Manitoba Highways

[bomberjet]

The Feds have been doling out billions for transit. Winnipeg (and Manitoba) is just bad at it.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

I'm surprised how fast Saskatchewan is building highways which has less population than Manitoba, and Manitoba hasn't progressed too much over the years. I mean, Saskatchewan has the potash industry which probably helps make more money for the province. But I'm not sure if it's all about the money, but more about the planners and having a vision. If we plan ahead, we know what we want and achieve the result faster and more efficiently.

I would think the population placement also has something to do with it. Manitoba has 60%+ of its population in the Winnipeg region. Saskatchewan is far more spread out so there's a higher usage of the intra province network.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by cheswick

I would think the population placement also has something to do with it. Manitoba has 60%+ of its population in the Winnipeg region. Saskatchewan is far more spread out so there's a higher usage of the intra province network.

I agree. For an expressway system in Manitoba, basically the only roads that would justify it are 1, 16, 75, and the Perimeter Highway.

Saskatchewan and Alberta has population centers all over the place, therefore an extensive expressway system would make sense. We all know that Alberta Highways 1, 2, 3, 4, and 16 are going to be upgraded to freeway standards in the future as they all go through the biggest cities in Alberta. Saskatchewan Highways 1, 7, 11, 16, and 39 also go through the biggest cities, therefore those highways would justify upgrades.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The Feds have been doling out billions for transit. Winnipeg (and Manitoba) is just bad at it.

We just need better planners who know how to do it right. I hate the idea of BRT because we will eventually get to a point where LRT will be needed and we will have to once again close the route and retrofit, which would cost more $.

[bomberjet]

It's not the planners. It's the money.

Winnipeg has no vision when the dollars get large. Just kind of throw your hands up and say it's too expensive. Which LRT is very expensive. But we need to do a better job in general leveraging federal money. The problem we get into is the matching requirement. We need money to get money. And we don't have a lot of money.

I don't see any chance Winnipeg gets LRT in the next few decades. Unless the Province gets hot to trot on Winnipeg transit. And they're spending the dollars on highway interchanges and twinning.

[Flatland Metropolis]

There are only two expressway areas under development, right now in Manitoba which is the ongoing interchange system being developed for the the Perimeter Highway to make it a free flow highway and then the upgrades and interchanges being developed for PTH 1 in Brandon. I guess you could also consider that having been done in Portage la Prairie as well though with PTH 1 and 1A.

There is nothing else that is being committed to right now and with most interchanges costs somewhere between $125-250 million (it was $1.5 billion to convert the Perimeter at one point, higher now) it is probably a big reason why our small province is not expanding this initiative at this time.

Winnipeg One Million Perimeter Freeway Initiative

[EdwardTH]

Having known some planners, they know what they're doing but you have to fight against council, the administration, the public and the budget every single step of the way and they're not really winning the battle.

As for BRT - I'd honestly rather have something mediocre that actually gets built somewhat soon, than spend another 20 years waiting for some perfect project that will never happen. BRT isn't perfect but the Blue line is up and running and the TOD sites are filling in. If they had insisted on LRT it would only go as far as the fort rouge yards right now and they would be spending the next 12 years trying to get funding and get the 2nd leg done.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

Having known some planners, they know what they're doing but you have to fight against council, the administration, the public and the budget every single step of the way and they're not really winning the battle.

As for BRT - I'd honestly rather have something mediocre that actually gets built somewhat soon, than spend another 20 years waiting for some perfect project that will never happen. BRT isn't perfect but the Blue line is up and running and the TOD sites are filling in. If they had insisted on LRT it would only go as far as the fort rouge yards right now and they would be spending the next 12 years trying to get funding and get the 2nd leg done.

Do we actually know how much it would cost to build a proper LRT system for Winnipeg? Ive never been able to find something concrete based off of an actual map. Just nebulous $X per mile.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Do we actually know how much it would cost to build a proper LRT system for Winnipeg? Ive never been able to find something concrete based off of an actual map. Just nebulous $X per mile.

Sad thing is that an LRT should have been built years ago. The chance should have been for the Pan Am games in 1999. Edmonton got theirs build in 1978 for the Commonwealth Games. Had they got i built then in Winnipeg, we would have at least had a good start. Not to mention it would also have been cheaper then

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Do we actually know how much it would cost to build a proper LRT system for Winnipeg? Ive never been able to find something concrete based off of an actual map. Just nebulous $X per mile.

US Source from 2001. It's about 2.5x more for LRT than BRT in construction. I searched a few other sources that point to a similar values.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig5_239798660

Keep in mind the 2nd leg of BRT in Winnipeg included the widening of the Jubilee overpass to 3 lanes NB, but that 2.5x figure is only the construction cost. Winnipeg doesn't have a current fleet of light rail trains, maintenance yard, trained staff so if ever we get a LRT, the first line will have a substantial secondary costs associated with it.

BRT also offers flexibility that is still needed in a moderate ridership city. We aren't Toronto where capacity along a route is an issue. Sure the Blue line hits its limits at the start of university semesters, but that's a function of inadequate drivers rather than the roadway being maxed out by the number of busses. Even if busses start queueing at Blue line stations, things like preboarding validation could be incorporated to speed up passenger flow before we truly declare that we've outgrown BRT. This still allows for busses to use the Blue line along certain parts of it, which LRT would not allow for.

Back to highways, I know a senior engineer with MTI. They all have ideas of how to build proper road networks. The city does too. They have to play politics, weasel around bureaucracy, and work with the money they have. I mean if a bunch of road and construction geeks (myself included) on this internet forum can come up with idealized road network designs for fun, guaranteed a new grad from civil engineering could do it better and in less time. Planning and engineering are not the constraints on Manitoba or Winnipeg's road networks, it's the people in the suits that control the money.

[bomberjet]

It's a number with billion at the end.

[Carboy15]

Well, BRT is great for a short term investment. In the long term, LRT will have multiple benefits. Building the LRT is the expensive part, but all we will have to do in the years to come is maintain it. Not saying BRT is bad, but it will need to be eventually upgraded in the long term. And also, with BRT I don't want the city to look cheap.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

And also, with BRT I don't want the city to look cheap.

Winnipeg is already cheap. I'd rather have a functional transit system with several BRT lines that services most of the city than hum and haw for decades about the merits of one LRT line, especially in the name of outward appearances of "looking cheap". Transit is to move people, let's get moving people rather than fantasizing about ways that might be better at moving people and not doing anything about it.

[bon_vivant]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Winnipeg is already cheap. I'd rather have a functional transit system with several BRT lines that services most of the city than hum and haw for decades about the merits of one LRT line, especially in the name of outward appearances of "looking cheap". Transit is to move people, let's get moving people rather than fantasizing about ways that might be better at moving people and not doing anything about it.

Yes we'll never be a wealthy city like Calgary or Vancouver and that's ok. Let's stop navel gazing and get on with building a cohesive BRT network instead of spending precious dollars on a costly feasibility study which will only confirm that LRT is still too expensive. We've been down that road already. (And speaking of roads... FIX THEM PROPERLY FFS). I love the idea of LRT but we just don't have the money to make it happen. Even if we did, I fear our "leaders" would manage to screw it up somehow.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

I agree. For an expressway system in Manitoba, basically the only roads that would justify it are 1, 16, 75, and the Perimeter Highway.

Why would anyone make Hwy #16 an expressway in Manitoba? The only reason it is twinned in Alberta, is because of the large population surrounding it, and how widely used i is. East of Saskatoon, it is just a normal highway, not worthy of even being twinned, as it's just as fast to go south of the #11 to Regina, then to Winnipeg on the trans-Canada.

Saskatchewan and Alberta has population centers all over the place, therefore an extensive expressway system would make sense.

It makes no sense in Saskatchewan, other than dividing the highway from Saskatoon to Regina. Winnipeg is larger than Saskatoon and Regina combined, so one can make a legitimate argument that Winnipeg should have at least two limited access highways running through it. The largest city in Saskatchewan has less than 400,000 people residing in it.

We all know that Alberta Highways 1, 2, 3, 4, and 16 are going to be upgraded to freeway standards in the future as they all go through the biggest cities in Alberta.

I would not hold your breath for the Crowsnest Pass highway (#3) to become a freeway. Not enough people use it. The only place it would be limited access is from the Hwy #2 intersection through Lethbridge. Hwy 16 is not going to be upgraded to a freeway in most parts of Alberta. The Government is spending hundreds of millions upgrading the Yellowhead inside Edmonton, to make it limited access. There simply is no money to extend the freeway to Lloydminster, or Jasper.

Saskatchewan Highways 1, 7, 11, 16, and 39 also go through the biggest cities, therefore those highways would justify upgrades.

One could make a better argument to upgrade Manitoba's main highways than that of Saskatchewan. Prince Albert, Kindersley, Yorkton, and Weyburn are not big cities. I mean one can argue Hwy #6 should have major upgrades since it goes to Thompson, but it's not a pressing matter.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

I agree. For an expressway system in Manitoba, basically the only roads that would justify it are 1, 16, 75, and the Perimeter Highway.

Saskatchewan and Alberta has population centers all over the place, therefore an extensive expressway system would make sense. We all know that Alberta Highways 1, 2, 3, 4, and 16 are going to be upgraded to freeway standards in the future as they all go through the biggest cities in Alberta. Saskatchewan Highways 1, 7, 11, 16, and 39 also go through the biggest cities, therefore those highways would justify upgrades.

I agree with most of the routes you target for upgrades although I’m not familiar with 39 in Sask.
Also, as Black Dog mentioned, Highway 16 east of Saskatoon probably doesn’t need to be a 4-lane expressway with the existence of Sask. #11 to the TCH #1. But for goodness sakes, build the interchange at #16 & #1 Please.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by craner

I agree with most of the routes you target for upgrades although I’m not familiar with 39 in Sask.

Highway 39 starts in Moose Jaw (population 35,000), and goes through Weyburn and Estevan (10,000 each), until crossing the US border. It makes zero sense to twin it or otherwise. It would be like twinning Hwy #10 from Brandon to the US border. In both cases, it is a low priority.

Also, as Black Dog mentioned, Highway 16 east of Saskatoon probably doesn’t need to be a 4-lane expressway with the existence of Sask. #11 to the TCH #1. But for goodness sakes, build the interchange at #16 & #1 Please.

I could see Hwy #16 being upgraded into three lanes at some points (from Neepawa to Hwy 10, Yorkton area, etc). However, it does not have the vehicle traffic to justify twinning it, especially when BC has not even twinned their portion of Hwy 16, despite it being far busier.

[craner]

^Well BC is their own unique beast - they don’t have any twinned routes #1, #3, & #16 could all use it. I don’t get why it’s not more of a priority for them & the Feds from a safety and economic perspective alone.

But I digress - back to Manitoba Highways.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Why would anyone make Hwy #16 an expressway in Manitoba? The only reason it is twinned in Alberta, is because of the large population surrounding it, and how widely used i is. East of Saskatoon, it is just a normal highway, not worthy of even being twinned, as it's just as fast to go south of the #11 to Regina, then to Winnipeg on the trans-Canada.

Valid Point. I'm not sure it would be twinned within the next 20 years, but in the future it would make sense. Hwy 16 twinning would be nice because it creates a more direct route from Saskatoon to Winnipeg.

I would not hold your breath for the Crowsnest Pass highway (#3) to become a freeway. Not enough people use it. The only place it would be limited access is from the Hwy #2 intersection through Lethbridge. Hwy 16 is not going to be upgraded to a freeway in most parts of Alberta. The Government is spending hundreds of millions upgrading the Yellowhead inside Edmonton, to make it limited access. There simply is no money to extend the freeway to Lloydminster, or Jasper.

Alberta has long term plans to convert the whole highway to freeway standards. Lethbridge to Fort Mac would happen first for sure

One could make a better argument to upgrade Manitoba's main highways than that of Saskatchewan. Prince Albert, Kindersley, Yorkton, and Weyburn are not big cities. I mean one can argue Hwy #6 should have major upgrades since it goes to Thompson, but it's not a pressing matter.

Highway 7 is Saskatchewan is the main connector route between Saskatoon and Calgary. Highway 39 connects to the USA (Minot, Bismarck, etc). So those routes would make sense with twinning.

Highway 6 in Manitoba could benefit from a twinning between Ashern Area (Hwy 67) till the Perimeter Highway, but as a future plan. For shorter term, Perimeter to Grosse Isle it could come in handy as it is being twinned from the Prairie Dog Line to the Perimeter (I know this is slight, but a start at least).

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Highway 39 starts in Moose Jaw (population 35,000), and goes through Weyburn and Estevan (10,000 each), until crossing the US border. It makes zero sense to twin it or otherwise. It would be like twinning Hwy #10 from Brandon to the US border. In both cases, it is a low priority.

Hwy 39 is a connector route to Minot and Bismarck. They are both bigger cities than Weyburn and etc. That would create a trade route for the USA too, not just Canada.