A couple things:
The portion of MN 101 south of I-94 in Rogers has been steadily turned back to the state. Currently the Hennepin and Scott County portions have been completely turned back, but for some reason Carver County won't take their portion. As such, currently there are "two" MN 101s because of it.
Today I went on a trip to Shakopee and came across what appeared to be some new MN 101 signage south of Carver County Road 61 (most recently the old US 212 alignment; this section of 101 south of old 212 used to carry US 169). I had thought that the segment between old US 212/Carver CR 61 and the Scott County line had been turned back, and it was the section of MN 101 north of there that had not been turned back.
So a few things:
1. Why did Carver County not take their portion of the route, and do they plan to?
2. If I am right that MN 101 has been "extended", why?
Quote1. Why did Carver County not take their portion of the route, and do they plan to?
Disagreement over what was considered an acceptable condition of the roadway for turnback. The new bridge at Shakopee was built long before the turnback, and Hennepin County got what they wanted: a new Grays Bay bridge.
There's also the little matter of turnback funds being limited.
Quote2. If I am right that MN 101 has been "extended", why?
You would be incorrect here. MN 101 never got turned back between old 212 and Scott County. The only section that HAS been turned back is the segment between the new 212 and MN 5 (coincidentally the section that has been realigned and widened to 4 lanes in recent years).
Quote from: froggie on July 08, 2010, 06:38:48 PM
You would be incorrect here. MN 101 never got turned back between old 212 and Scott County. The only section that HAS been turned back is the segment between the new 212 and MN 5 (coincidentally the section that has been realigned and widened to 4 lanes in recent years).
So now there are two segments of the MN 101 in Carver County - the section from the Hennepin line to MN 5, and now from new 212 to the Scott line?
More or less.