AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Author Topic: FHWA says no to MnDOT request at 169/494 (but 610 extension gets approved)  (Read 6233 times)

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12894
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 07:40:09 AM
    • Froggie's Place

http://www.startribune.com/local/43069087.html

In a nutshell, MnDOT requested a change in the proposed design at the I-494/US 169 interchange, wanting to drop 2 little-used ramps (SB 169 to WB 494 and EB 494 to NB 169) in order to cut $40 million from the project cost and enable it to use stimulus funds to pay for the project.  Their argument was that the two traffic movements are largely handled already by existing US 212.

FHWA, citing its policy of requiring full interchanges along Interstates, said no.

So what is arguably the 4th biggest bottleneck in the Twin Cities area (behind I-35W/MN 62, I-35W/I-494, and the I-94 Lowry Hill Tunnel) once again has its fix delayed.

Instead, MnDOT stimulus funds for the Twin Cities metro will go to an extension of MN 610 (west of US 169 to CSAH 81) and a host of smaller projects.
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4782
  • Last Login: February 20, 2024, 11:32:50 PM

So if FHWA is requiring full freeway-freeway interchanges, why is the new Mississippi River Bridge project in St. Louis getting away with so many half freeway-freeway interchanges?  The new I-70/extended I-44 interchange will be the biggest offender of this policy, with no much needed ramps to/from the bridge from/to I-44.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8751
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:47:42 PM

Would either project have been a design-build?
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Chris

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2577
  • International road enthusiast

  • Age: 36
  • Location: the Netherlands
  • Last Login: Today at 06:23:25 AM
    • Flickr

Full freeway interchanges, especially in urban areas, seem very important to me. It makes the network more flexible in case of road closures. That little used ramp may become very busy when a nearby road is closed and traffic has to make a detour.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8751
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:47:42 PM

It is a real shame that the TH 610 extension is going to be a design-build.  That will make it much harder to get the plans (I am still waiting for plans from the TH 212 design-build).
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

TheHighwayMan394

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5897
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Twin Ports/North Shore
  • Last Login: Today at 12:49:56 PM

I thought MNDot wanted to add at least one flyover at the I-494/US 169 interchange.
Logged
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

 


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.