Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[MG922]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

This is a pedestrian bridge? Seems to have eluded my pretty broad radar system.

Yup, a new pedestrian / bike only bridge. Because of Midtown being so terrible/dangerous for cycling. Last I heard the RFP for engineering (prelim design) is supposed to be released this year sometime

[bomberjet]

Awesome. Any word if some of the other locations will be coming up? I know there was talk recently about Kildonan Park to Kildonan Drive and then the University connections to St Vital.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Awesome. Any word if some of the other locations will be coming up? I know there was talk recently about Kildonan Park to Kildonan Drive and then the University connections to St Vital.

I haven't heard anything serious about the Kildonan Park to Kildonan Drive. The City actually did get an administrative report done about a decade ago into an aerial tram over the Red from U of M to St. Vital. I don't know why they considered such a needlessly complicated approach when a bridge would have done just fine.

Anyway, the U of M land use master plan calls for an AT bridge from the campus to St. Vital (near St. Amant Centre), but it's the City that is ultimately going to decide whether it gets built or not. I suppose if the Osborne Village-BroAss AT bridge gets built, the St. Vital-UM link could be next although that could be years and years away.

[bomberjet]

I thought there was some money in this years budget, maybe forecasted over the next couple years, for the KP thing and the U of M thing. I'll take another look when I get a moment.

[MG922]

Haven't heard anything about either of those locations. The only other ped bridge going ahead right now (that I'm aware of) is over the Seine, between Bishop and Fermor somewhere. That's currently being studied as part of the Southeast Cycling corridor.

[MG922]

Also the Ped bridge and Pembina / University crescent, but I believe that's been discussed here already at some point

[bomberjet]

You're right on both of those. The Pembina crossing RFP was out a month or two ago.

I took a quick look through the budget and couldn't find anything on the ones I referred to. I know we discussed them here, but I saw them elsewhere too.

There's so many projects and plans being worked on for AT right now. That's a good thing. Just need to get them right.

[EndoftheBeginning]

Yes, the Bishop-Pembina grade separated ped-cycling crossing was tendered for preliminary design. Awarded to Stantec for $242K.

Bid documents are here (but no conceptual plans or anything visual to look at) http://winnipeg.ca/MatMgt/FolderCont...2017&YEAR=2017

There was some work tendered for repairs to Midtown and St. Vital bridges, but nothing to do with a potential AT crossing (just regular expansion joint repairs).

[bomberjet]

There was, and may still be, an artists rendering of the Pembina bridge. It was kind of a crappy sketch just to show it. Stantec will give us shiny renders to look at sometime this fall.

[The Jabroni]

Just got back from the Public Information Session for the CPT western extension.

Apparently, the ultimate plan for Brookside/Route 90 and CPT is to have a diamond interchange there with traffic lights. This raises a major concern where there are a lot of commuter traffic from West St. Paul, Rosser, and Rockwood (Stonewall and Stony Mountain) where a traffic light will definitely slow down traffic.

I have some pics from the session tonight. I'll upload them when I have a chance.

[mcpish]

I attended the session for the Chief Peguis Trail extension too. Here's my video report, fresh off the Final Cut Pro X cutting floor:

• Video Link

[The Jabroni]

Some close up notes on the large maps...

https://imgur.com/gallery/uxfPQ

[esquire]

^ Thanks for the pictures and video, guys. Looks like a lot of people are scratching their heads over the intial and ultimate plan for CPT/Brookside.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by mcpish

I attended the session for the Chief Peguis Trail extension too. Here's my video report, fresh off the Final Cut Pro X cutting floor:

• Video Link

Great report!

Even though it's not set in stone, a lot of people (including myself) addressed to the engineers and architects of the ultimate plan for Brookside/Route 90-CPT junction as a diamond interchange. They may have their reasons, but putting a traffic light in either phases would be a major mistake, since Brookside has heavy traffic during weekday rush hours.

But we'll see what happens. At the very least, they've thought this through, and it's interesting hearing from the engineers that the city thought of a last minute change in regards to Ferrier and CPT to make it into a diamond, but mentioned that it was already out of scope of the project.

I can't wait for this to get built!

[mcpish]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Great report!

Even though it's not set in stone, a lot of people (including myself) addressed to the engineers and architects of the ultimate plan for Brookside/Route 90-CPT junction as a diamond interchange. They may have their reasons, but putting a traffic light in either phases would be a major mistake, since Brookside has heavy traffic during weekday rush hours.

But we'll see what happens. At the very least, they've thought this through, and it's interesting hearing from the engineers that the city thought of a last minute change in regards to Ferrier and CPT to make it into a diamond, but mentioned that it was already out of scope of the project.

I can't wait for this to get built!

Yeah as for Brookside/Route 90 I agree that ultimately a Diamond interchange design isn't the right one there. It should be something like a Parclo, ideally with at the least, flyover from westbound CPT to southbound Brookside. I drew an example below. Of course, other flyovers are always welcome too but as a minimum there should be this one.



I've been pushing/lobbying very hard for those interchanges at Ferrier and Pipeline. Glad to see that's ultimately the plan in the final phase. The dream of Winnipeg's first proper Freeway may come after-all. I've always had the sense that the engineers "want" to build it a Freeway but often they are limited by having to listen to the "concerns" (often very frugal concerns), of the local citizens of a neighbourhood. So all that's really needed is a few local citizens to be adamant that there is a generational change now, and we no longer want to be "cheap" Winnipeg that does things at low cost. It's time for us to spend a little and build proper infrastructure from the get-go. The engineers just need some local citizens that they can then point to, to their higher-ups and say, "yes we considered the concerns of the local citizens in the design, they actually told us to built it big, expensive, and elaborate". In other words it doesn't take much to convince them to advocate for what we'd want anyhow.

The next big thing I'm trying to advocate is the use of a full re-enforced concrete roadbed, none of this low cost asphalt stuff. That way, it'll match the work done on Centreport Canada Way (which is also concrete), it'll last longer, look better, be more rugged, and ultimately will cost less in the long run since it won't have to be constantly resurfaced.

[WildCake]

Re: diamond at brookside

As much as a freeflowing Brookside sounds appealing, we have to realize that this is Winnipeg, and any traffic continuing south has to contend with lights at inkster and beyond. Spending 30 mil on a diamond vs 150 mil on a cloverleaf with a high speed ramp isnt realistic when a set of light awaits whoever exits the high speed ramp in 1 km. Chances are there's going to be another set of lights on between there too by the time cpt is built.

As much as brookside should be freeflow until at least Logan, I doubt that will happen in our lifetimes (I'm 25), and so dollar value wise I don't think brookside and cpt should be more than a parclo.

While this same logic can be applied to bishop or perimeter (you'll hit a set of lights right after anyway, so what's the point) , those routes have plans to be fully grade separated in the distant but foreseeable future,and talks/studies have happened. I have not heard of any political rumbling to upgrade brookside

[esquire]

A diamond for the junction of a 4-lane PTH and a major expressway strikes me as somewhat lacking. Diamonds are perfect where major roads intersect with minor ones, but in this case putting two sets of lights permanently on highway 7 does not seem appropriate at all. I think mcpish's proposed layout makes far more sense.

On the other hand, a diamond would be a good illustration of how fiercely Manitoba resists change. Sure, a diamond would be a step up from the usual grossly inadequate at-grade intersection we've come to expect, but the replacement would simply be the absolute minimum possible type of grade-separated interchange.

[CoryB]

Re CPT/Brookside

Putting this in perspective: Ferrier and Dr Jose Rizal which don't have access to a similar road currently are scheduled for diamonds as is Pipeline which was a gravel road in that area as recently as 10 years ago. Brookside, a major four lane commercial trucking route, is scheduled for the same type of intersection.

The other issue I see is a semi with two fully load 53' trailers doesn't exactly start or stop for traffic lights in the most efficient manner.

I emailed in with comments and suggested Dr Jose Rizal and Ferrier have planned future access to CPT but no access is put in until there is funding to build the recommended diamonds. Along those same lines I suggested they either build the diamond at Pipeline from the start or close that access until funding is available. Those aren't easy choices but if the public in general takes the position of no new access to limited access roads without proper grade separation maybe we can start gaining some traction on actually getting those grade separations to be more than a "future consideration".

CPT from Henderson to Lag mostly got the limited access right. It would have been very easy to slap up a set of lights at Rothesay and leave both Raleigh and Gateway with access to the road.

In my comments on the CPT extension I pointed out the commercial truck traffic on Brookside and suggested a full grade separation similar to CCW and Perimeter would be more appropriate long term.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Re CPT/Brookside

Putting this in perspective: Ferrier and Dr Jose Rizal which don't have access to a similar road currently are scheduled for diamonds as is Pipeline which was a gravel road in that area as recently as 10 years ago. Brookside, a major four lane commercial trucking route, is scheduled for the same type of intersection.

The other issue I see is a semi with two fully load 53' trailers doesn't exactly start or stop for traffic lights in the most efficient manner.

I emailed in with comments and suggested Dr Jose Rizal and Ferrier have planned future access to CPT but no access is put in until there is funding to build the recommended diamonds. Along those same lines I suggested they either build the diamond at Pipeline from the start or close that access until funding is available. Those aren't easy choices but if the public in general takes the position of no new access to limited access roads without proper grade separation maybe we can start gaining some traction on actually getting those grade separations to be more than a "future consideration".

CPT from Henderson to Lag mostly got the limited access right. It would have been very easy to slap up a set of lights at Rothesay and leave both Raleigh and Gateway with access to the road.

In my comments on the CPT extension I pointed out the commercial truck traffic on Brookside and suggested a full grade separation similar to CCW and Perimeter would be more appropriate long term.

That would be ideal. If council can see this and weigh in all the options, they'll have to at least consider building the interchange.

At the moment, Brookside/Route 90 and CPT will perhaps be the most controversial section of this whole entire project. I guarantee it.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

At the moment, Brookside/Route 90 and CPT will perhaps be the most controversial section of this whole entire project. I guarantee it.

I am sure that Main and CPT and the type of grade separation there will also get lots of attention. That the plan is to permanently leave Main St with traffic lights while CPT will be free flowing I am sure with get lots of negative feedback from Riverbend and WSP residents even though it is the right move in a long term, bigger picture view of the whole city.