Hennepin & Lyndale Bottleneck Project

[grant1simons2]

E-mail them about that! I love the idea, it would add so much aesthetics to make the Walker and Loring look even better

[David Greene]

E-mail them about that! I love the idea, it would add so much aesthetics to make the Walker and Loring look even better

It's tougher to do with the freeway, obviously, but it can be a lot better than it is now.

[David Greene]

So...2A?

[Anondson]

Yeah, so, details of this round?

[David Greene]

[This is from memory. Others, please add and correct.]

Two overall options were presented. Things common to both options:

- SB Lyndale lane elimination presumably to make room for separate bike/ped facilities
- Free right from Dunwoody to SB Lyndale eliminated
- General tightening of corners to slow traffic
- Elimination of "crossover" left turn lane from NB Lyndale to WB Vineland
- Left-most SB Lyndale lane is left-turn-only from Dunwoody to Oak Grove
- "Suicide" bus stop at Groveland eliminated

Option 1
- NB Lyndale branches from 3-5 lanes before Groveland, much like today, though the left-most lane to Hennepin splits to also serve Lyndale

Option 2
- Additonal NB lane elimination from Dunwoody to Vineland
- Both "crossover" left turn lanes at Oak Grove/Vineland eliminated
- NB Lyndale branches from 3-5 lanes just after Groveland, making pedestrian crossings shorter
- Something about the light phasing at Groveland is different in this option, didn't hear the details

There were three options (A, B, C) presented for the Douglas/Groveland bypass.

Option A - Close the bypass entirely, keeping access to the high-rise apartment building; RIRO at Hennepin & Douglas; this adds quite a bit of greenspace

Option B - Douglas becomes one-way eastbound at the block into the bottleneck, right-out-only to Hennepin; this option prevents people from doing the NB Hennepin/SB bypass/EB Groveland move into downtown

Option C - Close accees to Douglas at Hennepin

[grant1simons2]

Yep 2A

[MNdible]

In 2A, how would one go from SB Lyndale to EB Groveland? Currently, that's achieved using the frontage road as a jughandle.

[David Greene]

In 2A, how would one go from SB Lyndale to EB Groveland? Currently, that's achieved using the frontage road as a jughandle.

You can't do that maneuver in any of the options. Take a left at Oak Grove.

[MSPtoMKE]

Were there layouts at the open house that are likely to be posted to the project website?

A small problem with the the A option is that the few route 25 buses that serve Kenwood use the bypass to access Douglas, if I understand it correctly.

[Nathan]

They will probably be posted and put up the survey as well...

I went 2B in my suggestion, mobility for all (cars) seemed less compromised and it was still much better for pedestrians.

[mattaudio]

Anyone snap pics of the layouts?
No talk of dedicated bus lanes or any sort of priority?

[twincitizen]

There were three options (A, B, C) presented for the Douglas/Groveland bypass.

Option A - Close the bypass entirely, keeping access to the high-rise apartment building; RIRO at Hennepin & Douglas; this adds quite a bit of greenspace

Option B - Douglas becomes one-way eastbound at the block into the bottleneck, right-out-only to Hennepin; this option prevents people from doing the NB Hennepin/SB bypass/EB Groveland move into downtown

Option C - Close accees to Douglas at Hennepin

Of the overall project options, Option 2 was clearly the bigger win for pedestrians, landscaping, lane reduction, etc. It's going to be a fight to get it, since those existing "crossover" left turn lanes have constituencies. I think the consensus among the de facto task force will be strongly in favor of Option 2, possibly with resistance from the churches. The neighborhood groups, the bike coalition, etc. will strongly favor Option 2. The City wouldn't be offering it if it wasn't possible. They suggested that added delays would be as little as 30 seconds for cars during peak periods, which seems completely reasonable.

Of the ABC options for Douglas/Groveland, Option C seemed to be the consensus among Lowry Hill / Douglas Ave residents (including bike/ped advocates). Option A is unworkable due to the Route 25. It also cuts off Douglas Ave residents' ability to access NB bottleneck. I'd lean toward Option C PLUS narrowing the "frontage road" down to the bare minimum. It's pretty wide today. I'd take it down to two lanes of traffic, plus parking on the west side only. Route 25 buses can stop in the NB traffic lane, instead of pulling over to the "parking lane". It's not a frequent route, currently making something like 4-5 NB trips in each AM/PM peak.

Fun rumor: a proposal for the Exit Realty building site is under development.

[twincitizen]

Option 1 vs. Option 2 at Oak Grove/Vineland: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-bFuU ... AG0886.jpg
Option 2 full layout: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-LOCT ... AG0882.jpg
Option 2 description: https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-XobS ... AG0883.jpg

[Nathan]

I thought the longer dedicated left turn lane from N bound Lyndale to W bound Vineland was pretty awesome, and created a lot of space for cars to back up when the walker is having an event, and creates quite a bit of green space.

I have been DYING for the exit realty building to be redeveloped... some sort of awesome residential that blocks the building next to it... in my dream it's pretty modern as a back drop to the Walker... just me.

Also another suggestion of mine on the survey was that Metro Transit and the Walker pool some cash and commission artist designed bus stop shelters for the west side of the corridor

[twincitizen]

Also another suggestion of mine on the survey was that Metro Transit and the Walker pool some cash and commission artist designed bus stop shelters for the west side of the corridor

Yes please!! That would really help connect the Walker (and the sculpture garden) to the every day public realm instead of feeling so closed off.

[mattaudio]

Thanks for the pics. I honestly didn't go to the meeting because it was a little too far to bike due to some schedule issues, and I hate getting to the neighborhood (driving OR biking).

I realize those left turn things have constituencies, but I don't understand why they can't just get rid of the northbound left turn "ramp" to go onto Vineland Place. Better idea? Keep going straight and do a U turn at Dunwoody (they could even build a Texas U ramp and it would be less intrusive than more turning movements at Vineland/Oak Grove). Or for those that live further into Kenwood, take Dunwoody to Stadium Parkway. The benefit from eliminating this left turn phase would be great for everyone including a majority of drivers.

[MNdible]

In 2A, how would one go from SB Lyndale to EB Groveland? Currently, that's achieved using the frontage road as a jughandle.

You can't do that maneuver in any of the options. Take a left at Oak Grove.

Obviously, this is a small part of a much larger picture. But, as I'm understanding it, we're making the Oak Grove turn more problematic by removing its crossover, and eliminating the Groveland turn? I suspect that's going to have some unintended consequences. And to what end, exactly?

[seanrichardryan]

Where is the express lane for vehicles avoiding the tunnel??

[twincitizen]

Obviously, this is a small part of a much larger picture. But, as I'm understanding it, we're making the Oak Grove turn more problematic by removing its crossover, and eliminating the Groveland turn? I suspect that's going to have some unintended consequences. And to what end, exactly?

I assume you are referring to SB for both intersections. Let's (everyone) try to be specific about which direction(s) we're talking about here.

There are no left turns allowed onto Groveland today, so I'm not sure what you're referring to there.

For SB bottleneck to EB Oak Grove, I agree that removal of the cutoff will cause additional delays, but only to cars making that movement. Instead of a shared turn/through lane, the left turners will have a LONG dedicated lane for cars to queue up. This will allow SB through traffic to move much more smoothly and predictably. I don't see a lot of short local trips using this left turn. I would guess this is primarily used by Loring Park residents who reverse commute to work via 394 west 94/694 west, and by churchgoers on Sundays. And I suppose any northsiders or suburbanites working in Loring Park.

Are delays to that turning movement acceptable if it improves the user experience for peds and SB traffic?

[MNdible]

I assume you are referring to SB for both intersections. Let's (everyone) try to be specific about which direction(s) we're talking about here.

There are no left turns allowed onto Groveland today, so I'm not sure what you're referring to there.

I think my original post was very clear as to what I was referring to -- the elimination of the ability to use the jughandle to go from SB Lyndale to EB Groveland. But thanks for schoolmarming me just the same.

Not entirely clear how signaling will work, but practically, the ability to move the cars from SB Lyndale to EB Oak Grove gets more complicated by having to get them through that short intermediate stretch of Oak Grove in the split.

I'm not saying any of these things are fatal flaws, but they do seem to be problems.