Minnesota Notes

[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.

[bschultzy]

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=

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

[Molandfreak]

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=

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.

[bschultzy]

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.

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.

[midwesternroadguy]

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.

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]

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.

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?

[Bickendan]

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=

So Alternative 2 is rebuilding the ramp they took out during the rebuild... without the original braiding on the WB 94 mainline.

[EpicRoadways]

A new update to a big-ticket project gearing up next year: with the upcoming widening and reconstruction of I-94 from Monticello to Albertville, the MnROAD test segment along the westbound lanes will become open to truck traffic only. I looked at the preliminary design layouts, and it seems that at least the entrance and exit ramps to the test road will be restriped down to a single lane. Very interested to see how they try to sign this- my guess is they'll make heavy use of VMSs, have some static signage that directs truck traffic into the rightmost lane ahead of the split and do away with the existing directional "X" and arrow system to direct traffic onto the test road.

In any case, I've always been a fan of the MnROAD segment and it's kinda sad that it'll no longer be open to non-truck traffic. I've driven that stretch of highway probably hundreds of times, and it's always fun to see whether you get routed onto the test road or stay on the main highway. There's no other facility like it anywhere in the states, as far as I know.

(Project page: the MnROAD stuff is way at the bottom of the "Project Home" tab)

[rhen_var]

There is a final design for the future interchange between US-14 and Olmsted County Highway west of Rochester that will be built starting next fall.  The design will include roundabouts and bridges over the railroad tracks that run just north of US-14.  The design can be found here: https://www.olmstedcounty.gov/sites/default/files/2024-04/OpenHouseLayout.pdf

From the design and the slides from the open house, it looks like the project will also include converting roughly two miles of County Highway 44 north of the interchange into a 4-lane divided highway, as one of the first steps of a plan to eventually build an outer beltway for the city that started almost 20 years ago. https://www.postbulletin.com/news/next-circle-drive-starts-to-take-shape

[Molandfreak]

Now we need some preliminary designs for interchanges in Byron to eliminate the last few lights on the US 14 corridor from New Ulm to Rochester.

[froggie]

Some changes from earlier concepts I've seen.  Most notably, no longer shifting the westbound mainline into the median.  The teardrops are another change.

[mattaudio]

as one of the first steps of a plan to eventually build an outer beltway for the city that started almost 20 years ago. https://www.postbulletin.com/news/next-circle-drive-starts-to-take-shape

If only they had access-managed West Circle Drive/Stroad, which has completely degraded over the last 20 years due to suburban development.

[M86]

This last weekend, I traveled up US 169 from the cities to Garrison. It's a gorgeous drive. And I got to cross the Rum River more times than I can count.

I passed a Business 169 shield on mainline 169. It was definitely north of Milaca. I do not remember a TO banner or mention of the business route prior.

And if I used the search function I could probably find the answer to my other question.

What are Inter County routes?

[froggie]

I'm pretty sure that Business 169 is on Onamia.

"InterCounty routes" are a central Minnesota (almost all District 3 IIRC) thing.  Think of it as a regional route marking system that utilizes select county state aid routes to provide seamless travel across county lines (where county routes often change numbers).

[Molandfreak]

The only current business loop of 169 is in Shakopee. There is an erroneous sign in Elk River that was mentioned here before, but no posted business loop exists in Elk River, Onamia, or anywhere else. If there is another one north of Milaca, it is brand new.

Onamia and Princeton could easily have business loops, but I guess the counties didn't want to sign them.

Northbound US 169 reassurance shield after the new 197th Street Entrance...

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I seem to recall the Mille Lacs CSAH 36 route through Milaca used to have more explicit business notation, but no longer. I don't think it was the old "THRU CITY" that I only ever remember seeing for the CSAH routes that served as business routes in Little Falls, though.

Also never was clear on why the directional indicators at Sherburne/Mille Lacs CSAH 29 in Princetron were greened out years ago.

[rte66man]

This last weekend, I traveled up US 169 from the cities to Garrison. It's a gorgeous drive. And I got to cross the Rum River more times than I can count.

My wife's family lives in the area so I've been up and down 169 a LOT. There are 4 crossings of the Rum River between the north end of Milaca and Onamia. It seems like more because of all the tributaries.

[Molandfreak]

Princetron

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I posted, then retracted about the I-35/535 connections reopening in Duluth because then I saw the Garfield Avenue overpass on 535 is not complete yet. The road is technically fully open between I-35 and Superior, but bypass ramps take the route around the incomplete Garfield Avenue span right now. That was why I got confused and retracted it.

[Molandfreak]

I posted, then retracted about the I-35/535 connections reopening in Duluth because then I saw the Garfield Avenue overpass on 535 is not complete yet. The road is technically fully open between I-35 and Superior, but bypass ramps take the route around the incomplete Garfield Avenue span right now. That was why I got confused and retracted it.

Honest mistake. News outlets are reporting on it as if they're almost completely done with the project.

[discochris]

I suspect this has been asked here before, but searching didn't help.  Today I drove US 2 all the way from Grand Forks to Iron River, WI.  Are there plans to make the highway 4 lane all the way through Northern Minnesota. It's 4 lane for a majority of it, but there are obviously gaps.

[froggie]

^ Not even close.  It was proposed A LONG TIME ago (i.e. in the 1970s), but traffic volumes don't justify 4 lanes, even on some of the existing 4-lane segments (specifically west of Bagley).

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Just based on *feel* without looking too deep into the counts, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to an expansion of US 2 between Proctor and TH 33, but it's definitely not critical.