Road Geek Topics

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7299
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby mattaudio » July 8th, 2015, 3:01 pm

Another weird thing about this corridor: Control cities. Going eastbound on the Mendota Bridge would not be easy for someone who is not familiar with the area. Such as someone who just rented a car at the airport less than a mile away.

Let's back up a little bit and look at control signs. The airport exit road uses St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Bloomington control destinations (and the St. Paul and Minneapolis actually merge to a single lane for eastbound MN TH 5. Weird): https://www.flickr.com/photos/jbenson2/2813669942

Eastbound MN TH 5 uses St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Hastings as control destinations. Yet further up, it uses Minneapolis and Mendota Bridge as controls, dropping the Hastings.

Then you get to the Mendota Bridge. Left lane is signed as North TH 13 and TH 110, right lane is signed as East TH 55 and South TH 13. No control destinations. I'd suggest changing the North TH 13 and South TH 13 to "TO North TH 13" etc, since it would then properly infer that MN 110 and East MN 55 are the primary roadways after the split. I would also add destination signs: Inver Grove Heights (or even Woodbury) for TH 110, along with a TO I-494 East sign, since 110 flows into eastbound 494 towards Woodbury. And Rochester for East MN 55, along with a TO US 52 SOUTH, since eastbound 55 flows into southbound US 52.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5799
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby twincitizen » July 8th, 2015, 3:18 pm

Mikey wrote:I've been thinking that for years.

I'd even go further - extend US 212 over MN 62 and MN 110 all the way to 494. The stump of MN 62 would be an unmarked state highway - signed as County 62
I like the US 212 idea too. It definitely makes sense as a single route, from 212/62 all the way to 110/494.

But for now I'm probably just going to ask MNDOT what the point of a 2 mile long MN-110 is. They could probably find the money to replace signs over 2 miles. Changing 62 (really, getting rid of it) would be a much bigger ask, even though it completely makes sense considering there is another totally separate MN-62 outstate (Crosstown having been Hennepin County 62 previously). It would be sorta sad to see the MN-62/62nd Street legacy go away though. Would federal approval be necessary to extend the US-212 route?

Mikey
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 196
Joined: January 6th, 2015, 2:33 pm
Location: Gunflint Trail

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mikey » July 8th, 2015, 5:06 pm

mattaudio wrote:I'd go even further - turn back Hiawatha Ave to the city, and route MN 55 via 62 to 35W to 94. It was already routed onto 94 between Hiawatha and Olson a few years back (it used to cross downtown on city streets).

I'd go even further:

Since it is planned to route MN 55 from US 52 to a dogleg via Dakota County 42 (thereby eliminating the little cut-the-corner route southeast from Koch Refinery)...

And, since it has been speculated that Dakota/Scott County Roads 42 would be upgraded to a state highway at some point (though MN TH 42 already exists in Southeast MN)...

And, since there's already precedent (in this corridor!) for splitting state highways with long concurrencies with a dominant highway (MN TH 56 formerly went north to St. Paul via Concord, whereas MN TH 56 now truncates at Hampton, and Dakota County 56, MN TH 156 now cover the old route from IGH north)...

I would therefore sign County 42's future name into Hastings (which would require a turnback or new number for the little section of 42 that loops north to Nininger Township) and truncate MN TH 55 at Interstate 94 in Downtown Minneapolis. The 7 mile expressway/freeway from the south end of the Mendota Bridge to the junction with US 52 would need a new designator, too (or it could be US 212 or MN 62, whichever one we decide not to route via existing 110).

Just sayin'
Fair warning - you started it! :D

The Great Dakota/Scott Co MnDOT swap:
Re-route US 10 from Prescott Junction south to Hastings, then over MN 55 and Co 42 to US 52, then concurrent with 52 back to St Paul. Co 42 (and Co 18?) west to US 169 becomes new MN 410. Extend MN 77 south to MN 410

Re-route MN 13 east over Yankee Doodle Rd and current MN 55 to US 52 - rebuild the intersections at each end to make the route a continuous road. Turn back MN 13 and MN 55 north of Yankee Doodle. Former MN 55 segments from Yankee Doodle to MN 110 become minor collectors (This would likely require adding a lane to 35E from 494 to Shepard Rd and upgrading MN 110 to Freeway from 35E to the Mendota Bridge)

Re-route MN 13 west over the stub ramps to US 169, the concurrent with 169 to Jordan**

Re-route MN 3 north of Diffley Rd over MN 149 (or planned Argenta Trail) to 494. Rebuild new MN 3 as a continuous road from Cliff Rd (Co 32) to 494

Turn back Mn 156, MN 149 north of 494, MN 282, MN 13 through Prior Lake to MN 19, and MN 3 east of MN 149

** Actually, end MN 13 at 169, extend US 69 north from Albert Lea over MN 13 and MN 21 to 169 at Jordan. IF the new bridge from 169 to 212 is built, number that as an extension of MN 13 and turn back MN 41

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7299
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby mattaudio » July 8th, 2015, 6:11 pm

Mikey wrote:Re-route MN 13 east over Yankee Doodle Rd and current MN 55 to US 52 - rebuild the intersections at each end to make the route a continuous road. Turn back MN 13 and MN 55 north of Yankee Doodle. Former MN 55 segments from Yankee Doodle to MN 110 become minor collectors (This would likely require adding a lane to 35E from 494 to Shepard Rd and upgrading MN 110 to Freeway from 35E to the Mendota Bridge)
There are three dominant uses of MN 55 southeast from the Mendota Bridge. Reverse commute to major job centers in Eagan, commute from Eagan to Minneapolis and points west, and a regional connection from Minneapolis to SE Minnesota via 52. Heading northbound, the split is signed MN 55 - Minneapolis / US 52 - St. Paul. I realize the seven stoplights (not counting the 8th, at Yankee Doodle / Argenta which will soon be a freeway interchange) are not likely to go away anytime soon. A freeway 110 to 494 to US 52 could be an adequate connection between Minneapolis and Rochester. But eliminating or downgrading this segment of 55 from 110 to 52 seems like it would have a major impact on the regular and reverse commute flows from Eagan. I don't think the issue would be 35E at all, since it runs perpendicular to these three flows. The issue would be 494, especially onto the eastern Bloomington Strip, with commuters and reverse commuters between Mpls and Eagan areas.

Not saying it couldn't happen, and I'm all for road removals, but I'm just not sure how it would work compared to other options.

Another question: What's the rationale behind rerouting 10 through Hastings to US 52? It would still have a long concurrency (52 instead of 61) ending roughly in Downtown St. Paul. Or would you be cutting US 52 short of Downtown St. Paul? I figure it will be a 3DI interstate route after it's fully freewayified... Maybe I-390 or something?

Anyways, I like the ideas.

User avatar
Mdcastle
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 761
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mdcastle » July 8th, 2015, 7:42 pm

Fantasy is OK, but to be realistic highway swaps should probably correspond to more correlation between the trunk highway system and the principal arterials. MN 13 does bug me being signed north-south through the suburbs, and it's not a principle arterial north of Cliff Road or south of 101. One option would be for Cliff Road west of I-35E, the stretch of MN 13 between Savage and Cliff Road, and the new freeway crossing (which will be east-west) to all have a single number. I like MN 17, MN 13 could go straight north to Jordan, ending there.

I also like the idea of combining MN 110 and MN 62 into one number.

Mikey
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 196
Joined: January 6th, 2015, 2:33 pm
Location: Gunflint Trail

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mikey » July 8th, 2015, 8:19 pm

mattaudio wrote:
Mikey wrote:Re-route MN 13 east over Yankee Doodle Rd and current MN 55 to US 52 - rebuild the intersections at each end to make the route a continuous road. Turn back MN 13 and MN 55 north of Yankee Doodle. Former MN 55 segments from Yankee Doodle to MN 110 become minor collectors (This would likely require adding a lane to 35E from 494 to Shepard Rd and upgrading MN 110 to Freeway from 35E to the Mendota Bridge)
There are three dominant uses of MN 55 southeast from the Mendota Bridge. Reverse commute to major job centers in Eagan, commute from Eagan to Minneapolis and points west, and a regional connection from Minneapolis to SE Minnesota via 52. Heading northbound, the split is signed MN 55 - Minneapolis / US 52 - St. Paul. I realize the seven stoplights (not counting the 8th, at Yankee Doodle / Argenta which will soon be a freeway interchange) are not likely to go away anytime soon. A freeway 110 to 494 to US 52 could be an adequate connection between Minneapolis and Rochester. But eliminating or downgrading this segment of 55 from 110 to 52 seems like it would have a major impact on the regular and reverse commute flows from Eagan. I don't think the issue would be 35E at all, since it runs perpendicular to these three flows. The issue would be 494, especially onto the eastern Bloomington Strip, with commuters and reverse commuters between Mpls and Eagan areas.

Not saying it couldn't happen, and I'm all for road removals, but I'm just not sure how it would work compared to other options.
Most of it is a preference for a grid of major freeways and streets rather than a grid of minor freeways and stroads. How much more distance is US 52 - MN 110 from Rochester to Minneapolis than MN 55? 1.5 miles? (just checked - it's 2) Add in the fact that MN 55 doesn't connect to either 494 or 35E. For the Eagan - Minneapolis commute, take 35E north to a freeway 110 (hence the 35E upgrade)

A less drastic plan would leave MN 55 as is west of Dodd Rd (although as a county road). I would still connect existing 55 west of Robert to Yankee Doodle and rebuild Dodd as a direct north-south road from Yankee Doddle to 494, just to simplify the connection to 494
mattaudio wrote:Another question: What's the rationale behind rerouting 10 through Hastings to US 52? It would still have a long concurrency (52 instead of 61) ending roughly in Downtown St. Paul. Or would you be cutting US 52 short of Downtown St. Paul? I figure it will be a 3DI interstate route after it's fully freeway-ified... Maybe I-390 or something?

Anyways, I like the ideas.
That's really based on my old idea of rerouting US 10 along Co 42 all the way to 35W, then up 35W all the way to Mounds View (and abandoning the US 10 shortcut from 694 to 35W) Since that shortcut was mostly freeway-ified and the 694/10/51 interchange rebuilt, that ain't happening.

As for 52 becoming an interstate, I'm partial to I-37: continuing south from Rochester along US 63 / I-380 / US 218 / etc to St Louis

froggie
Rice Park
Posts: 419
Joined: March 7th, 2014, 6:52 pm

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby froggie » July 8th, 2015, 9:14 pm

Would federal approval be necessary to extend the US-212 route?
Federal, no. AASHTO, yes.

User avatar
Mdcastle
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 761
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mdcastle » July 8th, 2015, 9:33 pm

I-37 would be a good choice for the Ave of Saints Corridor, but they're having a hard enough time just getting rid of the final signals. US 63 wasn't selected for the Ave of Saints, so it will probably never be freeway. I like I-590 if it's such a problem just to leave it as US 52.

froggie
Rice Park
Posts: 419
Joined: March 7th, 2014, 6:52 pm

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby froggie » July 9th, 2015, 5:12 am

My preference for the 52 corridor would be an even I-x90, given that it'll connect to two Interstates.

User avatar
Anondson
Capella Tower
Posts: 2973
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Anondson » July 27th, 2015, 7:15 pm

Felt this thread was the most appropriate. Maybe the way we merge is wrong by putting entire onus on the merger, and a better way would be to make the drivers in the highway lane being merged into take a far more active role in opening a space.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture ... -mistakes/

froggie
Rice Park
Posts: 419
Joined: March 7th, 2014, 6:52 pm

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby froggie » July 27th, 2015, 8:03 pm

In Minnesota, that would require a change of state law, which clearly puts the onus on the "mergee".

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4596
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby David Greene » July 27th, 2015, 8:24 pm

mattaudio wrote:I'd go even further - turn back Hiawatha Ave to the city, and route MN 55 via 62 to 35W to 94. It was already routed onto 94 between Hiawatha and Olson a few years back (it used to cross downtown on city streets).

I'd go even further:
I'd go even further. Rename MN-55 to Olson Memorial Highway like it was originally. Then have a big shindig about it so people can learn who Floyd Olson is and what he did.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4596
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby David Greene » July 27th, 2015, 8:28 pm

twincitizen wrote:But for now I'm probably just going to ask MNDOT what the point of a 2 mile long MN-110 is.
An even better subject for that question is MN-121.

Mikey
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 196
Joined: January 6th, 2015, 2:33 pm
Location: Gunflint Trail

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mikey » July 29th, 2015, 8:17 am

Anondson wrote:Felt this thread was the most appropriate. Maybe the way we merge is wrong by putting entire onus on the merger, and a better way would be to make the drivers in the highway lane being merged into take a far more active role in opening a space.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture ... -mistakes/
Learning to drive in Rochester, we always called it "courtesy merging"

The legal onus may be on the merging driver, but a driver in the right lane of the freeway needs to be observant and adjust if needed. Speed up a little bit to let the merging car in behind you. If there is no one in the left lane, SWITCH LANES! Then SWITCH BACK!!! It isn't that hard, but Minnesotans have this weird obsession with "This is MY LANE! I will NOT switch"

Mikey
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 196
Joined: January 6th, 2015, 2:33 pm
Location: Gunflint Trail

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mikey » July 29th, 2015, 8:20 am

David Greene wrote:
twincitizen wrote:But for now I'm probably just going to ask MNDOT what the point of a 2 mile long MN-110 is.
An even better subject for that question is MN-121.
MN 121 definitely needs to be turned back. At most, the southern block or two could be an unmarked ramp segment.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7299
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby mattaudio » July 29th, 2015, 8:49 am

It's really odd that MN 121 was kept when the Crosstown Commons redo happened. The southbound 121 to westbound 62 LTL is redundant, since Lyndale now has a ramp to west 62. Northbound 35W to Lyndale could have been connected where the ramp to EB 62 braids over the ramp from EB 62 to Lyndale. And Southbound 35W could have been accessed via the existing ramp to Westbound 62 by essentially turning the current 121 bridges into a trumpet. This would have necessitated maybe 6-12 more homes being taken, but it would have literally opened up blocks of new development opportunities.

Map: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid= ... sp=sharing

Mikey
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 196
Joined: January 6th, 2015, 2:33 pm
Location: Gunflint Trail

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mikey » July 29th, 2015, 7:22 pm

But "that's just the way it's always been"

also see: Hwy 10 in Arden Hills

User avatar
Mdcastle
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 761
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Mdcastle » August 3rd, 2015, 5:12 pm

Removing part of MN 121 and converting the rest to a city street has been brought up. I got the impression the businesses on Lyndale north of 50th like how easy it is to get to them by car from the freeway. How tight the turn is for northbound to westbound is, and the left exits, are some of the unfortunate parts of the project. I think the project was at the point where thinking even bigger would break it again, like thinking too small did.

Also, remember the WB ramp from Lyndale was a very late addition, when they scrapped a U-turn ramp from Portland (similar to the one their going to build at E Bush Lake Road in Bloomington now).

As a side note, MN 121 is one of my favorite routes, but I can survive without it...

froggie
Rice Park
Posts: 419
Joined: March 7th, 2014, 6:52 pm

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby froggie » August 3rd, 2015, 10:12 pm

As I recall, the South Lyndale master plan envisioned redoing what is now MN 121, including turning it back.

User avatar
Anondson
Capella Tower
Posts: 2973
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Road Geek Topics

Postby Anondson » September 7th, 2015, 8:05 am

"Do beg buttons actually work?"

http://www.citylab.com/navigator/2015/0 ... =SFTwitter

Thought, since it is difficult to tell if the signal is working, I think there is design room to design for crossing lights be more informative about what phase the signal is at to help peds know how long it will be to wait.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest