New Interchanges and Bypasses in MB / SK - Page 17

sask1982 · #**321** Posted **Apr 19, 2013, 12:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

Thanks bud! Looks like it is moving right along! Functional planning drawings to be next. I would best by late this year early next they have funding in place with construction to start Spring 2014! I base that on level of need (lots of trucks) and growth of the Regina area.

I'm going to say 2015 or 2016 at best. If you look at the projects priority page, it indicates that the Dewdney - Hwy 11 portion of the west bypass, as well as the Pilot Butte interchange, are priority OVER the south bypass, regarding the construction timeline specifically.

original · #**322** Posted **Apr 19, 2013, 10:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sask1982

Results from the 2nd open house (Tues Apr 16)
http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/adx/as...tation+(2).pdf

Wow, look at that purposed interchange. Can we get some of that in MB please?

I'm only kidding, that will never happen. All of our monies is spent on floods

Bdog · #**323** Posted **Apr 20, 2013, 2:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by original

Wow, look at that purposed interchange. Can we get some of that in MB please?

I'm only kidding, that will never happen. All of our monies is spent on floods

A systems interchange like the one in the picture would cost easily upwards of $140 - $150 M...

Shinook · #**324** Posted **Apr 20, 2013, 4:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by original

I'm only kidding, that will never happen. All of our monies is spent on floods

original · #**325** Posted **Apr 21, 2013, 12:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdog

A systems interchange like the one in the picture would cost easily upwards of $140 - $150 M...

Hey, that's peanuts for MB!
We're about to get a "flood" of infrastructure cash from the 1% PST hike!

original · #**326** Posted **Apr 21, 2013, 12:31 AM**

The puns are endless...

North_Regina_Boy · #**327** Posted **Apr 22, 2013, 3:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdog

A systems interchange like the one in the picture would cost easily upwards of $140 - $150 M...

If yea have read the totals for this project, they account for 2 of these systems interchanges.

If we don't get something like this there is no point to be doing this study. The better the initial infrastructure the better, build it right the first time!

djforsberg · #**328** Posted **Apr 22, 2013, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

If yea have read the totals for this project, they account for 2 of these systems interchanges.

If we don't get something like this there is no point to be doing this study. The better the initial infrastructure the better, build it right the first time!

So one on Highway 1 and the west by-pass, and another where? Highway 1 and the new SE bypass at Tower Road? Its going to be interesting to see how they are going to fit the service road in there as well.

North_Regina_Boy · #**329** Posted **Apr 22, 2013, 11:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by djforsberg

So one on Highway 1 and the west by-pass, and another where? Highway 1 and the new SE bypass at Tower Road? Its going to be interesting to see how they are going to fit the service road in there as well.

There are two be 2.5 actually. 3 at full build-out.

1 at RSB and #1 west side. One at Tower Road and #1 and there is to be a partial at #11 and the WRB. When the Circle is completed from Tower #1 north around IPSCO back to #11 the rest of the systems interchange there will occur.

As for now though only 1.5 will need to be constructed as there is already going to be a partial at #1 and the WRB.

Bdog · #**330** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

If yea have read the totals for this project, they account for 2 of these systems interchanges.

If we don't get something like this there is no point to be doing this study. The better the initial infrastructure the better, build it right the first time!

I guess it depends what type of systems interchanges they're planning. If it's for the type in the picture (which is likely unnecessary for traffic #s as they currently stand), it's easily $140 M + ... There are 10 bridges in that one interchange that they show...

brithgob · #**331** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 1:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdog

I guess it depends what type of systems interchanges they're planning. If it's for the type in the picture (which is likely unnecessary for traffic #s as they currently stand), it's easily $140 M + ... There are 10 bridges in that one interchange that they show...

These aren't being built because of current traffic numbers, but for the truck traffic to be generated by the GTH. I suspect it's current and prospective tenants dictating exactly what they want.

Treesplease · #**332** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 5:30 AM**

From what the engineers said at the open house I attended on the south bypass alignment, the reason for the systems interchange is same as the reason they can't just extend the bypass straight east on the current #1 to connect with tower road - the large/long trucks and the safety issues they pose. Two unit (or larger) trailer trucks need long distances to switch lanes. A clover leaf is dangerous enough for cars to weave in and out of never mind a multi-trailer truck - its a safety issue.
But yeah, the 10 bridge systems interchange seems excessvie.....it would seem there are cheaper 3 or 4 bridge alternatives out there - Los Angeles has good examples (that happen to carry a helluva lot more traffic)

North_Regina_Boy · #**333** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 4:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treesplease

From what the engineers said at the open house I attended on the south bypass alignment, the reason for the systems interchange is same as the reason they can't just extend the bypass straight east on the current #1 to connect with tower road - the large/long trucks and the safety issues they pose. Two unit (or larger) trailer trucks need long distances to switch lanes. A clover leaf is dangerous enough for cars to weave in and out of never mind a multi-trailer truck - its a safety issue.
But yeah, the 10 bridge systems interchange seems excessvie.....it would seem there are cheaper 3 or 4 bridge alternatives out there - Los Angeles has good examples (that happen to carry a helluva lot more traffic)

Yes this is all about safety and to some extent the need to free up trucks from Vic East.

The same reason they are going to build interchanges as a direct access to the hub and one at Dewdney. And I would assume that we would see one at 9th North when it does head up to highway 11.

sask1982 · #**334** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 6:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

Yes this is all about safety and to some extent the need to free up trucks from Vic East.

The same reason they are going to build interchanges as a direct access to the hub and one at Dewdney. And I would assume that we would see one at 9th North when it does head up to highway 11.

No immediate plans for interchange at 9th Ave N, is what I get from this PDF when it says "for future consideration".
http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/adx/as...ridor+Sign.pdf

Dougler306 · #**335** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 6:27 PM**

^^ Yes i would assume an interchange at 9th ave north and WRB won't happen for quit some time. You would think interchanges along 9th ave north would be built first> 9th and pasqua, then a bridge at McIntosh st (similar to dewdney interchange on ring road), and then still 2 more service interchanges, one at McCarthy, finally one at Courtney street. It will be a long time coming...

North_Regina_Boy · #**336** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 7:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dougler306

^^ Yes i would assume an interchange at 9th ave north and WRB won't happen for quit some time. You would think interchanges along 9th ave north would be built first> 9th and pasqua, then a bridge at McIntosh st (similar to dewdney interchange on ring road), and then still 2 more service interchanges, one at McCarthy, finally one at Courtney street. It will be a long time coming...

Yes it is coming, and with the 4-lane of 9th between McCarthy and Courtney it helps quite a bit. Looking forward to seeing the 100-150 long potash trains coming through the north-end CN Line after the K&S Legacy Mine opens

Stormer · #**337** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 8:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

Yes it is coming, and with the 4-lane of 9th between McCarthy and Courtney it helps quite a bit. Looking forward to seeing the 100-150 long potash trains coming through the north-end CN Line after the K&S Legacy Mine opens

I think the potash trains are a big unkown. K+S says they want to ship most of the potash through their to-be-constructed port near Vancouver. CN does not have a direct route to Vancouver from Regina. CN would probably go north through Saskatoon or more likely CP will build a spur to service the line from the CP mainline.

brithgob · #**338** Posted **Apr 23, 2013, 8:42 PM**

So in the context of "future consideration" what will be there when the bypass is first built? An overpass, do they cut off the existing road, or do they allow an at-grade intersection, which means the bypass won't be a true freeway?

Biff · #**339** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 1:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdog

I guess it depends what type of systems interchanges they're planning. If it's for the type in the picture (which is likely unnecessary for traffic #s as they currently stand), it's easily $140 M + ... There are 10 bridges in that one interchange that they show...

For budget comparison the planned Hwy 59 north and 101 north interchange here in Winnipeg has 7 new bridges and is estimated at $140 million.

Bdog · #**340** Posted **Apr 24, 2013, 4:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

For budget comparison the planned Hwy 59 north and 101 north interchange here in Winnipeg has 7 new bridges and is estimated at $140 million.

Very good point - which is why the total budget for the entire 20 km bypass seems unrealistic, when the budget itself would essentially be shot with two systems interchanges, without even including utility relocations, service interchanges, land acquisition, 20 km of 4 lane-divided construction, grading, ervice roads, etc. etc...