Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[cllew]

If there are no full or partial joint repairs required on PTH 100 I am not surprised that its moving along quickly.

City paving jobs usually require include some sort of full or partial joint repair for some reason.

That slows things down some while the concrete repair sets up before the mill and fill paving team starts.

[Reignman]

Guessing since the plan is to tear the existing highway up after the new lanes are constructed (sounds like possible start next year) they are not bothering with being meticulous...and therefore performing no required joint repairs. This should wrap up quickly.

[Reignman]

On another note...I was told by MIT that they are to be analyzing traffic data on the perimeter and to look at current traffic light timing sometime this summer. Here's hoping they come to their senses and increase the green cycles for perimiter traffic. Most busy intersections (St Mary's, St. Annes) have only a 45 second green cycle during peak traffic times which is woefully inadequate considering the perimieter is pretty much solid traffic during peak. Lineups at lights are often very long.

Outside of peak times the lights become fully actuated with a ridiculously short minimum green time for 100/101. Something like 13 seconds.

My opinion is any lights that have to be up should be timed with 1:30-2:00 green cycles for the perimeter. Any expressways I have seen in the U.S. (the few that actually have lights) are timed giving major priority to the dominant route. This constant stopping of high speed traffic is downright dangerous. Thoughts anyone? Do the green cycles need to be increased? And should these lights be fully actuated outside of peak times? Or should intersecting route traffic have to wait the full green cycle no matter the time of day and/or traffic on the perimeter?

[EastK]

Anyone know what the future plans are for the south perimeter? Are there any concrete plans to build interchanges and or expand to 3 lanes? That section between St Anne's and Brady Rd with the new Route 90 intersection is pretty bad.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Reignman

My opinion is any lights that have to be up should be timed with 1:30-2:00 green cycles for the perimeter. Any expressways I have seen in the U.S. (the few that actually have lights) are timed giving major priority to the dominant route. This constant stopping of high speed traffic is downright dangerous. Thoughts anyone? Do the green cycles need to be increased? And should these lights be fully actuated outside of peak times? Or should intersecting route traffic have to wait the full green cycle no matter the time of day and/or traffic on the perimeter?

The green cycles on the Perimeter are comically short... it almost feels like winning the lottery when you can pass by of those "prepare to stop" signs without the amber lights flashing.

I agree, in the US major routes with traffic lights tend to have much longer greens... makes more sense to do it that way as it seems much less dangerous, especially in the winter. That said, it could be an issue at an intersection like St. Mary's where there is a lot of traffic from the side street... the City might have to add room to stack cars waiting at a red, although that intersection really has outgrown traffic lights.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Reignman

My opinion is any lights that have to be up should be timed with 1:30-2:00 green cycles for the perimeter. Any expressways I have seen in the U.S. (the few that actually have lights) are timed giving major priority to the dominant route. This constant stopping of high speed traffic is downright dangerous. Thoughts anyone? Do the green cycles need to be increased? And should these lights be fully actuated outside of peak times? Or should intersecting route traffic have to wait the full green cycle no matter the time of day and/or traffic on the perimeter?

I think the lights on the Perimeter should be fully actuated giving priority to the Perimeter. There should be some form of an override switch though so if there is say a ten car lineup it adjusts the off peak balance to allow the other street to clear its backlog.

The other thing I would like to see happen is the timing of the lights on the Perimeter be fully synchronized. That would mean that once you are on the Perimeter if you drove near the speed limit all day without speeding you could drive continuously on the Perimeter without ever having another red light. Part of this could require the elimination of left turns during peak periods. Then at least we could get close to having a free flowing Perimeter.

In terms of planned interchange improvements on the Perimeter everything that has been announced as "planned" is west of Pembina and "east" of Wilkes.

[Reignman]

I agree esquire...St. Mary's/100 outgrew traffic lights a long time ago. And here's the stupid thing: during peak times PTH100 has a 45 second green every cycle....however the left turn/green cycle for St. Mary's and the following left turn cycle for perimeter traffic typically end up being a combined 45 seconds as well. Meaning the high-speed perimeter traffic is stopped just as much as it's flowing. Anybody with a functioning brain should be able to see that this arrangement is highly deficient and utterly dangerous, yet year after year it remains unchanged....as perimeter traffic counts continue to increase. I will never understand how people who are getting paid good government salaries to properly manage this traffic can't seem to get things right.

As for future interchanges along that route, they are all needed but I don't expect them to all happen at once. But until they (hopefully) do, the province needs to get it's act together and reconfigure things to let traffic flow. Re-time the lights giving the perimeter major priority. Cut off all gravel road access and eliminate all median crossings (which I hear is planned anyway). Cut off Waverley on the south side of 100 and route the Waverley traffic onto the already existing service road that runs up to where Kenaston meets 100 for access to perimeter. I honestly can't believe that wasn't done anyway. I shake my head every time I drive through there and think "only in Manitoba".

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by esquire

The green cycles on the Perimeter are comically short... it almost feels like winning the lottery when you can pass by of those "prepare to stop" signs without the amber lights flashing.

I agree, in the US major routes with traffic lights tend to have much longer greens... makes more sense to do it that way as it seems much less dangerous, especially in the winter. That said, it could be an issue at an intersection like St. Mary's where there is a lot of traffic from the side street... the City might have to add room to stack cars waiting at a red, although that intersection really has outgrown traffic lights.

I've always wondered how access to Maple Grove Park would be affected by a full interchange at St. Mary's and the Perimeter. Over the past decade, Maple Grove has really developed into a major City park - especially with all of the ultimate fields. It's also very popular with dog owners (and of course, football and rugby as it always has been). The current access is almost comical, but you're dealing with some obstacles (like the ridiculous angle of the intersection and the river, which is constantly eroding those banks).

I'd assume any interchange would require a re-alignment of St. Mary's to the east, to get closer to a 90 degree angle. Then maybe the throwaway St. Mary's (200 or 300 metres) could serve as the new access to Maple Grove?

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by Bdog

I've always wondered how access to Maple Grove Park would be affected by a full interchange at St. Mary's and the Perimeter. Over the past decade, Maple Grove has really developed into a major City park - especially with all of the ultimate fields. It's also very popular with dog owners (and of course, football and rugby as it always has been). The current access is almost comical, but you're dealing with some obstacles (like the ridiculous angle of the intersection and the river, which is constantly eroding those banks).

I'd assume any interchange would require a re-alignment of St. Mary's to the east, to get closer to a 90 degree angle. Then maybe the throwaway St. Mary's (200 or 300 metres) could serve as the new access to Maple Grove?

Can we add a bike lane/path down St. Mary's and into Maple Grove? That'd be so nice - biking there (for ultimate) is a little hairy at some spots.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Bdog

I've always wondered how access to Maple Grove Park would be affected by a full interchange at St. Mary's and the Perimeter. Over the past decade, Maple Grove has really developed into a major City park - especially with all of the ultimate fields. It's also very popular with dog owners (and of course, football and rugby as it always has been). The current access is almost comical, but you're dealing with some obstacles (like the ridiculous angle of the intersection and the river, which is constantly eroding those banks).

I'd assume any interchange would require a re-alignment of St. Mary's to the east, to get closer to a 90 degree angle. Then maybe the throwaway St. Mary's (200 or 300 metres) could serve as the new access to Maple Grove?

I have said this for some time now that these street intersections don't require massive interchanges. A larger diamond interchange would work just fine, and St Mary's and St Anne's don't need to be free flowing. With the Perimeter going over these streets there seems to be more than enough right of way to build even double lane on ramps.

Hopefully this province will figure out that a cloverleaf isn't the only style of grade separation possible.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

Hopefully this province will figure out that a cloverleaf isn't the only style of grade separation possible.

Well, MIT is going with a diamond at 100/2 (Manitoba's first, if you can believe it... are we the last North American state or province to get one, or is PEI still waiting too?) , even though that intersection between two busy highways arguably calls for something a bit more robust than that.

A diamond would be fine at St. Mary's although a parclo with SB/EB and EB/NB loops would be ideal.

[Reignman]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...ital-1.3068634

Our wonderful south perimeter is completely stopped for hours in one direction by a traffic accident...for the second time in about a week. Amazing nobody was seriously hurt.

[LilZebra]

Why are there so many vehicle crashes on the Perim. Hwy.?

[esquire]

Originally Posted by jimj_wpg

Why are there so many vehicle crashes on the Perim. Hwy.?

High speeds and traffic volumes, inadequate and outdated design.

The design standards of the Perimeter probably ceased being adequate sometime in the 80s.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by jimj_wpg

Why are there so many vehicle crashes on the Perim. Hwy.?

Poor designer on the Perimeter is a big piece as it has a nearly complete lack of acceleration (merge) and deceleration lanes. This forces traffic to slow drastically in the travelling lane as an exit approaches or enter a high speed lane well below the rate other vehicles are travelling at. The result of this is the Perimeter effectively has a single lane for traffic moving beyond the next immediate exit.

The design issues are compounded by driver education in Manitoba. With the near non-existence of proper road design proper merging and yielding are largely untaught to drivers. This is again compounded further when you have a large basis of urban living young drivers who can become fully licensed to drive anywhere at any time without any requirement to have completed any supervised driving or testing on high speed highway conditions.

Personally I will like to see Manitoba change its driver licensing to a four part system:

1. Written knowledge based exam.
2. Parallel Parking.
3. Urban setting road test.
4. Highway setting road test.

It would be ideal if the system could test both summer and winter driving styles but that may be too difficult.

To finish it off I would like to see every driver regardless of age, driving history and class level of license be required to fully pass the test every five years. Drivers would know well in advance when their retest before date was and could plan accordingly. The first test would be available at no charge however if the driver did not pass and required additional attempts each of those would be at the normal user fee rate. Anyone not passing before their expiry date would automatically drop to the lowest level of the Graduated License Program for new drivers (no passengers, no nighttime driving, no towing, no alcohol) and stay there for another six months before they became completely ineligible to drive without a qualified supervising driver. After six months at that stage if they cannot pass the written knowledge test which is also used to place brand new drivers into that stage they are fully suspended and must re-enter as a new driver. Anyone re-entering as a new driver would lose any drive safety rating above zero but fully maintain any negative rating.

[OverUnder]

That would be political suicide for any party to announce. There would be a solid majority against it.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by OverUnder

That would be political suicide for any party to announce. There would be a solid majority against it.

Might be good for rapid transit though.

[CoryB]

While my idea for driver licensing overhaul might not be popular it would go a long way to having safer drivers on our roads. Someone like the driver that drove their car into the Ultracuts and killed the young employee would end up being gated into a five year period and have a difficult time making it past that. It would also catch people of any age who have had changes in their health that should be surrendering their license. The retesting would also be a good refresher on how we all should drive even if we are "perfect" drivers.

[Wpg transit 163-1]

Originally Posted by CoryB

While my idea for driver licensing overhaul might not be popular it would go a long way to having safer drivers on our roads. Someone like the driver that drove their car into the Ultracuts and killed the young employee would end up being gated into a five year period and have a difficult time making it past that. It would also catch people of any age who have had changes in their health that should be surrendering their license. The retesting would also be a good refresher on how we all should drive even if we are "perfect" drivers.

I'm more in favour of mandatory testing for drivers 70 and older then i would be for all drivers.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by CoryB

While my idea for driver licensing overhaul might not be popular it would go a long way to having safer drivers on our roads. Someone like the driver that drove their car into the Ultracuts and killed the young employee would end up being gated into a five year period and have a difficult time making it past that. It would also catch people of any age who have had changes in their health that should be surrendering their license. The retesting would also be a good refresher on how we all should drive even if we are "perfect" drivers.

That person was caught driving with a suspended license... People like that will drive no matter what, legal or not. Forcing everyone to retest won't prevent much and will be a good way to piss people off and increase costs to the motor vehicles branch.