Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Stormer

They may be considering a P3. This stretches the capital cost over 30 years or so. The biggest advantage is risk transfer to the private sector. The Regina Bypass will be fully open in October. It is $2 billion. After 30 years they must turn over the project to the Government in “like new” condition. As a result they have used cutting-edge pavement tech and better bridge structures than the Government may have used. I will let you know how it is when it opens.

P3's have received criticism in Saskatchewan from the NDP and unions, but I have no doubt that some of them would have had massive cost overruns if the Government did them. One P3 hospital has a bad roof, but that is the contractor's problem for 30 years. If it was not a P3, it may have been on the taxpayer dime.

Originally Posted by craner

The fact that P3's get criticized by the NDP & unions probably means they are a good thing.

I’ve been arguing in favour of P3 for Perimeter Highway Upgrade a few pages back. I’m glad I’m not the only one.

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I'm somewhere in the middle on P3's. The innovations and outside the box thinking are usually pretty good. It reduces the costs. But it's all about minimizing everything to win the job. You need really good specs and control from the governments. Otherwise you'll end up with some stripped down version of what you want.

The O Train fiasco must serve as a warning nonetheless.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I’ve been arguing in favour of P3 for Perimeter Highway Upgrade a few pages back. I’m glad I’m not the only one.

The O Train fiasco must serve as a warning nonetheless.

P3s for road projects are great. Manitoba should do a DBFO P3 for a section of the Perimeter Highway and see how it goes. I think the general public would be very impressed with the quality and how quickly the road was built. From there doing the rest would be a much easier sell.

[Winnipegger]

Another big advantage of P3 projects is that once built and the maintain portion of the contract begins, no political meddling or switching of governments will alter the maintenance schedule of the asset for the duration of the contract (25 to 30 years).

Maintenance on other projects, whether built by municipal or provincial governments, can be too easily influenced by the whim of our shortsighted politicians and city Councillors. Money may be diverted from maintaining one project to build another, or maintenance may be cancelled all together for some projects if a fiscally austere government takes the reigns (as has been the case at the provincial level for the past 4 years and at the City for the past 20).

P3s get to avoid all that for the duration of their contract because the asset must be turned over in a certain condition once the contract expires.

One other benefit not often talked about is that the Provincial and Federal governments love handing out cash to municipalities when they do P3s as opposed to funding capital projects some other way. At a provincial level, it might mean the amount of money the provincial government needs to spend might be less since the Feds might be more eager to kick in some cash on a P3 project.

Does anyone know if the Province has done any P3s? As pointed out by others here, the City has a handful which have been mostly successful thus far. I just haven't heard of the Province doing any.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by buzzg

...and then they all have to be replaced at the same time as well.

Or you could not build interchanges and think of all the money you're saving.



If they're built properly, they can last a long time. Ontario has some interchanges from the late 1940s (on Highway 400 through Barrie) that still do their job today.

[Dengler Avenue]

Or the British solution: 3-lane roundabouts.

[bomberjet]

Normal bridges are typically designed with a 75 year life span. If you're building something huge and complex, it should be designed to 100 years at least. Cost goes up of course. The bridges will likely last longer than that. But that's when you get into things beyond their service life that are falling down.

That's typical of today's construction. Bridge decks should last 25 years. It's a cost benefit thing. It'll be really expensive and early impossible to build a bridge deck that'll last 75 years. So build it cheaper and replace it twice during the bridge's life.

We're not building pyramids or roman aqueducts out of solid stone.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I’ve been arguing in favour of P3 for Perimeter Highway Upgrade a few pages back. I’m glad I’m not the only one.

The O Train fiasco must serve as a warning nonetheless.

P3's are supposed to transfer most risks to the consortium, including delays and construction problems. If the consortium in Ottawa is not eating this or paying penalties then there is something wrong with the model in Ottawa. Maybe it is because SNC Lavalin is involved. They seem to have their own set of rules.

[bomberjet]

Depends on whom is responsible for the issues. If the Owner was negligent in some way they get the costs. If it's the P3 consortium, it's on them. If the city is weak and accepts the burden, then yes they're to blame for being weak.

SNC and their constructors (SNC would likely work for the constructor, but I'm not up to speed on that project and who is financing it) are no different than anyone else. They're in it to make money. On large jobs, there are always claims, court cases, etc.

Again based on my experience in Winnipeg, the City will tell you to pound sand unless they have meddled in some way and legitimately will pony up the cash. There has been very, very little of that on BRT. As the City says, they've used virtually none of their contingency.

[harls]

Originally Posted by Stormer

P3's are supposed to transfer most risks to the consortium, including delays and construction problems. If the consortium in Ottawa is not eating this or paying penalties then there is something wrong with the model in Ottawa. Maybe it is because SNC Lavalin is involved. They seem to have their own set of rules.

RTG (the consortium involved) missed 4 deadlines and were fined a million dollars for each time they missed the handover date.

[cllew]

I was on the south Perimeter last weekend to watch the truck convoy and see that CP rail has fixed the Emerson Rail crossing by St. Anne's Rd.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by cllew

I was on the south Perimeter last weekend to watch the truck convoy and see that CP rail has fixed the Emerson Rail crossing by St. Anne's Rd.

CP must have been doing work on the crossings on that line as they just replaced the Bishop Grandin crossing over the weekend as well.

[Dengler Avenue]

Does that mean the level crossing has been removed?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Does that mean the level crossing has been removed?

Not sure how you got that impression, but no.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Does that mean the level crossing has been removed?

The work was a sorely needed re-surfacing around the crossing to level the road and make the approaches smooth again. It was getting dangerous. Sadly, we'll have to wait a while longer to get that grade separation.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Biff

CP must have been doing work on the crossings on that line as they just replaced the Bishop Grandin crossing over the weekend as well.

Yes, it’s better now.

[cllew]

I think that CP is doing lots of work upgrading the tracks along the whole Emerson Subdivision in and around Winnipeg, not just the two crossings mentioned.

You drive down Archibald and you can see piles of old defective ties in the ditch waiting to be picked up for disposal.

[bomberjet]

Another death on 100 at Brady Rd this morning...

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Another death on 100 at Brady Rd this morning...

19 year-old too... :’( Condolence to the family.




Too bad flood prevention’s sucked out all the money. (I’m saying that because I’ve heard that the plan to upgrade 1/16 had to be dropped due to unexpected flood level at Winnipeg back then.)

[Hecate]

Honestly the province and the feds can’t keep pussyfooting around when it comes to dealing with our infrastructure crisis in Manitoba. Highways designed for the 1950’s are no longer acceptable. People are dying on our roads. Two young people in a week. Enough is enough.

[optimusREIM]

It should be a bigger story than it is. But the various levels of government are too busy fulfilling different priorities. The PCs are too stingy otherwise they might actually do it, the NDP loves to spend... on everything but roads (I know they do spend on roads, but they've had a damn long time to deal with the major issues like the perimeter and make major upgrades to other roads, and we have 1 new interchange in the last 25 years to show for it, well 2 since the 59/101 interchange was basically an entire new interchange).

And the feds well... we just don't have a large enough population for them to care too much. Not many elections are decided in Manitoba.

It has been nice to see such projects as the new 59/101 interchange and the closing of median openings etc in the last little while, but you'd think that if we even maintained a moderate level of expenditure every year dedicated to the upgrade of one interchange say, that would have made a world of difference by now. As if there was no way to find 20M back then and 50M now for a basic diamond every year. The reason is that it isn't a priority. The second a government makes it a priority, magically things start to happen. How novel!

We've gone far too long not prioritizing safety and efficiency. I hope that Pallister expedites the process for the perimeter but also makes upgrading other major highway intersections a priority. Some wouldn't even require that much work which is the sad part.