Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[The Unknown Poster]

Credit where it's due: They removed the No Right Turn On Red sign from Perimeter & Waverly. I had complained to the city last year and they eventually called me back to say it was a provincial matter. I never followed up but someone must have because they removed the sign. Thankfully.

You might be onto something about driver education. I took drivers ed in High School and did very well on both written and practical portions of my exam. Back when a 16 year old could be fully licensed with no restrictions (and honestly, we were pretty reckless at that age, thankfully we were also skilled drivers).

An awful lot of people dont seem to know what a yield sign is. An awful lot of people dont seem to understand turning left on a red light.

And an awful lot of people slow down when approaching a green light, I suppose to anticipate it turning red. Drives me insane.

Oh and a lot of people seem to think speed limit signs are suggestions and they'd just as soon drive 60 (or less) on Waverly where it's 80.

They dont seem to understand the concept of slower drivers stick to the right lane.

They dont seem aware of other people around them. This is especially maddening during heavy traffic when the first vehicle in line at a stop light takes their sweet time in proceeding, holding up the line behind them.

Many people refuse to allow others to merge into their lane (I see this a lot where the new Kenaston turns under the flyway and merges with the existing Kenaston).

A LOT of people stop at crosswalks when the people crossing havent even reached the median let alone have pressed the signal button. This is extremely dangerous to drivers and pedestrians.

I know there are jokes about certain stereotypes but there does seem to be an awful lot of people that *might* be newly immigrated here that dont seem confident behind the wheel or aware of driving here. I wonder how they are all getting their D.L.'s

[TR_Chick]

I think ideally, (if there was space) an interchange like the Anthony Henday and Yellowhead (or Calgary Trail) at the perimeter and Pembina, Lag (N), fermor, and portage (the big 4) would be warranted, and then interchanges more like the Henday and Stony Plain road for interchanges at highway 2/mcgillvary, mcphillips, main, and then diamonds at the lower key intersections like St. Annes, St Marys, Waverly, Wilkes etc.

I recently moved back to Winnipeg from Edmonton after spending almost a year there and while their system is intimidating at first (as are their drivers... some crazy folk out there!), it was so refreshing having a full merge lane and having true freeways. It gave me hope for what Bishop -could- be! And the perimeter. It comes down to population and sprawl though. Rush hour out there, even with their wonderful freeways aint got nothing on our rush hour! The demand and population necessitate the freeways and make it a priority.

[CoryB]

Well said The Unknown Post. One of the big challenges with our current system is you could pass a road test at 16 (it is still possible) then never drive again for the next 34 years. You would have an amazing drive safety rating at that point having never had a single infraction. At the age of 50 for some unknown reason you could then decide it is time to drive again and get back behind the wheel with no restrictions at all. I think most people would be in agreement that is a bad idea.

We also know that laws change over time. For example photo radar, reduced speeds in school zones, and slowing and moving over for vehicles on the side of the road all came into being since I first got my license. Back then you were also allowed to talk on a cell phone while driving. Having drivers pass a written test every five years would ensure that all drivers are keeping current with these changes.

Doing a retest on the road ever five years would also catch bad habits if they exist and encourage drivers to behave in a more consistent manner. The road test would also be an extra safeguard against changes in physical abilities which directly impact the ability to drive without depending on a physician's letter reporting it.

While it might not be viewed as the most popular project ever it would go a lot further to making our streets safer for everyone that photo radar. Improving safety in the community is a goal that everyone should be willing to work towards. The challenge is that unlike photo radar this has no potential to become a new revenue generation source.

[Reignman]

Anybody else have the pleasure of encountering traffic being backed up on EB 100 at St. Mary's all the way over the river? This has been happening more and more lately. When you first experience this, and find yourself stopping on the bridge almost a mile from the traffic lights you assume there must be yet another accident at that intersection. Turns out the backlog of traffic is due to the inadequacy of the left turn lane onto NB St. Mary's, leaving cars waiting to turn left hanging out into the inner through lane and effectively making the perimeter a one-lane highway at that section. This is not only an extreme inconvenience but now becomes a safety issue - as you get through traffic stuck in the inner lane becoming impatient and pulling out from a dead stop in front of high-speed traffic in the outer lane. Just another thing to add to the long list of flaws on the south perimeter highway.

In all the talk on here about new lanes being planned for the south perimeter, there has still been no announcement from the province (that I have seen anyway) that they plan on rebuilding this stretch in the short term. Can anyone provide any further info on when this may start? Can't happen soon enough...this highway becomes busier and more dangerous each passing day.

[esquire]

^ That intersection is the worst one on the Perimeter. Even the one that is slated to get a new interchange (PTH 100 & McGillivray) isn't as treacherous as PTH 100 and St. Mary's, for the reasons you cited.

[1ajs]

yep ive been stuck in the clog going north bound there that light is horrible

[buzzg]

Maybe it's time to move.

[Biff]

It is bad, and I like to complain like the rest of us but actually the reason for the extra long backups there is due to the construction on Bishop Grandin eastbound. All of the extra traffic on 100 is people trying to avoid the one lane of traffic on Bishop.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Anybody else have the pleasure of encountering traffic being backed up on EB 100 at St. Mary's all the way over the river? [...] This is not only an extreme inconvenience but now becomes a safety issue - as you get through traffic stuck in the inner lane becoming impatient and pulling out from a dead stop in front of high-speed traffic in the outer lane. Just another thing to add to the long list of flaws on the south perimeter highway.

Originally Posted by esquire

^ That intersection is the worst one on the Perimeter. Even the one that is slated to get a new interchange (PTH 100 & McGillivray) isn't as treacherous as PTH 100 and St. Mary's, for the reasons you cited.

Actually I strongly disagree that east bound Perimeter at St Mary's Rd is the most dangerous on the whole Perimeter. I would not rank it higher than third. Let me explain.

I think number one of the list of dangerous Perimeter intersections has to go to be Gunn Rd and the Perimeter. The number of serious collisions at that location alone make it worthy of that title. St Mary's Rd might have some collisions but doesn't seem to reach either the severity or frequency of Gunn Rd.

The second place on my list goes to west bound Wilkes to north bound Perimeter. At that intersection, west bound traffic turns onto a south bound access road, enters into a hairpin turn and then find themselves at the top of the bridge going around 50 KM/H with no where to go but into the outer 100 KM/H lane. Add in the volume of traffic through there regardless of time of day and from a safety perspective it is extremely worrying. Thankful it is not a frequent collision location for reasons that defy the odds. It is also a far easier fix than St Mary's Rd as the merge and exit lanes could easily be extended further south through the farmer's field. No new interchange needed.

In terms of the "one through lane" issue that is a common theme along the entire Perimeter. Look at the stretch from Lag past Route 90 on the north Perimeter. You have Henderson, Main, McPhillips and Route 90 all entering/exiting, in most case without proper merge lanes, and that is with grade separations. You also have an at grade train crossing, a set of traffic lights (at Pipeline), numerous uncontrolled access points to/from side roads and at least one completely uncontrolled, signalled, and unmarked full at grade crossing!

It is not just the stretch of the Perimeter from McGillvary to Lag that it dangerous, the entire thing is an extremely dangerous road to drive on.

[esquire]

^ Fair enough re Gunn and the Perimeter (I don't often drive on the NE Perimeter... like literally maybe once every 5 years or so... so I can't really comment on the point).

But for what it's worth I don't find Wilkes/100 to be all that treacherous... yeah the hairpins are substandard design and in need of an update, but I can't say I've had any harrowing moments there. Now of course if traffic volumes were significantly higher I could see it being a problem, but it works... I feel much more comfortable there than at St. Mary's/100.

[CoryB]

^^ I don't drive through the St Mary's intersection as often as others but have not once though it was an unsafe intersection. Maybe something has changed significantly recently.

That said, taking the Wilkes hairpin onto the Perimeter always has me worrying that the oncoming traffic will yield the left lane as I will have no where else to go. Pushing the entry further south and giving it an extended acceleration/merge lane would go a long way to improving it. Similarly, the south bound to Wilkes exit has a horrible but less dangerous design having traffic exit in the blind spot on the downside of the bridge. Again pushing the exit further south and having an extended deceleration lane would significantly improve vehicle safety there without a need for a full rebuilt on the overpass.

The best hope for St Mary's Rd at the Perimeter long term would be to build a diamond with St Mary's over the Perimeter. This type of construction would hopefully have minimal impact on the Perimeter and long term would better handle the left turn scenarios. That said, this project seems to have an aversion to diamonds so I doubt it will happen.

[esquire]

^ St. Mary's and 100 is not inherently dangerous, but it is just overwhelmed by traffic... as Biff pointed out, there has been a surge due to Bishop Grandin construction and you're seeing left-turning cars stacking up into the left-hand traffic lane which is always a dangerous situation. There are always many left-turning cars from EB 100 to NB St. Mary's, and SB St. Mary's to EB 100, which can also get dicey considering volumes, speeds, and less than ideal merge lanes. You're right though, in that a diamond would completely fix it.

Wilkes is pretty tricky in that adding accel/decel lanes can only be done with a rebuild of the bridge deck... it would cost quite a bit, and even then you'd still be stuck with the hairpins unless that gets rebuilt too at considerable expense. My guess is that the province would probably rather build a new interchange at a seriously deficient intersection rather than improve the outdated design of an existing one... as it is, Wilkes is probably much safer than a grade intersection.

[The Unknown Poster]

I just had a rough experience turning on to St Marys actually due to the immediate left turn into the football field/park that is there. South bound St Mary's traffic stopped at the light, blocking entry to the park. North bound St Mary's traffic wanting to turn there as soon as you get around the intersection from the Perimeter...almost a couple of fender benders and traffic backed into the intersection.

When there is an event going on at that park, its very busy there.

[Biff]

The contract for the 59/101 interchange project should have been signed last Friday or today. Heavy equipment should be on site in a couple of weeks. It is finally happening.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

Wilkes is pretty tricky in that adding accel/decel lanes can only be done with a rebuild of the bridge deck

I am not a traffic engineer but I disagree with fixing Wilkes at the Perimeter needing a deck rebuild to fix. For the south bound exit, move the exit 0.25 km south, add a third deceleration lane starting around where the current exit is located. Give it a good run, say 0.25-0.5 km to the south before entering a U-turn heading back towards Wilkes.

On the north bound stream instead of the current entry from Wilkes occurring near the top of the bridge you run the access road around 0.5 km to the south, still have that hairpin but then have a third lane on the Perimeter run for about 0.5 km giving traffic entering the flow time to merge into the left through lane at speed before the existing bridge deck.

No changes to the bridge deck or sides of the bridge needed. In terms of the cost of a new intersection compared to what I am suggesting it is a fraction of the money and addresses the issues with the current design.

[esquire]

^ Yeah, fair enough. Good idea. Would be nice if the radius was increased to make the ramps a bit more circular as opposed to some hairpin turn reminiscent of a Formula 1 racetrack.

[CoryB]

^^ The west side of Wilkes at the Perimeter is likely City owned land as part of the sewage treatment plant. That would just mean an expropriation of the land on the east side. As it is currently being used as farm land it would make sense to get this redesign at least on the books and grab the land before a development plan comes forward increasing the costs.

In terms of a complete rebuild, other than bumping the east-west lanes on Wilkes to four lanes there would be little to be gained. To increase the Perimeter to six lanes you would be talking about also doing the following: rebuild the Roblin, Portage Ave and CentrePort interchanges and expand the capacity on the Assinboine River bridge. Considering the cost of even one interchange that is something that isn't going to happen. I think the only way six lanes will happen on most of the Perimeter is an "interchange to interchange" outside lane. This is where merging traffic would enter and would essentially become a much long deceleration lane for vehicles exiting. It would then leave two lanes of free flowing traffic in each direction. Overall it should hugely improve the operation of the Perimeter as a whole. It really doesn't feel like we need it to be a six, eight or ten lane freeway. I would make the same argument about Bishop if it had grade separations.

[yellowghost]

Ok seriously. What makes an intersection "dangerous"? What makes most intersections dangerous is dangerous drivers. Start blaming the DRIVERS please. Always-late-for-work guy has the potential to make anything dangerous. A dangerous intersection would be say...the intersection at the bottom of the bridge on arlington street if the light was timed to go red when traffic was 3/4 of the way down. THAT is an example of a dangerous intersection.

[CoryB]

^^ Agreed. Gunn Rd at the Perimeter has traffic making left turns with no traffic light. That is an extremely poor design.

Similarly, the Wilkes and Perimeter interchange has slow speed traffic and high speed traffic needing to occupy the same space as they cross the bridge deck going north bound.

In both these cases driver behaviour also has limited control over the situation.

[esquire]

I love it when people jump up and say it's all on the drivers, as if road design had nothing to do with safety. If that's the case, then isn't it a waste of money to build anything more than 2-lane gravel roads?