HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 5:41 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
Finally got a response back to the e-mail I sent Steve Ashton a few months back, in response to another death on the deplorable Perimeter Highway. Wasn't from Ashton, but from someone within MIT.

Basically regurgitated all the recent announcements made by the province. Did provide a bit of insight into the PTH 59N/PTH101 interchange.

Quote: "As for the north Perimeter Highway (PTH 101), the construction of a full grade-separated interchange at PTH 101/PTH 59N is approved in MIT’s Multi-Year Capital Program. We are currently working on the preliminary engineering study and other pre-construction activities, including an area transportation study and detailed design.

All of these improvements reflect the growing importance of this route, an anticipation of increased traffic volumes, and the Department’s commitment to ensuring acceptable highway safety standards are maintained. More details will be announced as the various projects advance."


I asked for a bit of a timeline or any more info. So we'll see what I get back.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 5:51 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,089
^ That e-mail could have been written at virtually any point during the last 20 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 5:54 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
^ You're right. But sounds like something will actually come out of it this time. Maybe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 6:24 PM
h0twired's Avatar
h0twired h0twired is offline
Dynamic Positivity!
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
^ You're right. But sounds like something will actually come out of it this time. Maybe.
The current government is good at guaranteeing that things might happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 6:53 PM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
All of these improvements reflect the growing importance of this route, an anticipation of increased traffic volumes, and the Department’s commitment to ensuring acceptable highway safety standards are maintained.
Lol...ensuring highway safety standards are maintained? To maintain means that you actually meet them in the first place. I wonder if left turns out of the high speed lane on multi-lane highways meet highway safety standards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 7:10 PM
CoryB CoryB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,306
I personally hope something is done about the current transition from Waverly to the north bound Perimeter. The current entry is a tight curve forcing merging traffic to proceed at a slow speed followed by an extremely short merge lane, even by Winnipeg standards, due to the bridge. This all occurs next to what is currently open farm land. It would be nice, at a minimum, to see the merge lane extended south with a longer entry approach to at least give vehicles entering the traffic stream a fighting chance of merging at the speed of traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 7:33 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
The rest of the repsonse:

"The PTH 59/101 Interchange project is still a priority, but it is a very complex project that requires significant engineering – to ensure that we built a facility that can meet the traffic needs for the next 50 years or so.

The PTH 59/101 Interchange was delayed to allow for an area transportation study to be undertaken, as the public Open House response indicated there were concerns with the proposed design and the impacts on adjacent access points on PTH 59. Therefore, we believed it was vital to try and address the concerns.

We are currently in the process of reviewing design options and plan to hold an Open House shortly afterwards. Once we have the interchange concept finalized, we will finalize the detailed design, which then will allow the project to move to the construction phase."


So. If everything were to go as outlined in this e-mail, potential for site works to start next year. But I'd say we're at least two years off. Maybe.

Also sounds like it may get rolled out in phases. AT overpass, actual interchange. Then the interchange at PR 202. Then maybe the Garven interchange.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 8:08 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,048
That is a bull-shit response. The project basically skyrocketed in terms of budget to between $150-175 million, obviously way too expensive. That is why they are re-engineering it.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 9:42 PM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
Also sounds like it may get rolled out in phases. AT overpass, actual interchange. Then the interchange at PR 202. Then maybe the Garven interchange.
Trying to figure out why ensuring Hwy 59N is free flow outside of the city takes precedence over the perimeter...

Not that I don't wanna see 59 upgraded but shouldn't 100/101 be done first?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 9:58 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
^ You're right. It should be PTH 100 first. Then I can justify doing the 202 and Garven interchanges as part of the 59N interchange project, prior to finishing or in conjunction with, PTH 101. 59N and 101 is the busiest stretch of road in the province. There was a traffic flow map posted somewhere on SSP. I'll see if I can dig it up. But finishing PTH 100 first makes sense as it's a "national highway". Loose quotations as the Feds really don't maintain or pay for it.

Maybe it'll all be happening simultaneously over the next 5-10 (or 20) years . Sounds like MIT has a 5-10 year plan for PTH 100. The 59N is 5-10 years from completion, if ever.

Maybe none of it will happen once Pallister is voted in...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:02 PM
Kinguni's Avatar
Kinguni Kinguni is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tache
Posts: 1,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoryB View Post
I personally hope something is done about the current transition from Waverly to the north bound Perimeter. The current entry is a tight curve forcing merging traffic to proceed at a slow speed followed by an extremely short merge lane, even by Winnipeg standards, due to the bridge. This all occurs next to what is currently open farm land. It would be nice, at a minimum, to see the merge lane extended south with a longer entry approach to at least give vehicles entering the traffic stream a fighting chance of merging at the speed of traffic.
Sure, that intersection will be eliminated once the Kenaston intersection if sompleted. Waverley problem solved!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:15 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
Here's what the Kenaston and Waverley intersections will look like until the St. Norbert bypass goes ahead. Again, you'll notice no acceleration lane from NB Waverley to WB Perimeter. Stupid.





Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:19 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
That is a bull-shit response. The project basically skyrocketed in terms of budget to between $150-175 million, obviously way too expensive. That is why they are re-engineering it.
I was remembering you had said that before. Didn't want to keep prying at the guy. I was surprised I actually got a response.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 11:25 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,737
Complicated engineering ?

There are spaghetti junctions all over the world that were built a lot more quickly than this interchange was. The Burj Khalifa was built more quickly than this. The Three Gorges dam was built more quickly than this.

I've seen what they had planned as a lot of us have. It's hardly that complicated of an interchange.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 11:33 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
Complicated engineering ?

There are spaghetti junctions all over the world that were built a lot more quickly than this interchange was. The Burj Khalifa was built more quickly than this. The Three Gorges dam was built more quickly than this.

I've seen what they had planned as a lot of us have. It's hardly that complicated of an interchange.
Be patient, spocket, these things take time.

The 20 years it has taken to get to this point tells you that the PTH 101/59 interchange is clearly THE engineering challenge of the 21st century.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2014, 3:00 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cobourg, ON/Mesa, AZ
Posts: 3,584
What is the difference between this intersection and the one at #9 and 101?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2014, 1:41 PM
rypinion's Avatar
rypinion rypinion is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: East Exchange, Winnipeg
Posts: 1,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
What is the difference between this intersection and the one at #9 and 101?
I'd assume the extremely large amount of eastbound turning to northbound traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2014, 3:26 PM
CoryB CoryB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,306
Why in a relatively flat city do we continue to accept the lack of proper acceleration/deceleration lanes on our high speed routes? How many more accidents are we going to have to accept before this changes?

It might not exactly fair however it Phoenix the major routes often have exits every mile with a forced exit lane running between them. Traffic entering at that point has almost the full mile to be getting up to speed. Further, people are actually courtesy enough to move over and let traffic in. Compare that to Winnipeg where a driver recently gave me the finger because they needed to move out of the right most lane that I had just entered when the next lane over was completely empty and they had plenty of time to make the change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2014, 3:36 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,089
^ When people say that Winnipeggers don't know how to merge properly, I'd say it's mainly because we have very, very few proper merging lanes in and around the city. We're more or less used to being forced right into the traffic flow after taking an exit ramp or a yield lane.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2014, 5:11 PM
Reignman Reignman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
^ When people say that Winnipeggers don't know how to merge properly, I'd say it's mainly because we have very, very few proper merging lanes in and around the city. We're more or less used to being forced right into the traffic flow after taking an exit ramp or a yield lane.
I also believe that Winnipeggers don't like allowing vehicles to cut in front of them due to the amount of traffic lights on our "expressways"...the one car you let in front of you can literally make the difference whether you get through that light up ahead or not. A good example being the SB Pembina to EB Bishop loop during rush hour, if as part of eastbound traffic on Bishop, you let a driver in off that loop, good chance it will cause you an red extra light cycle at that dumb intersection with River.

Places with proper free flowing expressways, this is not a concern so letting cars cut in front of you makes little to no difference to your commute.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:26 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.