Perimeter Highway | Winnipeg

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I agree -- it is the person who is responsible for their choices, but the environment plays a major role in their choices. If this wasn't the case then those same people who get in accidents because of their bad choices would get in accidents all over the street network. But that's not the case, we have specific places that more accidents occur. Because those places are the poorly designed areas, the ones that we should and need to work on.

We will never eliminate all traffic accidents through design. All in all, environment isn't responsible for choices, but it does affect outcome. Build safe streets and we get less accidents, no matter the stupidity of our driving population.

Weren't you arguing a while back against "better designed" roadways, saying that a City of Winnipeg rail grade separation should have narrower lanes, steeper grades, and no accel-decel lanes because it was a waste of money and space?

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Weren't you arguing a while back against "better designed" roadways, saying that a City of Winnipeg rail grade separation should have narrower lanes, steeper grades, and no accel-decel lanes because it was a waste of money and space?

Narrower lanes reduces speed, which reduces the chances of and seriousness of accidents. Some would argue that narrower roads are "better designed".

[mattpa]

who saids narrower roads are better? clearly you we have shitty infastructure we need wider lanes to miss potholes here. I lived in poland narrow roads do not mean lower speeds, have you ever left canada? enlighten your self about how things are run outside of the province theres better farmer roads then we can highways here

[Spocket]

Narrower roads don't reduce anybody's speed. Why would they ? All that happens is that some people who are less confident drive a little slower while others drive at the normal speed. That's not safer...just the opposite in fact.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Weren't you arguing a while back against "better designed" roadways, saying that a City of Winnipeg rail grade separation should have narrower lanes, steeper grades, and no accel-decel lanes because it was a waste of money and space?

Narrow streets for cities, wide streets for highways... None in between.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Narrow streets for cities, wide streets for highways... None in between.

Interesting illustration. Of course, Winnipeg streets are mainly like the one in the middle image.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

Narrow streets for cities, wide streets for highways... None in between.

Only issue with that graphic is that its utter nonsense. There are less fatal collisions in urban settings like the middle one labelled deadly than there are on highways.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by cheswick

Only issue with that graphic is that its utter nonsense. There are less fatal collisions in urban settings like the middle one labelled deadly than there are on highways.

That has more to do with our sub-standard highways than it has to do with the fact that the middle picture is deadly.

EDIT: Just to add to this -- Trans Canada West of the City proper (in Headingly) is considered "rural" as is Lagimodiere North of the perimeter, Main Street from the City Limits to the start of Lockport, Henderson North, #3 through Oakbluff, Wilkes West of the perimeter...

I guess it all depends on how you define "highway" vs. "rural"... I in no way would call those "highways", and would put all those into the middle catagory.

[EastK]

If design does not matter then why do most of the collisions, especially deadly ones occur on the perimeter at signalized intersections and unsignaled crossings as opposed to overpasses and cloverleafs? How many people have been hurt and killed at the traffic signal monstrosity at the north perimeter and Lag alone? There is a reason that no other city or even town in North America designs their roads like Winnipeg does.

[drew]

Originally Posted by EastK

If design does not matter

It matters. It's just not responsible. That is what the last bit of discussion has been about.

[Komatiite]

It's such an asinine argument. It's irrelevant who or what is 'responsible' when there is a clearly defined control - design - that can reduce or eliminate problems.

Individual drivers are responsible for accidents, but most accidents happen at intersections. Do all these shitty drivers only drive through intersections and disappear into the ether when between them? Fill in the fucking blanks.

Citizens are responsible for crime, but addressing crime with a variety of social or economic tools/programs can lower incidence.

Focusing on individual agency frames the problem as moral hazard, and that is always a mistake when solving collective action problems. I am kind of surprised to see that argument featuring so prominently on an urban planning forum.

Edit: There is also the issue of bad design incentivizing poor individual driving decisions, but good luck getting the average Manitoba mouth breather to understand that. No, instead we get this JUST SLOW DOWN bullshit. Choke on a fucking cock.

[EastK]

Originally Posted by drew

It matters. It's just not responsible. That is what the last bit of discussion has been about.

So by that logic we shouldn't alter any spaces to increase safety and efficiency. Who needs a railing on a balcony or a hand guard on a saw when people should just pay more attention?

Like it or not people are not always at their best when driving, they are not always the most skilled drivers and our highways with their poor merge lanes and traffic signal intersections do not help. A good highway should create a safe environment for drivers to move about even if they don't have the driving skill of Michael Schummacher. Not only is it safer but also faster and more efficient as well. This is why no other jurisdiction in the North America and probably Western Europe has highways which look like ours.

[CoryB]

I was shocked this weekend to see even CCW has design flaws. While travelling south at night with a car in front of me their tail lights "disappeared" when they went through a dip in the road between spans. When they built the road it would seem to have cost minimal extra to eliminate that dip so that it didn't create a small blind spot of other drivers. In daytime conditions it would be a non-issue due to the height of vehicles.

As for the safety of grade separation compared to at-grade crossing, grade separations themselves do not make things "safer". Take the Portage Ave at the Perimeter interchange. It has fairly tight loops and there are often single vehicle accidents there. Within the last month there was one such accident with four people being sent to hospital. It was also for a similar reason that the north to west loop at Lag (north) and the Perimeter was close some 20+ years ago to be replaced with an at-grade signalled intersection. That same intersection of course is where a deadly accident occurred leading to an enquiry on the police misconduct of the accident investigation. But "poor design" played no part in that accident which removed a grade separated transition...

[esquire]

Originally Posted by CoryB

As for the safety of grade separation compared to at-grade crossing, grade separations themselves do not make things "safer". Take the Portage Ave at the Perimeter interchange. It has fairly tight loops and there are often single vehicle accidents there. Within the last month there was one such accident with four people being sent to hospital.

Well, yes and no... compare the loops in an old interchange like Portage or Pembina and the Perimeter to those of a newer one like CCW... you'll note that the new ones are much bigger and allow vehicles to take the loops at higher speeds. It's clearly a design response to the shortcomings of older interchanges which had a fairly narrow margin of error. Even the rebuilt NB to WB loop at Portage and the Perimeter is still pretty small and tight...

[OverUnder]

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/mani...ange-1.3214057

"Lagimodiere and Perimeter get $204M highway interchange"

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by OverUnder

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/mani...ange-1.3214057

"Lagimodiere and Perimeter get $204M highway interchange"

I love how the same interchange can be announced year after year as though it's news each time.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Narrower roads don't reduce anybody's speed. Why would they ? All that happens is that some people who are less confident drive a little slower while others drive at the normal speed. That's not safer...just the opposite in fact.

This is a well studied topic.

http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/1...ed-now/381117/

[mattpa]

lanes should be wide enough for a semi with extended mirrors and thats it no exceptions

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Spocket

I love how the same interchange can be announced year after year as though it's news each time.

This is a tired old government desperate to keep an "updated and progressive" image. I simply cannot wait until next spring to do my part in giving them the boot.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by biguc

This is a well studied topic.

http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/1...ed-now/381117/

Sorry, I was thinking in terms of driving alone. Wasn't considering the pedestrian aspect. Having said that, I stand by the principle that wider lanes are safer for streets that have little interaction with pedestrians such as expressways and the like.

My mind has been changed for urban streets though.
The caveat though is that this is only applicable in certain localizations. For the U.S. and Canada in our cities ? Probably makes it safer. In the country ? Not in my experience. Country-types will barrel down the road in the dead of night no matter how many twists and turns there are.

I think it comes down to bad drivers versus good drivers.