Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[cllew]

Originally Posted by EastK

That opening is large enough to require a large column of pillars in the center and given the spacing of the side pillars looks easily large enough to accomidate both AT and 2 lanes of traffic. Not sure what will prevent non emergency vehicles from using it.

A standard red circle do not enter sign with a tab below saying Emergency Vehicles only will be the traffic control.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by cllew

A standard red circle do not enter sign with a tab below saying Emergency Vehicles only will be the traffic control.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least. They might as well put one of these on the sign ---->

[bomberjet]

Not much else they can do. I wouldn't put up locked gates there for obvious reasons. Maybe some kind of electronic control.

[esquire]

^ Kidding aside, there could be a camera a la photo radar issuing tickets to non-exempt vehicles... the world's most expensive toll road.

The whole thing strikes me as a bit awkward though... if you're going to have a road, why not just open it to the public?

[bomberjet]

My only thoughts would be the City not wanting this to become another commuter route. Which it would be. People trying to get downtown avoiding Henderson. Even though its a bottleneck down at the river.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Either way, it was exactly that. The City not allowing it. It was not about ESP disallowing it.

Just to be clear it was ESP expecting Winnipeg to pick up added costs of traffic being dumped onto a low volume collector street. If the LGD of ESP had seriously wanted this connection to happen and come to the table with a legitimate offer to work with Winnipeg on this, included a sizable financial contribution, it would have happened. While Winnipeg might have been the one to say no publicly there is lots of blame on both sides here.

Originally Posted by EastK

That opening is large enough to require a large column of pillars in the center and given the spacing of the side pillars looks easily large enough to accomidate both AT and 2 lanes of traffic. Not sure what will prevent non emergency vehicles from using it.

Photo enforcement would be a pretty strong deterrent. Per this story driving on a closed road is an approximately $240 fine. The theoretical trip to Walmart would get expensive in a hurry with $480 payable in fines.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Just to be clear it was ESP expecting Winnipeg to pick up added costs of traffic being dumped onto a low volume collector street. If the LGD of ESP had seriously wanted this connection to happen and come to the table with a legitimate offer to work with Winnipeg on this, included a sizable financial contribution, it would have happened. While Winnipeg might have been the one to say no publicly there is lots of blame on both sides here.

Like you say. If ESP had put real dollars or effort into it, I'm sure a deal could've been reached. I'm not opposed to it. I think it would be great for easier access. No need to go on the highways, which is how it should be when travelling between close areas like that. The blockade Browaty spearheaded was in relation to the Wal-Mart proposal. I think even though they weren't officially related, they were pretty closely related issues.

In this case, I agreed with Browaty on the basis of Wal-Mart truck traffic.

[EastK]

Photo enforcement would be a pretty strong deterrent. Per this story driving on a closed road is an approximately $240 fine. The theoretical trip to Walmart would get expensive in a hurry with $480 payable in fines.[/QUOTE]

I somehow cannot see ESP going through all the trouble of using photo radar to close a small road especially when there is no drawback to the RM in people using it. It would sure be a good incentive for you to leave the snow on your plate till you crossed through!

[CoryB]

^^ Keep jurisdictions in mind. The Perimeter, and the AT tunnel under it, is a Provincial jurisdiction so they would be the ones potential operating the photo enforcement of the tunnel. They could also different the provincial police, aka RCMP, to assign an officer to do in person enforcement in the area if too many people are covering their plates. That would just add to your fine as it is a separate offense.

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

There is really nothing in it for the city to allow vehicle traffic from East St. Paul to funnel through an underpass and onto Rothesay, added traffic, ore wear and tear on a city road.


Apparently the new Walmart is going to go onto the soon to be closed Meadows golf course site.

Off-topic but Meadows is closing rrskylar? Wow if so it only opened 12 or so years ago.

[EastK]

Originally Posted by CoryB

^^ Keep jurisdictions in mind. The Perimeter, and the AT tunnel under it, is a Provincial jurisdiction so they would be the ones potential operating the photo enforcement of the tunnel. They could also different the provincial police, aka RCMP, to assign an officer to do in person enforcement in the area if too many people are covering their plates. That would just add to your fine as it is a separate offense.

This whole conversation though is kinda ridiculous when you think they spent all this money on an "emergency access" to only to not allow actual traffic through on a small local road. I know people are going to say all this traffic will be flying up Gateway but trust me as someone who knows the area nobody wants to use Gateway/Raleigh unless they have to as they are slow streets littered with stop signs and most traffic will stick to Lag and Henderson. It is completely normal in any other city to have different jurisdictions linked together so much there is little way to tell you are in a different town or city. I don't understand the fortress mentality we seem to have here.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Off-topic but Meadows is closing rrskylar? Wow if so it only opened 12 or so years ago.

I was kind of shocked when I heard that earlier this year. But yeah, this is their last season.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Off-topic but Meadows is closing rrskylar? Wow if so it only opened 12 or so years ago.

In my conversation with the area planner, the Meadows site is likely to be developed into housing. The zoning changes and access would be challenging for a commercial development the size of Wal-Mart. At this time there are no zoning changes of this type at the Red River Planning District.

Now the First Nations site just to the north of the golf course property would be able to develop a commercial site such as Wal-Mart. Still nothing official though.

[bomberjet]

The First Nation, Brokenhead I believe, are pissed they wont be able to put a gas bar up at the McGregor Farm Road access point. Same goes for the Wal-Mart. How would they get vehicles in there? From PR 202 is the only access point.

[CoryB]

A lot of other jurisdictions have cross boundary agencies that oversee transportation. In the case of Raleigh, it crosses a boundary and ESP just expected the Winnipeg to pick up any related costs but Winnipeg pushed back and said a different agreement was going to be needed.

It is somewhat interesting this isn't the first time in Winnipeg a proposed Walmart has raised concerns and needed to be relocated as a result.

[pacman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

The First Nation, Brokenhead I believe, are pissed they wont be able to put a gas bar up at the McGregor Farm Road access point. Same goes for the Wal-Mart. How would they get vehicles in there? From PR 202 is the only access point.

They can be pissed all they want. Any direct access point off of 59 between 101 and 202 would be the pinnacle of stupidity. If commercial or residential or both spring up on the east side anywhere between 101 and 202 then people will drive the extra minute or two to access it if they have no other choice. If your business plan will fail because there is no access until 202 then your plan isn't good enough, period.

[bomberjet]

Yup, totally agree.

And really, ANOTHER Wal-Mart? How many Wal-Marts does there need to be? Just drive to Regent or McPhillips if you want to go to Wal-Mart. Who shops at Wal-Mart anyways haha

[esquire]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Yup, totally agree.

And really, ANOTHER Wal-Mart? How many Wal-Marts does there need to be? Just drive to Regent or McPhillips if you want to go to Wal-Mart. Who shops at Wal-Mart anyways haha

Both of those Walmarts are complete zoos so I would think there must be significant demand for a new one. Last time I was at either was the McPhillips one 2 years ago... 10 pm on a Friday night in the summer and it was just packed in there. I was shocked. I've never seen my local Walmart (Taylor Ave) that busy even right before Christmas.

[bomberjet]

Maybe it's my dislike for Wal-Mart that drives my sentiment. Just seems like there's Wal-Marts everywhere.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

Last time I was at either was the McPhillips the busiest in the city one 2 years ago... 10 pm on a Friday night in the summer and it was just packed in there. I was shocked. I've never seen my local Walmart (Taylor Ave the quietest one in the city) that busy even right before Christmas.

Added the bold parts to clarify why you might have seen a difference between the two Walmart locations. It is also worth mentioning that Walmart definitely appeals to people of lower socio-economic levels. The area near the Taylor store tends to be of a higher socio-economic group than the McPhillips area. Further, Taylor is not terrible far from the Kennaston Walmart well the McPhillips location is a good distance from the next nearest Walmart.

In terms of access to the site, if the developer was willing to pay the cost for proper length exit/merge lanes I don't see why right in/right out wouldn't be acceptable for the site. It is the left turns that are an issue. If the developer was willing to pick up the costs for an overpass (extremely unlikely) I don't see why that wouldn't be acceptable either.