Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg - Page 77

CoryB · #**1521** Posted **Aug 22, 2017, 6:13 PM**

^^ The Perimeter between CCW and Lag has service roads most of the way so closing direct access should be a none issue on that stretch. Between Wilkes and McGillivary there is limited service roads so it is something that would need to be fixed. Also mostly being for farming field access makes it even worse as slow moving farm machinery has no place on a high speed, limited access road.

Bluenote · #**1522** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 12:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

^^ The Perimeter between CCW and Lag has service roads most of the way so closing direct access should be a none issue on that stretch. Between Wilkes and McGillivary there is limited service roads so it is something that would need to be fixed. Also mostly being for farming field access makes it even worse as slow moving farm machinery has no place on a high speed, limited access road.

Farmers are the least issue. The constant cement trucks turning and crossing into a 100kmh zone is insane. It's beyond belief it's allowed. Then Mcmunn also has a depot there and they have countless loads going in and out. Meanwhile they have a perfect service road to a set of lights. But never use it. Easier to cross traffic.

bomberjet · #**1523** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 1:07 AM**

Well everyone's gonna have to learn to use the service roads.

I haven't seen the RFP. But from Biff's description I would assume everything, including dinky rail crossings, will be grade separated. Freeway from CCW to Fermor. Essentially if CCW West extension went through, it would be freeway from the white horse to 207.

harls · #**1524** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

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

In Quebec, they don't do that (not sure if it's the same for interstates). If I were travelling southbound on the Perimeter I'd probably see something like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/Szdip15ZAS22

In that example, the exit is for A-30 in Quebec (coming off A-40), and A-20 can be reached if you take this exit.

Just make believe for a second and substitute the 30 for a 3, and the 20 for a 2.. Sorel-Tracy is Carman, Toronto is Treherne.

Biff · #**1525** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 2:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Well everyone's gonna have to learn to use the service roads.

I haven't seen the RFP. But from Biff's description I would assume everything, including dinky rail crossings, will be grade separated. Freeway from CCW to Fermor. Essentially if CCW West extension went through, it would be freeway from the white horse to 207.

Everything is accounted for.

jmt18325 · #**1526** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 2:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by harls

In Quebec, they don't do that (not sure if it's the same for interstates). If I were travelling southbound on the Perimeter I'd probably see something like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/Szdip15ZAS22

In that example, the exit is for A-30 in Quebec (coming off A-40), and A-20 can be reached if you take this exit.

Just make believe for a second and substitute the 30 for a 3, and the 20 for a 2.. Sorel-Tracy is Carman, Toronto is Treherne.

I'm surprised you managed to read that - an error on my part made that completely unintelligible. We do the same thing here sometimes, and sometimes we use concurrent numbers - weird system.

Kinguni · #**1527** Posted **Aug 23, 2017, 8:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I'm surprised you managed to read that - an error on my part made that completely unintelligible. We do the same thing here sometimes, and sometimes we use concurrent numbers - weird system.

For instance: https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.78165...2!8i6656?hl=en

Hockey · #**1528** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 2:04 AM**

The south perimeter RFP is posted on the MIT site.

https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/pdf/2017/r...nstruction.pdf

Edited

WildCake · #**1529** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 3:50 AM**

Wow awesome. Not too familiar with engineering lingo but my guess is pth 3 amd st Mary's interchanges are on deck since the document asks for a preliminary design for both of them but not the other interchanges. Makes sense given that they are the busiest intersections of south perimeter

Spocket · #**1530** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 3:53 AM**

How come when I click that link, I just get the MIT page? Where is the South Perimeter RFP?

Reignman · #**1531** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 1:55 PM**

According to the RFP, at grade intersections will be allowed on the St. Norbert bypass if traffic operations warrant them. Can't this province do anything the proper way?? This is supposed to be a high speed bypass to accomodate truck traffic....and they are open to the idea of traffic lights? Wow

bomberjet · #**1532** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 2:03 PM**

^I noticed that right away. South perimeter to freeway. Awesome. St. Norbert bypass to expressway standards.

Anyways, for the Perimeter they will indeed be getting rid of every crossing at making it a freeway.

McGillivray and St. Mary's look to be at the top of the list for interchanges. I haven't read through in detail, but it will likely be staged construction over numerous years.

WildCake · #**1533** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 2:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spocket

How come when I click that link, I just get the MIT page? Where is the South Perimeter RFP?

Its on that main page, far right side.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reignman

According to the RFP, at grade intersections will be allowed on the St. Norbert bypass if traffic operations warrant them. Can't this province do anything the proper way?? This is supposed to be a high speed bypass to accomodate truck traffic....and they are open to the idea of traffic lights? Wow

Even the wording in the document makes it seem as if the bypass is years away and that there is no point in making detailed designs for it. The province will likely have to re-study it when the time comes. I can imagine that in the 20 years (or 50 since were are Manitoba after all) or so before this gets built the area around it will have built up and traffic would warrant freeway standards there.

The portion of current RFP for the st norbert bypass looks to find the alignment of the road so the province can preserve the ROW to avoid expensive expropriation in the future.

The province likely has bigger fish to fry before the st norbert bypass, such as the headingley bypass, freewaying north perimeter and hwy 1 in brandon, or a Hwy 1/16 interchange

esquire · #**1534** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 2:47 PM**

^ St. Norbert bypass is not that huge a deal... MIT should focus on improving the dangerously deficient Perimeter first. The interchanges at St. Mary's and McGillivray can't happen soon enough.

Biff · #**1535** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 3:20 PM**

The Bypass was never intended to be a part of the design for the South Perimeter. As WildCake mentions that it is mainly for alignment an land acquisitions.

bomberjet · #**1536** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 3:25 PM**

IMO to get a proper highway system around the City, St. Norbert and Headingley bypasses are part of that. Trucks crawl through St. Norbert right now, same as Headingley. Just my two cents.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy this study is being done and hopefully gets implemented in the near future. Glad the province is planning ahead to preserve right of way at least. I'm still miffed the City gave up the beltway right of way through Transcona at Regent. That whole line of thinking just pisses me off.

jmt18325 · #**1537** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 4:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomberjet

IMO to get a proper highway system around the City, St. Norbert and Headingley bypasses are part of that. Trucks crawl through St. Norbert right now, same as Headingley. Just my two cents.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy this study is being done and hopefully gets implemented in the near future. Glad the province is planning ahead to preserve right of way at least. I'm still miffed the City gave up the beltway right of way through Transcona at Regent. That whole line of thinking just pisses me off.

Headingley isn't that bad really, except for the last two lights before the perimeter.

esquire · #**1538** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 4:36 PM**

I'd rather see existing roads brought to some kind of basic modern standard before building more half-baked bypasses.

CoryB · #**1539** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 4:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

Wow awesome. Not too familiar with engineering lingo but my guess is pth 3 amd st Mary's interchanges are on deck since the document asks for a preliminary design for both of them but not the other interchanges. Makes sense given that they are the busiest intersections of south perimeter

Portage and the Perimeter is one seriously busy intersection in all four directions and just about any time of day. It likely goes mostly unnoticed though as the interchange works for the most part.

--

As for HWY 1 in Headingley, the separation of east and west flows has improved it significantly but people seem to forget that not too long ago it was one of the most deadly sections of road in the capital region. That was a big piece of why the Headingley by-pass talk had started.

WildCake · #**1540** Posted **Oct 25, 2017, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

Portage and the Perimeter is one seriously busy intersection in all four directions and just about any time of day. It likely goes mostly unnoticed though as the interchange works for the most part.

Sorry I meant to say busiest out of the at-grade intersections with lights. The ones with interchanges already would definitely have more traffic