urbanMSP

Seems like a good PR campaign.

Nope.

Check it out, sign up, share!

Nope.

You're entitled to your opinion, just as I am mine. But thanks for taking up a huge chunk of thread space to make your opinion seem like it's the better one.

"My way or (never) the highway"

Accommodating bikes makes projects so damn expensive.

http://www.startribune.com/planners-35w ... 374563761/

*cough*

$345 Million for some bits of 35W in South Minneapolis.

Accommodating bikes makes projects so damn expensive.

http://www.startribune.com/planners-35w ... 374563761/

*cough*

$345 Million for some bits of 35W in South Minneapolis.

So much ignorance in transportation related article comments. I have to repress my natural desire to correct false comments for a little while and then the endless barrage just kills any desire I have to engage. Always depressing.

I don't understand why we're adding freeway exits.

I don't understand why we're adding freeway exits.

Especially the flyover to 28th Street. I think it has the potential to make things even worse on the 28th "valley" stretch.

I don't understand why the northbound on-ramp from Lake was dropped. Did they ever present a rational explanation? Getting onto northbound 35W from 35th/36th is a nightmare during rush hour and makes the intersections with 2nd Ave very dangerous.

Once you've spent money at the Lake Street businesses they don't care how hard it is to get back home.

The northbound on-ramp is needed much more than the off-ramp to 28th Street. Currently 5th Avenue backs up between 26th and Franklin since it is a de-facto on-ramp to I-94 East and I-35W north.

It really couldn't have added that much cost, could it? My hopeful theory is that they were worried about traffic queuing for the Lake St on-ramp up and down Lake St and in order to alleviate that they'd need additional north-bound on-ramps at 28th or 26th which may have pushed the overall cost too high and as a result it got pulled and they're planning a quick followup project for two additional on-ramps after this one's complete in order to break up the funding. I hope that's the case, anyways...

Looking at potential on-ramps at 28th and 26th... 28th looks pretty easy and obvious since you only loose a portion of that park. 26th would require taking four houses and probably unlikely. Thoughts?

No, the ramp to 28th St is a major cost driver in the project: It is a flyover ramp, nearly all bridge.
Their concern is likely the backup onto the 35W mainline between 35th and 31st, which is caused a) by the weave and b) by poor throughput through the 31st St intersection. If anything, I would have rather seen the northbound exit go directly to Lake St, getting rid of the stoplight/conflict at 31st and 2nd where few cars actually turn.

In my ideal world, I'd like to see 28th and Lake become a "split diamond," leaving 31st and 26th to be calmer, two-way streets connecting neighborhoods without freeway ramps attached. This would also help spacing between 35th and 31st.

In my ideal world, I'd like to see 28th and Lake become a "split diamond," leaving 31st and 26th to be calmer, two-way streets connecting neighborhoods without freeway ramps attached. This would also help spacing between 35th and 31st.

Assuming you mean 28th and 35W (not Lake), that sounds ideal to me too. At some point soon after the 35W/Lake project is complete something's got to be done. The north-bound on-ramp at 35th is way over capacity with traffic queued up west along 36th all the way back beyond Blaisdell at times.

Matt has often brought up his ideal situation. To which I have to respond that doing so would require either eliminating 31st under 35W or eliminating the adjacent sections of 2nd and Stevens between Lake and 31st. Topography and ramp grades make it impossible to add direct ramps to Lake while leaving everything else open.

Origin-destination data also disagrees with Matt's claim that few people exiting northbound turn onto 31st. During the morning peak, over half the traffic continues north of Lake St to 28th (presumably, this is why there's the push for a direct ramp to 28th), with 20% turning off onto 31st and 26% turning onto Lake. During the PM peak, 40% of exit ramp traffic turns onto 31st, with another 40% turning onto Lake. With that level of afternoon traffic turning onto 31sts, Matt's proposed solution would make things worse.

Regarding why no northbound on-ramp from Lake, from what I recall, it was a combination of three things that led to it being dropped:

- Queuing on eastbound Lake St
- It would create a weaving situation on northbound 35W, for folks getting on from Lake St who want to cut across a minimum of 2 lanes (and more likely 3) to head to downtown or westbound 94.
- To fit it under the planned exit ramp to 28th required additional right-of-way.

Is there any future hope of relieving pressure at the north-bound 35th St on-ramp?

The north-bound on-ramp at 35th is way over capacity with traffic queued up west along 36th all the way back beyond Blaisdell at times.

At what times and for how long?

PM rush.

The north-bound on-ramp at 35th is way over capacity with traffic queued up west along 36th all the way back beyond Blaisdell at times.

At what times and for how long?

Weekends. Most mornings.

AM rush too. To be clear, in my experiences with the AM rush hour it's not actually the capacity of the on-ramp itself that keeps traffic backed up for many blocks. It's the fact that there's just too much traffic trying to make its way through too many intersections with traffic lights. One might argue that improving synchronization between lights might help. I really don't think that's possible though because it's not simply an issue of one or two common paths on the way to the ramp. Even if you were to prioritize the single path with the greatest backup (36th St -> 2nd Ave -> on-ramp) you'd have a hard time figuring out how to appropriately synchronize traffic so that it flows down that path much quicker while not causing massively excessive waits for traffic going in other directions. I do have a feeling that even if you were to resolve that issue though that the actual on-ramp capacity might then cause severe backups as well as it merges into 35W traffic and as it competes for traffic coming off of 35W at the 31st St off-ramp.

I also have a feeling that a new north-bound on-ramp at Lake St or somewhere further north on 35W might also relieve some pressure at the top of the wedge where Hennepin and Lyndale come together to either head downtown or onto 94.

*EDIT* And as mattaudio pointed out earlier, also relieve some pressure at the Franklin/5th Ave on-ramp.

Planning Applications Report includes an item from Hennepin County:

Certificates of Appropriateness for the demolition and reconstruction of the existing E 46th Street bridge over Godfrey Parkway in the Minnehaha Historic District.

https://content.govdelivery.com/attachm ... 2B2016.pdf