Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by alittle1

I wish they would put a larger, better wine section in Costco. Free samples would be icing on the cake.

I was surprised how much Fargo grew to the west and south. The grid streets are already in place, won't be long before businesses fill up the empty fields.

Personally I dislike what is happening in Fargo. It seems to be a miniature Calgary and at night of you have ever driven through it. Those new sections you spoke of are void of life. And I am not talking about the interstates. But the actual city streets. But if I went back in time when my mother and grandmother would haul my ass down their to shop that city was full of life at night.

I do however give them 100% on doing grid pattern roads and not this garbage we do.


As for the original comment about free ways. We DO NOT NEED THEM. What we do need is the inner ring finished even with lights. And the outer ring finished with at the very least fly overs so cross Canada traffic doesn't need to stop. But reason I dislike the idea of inner freeways is look at Detroit. A poster child to why you do not want freeways. Google the decline of Detroit. And you will see that the installation of the freeway system also was part of the reason for the collapse of the city. And it makes perfect sense. The more you make it easy for people to avoid areas the faster you will see those areas decline. It's like every single town the trans Canada hwy by passes now. They are all dead or dieing. Of they actually do make for example a by pass around Morris. That towns days are numbered. Same holds true per say if you live like me in st vital and don't want to per say drive through st b. Because now I have to drive through it. I also because I do drive though it stop and shop in st b. If I was able to avoid it. Well I wouldn't be spending my money there.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

As for the original comment about free ways. We DO NOT NEED THEM. What we do need is the inner ring finished even with lights. And the outer ring finished with at the very least fly overs so cross Canada traffic doesn't need to stop. But reason I dislike the idea of inner freeways is look at Detroit. A poster child to why you do not want freeways. Google the decline of Detroit. And you will see that the installation of the freeway system also was part of the reason for the collapse of the city. And it makes perfect sense. The more you make it easy for people to avoid areas the faster you will see those areas decline. It's like every single town the trans Canada hwy by passes now. They are all dead or dieing. Of they actually do make for example a by pass around Morris. That towns days are numbered. Same holds true per say if you live like me in st vital and don't want to per say drive through st b. Because now I have to drive through it. I also because I do drive though it stop and shop in st b. If I was able to avoid it. Well I wouldn't be spending my money there.

Are you saying that with diamond interchanges built along routes like Bishop and Lagimodiere that it would cause the sorrounding areas to decline? Is St. Vital mall going to see a decline in business if and when an interchange is finally built at Bishop/St.Marys? I would argue it's likely the opposite. I, and many others I know purposely avoid these routes as much as possible due to the amount of poorly planned and poorly timed signalized intersections they are lined with. All of us on here know how bad Lag, Bishop and Kenaston get in rush hour.

To use Detroit as your example to avoid freeways altogether is a very weak argument. Many factors contributed to the fall of Detroit. There are countless prosperous and exciting cities across the world that have full freeway networks.

Now let me be clear...I am not advocating for a new freeway system to cut a swath through our inner city. Hell no. What I want is a free-flowing (as much as possible anyway) inner ring road to quickly and efficiently move our heavy traffic. And if for some reason there does need to be a traffic light put up, lets plan things a little better than whoever the brainiacs were who rubber-stamped four signalized T-bone intersections 500 ft apart along the eastern leg of Bishop.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by Reignman

Are you saying that with diamond interchanges built along routes like Bishop and Lagimodiere that it would cause the sorrounding areas to decline? Is St. Vital mall going to see a decline in business if and when an interchange is finally built at Bishop/St.Marys? I would argue it's likely the opposite. I, and many others I know purposely avoid these routes as much as possible due to the amount of poorly planned and poorly timed signalized intersections they are lined with. All of us on here know how bad Lag, Bishop and Kenaston get in rush hour.

To use Detroit as your example to avoid freeways altogether is a very weak argument. Many factors contributed to the fall of Detroit. There are countless prosperous and exciting cities across the world that have full freeway networks.

Now let me be clear...I am not advocating for a new freeway system to cut a swath through our inner city. Hell no. What I want is a free-flowing (as much as possible anyway) inner ring road to quickly and efficiently move our heavy traffic. And if for some reason there does need to be a traffic light put up, lets plan things a little better than whoever the brainiacs were who rubber-stamped four signalized T-bone intersections 500 ft apart along the eastern leg of Bishop.

Free way and interchanges are two different things. I was comparing American style freeways and the impact they would have had on Winnipeg if they were ever built. So yes my comparison of Detroit and what people were dreaming of in the 1960s are valid.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

I agree, I was a proponent of the CP Trail extension but had some doubts about whether the road was truly needed but those doubts have been put to rest as the volume use of the roadway has far exceeded my expectations. Traffic on residential streets in NK that were never designed for the volume they once saw before the CPT extension has been greatly decreased.

Have to also agree that the CPT/Gateway intersection was another lost opportunity by the city for finally building/designing something right. On top of that eliminating a north and south bound lane (the closure of Raleigh) traffic is now worse than before.

It's called induced demand.

Originally Posted by Reignman

Are you saying that with diamond interchanges built along routes like Bishop and Lagimodiere that it would cause the sorrounding areas to decline? Is St. Vital mall going to see a decline in business if and when an interchange is finally built at Bishop/St.Marys? I would argue it's likely the opposite. I, and many others I know purposely avoid these routes as much as possible due to the amount of poorly planned and poorly timed signalized intersections they are lined with. All of us on here know how bad Lag, Bishop and Kenaston get in rush hour.

Is St. Vital Mall going to see a reduction? No -- because it's built to the scale necessary to survive (the scale of the vehicle). Will all the small shops along St. Mary's, St. Anne's, and Dakota see a reduction? You damn well right they will (even more than they already do because all those streets are shitshows).

[Biff]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

Biff back when Bishop was being built they actually were installing overpasses at st Anne's and st Mary's.

The earth was even piled up at the st Anne's junction. Kinda like they had done at Route 90 and Bishop and are finally making a flyover.

My late father who worked on bishop told me at the time the reason work was halted though for st annes was due to the transmission lines , and that they had to go back and rework the plans as hydro was not about to move the lines. This went on for years if not a decade and by then the Bishop underpass at Pembina was built and st annes was forgotten.

The other one that failed was st annes and st Mary's merging into Dakota at the perimeter and a cloverleaf to be installed. Of course back in the 80s no one knew south st vital and st b were going to explode at the seams and again nothing happened except a swath of land set aside for Dakota to join the perimeter.

The other thing was both st Mary's and st annes were to have their own clover leafs. When I still lived in Vermette which is now south st vital my friends lived at two of the corners of st annes and the perimeter. The province and city were trying to buy them out to put the land aside for this dream. Eventually everyone sold except for one property. But both st Mary's and st annes have the land set aside if it ever happens.

Interesting stuff Bluenote - thanks.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

It's called induced demand.

True. When a new route is produced, immediately more cars get manufactured to fill it.

Same reason why I oppose the proposed expansion of Siloam Mission - more homeless people will be created to fill it.

[/sarcasm]

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

It's called induced demand.



Is St. Vital Mall going to see a reduction? No -- because it's built to the scale necessary to survive (the scale of the vehicle). Will all the small shops along St. Mary's, St. Anne's, and Dakota see a reduction? You damn well right they will (even more than they already do because all those streets are shitshows).

I don't understand why improved traffic flow along these routes would negatively affect businesses along them. If anything, I would think more traffic due to improved flow would be the result causing motorists to be attracted to the routes and therefore more potential customers to pass by. Keep in mind, only the St.Annes/St.Marys intersections with Bishop will be improved. There will still be a gazillion lights in either direction on both of those streets. How many people now avoid taking St. Anne's or St. Mary's due to the long waits to pass through Bishop Grandin? Eliminate, or reduce that problem and those people will return.

Personally better flow would bring me onto Bishop and into the St.Vital area more often than I do now. I can say from personal experience that sitting on Bishop backed up at St.Annes all the way to Dakota does not make contemplate sticking around and shopping along the side streets. It just pisses me off and I end up finding alternate routes to avoid the area completely.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Reignman

I don't understand why improved traffic flow along these routes would negatively affect businesses along them. If anything, I would think more traffic due to improved flow would be the result causing motorists to be attracted to the routes and therefore more potential customers to pass by. Keep in mind, only the St.Annes/St.Marys intersections with Bishop will be improved. There will still be a gazillion lights in either direction on both of those streets. How many people now avoid taking St. Anne's or St. Mary's due to the long waits to pass through Bishop Grandin? Eliminate, or reduce that problem and those people will return.

Personally better flow would bring me onto Bishop and into the St.Vital area more often than I do now. I can say from personal experience that sitting on Bishop backed up at St.Annes all the way to Dakota does not make contemplate sticking around and shopping along the side streets. It just pisses me off and I end up finding alternate routes to avoid the area completely.

Do me a favour and drive into one of the strip malls along St. Mary's or St. Anne's Road. Drive in, look in the 3, 4 or 5 shops they have, maybe buy something, maybe not. Then drive out. After you do this, tell me how more vehicles being able to drive past faster will help. It will just make people more likely to stop at a more auto-centric place.

What we have isn't good, but what you're asking for is even worse.

EDIT: After re-reading this it sounded a bit condicending (at least in my mind) -- it wasn't ment to be that way. I was being serious and this should be an experiment that everyone here should try. I suggest you pick a "transportation corridor" near your neighbourhood.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Do me a favour and drive into one of the strip malls along St. Mary's or St. Anne's Road. Drive in, look in the 3, 4 or 5 shops they have, maybe buy something, maybe not. Then drive out. After you do this, tell me how more vehicles being able to drive past faster will help. It will just make people more likely to stop at a more auto-centric place.

What we have isn't good, but what you're asking for is even worse.

As I said, the only improvement along St.Annes and St.Marys would be the huge rush hour lineups at Bishop Grandin. Trust me, sitting in those lineups on St.Annes does not cause anybody waiting in them to turn off and do a little shopping while they're in the area. Many people I know avoid it and instead use alternate routes such as Lakewood.

If what you're saying is correct though, in theory we could install a set of lights or a 4-way stop at every minor intersection along these streets and the small businesses should blossom?

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Reignman

As I said, the only improvement along St.Annes and St.Marys would be the huge rush hour lineups at Bishop Grandin. Trust me, sitting in those lineups on St.Annes does not cause anybody waiting in them to turn off and do a little shopping while they're in the area. Many people I know avoid it and instead use alternate routes such as Lakewood.

If what you're saying is correct though, in theory we could install a set of lights or a 4-way stop at every minor intersection along these streets and the small businesses should blossom?

That's a logical fallacy. If A yields B then ~A yields ~B isn't always true. Neither Adding nor subtracting stops from this area will make it any more or less viable.

The problem is that they want St. Mary's and St. Anne's to be both a neighbourhood street, lined with small business, and a transportation corridor, with a lot of fast moving traffic. These two things are mutually exclusive.

Have a read of fellow forumer Robert Galston's piece in the Free Press. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

The problem is that they want St. Mary's and St. Anne's to be both a neighbourhood street, lined with small business, and a transportation corridor, with a lot of fast moving traffic. These two things are mutually exclusive.

Not sure why these two things are mutually exclusive. Lots of prime examples in other cities where these roads act as both (e.g. Yonge Street in Toronto).

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

That's a logical fallacy. If A yields B then ~A yields ~B isn't always true. Neither Adding nor subtracting stops from this area will make it any more or less viable.

The problem is that they want St. Mary's and St. Anne's to be both a neighbourhood street, lined with small business, and a transportation corridor, with a lot of fast moving traffic. These two things are mutually exclusive.

Have a read of fellow forumer Robert Galston's piece in the Free Press. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

That is a fantastic article. I agree completely. Mr. Galston does touch on the points I am trying to make....that the streets that are meant to be expressways should be devoid of traffic lights, residential area and shopping center accesses. The Lagimodieres, Kenastons and Bishop Grandins. This is why I want the interchanges built at St.Annes and St.Marys....I am not asking for Corydon or Osborne or Portage or St.Marys to become high speed expressways. I want the routes meant to be expressways to see the necessary investment to become actual expressways.

[bomberjet]

^ Didn't read every single word of the above series of posts. But seems like you guys were talking differently.

Steve was saying that St. Mary's and Anne's can't be high speed routes AND local streets at the same time, which is 100% true.

Reignman was referring to Bishop Grandin mostly. And that by installing interchanges at St. Mary's and Anne's shouldn't dictate what happens to the surrounding area, which is also true.

Rman's example of people waiting in traffic will tend to stay in line as opposed to go shopping. Personally, I drive that route twice a day, Bishop Grandin.There's no way I'm getting out of those line-ups during rush hour to go by some hand warmers. I just want to get through as quickly as possible.

On the flip side. If there were no traffic issues on Bishop Grandin, there would be less traffic issues in the surrounding area. Which would lead me, personally, to be more likely to stray off my route home to make a stop or two. As opposed to driving to my local neighbourhood where I know everything.

[JDSunny]

I'm not sure if St. Mary's and St. Anne's need to be high-speed corridors; they are far too built up as it is and would require massive re-construction and lots of businesses and residents to be moved. However, I see no hard in constructing interchanges where these roads meet Bishop Grandin Blvd. None at all.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

^ Didn't read every single word of the above series of posts. But seems like you guys were talking differently.

Steve was saying that St. Mary's and Anne's can't be high speed routes AND local streets at the same time, which is 100% true.

Reignman was referring to Bishop Grandin mostly. And that by installing interchanges at St. Mary's and Anne's shouldn't dictate what happens to the surrounding area, which is also true.

Rman's example of people waiting in traffic will tend to stay in line as opposed to go shopping. Personally, I drive that route twice a day, Bishop Grandin.There's no way I'm getting out of those line-ups during rush hour to go by some hand warmers. I just want to get through as quickly as possible.

On the flip side. If there were no traffic issues on Bishop Grandin, there would be less traffic issues in the surrounding area. Which would lead me, personally, to be more likely to stray off my route home to make a stop or two. As opposed to driving to my local neighbourhood where I know everything.

Bomberjet, exactly. I am not asking for changes to St.Annes or St.Marys at all.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by JDSunny

I'm not sure if St. Mary's and St. Anne's need to be high-speed corridors; they are far too built up as it is and would require massive re-construction and lots of businesses and residents to be moved. However, I see no hard in constructing interchanges where these roads meet Bishop Grandin Blvd. None at all.

In any other city these intersections would have been grade separated long ago. The only reason they are not is because, as alittle put it, our civic government is pathetically cheap when it comes to our infrastructure. Think of it this way....a quick look on Google maps reveals that Regina's Ring Road has more interchanges on it within city limits than the entire city of Winnipeg has interchanges combined. A city almost a quarter the size of us, and therefore a quarter of the traffic - has more traffic interchanges than we do. I find this completely unnaceptable.

Somebody mentioned earlier they just want to see our inner ring road completed even if it means with lights. My fear with that is, once the ring is complete the city will throw their hands in the air and say "we're done", just as the province has done with the perimeter highway. Besides CCW, how many interchanges have been constructed on 100/101 since the NE link was completed in 1996? You guessed it....zero. All sorts of promises but nothing has materialized. Except endless excuses. Same thing would happen with inner ring road. I would like to see the infrastructure improvements made on existing roadways first, then put the extensions through. No different than how in the Interchanges thread some were saying how it would make more sense to build the Kenaston/100 cloverleaf BEFORE connecting Kenaston to the perimeter. Cause we all know if Kenaston is connected first, the province will sit on their hands and that interchange will never be built.

[alittle1]

In short, what Bishop needs is a two lane road running on both sides of the existing roadway with overpasses at River Rd., St.Mary's and St. Annes. The parallel roadways would service the local community as well as the local businesses.

St. Marys and St. Annes were never designed to handle the traffic load they have now. What we need is East-West roadways at Carrier to Maginot, and Mc Gillivary/Oakenwald to Fermor, to alleviate traffic on the North-South streets.

Please people, pick up a map and look at the obvious.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by alittle1

St. Marys and St. Annes were never designed to handle the traffic load they have now. What we need is East-West roadways at Carrier to Maginot, and Mc Gillivary/Oakenwald to Fermor, to alleviate traffic on the North-South streets.

Please people, pick up a map and look at the obvious.

I don't understand how connecting Oakenwald to McGillivary would alleviate traffic on StAnnes and StMarys heading to and from downtown to south St Vital. Not saying I wouldn't like to see that link made though...

[bomberjet]

Connecting McGillivray to Fermor via Oakenwold would provide another point of access to Pembina. So traffic wouldn't have to use St. Mary's/Anne's to travel to the north/south to the next nearest access point (Bishop Grandin or Osborne).

It would also provide the only east west route that would span the CoW. I've dreamt about this one before.

[Reignman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Connecting McGillivray to Fermor via Oakenwold would provide another point of access to Pembina. So traffic wouldn't have to use St. Mary's/Anne's to travel to the north/south to the next nearest access point (Bishop Grandin or Osborne).

It would also provide the only east west route that would span the CoW. I've dreamt about this one before.

Ok, makes sense. I like it! Is this something the city has considered ?