Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[esquire]

^ Were the 330 and Kenaston interchanges actually announced? I thought they were still in the concept stages.

[bomberjet]

They were both part of the McGillivray/Southwest Perimeter upgrade announcements. The Province is going to do the engineering for future interchanges as part of the McG/Perim. design. The Kenaston one will likely go ahead whenever the bypass does. The PR 330 one, who knows. It was shown as future on the design of the previous upgrade plan, which was taken down from MIT website recently. Likely because of the more recent announcements.

This was the previous design that was supposed to be completed already.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

They were both part of the McGillivray/Southwest Perimeter upgrade announcements. The Province is going to do the engineering for future interchanges as part of the McG/Perim. design. The Kenaston one will likely go ahead whenever the bypass does. The PR 330 one, who knows. It was shown as future on the design of the previous upgrade plan, which was taken down from MIT website recently. Likely because of the more recent announcements.

This was the previous design that was supposed to be completed already.

It pretty much is completed to a degree. They are almost done the Rt90 now and while building that they were installing the bases for the lights that will go at the LaSalle turnoff. The gravel road rehab is done on the north side already. I can promise you by winter the lights will be up.

What's stupid is that they did not realign Bradey road. It is a far more dangerous area IMO.

[alittle1]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

They were both part of the McGillivray/Southwest Perimeter upgrade announcements. The Province is going to do the engineering for future interchanges as part of the McG/Perim. design. The Kenaston one will likely go ahead whenever the bypass does. The PR 330 one, who knows. It was shown as future on the design of the previous upgrade plan, which was taken down from MIT website recently. Likely because of the more recent announcements.

This was the previous design that was supposed to be completed already.

Looks like some engineer didn't spend enough time in the sandbox!

[North_Regina_Boy]

More lights - Check
Increased traffic - Check
More delays - Check

Perfection by the Manitoba Highways Department in terms of alleviating traffic stress.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy

More lights - Check
Increased traffic - Check
More delays - Check

Perfection by the Manitoba Highways Department in terms of alleviating traffic stress.

Little do people know about MIT's subversive combat-sprawl-through-poor-highway-design tactics...

[njaohnt]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Because I like cars. Subsidizing roads makes my food cheaper so I have more money in my pocket to allow me to enjoy my hobbies and save more for retirement. Also so I can buy more, cooler and faster cars. And car parts.

This article explains how subsidized roads have destroyed public transportation in North America... I wonder what the city would look like if 90% of Winnipeggers were car-less... I wonder if having to take transit all the time would that bad if we had a full rapid transit system...
http://www.theurbancountry.com/2011/...iaries-of.html

The days of subsidizing roads being a good thing are over. The days of subsidizing transit are still here, but we're doing way too much of that. We are in the days when subsidizing AT paths is a good thing. If we would move on, and stop subsidizing roads, and only subsidize transit enough to keep the reduced fare at what they are, we would be closer to a walkable city, where cars don't eat up $8 to $16 thousand per year, plus all the subsidies. Car-less people subsidizing people with cars is not a good idea.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by njaohnt

If we would move on, and stop subsidizing roads, and only subsidize transit enough to keep the reduced fare at what they are, we would be closer to a walkable city,

And the transit buses will operate where, on the sidewalks?

This is a free country, we are free to decide how we move around, like it or not.

[biguc]

That doesn't mean you're entitled to any means to do so.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by biguc

That doesn't mean you're entitled to any means to do so.

Explain SVP.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by njaohnt

Car-less people subsidizing people with cars is not a good idea.

No different than car owners subsidizing transit when they don't use it.

[longfeather]

Originally Posted by njaohnt

The days of subsidizing roads being a good thing are over. The days of subsidizing transit are still here, but we're doing way too much of that. We are in the days when subsidizing AT paths is a good thing. If we would move on, and stop subsidizing roads, and only subsidize transit enough to keep the reduced fare at what they are, we would be closer to a walkable city, where cars don't eat up $8 to $16 thousand per year, plus all the subsidies. Car-less people subsidizing people with cars is not a good idea.

I assure you if you add up and average the taxes paid by drivers compared to the taxes paid by car-less transit users you will find that on average those without cars aren't 'subsidizing' anything

Never mind your magical buses that don't need roads, how do you expect your lights to stay on, your cell phone to keep working, and your Chinese goods to make it to walmart so you can take them home on the bus without roads? Everything about your life relies on roads whether you drive or not

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Explain SVP.

We're free to move around the country without our government impeding us. That doesn't mean they are obliged to provide us roads, airfare, mules, snowshoes, teleporters, monorails, sherpas, or any other means of easing our movement. Furthermore, "we are free to decide how we move around" is true as far as making the decision. I can decide to wear babies as slippers and march across this great land as much as I want. If I were to actually act on that decision, though, I'd end up in a lot of trouble. And I'd have to be an idiot to say that the government stopping me was a violation of my rights.

There are many good arguments for governments subsidising roads. Like you mentioned, roads are important for moving goods like food. You may want to make the case that moving people is as important as moving goods, but as long as roads are common goods, people commuting from point a to point b in personal vehicles will use up space and time on the roads, making moving goods on roads more expensive.

Since, by arguing that we have a right to use roads, you've ruled out making roads excludable goods, if we build road capacity without an equally or more efficient alternative means of personal transportation we are building for personal car use at the expense of conveying goods and indirectly subsidizing a lifestyle at the expense of your tax dollars and the cost of your food.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by longfeather

I assure you if you add up and average the taxes paid by drivers compared to the taxes paid by car-less transit users you will find that on average those without cars aren't 'subsidizing' anything

There is a finite amount of resources a government can use. Anything the government spends money on--or provides a tax break on--is subsidized at the expense of the rest of society.

We aren't talking about a transaction and government services aren't a basket of goods on sale to "taxpayers". It behoves us to ask our governments to spend money efficiently. Propping up a lifestyle that hinders the efficiency of activities like shipping and contracting that provide things we all value as fundamentally important economically (affordable food and housing) is a loss to all of us, in the end.

[bomberjet]

I noticed the Chief Peguis page on the Cities website was taken down. Morrison Herschfield was awarded the functional design for the extension to Route 90 for $1.128M. Could be an open house coming over the next couple months. Might be a bit early for that one though. But usually there's a reason for taking stuff down. Maybe it was just old.

Documents are filed here.

On a related note, there should be an open house for the Marion Widening project soon, with the selected option being presented. Info for that project is located here.

[njaohnt]

Our road system would be fine on $230 million per year(amount from gas tax). We spend $525 million per year on the roads in Manitoba. It would be better if we tripled gas tax, and collected ~$650 million in gas tax, then most problems would be solved.

A small amount (<0.1%) of Winnipeggers don't have a car, rarely take the bus, and walk almost everywhere. These people are subsidizing $50 million for the bus, and $200+ for the roads. People who don't have a car usually use their share of the transit subsidy, but they are paying $200+ million for roads, and only using $50 million of that for the transit subsidy. Yes buses use roads, but the transit fare should pay for gas tax on the buses, too.

[Riverman]

^ Sounds like it's time to buy a car and take advantage of all those subsidies! I have an old lady driven 2010 Pontiac G3 for sale if you are interested.

[The Unknown Poster]

Kenaston between Bishop and Perimeter opened yesterday. It's a nice drive. I didnt realise how much work has been done within Waverly West.

I also didnt realise they had made a "new" Bison drive as a significant cross street. I assume the plan is to connect the new Bison and existing Bison? probably using Cadboro? i recall there was a plan to rebuild the intersection of Waverly/Bison...is that still in the works? Timeframe?

Is there a plan to rebuild Brady? It's a crater-filled disaster right now but looks to be a side street once Waverly (and maybe Bison) connect to it...?

[njaohnt]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Kenaston between Bishop and Perimeter opened yesterday. It's a nice drive. I didnt realise how much work has been done within Waverly West.

Yes, a lot of work and waste. They don't reuse anything when they build those houses. Massive amounts of wood are being wasted. I know someone who goes there whenever he needs wood.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Kenaston between Bishop and Perimeter opened yesterday. It's a nice drive. I didnt realise how much work has been done within Waverly West.

I also didnt realise they had made a "new" Bison drive as a significant cross street. I assume the plan is to connect the new Bison and existing Bison? probably using Cadboro? i recall there was a plan to rebuild the intersection of Waverly/Bison...is that still in the works? Timeframe?

Is there a plan to rebuild Brady? It's a crater-filled disaster right now but looks to be a side street once Waverly (and maybe Bison) connect to it...?

The bison connection will follow the exact southern edge of bridgwater forest; from 0 to 150 metres north of cadboro. It will not be completed until the development of the bridgwater southeast neighbourhood. My guess is 5-10 years away. The reconstruction of bison and waverley will be a big mess.