Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet
I haven't heard of any issues. Really there is no issue. It's not like this is a cloverleaf on the Perimeter or something. What's Route 90 in the area, 60 km/h maybe 70 km/h.
I've heard people say it's really difficult for them to navigate the ramp down onto Route 90. But it's no different than if they were at any other location. They have a priority light to cross Portage. It's all hype in the media again.
|
Before the fire hall moved to its current location on Portage I witnessed an accident as a fire truck was coming from EB Portage to SB Route 90. Not seeing the fire truck coming and failing to react to the sirens the car next to me failed to yield to the fire truck and got side swiped when the truck merged across all lanes of traffic to take the Cordoyn exit on the left.
The location is not ideal but the issues have more to do with the underpass, merge lane and left side exit to Cordoyn. Most of those could be addressed with an on-demand light like the one on Portage for brining NB Route 90 to a stop when an emergency vehicle was planning to enter that road.
Almost forgot, in terms of possible MLLC bids I think the Hydro proposals might have resurfaced in reworked forms. That would suggest in addition to the list we know of there might have been proposals from SkyCity Centre, Winnipeg Square, "1 Portage and Main" and the parking lot west of Shaw Park on the Main St side of the tracks.
In terms of other possible bids for MLLC headquarters, might SkyCity have been in the bidding? Winnipeg Square might have repitched a rework of their Hydro proposal as could have the parking lot west of the tracks by Shaw Park and the "1 Portage and Main" site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzg
Yeah I think the biggest issue is the fact that redoing that whole bridge system area is the next major project the city has to tackle, and this limits its ability to do it. Sure, there is enough room to expand, but the reports have said St. James bridge needs to be entirely replaced, now there is no room to keep the old one open while a new one is built. It will be a nightmare having both directions going on the same bridge there (like Osborne had).
Also, the entrance/exit onto WB Portage is brutal — way too short, there's not enough room to properly come up to speed to merge, and people just sit there and wait (although this is also a WPG driver problem...).
|
The location of the fire hall in the interchange has almost no impact to the operation of the intersection or a possible rebuild of the St James bridge. First, the St James bridge is entirely south of Portage and the fire hall is north of Portage. The exit and merge lanes for Portage travelling traffic are "acceptable" by Manitoba standards so there would be little need to replace the Portage Ave bridge or change the current connections there. Even then the fire hall location only limits what could be done with SB to WB and WB to NB. As SB to WB is already routed away from that site it is unlikely to be changed. WB to NB has no real issues exiting from Portage so changing the curve of that exit would likely no be part of the plan.
As for the lack of a merge lane entering WB Portage, that is pretty much par for the course in Manitoba. Just look at virtually every grade separated interchange in the province. I can think of only three that have some degree of proper merge or exit lanes. A personal favourite is the harepin turn from WB Wilkes to NB Perimeter that basically drops traffic near a dead stop directly into a 100 km/h lane.
Prev
Linear Mode
