Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Biff]

It has been open for good now since late last year. No need to debate anymore.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

Gateway road doesn't warrant a connection to the Perimeter. It probably doesn't get enough traffic anyways to have a connection to the Perimeter.

But that's one of the sad realities of building freeways. Not opposed to building them, but their drawbacks are seperating neighborhoods.

I mean, in this case, the "separating neighbourhoods" is a bit of a stretch. This isn't like plowing through the middle of the inner city and causing disruption to existing dense urban built forms, it's dividing two suburban-tending-towards-rural subdivisions. The highway was already there. If anything, having the additional connection here is a bonus to their lifestyle.

I would be actually in favour of doing this sort of thing more often. Simple fly-overs of the various freeways by smaller less important streets is common everywhere else. Don't need connections to every single intersecting roadway.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by Wpgstvsouth94

Why that didn’t happen on day one is beyond me. That whole stretch feels unfinished without a proper interchange at birds hill Road…

I agree, but that was the biggest road project so far in Manitoba. And an interchange at Birds Hill road would be nice, but compared to other intersections in the province, that's lesser priority.

[Carboy15]

https://imgur.com/a/tf30eiB

But I am a bit more bothered by this at Oasis ROad, an incomplete Riro exit. To me it is confusing and doesn't make too much sense. I get that you can go to Garven Road, but that's a little ways away.

[Hecate]

Garven rd should have been a flyover at 59 and connected up with the oasis rd floodway interchange. You would eliminate the need for lights at garven and 59. Just have right in right out for traffic heading north on 59 at garven and everyone travelling south on 59 could access garven at the floodway.

They also need to deal with dunning and 59 because that’s a very unsafe intersection. Thousands of people live in that area with the trailer park there, not to mention it’s the only floodway crossing between lockport and the 59 crossing. So tons of traffic uses that intersection and it’s just a mess.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Garven rd should have been a flyover at 59 and connected up with the oasis rd floodway interchange. You would eliminate the need for lights at garven and 59. Just have right in right out for traffic heading north on 59 at garven and everyone travelling south on 59 could access garven at the floodway.

They also need to deal with dunning and 59 because that’s a very unsafe intersection. Thousands of people live in that area with the trailer park there, not to mention it’s the only floodway crossing between lockport and the 59 crossing. So tons of traffic uses that intersection and it’s just a mess.

Agreed with Dunning. It's also really the only off-the-highway gas station until Brokenhead, and likely the most convenient one for those pulling trailers or RVs compared to more compact city gas stations.

I'm usually death gripping the wheel when I drive through that intersection, especially in summer traffic.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Agreed with Dunning. It's also really the only off-the-highway gas station until Brokenhead, and likely the most convenient one for those pulling trailers or RVs compared to more compact city gas stations.

I'm usually death gripping the wheel when I drive through that intersection, especially in summer traffic.

Hopefully soon 59 can eventually be twinned through Brokenhead reserve.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

Hopefully soon 59 can eventually be twinned through Brokenhead reserve.

Anyone know if it's true that Brokenhead FN has been holding this hostage for years or is that just an lowkey anti-indigenous shot at worst, oversimplification at best?

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Anyone know if it's true that Brokenhead FN has been holding this hostage for years or is that just an lowkey anti-indigenous shot at worst, oversimplification at best?

I'm sure that's true. But I hope that we can break the bottleneck on Highway 59 South of Ile Des Chenes. The design study is supposed to happen around 2025 or so, but may not finish till 2030. Who knows when the construction would start.

[bomberjet]

Was browsing the MTI tender schedule and noticed this for South Perimeter. I assume this will begin detailed planning for the new bridge and existing bridge rehab as part of the South Perimeter projects.

Preliminary Design RFP ESP Structure 100 At Red River: 1.8km E of PTH 75 Winnipeg March

[Wpgstvsouth94]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Was browsing the MTI tender schedule and noticed this for South Perimeter. I assume this will begin detailed planning for the new bridge and existing bridge rehab as part of the South Perimeter projects.

Preliminary Design RFP ESP Structure 100 At Red River: 1.8km E of PTH 75 Winnipeg March

Saw this a while ago myself. I would hope when they rehab this bridge, or they build two separate bridges widened into three or four lanes. I need to structure or widen the current one because it has to be done regardless with the ongoing grade widening that are occurring with the interchange construction at St Mary’s.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Was browsing the MTI tender schedule and noticed this for South Perimeter. I assume this will begin detailed planning for the new bridge and existing bridge rehab as part of the South Perimeter projects.

Preliminary Design RFP ESP Structure 100 At Red River: 1.8km E of PTH 75 Winnipeg March

Are the Red River bridges on the south Perimeter already due for rehab? I swear they did extensive repairs on them in the early 2010s.

As much as I would personally benefit more from the South Perimeter bridges being widened to 3 lanes each way and I'm glad there's planning happening, the gong show that is the Red River bridges on the north Perimeter should be addressed first, including the lengthening (stretching eastward) of the Henderson ramps. The proximity of Main and Henderson ramps and the challenge with the Perimeter being the only river crossing for a decent distance makes it a busy stretch with a ton of weaving traffic.

[bomberjet]

I don't know. I didn't see the study on Merx yet. Maybe Biff knows lol

The new bridge is planned to go on the south side from what I can see in the design. But the interim phase of the South Perimeter plan just uses the existing bridge. Ultimate phase would still be decades out. So not really sure what the scoop is actually.

[Biff]

Pre-qual for Design Build Contractors is out for the Perimeter and Hwy 3 Interchange.

Construction slated to start Apr/May 2025. Open to traffic Oct 1, 2027

[bomberjet]

Awesome!

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Biff

Pre-qual for Design Build Contractors is out for the Perimeter and Hwy 3 Interchange.

Construction slated to start Apr/May 2025. Open to traffic Oct 1, 2027

I can't wait for that, but in the meantime the Government is planning on twinning Mcgillivary from Costco almost to the Perimeter hwy within the next two year.

Incidentally, Oak Bluff is doubling in size with the new "Oak Bluff West" subdivision. It may have 5,000 people by 2030.

source: https://qcwmaps.lotworks.ca/maps/oakbluff/

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

I can't wait for that, but in the meantime the Government is planning on twinning Mcgillivary from Costco almost to the Perimeter hwy within the next two year.

Incidentally, Oak Bluff is doubling in size with the new "Oak Bluff West" subdivision. It may have 5,000 people by 2030.

source: https://qcwmaps.lotworks.ca/maps/oakbluff/

I'm glad they're twinning it at least. But unfortunately there are going to be 5 more traffic lights from Loudoun Road to Brady Road. Kinda absurd even for an arterial road

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

I'm glad they're twinning it at least. But unfortunately there are going to be 5 more traffic lights from Loudoun Road to Brady Road. Kinda absurd even for an arterial road

I'm not sure where the traffic lights will go, but I guarantee they are building traffic lights (or at least a crosswalk) at the new Buffalo Crossing building on McGillivary and Front Street, as hundreds of people that hike or cycle through the Fort Whyte wildlife sanctuary cross the highway right now, especially on weekends.

I've heard they will be extending transit to the Buffalo Crossing Nature Centre by September. The whole area is booming, especially outside city limits on #3.

Edit* Just checked Buffalo Crossing's website. A controlled intersection will be built at Brady Road and McGillivary, allowing pedestrians and cyclists to cross from and to Fort Whyte Alive.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

I'm not sure where the traffic lights will go, but I guarantee they are building traffic lights (or at least a crosswalk) at the new Buffalo Crossing building on McGillivary and Front Street, as hundreds of people that hike or cycle through the Fort Whyte wildlife sanctuary cross the highway right now, especially on weekends.

I've heard they will be extending transit to the Buffalo Crossing Nature Centre by August. The whole area is booming, especially outside city limits on #3.

Edit* Just checked Buffalo Crossing's website. A controlled intersection will be built at Brady Road and McGillivary, allowing pedestrians and cyclists to cross from and to Fort Whyte Alive.

https://www.gov.mb.ca/asset_library/...dy-phase-2.pdf

This is technically the plans for McGillvary Blvd. 5 stop lights aren't bad compared to other streets in Winnipeg (Portage Ave for example) but still a bit absurd for an arterial road. And it's also limited access and not a stroad.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

https://www.gov.mb.ca/asset_library/...dy-phase-2.pdf
but still a bit absurd for an arterial road. And it's also limited access and not a stroad.

McGillivary has never been a limited access road.