Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Kinguni]

That's a very inexpensive vet. People drive out there because of that. I can't see that taking a couple of minutes longer to get there or out would cost him business.

My own vet is in the boonies down a couple of gravel roads. She's good and she's cheap. Has a tiny office in her house.

[CoryB]

If being an "inexpensive" vet is a key criteria I am almost surprised someone hasn't started up a mobile vet office in one of those larger vans. I know there is one that is a mobile breast cancer screening unit.

[rrskylar]

So more repairs to the south perimeter bridge over the Red, even though extensive work was done in 2006 (took years) a decade later work has to be redone!

On Highway 59 north the floodway bridge still down to one lane for the conceivable future with another structural issue, both these bridges are more than 50 years old and at one time do they need to be replaced and modernized? Sad

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

So more repairs to the south perimeter bridge over the Red, even though extensive work was done in 2006 (took years) a decade later work has to be redone!

On Highway 59 north the floodway bridge still down to one lane for the conceivable future with another structural issue, both these bridges are more than 50 years old and at one time do they need to be replaced and modernized? Sad

Yea at least the Perimeter bridge has been given a timeline (a few weeks) whereas the 59 over the floodway north of the city seems to be semi-permanent at this point.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Yea at least the Perimeter bridge has been given a timeline (a few weeks) whereas the 59 over the floodway north of the city seems to be semi-permanent at this point.

Spend and overbuild a major intersection for hundreds of millions and a couple KM north the divided highway is down to one lane for six months with no timeline on repairs...stuff like this happens mostly in third world countries, oh and Manitoba!

[bomberjet]

Bridge design life is usually 75 years. With deck replacements schedules for at least 2 times during that life. So if the bridges are 50 years old, then we're right on queue.

That being said, the deck replacement on 100 was done in 2006 I guess. But the contractor did not install the fibres in the concrete which was the original issue. There were lawsuits. So hopefully everything is covered there.

The floodway bridge should've been upgraded when the floodway project was done. However, they did the design just so that they didn't need to touch the bridge to save money. And here we are.

Wasn't the issue that a truck ran into the underside of the floodway bridge, not actual issues with the bridge itself? Same thing that happened to the Portage Bypass bridge.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Bridge design life is usually 75 years. With deck replacements schedules for at least 2 times during that life. So if the bridges are 50 years old, then we're right on queue.

That being said, the deck replacement on 100 was done in 2006 I guess. But the contractor did not install the fibres in the concrete which was the original issue. There were lawsuits. So hopefully everything is covered there.

The floodway bridge should've been upgraded when the floodway project was done. However, they did the design just so that they didn't need to touch the bridge to save money. And here we are.

Wasn't the issue that a truck ran into the underside of the floodway bridge, not actual issues with the bridge itself? Same thing that happened to the Portage Bypass bridge.

Well I know the floodway bridges on number one on the east side of the city were replaced with the floodway expansion, were the floodway bridges on the 59 south of the city replaced as well? The 59 north floodway bridges could/should have been replaced but we got a football stadium instead, proper interchanges should have been built at both St. Annes and St. Marys on the south perimeter but we got the little used Centre Port Roadway to nowhere instead!

[bomberjet]

Only some of the bridges were replaced. #1, some of the rail bridges. I'm not sure what else. Hwy 15.

There's a report outlining what was done and the reasoning. I'll see if I can find it. It included leaving bridges as is and literally removing the superstructure if they needed to in an extreme floodway event, which is ridiculous. Go out into the middle of a raging torrent and remove the bridge.

[cllew]

Its some where on the floodway authority site about what the rational was for each bridge. Some were just by jacking up the existing structure there could be more capacity others required new structures as the channel had to be widened.

[cllew]

IN this report are what the plans for the bridges were and what the final decision was after the project was costed out.

3rd page of report (5th of pdf)

[Biff]

59 N Floodway bridge Is slated to be replaced in the next 5 years. It is apparently on the bush, bush for some reason.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by CoryB

If being an "inexpensive" vet is a key criteria I am almost surprised someone hasn't started up a mobile vet office in one of those larger vans. I know there is one that is a mobile breast cancer screening unit.

What do you think the vet does when it goes to a dairy farm?

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by Biff

59 N Floodway bridge I slated to be replaced in the next 5years. It is apparently on the bush, bush for some reason.

So we have another five years, of an already over used highway, being down a lane! YAY! The other day we did 60 through there because of the traffic. I was hoping when the interchange was finished things would be back to normal... nope. I’m really not impressed with the new interchange. Spend all that money and there’s lights at birdshill and lights at headmaster. Why is the exit from the perimeter to 59 north only 70? And why all the conflicting signs? Why is it still a construction zone? Why is there artwork on the sides of the bridges? The reliefs can be seen by nobody. Why are there so many bridges? Was this design really necessary?

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Why is the exit from the perimeter to 59 north only 70?

Exit speed signs are suggestions only, not speed limits.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Exit speed signs are suggestions only, not speed limits.

I know there’s the yellow sign that recommends 70 just after that sign there’s a white sign that says reduce speed to 70 then another white sign that says 70. I should take a picture.

[bomberjet]

Which exit, the flyover ramp? Otherwise the interchange is on par with a modern cloverleaf. Having exit lanes separated from the main lines reduces weaving.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Hecate

So we have another five years,

"within" is the key word. MIT wants it done this year but the Province has to cough up the money.....and you know how that has been going lately.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Hecate

What do you think the vet does when it goes to a dairy farm?

If the south Perimeter vet is worried about customer access to their site they either except the cattle to "come to the office" or they aren't treating a lot of livestock.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Hecate

I know there’s the yellow sign that recommends 70 just after that sign there’s a white sign that says reduce speed to 70 then another white sign that says 70. I should take a picture.

Assuming we are talking EB 101 to NB 59. That is mostly reusing the pre-existing ramp. Before all the construction started the NB 59 speed in that section was 80. The ramp was likely designed with that speed in mind, ie less that 100. Either the changes, ie where WB to NB traffic merges in, or other a revaluation of the ramp to current standards likely resulted in lowering the speed. Further, if I remember correctly the old configuration was such that negotiating the bridge safely actually requires a fair bit of a speed drop.

[Phil’s neighbour]

The new ramp can easily accommodate 80 Kmh. It’s a world of a difference from the tight old overpass which was 60 on top of the bridge. They’re being far too cautious.

Originally Posted by CoryB

Assuming we are talking EB 101 to NB 59. That is mostly reusing the pre-existing ramp. Before all the construction started the NB 59 speed in that section was 80. The ramp was likely designed with that speed in mind, ie less that 100. Either the changes, ie where WB to NB traffic merges in, or other a revaluation of the ramp to current standards likely resulted in lowering the speed. Further, if I remember correctly the old configuration was such that negotiating the bridge safely actually requires a fair bit of a speed drop.