Couldn't MNdot have MN-55 go across I-94 and then turn onto 7th street which would bring MN-55 right to the Hiawatha ave. portion of the route instead of having it overlap I-94 and go around downtown?
Yes.
The idea is that through traffic is routed around the slowness and delays of downtown.
Quote from: Steve on February 19, 2013, 07:09:55 PM
The idea is that through traffic is routed around the slowness and delays of downtown.
I always thought that MN-55 went through downtown instead of going around it :-/
As signed I think it has a gap.
Quote from: NE2 on February 19, 2013, 07:47:30 PM
As signed I think it has a gap.
There is one mention of EB 55 joining EB 94 at the 7th St interchange, but otherwise you're right.
US 52 also previously went through the cities, including down University Ave, but that too was rerouted to follow the freeways.
Mike
They should bring back US 55.
MN-55 did go through downtown Minneapolis until about 10 years ago via 7th and 8th Streets. Hell, when I moved to Minneapolis in 1977, a number of downtown streets in Minneapolis and St. Paul were posted state highways even though most of the current freeways except I-394 were in existence. Keep in mind that MnDOT has a stated policy of turning back major metropolitan streets to local control when possible. Thus, most surface trunk highways through both Minneapolis and St. Paul have been turned back as city streets.
As it stands now, wouldn't it just be easier to make current MN-55 east of downtown Minneapolis MN-155, in much the same way that MN-156 in South St. Paul used to be MN-56? It's not like people typically follow the old route of MN-55 straight through downtown Minneapolis, do they? (This is under the assumption my fictional extension of US 212 didn't happen. I got that somewhere on the fictional highway board.) Actually, it could be MN-155 for the segment between I-94 and US 52 and MN-255 for the segment between US 52 and US 61.
I am amused by how US 52 has the gap west of Saint Paul. They don't sign it, yet North Dakota refuses to renumber their portion.
QuoteI am amused by how US 52 has the gap west of Saint Paul.
Only a gap in signage. It does exist officially. Much the same with MN 55...to which I don't see any need to renumber it unless and until Dakota County is successful in getting MnDOT to take over CSAH 42, at which time MN 55 can be truncated to where it meets US 52 in Inver Grove Heights.
"US 12 West Follow I-94 then I-394"
"US 52 West Follow I-94"
---
"US 12 East Follow I-394 then I-94 East"
"US 52 East Follow I-94"
Something like that.
US 52 is partially signed on I-94 in North Dakota. Probably 50% of the reassurance markers had a US 52 shield the last time I was up there.
Quote from: froggie on February 23, 2013, 06:56:37 AM
unless and until Dakota County is successful in getting MnDOT to take over CSAH 42
When was this proposed?
Quote from: bugo on February 20, 2013, 03:18:48 PM
They should bring back US 55.
How?
Quote from: froggie on February 23, 2013, 06:56:37 AM
QuoteI am amused by how US 52 has the gap west of Saint Paul.
Only a gap in signage. It does exist officially. Much the same with MN 55...to which I don't see any need to renumber it unless and until Dakota County is successful in getting MnDOT to take over CSAH 42, at which time MN 55 can be truncated to where it meets US 52 in Inver Grove Heights.
If 52 has to be a US highway, it could just be 10. 10 comes into North Dakota already and goes no further than Fargo.
Unless Froggie has some inside information I've not seen an actual proposal beyond the fact that the long term goal is for the state to maintain all and only the principal arterials in the metro area, and that when the new interchange with County 42 and US 52 is built the existing MN 55 interchange will be obliterated and traffic from Hastings will follow what is now County 42.
Monte's got it more or less correct. There's no current proposal on the table (as far as I know) for MnDOT to take over CSAH 42 west of US 52...it's a "long term vision" based on the goal Monte mentioned plus verbage in the Dakota County Transportation Plan.
QuoteIf 52 has to be a US highway, it could just be 10. 10 comes into North Dakota already and goes no further than Fargo.
I've thought much the same thing...
Quote from: froggie on April 16, 2013, 09:32:31 PM
Monte's got it more or less correct. There's no current proposal on the table (as far as I know) for MnDOT to take over CSAH 42 west of US 52...it's a "long term vision" based on the goal Monte mentioned plus verbage in the Dakota County Transportation Plan.
QuoteIf 52 has to be a US highway, it could just be 10. 10 comes into North Dakota already and goes no further than Fargo.
I've thought much the same thing...
True, and I've read your website enough times that it may be your idea I stole.
Quote from: Bickendan on April 15, 2013, 05:12:04 AM
"US 12 West Follow I-94 then I-394"
"US 52 West Follow I-94"
---
"US 12 East Follow I-394 then I-94 East"
"US 52 East Follow I-94"
Something like that.
Indeed.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=afton,+mn&ll=44.956842,-92.790613&spn=0.049379,0.111494&hnear=Afton,+Washington,+Minnesota&t=m&z=14&layer=c&cbll=44.956905,-92.7904&panoid=SIWxtnuEfiGRRjwGDcz1mQ&cbp=12,275.75,,1,5.33
Quote from: Mdcastle on April 16, 2013, 06:35:35 PM
Unless Froggie has some inside information I've not seen an actual proposal beyond the fact that the long term goal is for the state to maintain all and only the principal arterials in the metro area, and that when the new interchange with County 42 and US 52 is built the existing MN 55 interchange will be obliterated and traffic from Hastings will follow what is now County 42.
The new US 52/MN 55/County 42 interchange is proposed to upgrade the existing diamond interchange at Co 42 to a 7 ramp parclo and 4 new 4 lane divided road east into Hastings for MN 55. The old left exit for MN 55 east would be removed. Here is the site: http://www.co.dakota.mn.us/transportation/plannedconstruction/documents/cr42-hwy52study2002.pdf
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on February 20, 2013, 10:10:55 PM
MN-55 did go through downtown Minneapolis until about 10 years ago via 7th and 8th Streets. Hell, when I moved to Minneapolis in 1977, a number of downtown streets in Minneapolis and St. Paul were posted state highways even though most of the current freeways except I-394 were in existence. Keep in mind that MnDOT has a stated policy of turning back major metropolitan streets to local control when possible. Thus, most surface trunk highways through both Minneapolis and St. Paul have been turned back as city streets.
sounds like INDOT
any signage remnants of state highways which are no longer under state maintenance?
I guess the next topic talking about MN 55 is why when the Hiawatha line was put in didn't MNDOT rebuild Hiawatha Ave the way it should have been as a freeway .....? I think the signals are timed to FORCE anyone travelling on Hiawatha to wait at EVERY light!
The NIMBYs won that one, more or less. A full freeway wasn't built, but an interchange at Lake Street was, and the road was rerouted away from the VA hospital. With the light rail there's noises being made about downscaling Hiawatha into a cute "walkable" neighborhood street, but as AFAIK these are just noises from some of the more anti-car residents.
Quote from: Mdcastle on November 19, 2013, 09:51:14 AM
The NIMBYs won that one, for the most part. A full freeway wasn't built, but an interchange at Lake Street was, and the road was rerouted away from the VA hospital. With the light rail there's noises being made about downscaling Hiawatha into a cute "walkable" neighborhood street, but as AFAIK these are just noises from some of the more anti-car residents, not anything that's even being talked about officially.
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on November 18, 2013, 06:33:25 PM
I guess the next topic talking about MN 55 is why when the Hiawatha line was put in didn't MNDOT rebuild Hiawatha Ave the way it should have been as a freeway .....? I think the signals are timed to FORCE anyone travelling on Hiawatha to wait at EVERY light!
Part of the reason for delays along Hiawatha with the light rail is early preemption of the signals at intersections. The signals detect the train before it triggers the crossing signals on the cross-streets, and the signal goes into a preemption mode, stopping Hiawatha traffic to clear the cross-street. Once the crossing signals are triggered, the signal then gives the green to Hiawatha. I've seen the same mode of operation in Denver, so I would guess this is standard practice for LRT. I think Monte addresses the "why it's not a freeway" part of the question.
Quote from: Mdcastle on November 19, 2013, 09:51:14 AM
The NIMBYs won that one, more or less. A full freeway wasn't built, but an interchange at Lake Street was, and the road was rerouted away from the VA hospital. With the light rail there's noises being made about downscaling Hiawatha into a cute "walkable" neighborhood street, but as AFAIK these are just noises from some of the more anti-car residents.
Weak on MNDOT. So instead of being a nice alternative to MSP airport, Hiawatha is no certainly no picnic to travel. It appears as though this corridor could easily be fixed and made much safer by elevating each of the crossings over BOTH the rail line and Hiawatha Ave and add 2 interchanges between MN 62 and Lake St and perhaps another lid or two along the corridor as well.
I'm so sick of these anti car people ruining everything
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on November 19, 2013, 11:44:36 AM
Part of the reason for delays along Hiawatha with the light rail is early preemption of the signals at intersections. The signals detect the train before it triggers the crossing signals on the cross-streets, and the signal goes into a preemption mode, stopping Hiawatha traffic to clear the cross-street. Once the crossing signals are triggered, the signal then gives the green to Hiawatha. I've seen the same mode of operation in Denver, so I would guess this is standard practice for LRT. I think Monte addresses the "why it's not a freeway" part of the question.
As I recall back in 2012, the signal preemption along MN 55 starts long before the light rail transit vehicles actually trigger the crossing signals - seemed like at least a minute - which results in extremely long green times for the cross streets. For some jurisdictions in Iowa and Missouri, the preemption starts at most 10 seconds before or when the crossing gates are triggered.
QuoteI guess the next topic talking about MN 55 is why when the Hiawatha line was put in didn't MNDOT rebuild Hiawatha Ave the way it should have been as a freeway .....?
That battle ended in 1985 when MnDOT's own EIS for Hiawatha Ave listed a 4-lane boulevard with LRT as the preferred alternative. That said, their Access Management designation for Hiawatha suggests they'd still like to remove the signals at 26th and 28th.
QuoteWeak on MNDOT. So instead of being a nice alternative to MSP airport, Hiawatha is no certainly no picnic to travel. It appears as though this corridor could easily be fixed and made much safer by elevating each of the crossings over BOTH the rail line and Hiawatha Ave and add 2 interchanges between MN 62 and Lake St and perhaps another lid or two along the corridor as well.
MnDOT has long wanted people to take 35W to 62 or 494 to get to the airport instead of taking Hiawatha. 'Course, it's just as easy to hop the LRT now if your origin or destination is downtown. It's actually quite useful (not to mention MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE) to fly in, hop the LRT, and get your rental car downtown. I've done that myself.
QuoteI'm so sick of these anti car people ruining everything
Monte's "anti-car people" comment isn't quite apt. More appropriate for this scenario would be "neighborhood activists". It's really the adjacent neighborhood residents driving the proposal (no pun intended).
Like I-35W and MN 62 can handle the traffic. If they could could squeeze a tight diamond in at 46th it would go a long way to fixing the problem.
I'll admit thought that LRT is quite useful. I need to go to Chicago several times a year for medical appointments, so I'll park for free at the 24th Ave park and ride and fly out and back the same day.
QuoteLike I-35W and MN 62 can handle the traffic.
Off-peak, they can. Nevermind that dedicated HOV (I guess HO/T now) lanes on 35W and a 3rd lane each way on the Crosstown between 35W and Cedar have been part of the long-range plan for years.
QuoteIf they could could squeeze a tight diamond in at 46th it would go a long way to fixing the problem.
Don't even need that. Grade-separating the LRT, which was also part of the 1985 EIS, would have solved the problem. But given that the city balked at paying a whopping $3 million contribution for the Lake St LRT grade separation, don't look for one at 46th anytime soon.