Manitoba | Highways

[BorealLynx]

Someone raised a good point in another forum. As per the official posted transcript of the Provincial throne speech of November 18, 2025:

"Next year we will also start work on twinning Highway 1 from the Ontario border to West Hawk Lake..."

The distance from the Ontario border to West Hawk Lake is all of a kilometer or two, albeit a rather hilly stretch. Is that a typo and Premier Kinew meant to say to Falcon Lake, or does this suggest that the Province will be doing the TCH twinning project through the Whiteshell in segments?

[Dengler Avenue]

I won’t be surprised if twinning is done in segments.
For one, MTO twins in chunks that are < 10 km too (except for a single 14-km contract from Pass Lake to Loon, east of T Bay).
For two, the intention of focusing on West Hawk Lake may be to address access issues.
For three, this prevents the issue of property acquisition at Falcon Lake from stalling the entire project.

[bomberjet]

I missed that West Hawk reference. Just assumed it was the full twinning. That'd be rather disappointing. There was to be an RFP released this year for detailed design on the twinning. will need the check the status of that again.

[Biff]

It is just the first phase of the project.

That portion of the highway alignment is not in question. All proposed short listed highway alignments connect to the weigh station and new twinning on the Ontario side of the boarder, so why not chip away at the construction. That, and there are no property acquisitions required.

[bomberjet]

Would that portion include any work on the West Hawk interchange? Any yes I suppose it's better than nothing..

[Biff]

That I don't know. I would think not considering the speed at which they are moving with this. I will bet it will come a hundred yards or so from the eastern merge ramp.

[KnickKnack]

Originally Posted by Biff

That I don't know. I would think not considering the speed at which they are moving with this. I will bet it will come a hundred yards or so from the eastern merge ramp.

There’s barely 2km from the eastern end of the west hawk interchange to the weigh scales. From the scales to the Ontario border has already been twinned.

Would such a small segment really be worth the trouble? Maybe if they’re rebuilding the interchange at the same time I could see it being worth it.

At least with this first segment twinned they will connect to the 44 and the only part of the TCH in Manitoba with no alternative would be dealt with.

[bomberjet]

That stretch has most of the high fill areas (high embankment). So taking care of that would be something I suppose in the overall project scheme. But in general it's a small piece of the larger project. Splitting it out over at least 2 phases would help with funding.

[BorealLynx]

If they are doing it in segments, it would seem logical for them to do the stretch from the Ontario border to west of West Hawk Lake, past the interchange with 44, to the point where the TCH takes a turn to the SW. It seems that every alternative for this project has that stretch in common; it's the part from that bend to near Falcon Lake (especially at Barren Lake and the stables) that seems to be where decisions still need to be made. This would be the "easy" part.

And any first phase had better include the interchange with 44. If they were to stop just to the east of the West Hawk Lake junction and leave the interchange as it is for now, this would be the most token of all gestures possible.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Cite your sources - you've been touting that the North Perimeter is much worse but you've yet to bring up any evidence of that.

The MTI 2023 traffic flow maps show pretty equal traffic counts on the North and South Perimeter.

https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/traffic/mhtis/flowmap_2023.pdf

Source: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/traffic/counts.html

Use the map for more current info than that outdate PDF.

Originally Posted by WildCake

The hot spots are the Red River and Assiniboine River crossings, with fewer in-city options forcing traffic to use those bridges, and those areas also tend to be the areas of the Perimeter that are surrounded by the built-up portion of the city, not fields. Yes, PTH 8 to Henderson is the busiest segment, but those are currently interchange-controlled.

Henderson would benefit from ramp lengthening so the interaction points with exit/merge traffic are well away from the bridge. Also the Main NB to Perimeter EB flow is a major conflict point. Not as bad as some but without additional lanes on the Henderson bridge there will not be an easy solution. The easiest might be to repurpose the current bridge as EB only and build a new WB span to the north of the current bridge.

Originally Posted by WildCake

Cite your sources

Originally Posted by WildCake

Looking at that map, St Anne's to 59S is the busiest stretch of the whole Perimeter that isn't a river crossing.

As you said, cite your sources. By my read on the MTI site the following all have significantly higher traffic counts without a river:

Pipeline, HWY 7, HWY 3 and Kennaston.

Originally Posted by WildCake

Even with similar enough traffic counts, we have to also be looking at collisions, including severe collisions and fatalities. Which MTI has presented with that graph using the coloured circles. We don't know the methodology behind it but it provides a good snapshot. So St Anne's, Dugald, and Deacons are the 3 worst ones in the Province. Pretty obvious to me which intersections on the Perimeter should be addressed first, which MTI seems to be working towards. Unless you have compelling evidence otherwise, I can't understand this fixation on the North Perimeter being dramatically worse than the South Perimeter.

Again, as you say "cite your sources".

The traffic volumes at Portage and the Perimeter on not managable at the current volume and more serious and fatal collisions will result.

Here is one that has already happened:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-perimeter-closed-1.4134127

How many people do you think should die before action is taken to fix the dangerous situation?

Again, as you like to say, "cite your sources".

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Source: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/traffic/counts.html

Use the map for more current info than that outdate PDF.

Thanks for sharing, I was not aware that this existed. It does seem like North Perimeter numbers are growing a bit faster than South, although I'd be curious to their methodology.

You can click on the specific segments and it says "estimation year" and "2024 AADT". Any segment with a more recent Estimation year has significantly higher 2024 AADT numbers than nearby segments with older estimation years. That makes me think the model they're using to estimate traffic volumes is inaccurate and there's been more growth in traffic volumes than the model is predicting with old data. There's a ton of segments with estimation years 2014 or older.

Originally Posted by CoryB

Henderson would benefit from ramp lengthening so the interaction points with exit/merge traffic are well away from the bridge. Also the Main NB to Perimeter EB flow is a major conflict point. Not as bad as some but without additional lanes on the Henderson bridge there will not be an easy solution. The easiest might be to repurpose the current bridge as EB only and build a new WB span to the north of the current bridge.

Agreed, it's a gong show, but unfortunately the Perimeter is so outdated that correcting that problem is a low priority among all the other issues. It would probably only happen when the Red River bridges are up for a rehab, which I have no idea when that might be.

Originally Posted by CoryB

As you said, cite your sources. By my read on the MTI site the following all have significantly higher traffic counts without a river:

Pipeline, HWY 7, HWY 3 and Kennaston.

Yep, that's clear, however, traffic count is only one piece of the decision-making puzzle. Collisions, fatalities, strategic importance to the road network also play a role.

See the map MTI shared for the Carberry interchange to argue that it should be a temporary measure and not an interchange, which the politicians ignored. The big coloured circles used some sort of method to determine traffic/collision severity index. St Annes and Dugald are the worst on the Perimeter, even if they have lower traffic counts.

Originally Posted by CoryB

Again, as you say "cite your sources".

The traffic volumes at Portage and the Perimeter on not managable at the current volume and more serious and fatal collisions will result.

Here is one that has already happened:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-perimeter-closed-1.4134127

Agreed that the interchange design no longer works. Same for 100/Pembina. Same for the short ramps on Wilkes, and the Henderson/Main proximity and ramp issues. Once again though, too many problems to pick from.

You can cherry pick news articles about a fatality for just about any segment or intersection on the Perimeter. The one you shared is not even recent, but 8 years ago, and the wording indicates the driver lost control of her motorcycle which could be driver experience or roadway conditions that aren't related to the design issues with that interchange. It really isn't clear.

Quickly scanning Google news for articles in the last 4 years, I find deaths at McGillivray (x2 incidents), Dugald, Pipeline, and St Anne's Road intersections, plus between 6 and Rosser and between St Marys/St Annes. This is just glancing at articles, and could be missing some.

The highway has inadequacies all around, and even if it was a perfect freeway there'd still be collisions and deaths. Driver error still happen even under ideal roadway setups.

Originally Posted by CoryB

How many people do you think should die before action is taken to fix the dangerous situation?

I'm not advocating for more death and destruction. In fact, I'm hoping our elected politicians chose projects that address the highest risk intersections so that the locations with the highest risk of deaths and severe collisions are addressed first.

[bomberjet]

Traffic counts does not equal collision data. The red circles are high collision locations.

[Wpgdude]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Source: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/traffic/counts.html

Use the map for more current info than that outdate PDF.



Henderson would benefit from ramp lengthening so the interaction points with exit/merge traffic are well away from the bridge. Also the Main NB to Perimeter EB flow is a major conflict point. Not as bad as some but without additional lanes on the Henderson bridge there will not be an easy solution. The easiest might be to repurpose the current bridge as EB only and build a new WB span to the north of the current bridge.





As you said, cite your sources. By my read on the MTI site the following all have significantly higher traffic counts without a river:

Pipeline, HWY 7, HWY 3 and Kennaston.



Again, as you say "cite your sources".

The traffic volumes at Portage and the Perimeter on not managable at the current volume and more serious and fatal collisions will result.

Here is one that has already happened:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-perimeter-closed-1.4134127

How many people do you think should die before action is taken to fix the dangerous situation?

Again, as you like to say, "cite your sources".

That accident was in 2017 and the motorcyclist lost control.

[VANRIDERFAN]

TCH 1 and PTH 5 to become an overpass.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/...rpass-construction-starts-2027-9.6986811

To the civil engineers here, why 2.5 years of construction and north of a 100 million?

[bomberjet]

Because theyre insane. They'll probably reconstruct the highway for miles in each direction, widen the median, buy property.

The timeline seems good as theyll do a design etc. Its a glacial pace though.

[Danny D Oh]

Pure populist insanity at Carberry.

TCH runs through busy commercial and residential adjacent areas in Winnipeg, Headingley and Brandon which are all death traps. 1 and 16 intersection west of Portage is one of the busiest highway junctions on this continent controlled by a light...beyond that it is designed terribly with poor visibility from north, south and west...also a death trap.

And with all that we're going to build a 9 figure interchange at Carberry where there is minimal cross traffic.

Just showing how this government goes with the wind instead of being willing to defend any sound policy or decision-making. Do they really care that much about the Dauphin seat?

[Carboy15]

Well, I'm at least glad they're 'doing something' at Carberry as opposed to just doing a band aid fix. Yeah, doing a median widening or whatever is more cost effective but they'll say they're going to build an Interchange in 25 years, and 30 years later nothing comes nor is planned.

But I believe a rural Intersection is far more dangerous than an Intersection in an urban area despite there being less traffic. My reasons being because in a rural area there's less stimuli as it's open land, Higher Speed, etc. Versus an urban area despite more traffic, it has stimuli such as pedestrians, businesses, etc. In an urban area you are more urged to slow down as opposed to a rural area where slowing down feels like a crawl. Urban areas of course have higher risk of collisions and accidents, but usually there's less fatalities compared to a rural area.

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

Well, I'm at least glad they're 'doing something' at Carberry as opposed to just doing a band aid fix. Yeah, doing a median widening or whatever is more cost effective but they'll say they're going to build an Interchange in 25 years, and 30 years later nothing comes nor is planned.

But I believe a rural Intersection is far more dangerous than an Intersection in an urban area despite there being less traffic. My reasons being because in a rural area there's less stimuli as it's open land, Higher Speed, etc. Versus an urban area despite more traffic, it has stimuli such as pedestrians, businesses, etc. In an urban area you are more urged to slow down as opposed to a rural area where slowing down feels like a crawl. Urban areas of course have higher risk of collisions and accidents, but usually there's less fatalities compared to a rural area.

Sure but that's exactly why the initial proposed solution was fine. There's hardly any cross traffic at that intersection to necessitate the interchange. There are far more pressing intersections and stretches of road. But they just haven't had the single mass casualty event...just pile up deaths month by month instead.

[Carboy15]

But of course I think that Highway 1 @ 16 is long overdue. It was announced in 2008 and became vaporware. And a roundabout was planned in 2020, thankfully that was cancelled.

https://stroadz.glide.page/dl/d0a5f4/s/c0a8e8/r/zXwpCLk5fH21MQYJO4QX
https://stroadz.glide.page/dl/d0a5f4/s/c0a8e8/r/Ljbg7WQu5eYe6AZlJdMO

They could so something as simple as this to provide access to Highway 16 and the nearby commercial areas. These designs could also make the Highway safer as it could also remove the need for all those Intersections between Highway 16 and 1A.

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

But of course I think that Highway 1 @ 16 is long overdue. It was announced in 2008 and became vaporware. And a roundabout was planned in 2020, thankfully that was cancelled.

https://stroadz.glide.page/dl/d0a5f4/s/c0a8e8/r/zXwpCLk5fH21MQYJO4QX
https://stroadz.glide.page/dl/d0a5f4/s/c0a8e8/r/Ljbg7WQu5eYe6AZlJdMO

They could so something as simple as this to provide access to Highway 16 and the nearby commercial areas. These designs could also make the Highway safer as it could also remove the need for all those Intersections between Highway 16 and 1A.

Pallister didn't like the price he'd get for all the land he owns adjacent to the intersection. And nobody has been willing to deal with CNR.

The RM and province keep parceling out land right there too for industrial development. It gets worse and worse further and further way from solving the issues with the TCH because there's no space to work with.

BTW the roundabout style interchanges they built at the west end of the Portage By Pass are brutal. Jack-knifed semis there all winter. Better than the semis crashing into the bridge I guess.

I don't think our drivers are up to handling a roundabout interchange, particularly in winter driving conditions. Nobody knows how to drive without speeding or slamming on the brakes.