urbanMSP

Would the 35W-to-100 westbound aux lane simply be converted to the new mainline? That lane was just added. I'm guessing the final profile will be 3+1 MnPass, in which case the existing westbound lane would be plenty. If anything, they can change aux lanes to start at 35W and exit at France, then start at the France loop and end at 100.

Or we could simply convert all of 494 to MnPASS and be done with it.

Um, MnDOT is planning to widen I-94 to six lanes between Monticello and Clearwater in 2021:
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/d3/i94/monti ... index.html

UN IPCC Report.

Planet dying.

Moar freeways.

UN IPCC Report.

Planet dying.

Moar freeways.

How many people who use I-94 on that segment either don't believe those reports, or believe them but don't care because they don't want inconveniences?

But remember, anything built can be destroyed (legally of course).

So, in a few years I-94 will be 6 lanes from 494/694 to 610, 8 LANES from 610 to 101, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/projec ... df/faq.pdf then back to six lanes through Albertville, 4 lanes to Monticello, and then back to six again to Clearwater...

And they still aren't sure if they're gonna get rid of the "center lane merge" on 94 at Fish Lake - http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/projec ... df/faq.pdf - you know, the one thing that should be fixed

At least Grand Marais's rebuild of Hwy 61 next year is being done right: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/d1/projects/ ... index.html

I think it's interesting that they can't reduce the temporary traffic to one lane due to congestion or something... when we have a parallel four lane facility in Hwy 10. Just make sure you don't have any projects on Hwy 10 (or Hwy 55 for that matter) at the same time, and things will figure themselves out. Maybe do something else to discourage the use of Hwy 24 (Clear Lake - Clearwater connection) during that time, and encourage more motorists to use Hwy 10 to Monticello or Elk River or beyond.

This seems like a backdoor way to push forth freeway expansion without environmental review.

And even for people who DO want more freeway lanes... wouldn't this money be better spent elsewhere? Maybe adding a lane between 494/694 and Maple Grove Parkway (a chokepoint) or adding a lane between the new 610 merge and 101 (another chokepoint?)

Edit: Love too see this on the MnDOT FAQ, yet clearly we can't bother to enforce speeding or failing to stop for crossing pedestrians.

What can be done about the engine braking/jakebraking by trucks decelerating to the truck stop?
Restrictions on engine breaking already exist in this area, so the best way to improve this is through
enforcement.

... when we have a parallel four lane facility in Hwy 10...

Don't forget that we (Minnesotans, not necessarily streets.mn) keep talking about the "failure" of Northstar without discussing how MNDOT is continually undermining that line by adding capacity in both parallel corridors.

Met Council Transportation Committee agenda from 1/28/19: https://metrocouncil.org/getdoc/c0e22db ... WbBgFUqxKg

Big agenda. Of note, the annual selection of regional solicitation projects are item 5.

12 Hennepin Ave Reconstruction
13 Lowry Ave NE Reconstruction
14 37th Ave NE Reconstruction

24 Route 68 Transit Service Expansion
25 Route 32 Transit Service Expansion
26 Route 4 Transit Service Expansion

29 Chicago-Portland Avenue Corridor Bus Stop Modernization
30 Emerson and Fremont Avenue Bus Stop Modernization
31 Lake Street-Marshall Avenue Corridor Bus Stop Modernization
32 Route 6 Corridor Bus and Stop Modernization

39 Kellogg Boulevard Capital City Bikeway Phase I
40 University Ave and 4th St SE Protected Bikeways in Mpls
41 Hennepin Ave and 1st Ave NE Bicycle and Ped Facilities

I asked if there was a particular design consensus for the Lowry Ave NE reconstruction funded via regional solicitation, and the county says there is not yet a design concept or profile.

My interpretation is that 29-32 are all components of aBRT, so this would boost the B, D and E lines. Nice to see these moving closer to fully-funded ($27 million total here).

Fridley is reviewing Hwy 65 and University Ave within the city:

http://fridleymn.gov/1403/University-Av ... ridor-Deve

This could go into a few threads but I'll just post it here. https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_va ... 9fb5e.html

Interesting that the gap between the north- and southbound lanes of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge was designed for light rail in mind, not that I'm holding my breath on that.

I'd rather see no expansion of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge as that only encourages more people to live south of the river and commute north in private cars, but I'm sure if they get the funding they'll put in more general lanes and when that's not enough they'll wonder why it's congested again (hint: induced demand).

*cough* congestion pricing *cough*

There was a time we temporarily opened the 169 bridge up to an extra lane each direction. Everyone who lived south of the bridge remembers it. My brother, who bought a home in Savage, never loses an opportunity to mention it and that we should do it again.

Highway 169 was restriped over the weekend to add a lane. Amazing how fast things can happen sometimes....

https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_va ... 91664.html

Ramsey County is planning to do a 4-3 conversion of Larpenteur Ave (Dale to 35E) where three people have been killed walking in the last few years. Project will include bike lanes. Meeting here: https://www.facebook.com/events/854135888312101/

It would be nice if the county would proactively do this before more people are killed. There is no justification for four lane designs on virtually all of these county roads. Almost all of them have ADT under 20k, and should be extremely easy fixes with few (if any) tradeoffs for drivers.

Props to them for making the safe decision and holding the community meeting to talk about it afterwards, though.

CM Jenkins reports that 42nd St will be getting bike lanes this year. Not sure about more details.