New Interchanges and Bypasses in MB / SK

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

Thanks for feeling my pain Esquire. I have grown a major hatred towards Lagimodiere that only started about 5 years ago. The stretch between Marion and Dugald is about the biggest gong show of a road I have ever seen.

The line-ups at the north Perimeter (north-bound) are outrageous almost every evening...frequently extending south past McIvor Ave. It has really degenerated from an almost expressway like roadway into something to be avoided.

I'm not often in that neck of the woods, but I have learned that Lagimodiere between Marion and Dugald is best avoided unless I want dramatically elevated blood pressure. I don't understand why that short stretch is like molasses, but it's clear that the road is way over capacity there.

I remember the days when Lagimodiere was much freer-flowing than it is now and when there were fewer signalized intersections as well. In some ways it's very similar to the experience with Kenaston - when I was a university student in the 90s I used to barrel down Kenaston to the U of M making great time. Now, during rush hour, Kenaston (also still only 2 lanes despite explosive suburban growth in SW Winnipeg) is barely different than your average city arterial.

Even though Winnipeg never had freeways we sort of got by with the quasi-expressways like Lagimodiere and Kenaston for cross-town traffic, but Biff's right - even those are deteriorating to the point where they barely function that way anymore.

[bomberjet]

Marion is to be closed, made a right in/right out thing whenever the Marion Goulet connection goes forward. The RFP for functional design closed a couple months back. Didn't ever hear who got that contract. It's in the short term range on the Cities planning list. Will it include an overpass at Dugald and Lag, I doubt it. But here's hoping!

So theoretically:
Marion is closed.
Overpass at Dugald of some sort (diamond?).
Somehow close Warman just south of the CN overpass.
Diamond at Regent.
Diamond at Reenders.
Close Almey.
Diamond at Grassie.
Stack at CPT.
Close Springfield and reroute to diamond at possibly McIvor or to Headmaster(might be a stretch.)
Diamond at Headmaster.
Compete Perimeter cloverleaf/fly-over (planned).
Diamond at PR 202 (potentially included with the above).

Freeway from Symington yard to the floodway. Cost anbody? $500M just for the overpasses, never mind the road works in between.

[northern_hoser]

Originally Posted by Biff

I think I showed this before, my idea of what to do at Regent & Lag. My only question is how to connect to Almey properly (because I am no civil engineer)

Thanks Biff. I thought I saw it on here.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Marion is to be closed, made a right in/right out thing whenever the Marion Goulet connection goes forward. The RFP for functional design closed a couple months back. Didn't ever hear who got that contract. It's in the short term range on the Cities planning list. Will it include an overpass at Dugald and Lag, I doubt it. But here's hoping!

So theoretically:
Marion is closed.
Overpass at Dugald of some sort (diamond?).
Somehow close Warman just south of the CN overpass.
Diamond at Regent.
Diamond at Reenders.
Close Almey.
Diamond at Grassie.
Stack at CPT.
Close Springfield and reroute to diamond at possibly McIvor or to Headmaster(might be a stretch.)
Diamond at Headmaster.
Compete Perimeter cloverleaf/fly-over (planned).
Diamond at PR 202 (potentially included with the above).

Freeway from Symington yard to the floodway. Cost anbody? $500M just for the overpasses, never mind the road works in between.

That sounds fantastic...can't see most of that happening in our lifetimes but we can always dream.

Question on the Marion/Goulet connection. Is a grade separation at Archibald and the adjacent rail line part of this plan?

As for a Dugald/lag diamond..this would seem more possible due to the current existence of the eastern ramp in the form of the rail overpass.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by harls

If (ever) the province decides to make some sort of interchange at the Perimeter with hwy 2 and 3, what's going to happen with that Petro-Can/Humpty's place.. will they have to be expropriated? No big loss as their pancakes suck.

I would close the access from 2 entirely.. feed it into the new 3/perimeter interchange.

I am not the expert here but seems to be enough land south of Humpty's to just leave them in place, the west side of the intersection could be the bigger problem in and interchange here. I am not fully aware of the traffic patterns but might it be possible to make Hwy 3/McGillvary a "left only" over pass and Hwy 2 a full interchange instead?

Originally Posted by Reignman

This. Couldn't agree more Cory. I understand everybody wants direct, easy access from residential areas to these "expressways". However if streets like Lag, Bishop are to ever truly function as intended it will take compromise by residents and the political will to see these infrastructure improvements through. The latter seems to be the toughest part!

I really like Biffs idea for Lag...would be a huge improvement over the current mess. Next up would be what to do with the Grassie/Springfield/CPT nightmare. Honestly with CPT now open I can't believe Springfield @ Lag is still a signalized intersection. Is the plan to cut Springfield access eventually?

Thre reality everyone needs to face is if you give up the shortest access path (ie Almey @ Lag, River @ Bishop) in trade of the expressways being able to move traffic faster the overall impact to your total compute team should be minimal. It is the same idea with every small crossing on the Perimeter, elminating a lot of them would make the Perimeter safer for everyone including the handful of people each closing inconviences.

As for Grassie/Springfied/CPT start with a full interchange at CPT then make Grassie and Springfield both left only no overpass routing the traffic through the CPT/Lag interchange if they need to left turn or cross over. The side effect there being that traffic that does not need to be on collector streets (Grassie/Springfield) would be strongly encouraged to use the expressway.

I too am shocked that Springfield is still a signaled intersection. I suspect the businesses on the eastern portion of Springfield pushed strongly to keep that access. I really wish they would close the Springfield closing completely with traffic for south bound Lag needing left turn access to Springfield being able to to it at McIvor and then use and access road east of Lag to get to Springfield. Not a perfect solution but solves the issue with the near useless light so close to CPT.

Originally Posted by esquire

Apart from the interchange issue though, I can't believe that Lag is still only 4 lanes the way it was in the 70s. How has there not been any discussion about turning it into a 6 lane road? The congestion between Marion and the north Perimeter is so bad it makes me feel sorry for anyone who has to contend with that every day.

I think the existing grade seperations are exactly why Lag has not been expanded. The Perimeter overpass, the rail overpass south of Lag, the bridge under the CN line south of Marrion and the overpass at the south Perimeter all can only handle four lanes. If you increase the number of lanes between those points you are just creating choke points. The only real hope is having really long exit/merge lanes between the choke points to seperate out the through traffic to try and get it flowing better.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm not often in that neck of the woods, but I have learned that Lagimodiere between Marion and Dugald is best avoided unless I want dramatically elevated blood pressure. I don't understand why that short stretch is like molasses, but it's clear that the road is way over capacity there.

My experience is that the light cycle at Dugald/Lag is much too short for the Lag traffic. The light is turning amber once the 10th car back in the lineup is starting to move. Lag has far heavier traffic than Dugald does yet the green light cycles both directions do not reflect this.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Question on the Marion/Goulet connection. Is a grade separation at Archibald and the adjacent rail line part of this plan?

Yes, there will be. That's where the bulk of the money will be spent on that project. Similar to the Disraeli overpassing Point Douglas. This one will be really interesting seeing as how the plan is to demolish all the houses on Doucet Ave. west of Archibald. Again, the functional design is out, but who knows how long it will be until construction. 5 years, 10 years, never?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Reignman

My experience is that the light cycle at Dugald/Lag is much too short for the Lag traffic. The light is turning amber once the 10th car back in the lineup is starting to move. Lag has far heavier traffic than Dugald does yet the green light cycles both directions do not reflect this.

That's a very likely explanation. This situation is endemic throughout Winnipeg... there are a lot of intersections that have ludicrously short green lights, or ludicrously short left-turn arrows. The end result is you have dozens of cars stacked up on major arterials because hardly anyone can get through on a green. In the winter when streets are icy, traffic barely starts moving before lights turn red again.

I find that in many US cities that I've driven in, secondary streets tend to have long red lights while the major streets have long greens.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Marion is to be closed, made a right in/right out thing whenever the Marion Goulet connection goes forward. The RFP for functional design closed a couple months back. Didn't ever hear who got that contract.

MMM Group has been awarded the Functional Design.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by esquire

That's a very likely explanation. This situation is endemic throughout Winnipeg... there are a lot of intersections that have ludicrously short green lights, or ludicrously short left-turn arrows. The end result is you have dozens of cars stacked up on major arterials because hardly anyone can get through on a green. In the winter when streets are icy, traffic barely starts moving before lights turn red again.

I find that in many US cities that I've driven in, secondary streets tend to have long red lights while the major streets have long greens.

It really is. And sadly, the city seems in no hurry to improve these situations. I emailed the city months back about light cycle at Pembina and Plaza Dr. During evening rush hour, Plaza has green light just as long as Pembina does, cars sometimes are lined up all the way north to Chevrier. It's ridiculous. Their response at the time? Basically, they said they need to hear more complaints about it before anything will be done. I actually received a voice message two months or so back, from councillors office stating that they investigated my complaint and agreed with my assessment. Was told changing the cycle has been deemed a priority. As of last night, this cycle is still the same.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Biff

MMM Group has been awarded the Functional Design.

Cool, thanks. They did the PTH 59N/PTH 101 re-functional design update.

[morty]

Originally Posted by Reignman

It really is. And sadly, the city seems in no hurry to improve these situations. I emailed the city months back about light cycle at Pembina and Plaza Dr. During evening rush hour, Plaza has green light just as long as Pembina does, cars sometimes are lined up all the way north to Chevrier. It's ridiculous. Their response at the time? Basically, they said they need to hear more complaints about it before anything will be done. I actually received a voice message two months or so back, from councillors office stating that they investigated my complaint and agreed with my assessment. Was told changing the cycle has been deemed a priority. As of last night, this cycle is still the same.

Funny... I recently called 311 to complain about the same issue, but they told me the city was already aware of the issue. Nothing about noting my complaint. Pembina and Point/Windermere going northbound during the afternoon is pretty bad as well.

[cslusarc]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The speed limit was reduced last year from 80 km/h to 70 km/h through the intersection.

The 70 km/h speed limit between the Concordia overpass and the CN Mainline overpass on Lagemodiere Blvd has been there for a good decade now, if not longer. I don't remember exactly when the speed limit was changed but its been at least a decade now.

[CoryB]

I think the 70 km/h section on Lag has been there about as long as the Rona, maybe even going to when Almey crossed Lag and connected to to Panet.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by morty

Funny... I recently called 311 to complain about the same issue, but they told me the city was already aware of the issue. Nothing about noting my complaint. Pembina and Point/Windermere going northbound during the afternoon is pretty bad as well.

Morty, it's good to know I'm not the only one who noticed this. I find it amazing how Plaza has a longer green left turn arrow than Bishop has a left turn arrow onto southbound Pembina. Really now, who actually programmed this in the first place?

My opinion is that a city that refuses to invest in grade separations should at least synchronize and properly time the lights erected in their stead. Lagimodiere as mentioned is a complete mess. Pembina. Kenastop. Northbound Lag at Fermor. Traffic on eastbound Bishop often backed up from St. Annes to almost Dakota during rush hour. The list goes on. Is there anybody at Public Works whose job is to actually monitor this stuff? Or do they just wait for residents to point these issues out?

[bomberjet]

Really? I've never ever noticed it was 70 km/h through there until they put up the new signs. I've been speeding for a long time then!

[bomberjet]

http://www.manitobacapitalregion.ca/...s-June2013.pdf

Manitoba capital region transportation master plan. Kind of a more generic one than Winnipeg's. But includes the St. Norbert and Headingley Bypass.

Also talks about a new Oakbank Corridor that lines up with the future Chief Peguis Trail east extension. Instead of trying to widen Dugald and deal with that 3 lane Floodway bridge. Of course a new one would need to be built.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

http://www.manitobacapitalregion.ca/...s-June2013.pdf

Manitoba capital region transportation master plan. Kind of a more generic one than Winnipeg's. But includes the St. Norbert and Headingley Bypass.

Also talks about a new Oakbank Corridor that lines up with the future Chief Peguis Trail east extension. Instead of trying to widen Dugald and deal with that 3 lane Floodway bridge. Of course a new one would need to be built.

Any word if any or all of these are considered near term projects? My concern is that these may just end up being another two sets of lights on the Perimiter!

One thing I don't understand regarding the Oakbank corridor...instead of adding a fourth lane to the Dugald Floodway bridge from the start, buying out a few properties on Dugald between Plessis and Perimeter, and twinning that existing roadway up to 206...the province feels it's better to construct a brand new corridor with a new Floodway span and add yet another (likely at grade) intersection on the Perimeter?

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Really? I've never ever noticed it was 70 km/h through there until they put up the new signs. I've been speeding for a long time then!

Likewise, it's only in the last year that I noticed the sign. On another note it's pretty pathetic what became of Lag., from a high speed corridor to a road now riddled with traffic lights, congestion, rutted gravel shoulders, unkempt medians....

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Any word if any or all of these are considered near term projects? My concern is that these may just end up being another two sets of lights on the Perimiter!

One thing I don't understand regarding the Oakbank corridor...instead of adding a fourth lane to the Dugald Floodway bridge from the start, buying out a few properties on Dugald between Plessis and Perimeter, and twinning that existing roadway up to 206...the province feels it's better to construct a brand new corridor with a new Floodway span and add yet another (likely at grade) intersection on the Perimeter?

If the new Oakbank corridor is basically a east extension of Cheif Peagus as the document suggests this definitely makes sense as there will almost certinaly be an interchange at the Perimeter. Something to keep in mind is that the corridor would effectively be adding four lanes to Dugald. The corridor would also likkely benefit points further east like Anola as traffic could be shifted to the corridor. There has been talk about that corridor for 20+ years now and with the priority for Cheif Peagus being completing the west exention first this is still a good ways off.

The Headingley by-pass already as their interchange build as part of the CentrePort road work. It really feels odd that they built a mass interchange and the road (CentrePort Canada Way) just stops at the Perimeter currently. I really think the Headingley by-pass is a real near term project.

The St Norbert by-pass looks like it is being planned to share a future interchange with Waverly. The interesting piece here that I did not see coming is that this would actually play into the CentrePort road infrastructure by helping improve the flow of traffic for CentrePort to points south of Winnipeg include the USA. This slight hat tip suggests that all at-grade intersections between Portage and Pembina on the Perimeter are nearer term priorities for grade seperation that ones outside of that with the possible exception being HWY 6.