Street, Road and Highway Projects

[Trademark]

The elevated part of Highway 53 does indeed split residential neighborhoods from businesses. Is it really worth keeping that half mile of grade-separation that will require an over-engineered interchange with I-35 and I-535? To me the answer is no. We can keep the interchange for I-35 and I-535, but there's no need for a grade-separated Highway 53 and making this interchange more complicated than it has to be.

How does it split the neighborhood when there are crossings at Michigan St, Superior St, 1st St, 21st Avenue, 20th Avenue, and 5th St. The geography of Duluth means that only a few routes will be able to be built to connect the land on the Heights down to the lower part of the city. Especially with the truck traffic that has to come this way, the grade separated pedestrian crossings that exist today are a way better solution then trying to redo this section. and make it at-grade.

[Mikey]

Not to mention lowering Hwy 53 to street level would make the hill an even steeper climb.

The new interchange is simplifying the ramps and putting I-35 directly on the dirt from what I've seen, so it shouldn't be quite the tangled mess anymore: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/d1/projects ... etland.pdf

[DanPatchToget]

Based on aerial photos it seems like they made do without the elevated freeway prior to the 70s, and it's not like it has to be a steep drop-off to street level. From 20th to 21st Avenue it looks like Highway 53 could gently descend to street level. Plus based on traffic levels and several other alternative routes at least for cars I don't see why Highway 53 has to be a 5-lane stroad. The traffic levels are within the maximum allowed for a road diet to 3 lanes and would provide a wide buffer for pedestrians and bikers.

Is the proposed interchange design by MnDOT really worth it since it would cost around $300 million? There's all this talk about limited transportation funds, especially with transit, but when it comes to roads it seems like we forget that and go big with road designs. I don't live in the area so I suppose I don't have much of a say, but then again people outside the metro love to criticize funding light rail and bus projects that are nowhere near them. To me it's not worth it keeping that elevated freeway section and it would be better off as an at-grade 3-lane multi-modal road that has much better pedestrian and bike facilities than what's currently there, and I-35 and I-535 traffic can still move freely between each other.

[xandrex]

There very well might be cheaper ways to fix this whole intersection.

That said, how much money would you save by "gently descend[ing]" Hwy 53 to street level? Given that Hwy 53 runs concurrent with I-535 (which is literally just the bridge to Superior - only 53 continues beyond that point), it presumably needs to be connected to the Blatnik Bridge. That means sloping down to 20th Ave and then sloping right back up to get over I-35. And a whole lot of the bridging for this project is stuff that would exist even if you disconnected Hwy 53 from itself - 535 is elevated and requires four ramps!

I've long thought Hwy 53 was overbuilt, especially between the Miller Hill Mall area and Piedmont Ave. But it's also an incredibly empty stretch that probably wouldn't see much benefit from wider sidewalks or bike lanes (although it probably wouldn't hurt to add them). But the idea of turning the segment from Piedmont Ave to I-35 into a multi-modal road seems well-intentioned but I'm not sure the use case. It's a moderately steep section of roadway butted up against a retaining wall. You probably want at least two lanes going up hill, since semis use this route to get to the largest retail corridor in the city and they go quite slow through this stretch. The road's winding character means pedestrians would be adding distance between destinations, so they're better served by using 21st, 22nd, 23rd, or (most likely) 24th avenue. Maybe the winding is a benefit for bikers, but, wow, that's a steep stretch, especially if you're trying to get into Piedmont.

[DanPatchToget]

If keeping the elevated part of Highway 53 is a must (which to me is debatable), then perhaps a cheaper solution to the one MnDOT is proposing is completely rebuilding Highway 53 over I-35 with signalized intersections for the on/off ramps (basically what it looks like at 27th Avenue across I-35). As you said I-535 is a short segment, so would it make a huge difference if the segment over I-35 had traffic signals?

[DanPatchToget]

Like this:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ddzadAqQnLEyfRiD6
https://photos.app.goo.gl/bTbfJbXE8cM6eQxj7

[MSPtoMKE]

I’m not an expert on the regulations, but I’m pretty certain I-535 would be required to be connected to I-35 with free-flowing ramps up to Interstate standard. There are a some exceptions that are grandfathered in, but I don’t think new construction like that would be allowed.

[Mdcastle]

Anything is possible in a fantasy world, but you're correct, in the real world that absolutely not be allowed, nor would Wisconsin likely be too happy about losing an interstate highway if we just called it US 53 from here on out. Unlike Minnesota they've been very assertive about trying to get new interstate designations to any highway that qualifies, witness I-39 and I-41.

There's a reason we have actual design standards for interstates and it's to ensure a consistent product, not dilute the branding, and help keep motorists from encountering unexpected surprises.

[DanPatchToget]

Anything is possible in a fantasy world, but you're correct, in the real world that absolutely not be allowed, nor would Wisconsin likely be too happy about losing an interstate highway if we just called it US 53 from here on out. Unlike Minnesota they've been very assertive about trying to get new interstate designations to any highway that qualifies, witness I-39 and I-41.

There's a reason we have actual design standards for interstates and it's to ensure a consistent product, not dilute the branding, and help keep motorists from encountering unexpected surprises.

In reality we have limited funding for transportation, so why spend millions more on ramps just so drivers going across the state border shave a minute at most off of their travel time? On the Wisconsin side of this "interstate highway" there's at-grade intersections as soon as you enter Superior. Give enough advanced warning to drivers of signals ahead and a slightly lower speed limit and there won't be "unexpected surprises."

[Mdcastle]

So, who gets to tell Wisconsin they're losing Interstate 535 and you don't you think they'd raise enough stink over it that the federal government would never allow us to remove the interstate designation and build a ramp with signals?

[DanPatchToget]

So, who gets to tell Wisconsin they're losing Interstate 535 and you don't you think they'd raise enough stink over it that the federal government would never allow us to remove the interstate designation and build a ramp with signals?

I’d be happy to tell them. I don’t see the issue considering 535 is a very short segment and only two signalized intersections would be added (perhaps a diverging diamond since I think those are supposed to be safer and allow better traffic flow). You’re making it sound like the bridge would be torn down and replaced with a car ferry, but my proposal is nowhere near that radical.

[Mikey]

Considering the construction project has been underway since last summer...

Honestly, pushing for a cap between downtown Duluth and Canal Park seems like a better use of effort. It's also much more likely to be transformative. Keep the elevation of Superior St, extend it south, along with relocating the existing wall of parking ramps. Look into removing or relocating the power plant at Lake Ave

[DanPatchToget]

Considering the construction project has been underway since last summer...

Southwest LRT has been under construction for nearly 3 years but that hasn't stopped Republicans from trying to cancel it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Trademark]

Hiawatha and Lake intersection is going to be reconstructed from a Single Point Urban Interchange to a simple diamond. With additional community space underneath the bridge probably similar to Lake Street and 35w. They are looking for comments on what to do with the added space.

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/fd ... 488f850a5c

[Hero]

Bloomington Ave is having the bridge over Minnehaha reconstructed. I thought I saw somewhere the park department wanted to rework the intersection here. To bad they are just reconstructing the bridge and not replacing it with one that would allow the parkway and pedestrian paths to go under Bloomington Ave. When the weather is nice I almost always see pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross at that light.

[HiawathaGuy]

Bloomington Ave is having the bridge over Minnehaha reconstructed. I thought I saw somewhere the park department wanted to rework the intersection here. Too bad they are just reconstructing the bridge and not replacing it with one that would allow the parkway and pedestrian paths to go under Bloomington Ave. When the weather is nice I almost always see pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross at that light.

I don't think there's enough clearance to move the trail under the bridge here. And the intersection with the parkway precludes raising the bridge to make it higher for that change to happen.

[mattaudio]

Long ago there were some maps floating around, and the best idea seemed to be adjusting Bloomington to de-skew the intersection on a new bridge. This current intersection is messed up because the extreme skew results in people driving into the crosswalk (without realizing it) to bypass motorists waiting for a gap to turn left.

bloomington.png

[mister.shoes]

Adding a curve to Bloomington like that would slow drivers absolutely flying down the hills on either side of the creek. That intersection suuuuuuucks.

[fehler]

You could completely grade separate Bloomington from the Parkway. Not every road needs to intersect.

[Hero]

You could completely grade separate Bloomington from the Parkway. Not every road needs to intersect.

This was also my thought. It isn't as if 15th and 16th won't be options to connect to the parkway. Although having no intersection could cause traffic on Bloomington to travel even faster.