MN 610 extension west to I-94

[I94RoadRunner]

Apparently there has been a ground breaking ceremony for the last piece of the MN 610 freeway connecting it to I-94. I took a ride out there yesterday, and the only evidence I could find of road work in Maple Grove was all of the jersey barriers that were in the median at the current west end of MN 610. Here is the story on KSTP: http://kstp.com/article/stories/s3592399.shtml ..... Stay tuned, I will be watching as this project gets going and post updates .....

[The High Plains Traveler]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

[I94RoadRunner]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Yeah, sort it is sort of like the 35W and 62 commons. Can't wait for this last piece to get finished, Maple Grove Pkwy is getting congested. It is probably Maple Grove's city council pushing to finish 610 for just this reason .....

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I was trying to figure out where the "common" section is going to end. You don't have to drive too far past the end of the current section of 610 before you hit a substation and the Maple Grove high school.

[NE2]

More like frontage roads. CR 81 isn't a freeway.

If you zoom far enough on the Goog someone drew in the proposed route, which will use empty land just south of 101st Avenue.

[froggie]

I was trying to figure out where the "common" section is going to end. You don't have to drive too far past the end of the current section of 610 before you hit a substation and the Maple Grove high school.

As SPUI indicated, more or less here.  The width between the substation and the high school is where 610 will run, both of which were specifically designed/built to accommodate the 610 right-of-way.

[I94RoadRunner]

With the project, there is still the need to relocate one or two of the towers to accommodate the new 610 freeway according to what I read on the project website.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Do you think there's any possibility 610 will be signed for St. Paul traffic? Would not only take traffic off I-94 but the most congested parts of I-694 as well (the section from I-94/MN 252 to I-35W).

[The High Plains Traveler]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Do you think there's any possibility 610 will be signed for St. Paul traffic? Would not only take traffic off I-94 but the most congested parts of I-694 as well (the section from I-94/MN 252 to I-35W).

Considering that MnDOT basically avoids control cities close to the Twin Cities, no. Look at the I-94/494/694 junction: there are no control cities at all (except for St. Cloud, for outbound traffic only), even though this is the first major interchange incoming eastbound traffic encounters.
EDIT: I did verify on GSV what I thought I saw when up there this summer, and St. Paul does make an appearance on an advance sign for the I-94/694 split in Brooklyn Center, well east of the new interchange being discussed.

[I94RoadRunner]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Do you think there's any possibility 610 will be signed for St. Paul traffic? Would not only take traffic off I-94 but the most congested parts of I-694 as well (the section from I-94/MN 252 to I-35W).

If there is a control City, I bet it will be something like Blaine or Fridley. Most likely none I would guess though .....?

[TheHighwayMan3561]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Do you think there's any possibility 610 will be signed for St. Paul traffic? Would not only take traffic off I-94 but the most congested parts of I-694 as well (the section from I-94/MN 252 to I-35W).

If there is a control City, I bet it will be something like Blaine or Fridley. Most likely none I would guess though .....?

Yeah, knowing MNDot I'm not hopeful, but it's a slightly out of the box thought.

[I94RoadRunner]

That will create a full freeway alternate from I-94 to St. Paul. The "commons" section with County Road 81 is pretty interesting - sort of reminiscent of the freeway commons along I-35W at Hwy 62 and I-94.

Do you think there's any possibility 610 will be signed for St. Paul traffic? Would not only take traffic off I-94 but the most congested parts of I-694 as well (the section from I-94/MN 252 to I-35W).

If there is a control City, I bet it will be something like Blaine or Fridley. Most likely none I would guess though .....?

Yeah, knowing MNDot I'm not hopeful, but it's a slightly out of the box thought.

I am partial to numbering 610 as something like I-294 or I-435 with a control City of Blaine once it is finished. Yes, I will agree that not every road needs to be an interstate, however the 610 freeway will serve as a useful bypass of I-94/694 for traffic bound for the NE suburbs or Wisconsin as well as the local traffic and for that reason a 3di may be justified IMO .....

[Molandfreak]

I've never understood why people think that MN/DOT is inherently against creating new Interstates. Yeah, nothing's been created since the original plan, but does that really mean they have a hatred of them?

[Bickendan]

It's not as bad as Arizona and 3dis...

[SSOWorld]

It's not as bad as Arizona and 3dis...

What 3dis?

[TheHighwayMan3561]

It's not as bad as Arizona and 3dis...

What 3dis?

Questions About Phoenix Area Interstates Prohibited

[froggie]

I've never understood why people think that MN/DOT is inherently against creating new Interstates. Yeah, nothing's been created since the original plan, but does that really mean they have a hatred of them?

In my dealings with MnDOT, I haven't noticed a "hatred" of new Interstates...not sure where that's coming from.  What I have noticed can basically be summed up as a "lack of interest".

[Molandfreak]

They'll have to at least get an unsigned interstate designation on U.S. 52 to get a 70 mph speed limit after the freeway upgrade. Otherwise it'll be a 65 limit on a road with a 70 design speed (this shows up on the future interchange PDFs).

[SSOWorld]

That's definitely a Minnesota thing to want Interstate status to get a 4-lane to 70 mph.  oh wait... Iowa seems to behave the same - as does Illinois...

[bugo]

Is Minnesota the only state that calls 'plexes "commons"?

[NE2]

Is Minnesota the only state that calls 'plexes "commons"?

That's one more than calls them multiplexes.

[The High Plains Traveler]

They'll have to at least get an unsigned interstate designation on U.S. 52 to get a 70 mph speed limit after the freeway upgrade. Otherwise it'll be a 65 limit on a road with a 70 design speed (this shows up on the future interchange PDFs).

There is no law against MnDOT posting a non-interstate freeway at 70 mph. All that is required is a speed study and a determination by MnDOT that it's safe. Same way they get 60 mph segments on some two-lane highways.