each end of the freeway portion. Outside of rush hour it takes no more than 10 mins to commute and is enjoyable to drive.

Something of that nature would be ideal for Bishop, with diamond interchanges. The major difference between Glenmore and Bishop is that Bishop has more space to work with, whereas with Glenmore they had to buy and demolish buildings to create room. What is it, 12? sets of lights that could - realistically - be improved or removed entirely

Lag is another story though, and that road is in need of more serious looks than Bishop, imo. Currently, Lag is longer than Bishop and even more of a mess given the only interchanges are at either end of the road where it connects to the perimeter but how little space there is to work with. Some really head scratching lights especially around old saint boniface.

Though, I also agree with the prior comment regarding creating potential bottlenecks. I'm not sure exactly what the best way would be overall to deal with those two in the long term.

Reality is money will hold back anything from seriously moving forward. But if the current kenaston to bishop overpass is any indication, the city is capable of creating some free flow, likely aware of the advantages, and hopefully will work towards doing something about it if possible. I wonder if the city is considering anything serious within the next 5-10 years?

Originally Posted by esquire

Is there any particular reason that Winnipeg streets have such comically short light cycles? In the winter when there is snow and ice to contend with, traffic barely gets moving on a green before the light turns amber.

In Winnipeg, our egalitarian spirit means that Chevrier or whatever gets nearly the same green light time as Pembina.... compare with virtually any city in the US where the main drag gets much longer greens. Sure it's annoying for people waiting to make a turn off a side street, but people adjust their patterns accordingly, and bonus, it gets traffic moving on the main drag... you can actually hit three green lights in a row.

With our snow and ice you would think that if anything, our greens would be longer. By my experience there are longer almost anywhere else.

I've always wondered this too. No idea why especially on the busier high speed roads in the city. At night it can speed up with the flashing yellows, but that just makes it more desirable for those lights to not even exist in the first place

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by esquire

Is there any particular reason that Winnipeg streets have such comically short light cycles? In the winter when there is snow and ice to contend with, traffic barely gets moving on a green before the light turns amber.

In Winnipeg, our egalitarian spirit means that Chevrier or whatever gets nearly the same green light time as Pembina.... compare with virtually any city in the US where the main drag gets much longer greens. Sure it's annoying for people waiting to make a turn off a side street, but people adjust their patterns accordingly, and bonus, it gets traffic moving on the main drag... you can actually hit three green lights in a row.

With our snow and ice you would think that if anything, our greens would be longer. By my experience there are longer almost anywhere else.

They've shortened the light cycle at many of the intersections along Henderson (Leighton, Kimberley) making Henderson much more free flow, believe this was done about a year and half ago.

My beef with the city is the lack of uniform speed limits on similar roadways throughout the city, ex. Raleigh is 60 KM/H yet Molson is 50, both two lane roadways. There are many more examples of this across the city. Speed limits in general are set too slow for the speeds they can handle, the quality of vehicles people drive today and compared to what speed people actually do drive at. But of course unrealistic speed limits do benefit the city coffers don't they

[1ajs]

because residential is along those routes so they drop it to 50

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Speed limits in general are set too slow for the speeds they can handle, the quality of vehicles people drive today and compared to what speed people actually do drive at.

I guess there's two options:

1. Use safety improvements in vehicles to increase the speed that people can drive in neighbourhoods

2. Use safety improvements in vehicles to increase safety in neighbourhoods

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Reignman

I agree with esquire that it's too late now, especially for Lagimodiere. This cheap-ass city has screwed these routes up so badly now that they would literally go broke trying to make them completely free flow. I wonder if the city would have even approved the huge Pembina/Bishop parclo expenditure back in the 80's if they knew how little of an impact it really has now during peak traffic - considering eastbound traffic on Bishop is often lined up all the way back under the overpass because of that light on River. What a waste.

What could be done to improve the situation however, is to add grade separations at specific intersections and then remove lights where intersections with minor roads exist (Bishop & River, Lagimodiere & Headmaster as examples) and/or program the remaining lights to give priority to the route meant to be the expressway. As is seen in the US. Right now seeing Bishop have a 30 second green cycle at streets like Island Shore is just a complete joke.

I have been saying these 2 things for years... Lagimodiere is awful, and what does the City do? It adds a turning lane to one of the most dangerous intersections, Grassie, when literally less than a km south is an interchange into the same neighbourhood. What the hell?

It makes me ill that the City would add money to an already hypertrophic intersection to "increase safety", when just closing the intersection and forcing people to use the interchange (a place where far less accidents happen) is the cheaper and safer thing to do. Sure, that interchange isn't exactly the best designed, but the money they save from closing Grassie could be used to fix it up a bit. And seriously, it will end up adding less than 2 minutes to anyone's drive.

I would be extremely happy if one of the coming candadites for Council/Mayor actually talked about elimination of intersections on major trade routes (ie. the inner ring road).

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I would be extremely happy if one of the coming candadites for Council/Mayor actually talked about elimination of intersections on major trade routes (ie. the inner ring road).

Winnipeg would need to face some hard realities though if looking at a proper inner ring road.

First, they would need to accept Route 90 as a non-starter and move to focus to William Clement. South of Portage it could be made free flowing. The bigger issues is between Portage and CentrePort Way.

Second, they need to look at the mess that is CentrePort Way. Who in their right mind approved a bridge over one set of tracks but allowed an at-grade crossing for a second set that were nearby? Further, how did a new "expressway" get built with two at-grade signalled intersections? Finally, the mix of speeds on CentrePort Way needs to be addressed.

Third, look at the mess that is Chief Peguis Trail. Again, a new extension to an "expressway" with two new at-grade signaled intersections (Gateway and Lag).

If we are serious about getting city-wide support for building an inner ring road all the money cannot be spent solely to fix the issues on Bishop, it needs to be spread to all parts of the City of voters not living/working in the immediate area are going to oppose any plans to spend large amounts of money. Further, the people in areas being improved need to not complain about their routes being made slightly longer by any changes that happen (ie closing left turns from River onto Bishop when there are existing loop backs in place that solve that meaning the light could be removed without building a diamond).