Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[Biff]

The conceptual plan is to upgrade Hwy 8 from the Perimeter to St Andrews and then twin Hwy 230 from there, straight to the backside of Selkirk where McPhillips changes to Hwy 4 near the Selkirk Recreation Complex.

The Functional Design RFP should be out soon.

They will also continue to upgrade Hwy 9 like they have been doing around River Rd and Parks Creek. But like others have said there is only so much you can do to improve Hwy 9 with all the residences with direct access.

[wardlow]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ It was actually built in the 80s during the Pawley era.

Ah, right. I sometimes get my social democratic glory days mixed up.

[MG922]

Some context to see how huge the bridge to nowhere is:

[rrskylar]

Another bungled NDP gift that keeps on giving. The city of Selkirk didn't want the bridge there but the land for the highway leading to the bridge was on land owned by an NDP cabinet ministers family so that's where it went!

[esquire]

Originally Posted by MG922

Ah, now this is a good story! Built in 1987, I'm almost positive it's the longest bridge in Manitoba at 850m (~1/2mile!!) long from end to end. I'm not sure on the rationale for the bridge in the first place, but I do know the reason that it's so tall and long.

Someone lived in the area owned a large sailboat. This person knew a provincial politician, who apparently had an in with the premier at the time. Somehow they managed to swing a deal and forced MIT to increase the height of the bridge to allow for the sailboat to go under. Increasing the height meant having to add a few more spans to each end to maintain acceptable grades. All for a sailboat.

Who knows if that sailboat ever went under that bridge?!

Devil's advocate tho, it does make sense to have a bridge there, as there are farmers and people living along the river. This bridge is also the northernmost bridge over the Red River. Edit: location makes sense, the sheer size does not.

Interesting story. Although for what it's worth, it's really not that far from the bridge across the Red in Selkirk itself... it's not as though it's the only bridge for miles and miles or some such.

It is a huge bridge, though, as MG's pictures illustrate... it looks like something you'd see in a coastal state like Florida or Maryland that crosses a busy navigable waterway.

It really is funny how busy highways go without upgrades seemingly forever, while places that don't really need it get these huge pieces of infrastructure. (See also: Centreport Canada Way)

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by CoryB

HWY 59 between Selkirk and Winnipeg is a poor alternative to a true four lane Selkirk corridor route. It is really too far east to capture most of that traffic. There is also not a direct route linking Selkirk and HWY 59. Even if you want to make a claim that they could just use HWY 44 that would mean a new bridge over the Red River and to twin HWY 44 between Lockport and HWY 59.

Ah yes, the infamous "bridge to nowhere" built in the 80s as a replacement for the old E Selkirk bridge. I can't recall where that bridge is but it already exists. Perhaps someone even older than me can recall better its location. It was called the "bridge to no where" as it was built well outside of town and one side had left the connecting road as a "future consideration".

I'm talking about the awful green coloured Lift Bridge (built in '35) that is near the Red River (needs some paint!) And when you're on the E. Selkirk side the Hwy. curves along the River. I've been on it 2x in the past 2 or 3 years (sister drives), at night...the lighting is not that great either, so cannot go high speed there, which means low volumes of traffic can pass thru there.




Is there another Bridge?

[MG922]

The lift bridge you mention is right in town, and I think there has been some thought into how to replace it, but I haven't heard of anything formal yet. It's ridiculously narrow.

The bridge to nowhere is north of selkirk, connecting Hwy59 to the new mall area at the north end of town.

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Another bungled NDP gift that keeps on giving. The city of Selkirk didn't want the bridge there but the land for the highway leading to the bridge was on land owned by an NDP cabinet ministers family so that's where it went!

And Pawley himself represented Selkirk.

Well, when Selkirk pop. reaches 400,000 or more, they'll be ready. Until then, it's a Bridge for the Future, built a generation or two before its time.

[mcpish]

Originally Posted by The Jabroni

This issue was raised at the meeting in June. The interchange at CPT/McPhillips is warranted, and would relieve traffic not just only on Leila/McPhillips, but also on Leila/Main and Partridge/Main.

When the extension goes further west from CPT/McPhillips to CPT/Route 90-Brookside, it will definitely replace the intersection of Inkster/McPhillips in a major way, and reduce traffic along Inkster between McPhillips and Route 90.

Exactly. I live right on Templeton & McPhillips in the Garden Park Neighbourhood (just a few hundred metres from the new McPhillips/CPT diamond interchange near the co-op gas station). When CPT eventually goes west to Route90/Centreport that will completely eliminate my need to drive Inkster to get out west towards the #1 TCH via Centreport. I'm really looking forward to this project as it'll be a road I'll be using constantly.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by MG922

Ah, now this is a good story! Built in 1987, I'm almost positive it's the longest bridge in Manitoba at 850m (~1/2mile!!) long from end to end. I'm not sure on the rationale for the bridge in the first place, but I do know the reason that it's so tall and long.

Someone lived in the area owned a large sailboat. This person knew a provincial politician, who apparently had an in with the premier at the time. Somehow they managed to swing a deal and forced MIT to increase the height of the bridge to allow for the sailboat to go under. Increasing the height meant having to add a few more spans to each end to maintain acceptable grades. All for a sailboat.

Who knows if that sailboat ever went under that bridge?!

Devil's advocate tho, it does make sense to have a bridge there, as there are farmers and people living along the river. This bridge is also the northernmost bridge over the Red River. Edit: location makes sense, the sheer size does not.

I was told it was for the river boats to get under. Especially the Lord Selkirk and many of the others that use Selkirk shipyards.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by MG922

Some context to see how huge the bridge to nowhere is:

Yeah, I didn't realize how huge this bridge was. I always assumed that the terrain was a bit wide and lower, because this part of the Red River valley is lower than in Winnipeg.

Well, now I know. I've driven over it a few times and thought nothing of how big it was until this picture.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

I was told it was for the river boats to get under. Especially the Lord Selkirk and many of the others that use Selkirk shipyards.

Specifically the CCGS Namao. It used to winter in Selkirk. The Namao was the reason for the dredged channel out to the two mile fairway buoy.

[bomberjet]

The riverbanks around that bridge are quite low, as seen in the photos. So it needs to be longer when in flood conditions. But yes, it's quite high.

The connection to 59 makes sense to me. But again, yeah kind of a huge bridge.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by LilZebra

I'm talking about the awful green coloured Lift Bridge (built in '35) that is near the Red River (needs some paint!)

I am a little young to remember to full details but fairly certain the "bridge to nowhere" was pitched in part as a replacement for the bridge you mention.

[cllew]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I would like to hear the rationale behind that Highway 4 bridge. Was it supposed to be the first leg of a longer route? It really seems to serve no particular purpose... are there that many people driving from Gimli to Pine Falls that they had to build a route that bypasses Selkirk?

It does provide another crossing in the spring when the Hwy 204 lift Bridge approaches flood out. If the Hwy 4 bridge was not there traffic would have to go to Hwy 44 to cross the river.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by cllew

It does provide another crossing in the spring when the Hwy 204 lift Bridge approaches flood out. If the Hwy 4 bridge was not there traffic would have to go to Hwy 44 to cross the river.

There was the famous (for law students of my era) incident in which that bridge (I think it was) was rammed by a boat and had to be closed. That event led to a case called Star Village Tavern v. Neeld (or something like that) that was in our first-year Torts casebook. The issue was that there was a bar in East Selkirk that lost most of its customers when the bridge was knocked out, and whether they could recover damages in negligence for that loss of trade from the boat's owner.

[DavefromSt.Vital]

Star Village Tavern v. Nield et al., 71 DLR (3d) 439

Incident was in 1974

https://www.canlii.org/en/mb/mbqb/do...?resultIndex=1

[pacman]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...rman-1.4390562

Well I hope Coucillor Morantz has a few evenings set aside for Engineering courses. He obviously knows more about roads than traffic engineers on staff at the City and there are more and more openings for them every time a politician sticks his nose where it doesn't belong.

[pacman]

Sorry to double post, but I know Deane, Suderman, to a lesser degree Escobar, and the people that are currently in "acting" positions. Let's just say that the City's public works department has lost a lot of quality and is currently in a lot worse shape with no signs of improvement. The public service are not saints but they definitely need protection by the politicians in order to do their job properly instead of being scapegoated / undermined every time there are hard decisions to be made.

[esquire]

^ While I'm not keen on councillors who claim to know more than the experts, it does appear as though the process followed in this situation was not really above board. Although why this had to end with an experienced engineer being pushed out of the City of Winnipeg, I don't quite understand.