Reconnect US 61?

[DandyDan]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

[SEWIGuy]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

So...renumber it twice?

[DandyDan]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

So...renumber it twice?

I suppose you could think of it like that. But if MNDoT knows it wants to get rid of it, why wait until they have a deal with every single community on the route? Call it MN 561 in the interim. If they make a deal with Maplewood, the piece in Maplewood goes. If they make a deal with Forest Lake, then the piece in Forest Lake goes. It continues until eventually,  it's all gone.

[SEWIGuy]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

So...renumber it twice?

I suppose you could think of it like that. But if MNDoT knows it wants to get rid of it, why wait until they have a deal with every single community on the route? Call it MN 561 in the interim. If they make a deal with Maplewood, the piece in Maplewood goes. If they make a deal with Forest Lake, then the piece in Forest Lake goes. It continues until eventually,  it's all gone.

I'm think about it like that, because that's actually what you are proposing.

And I think you are misunderstanding something. My guess is MnDOT wants to get rid of the state maintenance responsibilities. I doubt they care much about the actual number.

[The Ghostbuster]

There had been a MN 361 designated between Rush City and Rock Creek along US 61's old alignment. It started at Interstate 35's Exit 159, went east on County Highway 1 into Rush City, then straight north on old US 61 to end at MN 70 in Rock Creek. It lasted from 1969 to 2011, when it was decommissioned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Highway_361.

[froggie]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

So...renumber it twice?

I suppose you could think of it like that. But if MNDoT knows it wants to get rid of it, why wait until they have a deal with every single community on the route? Call it MN 561 in the interim. If they make a deal with Maplewood, the piece in Maplewood goes. If they make a deal with Forest Lake, then the piece in Forest Lake goes. It continues until eventually,  it's all gone.

Not unlike what's been happening with 101 through Carver County...bits and pieces here and there as MnDOT comes to agreement with the locals.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

There had been a MN 361 designated between Rush City and Rock Creek along US 61's old alignment. It started at Interstate 35's Exit 159, went east on County Highway 1 into Rush City, then straight north on old US 61 to end at MN 70 in Rock Creek. It lasted from 1969 to 2011, when it was decommissioned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Highway_361.

Because I-35 already enters all the relevant cities listed on the Constitutional Route 1 definition as it relates to turning back US 61 from Wyoming south, having to create a dummy state route to maintain compliance like with 361 until Rush City and Pine City expanded to encompass I-35 would not be needed this time.

[The Ghostbuster]

It would have been understandable if MN 361 had been a Business 35 instead (although a Business 35 would have had to follow MN 70 westward back to Interstate 35). The only Business 35 that was ever designated along old US 61 was the one through Pine City (just to the north of where MN 361 used to exist).

[TheHighwayMan3561]

It would have been understandable if MN 361 had been a Business 35 instead (although a Business 35 would have had to follow MN 70 westward back to Interstate 35). The only Business 35 that was ever designated along old US 61 was the one through Pine City (just to the north of where MN 361 used to exist).

The issue though is the route needed to be state-maintained. Unless this hypothetical I-35 business loop was state-maintained (and it would have had to go up to Pine City and back to I-35 on the also-now-decommissioned TH 324), it would not have been in compliance with the state constitution.

[Molandfreak]

I wonder if it was ever considered that they could decommission US 61 north of I-94 now and then rename that segment MN 561 (or something like that) until the state turns back the highway to the various communities on the route.

So...renumber it twice?

I suppose you could think of it like that. But if MNDoT knows it wants to get rid of it, why wait until they have a deal with every single community on the route? Call it MN 561 in the interim. If they make a deal with Maplewood, the piece in Maplewood goes. If they make a deal with Forest Lake, then the piece in Forest Lake goes. It continues until eventually,  it's all gone.

I'm think about it like that, because that's actually what you are proposing.

And I think you are misunderstanding something. My guess is MnDOT wants to get rid of the state maintenance responsibilities. I doubt they care much about the actual number.

The point is that if they were to renumber that portion, they would have a much easier time negotiating the turnback, because they could turn it back in bits and pieces rather than being boxed into it all in one go. The more sections go, the fewer sections that are actively being maintained by MnDOT, thereby saving money. They could even reuse some old signs from TH 361 if they wish.