Interstate 94

[DanPatchToget]

A lot of off-topic conversation here. It's not a zero-sum game. Do all the above low-hanging fruit improvements AND make 94 less of a car sewer.

Agreed.

I'm amazed MnDOT even has removing the freeway as an option. That in itself is a major accomplishment, and we wouldn't get there if we decided not to push for it because we thought it would be too hard. You think the powers that be would've cancelled I-335 and the freewaying (for a lack of a better word) of Hiawatha Avenue if advocates thought it would be too difficult of a goal to reach?

[mister.shoes]

Completely agree with the list above. Can't remember who made them, but there were Google Maps-ified mockups of a regridded North Loop without the viaducts, and a re-gridded CSAH-122 (35W / 4th St spaghetti). Those would be such huge improvments, at the cost of much less political capital.

I did some of these! They’re old enough now some of the ideas need updating, but the sentiment remains.

dte-redone-rev4.jpg

nl-redone-rev1.jpg

[Korh]

I was thinking about the proposed reimagining of i94 and supposing they go full out with the boulevard idea. Is anyone else getting the sinking idea that it might be a case of 1 step forward, 2 or even 3 steps back as I wouldn't be surprised if plans to widen 36, 5, and maybe 62 geta introduced and fast tracked.

[angrysuburbanite]

You might be right, but in a perfect world, where the boulevard is well-implemented, I think it could spark more support and investment into more freeway removal and capping. But that’s only if this is done correctly. I think the fact that the first highway removal project in the Twin Cities might be such a vital corridor could either be a huge success, or an absolute mess. As a success, it could allow many people living along the corridor to consider dropping a car for some shorter trips. But, the road could end up being an awful, noisy stroad instead of a boulevard, which could make some people stick with a car, since it would be so unpleasant.

As someone who lives very close to a freeway, I do very much support a removal of I-94, but only if it is done in a way that truly prioritizes non-automobile traffic. I would love to see MnDOT bring in some people from countries who have done similar projects to help make it more walkable, quiet, and friendly. Giving the new boulevard a distinct sense of place would do wonders to its popularity. Add some plazas, good new development, and quality pedestrian infrastructure, and it will flourish.

Living near a freeway sucks. Going outside, it is constant white noise. I cannot concentrate on anything on a cloudy day because it’s so loud. I have contacted the city manager and MnDOT multiple times to ask to consider building sound walls or something, but they would just come up with an excuse as to why they can’t.

I bring this up because nobody else in my neighborhood likes this freeway—it blocks us from easily accessing nearby schools and parks, and makes it impossible to speak at a normal volume outside. This is in a suburb which developed after the freeway, so I can only imagine how much more amplified this is in a built up, urban setting. Ultimately, I think it should be up to the people who live along the corridor. If they want 94 removed, go for it!

TL;DR: Radically changing the design of a major road like this is a huge undertaking, but I think done right it could have the potential to initiate more support for such projects. But, this project is at the discretion of the corridor’s residents—they should be the people to choose, not suburbanites like me.

(If you read all of this, thanks for bearing with me!)

[BigIdeasGuy]

I realize rebuilding 94 is a once in a generation opportunity but with the stakes so high about the impact of the removal and implementation of such an unprecedented project locally wouldn't it be wise to save the big push of freeway removal with a section with more built in redundancy and probably an easier sell politically, I'm thinking 94 between 394 and 694 would be the ideal test case locally for freeway removal.

[DanPatchToget]

I think any freeway removal here would be extremely important to get right, and I don't know how confident I'd be in that happening.

Capping a freeway on the other hand I'd feel much more confident in. Yeah the freeway and traffic are still there, but at least some urban land is reclaimed for development and green space, plus it can look like the freeway doesn't even exist. Case in point when I was biking in Amsterdam and wondered why there was a long stretch of green space, and only after I looked on Google Maps did I realize I was on top of a freeway. Here's that area: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3060036 ... &entry=ttu

[angrysuburbanite]

This is getting into fantasy land for me, but my dream would be for 394 to be removed instead, it would open up so many opportunities for development downtown and near the (as of now) useless SWLRT stations, but this would be a hard sell for a lot of people (I would want the ABC ramps removed as part of it).

I don't know road design criteria very well, but would it be possible to cap part of 94 and have some sections as a boulevard, or would that just be pure madness?

The Twin Cities does have way too many freeways in my opinion, there is so much wasted space as they exist now. Why do we need 494, 169, 100, and 35W so close to each other??

[Korh]

Kinda disagree since iirc one original studies that first looked at the concept of induced demand in highways noted that parallel routes were often the lesser of two evils over just expanding one by the same amount of lanes as the actual induced demand was notable less, it created redundancies for better traffic flow, and the cost to eventually cap or cross each where less,

[Anondson]

Regarding the near proximity of TH100 to US169 to I-494 (from Eden Prairie to Maple Grove)…

TH100 began life as the Belt Line, originally intended to be a ring highway around both downtowns, authorized in 1934. Eventually the New Deal funded a lot of the construction as a sort of destination parkway where drivers could pull off the road and have picnics.

US 169 began as Hennepin County Rd 18 where the county in the 1970s-80s chose to upgrade the existing county road to grade separated freeway, and extend the full freeway from the Bloomington Ferry Bridge up to Anoka. In a way, to divert north-south traffic away from 100, and upgrade the river crossing Bloomington Ferry Bridge 2-lane river crossing to alleviate 35W. While County 18 was being made a freeway, US 169 was routed along TH100. Hennepin County making the county road a freeway is the reason the geometries of the on- and off-ramps from Cedar Lake Road to Brooklyn Park were so different than federal highways, because at the time a country road did not need to be built to the same design as federal highways.

494 through the western suburbs was part of the interstate highway project building a new bypass ring highway further out Because that New Deal era ring road was congested.

[Tom H.]

And let's all be thankful that Lake Minnetonka physically precludes just about any feasible idea for a third ring road.

[thespeedmccool]

And let's all be thankful that Lake Minnetonka physically precludes just about any feasible idea for a third ring road.

Funny you should mention it.

I doubt I could track it down, but some years ago in MNDOT's Corridors of Commerce request, they asked for money to plan "I-894", an outer beltway for the Twin Cities.

It obviously wasn't funded and there were no details beyond that, but someone at MNDOT thinks we have too few ring roads.

[Tom H.]

If they tried to route a freeway through one of the many narrow isthmuses, or bridge it over one of the lake channels, I can't even imagine the level of pushback they'd get from the millionaire mansion owners on the lake. A legal fight for the ages.

Or maybe they'd just tunnel it under the lake - what could go wrong?

[Mdcastle]

The original Corridors of Commerce anyone with an internet connection was allowed to make a proposal, they didn't have to come from a government agency. I think it's safe to say the I-894 proposal was some random person either making simple joke or a making a statement about how bad the traffic congestion is, not a serious proposal.

[Korh]

>implying they wouldn't just push it further west of the lake and make it stupidly big
I went to visit family in some growing cities in the sunbelt last winter, I know how massive those beltways can get.

[angrysuburbanite]

This all brings up a point to Korh's original question on the "1 step forward, 2 steps backward thing": is it better to have more frequent, but narrower highways, or less frequent, but larger highways?

[Tcmetro]

Chicago has a network of wide freeways infrequently spaced and it just creates overburdened arterials that are awful places for doing anything including driving.

[Korh]

I kinda prefer the former because it creates redundancies (I remember how fun it was trying to cross the ferry bridge when 35 was down), plus imo a grade separated freeway is still preferable to a strode with dozens of unsafe crossings, although you can argue that the latter is easier to convert.

[Multimodal]

Highways have no business going through cities: roads/highways (unlike local streets) connect places, they aren't places themselves, and do not belong in urban spaces/neighborhoods

494/694 can stay, but there should be zero highways inside that ring, just transit & local streets & transit boulevards, like the proposed Twin Cities Boulevard.

Transit can be surface (local) or subway (express for a place as spread out as the Twin Cities).

[Bob Stinson's Ghost]

Hi, I'm just tuning in to the debate on this. None of the promotional materials address the issue of freight traffic if 94 got turned into a "boulevard". Nobody seems to be studying this. In particular, what would be the impact on the BNSF intermodal yard?

Given a choice between a semi driving down in the trench versus a semi idling at a stop light on the boulevard I think I'd choose the former.

[EOst]

In particular, what would be the impact on the BNSF intermodal yard?

Cataclysmic.