Manitoba Highways

[plrh]

Originally Posted by Hockey

People without cars and car insurance benefit from roads. These folks may take the bus, Uber, taxi, bike or carpool. All those use roads.

All the food and goods they buy in stores are trucked in, so they benefit from roads and road repairs.

Therefore all taxpayers should contribute to road maintenance, not just those with auto insurance.

Bad public policy to divert MPI profits to roads and maintenance IMO.

i Disagree. The roads already exist. There is no additional benefit to non drivers if the road is smooth vs if it is bumpy. The delivery trucks arrive, maybe 10 minutes later than the could. On a 14 hour drive from Calgary the 10minute delay is less than the variance from rush hour, but for a significant cost increase.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by Hockey

People without cars and car insurance benefit from roads. These folks may take the bus, Uber, taxi, bike or carpool. All those use roads.

All the food and goods they buy in stores are trucked in, so they benefit from roads and road repairs.

Therefore all taxpayers should contribute to road maintenance, not just those with auto insurance.

Bad public policy to divert MPI profits to roads and maintenance IMO.

I disagree with Bodagin's idea of MPI shuffling surplus money to roads, but remember that taxis, Ubers, busses all currently pay MPI to use insure their vehicles. Trucks would be insured as well, whether here or elsewhere in the country/continent.

Personal vehicles have an outsized per-capita contribution to the wear and tear on the roads so if this plan would go ahead, it would be fairly equitable to the wear they place on the roads, similarly to a gas tax.

[drew]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

Yes, and yes. I'll accept your shame on the Reddit side. It's warranted. But, numbers.



The suggestion is not for MPI to solely fund the roads. The suggestion is for excess MPI surplus to be diverted to roads, instead of being wasted on rebates. Surplus only, when surplus exists. If no surplus exists, no transfers occur. Existing gov road budgets remain unchanged and unrelated to this. It's a bonus only, as a means of tackling the ginormous infrastructure deficit in this province and city.

This $$ would become part of the government general revenue and probably not amount to one additional shovel in the ground for road work.

See gas tax.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by drew

This $$ would become part of the government general revenue and probably not amount to one additional shovel in the ground for road work.

See gas tax.

100% valid and agree. Gooberment is a squander-fest. Rigid rules would have to be followed. If that meant MPI direct-funding projects themselves, so beit. To clarify, not MPI managing road projects. Merely funding projects directly, to reduce the chance of misappropriation. It's 1 idea, there's other ways.

Bottom line, these funds could NOT:

-Be relied upon or expected.
-Be grouped into general revenue pool.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

^I pay MPI to insure my vehicle. I don't pay them to fix roads or do other things NOT related to the insurance of my vehicle. If that's part of the contract I want to know that up front.

Otherwise, you are stealing from me.

It's not uncommon for auto insurers to invest in road safety projects. In the US, State Farm provides funding to cities to remediate dangerous intersections.

In Canada, ICBC has been funding road safety and road improvement projects in BC since 1990. Their research shows for every $1 invested in road safety, $4.70 comes back in savings. ICBC funded road safety improvements can include rumble strips, flashing beacons at pedestrian crosswalks, traffic signal upgrades, etc. https://www.icbc.com/road-safety/com...d-improvements

More details about ICBC's Road Improvement Program:
https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/newsroom/2021-jan05

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Ozabald

It's not uncommon for auto insurers to invest in road safety projects. In the US, State Farm provides funding to cities to remediate dangerous intersections.

In Canada, ICBC has been funding road safety and road improvement projects in BC since 1990. Their research shows for every $1 invested in road safety, $4.70 comes back in savings. ICBC funded road safety improvements can include rumble strips, flashing beacons at pedestrian crosswalks, traffic signal upgrades, etc. https://www.icbc.com/road-safety/com...d-improvements

More details about ICBC's Road Improvement Program:
https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/newsroom/2021-jan05

100%. Three methods to increase road safety and reduce accidents:

1: Engineering
2: Education
3: Enforcement

In that order. MB deals with safety in the exact opposite order.

So yes, engineering, better roads, better road design, uncratered roads is absolutely in the crown insurer's purview. It shouldn't be made a mandate. But it totally relates.

Less potholes = less pothole claims = lower premiums. It's an investment. Same applies to dangerous intersections.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

100%. Three methods to increase road safety and reduce accidents:

1: Engineering
2: Education
3: Enforcement

In that order. MB deals with safety in the exact opposite order.

So yes, engineering, better roads, better road design, uncratered roads is absolutely in the crown insurer's purview. It shouldn't be made a mandate. But it totally relates.

Less potholes = less pothole claims = lower premiums. It's an investment. Same applies to dangerous intersections.

It's a little bit of a bait and switch using ICBC as the example. Their program is for safety improvements like the post OP said, lights, rumble strips, etc. Not any road repairs as you're advocating for. Personally, I don't believe in rebates either, I think it should be reinvested primarily into fixing some critical shortages for MPI, like road testing and then it should go to process digitization in conjunction with the province to develop universal cards (health, driver, voting, etc all chipped into the card) to be distributed by MPI . I could get behind MPI money going into modernizing crosswalks and adding new lighting though, like they do it in BC.

[BlackDog204]

The potholes in Winnipeg are something else. They dont even bother painting dividing lines on the roads either. Winnipeg's roads rival a Third World country.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

The potholes in Winnipeg are something else. They dont even bother painting dividing lines on the roads either. Winnipeg's roads rival a Third World country.

Ever since they city and province switched to the water-based paint they use, it wears out twice or three times faster than the old road paint they used back in the day.

Even with the added benefit of mixing in reflective material in the paint, on the highways, the yellow paint looks the same as the white paint at night when your headlights are shining on the painted lines with the embedded reflective material.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

It's a little bit of a bait and switch using ICBC as the example. Their program is for safety improvements like the post OP said, lights, rumble strips, etc. Not any road repairs as you're advocating for. Personally, I don't believe in rebates either, I think it should be reinvested primarily into fixing some critical shortages for MPI, like road testing and then it should go to process digitization in conjunction with the province to develop universal cards (health, driver, voting, etc all chipped into the card) to be distributed by MPI . I could get behind MPI money going into modernizing crosswalks and adding new lighting though, like they do it in BC.

Did some further digging and the ICBC Road Improvement Program does include road repairs and general maintenance. The City of Richmond, for example, received ICBC funding in 2021 for the re-striping of lane lines.

ICBC funded road repair projects have included road surface repairs, resurfacing, shoulder improvements, drainage systems repair/replacement, and replacement of concrete road panels with asphalt.

[VANRIDERFAN]

So in January I sent this email to the Manitoba Highways department:

To the Minister:

It is inconceivable that this province outright refuses to build grade separated interchanges west of the Perimeter Highway. There is no reason that the Province could not plan to build an interchange every 3 to 5 years and have the entire TCH covered at Virden, Brandon (build the bypass to the north), Carberry, Yellowhead, Elie, and Oakville in 24 years. If the Province had decided to commence this in 1980 it would have been done 30 years ago!

XXX XXXXXXX
Formerly from Killarney.

Ottawa ON

I received this from the minster's office today

Engineering and Technical Services Division
Highway Engineering Services
14 - 215 Garry Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3P3
T 204-599-6605
www.manitoba.ca
April 16, 2024

Dear Sir:
Thank you for your January 17, 2024 email to the Honourable Lisa Naylor, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, regarding grade separated interchanges in Manitoba. Your email was forwarded to me, and I am pleased to respond on behalf of the department.

Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure appreciates your feedback and the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

The department often explores design options with grade-separated interchanges at major intersections on the provincial highway network to promote safety, mobility, and support local economy. Factors such as the traffic volumes, safety or operational issues at a specific location must justify the cost of this solution, because grade separated interchanges are not always the most cost-effective option. The cost to construct an interchange in Manitoba can vary significantly depending on the location and type of the
interchange proposed - from as little as $100 million (M) to as much as $250M. By contrast our total provincial highway capital program has historically ranged from $350M to just over $575M in the past decade.

Over the past 15 years, Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure has constructed or is constructing grade separated interchanges or overpasses at the following locations:

• PTH 101 at Saskatchewan Ave
• PTH 101 at PTH 190
• PTH 190 at CP Rail
• PTH 59 at PTH 101
• PTH 100 at St. Mary’s Road (ongoing project)
• PTH 1 at PTH 1A – Portage la Prairie (ongoing project)
• PTH 10 at CP Rail – Brandon - Daly Overpass (ongoing project)
• PTH 100 at PTH 3 (Oak Bluff) (construction expected to start in 2025)
• PTH 100 at St. Anne’s Road (project in planning phase

The department will consider more grade separated interchanges in the long-term planning phase.

Detailed information regarding future infrastructure projects can be found within the 2023 Multi-Year Infrastructure Investment Strategy available on the department’s official website at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/myhis/index.html.

Thank you again for your inquiry.

Sincerely,

Dustin Booy, M.Eng., P.Eng.
Executive Director
c: Honourable Lisa Naylor, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure


Boiler plate stuff and I still think a 100 million for an overpass is nuts. But I'm not a civil engineer so what do I know?

[bomberjet]

You'll never get a real response. Just word salad.

Seems like other jurisdictions can get it done for cheaper than Manitoba. Bad soil, concrete, blah, blah, blah. We've argued about it and will not win with responses like that from the Province.

[Carboy15]

At least the Perimeter Highway has long term plans to convert the entire highway to a freeway standard. At least we have a vision to get it done, but it will take years till it is finished. And now we are currently building the St Mary's Interchange, next is McGillvary. Also think about the big interchange projects at Lagimodiere and Centreport Canada Way.

Speaking of which, Trans Canada Highway was twinned to Saskatchewan in 2007, and we have yet to twin it to Ontario, which I think needs to come first before Centreport Canada way.

Think of it this way, Even though the province isn't building interchanges at the pace we would expect it to, at least we are making progress.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

So in January I sent this email to the Manitoba Highways department:

To the Minister:

It is inconceivable that this province outright refuses to build grade separated interchanges west of the Perimeter Highway. There is no reason that the Province could not plan to build an interchange every 3 to 5 years and have the entire TCH covered at Virden, Brandon (build the bypass to the north), Carberry, Yellowhead, Elie, and Oakville in 24 years. If the Province had decided to commence this in 1980 it would have been done 30 years ago!

XXX XXXXXXX
Formerly from Killarney.

Ottawa ON

I received this from the minster's office today

Engineering and Technical Services Division
Highway Engineering Services
14 - 215 Garry Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3P3
T 204-599-6605
www.manitoba.ca
April 16, 2024

Dear Sir:
Thank you for your January 17, 2024 email to the Honourable Lisa Naylor, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, regarding grade separated interchanges in Manitoba. Your email was forwarded to me, and I am pleased to respond on behalf of the department.

Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure appreciates your feedback and the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

The department often explores design options with grade-separated interchanges at major intersections on the provincial highway network to promote safety, mobility, and support local economy. Factors such as the traffic volumes, safety or operational issues at a specific location must justify the cost of this solution, because grade separated interchanges are not always the most cost-effective option. The cost to construct an interchange in Manitoba can vary significantly depending on the location and type of the
interchange proposed - from as little as $100 million (M) to as much as $250M. By contrast our total provincial highway capital program has historically ranged from $350M to just over $575M in the past decade.

Over the past 15 years, Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure has constructed or is constructing grade separated interchanges or overpasses at the following locations:

• PTH 101 at Saskatchewan Ave
• PTH 101 at PTH 190
• PTH 190 at CP Rail
• PTH 59 at PTH 101
• PTH 100 at St. Mary’s Road (ongoing project)
• PTH 1 at PTH 1A – Portage la Prairie (ongoing project)
• PTH 10 at CP Rail – Brandon - Daly Overpass (ongoing project)
• PTH 100 at PTH 3 (Oak Bluff) (construction expected to start in 2025)
• PTH 100 at St. Anne’s Road (project in planning phase

The department will consider more grade separated interchanges in the long-term planning phase.

Detailed information regarding future infrastructure projects can be found within the 2023 Multi-Year Infrastructure Investment Strategy available on the department’s official website at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mti/myhis/index.html.

Thank you again for your inquiry.

Sincerely,

Dustin Booy, M.Eng., P.Eng.
Executive Director
c: Honourable Lisa Naylor, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure


Boiler plate stuff and I still think a 100 million for an overpass is nuts. But I'm not a civil engineer so what do I know?

LOL gotta love how they made one project look good by separating it into 3 interchanges

• PTH 101 at Saskatchewan Ave
• PTH 101 at PTH 190
• PTH 190 at CP Rail
^ All one project
• PTH 59 at PTH 101
It was well overdue at the time
• PTH 100 at St. Mary’s Road (ongoing project)
congrats MB!
• PTH 1 at PTH 1A – Portage la Prairie (ongoing project)
reconstruction of an existing interchange, not a new project, nice try though
• PTH 10 at CP Rail – Brandon - Daly Overpass (ongoing project)
Bridge replacement, tough to really call it an interchange, just a rail bridge that happens to have ramps on either ends because it's logical. It's a reconstruction project regardless
• PTH 100 at PTH 3 (Oak Bluff) (construction expected to start in 2025)
Hasn't started, could still be scrapped
• PTH 100 at St. Anne’s Road (project in planning phase)
hasn't started, could still be scrapped

So really three interchange projects in the last 15 years. Not bad at first glance, but it's worth mentioning that prior to Centreport, there was really nothing for what 15-20 years? So if you extended the timeline to "in the last 30 years", the list would be identical and looks way worse.

[Carboy15]

https://imgur.com/a/9MfDRoA

Anyways, there are lots of other routes that need to be twinned yet.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by WildCake

LOL gotta love how they made one project look good by separating it into 3 interchanges

• PTH 101 at Saskatchewan Ave
• PTH 101 at PTH 190
• PTH 190 at CP Rail
^ All one project
• PTH 59 at PTH 101
It was well overdue at the time
• PTH 100 at St. Mary’s Road (ongoing project)
congrats MB!
• PTH 1 at PTH 1A – Portage la Prairie (ongoing project)
reconstruction of an existing interchange, not a new project, nice try though
• PTH 10 at CP Rail – Brandon - Daly Overpass (ongoing project)
Bridge replacement, tough to really call it an interchange, just a rail bridge that happens to have ramps on either ends because it's logical. It's a reconstruction project regardless
• PTH 100 at PTH 3 (Oak Bluff) (construction expected to start in 2025)
Hasn't started, could still be scrapped
• PTH 100 at St. Anne’s Road (project in planning phase)
hasn't started, could still be scrapped

So really three interchange projects in the last 15 years. Not bad at first glance, but it's worth mentioning that prior to Centreport, there was really nothing for what 15-20 years? So if you extended the timeline to "in the last 30 years", the list would be identical and looks way worse.

Bruh, no way.

[Carboy15]

I'm surprised how fast Saskatchewan is building highways which has less population than Manitoba, and Manitoba hasn't progressed too much over the years. I mean, Saskatchewan has the potash industry which probably helps make more money for the province. But I'm not sure if it's all about the money, but more about the planners and having a vision. If we plan ahead, we know what we want and achieve the result faster and more efficiently.

[drew]

^ it's mostly $$. And don't forget oil revenues.

[Carboy15]

Originally Posted by drew

^ it's mostly $$. And don't forget oil revenues.

You're right about $$, but we still deserve better. With road quality, we should put bit more money into each project and fix the roads better, and maybe delay a few less important projects. That way, the road can last longer and need to be fixed less, saving more in the long term.

It's easier said than done, but I believe we should do more for less (more investing and fixing for less repairs)