Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg - Page 76

Hockey · #**1501** Posted **Aug 19, 2017, 1:28 AM**

Is there any wiggle room in he RFP for the south perimeter re design to actually re route the highway? In other words, could the 2- year study propose an alternative route closer to the urban areas in SW Winnipeg.

Kinguni · #**1502** Posted **Aug 19, 2017, 1:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey

Is there any wiggle room in he RFP for the south perimeter re design to actually re route the highway? In other words, could the 2- year study propose an alternative route closer to the urban areas in SE winnipeg.

The city is already built out. Alternative would be bringing the inner ring up to high capacity freeway standards.

Bluenote · #**1503** Posted **Aug 19, 2017, 11:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey

Is there any wiggle room in he RFP for the south perimeter re design to actually re route the highway? In other words, could the 2- year study propose an alternative route closer to the urban areas in SE winnipeg.

There is nothing wrong with the SE perimeter. It's 59 Hwy west that needs extreme help.

Jets4Life · #**1504** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 12:07 AM**

I still cannot believe the Government has not done anything about #59 north and the Perimeter. I thought they would have built a cloverleaf 10 years ago.

WildCake · #**1505** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 12:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey

Is there any wiggle room in he RFP for the south perimeter re design to actually re route the highway? In other words, could the 2- year study propose an alternative route closer to the urban areas in SE winnipeg.

Where would this route run? SE Winnipeg is going to be serviced by the eventual extension of Bishop Grandin and link up with Plessis (or some road in that region). It wouldn't make sense to reroute Perimeter out that way.

Similarly, advocating for SW perimeter to cut in closer to "developped Winnipeg" neglects the fact that Winnipeg will spread out to that portion of the perimeter eventually, and that Bishop will be extended West to connect with a southern extension of ed schreyer parkway. The tentative inner beltway in the city will generally be within 2.5 - 5 km of perimeter which seems to be appropriate for the city's needs

Reignman · #**1506** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 12:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

I still cannot believe the Government has not done anything about #59 north and the Perimeter. I thought they would have built a cloverleaf 10 years ago.

Take a spin out that way sometime...you may be a little surprised!

Jets4Life · #**1507** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 12:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reignman

Take a spin out that way sometime...you may be a little surprised!

They finally finished it?

jmt18325 · #**1508** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 12:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

They finally finished it?

The interchange has been under construction for two years now.

The Jabroni · #**1509** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 5:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

I still cannot believe the Government has not done anything about #59 north and the Perimeter. I thought they would have built a cloverleaf 10 years ago.

Bro...

...it's been under construction for nearly two years now.

As Reignman and jmt mentioned earlier, take a drive out around that section. It's a massive project!

Jets4Life · #**1510** Posted **Aug 20, 2017, 6:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Bro...

...it's been under construction for nearly two years now.

As Reignman and jmt mentioned earlier, take a drive out around that section. It's a massive project!

I do not live in Winnipeg.

Biff · #**1511** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 4:26 PM**

I have to say, after reading through the South Perimeter RFP it is very comprehensive on what they want. It covers every little intersection and involves 22 redeveloped and new interchange structures making it a complete, true freeway. I can't see that they missed anything. It will be interesting to see how/if it is implemented. They even want to get started on parts while the study could still be underway.

jmt18325 · #**1512** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 4:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

I have to say, after reading through the South Perimeter RFP it is very comprehensive on what they want. It covers every little intersection and involves 22 redeveloped and new interchange structures making it a complete, true freeway. I can't see that they missed anything. It will be interesting to see how/if it is implemented. They even want to get started on parts while the study could still be underway.

Could the upcoming intersection improvements to 2 from 3 - 100 be part of that early start?

Winnipeg Grump · #**1513** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 5:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

Where would this route run? SE Winnipeg is going to be serviced by the eventual extension of Bishop Grandin and link up with Plessis (or some road in that region). It wouldn't make sense to reroute Perimeter out that way.

Similarly, advocating for SW perimeter to cut in closer to "developped Winnipeg" neglects the fact that Winnipeg will spread out to that portion of the perimeter eventually, and that Bishop will be extended West to connect with a southern extension of ed schreyer parkway. The tentative inner beltway in the city will generally be within 2.5 - 5 km of perimeter which seems to be appropriate for the city's needs

Ed Schreyer Parkway is to connect Regent and Plessis. You're referencing the southern extension of the William R. Clement Parkway that is meant to go from Grant to Wilkes, and then from there to McGillivray Blvd. and eventually Bishop.

Ol' Bill's bones be spinnin' right now hearing him equated with a Dipper Premier!

BTW - the timeline for the WRCP Extension has been extended and there will be new meetings/consultations with the stakeholders and public this fall.

Was a bit confused reading this on the city's site:
"Phase I - Shorter-term

The recommended road network includes the extension of WRCP from Grant Avenue to a signalized intersection with the extension of SLP.
Phase II* - Longer-term

Future extension of WRCP from SLP to McGillivray Boulevard."

The Open House drawings showed a grade-separated intersection at Wilkes. Anyone have any insight as to what changed between the OH and now?

CoryB · #**1514** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

Bro...

[Lag and 59 interchange has] been under construction for nearly two over 40 years now.

Fixed it up a little for you. The "temporary" construction detour, aka the north set of lights, have been in place over 20 years now.

Biff · #**1515** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Could the upcoming intersection improvements to 2 from 3 - 100 be part of that early start?

I would suspect so, given that the plan has been there for a couple of years. PTH 2 will have no connection to the Perimeter.

jmt18325 · #**1516** Posted **Aug 21, 2017, 6:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

I would suspect so, given that the plan has been there for a couple of years. PTH 2 will have no connection to the Perimeter.

I wonder if they would consider renumbering the part of 3 from 100 to 2/3?

Spocket · #**1517** Posted **Aug 22, 2017, 9:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

I have to say, after reading through the South Perimeter RFP it is very comprehensive on what they want. It covers every little intersection and involves 22 redeveloped and new interchange structures making it a complete, true freeway. I can't see that they missed anything. It will be interesting to see how/if it is implemented. They even want to get started on parts while the study could still be underway.

Well, if it actually becomes part of policy then it will happen. The question is how long it will take them to actually implement any of it. Two years for functional design study and then 60 more years to actually implement it. I wouldn't hold my breath.

CoryB · #**1518** Posted **Aug 22, 2017, 4:53 PM**

If the HWY2/3 interchange on the Perimeter happens something also really needs to be done to make McGillivary to Wilkes limited access. The amount of access for essentially farmers fields in that stretch is unreasonable.

Spocket · #**1519** Posted **Aug 22, 2017, 5:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

If the HWY2/3 interchange on the Perimeter happens something also really needs to be done to make McGillivary to Wilkes limited access. The amount of access for essentially farmers fields in that stretch is unreasonable.

It's unreasonable along the entirety of the Perimeter, not just that section. The quickest, cheapest way for the province to be its usual frugal self and increase safety by an order of magnitude would be to simply block off all those intersecting roads and leave only the signalized intersections. But then we'd need some sort of multi-million dollar study to tell us what any pair of eyes can see. How can we expect anything less from our diligent masters on Broadway?

Biff · #**1520** Posted **Aug 22, 2017, 6:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

If the HWY2/3 interchange on the Perimeter happens something also really needs to be done to make McGillivary to Wilkes limited access. The amount of access for essentially farmers fields in that stretch is unreasonable.

They are planning a interchange/diamond for Four Mile Rd - Wyper Rd and the Perimeter. That is about half way between Wilkes and McGillavray. I would assume for future development and east/west access at a reasonable interval.

In my estimation this would be one of the interchanges that would be last done due to its low priority.