News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Minnesota Notes

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

Previous topic - Next topic

invincor

The most direct route from Red Wing to Rochester is to first follow MN 58 south to US 52 at Zumbrota and then take 52 the rest of the way.  So, why wasn't US 63 routed this way when it was established? It first does a duplex with US 61 to Lake City and then heads south to Rochester.  Does anyone know the reason why?


texaskdog

#1651
Quote from: invincor on February 26, 2023, 06:50:28 PM
The most direct route from Red Wing to Rochester is to first follow MN 58 south to US 52 at Zumbrota and then take 52 the rest of the way.  So, why wasn't US 63 routed this way when it was established? It first does a duplex with US 61 to Lake City and then heads south to Rochester.  Does anyone know the reason why?

I would think (without knowing) that Lake City was considered an important city back in the day.  Now with US 63 routed out of Rochester it's got that really silly jog where it should just be moved to MN 58, especially with US 52 being a freeway now.  51 minutes through Zumbrota, 64 minutes staying on US 63.  Crazy.

Molandfreak

Keeping US 63 on the least-confusing route possible was probably the top priority in 1935. It was a straight route through Rochester until very recently and already had 15 years of recognition as one corridor, since constitutional route 59 had been there before. The only thing that changed when 63 came along was that it was now multiplexed with 61 to Red Wing.
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.

DandyDan

Quote from: invincor on February 26, 2023, 06:50:28 PM
The most direct route from Red Wing to Rochester is to first follow MN 58 south to US 52 at Zumbrota and then take 52 the rest of the way.  So, why wasn't US 63 routed this way when it was established? It first does a duplex with US 61 to Lake City and then heads south to Rochester.  Does anyone know the reason why?
Having clinched MN 58, there are some terrain issues along part of that route. This is the Driftless Area, after all.
MORE FUN THAN HUMANLY THOUGHT POSSIBLE

froggie

Worth noting that, for a year or two in the mid-1930s, Minnesota had petitioned and designated what is now US 63 as US 59 (which fit the Constitutional route and was closer to the grid).  They might have even signed it as such briefly.  US 59 ended in Lake City.  Safe to say that's why US 63 goes through Lake City, because its (brief) predecessor went there.

invincor

Thank you Froggie.  I guessed in advance you'd have the answer.  :)

TheHighwayMan3561

$2 million in federal money will go toward the proposed Rondo Land Bridge over I-94 in St. Paul. The cap seems to be the favored route for the state and city in addressing the long-simmering issue regarding I-94 on St. Paul's west side, although some other activist groups around this project have stated a full removal/downgrade is the only option they'll accept.

https://www.twincities.com/2023/02/27/2m-in-federal-funding-granted-to-rondo-community-land-bridge-project-in-st-paul/
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

Molandfreak

Hopefully some of that could go towards a partial redesign of the 52/94 interchange again... Or at least signage to direct trucks to 61 instead.
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: TheHighwayMan394 on February 27, 2023, 04:43:04 PM
$2 million in federal money will go toward the proposed Rondo Land Bridge over I-94 in St. Paul. The cap seems to be the favored route for the state and city in addressing the long-simmering issue regarding I-94 on St. Paul's west side, although some other activist groups around this project have stated a full removal/downgrade is the only option they'll accept.

https://www.twincities.com/2023/02/27/2m-in-federal-funding-granted-to-rondo-community-land-bridge-project-in-st-paul/

My sense is that some of those groups aren't local to the Rondo neighborhood, and with their broader aim to totally remove I-94 in the core of the metro, their all-or-nothing approach really is doomed to fail. Sure, removing a freeway that harmed (and continues to harm) residents living in its path sounds great, and I wish those harms could be removed. There's just no feasible way to make this work. It would be better to build the land bridge in Rondo and make other similar moves along the route than take a moonshot that's bound to miss. Or invent a time machine that takes you back to the 1940s and get George Herrold's plan to put I-94 on the northern route through St. Paul passed.

TheHighwayMan3561

Work on the US 53 section on the north side of the Twin Ports Interchange project could be significantly delayed after crews accidentally uncovered the remains of an indigenous person. This is not something that will be taken lightly, as the discovery of an indigenous burial ground has set the TH 23 project within a different part of Duluth back for several years (the pandemic has probably also contributed) and it is likely as much time will be taken as needed to determine if this was isolated or a formal burial ground. The article notes no such remains were found when the US 53 viaduct was originally built.

https://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/local/indigenous-remains-found-during-twin-ports-interchange-construction?fbclid=IwAR0Mc6QPVgOolxcx-f3Qbg9-ZrLe7m3gWKf1pKFYI-Frz-JKuNNWQi6XzM0
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

TheHighwayMan3561

On a happier note, a bill is advancing to designate TH 5 in Chanhassen as the Prince Rogers Nelson Memorial Highway.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=HF717&type=bill&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2023&session_number=0
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

roadman65

I was noticing how US 69 ends abruptly in Albert Lead without connecting to either I-35 or I-90 or even US 65. Its endpoint is west of US 65 by eight blocks.
https://www.usends.com/69.html

According to Dale Sanderson it seems to have to do with Historical US 16 as its endpoint is where the truncated US Route once aligned.

To me it's interesting that they didn't extend it north to end at I-90 once US 16 got cut to Rapid City.

Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

texaskdog

Quote from: roadman65 on March 21, 2023, 07:44:38 PM
I was noticing how US 69 ends abruptly in Albert Lead without connecting to either I-35 or I-90 or even US 65. Its endpoint is west of US 65 by eight blocks.
https://www.usends.com/69.html

According to Dale Sanderson it seems to have to do with Historical US 16 as its endpoint is where the truncated US Route once aligned.

To me it's interesting that they didn't extend it north to end at I-90 once US 16 got cut to Rapid City.



Agreed. It's almost like someone just forgot to do it.

TheHighwayMan3561

#1663
This is one of those topics that gets rehashed every couple years. I don't have a definitive answer and it's hard to find maps of what exactly connected 69 and 65, although I did find one map that indicated only US 16, indicating TH 13 ended at the same intersection US 69 did.

My guess is 69 was not extended simply because MDH/MnDOT didn't need AASHTO approval to just extend TH 13 the short distance east over old US 16 to US 65 downtown.

An extension would surely have been approved, but I wouldn't be surprised if the state thought it wasn't worth the paperwork and hassle.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

texaskdog

Quote from: bschultzy on March 01, 2023, 01:47:04 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 27, 2023, 04:43:04 PM
Or invent a time machine that takes you back to the 1940s and get George Herrold's plan to put I-94 on the northern route through St. Paul passed.

do tell

on_wisconsin

#1665
Quote from: texaskdog on March 22, 2023, 11:42:26 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 27, 2023, 04:43:04 PM
Or invent a time machine that takes you back to the 1940s and get George Herrold's plan to put I-94 on the northern route through St. Paul passed.
do tell

https://www.mnopedia.org/event/neighborhood-resistance-i-94-1953-1965
There is also a bunch of info in this thread as well: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=32295.0
"Speed does not kill, suddenly becoming stationary... that's what gets you" - Jeremy Clarkson

froggie

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 22, 2023, 02:12:28 PM
This is one of those topics that gets rehashed every couple years. I don't have a definitive answer and it's hard to find maps of what exactly connected 69 and 65, although I did find one map that indicated only US 16, indicating TH 13 ended at the same intersection US 69 did.

I have a number of state maps from the era and those I don't have are on the Minnesota Digital Library.  Other info can be gleaned from MnDOT's project logs.

Prior to 1939, US 69 came into Albert Lea from the south via South Broadway, meeting US 65 directly at what is now the South Broadway/CSAH 18 intersection.  Sanderson on his page seems to think that 69 continued concurrent with 65 up to 16 at Main St, though he doesn't show any proof or validation of this, nor have I come across any.

US 69 was realigned south of Albert Lea in 1939, more or less along it's current alignment.  The junction with 16 was, at the time, a rather large Wye.  The MN 13 connection was not built until 1952-53, at which point the junction became the standard 4-way intersection it is today (albeit not widened to 4-lanes until the 1960s).  Prior to that, MN 13 met US 16 at Main St/Ermina Ave and took a convoluted route north and northwest out of Albert Lea.

The first state map to show city insets besides the Twin Cities and Duluth is the 1946 edition.  Every map from 1946 to 1961 shows US 69 along US 16, presumably ending at US 65 at Main/Broadway.  The 1962 map is the first map to not show this 16/69 concurrency.

When this leg of US 16 was decommissioned in 1973, the stretch from US 69 to US 65/Broadway was specifically transferred to MN 13's Control Section per the Project Logs.  So it's safe to say that's when MN 13 was extended.

The Ghostbuster

I always found it interesting that US 69 never made it north of Albert Lea, while its spur route US 169 makes it all the way north to Virginia (and International Falls before 1934). Although there are a number of examples of 3-digit US Highways going further north (or south, or east, or west) of their parent routes, though it always seems a little awkward to me.

TheHighwayMan3561

^ Good to know. Although then that raises a couple more questions

1. If the 16/69 duplex was signed in the field.
2. If a step was skipped/missed with AASH(T)O along the way. I didn't exhaustively check the applications but found nothing regarding 69 from the three years I checked 1960-62.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

Molandfreak

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 23, 2023, 12:44:49 PM
I always found it interesting that US 69 never made it north of Albert Lea, while its spur route US 169 makes it all the way north to Virginia (and International Falls before 1934). Although there are a number of examples of 3-digit US Highways going further north (or south, or east, or west) of their parent routes, though it always seems a little awkward to me.
US 69's extension into Minnesota was really Iowa's initiative to provide an alternate route to US 65 (before I-35 came along). The routing of US 65 was extremely awkward from Faribault to Lakeville until former MN 165 was paved and US 65 was re-routed to follow it in 1957. Getting MN 165 paved was probably the priority rather than signing yet another alternate route as a US highway.
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.

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: Molandfreak on March 23, 2023, 10:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 23, 2023, 12:44:49 PM
I always found it interesting that US 69 never made it north of Albert Lea, while its spur route US 169 makes it all the way north to Virginia (and International Falls before 1934). Although there are a number of examples of 3-digit US Highways going further north (or south, or east, or west) of their parent routes, though it always seems a little awkward to me.
US 69's extension into Minnesota was really Iowa's initiative to provide an alternate route to US 65 (before I-35 came along). The routing of US 65 was extremely awkward from Faribault to Lakeville until former MN 165 was paved and US 65 was re-routed to follow it in 1957. Getting MN 165 paved was probably the priority rather than signing yet another alternate route as a US highway.

I guess 69 could have followed today's TH 13, then ultimately taken over what is today's 169 from MSP north...I just don't see a reason for this, though.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

froggie

So I found this document of interest (if needed, search MN for state and 1952 for year).  About 1/3 of the way down is a mileage tabulation that the state highway department submitted to AASHO.  It shows US 69 as "beginning" at US 16 and extending 12.49 miles down to the Iowa line.  This mileage matches what recent MnDOT Logpoint and Keypoint reports show for the mileage on US 69 from the state line to MN 13.  Given that the same mileage tabulation shows then-US 371's northern terminus concurrent with US 2, it's reasonable to consider that US 69 indeed ended at US 16 and the state highway maps showing the two concurrent were in error.

froggie

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/news/2023/03/21-metro-Publicmeeting.html

MnDOT public meeting on April 18th for the I-94/MN 252 corridor from downtown Minneapolis to MN 610.  Comments are open on the Scoping Document will be accepted through May 19th.

A lot to digest with this one.  This is the restart of a previous study conducted to assess upgrading MN 252 to a freeway (which was funded via state dollars) but elements of which were opposed by local suburbs...particularly Brooklyn Center with the impacts at 66th Ave.  So MnDOT basically went back to the drawing board.

Several dozen alternatives (some rather farcical) were analyzed for MN 252, many of which include the segment of I-94 to the south.  All non-freeway alternatives for MN 252 have since been dropped, leaving three:  a 4- or 6-lane freeway with bus shoulders, and a 6-lane freeway with 2 lanes being managed lanes (most likely HO/T given precedent elsewhere in the Twin Cities).

The alternatives for I-94 range from doing nothing to adding a lane between MN 252 and Dowling Ave and converting an existing lane between Dowling Ave and 4th St to HO/T.  The I-94 options that include a HO/T lane (whether addition or conversion) would also add a direct connection to the 4th St ramp...creating a HO/T lane without that direct connection was considered but dropped.  The I-94 alternatives also look at adding the lane "southbound only" or in both directions.

One interesting option at the 94/252 merge that is being considered would "flip" eastbound 94 and southbound 252, so that the 252 lanes would merge on the right instead of on the left as they currently do.

Five different alternatives for access along 252 are being considered.  The only constants among the five are that all would have an interchange at CSAH 109/85th Ave and all would eliminate access at 81st Ave/Humboldt (though an overpass at 81st/Humboldt will be considered).  Only one of the five retains access at 70th Ave...all other alternatives would eliminate access there and NOT include an overpass.

Several interchange designs were considered at each access point, but only the Tight Diamond is being retained as an option at every location except 66th.  As a general rule, bridging 252 over the cross-streets would have fewer property impacts but greater noise impacts.  Given the latter and local input thus far, I would expect to see those cross streets bridged over 252.  A split-diamond between 73rd and Brookdale Dr is also being considered as an option.

A potential interchange at 66th is complicated due to both adjacent development and the close proximity of the 94/694/252 interchange.  This is the only location along the corridor where a tight diamond is *NOT* being considered.  The remaining interchange options at 66th are a folded-diamond to the north or a diamond with C/D roads between 66th and 694.

The Ghostbuster

How many homes and businesses might have to be demolished if MN 252 is converted to freeway standards?

Mdcastle

If they had asked me in 1985 I could have told them they needed a freeway, and I would have given them a better deal on a consultant fee.

8th Grade English class we had to write a "Letter to the Editor" and mine was complaining about the traffic signals on 252



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.