urbanMSP

If the habit is to merge/shift as soon as possible, all a barrier is going to do is shift where that happens...you'll still have the same problem of large numbers of drivers swapping lanes in a short space.

Which is precisely why having the 35W flyover enter into the middle of I-94 (split between I-94, and I-394/Hennepin-Lyndale) would literally eliminate this weave. The current plan to have the flyover enter the mainline on the left is a second choice, but still necessitates some weaving.

If the habit is to merge/shift as soon as possible, all a barrier is going to do is shift where that happens...you'll still have the same problem of large numbers of drivers swapping lanes in a short space.

Theoretically, there would be more lane for acceleration. But we all know what they say about theory and practice.

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/d ... 8ba57f.pdf

35W-Lake ($25MM) and various Orange Line stations ($12.1MM) are both in the House bonding proposal, so regardless of whatever else happens this year, this project is going to get funded and move forward.

But what the hell is this nonsense?

The Metro Orange BRT Line must not follow
a route that requires an underpass or tunnel
to be built under I-494 at Knox Avenue, but
must follow the Penn Avenue route after
coming down into the circle on the bottom of
Knox Avenue on the north side of I-494.

Who wrote that? Kraus-Anderson?
As far as I know, Richfield and Bloomington both fully support the Knox alignment, so I'm trying to figure what legislator would've been approached to insert that bullshit into the bill.

Weird. Although that routing probably would serve a lot more potential riders (at the expense of speed).

How do you figure?
I assume it would have (approximately) the same two station locations (76/Knox and Knox/American). Metro Transit would not likely propose a 3rd station along the loop route. Even if either station location were tweaked a few hundred feet, I don't see any potential huge ridership jumps. And overall you would lose ridership due to the added time (at least under ridership models/simulations, skeptical if any real world loss would occur)

Maybe I'm not envisioning the Penn Ave route correctly, but I'd imagine it would better serve the bulk of the new Penn-American development, the Best Buy campus, and the large Crossroads apartment complex.

In any case, I wouldn't expect that this language will last, and even if it did, I don't think it would preclude a future legislature from funding the Knox routing.

And I'm saying it would drive past those things, but would generally have the same exact two station locations that the Knox underpass routing would. Should this scenario play out, I don't think Metro Transit would change the station locations (much) or add a third station along the "detour" loop.

Given that the segment lies in her district, I sent Slocum an email asking if she inserted that provision, or (if not her) knows who did. Given that I'm not a resident of that district, I doubt I'll hear back.

I wrote Slocum as well. This is very disappointing -- not simply because it will add a huge amount of circularity and six extra signals to the Orange Line -- but because it would mean losing a critical planned bike-ped connection between the communities. The gap between Penn Ave and Lyndale Ave is huge for a bike or pedestrian. This would fill the gap nicely, especially considering major destinations on both sides of the freeway at this location.

Richfield and Bloomington both support Knox Ave. The only people I know who oppose it are the "least and worst use" property owners on the immediate south side of 494. Even then, I'm surprised they'd ask for this, versus demanding the frontage road alignment that doesn't require extending Knox.

I would assume the provision was written by a GOP member, not the DFLer who represents the district. Not only is Rep. Slocum in the minority party, she's not on the Capital Investment Committee that wrote the bill. Jean Wagenius, however, is on the CIC.

I still assume the provision was written by a Republican, because one (or both) of the following is true:
A. They were directly lobbied by Kraus Anderson (owner of Southtown)
B. Simply due to costs - they don't want to fund the underpass (which is really short-sighted and dumb because it would be a minor add-on to the larger 35W-494 turbine Phase 1 project that will likely be happening soon anyways)

EDIT: it's option A, straight up. This is coming from the K-A exec level, who would quite plausibly have some pretty tight connections with MNGOP leadership. As many of us suspect though, it will likely never make the conference bill. I doubt it even makes waves.

Find out more at the open house TONIGHT, where all the planners will be clinically depressed after the failure of the bonding bill (which actually included all the 35W & Orange Line stuff): https://www.metrotransit.org/learn-more ... ine-may-24

TODAY, May 24 - 6 to 8 p.m.
Kennedy High School Media Room
9701 Nicollet Avenue South

Open house topics include:
• Planned route and station improvements
• Station design concepts
• Traffic impacts
• Area of study for historic and cultural resources
• Service improvements
• Environmental justice and social impacts
• Impacts on the built environment

Did anyone go?

I did. Nice to see that the local routes in Bloomington and Edina will be improved, I just wish it would happen sooner.

I asked about funding from the state and they said hopefully there will be a special session in order to get the funding requested for this project, which I believe was $10 million. If that doesn't happen it may not necessarily delay the project if the other sources of funding come through, but it's a wait and see.

The Knox alignment is coming along. The previously discussed Southtown "wiggle" is in the plan. They just couldn't get Kraus Anderson to come along on a straight shot alignment, and Bloomington wasn't willing to go to bat against K-A again (following the dustup around rezoning Southtown, which was ultimately postponed)

Much as that may very slightly affect the ride quality (one more curve to handle), it only affects running time by a few seconds. And the way they have it designed to intersect with the frontage road (around the current Lucky's 13 site), it should actually do a much better job of keeping general traffic out. A straight shot Knox alignment would look a lot more appealing to general traffic. The project team is still extremely confident this is going forward as transitway only, with a separated bike/ped pathway on the west side of the transit lanes.

Something not in the plan (yet anyways) is a much needed road diet of Knox Ave between American and 82nd. Just look at that overbuilt nonsense. Maybe instead of a physical road diet, it can be turned into as much of an advantage for transit as possible (i.e. one of the SB left turn lanes could be transit only)

Is there any plan to actually have slip ramps to/from the HOV lanes at 76th or at American/82nd as part of interchange rebuilding? I have not seen that in the most recent MnDOT files for the 35W/494 rebuild. Which is a crying shame, since this poor bus will have to weave in and out of HOV lanes to get around stopped rush hour traffic and then to get to outside stations at 66th, Knox, and 98th.

If that can't be built, I hope they can do a southbound HOV/BRT entrance from Knox to 35W, since there's a planned braid bridge for the 82nd St exit to cross over the 494 entrance to 35W south.

Is there any plan to actually have slip ramps to/from the HOV lanes at 76th or at American/82nd as part of interchange rebuilding? I have not seen that in the most recent MnDOT files for the 35W/494 rebuild. Which is a crying shame, since this poor bus will have to weave in and out of HOV lanes to get around stopped rush hour traffic and then to get to outside stations at 66th, Knox, and 98th.

If that can't be built, I hope they can do a southbound HOV/BRT entrance from Knox to 35W, since there's a planned braid bridge for the 82nd St exit to cross over the 494 entrance to 35W south.

They said in the Orange Line Plan Update that it would be impossible for the buses to weave from the HOV lane at 76th to the outside lane in time to exit at 66th, so the buses wouldn't be able to use any of those solutions unfortunately.

Is there any plan to actually have slip ramps to/from the HOV lanes at 76th or at American/82nd as part of interchange rebuilding? I have not seen that in the most recent MnDOT files for the 35W/494 rebuild. Which is a crying shame, since this poor bus will have to weave in and out of HOV lanes to get around stopped rush hour traffic and then to get to outside stations at 66th, Knox, and 98th.

If that can't be built, I hope they can do a southbound HOV/BRT entrance from Knox to 35W, since there's a planned braid bridge for the 82nd St exit to cross over the 494 entrance to 35W south.

There is plenty of time between the 46th station and 66th St exit to switch lanes. And the 66th interchange isn't going to be rebuilt for a long, long time. I really wouldn't worry about it Matt. That's a question for 20+ years from now.

More proof BRT is hardly "light rail on rubber tires" though. Without dedicated ROW, this bus will feature weaving and lurching harming ride quality during congested rush hours on 35W.

I think any pretext of "light rail on rubber tires" left this project years ago. A massively improved bus service with higher-amenity stops, the most critical of which are inline, still helps.