Winnipeg | Portage and Main

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

In 2018, it was

1) Regent and Lag
2) Portage and Morary
3) Portage and Main
4) Waverley and Bishop
5) Kenaston and Sterling Lyon
6) Century and Ness

I'm guess these moved up, and Portage and Main moved down to 6?

I still can't believe they never planned an overpass for Kenaston and Sterling Lyon. I was always under the impression that the city would build an overpass for the Bishop Grandin- Waverley street interchange. Are there any plans to do so eventually?

Edmonton built a fly over for the sole purpose of residents to get to IKEA ( and to a lesser extent- South Edmonton Common) around 15 years ago.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

I still can't believe they never planned an overpass for Kenaston and Sterling Lyon. I was always under the impression that the city would build an overpass for the Bishop Grandin- Waverley street interchange. Are there any plans to do so eventually?

Edmonton built a fly over for the sole purpose of residents to get to IKEA ( and to a lesser extent- South Edmonton Common) around 15 years ago.

This should be moved to the Winnipeg R&I thread. Both of those intersections are listed for interchanges in the drafts for the next Transportation Master Plan 2050. See page 42/43 on this document (24th slide):

LINK

That doesn't mean it'll get done in our lifetime. I keep seeing Fermor/Lag as being a sooner priority in CoW documents for whatever reason. I don't drive through there often but I've never thought of that as a higher priority than the inner ring road intersections.

Edmonton was able to add a flyover to serve that commercial development because #2 and that segment of Anthony Henday were already freeways so they couldn't pull off a Winnipeg and slap lights there, since there would be no other existing light-controlled intersections a mere km in every directions, like it was in Winnipeg. They also probably had enough dignity and Edmonton was in a strong enough growth position that they could impose demands on the developers for them to cover most or all the infrastructure needs of the development, unlike Winnipeg where they can usually get out of their infrastructure obligations (see Waverley West).

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by WildCake

This should be moved to the Winnipeg R&I thread. Both of those intersections are listed for interchanges in the drafts for the next Transportation Master Plan 2050. See page 42/43 on this document (24th slide):

LINK

That doesn't mean it'll get done in our lifetime. I keep seeing Fermor/Lag as being a sooner priority in CoW documents for whatever reason. I don't drive through there often but I've never thought of that as a higher priority than the inner ring road intersections.

Edmonton was able to add a flyover to serve that commercial development because #2 and that segment of Anthony Henday were already freeways so they couldn't pull off a Winnipeg and slap lights there, since there would be no other existing light-controlled intersections a mere km in every directions, like it was in Winnipeg. They also probably had enough dignity and Edmonton was in a strong enough growth position that they could impose demands on the developers for them to cover most or all the infrastructure needs of the development, unlike Winnipeg where they can usually get out of their infrastructure obligations (see Waverley West).

I can't see them doing an overpass of some sort anytime soon.

Even if they did, they would have to do something similar to how the CPT flyover on Main St. being planned.

Your link is broken by the way. Got an XML error.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Edmonton was able to add a flyover to serve that commercial development because #2 and that segment of Anthony Henday were already freeways so they couldn't pull off a Winnipeg and slap lights there,

This is just not correct.

Up until 2011, the QE2 limited access highway ended around Anthony Henday overpass (which was completed in 2006). For several years, Calgary Trail and 23 Ave NW were at grade. They built both at the same time, and now that highway is limited access to roughly 34 Ave NW. It was definitely not a freeway, when it was constructed around 2011.

[WildCake]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

This is just not correct.

Up until 2011, the QE2 limited access highway ended around Anthony Henday overpass (which was completed in 2006). For several years, Calgary Trail and 23 Ave NW were at grade. They built both at the same time, and now that highway is limited access to roughly 34 Ave NW. It was definitely not a freeway, when it was constructed around 2011.

I looked on historical Google Maps and the 23 Ave NW/QEII and this Ikea flyover were built in the summer of 2009.

Either way, timeline doesn't matter for this point. Even if it wasn't a freeway when Ikea was built, Edmonton had the clout to protect it as a future freeway when that corner was developed and commercialized.

Winnipeg's response to Ikea arriving was more along the lines of "Your honour, we are so blessed with the presence of your blue and yellow warehouse in our humble and destitute city. How can we provide the most convenient and cheap access for you, no matter how much it hamstrings any future roadway upgrades for us. "

Kenaston/Sterling Lyon interchange is a waste of planning efforts unless astronomical sums of money are spent. I can't figure out which route would be the free flow, if both? There's lights 250m to the south, 300m to the west, and a building will eventually go to the NW corner of the intersection because the city protected jack all for future ROW needs.

Might as well focus on doing William Clement to Abinojii Mikanah properly, but I'm not holding my breath on that.

[pspeid]

^^ I remember the city giving Ikea some leeway on their signage, but I can't remember anything about roadway access (though I could be wrong). Even if they did, seriously, who cares? I'd rather be able to say "Winnipeg has an Ikea" than "Winnipeg has a free flow road where you can drive past things at high speed". If I remember correctly, Winnipeg was, and still is, too small for the typical Ikea placement (I think they usually insist on a population of 1 million or more?). If we had to kiss some Swedish butt and adjust a road and signage, I personally think it was worth it...and I never bought from Ikea before they came here.

Anyhoo, since this is the P & M thread, I'm looking forward to seeing some plans and timelines for the re-opening.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by pspeid

^^ I remember the city giving Ikea some leeway on their signage, but I can't remember anything about roadway access (though I could be wrong). Even if they did, seriously, who cares? I'd rather be able to say "Winnipeg has an Ikea" than "Winnipeg has a free flow road where you can drive past things at high speed". If I remember correctly, Winnipeg was, and still is, too small for the typical Ikea placement (I think they usually insist on a population of 1 million or more?). If we had to kiss some Swedish butt and adjust a road and signage, I personally think it was worth it...and I never bought from Ikea before they came here.

Anyhoo, since this is the P & M thread, I'm looking forward to seeing some plans and timelines for the re-opening.

There are plenty of Ikea stores in population centres of less than a million. Quebec City and Halifax to name two others in Canada.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by cheswick

There are plenty of Ikea stores in population centres of less than a million. Quebec City and Halifax to name two others in Canada.

That I did not know! Thanks I was under the impression they only built in larger centres.

[rdaner]

As far as Halifax goes I know that the store is intended to serve the entire Maritimes region and there is a large student population.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by WildCake

I looked on historical Google Maps and the 23 Ave NW/QEII and this Ikea flyover were built in the summer of 2009.

Dude, I was in Edmonton in 2011, and the QE2/23Ave NW diamond interchange, and the flyover to the mall were not complete, until the fall of 2011.

Winnipeg's response to Ikea arriving was more along the lines of "Your honour, we are so blessed with the presence of your blue and yellow warehouse in our humble and destitute city. How can we provide the most convenient and cheap access for you, no matter how much it hamstrings any future roadway upgrades for us. "

Winnipeg would have built an overpass and off ramps to IKEA if they want to lure the company here faster.

Kenaston/Sterling Lyon interchange is a waste of planning efforts unless astronomical sums of money are spent. I can't figure out which route would be the free flow, if both?

Considering they knew what was planned, a cloverleaf would have been ideal.


The city fucked up the Waverley-Bishop Grandin Blvd interchange too. If one were to notice the way Waverley heights was done, it gave room for a future overpass. Then the city decided they needed an auto mall in close proximity to the north. Today, the only thing that would work, would probably be a diamond interchange.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by pspeid

^^ I remember the city giving Ikea some leeway on their signage, but I can't remember anything about roadway access (though I could be wrong). Even if they did, seriously, who cares? I'd rather be able to say "Winnipeg has an Ikea" than "Winnipeg has a free flow road where you can drive past things at high speed".

Personally, I could care less about the IKEA. The fact is, that anyone with a passing knowledge of city planning could have predicted that Kenaston-Sterling Lyon would eventually be one of the most congested at-grade intersections in the city, due to the fact that it's in the Southwest, where the Winnipeg is growing faster than literally anywhere else.

I knew the city was cheap, but why they decided to go with an at-grade interchange, especially since Kenaston was going to be such a major artery to Centreport is beyond me.

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by pspeid

^^ I remember the city giving Ikea some leeway on their signage, but I can't remember anything about roadway access (though I could be wrong). Even if they did, seriously, who cares? I'd rather be able to say "Winnipeg has an Ikea" than "Winnipeg has a free flow road where you can drive past things at high speed". If I remember correctly, Winnipeg was, and still is, too small for the typical Ikea placement (I think they usually insist on a population of 1 million or more?). If we had to kiss some Swedish butt and adjust a road and signage, I personally think it was worth it...and I never bought from Ikea before they came here.

Anyhoo, since this is the P & M thread, I'm looking forward to seeing some plans and timelines for the re-opening.

Halifax has an Ikea with a metro population of 500K. BTW, the Ikea in Halifax (Dartmouth) is accessed through two interchanges off a freeway. Quebec City has an Ikea as well; accessed by exit of a freeway. So, Winnipeg is not unique in being a relatively small city with an Ikea.

[bomberjet]

The IKEA itself does not deserve an interchange. But the Kenaston/Sterling Lyon intersection is ridiculous. There are 3 left turn lanes. 3 of them!! And the intersection is huge.

[Biff]

Yup, 11 lanes across on Kenaston south side of the intersection.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The IKEA itself does not deserve an interchange. But the Kenaston/Sterling Lyon intersection is ridiculous. There are 3 left turn lanes. 3 of them!! And the intersection is huge.

I'm pretty that intersection alone is enough to host a Bomber game and have the field sit comfortably right in the middle of it. Might have to angle it and wiggle it in to make it fit.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The IKEA itself does not deserve an interchange. But the Kenaston/Sterling Lyon intersection is ridiculous. There are 3 left turn lanes. 3 of them!! And the intersection is huge.

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Considering they knew what was planned, a cloverleaf would have been ideal.

The city fucked up the Waverley-Bishop Grandin Blvd interchange too.

100% On point. Glad these important intersections are finally being talked about.

Waverly/Bishop isn't fucked. Lots of room for clover there still.

Originally Posted by WildCake

I can't figure out which route would be the free flow, if both?

Kenaston free flow and Sterling Lyon SPUI would be my suggestion. Sterling is the slow moving artery. But that slow-moving problem will be exacerbated when Wilkes South starts developing. Those existing Outlet Mall lights will get really bad.

Both Sterling and Kenaston should free flow ideally. In fact, Sterling/Wilkes should be built straight through to Fermor to split the city in a free flowing manner.

(I know this isn't P+M related. But P+M has taken way more airtime than it deserves. So P+M hardcores can deal with the inverse for once.)