News:

why is this up in the corner now

Main Menu

Minnesota Notes

Started by Mdcastle, April 18, 2012, 07:54:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

midwesternroadguy

A new survey showing design alternatives for the NB exits from the Lafayette Bridge has been released.  Most of the alternatives add a second lane to the NB 52 to WB 94 movement.  However, the first alternatives don't address the weaving issues between 52 and 35E on 94.  The last two alternatives do, but the last of those has an extensive rerouting of E. 7th Street. 

None of these alternatives addresses the other key issue at this interchange—the long uphill gradient on the 94 WB to 35E NB ramp.  Trucks are so pokey, backing up traffic onto 94. A full second lane will be occupied by other slow vehicles too.  A (very expensive) flyover from NB 52 directly to NB 35E is what is needed to lessen the grades, but that would require acquiring 3 blocks of ROW.

The alternatives are depicted in the survey below:


https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TH52atI-94?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=


Molandfreak

As long as they prohibit trucks from the left lane or do something similar to avoid them backing the interchange up horribly, I am fine with whatever they do there.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

bschultzy

Quote from: midwesternroadguy on June 27, 2024, 05:50:12 AMA new survey showing design alternatives for the NB exits from the Lafayette Bridge has been released.  Most of the alternatives add a second lane to the NB 52 to WB 94 movement.  However, the first alternatives don't address the weaving issues between 52 and 35E on 94.  The last two alternatives do, but the last of those has an extensive rerouting of E. 7th Street. 

None of these alternatives addresses the other key issue at this interchange—the long uphill gradient on the 94 WB to 35E NB ramp.  Trucks are so pokey, backing up traffic onto 94. A full second lane will be occupied by other slow vehicles too.  A (very expensive) flyover from NB 52 directly to NB 35E is what is needed to lessen the grades, but that would require acquiring 3 blocks of ROW.

The alternatives are depicted in the survey below:


https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TH52atI-94?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=

I don't think it can be talked about enough how much taxpayer money MNDOT wasted with the first rebuild of the interchange.

Molandfreak

Quote from: bschultzy on June 27, 2024, 12:37:00 PM
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on June 27, 2024, 05:50:12 AMA new survey showing design alternatives for the NB exits from the Lafayette Bridge has been released.  Most of the alternatives add a second lane to the NB 52 to WB 94 movement.  However, the first alternatives don't address the weaving issues between 52 and 35E on 94.  The last two alternatives do, but the last of those has an extensive rerouting of E. 7th Street. 

None of these alternatives addresses the other key issue at this interchange—the long uphill gradient on the 94 WB to 35E NB ramp.  Trucks are so pokey, backing up traffic onto 94. A full second lane will be occupied by other slow vehicles too.  A (very expensive) flyover from NB 52 directly to NB 35E is what is needed to lessen the grades, but that would require acquiring 3 blocks of ROW.

The alternatives are depicted in the survey below:


https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TH52atI-94?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=

I don't think it can be talked about enough how much taxpayer money MNDOT wasted with the first rebuild of the interchange.
Honestly, I would be ok with leaving it as-is and installing signs directing trucks to I-494 and US 61 to access 94. The ramps are good enough for non-commercial vehicles to take the tight curve at 30 mph. Trucks who are unable to take it at more than 10 mph are the major cause of the issue here.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

bschultzy

#1904
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 27, 2024, 01:54:28 PMHonestly, I would be ok with leaving it as-is and installing signs directing trucks to I-494 and US 61 to access 94. The ramps are good enough for non-commercial vehicles to take the tight curve at 30 mph. Trucks who are unable to take it at more than 10 mph are the major cause of the issue here.

That's certainly a viable option in my mind. I'm sure some trucks use the Lafayette Bridge due to the restrictions on 35E south of downtown and some originate in the industrial area south of downtown. But 10/61 isn't that much farther east and would mitigate much of those issues. I wish MnDOT would've taken this into consideration when they redesigned the interchange pre-2015.

TheHighwayMan3561

An amusing error I saw in the I-494 work zone in Bloomington, one of those electronic variable speed limit signs errantly said "SPEED LIMIT 65". The normal limit on 494 is 60.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

midwesternroadguy

#1906
Quote from: bschultzy on June 27, 2024, 04:31:07 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 27, 2024, 01:54:28 PMHonestly, I would be ok with leaving it as-is and installing signs directing trucks to I-494 and US 61 to access 94. The ramps are good enough for non-commercial vehicles to take the tight curve at 30 mph. Trucks who are unable to take it at more than 10 mph are the major cause of the issue here.

That's certainly a viable option in my mind. I'm sure some trucks use the Lafayette Bridge due to the restrictions on 35E south of downtown and some originate in the industrial area south of downtown. But 10/61 isn't that much farther east and would mitigate much of those issues. I wish MnDOT would've taken this into consideration when they redesigned the interchange pre-2015.

Sorry, but some truck drivers aren't the professionals they once were. I see trucks violating "no truck" regulations all the time, whether it's no trucks in the left lane, or, e. g. on the 35E parkway.

I don't have faith in truckers following any changes at the Lafayette interchange—particularly in Minnesota where one can get away with anything.

Molandfreak

Quote from: midwesternroadguy on July 04, 2024, 11:41:41 PM
Quote from: bschultzy on June 27, 2024, 04:31:07 PM
QuoteHonestly, I would be ok with leaving it as-is and installing signs directing trucks to I-494 and US 61 to access 94. The ramps are good enough for non-commercial vehicles to take the tight curve at 30 mph. Trucks who are unable to take it at more than 10 mph are the major cause of the issue here.

That's certainly a viable option in my mind. I'm sure some trucks use the Lafayette Bridge due to the restrictions on 35E south of downtown and some originate in the industrial area south of downtown. But 10/61 isn't that much farther east and would mitigate much of those issues. I wish MnDOT would've taken this into consideration when they redesigned the interchange pre-2015.

Sorry, but some truck drivers aren't the professionals they once were. I see trucks violating "no truck" regulations all the time, whether it's no trucks in the left lane, or, e. g. on the 35E parkway.

I don't have faith in truckers following any changes at the Lafayette interchange—particularly in Minnesota where one can get away with anything.
I no longer use 35E on a regular basis, but I don't think I've ever seen anything bigger than a 20' box truck on the parkway. Is this a common problem nowadays?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

Bickendan

Quote from: midwesternroadguy on June 27, 2024, 05:50:12 AMA new survey showing design alternatives for the NB exits from the Lafayette Bridge has been released.  Most of the alternatives add a second lane to the NB 52 to WB 94 movement.  However, the first alternatives don't address the weaving issues between 52 and 35E on 94.  The last two alternatives do, but the last of those has an extensive rerouting of E. 7th Street. 

None of these alternatives addresses the other key issue at this interchange—the long uphill gradient on the 94 WB to 35E NB ramp.  Trucks are so pokey, backing up traffic onto 94. A full second lane will be occupied by other slow vehicles too.  A (very expensive) flyover from NB 52 directly to NB 35E is what is needed to lessen the grades, but that would require acquiring 3 blocks of ROW.

The alternatives are depicted in the survey below:


https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TH52atI-94?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=
So Alternative 2 is rebuilding the ramp they took out during the rebuild... without the original braiding on the WB 94 mainline.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.