Manitoba Highways

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I mean they probably could get an interchange to physically fit. But they would need to build a wall basically right at the edge of the lane/shoulder, to be able to get the ramp to fit between the track and railway. #1 going over whatever the crossroad is. Then you have the issue of roadway intersection right next to the railway crossing. It's just a mess.

Well there was my proposal too, which also included stuff about the current PTH/Fermor Ave interchange.

I'll just do the functional design for MI right now for PTH 1 out to PTH 12. Diamond interchanges at both ends of 207 and at 206. PTH 1 over the crossroads. Close all median openings and access points to PTH 1. Done.

6 lanes (in total) of TCH up to PTH 12 too

I will take payment of the $3 million now please.

Nah man we’ve gotta do this for free.
Remember, I single-handedly drew up the proposal of 1482 km* of TCH 4-laning in Northern Ontario and MTO didn’t pay me a single penny for that~ It was 4 months of “volunteering”~~
* The other 482 km are either existing divided 4 lanes (grade separated or not) or those proposed (but not yet constructed) by MTO.

[bomberjet]

Good job! It's that EB exit and entrance lane that gets underestimated. I feel like it would be easier to raise #1 over top and just leave 207 at grade. Build a wall on the south side of #1 and hopefully it'll fit. Maybe it's need to be squeezed northwards a bit to make it fit.

[Dengler Avenue]

Do you mean shifting everything, i.e. both directions of TCH and abutting properties slightly north to make room for the diamond interchange? I think it's doable. As for which road should be on the overpass, I think it's still possible to put 207 on it. Properties to the north can be accessed from Reimer Road.
Also, by "wall" do you mean the retaining wall for overpasses?

If building an interchange at the current location proves too disruptive, though, M.I.T. might just take Biff's design. The thing is, given what's happening with Headingley Bypass, I feel that M.I.T. will only put this one up for show as well.

[bomberjet]

Ya shift the highway northwards a bit and likely have both directions of travel on the same bridge with a concrete median.

And yes retaining wall. In either option (#1 over or under) it'd be needed between the highway and the EB exit/entrance lanes you show.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

And yes retaining wall. In either option (#1 over or under) it'd be needed between the highway and the EB exit/entrance lanes you show.

Okay, I think I had that in mind when I drew this.
In fact, I probably even had this interchange in mind when I proposed TCH/207:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.19462...7i16384!8i8192
Notice how Tannery Road climbs over the rail to meet South Fraser Perimeter Road (B.C.-17) at a diamond.

Ps: What the, B.C. really has some dumb speed limit on their highways...

[CoryB]

I like your design but it is way too ambitious for what the province does, needing 7 new bridges without even looking at Deacons Corner.

What I could see happening:

South to east follows on the outside of south to west.

West to south has a single bridge crossing both these.

Then south to east and west to south loop north to cross TCH with a single bridge.

West of where the new lanes connect to TCH east to south splits off.

South to east merges to TCH, and west to south and east to south merge into a single lane and use the existing east to south ramp.

If north to west needs changes to improvement alignment the loop is move well north of the location and loops the outside of the structure starting further north and connecting further east than any of the other direction changing flows.

Net: 2 new bridges and even that is high for how we do things here.

Likely reality: Perimeter is made free flowing and TCH has lights added east and west of the existing bridge as a diamond "safety upgrade"

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Biff

How bout this



Sorry, I don't have the time or patience to redo it with the current highways "x" out.

just quoting Biff's drawing as a reminder

Originally Posted by CoryB

I like your design but it is way too ambitious for what the province does, needing 7 new bridges without even looking at Deacons Corner.

I agree.

Likely reality: Perimeter is made free flowing and TCH has lights added east and west of the existing bridge as a diamond "safety upgrade"

I highly doubt it. Unlike Portage Avenue through Headingley, which can't be converted to a freeway, Fermor Avenue - TCH is salvageable beyond the cloverleaf. Plus, disrupting the flow of traffic from TCH to PTH-100 will upset a lot of people. That's gonna force a lot of people onto PTH-101 when they should be on PTH-100 instead...

[Dengler Avenue]

Sadly, it's hard for people to follow if it's only described in words.

I wonder how safe this is.
Now that's only 4 new bridges (or potentially 3 if we change how the lanes merge from Fermor Avenue EB to PTH-100 WB).
But darn it, only if the interchange were farther from the Floodway...

[CoryB]

1. draw a new line from the right side of the picture for the west bound flow going outside the tree circle towards the Perimeter at the top. It crosses a little north of there actually (one bridge).

2. It then comes back to grade off the top of the screen but essentially next to the top most road heading east-west (left-right in the photo) with a new exit lane even further towards the top of the picture.

3. Those two lanes then cross TCH with a two-lane single bridge structure near the truck in the top left corner. (second bridge).

4. The inside of the two lanes from the new bridge then merges with the exit to the Perimeter by the truck. The outside of those two lanes then goes over the exit lane near the car a little right on the truck and on the exit. (third bridge) it then comes back to grade in the triangle a little further to the right and merges into the through lanes on TCH.

5. The top-right circle ramp could also be move well off the top of the screen and turned into a looser bend coming back in way before the split off I suggest in the first point.

It fixes a lot of the issues with the current design and minimizes new bridge construction. It also takes advantage of the mostly lightly developed land in the area.

That said as I previously mentioned, as TCH west of the east Perimeter will never be a limited access/free flowing road it is much more likely it just gets converted to a diamond with the Perimeter being free flowing, perhaps with a single west to south fly-over. (one new bridge).

[bomberjet]

That interchange will stay as is for the next few decades. The plan is to just make the cloverleaf bigger at that time. More likely scenario, MI does another study in 30 years and does something else.

Speaking of Fermor. When the Province does the Symington overpass at Plessis, they should account for how Bishop Grandin will connect to Fermor. Ideally they would connect Bishop to Plessis. All the plans I've seen just show Bishop dumping out onto Fermor at random locations.

[CoryB]

Connecting Bishop to Plessis at Fermor makes sense in terms of a future inner ring road. Not sure exactly what the eastern route would be but it could be pulled off Plessis between TCH and Dugald to suit whatever the plan ends up being.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Connecting Bishop to Plessis at Fermor makes sense in terms of a future inner ring road. Not sure exactly what the eastern route would be but it could be pulled off Plessis between TCH and Dugald to suit whatever the plan ends up being.

I’m still wondering what the city will do with Chief Peguis east of Lag., ideally they should have at least extended it to Plessis.

The eastern side of the city seems to lack the needed infrastructure especially with all the new housing, Concordia, Peguis etc. Should all have already been twinned!

[bomberjet]

I had more images in my photobucket account that showed what I had drawn up. But had this one on imgur from a couple years back.



The red line is the original plan for Chief and Ed Schreyer Parkway. Chief will head off eastward to follow Gunn Rd to Oakbank.

Ed Schreyer parkway will be built north south at some point. But the City really pooched themselves when they sold off the right of way south of Regent. The only option left is the blue line to get onto Plessis and then down south to wards Fermor. They could've used the Ravelston corridor, but again pooched that option when the divided up the old East Yards land. Really no good options.

So If the Province were to get Bishop connected with Fermor. The only further upgrades that could be done would be building a new 4 lane Plessis on the golf course land to connect with the underpass at Dugald.

In more recent news. Devonshire will be connected next year, essentially completing the road network in the area. Only further work would be the final twinning of Peguis and then the expressways.

Medium term Concorida will be upgraded/twinned from Molson to Peguis. The overpass is slated for rehab in the medium term so maybe that will all happen together. Long term Concordia will be extended to Plessis and Grassie dead ended when ESP goes ahead.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Oh there this one. This is it right?

C01270 01 RFP ESP Functional Design
Bituminous Reconstruction (Twinning) 5.0km West of PR 301 -- Ontario Boundary Unorganized
Territory Aug

I'm not familiar with RFPs but the wording above seems to suggest this study would look at the entire remaining section of untwinned highway. There's 2 points where 301 and hwy 1 meet and the only real intersection is at falcon lake (the second is just an overpass halfway between falcon and west hawk).

5km west of that is well into the twinned portion of the highway.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by Biff

Lots of interesting projects in the MB Highways 2021 Advertising Schedule.

https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/contracts/...edule_2020.pdf

- Functional Design for twinning Hwy 1 east of West Hawk access
- Design Build RFP for St Marys Interchange - Jun
- Intersection improvements at the Perimeter/Wenzel and Hwy 1/Deacons Corner
- Design for Symington Yard Overpass - Hwy 1
- Aimes Rd Structure over Seine River - will facilitate the closing of the Perimeter access and the construction of St Annes Interchange.

Also looks like they want a design for a replacement on the St Marys (hwy 200) bridge over the floodway.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I had more images in my photobucket account that showed what I had drawn up. But had this one on imgur from a couple years back.

The red line is the original plan for Chief and Ed Schreyer Parkway. Chief will head off eastward to follow Gunn Rd to Oakbank.

Anyone here know what is up with that ridge around what appears to be the CPT reserve east of Lag?

Looking over it on Google Maps is almost looks like a natural feature and oddly has a creek in it perhaps? I had long though it was a mad-made feature but questioning myself now. If it was man-made why have the special drainage underpass for it at Gunn and Day?

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by WildCake

I'm not familiar with RFPs but the wording above seems to suggest this study would look at the entire remaining section of untwinned highway. There's 2 points where 301 and hwy 1 meet and the only real intersection is at falcon lake (the second is just an overpass halfway between falcon and west hawk).

5km west of that is well into the twinned portion of the highway.

Seems this covers the whole stretch of it. There's just a bunch of different RFP's for work in that area. 5 of them.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Anyone here know what is up with that ridge around what appears to be the CPT reserve east of Lag?

Looking over it on Google Maps is almost looks like a natural feature and oddly has a creek in it perhaps? I had long though it was a mad-made feature but questioning myself now. If it was man-made why have the special drainage underpass for it at Gunn and Day?

Cordite drain is definitely man made. It drains into the pond near Springfield, then into Bunns Creek eventually. I'm not sure what old creek it replaces. If it was Bunns Creek or just some other drainage feature. If you follow it and go across the floodway, there are also drainage channels there. In typical prairie fashion, all the old drainage channels were filled in and drainage routed to new man made channels.

I think the large berms just east of Lag have to do with the rail yard. But could be wrong.

Prior to Gunn and Day being upgraded (straightened out with the box culvert), you had to take a deke northwards on Gunn at the intersection. Everyone used to just drive through the ditch instead.

[plrh]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Anyone here know what is up with that ridge around what appears to be the CPT reserve east of Lag?

Looking over it on Google Maps is almost looks like a natural feature and oddly has a creek in it perhaps? I had long though it was a mad-made feature but questioning myself now. If it was man-made why have the special drainage underpass for it at Gunn and Day?

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...jFOEFlNO_NcCbA

Is it the Cordite Landfill Site?

[bomberjet]

Right. That would be it. Amazing how many landfills are around, and from not that long ago. That one from the 70's.

Also really liked to go by there and see what people had written with the stones. People still do it but seems harder to see for some reason. Maybe my eyes.