Freeway-Free City - Something Winnipeg can be proud of

[Runt]

One interchange at St Marys , flyover at Dakota, interchange at St Anne's.
This works and would be great. I would be against slamming a freeway through a community like they have in Minny-StPaul or Cedar Rapids.

[Kinguni]

Originally Posted by Runt

One interchange at St Marys , flyover at Dakota, interchange at St Anne's.

And a flyover at River Rd. Something at Lakewood could almost be justified too. Too bad Lakewood and Island Shore don't line up.

[Runt]

Poor planning there.
On Lag I would love to see BG , Fermor, CP trail all should get interchanges.
Lag from Regent north would be easy to make free flow. If the political will was there.

[RTD]

Originally Posted by pausgree

You might as well give up in hoping to see backward Winnipeg build freeways.
How long has it been now,....almost 40 years, and the Perimeter Highway is still not all free-flow.
That city is an embarrassment when it comes to having an efficient, modern roadway system, considering it is situated at the crossroads of Canada! If the railways running through Winnipeg are well accomadated for( which they are), why can't the roadways be modernized?

Too bad, because it is a nice city with nice buildings in a beautiful river setting but the banjo-picking citizens " don't want none o' them thar high-falutin' big city freeways scarin' us inta goin' so fast!"


Little wonder Winnipeg has dropped from being the 4th largest city in Canada for about 80 years to being 8th or 9th largest now. Figures.

Is this constructive criticism, or is it just another one of our beloved friends from out west dropping in to dump all over Winnipeg? We know the challenges this city faces, unlike yourself who is on the outside looking in. As stated before, please return to your Deadmonton threads. I know you will be much happier there

[pausgree]

Originally Posted by Lee_Haber8

I was looking at another forum about large U.S. cities without freeways and it might be that Winnipeg may be the only large city of over 500,000 people. Whether it was intentional or good fortune, I think it is something Winnipeg should be proud of: that we haven't made the mistake that has blighted so many cities on this continent.

Now, hopefully we can get around to improving public transit and urban life to kill any ideas of building freeways in the future

The reason you can't find a forum about a large city with no freeways except Winnipeg, is that no other large city is as freaking BACKWARD as Winnipeg !

It's not good fortune....trust me.

And you're PROUD of the fact that your city has no freeways??? That's like being proud you're using paper, pencils, cardboard folders & a metal filing cabinet to keep records & run a business INSTEAD of a computer!!
That's real smart, that is! Those computers use electricity and might need upgrading in a couple of years, so why use them, huh??

I wouldn't worry about future plans to build freeways in your city, Lee_Haber8....Winnipeggers have shown for many decades now that they " PREfers our traffics ta be mosyin' along nice an' slow-like in these here parts...not racin' down some dag gum freeway!"

[RTD]

^ Alright buddy, that is enough. Unless you have some decent constructive criticism to share, please take your trolling elsewhere.

Mods?

[jmt18325]

Winnipeg really doesn't have traffic problems even though we lack freeways.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Kinguni

There shouldn't be lights at River, St. Mary's, Dakota or St. Anne's.

The stupidest thing about those lights isn't that they're there actually , it's that the city had the room it needed to build interchanges . Unfortunately (as should probably have been expected mind you) a few years ago the city concluded that that land reserved for the ROW was surplus and sold it off to developers. I'm pretty sure there's still room for interchanges but as per usual , nobody in charge of running this town knows the first thing about sticking to a plan.

Still , although some routes definitely require serious upgrading and interchanges , overall we seem to be doing just fine without freeways. I've argued in the past and still believe that an inner ring freeway is a good idea but otherwise , as long as people can get around there's not much to complain about.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by pausgree

I wouldn't worry about future plans to build freeways in your city, Lee_Haber8....Winnipeggers have shown for many decades now that they " PREfers our traffics ta be mosyin' along nice an' slow-like in these here parts...not racin' down some dag gum freeway!"

What's wrong with moseying along? I would prefer that too. It's civilized and humane. Although, living in a city with several freeways, I can attest that there isn't much "racin'" happening on the Gardiner Expressway or 401 most of the time. You're 100 times as likely to sit in a complete traffic standstill on the freeway than you are on a Winnipeg city street.

Winnipeg is fortunate that the ruinous expressway project of the 1960s wasn't carried out. If you can imagine a city full of crumbling Disraeli bridges, that's about how it would look.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Spocket

The stupidest thing about those lights isn't that they're there actually , it's that the city had the room it needed to build interchanges . Unfortunately (as should probably have been expected mind you) a few years ago the city concluded that that land reserved for the ROW was surplus and sold it off to developers. I'm pretty sure there's still room for interchanges but as per usual , nobody in charge of running this town knows the first thing about sticking to a plan.

Still , although some routes definitely require serious upgrading and interchanges , overall we seem to be doing just fine without freeways. I've argued in the past and still believe that an inner ring freeway is a good idea but otherwise , as long as people can get around there's not much to complain about.

There were supposed to be some overpasses on Bishop Grandin as originally conceived, but when the Sterling Lyon government came into office in 1977 it cancelled the funding since the province didn't have money for that sort of thing anymore. Which it didn't. The Pembina intersection (which was initially just a T-intersection) quickly became such a bottleneck, however, that a few years later they built the overpass and partial interchange there in conjunction with the extension of the road to Waverley. Bishop Grandin was also just two lanes east of St. Anne's for quite a long time.

Actually, the building of Bishop Grandin happened so suddenly that another bridge that was about to be built over the Seine River at the same had to be cancelled after it was almost ready to start construction. That bridge was going to link Beaverhill Boulevard to St. Anne's Road. The new alignment of Beaverhill west of the Seine, which was built in anticipation of the new bridge that never got built, is still there, I think.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Actually, the building of Bishop Grandin happened so suddenly that another bridge that was about to be built over the Seine River at the same had to be cancelled after it was almost ready to start construction. That bridge was going to link Beaverhill Boulevard to St. Anne's Road. The new alignment of Beaverhill west of the Seine, which was built in anticipation of the new bridge that never got built, is still there, I think.

Interesting, I never knew that... As for the point about freeways in Toronto, I completely agree. They don't call it the Don Valley Parking lot for nothing. I can't imagine any real benefit to having freeways in Winnipeg. Tens of millions of dollars to shorten commute times by 5 minutes (because commute times are really the only times that Winnipeg arterials are congested). Besides rush hour, how many times do you actually need to wait at a light for more than one red? Is there any corner of the city where it takes more than half hour to get downtown? If people are so gung-ho on freeways, how do they expect they will be paid for? Interchanges, even some of the simplest ones, can cost tens millions. Are people willing to have their property taxes raised, or do they want to pay tolls? I'm not sure freeways are necessary...

[JayM]

This is the type of interchanges that should be applied, allowing the traffic to flow with no lights or stops of sorts.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_%28road%29

[Runt]

I have no problem with how Cities like Calgary and Edmonton have set themselves up with freeways. They are a pleasure to drive in. I have lived in both cities in the early 90's and was envious of the money that they could spend on there road systems. But really-- Winnipeg doesn't have traffic problems-example- I can leave the MTS centre and be home in the RM of Hanover in 45-50min tops. There are 5-6 different routes which i can use to get there. Winnipeg just needs to upgrade the Perimeter and maybe the inner ring rd. To just build a freeway to say were a big city is stupid and childish.

[Runt]

An example of a freeway being useless...in the Twin Cities is the I-494 or more specific the "Bloomington "stretch. anywhere from 2.30pm till 7.00pm this 8 lane (4 each way) is a zoo to which Calgary or Edmonton cannot compare.
To escape this maddnesss I jump off 494 before this crawling parking lot and head towards a county hwy with ..wait for it .... Lights. Actual route 494 to 169 to 13 to 35w and I am out of the cities in 20 mins instead of waiting in traffic for a hour on a ... FREEWAY.

[Cow-garian]

IMO, if Winnipeg's government/citizens true reason for having no freeways is to maintain a more sustainable, non-sprawling, budget friendly, less car oriented society, with a more human 'neighbourly' feel. I say 'AWESOME!'

I may not completely agree with a non free-way concept, but but on the flip side I full-heartily agree with any form of anti-sprawling/less car concept. For the Deadmonton folks, at least you can agree that this will be a very interesting real life socio-economic experiment at the very least.

I am actually very surprised so many Albertans who have posted something on this thread are in such up-roar and got their panties on too tight. As a extremely (for Canada) Conservative province (on a side point: go NDP! ) we should act what we preach; ingenuity, creativity, individualism and an open mind to new concepts.

So to that I say, Winnipeg stay on course, you'll have many cities, professors and urban planners having an eye on you the bigger you get with no freeways. Why, cause if you guys stumble on to something amazing; you all will look like geniuses . But if not, well...

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Cow-garian

I am actually very surprised so many Albertans who have posted something on this thread are in such up-roar and got their panties on too tight. As a extremely (for Canada) Conservative province (on a side point: go NDP! ) we should act what we preach; ingenuity, creativity, individualism and an open mind to new concepts.

Yeah. What I'm really surprised about is how ultra conservative Albertans advocated freeways so much, which are a huge government expenditure. You'd think that as free-market advocates, they would advocate for tolls, congestion pricing, and other mechanisms/user fees so that drivers pay the true costs of their activity. Interesting...

[vid]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Yeah. What I'm really surprised about is how ultra conservative Albertans advocated freeways so much, which are a huge government expenditure. You'd think that as free-market advocates, they would advocate for tolls, congestion pricing, and other mechanisms/user fees so that drivers pay the true costs of their activity. Interesting...

Many conservatives want their cake and to eat it too. We call this "sheep in wolf's clothing".

Meanwhile, actual fiscal conservatives are considered insane leftists.

[1ajs]

yea the political terms mean abosulutly nothing anymore


anyhow despite the lvoe of the car we have maniged to have a balance of sorts in this city

[dennis]

[QUOTE][And you're PROUD of the fact that your city has no freeways??? That's like being proud you're using paper, pencils, cardboard folders & a metal filing cabinet to keep records & run a business INSTEAD of a computer!!
That's real smart, that is! Those computers use electricity and might need upgrading in a couple of years, so why use them, huh??
/QUOTE]

I agree with this point. It was mentioned before. Since Winnipeg is poised to become a transport mecca once again with Centreport, a better freeway system to transport goods through, aroung and out of Winnipeg is needed. Freeways reduce the costs of fuel consumption, accidents and depreciation. By a large amount. Starting a big rig from a full stop uses alot of fuel and causes extra wear on the engine...

Though I do have to disagree with the tone you typed your message with.

[RTD]

I also agree with the inner ring route perimeter routes (and Lagimodiere Blvd.) as free-flowing routes. Lag can get quite congested and backed up and impede my getting back to Transcona from downtown . The inner ring and perimeter would be more for transportation of goods and services through and around the city. As Winnipeg is poised to become the Global Transportation Hub of Canada, we do need to account for this future growth and plan ahead instead of waiting last minute and getting bit in the ass like we mostly do. However, beyone these routes, there is no need for other freeway routes througout the city. We aren't big enough to merit that, yet. And no one would or should ever encourage building a freeway into downtown. It's not necesary or needed.