Winnipeg Roads & Infrastructure - Page 161

bomberjet · #**3201** Posted **Jul 21, 2017, 4:13 PM**

Good news. I did notice the accel/decal lanes were very long. Construction is stretching all the way to Waverley almost. And yeah, there will be a new street that connects with Waverley at Scurfield. Right of way has been there for some time.

BigG · #**3202** Posted **Jul 21, 2017, 4:37 PM**

It was posted before, but here is the link for Bishop Grandin Crossing from the city.

http://winnipeg.ca/ppd/planning/Seco...P-Apr-8-14.pdf

WildCake · #**3203** Posted **Jul 21, 2017, 5:08 PM**

Not sure if this work is related to the new RIRO, but there's a 2nd left turn lane from WB bishop to SB waverley, that turn light always had backed up traffic during rush hour

Jeremy6 · #**3204** Posted **Jul 21, 2017, 5:22 PM**

Was hoping they were just adding an entire third lane on that stretch of Bishop. Wouldn't it make sense to do that rather than ending the acc. lane then back to the dec. lane onto Waverley?

Reignman · #**3205** Posted **Jul 21, 2017, 10:00 PM**

Good to see the city not caving to what was very likely a demand from developer to add a light on Bishop. Too bad they didn't have the balls to tell SCU that they would not be keeping the light at Lag/Almey when they closed the Ravelston access...which has now become a light solely to serve one business.

cllew · #**3206** Posted **Jul 22, 2017, 12:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reignman

Good to see the city not caving to what was very likely a demand from developer to add a light on Bishop. Too bad they didn't have the balls to tell SCU that they would not be keeping the light at Lag/Almey when they closed the Ravelston access...which has now become a light solely to serve one business.

Its serving just one business for the moment as the vacant land on the south east corner is up for development after the KEG did not build there.

There is a rumor that there may be a QSR going in that location in the near future and would probably justify a signal there if one was not there now.

As long as access to and from the Almey stub is on a demand circuit I don't have a problem with a signal there

EastK · #**3207** Posted **Jul 22, 2017, 3:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cllew

Its serving just one business for the moment as the vacant land on the south east corner is up for development after the KEG did not build there.

There is a rumor that there may be a QSR going in that location in the near future and would probably justify a signal there if one was not there now.

As long as access to and from the Almey stub is on a demand circuit I don't have a problem with a signal there

There is no good reason to have a light there to serve one business! No other city in North America would allow a traffic signal on a major road just to serve such a small group of people and yet we allow it constantly. Hell the city allowed a signal at Headmaster just so people can turn off to get some Tim Hortons.

rrskylar · #**3208** Posted **Jul 22, 2017, 3:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reignman

Good to see the city not caving to what was very likely a demand from developer to add a light on Bishop. Too bad they didn't have the balls to tell SCU that they would not be keeping the light at Lag/Almey when they closed the Ravelston access...which has now become a light solely to serve one business.

Classic case of poor city planning, the city knew Almey would eventually be closed but still allowed SCU to build on that site. Service should have been extended from Reenders to SCU with an on and off lane from Lag. for the SCU!

cllew · #**3209** Posted **Jul 22, 2017, 6:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastK

There is no good reason to have a light there to serve one business! No other city in North America would allow a traffic signal on a major road just to serve such a small group of people and yet we allow it constantly. Hell the city allowed a signal at Headmaster just so people can turn off to get some Tim Hortons.

That the signal was put in for Tim Horton's on Headmaster is a urban legend that won't go away. It was put in for the traffic off of Headmaster as that is the last city street that connects to HWY 59. If I recall properly it was part of the development agreement for that whole residential development and was to go in when Headmaster was completed to HWY 59.

Looking at Google maps history the signals show up in 2009 which way before the strip mall the Tim's is located was even built.

It also serves to take traffic off and on the DeVries frontage road.

bomberjet · #**3210** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 2:53 PM**

The intersection at Headmaster is being re-configured right now to be a proper 4 legged intersection. It allows closing the last piece of access for Knowles onto Lag. All the median openings and access points there will be gone.

Headmaster itself runs all the way from Rothesay and will now serve everyone east of Lag.

It's one of those future interchange locations we love soo much. Diamond interchange there and at Springfield. Route McIvor access to those points. Next interchange down would be CPT.

That being said, one interchange at McIvor would be the best. But the residents in that area already had McIvor closed for a number of years at De Vries. Pretty sure they wouldn't want McIvor turning into a freeway on ramp.

CoryB · #**3211** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LilZebra

You're thinking of Katz. He was an expert at doing that.

The point I was making is Katz wasted an opportunity for federal infrastructure money and Bowman is planning to fall into the same trap. Different use of funds but the negative impact will still be felt and long outlive their short sited choices.

jmt18325 · #**3212** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 6:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

The point I was making is Katz wasted an opportunity for federal infrastructure money and Bowman is planning to fall into the same trap. Different use of funds but the negative impact will still be felt and long outlive their short sited choices.

I don't see how fixing the streets will leave Winnipeg in a worse position.

OTA in Winnipeg · #**3213** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 7:12 PM**

^^^^

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

You know, I don't like to complain. But I've been all across western Canada this last week or so and I cannot believe that a city the size of Saskatoon, for example, has a great freeway system and they are a city of 295,000 people. What the hell are we waiting for? Our eventual approach to one million and complete gridlock?

Council and the mayor really need to get out more and see how it's done.

This would be one of the reasons. Notwithstanding, please yes, keep on fixing the streets.

CoryB · #**3214** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 8:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Classic case of poor city planning, the city knew Almey would eventually be closed but still allowed SCU to build on that site. Service should have been extended from Reenders to SCU with an on and off lane from Lag. for the SCU!

Details are a little fuzzy but I recall Almey used to actually extend through to Panet and actually had houses west of Lag. I can't recall if it had a light back then. I also think at the time Panet may have stopped before the train tracks. Again details are fuzzy as that was quite sometime back. When the Rona development happened that whole light should have been pulled.

CoryB · #**3215** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 8:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I don't see how fixing the streets will leave Winnipeg in a worse position.

Winnipeg has an estimated 40 year infrastructure debt on building out roads. If you really want to start discussing it the original inner ring road plans that get so frequently discussed here goes back even further, back well before Bishop was even four lanes. But yes, lets use the money intended to try and catch up some of that infrastructure defect for basic road maintenance which should be coming out of the annual tax dollars collected by city hall.

jmt18325 · #**3216** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 9:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

Winnipeg has an estimated 40 year infrastructure debt on building out roads.

It also has a massive infrastructure deficit related to deferred maintenance. I'd say that's just as important.

cllew · #**3217** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoryB

Details are a little fuzzy but I recall Almey used to actually extend through to Panet and actually had houses west of Lag. I can't recall if it had a light back then. I also think at the time Panet may have stopped before the train tracks. Again details are fuzzy as that was quite sometime back. When the Rona development happened that whole light should have been pulled.

Your correct Amley went through but was "closed" when the Rona went in and the ROW was included in the land that makes up the parking lot.

Panet ends on the south side of the CP rail ROW and Molson starts on the north side.

cllew · #**3218** Posted **Jul 24, 2017, 9:17 PM**

I can't recall the city Councillor that rushed the traffic signals in at Grassie and 59 after a school bus was hit there (either Mike Ruta or Alf Penner), but the signals department had them up strung with overhead temp wire within a week of the accident.

This was a case of the traffic count numbers did not justify signals at that time, but the political points to be gained before a civic election caused the department to be told to put them in.

rrskylar · #**3219** Posted **Aug 2, 2017, 6:43 PM**

Some aerial photo's of the road network of the little city to the west of us (found the link on the Saskatoon Roads and Infrastructure thread)

http://www.saskatoonpics.com/Aerial/...es/i-5DGpxGD/A

esquire · #**3220** Posted **Aug 2, 2017, 6:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Some aerial photo's of the road network of the little city to the west of us (found the link on the Saskatoon Roads and Infrastructure thread)

http://www.saskatoonpics.com/Aerial/...es/i-5DGpxGD/A

Silly Saskatoon, don't they know that proper infrastructure is only for Really Important Cities?