Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by WildCake

I do believe Biff was saying the reconstruction of the Perimeter roadways adds a significant cost to the project. Plus traffic management and detouring on the main thoroughfare etc...

That Niagara project looks like it was just a bridge construction. QEW wasn't rerouted or anything.

And the St Anne's interchange includes the rail overpass to the east, which will involve some form of temporary lanes of travel to accommodate the structure construction. So two structures, one being in the middle of the main highway.

I'm no expert though. Just tossing out factors that might justify a higher price, but how much higher, I don't know.

I agree it would increase the costs… but not by 100 million. You should look at what was built in Texas, the 360 interchange in Arlington, dozens and dozens of lanes, probably a dozen stacked bridges. Just a beast of an interchange…. 260 million. And we’re getting a diamond. For half that.

ITS CORRUPTION.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Hecate

I agree it would increase the costs… but not by 100 million. You should look at what was built in Texas, the 360 interchange in Arlington, dozens and dozens of lanes, probably a dozen stacked bridges. Just a beast of an interchange…. 260 million. And we’re getting a diamond. For half that.

ITS CORRUPTION.

Nice find Hecate. Here's the link. Note it's 2016 dollars. But even with an inflation adjustment of 31% and currency conversion it's still $425m CAD. MB would say it's worth $2b.

https://www.arlingtontx.gov/news/my_...groundbreaking

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by plrh

Placing dirt is several times more expensive in MB than in some provinces. That's why they placed all granular material for the St. Mary's project, and removed all of the clay.

I can understand gumbo at St Mary's, sitting 200m off the river. But at McGillivray and many of these other locations? Seems like a stretch.

Regardless, it's more reason to reuse existing roads as much as possible, since they've already compacted for decades. Take McGillivray. They're proposing ~9.5km of NEW 2 lane roads + access roads. Almost 10km!! Just to build an overpass. My design? Only needs 1.8km. They created 5x more work than needed.

Use what's there and stop building access roads to nowhere, then gumbo has no chance of creating an issue.

[Hockey]

Just to add to the perimeter cost conversation here, it is more than bridge constructions because there is an initial design as well as an ultimate design. The ultimate design is a 6 lane highway so there are road bases moving and median widenings to accommodate the ultimate design for traffic levels of the future.

The costs today are investments in the future and will only increase if they are delayed.

[bodaggin]

Here's Oak Bluff's access road extravaganza. Captioned. I just pointed out 6km of unneeded road and access construction.
Deleting them saves $20-25 million right off the hop.

[bodaggin]

McGillivray overpass land listed on MLS for $18.5m now. Clearly someone is speculating on the interchange build.

If I was MB Gov. I would buy this parcel now and rezone the half moon section for a major truck stop (Flying J, Buc-ee's, food, etc) as part of the overpass design. Then resell these lots to offset my $18m land costs. Maybe $10m or more could be recouped to save taxpayer money. (guessing)

The Headingley Flying J becomes obsolete when the Headingley bypass gets built. So a larger capacity Oak Bluff truck stop would fill that gap when Headingley goes "offline". Massive, truck-friendly acceleration lanes are already prebuilt using old SB Perimeter too. Three birds, one stone.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

McGillivray overpass land listed on MLS for $18.5m now. Clearly someone is speculating on the interchange build.

If I was MB Gov. I would buy this parcel now and rezone the half moon section for a major truck stop (Flying J, Buc-ee's, food, etc) as part of the overpass design. Then resell these lots to offset my $18m land costs. Maybe $10m or more could be recouped to save taxpayer money. (guessing)

The Headingley Flying J becomes obsolete when the Headingley bypass gets built. So a larger capacity Oak Bluff truck stop would fill that gap when Headingley goes "offline". Massive, truck-friendly acceleration lanes are already prebuilt using old SB Perimeter too. Three birds, one stone.

Good plan. I would love to have a Buc-ee's in Winnipeg

[bomberjet]

Shit send this to the Minister, Deputy Minister, adm, all the people at MTI. The plan with the Flying J is way better than what they have proposed.

[bodaggin]

I sent the first 2 to MTI Design before I saw the land for sale and had the truck stop idea. Doubt they'll even read it. Feel free to email it to them too. The more sources they hear from, the more prone they are to listen.

HighwayDesign@gov.mb.ca

I also messaged Bartley Kives to try and get some attention to these ongoing overpass fiascos. I pointed him to the insane $100m Carberry number being thrown around. He seemed obsessed with reading gov reports for sources, and not interested in comparables in other regions. Doubt he'll write, so feel free to poke him or other writers too.

The issue is deeper than Carberry, Oak Bluff, and St Mary's. Dumb, expensive decisions are being made on EVERY overpass they propose, as we keep pointing out. It's an Overpass Epidemic. Those involved need to feel the heat until it smartens up. Otherwise we'll have no money left for any overpasses. And we desperately need a lot of them.

[Mr Tall Forehead]

The province should move to acquire key properties before releasing design plans. That's realistically maybe $6-7 million of ag/commercial land but now the landowner is trying to sell it for more than double that.

[rivercity]

its been listed for 215 days

[biguc]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

McGillivray overpass land listed on MLS for $18.5m now. Clearly someone is speculating on the interchange build.

If I was MB Gov. I would buy this parcel now and rezone the half moon section for a major truck stop (Flying J, Buc-ee's, food, etc) as part of the overpass design. Then resell these lots to offset my $18m land costs. Maybe $10m or more could be recouped to save taxpayer money. (guessing)

The Headingley Flying J becomes obsolete when the Headingley bypass gets built. So a larger capacity Oak Bluff truck stop would fill that gap when Headingley goes "offline". Massive, truck-friendly acceleration lanes are already prebuilt using old SB Perimeter too. Three birds, one stone.

Good calls here. You could go one further and do this without any ramps at McGillivray. Just turn the existing highway into a service road with flyover access at each end to the Perimeter and a simple overpass for McGillivray.

Something similar would nicely sort Deacon's Corner.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by biguc

You could go one further and do this without any ramps at McGillivray. Just turn the existing highway into a service road with flyover access at each end to the Perimeter and a simple overpass for McGillivray.

Something similar would nicely sort Deacon's Corner.

Could you mock this up? I think I know what you're talking about but would like to see. Keep in mind you need about 250-350m of width for access ramps to get up to grade for the McGillivray bridge over Perimeter (and that's pushing it). The Petro, Esso, Enns may cause trouble here.

Has anyone driven WB/NB Perimeter here lately? How sharp are those corners? Do they even need realigning? I forget it. That plays into how land hungry the design gets too.

[bomberjet]

Use the Portage bypass as an analog. At the ends, well I guess just the east end, there is only a fly-over. I think this would require 3 bridges at Oak Bluff though.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

Could you mock this up? I think I know what you're talking about but would like to see. Keep in mind you need about 250-350m of width for access ramps to get up to grade for the McGillivray bridge over Perimeter (and that's pushing it). The Petro, Esso, Enns may cause trouble here.

Sure thing. Like this:

[Mr Tall Forehead]

Interesting ideas!

I would think with that design they would have to include a simple turning lane for traffic going west/north bound Perimeter to east bound McGillivray/PTH3 (rather than running traffic over two bridges). Would seem like an easy addition though.

[Carboy15]

One thing at McGillvary I am a bit frustrated about is that there is so much space allocated for the diamond interchange that is supposed to be built and they are just putting a diamond interchange there? In that space they could at least fit a Parclo or maybe even a full cloverleaf (or cloverstack). A diamond interchange is I guess better than nothing, but won't work in the long term.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

One thing at McGillvary I am a bit frustrated about is that there is so much space allocated for the diamond interchange

No kidding man. I measured roughly 100 acres for the interchange, ramps and the mile of fresh Hwy 2/3 only. Not including all the access roads or Perimeter straightening. It's absolutely ludicrous.

For perspective, the Portage/Perimeter cloverleaf is 32 acres. Or 42 acres including ALL buffers on all sides. For a low speed CLOVER.

[Carboy15]

https://imgur.com/a/a3pXURB

These are the interchange designs that could have been put there. Maybe for the future they could upgrade to one of those, but I hope they still keep the space allocated for the interchange. If they fill it up with houses and have no space for the future, then I wouldn't be surprised. That's Manitoba planning LOL.

P.S. Especially if they are connecting Abinoji Mikanah to there, those designs would make sense

Plus, this https://imgur.com/a/WdQFu2U could have been done right now rather than a full realignment, but the realignment has benefits too.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Carboy15

Plus, this https://imgur.com/a/WdQFu2U could have been done right now rather than a full realignment, but the realignment has benefits too.

This is the one. Bang on Carboy. I kept struggling to work around Enns Bros with a diamond, but parclo does it. With very minimal impact. Only absorbs parking lots from Esso/Petro (no buildings, less $$). That's all this intersection needs. Saves $100+ million vs the nonsense MTI proposed. Easily. Send'r in to the govt bean counters.