New Interchanges and Bypasses in MB / SK

[North_Regina_Boy]

I agree signage does suck quite a lot here. There are places where I have seen cars bolt across lanes to get to an exit. It likely wouldn't hurt to upgrade some of it.

[trebor204]

Lagimodiere and Perimeter to get $204M highway interchange

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...ange-1.3214057

[esquire]

^ According to the news release, the project includes traffic lights at 59 and Birds Hill Road, so sadly 59 will only be down by one set of lights as a result of this interchange. On the bright side, 59 from Birds Hill Road to 101 will be 6 lanes, although in reality it should be 6 lanes at least to Garven Road...

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ According to the news release, the project includes traffic lights at 59 and Birds Hill Road, so sadly 59 will only be down by one set of lights as a result of this interchange. On the bright side, 59 from Birds Hill Road to 101 will be 6 lanes, although in reality it should be 6 lanes at least to Garven Road...

Why? I don't even think 6 lanes to Birds Hill is necessary, never mind all the way to Garvin. It's not even 6 lanes in the City.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Why? I don't even think 6 lanes to Birds Hill is necessary, never mind all the way to Garvin. It's not even 6 lanes in the City.

I don't often drive up around there, but when I do the highway usually seems extremely busy.

The fact that Lagimodiere through the city is still only 4 lanes for the most part is not an excuse, though...frankly, that situation is inexcusable and I'm amazed that it hasn't been expanded yet.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Why? I don't even think 6 lanes to Birds Hill is necessary, never mind all the way to Garvin. It's not even 6 lanes in the City.

I use this stretch of highway almost daily and I believe that 59 (Lagimodiere) should be 6 lanes from Garvin Rd to the South Perimeter. Esquire is right in saying that just because it isn't through the City doesn't excuse it from being right. I can't believe I am saying this but the Province is actually building this right - closing down access points at Knowles, Pritchard Farm Rd and Raleigh......although I believe they are making a huge mistake in not building the diamond interchange at Birds Hill Rd. That would maybe add and extra $20m onto a $200m project to do it right.

[bomberjet]

That is the busiest stretch of roadway in the Province. If we get six lanes anywhere, it should be there.

Can't believe this project has actually started.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by esquire

I don't often drive up around there, but when I do the highway usually seems extremely busy.

The fact that Lagimodiere through the city is still only 4 lanes for the most part is not an excuse, though...frankly, that situation is inexcusable and I'm amazed that it hasn't been expanded yet.

Originally Posted by Biff

I use this stretch of highway almost daily and I believe that 59 (Lagimodiere) should be 6 lanes from Garvin Rd to the South Perimeter. Esquire is right in saying that just because it isn't through the City doesn't excuse it from being right. I can't believe I am saying this but the Province is actually building this right - closing down access points at Knowles, Pritchard Farm Rd and Raleigh......although I believe they are making a huge mistake in not building the diamond interchange at Birds Hill Rd. That would maybe add and extra $20m onto a $200m project to do it right.

I don't disagree with you; the whole length of Lagimodiere is awful. But the only reason we 'need' 6 lanes on this whole stretch is because we use it as both a local collector and a transportation corridor. Limit the access, build diamonds and Lagimodiere would be just fine without 6 lanes.

We are keeping a light/access on Lagimodiere just because of 1 parcel of land (SCU on Almey). Seriously? Same with expansions to the Grassie intersection when we have a perfectly safe partial cloverleaf just over a kilometer south that would add a maximum of 5 minutes to any commute if we completely closed the Grassie intersection.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I don't disagree with you; the whole length of Lagimodiere is awful. But the only reason we 'need' 6 lanes on this whole stretch is because we use it as both a local collector and a transportation corridor. Limit the access, build diamonds and Lagimodiere would be just fine without 6 lanes.

We are keeping a light/access on Lagimodiere just because of 1 parcel of land (SCU on Almey). Seriously? Same with expansions to the Grassie intersection when we have a perfectly safe partial cloverleaf just over a kilometer south that would add a maximum of 5 minutes to any commute if we completely closed the Grassie intersection.

Yeah, fair enough. Lagimodiere would work better if there were fewer intersections and more grade separations. Seeing that the city has built one interchange in the last 20+ years though, I figured that widening Lagimodiere was more likely to actually happen.

(And I agree, the light at Almey is bunk... in most other cities, that wouldn't be allowed...)

[Riverman]

This reminds me of all the proponents of a 6 lane Disraeli. Six lanes with a stoplight at each end. The number of lanes has nothing to with the congestion, it is the number of stoplights.

[CoryB]

Please tell me the rebuild of Lag between the Perimeter and Birds Hill includes moving the ill located weigh station. If this is to truly become a limited access high speed route having the dead exit/entry weight station located in the middle of two lanes of traffic needs to stop. If the weigh station is still permanently needed how about moving it to 213 between 59 and 207 since it is primarily targeting gravel trucks coming from east of 207 on 213.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by esquire

Yeah, fair enough. Lagimodiere would work better if there were fewer intersections and more grade separations. Seeing that the city has built one interchange in the last 20+ years though, I figured that widening Lagimodiere was more likely to actually happen.

(And I agree, the light at Almey is bunk... in most other cities, that wouldn't be allowed...)

From what I've seen, the Almey access point should be getting busier in the future given that the plan is to run two new collector streets between Peguis and the north/south leg of Ravelston turning most of Ravelston into a local street. They would both be situated between Almey and Ravelston.

[CoryB]

This is really stretching memories but I think the light at Almey and Lag goes way back to before Renders crossed Lag and was actually the main access from Lag to Pannet back in a day when there was still houses between Pannet and Lag in that area.

[cllew]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Please tell me the rebuild of Lag between the Perimeter and Birds Hill includes moving the ill located weigh station. If this is to truly become a limited access high speed route having the dead exit/entry weight station located in the middle of two lanes of traffic needs to stop. If the weigh station is still permanently needed how about moving it to 213 between 59 and 207 since it is primarily targeting gravel trucks coming from east of 207 on 213.

When is the last time the Hwy 59 station was in use? The last few times I have been there during a week day the "all trucks report when lights flashing" signs were not in use. I think they expect the truckers to use the honor system to be legal weight.

Is the one in Rosser for the Hwy 7 gravel trucks still in use or has it also been mothballed?

[Kronos]

From the City of Winnipeg Transcona West Structure Plan By-Law pdf pg. 19 of 49 (2006):

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/docu...6/2006.215.pdf

a) The Almey – Ravelston Special Planning Area includes a hierarchy of streets that include arterial streets, major collectors, and collectors as illustrated in Map 4. Detailed alignment of collector and local streets will be identified in the Development Application phase.
(b) The City shall consider future transportation linkages within the Special Plan Area (Map 4) when reviewing any plans of development, and shall protect the future rights-of-ways through site plan reviews, development controls, easement agreements, and/or acquiring land.
(c) The City of Winnipeg shall have the ability to acquire additional right-of- way through standard dedication practices to accommodate the roadway network.
(d) The Almey – Lagimodiere connection will only be severed upon completion of the Reenders Drive extension connecting at a minimum two lanes of the ultimate four lane roadway with Peguis Street.
(e) the traffic control signals located at the present Almey – Lagimodiere intersection be retained following the closing of Almey Avenue, west of Ravelston Avenue to continue providing adequate northbound and southbound vehicular access to the commercial lands located on the east side of Lagimodiere Boulevard, west of Ravelston Avenue.
(f) That pedestrian access to Lagimodiere Blvd via Almey Avenue be maintained after the Almey Avenue right-of-way has been closed to vehicle traffic west of Ravelston Avenue West and east of Lagimodiere Boulevard, which would be triggered by the extension of Reenders Drive (as stipulated in Recommendation 5.2.2(4)(d).
(g) That the Reenders Drive extension and permanent closure of Almey Avenue west of Ravelston Avenue be done concurrently as one project.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Kronos

From the City of Winnipeg Transcona West Structure Plan By-Law pdf pg. 19 of 49 (2006):

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/docu...6/2006.215.pdf

a) The Almey – Ravelston Special Planning Area includes a hierarchy of streets that include arterial streets, major collectors, and collectors as illustrated in Map 4. Detailed alignment of collector and local streets will be identified in the Development Application phase.
(b) The City shall consider future transportation linkages within the Special Plan Area (Map 4) when reviewing any plans of development, and shall protect the future rights-of-ways through site plan reviews, development controls, easement agreements, and/or acquiring land.
(c) The City of Winnipeg shall have the ability to acquire additional right-of- way through standard dedication practices to accommodate the roadway network.
(d) The Almey – Lagimodiere connection will only be severed upon completion of the Reenders Drive extension connecting at a minimum two lanes of the ultimate four lane roadway with Peguis Street.
(e) the traffic control signals located at the present Almey – Lagimodiere intersection be retained following the closing of Almey Avenue, west of Ravelston Avenue to continue providing adequate northbound and southbound vehicular access to the commercial lands located on the east side of Lagimodiere Boulevard, west of Ravelston Avenue.
(f) That pedestrian access to Lagimodiere Blvd via Almey Avenue be maintained after the Almey Avenue right-of-way has been closed to vehicle traffic west of Ravelston Avenue West and east of Lagimodiere Boulevard, which would be triggered by the extension of Reenders Drive (as stipulated in Recommendation 5.2.2(4)(d).
(g) That the Reenders Drive extension and permanent closure of Almey Avenue west of Ravelston Avenue be done concurrently as one project.

This plan is a few years old already. There have quietly been changes proposed and made given the recent approvals of a few larger subdivisions to the north of Ravelston and east of Peguis.

[njaohnt]

Originally Posted by Kronos

From the City of Winnipeg Transcona West Structure Plan By-Law pdf pg. 19 of 49 (2006):

http://clkapps.winnipeg.ca/dmis/docu...6/2006.215.pdf

a) The Almey – Ravelston Special Planning Area includes a hierarchy of streets that include arterial streets, major collectors, and collectors as illustrated in Map 4. Detailed alignment of collector and local streets will be identified in the Development Application phase.
(b) The City shall consider future transportation linkages within the Special Plan Area (Map 4) when reviewing any plans of development, and shall protect the future rights-of-ways through site plan reviews, development controls, easement agreements, and/or acquiring land.
(c) The City of Winnipeg shall have the ability to acquire additional right-of- way through standard dedication practices to accommodate the roadway network.
(d) The Almey – Lagimodiere connection will only be severed upon completion of the Reenders Drive extension connecting at a minimum two lanes of the ultimate four lane roadway with Peguis Street.
(e) the traffic control signals located at the present Almey – Lagimodiere intersection be retained following the closing of Almey Avenue, west of Ravelston Avenue to continue providing adequate northbound and southbound vehicular access to the commercial lands located on the east side of Lagimodiere Boulevard, west of Ravelston Avenue.
(f) That pedestrian access to Lagimodiere Blvd via Almey Avenue be maintained after the Almey Avenue right-of-way has been closed to vehicle traffic west of Ravelston Avenue West and east of Lagimodiere Boulevard, which would be triggered by the extension of Reenders Drive (as stipulated in Recommendation 5.2.2(4)(d).
(g) That the Reenders Drive extension and permanent closure of Almey Avenue west of Ravelston Avenue be done concurrently as one project.

Map 5 -- Grade separation at Regent and Lag!

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

This plan is a few years old already. There have quietly been changes proposed and made given the recent approvals of a few larger subdivisions to the north of Ravelston and east of Peguis.

Definitely. It still has the Ed Schreyer Parkway listing going through the Tall Grass Prairie Reserve which I'm pretty sure will never happen now; not to mention the wall of new residential housing just to the south of there.

[bomberjet]

The regent and lag interchange is long long term haha. And apparently the city thinks they can get ESP to regent to use the street right beside the tall grass thing.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Pinus

Definitely. It still has the Ed Schreyer Parkway listing going through the Tall Grass Prairie Reserve which I'm pretty sure will never happen now; not to mention the wall of new residential housing just to the south of there.

The Ed Schreyer Parkway will not go through the Tall Grass Prairie reserve. It will use the Bradley St right of way and terminate at Regent right in front of Vickar Community Chevrolet. The existing industry (Carvista and Buhler)actually encroach on city land I believe, so the city will be able to cobble together a few more feet of space to run 4 lanes into Regent.