Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg - Page 82

esquire · #**1621** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 4:36 PM**

And the award for least surprising headline of the year goes to:

Proposed south Perimeter changes raise objections

wardlow · #**1622** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 5:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

And the award for least surprising headline of the year goes to:

Proposed south Perimeter changes raise objections

LOL. The RM of Macdonald has a 150-acre industrial park in Oak Bluff. (Plus another 400 acres designated for industrial on the south side of Oak Bluff. And then this guy complains about truck traffic like it just magically appeared.

Dengler Avenue · #**1623** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 6:15 PM**

It may sound harsh, but it’s time to not let them drag everyone behind. Nobody wants lights on the perimeter. Also, headingley bypass needs to go forward, completely grade separated with interchanges only. Obviously in that case, the interchange between 101 and 190 will need to be revamped.

esquire · #**1624** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 6:18 PM**

^ 101/190 interchange was built with the Headingley bypass extension in mind. All MIT needs to do is finish the ramps.

wardlow · #**1625** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 7:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ 101/190 interchange was built with the Headingley bypass extension in mind. All MIT needs to do is finish the ramps.

Every time I hear about the extension of 190, I'm reminded of the property nearby with a Blue Bomber endzone in the backyard.

esquire · #**1626** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wardlow

Every time I hear about the extension of 190, I'm reminded of the property nearby with a Blue Bomber endzone in the backyard.

Ha, that's awesome. Looks like someone went nuts at the old stadium's closing-down sale.

wardlow · #**1627** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 7:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

Ha, that's awesome. Looks like someone went nuts at the old stadium's closing-down sale.

I can easily imagine what the fixtures in the family bathroom of this house look like.

bomberjet · #**1628** Posted **Jun 5, 2018, 7:57 PM**

Wow, awesome! Unfortunately the bypass is to go right through there.

Corndogger · #**1629** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 12:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

And the award for least surprising headline of the year goes to:

Proposed south Perimeter changes raise objections

People are flipping out over an increase of 30 trucks/day?! Some of the comments are priceless but this one is classic.

By closing these intersections they are putting hundreds of citizens at risk. Fire, Ambulance and Police will have to make huge detours to arrive at an incident. Farmers that have fields on both sides of the highway will now have to drive their implements on the Perimeter for many kilometers to get to the other side. A huge hazard to traffic. People living off the Perimeter will now incur thousands of dollars of extra fuel cost and travel time. They will be essentially cut off from Winnipeg and will need to take an indirect route many kms longer. As a matter of fact one of the alternate routes will necessitate the crossing of Hwy 59 to get back to the Perimeter at a much more dangerous intersection.

Thousands of dollars in extra fuel costs and travel time? Cut off from Winnipeg? Just how averse to change are these people?

Spocket · #**1630** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 5:25 AM**

I'm not following how farmers are going to have to drive their tractors on the Perimeter. They're going to cross it. Driving on it makes no sense no matter how you cut it if the Perimeter has no at grade crossings except for a few designated ones.

WildCake · #**1631** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 1:08 PM**

People will always complain when negative changes happen in their lives. It’s human nature. It’s also in the nature of news media to report on these complaints, especially in local news or on a slow day.

These people in Oak Bluff would have probably bought the same home or live in the same area even if Perimeter was properly built in the first place and their nearest access was slightly farther off than it is now. I doubt the inconvenience will cause anyone to uproot themselves and leave. Just some people that need more hobbies than to complain to media, or it was these newpapers that went fishing for opposition stories at the open house to get an ‘interesting’ story.

I’m glad MI had these open houses, I just hope they don’t end up backing down from this initiative just because of some more vocal business owners in the area. If they do back out, I’ll rent a front end loader and rip up the gravel road intersections myself on a weekend - with a case of beer in the cab. Hell, if someone else can supply the beer, I’ll take care of north perimeter too while I’m at it.

Dengler Avenue · #**1632** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 3:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

People will always complain when negative changes happen in their lives. It’s human nature. It’s also in the nature of news media to report on these complaints, especially in local news or on a slow day.

These people in Oak Bluff would have probably bought the same home or live in the same area even if Perimeter was properly built in the first place and their nearest access was slightly farther off than it is now. I doubt the inconvenience will cause anyone to uproot themselves and leave. Just some people that need more hobbies than to complain to media, or it was these newpapers that went fishing for opposition stories at the open house to get an ‘interesting’ story.

I’m glad MI had these open houses, I just hope they don’t end up backing down from this initiative just because of some more vocal business owners in the area. If they do back out, I’ll rent a front end loader and rip up the gravel road intersections myself on a weekend - with a case of beer in the cab. Hell, if someone else can supply the beer, I’ll take care of north perimeter too while I’m at it.

Uh please don’t do it impaired...

Also, if you really wanna take the matter into your own hand, I shall challenge you to rip up the median crossing of the light-controlled intersections too, forcing a RIRO at those places. Don’t forget 1&207 as well. Now traffic shall be free-flowing around and east of Winnipeg..

Ps: I hope it’s okay to joke about these things. Also I just realized such work is impossible at 101&59.

bomberjet · #**1633** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 4:11 PM**

Blah blah blah. Does these people realize the changes are making their lives safer???!!!

Or do they just stay in Oak Bluff and not use the Highway at all?

WildCake · #**1634** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 4:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Uh please don’t do it impaired...

Also, if you really wanna take the matter into your own hand, I shall challenge you to rip up the median crossing of the light-controlled intersections too, forcing a RIRO at those places. Don’t forget 1&207 as well. Now traffic shall be free-flowing around and east of Winnipeg..

Ps: I hope it’s okay to joke about these things. Also I just realized such work is impossible at 101&59.

I'll just get rid of the gravel road access to Perimeter and use the dirt to block off the medians.

Kidding aside, this is not an extensive project and could probably done properly in a week (not by drunk-and-enraged-at-crappy-highways-WildCake). Manitoba Infrastructure could've easily bypassed the public consults given the minimal scope of this projects and left the complainers with one choice - accepting the new reality, but were open enough about the process and will have to deal with the complaining associated

roccerfeller · #**1635** Posted **Jun 7, 2018, 4:58 PM**

I saw the same/similar kinds of complaints in Calgary.

These kinds of things happen but the bigger picture of safety and usability must prevail.

The province just has to go forward with making the right decision, which is to make the perimeter like Anthony Henday or Stoney Trail...free flowing with the appropriate lighting all the way around

WildCake · #**1636** Posted **Jun 8, 2018, 7:58 PM**

Found this planning document for MacDonald/Ritchot municipalities. The date on the URL says it is from May 2018. If you scroll to Map 3, it shows the zoning blocks for Oak Bluff, as well as the ‘proposed bypass’ of Hwy 3, with a Parclo interchange set in between the current locations of Hwy 2 and 3.

http://cms.rmofmacdonald.com/_docs/M...913b65f94a.pdf

The municipalities are being consulted with the functional design study so I suspect that this information has some truth/weight behind it rather than being completely conceptual. Some of us on the forum have also suspected that to be the location, rather than where 3 and 100 are right now. That would better utilize the space in the area rather than be constrained by the current buildings, and minimize construction disruptions on Hwy 3 when this gets built

esquire · #**1637** Posted **Jun 8, 2018, 8:06 PM**

^ A parclo interchange like that would be perfect. Certainly better than a diamond. But is this an old iteration of the plan before the announcement of a diamond interchange a couple of years ago?

Dengler Avenue · #**1638** Posted **Jun 8, 2018, 9:05 PM**

Also a (digressive) question: How will 100&330 be modified? Based on the current configuration, there seems to be little space to put an interchange there.

Spocket · #**1639** Posted **Jun 9, 2018, 4:05 AM**

^^^Pretty simple actually: Just a parclo along the lines of what they have at Wilkes.

CoryB · #**1640** Posted **Jun 11, 2018, 3:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCake

Hell, if someone else can supply the beer, I’ll take care of north perimeter too while I’m at it.

If I toss in a case of beer while you have the front end loader out could you take out the median crossing for St Marys and St Annes making them the right in-right out only that they should be.