New Interchanges and Bypasses in MB / SK

[North_Regina_Boy]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

This is an e-mail I've just sent to MIT minister Steve Ashton. I encourage you all to do the same and tell others as well. Nothing will change unless we as a society reach out to the leaders and make our views known. They probably already know all this I would hope. But without public pressure, nothing will happen.


Mr. Minister,

With all do respect, the current state of the Perimeter Highway is appalling.

Unfortunately this morning, another citizen of the Province of Manitoba has lost their life while travelling on this extremely dangerous and inconsistent highway. When will the Province truly invest in bringing this busy and important highway up to modern day standards?

The lack of consistency is the most pressing issue in my eyes. I understand that it will require in the billions of dollars to complete the Perimeter as a true expressway. At the site of this morning’s accident, there is some form of a merge lane present. At many locations there are no merge lanes, other locations have full merge lanes. This inconsistency leaves motorists guessing and creates dangerous driving conditions for all.

What should happen, as was the original plan for the Perimeter Highway, is create a true limited access roadway with interchanges and fly-overs. As mentioned, I and all residents understand this goal will only be reached with an enormous and planned investment by the province.

What is the status of the PTH 59N and PTH 101 interchange completion? Another extremely dangerous location that continues to operate. The answer that it was put on hold due to flooding costs is completely unacceptable. I understand the Province has limited resources in terms of budget. However, continuing to turn a blind eye on locations of this magnitude is unacceptable. It seems there is no real drive by yourself, as the Minister responsible for transportation, to see these project completed.

The south Perimeter Highway is down right dangerous. I am aware there are plans to eliminate some median openings and install a new set of traffic lights at PR 330. This is an admirable step in the right direction. However, the future plan for an interchange at that location is likely decades off. With the impending construction of the Kenaston Boulevard extension and addition of traffic lights at that location, I am afraid yet another unsafe intersection will be the location of future fatalities. No matter how modern the traffic lights and design are, it is still an at grade intersection.

When will the Province stand up for its citizens and do the right thing? There should be no new traffic lights installed on the Perimeter. The developers of Waverley West should be held responsible for the cost of the new interchange at Kenaston. Now the lives of citizens will be put at risk due to the political unwillingness of the Manitoba government to do the right thing.

In closing, Mr. Minister. The citizens of Manitoba, including myself, are extremely angry and disappointed that this apparent lack of disregard for human life continues. When will the Province make the right decisions and create a safe environment to travel? Not only for the citizens of Manitoba, but visitors to our province on business and pleasure. Money is no excuse, Mr. Minister. I am holding you personally responsible to bring this roadway into modern times. After all, this is what you are getting paid to do. To keep the best interests of the citizens at top of mind.


We'll see if I get a response.

Very nicely written, I should write one from here (Saskatchewan) and let him know that people outside of Manitoba are looking, and scrutinizing current / future planning. As a means of determining future residency or vacations.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by esquire

This is why Winnipeggers have a reputation for stopping in yield lanes

You're supposed to any time that you don't have a clear entry onto the next street, merge lane or no.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

You're supposed to any time that you don't have a clear entry onto the next street, merge lane or no.

Nice to see you posting again here jmt! Been awhile no?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

You're supposed to any time that you don't have a clear entry onto the next street, merge lane or no.

You have to stop only if necessary... the yield sign doesn't require drivers to stop unless they have to in order to yield right of way. If there is a merge lane and you can safely enter the traffic lanes out of a turn, you don't have to stop!

[original]

Originally Posted by esquire

You have to stop only if necessary... the yield sign doesn't require drivers to stop unless they have to in order to yield right of way. If there is a merge lane and you can safely enter the traffic lanes out of a turn, you don't have to stop!

You check to see if you have room to merge, speed up, attempt to join the flow of traffic. Unfortunately, most merge lanes are way too short for this. Even then, sometimes people on the right lane refused to let me in.

Merging off a cloverleaf on the perimeter usually works ok, most people move over to the left lane and let you in. However, on slower roads such as CP Trail, most people don't allow you to merge. They ether don't move left, or they speed up so you can't get in. Winnipeg drivers...

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by original

You know what bothers me about this emoticon..no matter if you agree or disagree with a posters opinion, it's a free pass to say your an idiot or moron...etc...

You expressed your opinion and than added this, your just why, even if you disagree with a poster or label the majority as such?

Edit: Although I have experienced some of what you mention...

Highway Traffic Act
"yield sign" means a sign requiring the driver of a vehicle facing it to yield the right-of-way to traffic of an intersecting or connecting highway.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Cyrodill

Highway Traffic Act
"yield sign" means a sign requiring the driver of a vehicle facing it to yield the right-of-way to traffic of an intersecting or connecting highway.

The problem here could be a lack of signage then as every interchange I can think of on the Perimeter with the possible exception of the McPhillips one, does not have yield signs or proper length to their merge lanes.

[macblaze]

Originally Posted by original

don't move left, or they speed up so you can't get in. Winnipeg drivers...

It's the same thing here in Regina and maybe all of Sask , don't want to let you in and will speed up to make sure that you are not allowed in. Maybe it a small town thing since lot of people from Sask or MB come from small towns not really sure but when you go to larger center like Toronto or Vancouver you don't see that as much.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by macblaze

It's the same thing here in Regina and maybe all of Sask , don't want to let you in and will speed up to make sure that you are not allowed in. Maybe it a small town thing since lot of people from Sask or MB come from small towns not really sure but when you go to larger center like Toronto or Vancouver you don't see that as much.

Personally, maybe the minority here, I have found that drivers let me merge with ease?..and I return the favour by allowing those at yield intersections or construction ahead lanes to come on into my lane infront of me. Could be the drivers mindset and how they deal with situations. I drove in a work capacity for ever and was always relaxed, even when I didn't have my over head flashing lights on..

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by esquire

You have to stop only if necessary... the yield sign doesn't require drivers to stop unless they have to in order to yield right of way.

I think that's what I said...

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Nice to see you posting again here jmt! Been awhile no?

I come here from time to time...I was busy with a girl, but, she found someone new and didn't bother to tell me so...expect to see more of me

[esquire]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I think that's what I said...

Huh? The issue isn't that Winnipeggers stop at yield lanes when they have to, it's that they have a reputation for stopping when they don't have to.

[jmt18325]

I thought he was under the mistaken impression that you enter a merge lane when you don't have a clear entry to the next street...that was what I was trying to clear up.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by esquire

The city is wildly inconsistent with its approach to proper merge lanes. They generally don't exist, but then they turn up in places that you wouldn't necessarily expect them. It also doesn't do a good job of signing them to make their presence known.

This is why Winnipeggers have a reputation for stopping in yield lanes - people unfamiliar with a specific intersection will generally make the safe assumption that there is no merge lane and come to a stop.

Slowly, the city are either replacing the yield signs with merge signs, or installing new merge signs where there should be with merge lanes.

It's 50/50 that both the city and drivers of Winnipeg are causing this issue. Go back a couple years ago, and you will see yield signs with or without merging lanes, or lanes where there are merging to the main road without a merge sign, and drivers will think that they need to "yield" before proceeding.

Then you have the drivers who don't allow anybody into the fast lane by either not switching to the left lane, or speeding up to prevent them from entering. That exacerbates the issue even further, which is why I feel that drivers "revert" to yielding, despite the fact that the driver should be merging.

It's frustrating on so many levels! If any of us Manitobans did this in the States, we would have a string of angry local motorists wanting us to go back to Canuckistan, because of our socialist and non-conforming driving style. It's ridiculous!

[original]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

If any of us Manitobans did this in the States, we would have a string of angry local motorists wanting us to go back to Canuckistan, because of our socialist and non-conforming driving style. It's ridiculous!

This.
I got honked at for not accelerating fast enough when I merged onto i35w in Minneapolis.

Originally Posted by Cyrodill

You know what bothers me about this emoticon..no matter if you agree or disagree with a posters opinion, it's a free pass to say your an idiot or moron...etc...

You expressed your opinion and than added this, your just why, even if you disagree with a poster or label the majority as such?

Edit: Although I have experienced some of what you mention...

Highway Traffic Act
"yield sign" means a sign requiring the driver of a vehicle facing it to yield the right-of-way to traffic of an intersecting or connecting highway.

What is the point of this post?
Most MB drivers suck. Plain and simple.

[yellowghost]

Food for thought. The city clearly cannot afford proper expressways OR it's citizens would not accept a tax hike that be required to pay for the construction. Now... how about the possibility of a toll freeway. I know they are in use all over the world. The argument against:"what the hell..I have to pay to use it..I pay my taxes..I pay this, I pay that.." bla bla bla.The argument for: you can get from one side of the city to the other in under 40 minutes...10-15 minutes to get downtown, which saves time. Better fuel economy, which saves money.Less wear and tear on the vehicle, which saves money. What you guys think?

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by yellowghost

Food for thought. The city clearly cannot afford proper expressways OR it's citizens would not accept a tax hike that be required to pay for the construction. Now... how about the possibility of a toll freeway. I know they are in use all over the world. The argument against:"what the hell..I have to pay to use it..I pay my taxes..I pay this, I pay that.." bla bla bla.The argument for: you can get from one side of the city to the other in under 40 minutes...10-15 minutes to get downtown, which saves time. Better fuel economy, which saves money.Less wear and tear on the vehicle, which saves money. What you guys think?

Other than the future proposed connection of Dugald Rd to Goulet, I really don't see any somewhat realistic scenarios left for a freeway into downtown. I would however, totally support the idea of paying a toll if it meant completion of free flowing inner city beltway. This is what I envision for the first two legs (north and south) of inner beltway:

Bishop Grandin Blvd:

• cloverleaf/cloverstack @ Fermor/Plessis
• diamond @ Lagimodiere
• cut the four residential roads between Lag and St. Annes
• diamond @ St. Annes
• flyover @ Dakota
• diamond @ St. Marys
• cut River
• diamond @ Waverley
• cloverleaf/cloverstack @ Kenaston

Chief Peguis Trail:

• interchange @ Ed Schreyer (unsure if plan is for Ed Schreyer to continue north of CPT)
• diamond @ Lagimodiere
• flyover @ Gateway
• diamond @ Henderson
• diamond @ Main
• diamond @ McPhillips
• cloverleaf/cloverstack @ Route 90

Obviously an enormous investment and we can safely say this will never happen. Just dreaming!

[CoryB]

I think the idea of toll roads could work but the bigger issue is the land that would be needed for it to happen. Changing existing roads to a pay-per-use (toll) model would be a non-starter.

[bomberjet]

Looks like the contractor is mobilizing for the Kenaston/Bishop fly-over. Site office trailers there now, with what looked like a pile driver.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Looks like the contractor is mobilizing for the Kenaston/Bishop fly-over. Site office trailers there now, with what looked like a pile driver.

What exactly are they building there? A simple Kenaston flyover of Bishop?