Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

I was talking with a construction buddy from out of town and we pondered something that winnipegers would probably cry about. But he said " why not put toll booths on the perimeter hwy." I was wtf at first. But listen to his idea.

First the city / province takes the loan out to completely redo and finish the entire perimeter hwy. I mean everything. Widen where needed to 3 lanes or more. Over and underpasses. Limited access. Raised speeds. Basically turning it into a real free way.

Now once it's done you install the booths. Everyone would be forced through it just like the Coq in bc. And when it's paid for remove the booths. The Coq did the exact same thing and they removed the booths 2 years ago. After hearing that. IMO great idea as it would get built fast and we would improve the construction trade as we would need out of province workers and companies to do it. No tax payer money. And in the end maybe some of those companies would invest in Manitoba even. But we would have one of the best routes for trucking , moving cars etc in Canada. That would be a huge plus to trade IMO.

The only solution anybody has in this province for creating jobs is paying people to dig holes and fill them. There's very little need for an upgraded perimeter highway as far as our economy goes because there aren't any existing capacity issues. All anybody would succeed in doing is keeping people off the perimeter highway creating more traffic pressure on the interior traffic routes.

[original]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

I was talking with a construction buddy from out of town and we pondered something that winnipegers would probably cry about. But he said " why not put toll booths on the perimeter hwy." I was wtf at first. But listen to his idea.

First the city / province takes the loan out to completely redo and finish the entire perimeter hwy. I mean everything. Widen where needed to 3 lanes or more. Over and underpasses. Limited access. Raised speeds. Basically turning it into a real free way.

Now once it's done you install the booths. Everyone would be forced through it just like the Coq in bc. And when it's paid for remove the booths. The Coq did the exact same thing and they removed the booths 2 years ago. After hearing that. IMO great idea as it would get built fast and we would improve the construction trade as we would need out of province workers and companies to do it. No tax payer money. And in the end maybe some of those companies would invest in Manitoba even. But we would have one of the best routes for trucking , moving cars etc in Canada. That would be a huge plus to trade IMO.

I would pay to fly 110 or 120 down a limited access perimeter in a heart beat. My current 45-50 minute crawl from south Winnipeg to East St. Paul limits down Bishop/Lag during rush hour is pretty unbearable. I bet I could be home in 12-15 mins if it was a true freeway.

[CoryB]

The idea of a toll road seems reasonable but why remove the toll?

Also some logistics questions:

1. Would there be a fast, automated line frequent users would drive through?
2. Is the payment based on distance travelled or is it a single pay-to-use fee?
3. Would there be different fees based on vehicle size, ie $5 per car, $10 per box truck, $15 for a single 53' trailer, $20 for double 53' trailer.

If the toll was implemented I would like to see it impact all roads that see significant upgrades or our built to accommodate sprawl. For example, you are using the new Bishop fly-over you pay ever time you use it, same for CentrePort Canada Way.

[bomberjet]

Electronic tolls, so no stopping at all. Work out some kind of system. If you use it everyday, probably better to get a monthly pass. If you use it once in a while, pay as you go or something. All monitored by cameras at entry points, counting your license plate each time. If you no pay, you get bill. Like this at a lot of major bridges. Old school cash toll booths seem old.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Electronic tolls, so no stopping at all. Work out some kind of system. If you use it everyday, probably better to get a monthly pass. If you use it once in a while, pay as you go or something. All monitored by cameras at entry points, counting your license plate each time. If you no pay, you get bill. Like this at a lot of major bridges. Old school cash toll booths seem old.

Does anyone still build the old kind of toll routes with plazas, etc.? Whenever I see a new toll route going up somewhere it's invariably an ETR that uses transponders.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by CoryB

The idea of a toll road seems reasonable but why remove the toll?

Also some logistics questions:

1. Would there be a fast, automated line frequent users would drive through?
2. Is the payment based on distance travelled or is it a single pay-to-use fee?
3. Would there be different fees based on vehicle size, ie $5 per car, $10 per box truck, $15 for a single 53' trailer, $20 for double 53' trailer.

If the toll was implemented I would like to see it impact all roads that see significant upgrades or our built to accommodate sprawl. For example, you are using the new Bishop fly-over you pay ever time you use it, same for CentrePort Canada Way.

There's already precedence for this type of toll highway. The 407 in Toronto - owned by SNC-Lavalin - offers an alternative to the 401 by running a few miles to the North and by charging every vehicle by what type it is and over how many kilometres it travels. If you have a transponder, you aren't charged an entrance/exit fee. If you don't, you are and your bill arrives in the mail a week later.

But the thing about the 407 is that it only survives because of the sheer volume of traffic that runs east/west through the GTA. The 401 is a parking lot at almost all times during the work day and creates significant downtime and inefficiency for anything requiring transport. That's why companies put these transponders in their vehicles and require that drivers go out of their way to use it as a by-pass. It's essentially a luxury for citizens who can afford it and a economic tool for businesses that depend upon being on time. But it isn't cheap because building and maintaining highways isn't a cheap thing to do.

Who here is ever held up on the perimeter? And this isn't to say it isn't theoretically a good idea, but this horse is out of the barn. It's already free and you aren't offering an alternative to anything, so where is the value?

The average joe is simply going to avoid the perimeter if there's a toll. The most pronounced effect will be greater pressure on city routes where the perimeter, if free, is a better alternative now rendered costly.

All we'll have is another significant infrastructure upgrade that isn't producing any value...

[Spocket]

Tolling the Perimeter isn't a bad idea exactly , it's just political suicide.

The city of Winnipeg happens to have an inner loop even if it's only half complete. It's just too easy to avoid the Perimeter. So people would just avoid it and head a little further into the city. Further, it would increase the truck traffic on all the arterials along that inner route. Since the city can never seem to hold on to a long-term plan, you know that no matter how bad the traffic gets, they'd paint a turd yellow and call it gold. Nothing would be done but we'd have neverending "plans" discussed at council meetings.

Besides that, it's probably actually still cheaper to just turn into a free-flowing highway without the tolls. Why ? Because we're not actually that far away from building enough interchanges to accomplish that goal and the rest is just cutting off the at-grade intersections. Right now we need seven or eight interchanges plus road reroutes to turn it into a freeway. You could probably do that for about 500 million. Actually, considering you know it would all be done on the cheap, I'd wager it could get done for significantly less. I mean, we spent hundreds of millions on the Floodway so we know the money can be found. You'd end up doing the same thing with a toll-way except that, of course you'd make money on the tolls. The problem is that with fewer people using the route, we'd basically make it into a white elephant that would probably never truly pay for itself. We'd be spending money maintaining it without ever actually paying it off.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Tolling the Perimeter isn't a bad idea exactly , it's just political suicide.

The city of Winnipeg happens to have an inner loop even if it's only half complete. It's just too easy to avoid the Perimeter. So people would just avoid it and head a little further into the city. Further, it would increase the truck traffic on all the arterials along that inner route. Since the city can never seem to hold on to a long-term plan, you know that no matter how bad the traffic gets, they'd paint a turd yellow and call it gold. Nothing would be done but we'd have neverending "plans" discussed at council meetings.

Besides that, it's probably actually still cheaper to just turn into a free-flowing highway without the tolls. Why ? Because we're not actually that far away from building enough interchanges to accomplish that goal and the rest is just cutting off the at-grade intersections. Right now we need seven or eight interchanges plus road reroutes to turn it into a freeway. You could probably do that for about 500 million. Actually, considering you know it would all be done on the cheap, I'd wager it could get done for significantly less. I mean, we spent hundreds of millions on the Floodway so we know the money can be found. You'd end up doing the same thing with a toll-way except that, of course you'd make money on the tolls. The problem is that with fewer people using the route, we'd basically make it into a white elephant that would probably never truly pay for itself. We'd be spending money maintaining it without ever actually paying it off.

Sorry, but the bolded part is a logical fallacy. One has expense and revenue, the other has the exact same expense without revenue.

The only reason this would not work is because of what both you, Esquire and Simplicity mentioned; we have too many convenient and free alternatives.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Sorry, but the bolded part is a logical fallacy. One has expense and revenue, the other has the exact same expense without revenue.

The only reason this would not work is because of what both you, Esquire and Simplicity mentioned; we have too many convenient and free alternatives.

East - West traffic has no other alternatives. You either dive into the city for a nice 1-2 hour at rush hour commute which would be even worse if people avoided the perimeter. Or you have two choice outside the city. North perimeter or south perimeter. All the traffic on the trans Canada hwy has no choice but to use it. Same as it was when you took the Coq in bc. Sure you could take the old #1 and add many hours. But people tend to want to get from point a to b as fast as possible.

[harls]

Originally Posted by esquire

Does anyone still build the old kind of toll routes with plazas, etc.? Whenever I see a new toll route going up somewhere it's invariably an ETR that uses transponders.

The toll booth on Autoroute 30 near Montreal is fairly new and they still have the option to pay cash.

http://www.a30express.com/en/

• Video Link

toll booth is at about 7:50.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

East - West traffic has no other alternatives. You either dive into the city for a nice 1-2 hour at rush hour commute which would be even worse if people avoided the perimeter. Or you have two choice outside the city. North perimeter or south perimeter. All the traffic on the trans Canada hwy has no choice but to use it. Same as it was when you took the Coq in bc. Sure you could take the old #1 and add many hours. But people tend to want to get from point a to b as fast as possible.

You can't fund a perimeter expansion and improvement through trucking companies that on the rare occasion don't have to stop in the city and only require a direct by-pass.

Everybody else has an alternative route. As a city, we should be encouraging usage of the perimeter given that it's a provincial responsibility. The last thing we need are more vehicles choosing Lag or Bishop or the CPT as a perfectly good, perfectly free substitute.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

The last thing we need are more vehicles choosing Lag or Bishop or the CPT as a perfectly good, perfectly free substitute.

Perfectly good? Do you ever drive Bishop or Lag in rush hour? Nothing, absolutely nothing perfect about those routes unless your idea of perfect is enjoying the sorroundings while sitting (and sitting...and sitting) at red lights. They are an absolute shitmess now...nevermind adding traffic re-directed from the perimiter.

I for one would support and use a toll road perimiter if it meant complete free flow.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Perfectly good? Do you ever drive Bishop or Lag in rush hour? Nothing, absolutely nothing perfect about those routes unless your idea of perfect is enjoying the sorroundings while sitting (and sitting...and sitting) at red lights. They are an absolute shitmess now...nevermind adding traffic re-directed from the perimiter.

I for one would support and use a toll road perimiter if it meant complete free flow.

You are one voice amongst many... Toll roads in the states have gone bankrupt because people (engineers) overestimate the value that roads provide.

Here is one example: http://www.theamericanconservative.c...goes-bankrupt/

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Perfectly good? Do you ever drive Bishop or Lag in rush hour? Nothing, absolutely nothing perfect about those routes unless your idea of perfect is enjoying the sorroundings while sitting (and sitting...and sitting) at red lights. They are an absolute shitmess now...nevermind adding traffic re-directed from the perimiter.

I for one would support and use a toll road perimiter if it meant complete free flow.

I'm not saying they're the ideal choices, I'm saying they're the free ones and they're unbearable as it is; toll the perimeter and they'll get worse. But this is a choice many people could be making now and don't. Adding another lane to alleviate a capacity issue that doesn't exist and charging for it isn't going to attract any more people to it than it currently does, it'll only have the opposite effect.

People are generally loathe to pay for something they haven't had to previously. Especially where there's no added value for them. And we're a pretty average city where it comes to income. Very few people are going to spend $7 or $10 to drive home; they'll instead pay with their time. This is equitable to Burger King giving away free whoppers - somebody will stand in line for hours to get that hamburger. Should they? Strictly speaking no; in a perfect world their time is more valuable than the $4 hamburger. But it's not that people aren't acting rationally, it's that sometimes the most rational thing people have a surplus of is their time instead of their money.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Sorry, but the bolded part is a logical fallacy. One has expense and revenue, the other has the exact same expense without revenue.

The only reason this would not work is because of what both you, Esquire and Simplicity mentioned; we have too many convenient and free alternatives.

Well no, it's not a logical fallacy because if you're factoring in all the pertinent information it probably is cheaper than tolling it.

If you toll the highway and people use alternative routes, what's going to happen ? You've just spent hundreds of millions on a highway that few people are going to use. In the meantime, all the traffic that would otherwise use it switches to new routes. So you end up with the extra burden of having to upgrade infrastructure otherwise unrelated to the Perimeter. Due to the increased traffic volumes on the switch-routes, they require not just expansion and upgrades but increased maintenance costs. It's the same reason that it actually cost us less to build the Chief Peguis extension rather than continue to pay for the severe beating the alternative routes were taking. We wound up paying more in the long term to keep those routes drivable than it would cost us to simply build the CPT extension.

As it stands now, we've got pretty good alternatives to the Perimeter. Just follow number 1 into the city, take Lag. and then Bishop all the way to wherever you want to get to. If you plan to simply pass through the city then just remember to turn when you hit Portage.

So if you spend all those millions to upgrade the highway, I'll say it again that if you toll it, the decreased traffic volume will essentially turn it into a parking lot that can barely cover its own maintenance in the long term. Meanwhile you're getting the bill for the increased costs on alternative routes. So yes, it could be cheaper to make it fully free-flowing without the tolls.

[yellowghost]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

; we have too many convenient and alternatives.

This might also be a "logical infallacy"😉. I think what he means is..it cost money to build tollbooths. Before that even, the city would have pour millions into a "study" to acertain the feasily of toll roads, transponders etc. The price of the toll should decide its fate.Like..if one estimates that a trip to and from work in a V8 truck cost 15 dollars daily in stop and go traffic. But if that trip under highway conditions reduces fuel cossumption to only 10 dollars daily.. and if the dailly toll is 2 or 3 dollars, one is saving a little bit of cash and a whole lot of time. ✌

[bomberjet]

Brought this post over from the Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure thread.

Originally Posted by Simplicity

The province's tender list for the 2015-2016 construction season. We can start a pool to see which of these projects becomes the victim of next years flood...

http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/contracts/index.html

I noticed the PTH 100 median barrier is up for tender this spring. Looks they're actually trying to get something going prior to the election. Also structure rehabs at Roblin and McPhillips. Roblin grading rehab is already started.

1 Concrete Median Barrier 100 South Perimeter: Waverly Street - St. Mary's Road May 23, 2015

1 Structure Rehabilitation (2051-02) 241 At PTH 100 Overpass (E/B) (Winnipeg at Roblin Blvd)
Structure Rehabilitation (2051-01) At PTH 100 Overpass (W/B) (Winnipeg at Roblin Blvd) April 8, 2015

1 Structure Rehabilitation (3862-01, 3862-02) 008 At PTH 101 Overpass April 15, 2015

MIT also announced the Pembina and Fermor rehabs are nearing completion, finally.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Well no, it's not a logical fallacy because if you're factoring in all the pertinent information it probably is cheaper than tolling it.

If you toll the highway and people use alternative routes, what's going to happen ? You've just spent hundreds of millions on a highway that few people are going to use. In the meantime, all the traffic that would otherwise use it switches to new routes. So you end up with the extra burden of having to upgrade infrastructure otherwise unrelated to the Perimeter. Due to the increased traffic volumes on the switch-routes, they require not just expansion and upgrades but increased maintenance costs. It's the same reason that it actually cost us less to build the Chief Peguis extension rather than continue to pay for the severe beating the alternative routes were taking. We wound up paying more in the long term to keep those routes drivable than it would cost us to simply build the CPT extension.

As it stands now, we've got pretty good alternatives to the Perimeter. Just follow number 1 into the city, take Lag. and then Bishop all the way to wherever you want to get to. If you plan to simply pass through the city then just remember to turn when you hit Portage.

So if you spend all those millions to upgrade the highway, I'll say it again that if you toll it, the decreased traffic volume will essentially turn it into a parking lot that can barely cover its own maintenance in the long term. Meanwhile you're getting the bill for the increased costs on alternative routes. So yes, it could be cheaper to make it fully free-flowing without the tolls.

I think everything you said here confirms everything I have ever said about transportation infrastructure. Engineers (and everyone) overestimate the value transportation infrastructure provides, people are not willing to pay for roads, so why should we continue to build them? Why should we upgrade the perimeter if people are not willing to pay to use it?

Why would the City/Province build anything that people don't value enough to pay for?

And that bolded part is not true in the slightest. It was not cheaper to build CPT than it was to maintain Springfield and Gilmore for 50 years, because now not only do we maintain Springfield and Gilmore with less traffic, but we pay to maintain CPT too. And we also have had to upgrade Gateway. This wasn't even close to being cheaper than maintaining the alternative East/West routes.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I noticed the PTH 100 median barrier is up for tender this spring. Looks they're actually trying to get something going prior to the election.

Why is a median barrier required along that stretch?

[biguc]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I think everything you said here confirms everything I have ever said about transportation infrastructure. Engineers (and everyone) overestimate the value transportation infrastructure provides, people are not willing to pay for roads, so why should we continue to build them? Why should we upgrade the perimeter if people are not willing to pay to use it?

Why would the City/Province build anything that people don't value enough to pay for?

And that bolded part is not true in the slightest. It was not cheaper to build CPT than it was to maintain Springfield and Gilmore for 50 years, because now not only do we maintain Springfield and Gilmore with less traffic, but we pay to maintain CPT too. And we also have had to upgrade Gateway. This wasn't even close to being cheaper than maintaining the alternative East/West routes.

A few years back i spent a few weeks trying to sell pay-for-play road funding to this board. As far as I'm concerned, people should pay for every kilometer they drive on any road.