Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[biguc]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

The sad truth is that Winnipeg will NEVER have a true freeway. The best you can hope for is that future projects are budgeted with things like bridges, cloverleaves in mind. For example, Chief penguis street to be extended westward and eastward no? Is it planned to get joined with other streets at its new ends with cloverleaves or traffic lights? If the plan is cloverleaves, then it take much longer for the city to aquire the money for the project. But even if it is...you still have all those intersections in between to slow down traffic. I have seen a significant reduction in traffic flow since I started driving in 1992. I wonder sometimes what streets like pembina, Keewatin, Henderson..etc. will looks like in 20 years in a rush hour. I am afraid a tradegy is the only way action will be taken in this matter. Perhaps if somebody of importance dies because paramedics cannot arrive in time because they just litterally cannot get thru the traffic.

That's an incredibly happy truth. Cities are invariably worse off for freeways. We can all breathe a sigh of relief that Winnipeg didn't go down that road and end up like so many comparable American cities--depopulated, broke, ravaged by crime and poverty, and ringed by endless sprawl. If you want to see what could have been, just look at satellite pictures of Detroit, Buffalo, Cleveland, Albany... any city east of the Mississippi. It's sad, sad stuff.

That said, this city needs to get off the incredibly stupid and unsafe fence it's on when it comes to road building. Check out this piece here on "stroads": http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2...l#.UuAmnRDnaUk

The real sad truth is that stroad describes nearly every major artery in this city, in one form or another. Whether it's older, street-like roads like Henderson, Portage, or Pembina; or pseudo-expressways like Kenaston, Waverley, or Lagimodier; they all keep one costly, dangerous foot on each side of the street/road line.

rrskylar mentioned service roads a few posts back and, for my money, they're the best bet for Winnipeg's more suburban stroads. They're relatively cheap to build, fit in limited space, reduce access to the road, and accommodate future diamond interchanges, and get the city off the hook for building intersections for every business. Service roads now and a gradual replacement of intersections with diamond interchanges would do well to convert Winnipeg's roadiest stroads into functional roads--even one day into something like freeways.

You mention cloverleafs but those only make sense for two country highways meeting each other. In a city, they're a tremendous waste of space and easily the most hostile environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Since Chief Peguis would cross more street-like stroads that currently accommodate mixed traffic, highway-style interchanges cannot work. Diamond interchanges, on the other hand, are feasible and affordable alternatives.

As for the street-like stroads I mentioned earlier (Portage, Pembina, Nairn, Henderson, St. Annes, McPhillips, and so on): they need to become streets. They're already too intensely developed to turn into roads without massive, expensive expropriations. On the other hand, some of these streets are massive and really suck to walk along. Of all of them, Pembina is on the best track with its segregated cycling lanes, but that just scratches the surface. Upzoning, widening sidewalks, more pedestrian corridors, continental crosswalks (http://sf.streetsblog.org/2013/11/01...on-sf-streets/ --maybe something Ross Eadie should hear about), better transit service... I'd even go so far as to ban access from parking lots onto these streets--an advantage on two fronts, improving safety and the pedestrian experience.

There are low-cost, incremental changes the city can start making right now that will improve traffic, safety, urbanity, and cost-effectiveness in this city. Part of the problem is the bottom-dollar, Tom Brodbeck, save taxpayers money mentality that thinks scrapping everything but filling pot holes is Winnipeg's ticket to ride. Winnipeg isn't rich, but it's not so broke we have to settle for bullshit every time. And making the right moves now will only help us in the future.

[yellowghost]

I agree, Mr.Biguc that we need to put the brakes on sprawl, I think that this city cannot afford it. We need to grow up, not out. But I never understood how freeways have been linked to crime. They do slice thru neighboorhoods in large cities. But EVERY city has pockets of crime and poverty. If what you are saying is true..then in theory, since we have no freeways, we don't have dangerous areas and thus no crime? Just seems bizzare to me that I can drive thru Fargo in less than 15 minutes and takes almost an hour to drive thru Winnipeg. Just seems wastefull.

[dennis]

Having freeways can be a acceptable if they don't splice through established areas. Chief Peguis trail has already cut north kildonan. Will adding diamond interchanges at Henderson and Raleigh won't do much harm if there is a good pedestrian overpass built to bridge the gap. I also don't see much pedestrian activity crossing over lag from maple leaf to the city reservoir across the street. That would be a good place for a freeway. Cutting through the forks and downtown such as an earlier study proposed would, however, not be so good.

[dennis]

(Typing from sunny Punta Cana. )

[Biff]

Originally Posted by dennis

Chief Peguis trail has already cut north kildonan.

I have to disagree with you on this point. The Chief Peguis Trail has not cut NK as that clearing has been there for 50 years or more. There are no less crossings of Chief Peguis than the empty corridor had 3 years ago.

I would argue that Chief Peguis has actually enhanced the neighborhood with likely the most used walk/riding trail system in the city. The east-west route has also relieved a lot of the traffic from Springfield Rd, Donwood, Gilmore and McIvor. I feel, living in very close vicinity to it that is is a great addition to the area.....accept for the ridiculous botch job of an intersection at Gateway and CPT. Why they didn't just put an overpass while they were building the pedestrian overpass absolutely baffles my mind. What a missed opportunity

[esquire]

Rather than adding any new expressways, I think it would be ideal to see capacity of existing ones increased by adding lanes and interchanges at key bottlenecks. Bishop Grandin, south Kenaston and Lagimodiere are prime offenders in this respect three are relatively wide rights of way, but often traffic ends up crawling because of a litany of traffic lights or simple congestion from having a 2014 volume of cars on a road that hasn't been improved at all in over 40 years (Lagimodiere).

Even a half-dozen relatively simple interchanges (Lagimodiere at Regent and Chief Peguis, Bishop Grandin at River and St. Mary's, Kenaston at McGillivray and the big box shopping area) and a few KMs of additional lanes on each of those three routes would probably do a lot to move more cars without having to build brand new expressways.

[Biff]

Interchanges have been pre-designed for St Anne's/Bishop and a combined interchange for St Mary's/Dakota/Bishop. The latter is combined due to the proximity of the two streets (Dakota and St Mary's) and will be built at the same time. When???

The open houses for the Marion/Dugald connector should be out in spring this year.

I generally agree with your statements regarding our current "expressways" and their old designs, lack of upgrades Esquire.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Biff

I have to disagree with you on this point. The Chief Peguis Trail has not cut NK as that clearing has been there for 50 years or more. There are no less crossings of Chief Peguis than the empty corridor had 3 years ago.

I would argue that Chief Peguis has actually enhanced the neighborhood with likely the most used walk/riding trail system in the city. The east-west route has also relieved a lot of the traffic from Springfield Rd, Donwood, Gilmore and McIvor. I feel, living in very close vicinity to it that is is a great addition to the area.....accept for the ridiculous botch job of an intersection at Gateway and CPT. Why they didn't just put an overpass while they were building the pedestrian overpass absolutely baffles my mind. What a missed opportunity

I agree, I was a proponent of the CP Trail extension but had some doubts about whether the road was truly needed but those doubts have been put to rest as the volume use of the roadway has far exceeded my expectations. Traffic on residential streets in NK that were never designed for the volume they once saw before the CPT extension has been greatly decreased.

Have to also agree that the CPT/Gateway intersection was another lost opportunity by the city for finally building/designing something right. On top of that eliminating a north and south bound lane (the closure of Raleigh) traffic is now worse than before.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

I agree, Mr.Biguc that we need to put the brakes on sprawl, I think that this city cannot afford it. We need to grow up, not out. But I never understood how freeways have been linked to crime. They do slice thru neighboorhoods in large cities. But EVERY city has pockets of crime and poverty. If what you are saying is true..then in theory, since we have no freeways, we don't have dangerous areas and thus no crime? Just seems bizzare to me that I can drive thru Fargo in less than 15 minutes and takes almost an hour to drive thru Winnipeg. Just seems wastefull.

Just because there aren't any lions around here doesn't mean a bear isn't mauling you.

As for driving through Fargo in 15 minutes, it is great. Fargo is a toilet. But given that you live here, in Winnipeg (I take it), wouldn't you rather live in a good city you don't want to blitz through?

[yellowghost]

Yep. Fargo is nothing special and thats why I love to blitz thru it on route to a great city, Minneapolis! However I do sometimes stop there to refuel on gardetto's (original) unavailable in this good city.

[dennis]

Originally Posted by Biff

I have to disagree with you on this point. The Chief Peguis Trail has not cut NK as that clearing has been there for 50 years or more. There are no less crossings of Chief Peguis than the empty corridor had 3 years ago.

I would argue that Chief Peguis has actually enhanced the neighborhood with likely the most used walk/riding trail system in the city. The east-west route has also relieved a lot of the traffic from Springfield Rd, Donwood, Gilmore and McIvor. I feel, living in very close vicinity to it that is is a great addition to the area.....accept for the ridiculous botch job of an intersection at Gateway and CPT. Why they didn't just put an overpass while they were building the pedestrian overpass absolutely baffles my mind. What a missed opportunity

And there you go. Adding interchanges with good pedestrian crossings at Henderson and Raleigh will only enhance traffic flow without changing pedestrian flow-as long as the pedestrian crossings are inviting. I agree with you that it should have been done that way at the start.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by Biff

Interchanges have been pre-designed for St Anne's/Bishop and a combined interchange for St Mary's/Dakota/Bishop. The latter is combined due to the proximity of the two streets (Dakota and St Mary's) and will be built at the same time. When???

The open houses for the Marion/Dugald connector should be out in spring this year.

I generally agree with your statements regarding our current "expressways" and their old designs, lack of upgrades Esquire.

The Bishop interchanges sound great...I have my doubts that they will ever happen, but crossing my fingers that I see these go up in my lifetime.

So if St. Mary's & Dakota will share an interchange, I assume Dakota will be cut off from Bishop Grandin at that time? That would leave the stretch of Bishop between Lag and Pembina with only traffic signals at residential access roads such as River, Shorehill, Lakewood, Island Shore and De La Seigneurie. Does you know if the city has any plans in place to deal with eliminating access to Bishop for these? Which shouldn't be there in the first place.

It would seem that with some foresight when planning the residential areas off Bishop east such as Island Lakes, that the four residential access roads could have somehow been combined into one intersection with Bishop. If you look at Google maps, Island Shore would directly line up with Lakewood if it didn't turn to the east just before Bishop. That would eliminate one intersection. Then Shorehill and De La Seigneurie could have been designed to route east/west before Bishop to intersect at one point with Island Shore. Leaving only the Island Shore/Lakewood connection to Bishop which could easily be dealt with via a diamond interchange. Seriously, who designed this crap?

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Reignman

The Bishop interchanges sound great...I have my doubts that they will ever happen, but crossing my fingers that I see these go up in my lifetime.

So if St. Mary's & Dakota will share an interchange, I assume Dakota will be cut off from Bishop Grandin at that time?

Dakota an St Mary's both have bridges that cross over Bishop, it is just that access off and onto Bishop will be shared. The reason is that the distance between Dakota and St Mary's is not far enough to have proper off and on ramps for both roads within that distance.

[alittle1]

Originally Posted by Reignman

The Bishop interchanges sound great...I have my doubts that they will ever happen, but crossing my fingers that I see these go up in my lifetime.

So if St. Mary's & Dakota will share an interchange, I assume Dakota will be cut off from Bishop Grandin at that time? That would leave the stretch of Bishop between Lag and Pembina with only traffic signals at residential access roads such as River, Shorehill, Lakewood, Island Shore and De La Seigneurie. Does you know if the city has any plans in place to deal with eliminating access to Bishop for these? Which shouldn't be there in the first place.

It would seem that with some foresight when planning the residential areas off Bishop east such as Island Lakes, that the four residential access roads could have somehow been combined into one intersection with Bishop. If you look at Google maps, Island Shore would directly line up with Lakewood if it didn't turn to the east just before Bishop. That would eliminate one intersection. Then Shorehill and De La Seigneurie could have been designed to route east/west before Bishop to intersect at one point with Island Shore. Leaving only the Island Shore/Lakewood connection to Bishop which could easily be dealt with via a diamond interchange. Seriously, who designed this crap?

Perhaps you were a little young at the time, but Bishop was a two lane road for two years, becausethey thought it wouldn't be used that much.

As to who designed this crap?, the same bunch that designed the other crap you are driving on! You keep voting back in the same bunch of yahoo's that have about as much foresight as a hemorrhoid sitting on the crack of my ass. The view never changes!

If you remember, Katz rode around with a traffic expert from Chicago a few years ago and asked him to give his opinion on Winnipeg's traffic situation and recommend changes. He left his recommendations and a bill for $300K, neither of which have been seen again. As I said before, Want to know what to do about Winnipeg traffic? Ask a person who drives it every day, truck driver, courier, serviceman, etc. I still know more backstreets and short cuts than the average citizen and I can drive from NK to Charliewood in 20 minutes or less. Long gone are the days when you could drive from Westwood to downtown on Portage at 35 mph without stopping for a light. One of the reasons why is, trucks won't keep to the center lane they think they're sports cars now. How do you re-train them? Open the door up and cuff them behind the ear, highly frowned on now but it worked in the old days before they cried 'assault' because of a gesture.

okay, I'm done my rant.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by alittle1

Perhaps you were a little young at the time, but Bishop was a two lane road for two years, becausethey thought it wouldn't be used that much.

As to who designed this crap?, the same bunch that designed the other crap you are driving on! You keep voting back in the same bunch of yahoo's that have about as much foresight as a hemorrhoid sitting on the crack of my ass. The view never changes!

If you remember, Katz rode around with a traffic expert from Chicago a few years ago and asked him to give his opinion on Winnipeg's traffic situation and recommend changes. He left his recommendations and a bill for $300K, neither of which have been seen again. As I said before, Want to know what to do about Winnipeg traffic? Ask a person who drives it every day, truck driver, courier, serviceman, etc. I still know more backstreets and short cuts than the average citizen and I can drive from NK to Charliewood in 20 minutes or less. Long gone are the days when you could drive from Westwood to downtown on Portage at 35 mph without stopping for a light. One of the reasons why is, trucks won't keep to the center lane they think they're sports cars now. How do you re-train them? Open the door up and cuff them behind the ear, highly frowned on now but it worked in the old days before they cried 'assault' because of a gesture.

okay, I'm done my rant.

What do the Americans know about roads and infrastructure?

Bishop was built when....in the 60's sometime? Island Lakes are surrounding residential areas went up in the 80's. I was a kid in the 80's but the city had to know that Bishop was part of the planned inner ring road by then, no?

Fact of the matter is there is/was no proper long term planning in this city, and now we are left with lights upon lights along these arterials that were supposed to be expressways, which typically have short green cycles for the high traffic routes and of course are not even synchronized. And yet the city wants traffic to stay off residential roads as much as possible, when often it's quicker to take residential roads. For example, in rush hour, I find it much quicker to turn south on River off Bishop and take River/Nova Vista up to St. Annes, rather than deal with the ridiculous traffic backlog on Bishop eastbound between River and St. Annes.

[alittle1]

Originally Posted by Reignman

What do the Americans know about roads and infrastructure?

Bishop was built when....in the 60's sometime? Island Lakes are surrounding residential areas went up in the 80's. I was a kid in the 80's but the city had to know that Bishop was part of the planned inner ring road by then, no?

Fact of the matter is there is/was no proper long term planning in this city, and now we are left with lights upon lights along these arterials that were supposed to be expressways, which typically have short green cycles for the high traffic routes and of course are not even synchronized. And yet the city wants traffic to stay off residential roads as much as possible, when often it's quicker to take residential roads. For example, in rush hour, I find it much quicker to turn south on River off Bishop and take River/Nova Vista up to St. Annes, rather than deal with the ridiculous traffic backlog on Bishop eastbound between River and St. Annes.

R'man, bishop was built in the 80's.

Back in the 60's, Metropolitan Corporation of Greater Winnipeg aka METRO was a citywide liaison body that covered streets and transit, parks and planning for the entire cities (7) at the time. It planned and developed roads like Route 90 and 20, things that would have never happened, finally did. In general, they were impartial and stepped on the toes of the Great City of Winnipeg many times, as well as, Steve Juba. ( I could spend hours talking about the Juba - Bernie Wolfe/Bonniecastle (Metro) wars of the 60's.) Most of the major roadways that are now in place were the brainchild of a 1967 report titled the Winnipeg Regional Streets and Roads Study produced under Bernie Wolfe et al. The Chief Peguis Trail was one of those mentioned in the study, only to be shunned by the new City of Winnipeg's Great Council of the 1970's (48 members). Proposed development from McPhillips-Henderson-Lage-Regent- Plessis Rd. south was about 40 - 50 Mil including bridges and overpasses. A fraction of today's cost of construction.

The City of Winnipeg is basically cheap, not to be confused with cautious. Rather than build a street and have the area fill around it, they sit on there hands, dictate from above as to what and where you can build, dump some gravel on the prairie mud, stick up a four-way stop sign and call it done.

In Calgary, they will provide a full service package to an area, sewer, water, road, and utilities; work with developers to see the raw land through to final finish and all with harmony and understanding.

In 1956, Winnipeg was the 4th largest City in Canada, standing at the crossroads of this nation, straight and tall. Today, they call us WhinnerPeg. No guts, no glory! There's mice in the pantry and no one gives a shit. Do you?

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

Just seems bizzare to me that I can drive thru Fargo in less than 15 minutes and takes almost an hour to drive thru Winnipeg. Just seems wastefull.

Fargo is 1/4 the size of Winnipeg, 15 minutes is 1/4 of an hour, how long would it take to drive thru 2 Fargo's?

Fargo happens to be located at the intersection of two major federally funded inter-state highways that were neither put there for Fargo itself. Aside for a couple of nice old residential areas along the river and a few small pockets in the down-town Fargo really has nothing else that differentiates it from any smaller sized US city. That said I do like the liquor section in the Costco there.

[alittle1]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Fargo is 1/4 the size of Winnipeg, 15 minutes is 1/4 of an hour, how long would it take to drive thru 2 Fargo's?

Fargo happens to be located at the intersection of two major federally funded inter-state highways that were neither put there for Fargo itself. Aside for a couple of nice old residential areas along the river and a few small pockets in the down-town Fargo really has nothing else that differentiates it from any smaller sized US city. That said I do like the liquor section in the Costco there.

I wish they would put a larger, better wine section in Costco. Free samples would be icing on the cake.

I was surprised how much Fargo grew to the west and south. The grid streets are already in place, won't be long before businesses fill up the empty fields.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by alittle1

R'man, bishop was built in the 80's.

Bishop Grandin was opened in 1978 from Pembina to Lagimodière. It was a prerequisite of building St. Vital Centre. The St. Boniface section was two lanes for a couple of years because there wasn't enough in the budget for the other two lanes. The intersections were built with the four-lane configuration, however, so the road bloated awkwardly out to four lanes from two around each of the intersections.

While Bishop Grandin was part of the Suburban Beltway plan of the 60s, I think the city had largely given up on that until St. Vital Centre finally went ahead. In the meantime, the city had already started work on extending Beaverhill Blvd. to St. Anne's Road, which was the 1970s idea for a new Seine River crossing. This work was suddenly abandoned when the funding for Route 165 came through and the newly completed part of Beaverhill in St. Vital was left as a dead-end road and then apparently removed since it doesn't seem to be on the street plan anymore.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by Biff

Interchanges have been pre-designed for St Anne's/Bishop and a combined interchange for St Mary's/Dakota/Bishop. The latter is combined due to the proximity of the two streets (Dakota and St Mary's) and will be built at the same time. When???

The open houses for the Marion/Dugald connector should be out in spring this year.

I generally agree with your statements regarding our current "expressways" and their old designs, lack of upgrades Esquire.

Biff back when Bishop was being built they actually were installing overpasses at st Anne's and st Mary's.

The earth was even piled up at the st Anne's junction. Kinda like they had done at Route 90 and Bishop and are finally making a flyover.

My late father who worked on bishop told me at the time the reason work was halted though for st annes was due to the transmission lines , and that they had to go back and rework the plans as hydro was not about to move the lines. This went on for years if not a decade and by then the Bishop underpass at Pembina was built and st annes was forgotten.

The other one that failed was st annes and st Mary's merging into Dakota at the perimeter and a cloverleaf to be installed. Of course back in the 80s no one knew south st vital and st b were going to explode at the seams and again nothing happened except a swath of land set aside for Dakota to join the perimeter.

The other thing was both st Mary's and st annes were to have their own clover leafs. When I still lived in Vermette which is now south st vital my friends lived at two of the corners of st annes and the perimeter. The province and city were trying to buy them out to put the land aside for this dream. Eventually everyone sold except for one property. But both st Mary's and st annes have the land set aside if it ever happens.