Minnesota state route 65

[agentsteel53]

Young guy, not familiar with how things work here.  I should take my foot off the sarcasm pedal a little, too.

he's been blowing up my inbox - and those of the other admins - with inane messages over the last several hours.

he's cruising for something that a bit more heavy-handed than sarcasm here.

[John Madden]

dude, you just PMed me that exact message as well - albeit, without the context.  it took me looking at the most recent posts to figure out what you were trying to say. 

what is wrong with you?

Young guy, not familiar with how things work here.  I should take my foot off the sarcasm pedal a little, too.

US-65 ends at I-35 in Albert lea, MN, but back in the 30's it followed what today is I-35 to Burnsville, MN and then followed I-35W to Minneapolis at MN-65 and then MN-65 would complete US-65's journey to US-71 in Little fork, MN. For a year back in 1934 to 1935 MN-65 didn't exist and it was just US-65 all the way to Little fork.

do you have a map or other source showing US-65 being run that far north?

Wikipedia 

Does your Wikipedia article have a footnote refernce to some outside source?  If so, that would be much more beneficial.

It does not have a footnote. It said this:  Minnesota Highway 65 travels north (where U.S. 65 briefly once had from 1934 to 1935) through Cambridge, Mora, and McGregor before terminating at an intersection with U.S. Highway 71 in Littlefork (just south of International Falls).

[bugo]

Maps or it didn't happen.

[kphoger]

Maps or it didn't happen.

*gasp* The wikigods will throw lightning bolts at your head!

[John Madden]

Maps or it didn't happen.

I just found a map at this link http://www.highplainstraveler.info/maps/34mnmap.jpg

[John Madden]

US-65 ends at I-35 in Albert lea, MN, but back in the 30's it followed what today is I-35 to Burnsville, MN and then followed I-35W to Minneapolis at MN-65 and then MN-65 would complete US-65's journey to US-71 in Little fork, MN. For a year back in 1934 to 1935 MN-65 didn't exist and it was just US-65 all the way to Little fork.

do you have a map or other source showing US-65 being run that far north?

http://www.highplainstraveler.info/maps/MN1934a.htm

[NE2]

Definitely a map fuckup.

[Molandfreak]

That map is of various proposals in 1934, as evidenced by the fact that 218 goes all the way to Moorhead. There isn't any evidence of 218 making it to Fargo (that was replaced by 10 and 52), and there isn't any evidence that U.S. 65 was signed anywhere north of Swan River.

[bugo]

Thanks for the map scan.  I need to surf Steve's site for more maps.

[The High Plains Traveler]

I did the research over 10 years ago on this for my Unofficial Minnesota Highways Page (www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm). To summarize: Minnesota did a major renumbering of both state and U.S. routes in 1934. My sources included not only official Minnesota, and other map publishers for 1934, but also research at the Minnesota Historical Society of Minnesota Highway Department publications during that period. It appears from this information that Minnesota did indeed post U.S. 65 north of Minneapolis to the northern part of the state, but also U.S. 218 as far north as St. Paul and a U.S. 59 from the Iowa border to Red Wing. I found an early 1935 document indicating that those routes would be renumbered as MN-65, MN-218 and U.S. 63.

There was also a preliminary 1934 plan, for which I've only found snippets of information, that had quite a few different route numbers. These included an extension of U.S. 218 to St. Cloud and then over former U.S. 10N to Moorhead, instead of the MN-218 extension that angled north over what is now MN-25 to Brainerd; also, a U.S. 208 over U.S. (now MN-) 210 between Motley and Carleton. So, if anyone has a 1934 map showing these changes on more than a city inset level let me know.

[Molandfreak]

I did the research over 10 years ago on this for my Unofficial Minnesota Highways Page (www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm). To summarize: Minnesota did a major renumbering of both state and U.S. routes in 1934. My sources included not only official Minnesota, and other map publishers for 1934, but also research at the Minnesota Historical Society of Minnesota Highway Department publications during that period. It appears from this information that Minnesota did indeed post U.S. 65 north of Minneapolis to the northern part of the state, but also U.S. 218 as far north as St. Paul and a U.S. 59 from the Iowa border to Red Wing. I found an early 1935 document indicating that those routes would be renumbered as MN-65, MN-218 and U.S. 63.

There was also a preliminary 1934 plan, for which I've only found snippets of information, that had quite a few different route numbers. These included an extension of U.S. 218 to St. Cloud and then over former U.S. 10N to Moorhead, instead of the MN-218 extension that angled north over what is now MN-25 to Brainerd; also, a U.S. 208 over U.S. (now MN-) 210 between Motley and Carleton. So, if anyone has a 1934 map showing these changes on more than a city inset level let me know.

What was the rationale for 208 instead of 202 or something? It was a lot closer...

[The High Plains Traveler]

I did the research over 10 years ago on this for my Unofficial Minnesota Highways Page (www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm). To summarize: Minnesota did a major renumbering of both state and U.S. routes in 1934. My sources included not only official Minnesota, and other map publishers for 1934, but also research at the Minnesota Historical Society of Minnesota Highway Department publications during that period. It appears from this information that Minnesota did indeed post U.S. 65 north of Minneapolis to the northern part of the state, but also U.S. 218 as far north as St. Paul and a U.S. 59 from the Iowa border to Red Wing. I found an early 1935 document indicating that those routes would be renumbered as MN-65, MN-218 and U.S. 63.

There was also a preliminary 1934 plan, for which I've only found snippets of information, that had quite a few different route numbers. These included an extension of U.S. 218 to St. Cloud and then over former U.S. 10N to Moorhead, instead of the MN-218 extension that angled north over what is now MN-25 to Brainerd; also, a U.S. 208 over U.S. (now MN-) 210 between Motley and Carleton. So, if anyone has a 1934 map showing these changes on more than a city inset level let me know.

What was the rationale for 208 instead of 202 or something? It was a lot closer...

It was not rational. It was just a plan that I saw on a 1934 map, nationwide scale, that had this designation on a route that under this plan would not have originated at U.S. 10. In the final 1934 plan, U.S. 10 took the northern branch between St. Cloud and Fargo, and 210 stayed. At least 208 would have been no worse than U.S. 400.

[NE2]

At least 208 would have been no worse than U.S. 104.

Fixed. Well, it's a little worse than 104, but not by much.

[The High Plains Traveler]

At least 208 would have been no worse than U.S. 104.

Fixed. Well, it's a little worse than 104, but not by much.

It was bad because there was and is U.S. 8 in the general vicinity. If that's analogous to U.S. 4 and 104, which I refuse to go research, then they're equally bad.

[NE2]

http://www.usends.com/mapguy/MapPgs/mapx04.htm

[agentsteel53]

Definitely a map fuckup.

how about this map which shows it ending at US-210?

http://reflections.mndigital.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/mdt/id/210/rec/9

this map also shows the first US-59.  given that that one was never approved by AASHO, I'm doubting that the US-65 extension was official either ... but it may have been signed by Minnesota, in blatant violation of AASHO regulations, because GeorgiaOklahoma.

[bugo]

http://reflections.mndigital.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/mdt/id/210/rec/9

What's the deal with US/MN 218?

[The High Plains Traveler]

Definitely a map fuckup.

how about this map which shows it ending at US-210?

http://reflections.mndigital.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/mdt/id/210/rec/9

this map also shows the first US-59.  given that that one was never approved by AASHO, I'm doubting that the US-65 extension was official either ... but it may have been signed by Minnesota, in blatant violation of AASHO regulations, because GeorgiaOklahoma.

Minnesota wanted that route to be U.S. 59 because it was originally State Highway 59 - as it was also in Iowa, though Iowa didn't go along with the U.S. designation. Too bad since it would have been more in the correct location than the U.S. 59 that appeared in 1935.  I agree that AASHO likely didn't go along with the 59, 65, 212 and 218 designations/extensions, since the routes were renumbered less than a year after they were originally posted.

http://reflections.mndigital.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/mdt/id/210/rec/9

What's the deal with US/MN 218?

Minnesota did some really weird shit with 218. The original plan, which I have only seen on 1934 Gousha map city insets or national scale maps, looks like U.S. 218 would have replaced U.S. 10N to Fargo. If that isn't an out of place, wrong-direction route I don't know what is. What they ended up with was a U.S. 218 extension to St. Paul, which became MN-218 along U.S. 52 as far as Becker, then north along a new state highway to Brainerd. In 1935, all of the route north of Owatonna became MN-218. It's now MN-3 from Faribault to St. Paul and MN-25 from Becker to Brainerd.

[discochris]

US-65 ends at I-35 in Albert lea, MN, but back in the 30's it followed what today is I-35 to Burnsville, MN and then followed I-35W to Minneapolis at MN-65 and then MN-65 would complete US-65's journey to US-71 in Little fork, MN. For a year back in 1934 to 1935 MN-65 didn't exist and it was just US-65 all the way to Little fork.

I know this is bumping up an old thread, but there were signs for US-65 concurrent with I-35 as late as the early to mid 1990's as far north as Faribault. I know this because my then girlfriend, now wife is from there, and I made the drive down there quite often and always thought it was odd.

[froggie]

I don't recall them lasting that long.  I also took that corridor often (lived in Minneapolis, grandparents in Hartland), and I recall the US 65 shields being gone by the late 80s.  MnDOT usually keeps up to date on signage and sign standards.  If there were errant US 65 shields that lasted longer, they were probably on the local roads.

[discochris]

I don't recall them lasting that long.  I also took that corridor often (lived in Minneapolis, grandparents in Hartland), and I recall the US 65 shields being gone by the late 80s.  MnDOT usually keeps up to date on signage and sign standards.  If there were errant US 65 shields that lasted longer, they were probably on the local roads.

They were most definitely on the overpass signs at some of the ramps. The ones that point down the ramp and usually have the name of either the next town or the next major control city on them as you enter the freeway (not sure there's a name for those signs). 

[TheHighwayMan3561]

There were three US 61 shields at least that lasted well into the MN 61 era- Ely, County 3, and the back exit to the Thompson Hill rest area. The first two I confirmed gone with Google Street View

Not that it matters now (or in 2013), but I'm assuming "County 3" refers to Lake County Road 3?