HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1221  
Old Posted Apr 26, 2017, 9:55 PM
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoryB View Post
I actually lived out in that area at the time the missing link in the Perimeter was built. It was around the same time the Oak Bank corridor discussions first came up. Way back then HWY 15 was near capacity and a rather dangerous route to drive on. Since that time the traffic counts have only increased.

Sure there was plans to change the HWY 15 bridge over the floodway to add an extra east lane to take traffic from the Perimeter. The thing is they quickly determined that and extra lane for traffic from 101 to roughly 207 wasn't going to be sufficient and something more was needed.

As biff pointed out the location of the rail line and existing development along the current HWY 15 route make it cost prohibitive to twin in place. The road is necessary due to city planning decisions that go back over 50 years. Saying Winnipeg should put the sprawl genie back in the bottle is something that won't happen unless you invent time travel and go back and fix the issues before they start.

I'm not really concerned with your commute down a new 4 lane Hwy from OakBank tbh.

I'm concerned that another set of traffic lights will result from this pie In the Sky venture.

I wasn't also talking about the bridge over the floodway. I was talking about the perimeter itself. Again I don't care about anyone's commute. I care about the perimeter being free flowing.

Moving 15 north does what???? Well it's adds another set of lights. That's a win win for us .

Then we still have a cluster f*ck at the old 15 intersection. We have a railway blockage as well.

It would be prudent to just put some passing lanes on 15.
It would be prudent to finish the overpass for 15 and the rail line that was started and never finished.

Doing that will get make your commute a little safer and faster. And it will make the east perimeter free flowing.

As for GUNN. Screw it. Just have the west lane be able to have traffic enter or exit. This way no more crossing traffic and it will save lives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1222  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 12:16 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 3,025
This is a city and a province that have had roughly 70 years to make the Perimeter free flowing. If you think that the politicians will suddenly come to their senses and do what they planned from the beginning, you're all being naive. Those clowns will put up a light at any random city intersection with no traffic rather than save a little bit and put the money towards an interchange.

Every chance they get to improve the Perimeter, they squander. When the last leg of the Perimeter was being completed in the 90's, they could have made Gunn Rd into a set of ramps rather than an intersection. Did they do that? Fuck no. That would have made sense and we don't want that kind of shit in this town.

Hell, they shut down a perfectly usable interchange when they completed the Perimeter and replaced it with lights. Took them 20 years to finally finish what they started.

Eliminating uncontrolled access points? How fucking hard is that? All they have to do is literally put some barriers up if they want to cheap out but they can't even manage that. Seriously, they make it impossible not to think of them as ass clowns when it comes to keeping promises concerning traffic infrastructure. Do you guys realize that Winnipeg is one of if not the largest city in the developed world without a freeway? Hell, even cities in the developing world have better transportation infrastructure most of the time.

The real kicker is that successive governments have insisted that we're supposed to be some sort of transportation hub because of our location but not a single one of them has ever built anything to make the claim remotely legitimate. They're idiots but that's what decades of voting for these clowns will get you.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1223  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 1:43 PM
TimeFadesAway TimeFadesAway is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
This is a city and a province that have had roughly 70 years to make the Perimeter free flowing. If you think that the politicians will suddenly come to their senses and do what they planned from the beginning, you're all being naive. Those clowns will put up a light at any random city intersection with no traffic rather than save a little bit and put the money towards an interchange.

Every chance they get to improve the Perimeter, they squander. When the last leg of the Perimeter was being completed in the 90's, they could have made Gunn Rd into a set of ramps rather than an intersection. Did they do that? Fuck no. That would have made sense and we don't want that kind of shit in this town.

Hell, they shut down a perfectly usable interchange when they completed the Perimeter and replaced it with lights. Took them 20 years to finally finish what they started.

Eliminating uncontrolled access points? How fucking hard is that? All they have to do is literally put some barriers up if they want to cheap out but they can't even manage that. Seriously, they make it impossible not to think of them as ass clowns when it comes to keeping promises concerning traffic infrastructure. Do you guys realize that Winnipeg is one of if not the largest city in the developed world without a freeway? Hell, even cities in the developing world have better transportation infrastructure most of the time.

The real kicker is that successive governments have insisted that we're supposed to be some sort of transportation hub because of our location but not a single one of them has ever built anything to make the claim remotely legitimate. They're idiots but that's what decades of voting for these clowns will get you.
For some reason, I'm getting the sense you are not a big fan of the politicians in Manitoba.

I think a big part of the problem is that due to the demographics of our province, we don't have a reasonable, middle-ground option. With small shifts in the electorate we vacillate between parties of left and right wing ideologues. Both parties end up messing things up in their own way. The NDP spread themselves too thin by trying to be everything to everybody and most things end up being half-assed as a result. Then the Tories come in and nearly burn the province to the ground. Rinse and repeat. That's how we end up with a half-assed perimeter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1224  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 2:31 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 3,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeFadesAway View Post
For some reason, I'm getting the sense you are not a big fan of the politicians in Manitoba.

I think a big part of the problem is that due to the demographics of our province, we don't have a reasonable, middle-ground option. With small shifts in the electorate we vacillate between parties of left and right wing ideologues. Both parties end up messing things up in their own way. The NDP spread themselves too thin by trying to be everything to everybody and most things end up being half-assed as a result. Then the Tories come in and nearly burn the province to the ground. Rinse and repeat. That's how we end up with a half-assed perimeter.
I've been watching these asshats fuck thing up for the last 40 years. Ever been to the Legislature? It's like watching schoolkids with a lenient substitute teacher.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1225  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 2:31 PM
CoryB CoryB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
I'm not really concerned with your commute down a new 4 lane Hwy from OakBank tbh.
Thanks for confirming you don't bother to actually read posts before replying to them. Made it pretty clear I am unlikely to ever drive on a new highway to Oak Bank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
I'm concerned that another set of traffic lights will result from this pie In the Sky venture.

I wasn't also talking about the bridge over the floodway. I was talking about the perimeter itself. Again I don't care about anyone's commute. I care about the perimeter being free flowing.
Perfect, we finally seem to be getting on the same page. The Oak Bank corridor wouldn't have new traffic lights on the Perimeter as part of the build would be a full interchange. Even better it would eliminated a local access street on the Perimeter closing the Gunn Rd access you so hate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
As for GUNN. St Mary's and St Anne's Screw it. Just have the west south lane be able to have traffic enter or exit. This way no more crossing traffic and it will save lives.
Excellent idea and a very cost effective solution to the current issues on the south Perimeter. You should write that in a formal letter to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1226  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 2:34 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
I've been watching these asshats fuck thing up for the last 40 years. Ever been to the Legislature? It's like watching schoolkids with a lenient substitute teacher.


In that vein, maybe they'd do less damage if the speaker, in true substitute-teacher style, just let the MLAs play heads-up, seven-up in the legislative chamber.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1227  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2017, 11:03 PM
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoryB View Post
Thanks for confirming you don't bother to actually read posts before replying to them. Made it pretty clear I am unlikely to ever drive on a new highway to Oak Bank.



Perfect, we finally seem to be getting on the same page. The Oak Bank corridor wouldn't have new traffic lights on the Perimeter as part of the build would be a full interchange. Even better it would eliminated a local access street on the Perimeter closing the Gunn Rd access you so hate.



Excellent idea and a very cost effective solution to the current issues on the south Perimeter. You should write that in a formal letter to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation.

Cory my dear boy lol. Stop changing what I said. I understand you are pro-cona and pro-bank. Gunn road needs to close until they put in a proper free flowing intersection. Period!!!! And if they do that. I want 15 that is there closed for good. Wtf is the point in moving 15 north a few Kms only to leave the existing 15 with a nice set of lights. And a bridge that cost us taxpayers money to get over the floodway.

As for St Anne's. Don't care. Close it.
As for St Mary's. Well it's a provincial road. Remember your hug fest for Pipeline being a PR. Well St Mary's is probably the biggest one of them all. You can take it all the way to St Jean Baptist. That's further then Morris in case you were wondering. But hey. Let's close it off like you said. We can funnel all that traffic onto Pembina Hwy. St Nob will be such an awesome place then.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1228  
Old Posted May 1, 2017, 5:12 PM
vjose32 vjose32 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 641
I've been taking the perimeter lately to get to and from a job site in Steinbach. It takes me about 15 minutes to get from Fermor to McPhillips and that's with 2 sets of lights and all that ridiculous construction going on. I really don't think it's worth it to spend $200 million on an interchange at Dugald to shave off 2-3 minutes from that.

Speaking of which I think they should have at the least put in a flyover when they did route 90 and that they should eliminate that second set of lights at Waverly, probably easy enough to route traffic to route 90 like they did on the other side.

Perhaps that is also something they can do with St Anne's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1229  
Old Posted May 3, 2017, 5:18 AM
mcpish mcpish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 86
My idea is that they should probably build a new freeway grade bypass around Winnipeg right around the Steinbach interchange or the 207 junction (where the TCH takes a northwest bend after leaving the Boreal Forest to go up to Winnipeg) and just have the new bypass extend due west and around the City and then rejoin the TCH around Highway 332 near Dacotah/Cartier. I marked it on this map. The land should be pretty open and it would be a much more direct by-pass route than the current practice of driving the north-west turn on the TCH up to Winnipeg, only to then take the Perimeter around to Portage Ave. Since the TCH is so much further to the south of the city on the east side it makes sense to me. Has any thought been given to this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1230  
Old Posted May 3, 2017, 11:27 AM
WildCake WildCake is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 265
Interesting idea mcphish. Could be something worth looking at, similar to Regona's bypass. Couple of issues first though:
1. This province already has massive amounts of infrastructure deficiencies. Add in a brand new multi billion bypass is not gonna make things better
2. Perimeter, unlike Regina, isnt completely a loss - most issues are resolvable by splashing money at it. Regina's Victoria ave. would have been a fortune to upgrade so it made some sense to build a brand new highway.
3. Most traffic on perimeter is local, so infrastructure upgrades to perimeter will need to happen regardless of this bypass
4. It would cross in the red river flood plain whereas perimeter is protected. Flood measures would have to be implemented ($$)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1231  
Old Posted May 3, 2017, 4:00 PM
vjose32 vjose32 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 641
I was actually thinking of a road myself to take you directly from highway 12 north of Fermor directly to Dugald and the perimeter, would make the trip shorter a bit I'm guessing. Or maybe not quite to the perimeter, I guess it isn't necessary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1232  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 12:16 AM
YWG-RO YWG-RO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 130
This TCH bypass could be paired with the CNR / CPR mainline relocation. Interesting idea.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1233  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 3:57 AM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 3,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpish View Post
My idea is that they should probably build a new freeway grade bypass around Winnipeg right around the Steinbach interchange or the 207 junction (where the TCH takes a northwest bend after leaving the Boreal Forest to go up to Winnipeg) and just have the new bypass extend due west and around the City and then rejoin the TCH around Highway 332 near Dacotah/Cartier. I marked it on this map. The land should be pretty open and it would be a much more direct by-pass route than the current practice of driving the north-west turn on the TCH up to Winnipeg, only to then take the Perimeter around to Portage Ave. Since the TCH is so much further to the south of the city on the east side it makes sense to me. Has any thought been given to this?
It's cheaper and more sensible to simply finish the job with the Perimeter.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1234  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 4:14 AM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpish View Post
My idea is that they should probably build a new freeway grade bypass around Winnipeg right around the Steinbach interchange or the 207 junction (where the TCH takes a northwest bend after leaving the Boreal Forest to go up to Winnipeg) and just have the new bypass extend due west and around the City and then rejoin the TCH around Highway 332 near Dacotah/Cartier. I marked it on this map. The land should be pretty open and it would be a much more direct by-pass route than the current practice of driving the north-west turn on the TCH up to Winnipeg, only to then take the Perimeter around to Portage Ave. Since the TCH is so much further to the south of the city on the east side it makes sense to me. Has any thought been given to this?
Not a bad idea...but realistically we know that it would be built with traffic lights at 59, 75, 2, 3 etc...with of course the ironclad take-it-to-the-bank promise of a "future grade separated interchange" at each intersection.

Last edited by Reignman; May 5, 2017 at 12:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1235  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 3:18 PM
CoryB CoryB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,793
You could do a fork at TC1 and 206 south running west and connecting up with 247 at 75. Build up that road and then tie it into at 424 and 2. This could be the start of a secondary ring road for the capital region. Doing this would also offload traffic from the south Perimeter and could potentially be done instead of the plan to expand the Perimeter to 6 lanes.

Ultimately the tax payers of Manitoba are building two new lanes of highway somewhere on the southern edge of Winnipeg. Starting a new, second ring road definitely makes some sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1236  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 3:28 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,848
^ Second ring? The city has barely even begun to sprawl out to the existing one.

I'd like to finish our current half-assed ring road with the interchanges and other improvements it sorely needs before we start building a second inevitably half-assed ring road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1237  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 5:36 PM
CoryB CoryB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,793
^^ Oh I agree the top priority should be on making the existing Perimeter a full limited access road with proper grade separations. That said though there is lots of talk of expanded the south Perimeter from four to six lanes without any added grade separations. All that is doing is making the grade separations more expensive further down the line.

I think there is some strong merit in giving a new south bypass consideration over adding lanes on the existing route.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1238  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 7:36 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 9,400
If anything it's the north-south section of the west Perimeter that is out of the way. Have a south headingley bypass would be the best of both options I think. Upgrade the south Perimeter to 6 lanes freeway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1239  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 8:03 PM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoryB View Post
I think there is some strong merit in giving a new south bypass consideration over adding lanes on the existing route.
We agree overall, but I'd rather nothing be done as opposed to a new bypass route that may only minimally improve safety or decrease volume on the Perimeter. Another bypass will only serve to soak up funds required for a proper reconstruction of the Perimeter. Any option, whether it be 6-laning without grade separation or a bypass that deviates from a proper grade-separated Perimeter (especially between 59 and PR 330) should be strenuously opposed.

I'd imagine long-haul traffic will likely start using the north stretch of the Perimeter as soon as the 101/59 interchange is complete - avoiding traffic lights take a pretty high priority with trucks. A southern bypass might save them a few minutes, but the north route around the city is the best compromise I can imagine at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1240  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 8:08 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 9,400
I'm not sure if it'd be quicker to go North. It's almost exactly 10km longer via 101 than 100. Still with traffic lights.

What would be interesting to see is if Chief Peguis extended from east to west perimeter and further west via the headingley bypass, what would be faster. I'm betting Chief Peguis, even with some traffic lights and reduced speed on CPT, it would be fastest. Unless of course 100 is upgraded to freeway (or close to) by that time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:16 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.