Interstate 35W

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
PhilmerPhil
Moderator
Posts: 1064
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 11:38 am
Location: SOUP: SOuth UPtown

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby PhilmerPhil » July 31st, 2013, 11:35 am

And just because it was something before doesn't mean it has to be that way forever. There's no read to protect the "history" or a road's governing body. If the current entity that controls it isn't maintaining it correctly then somebody else more appropriate should take it over.
But the way roads have been maintained historically has so much character and is so unique! Allowing this to change will open up doors to other changes!!!

Is there a map anywhere of county roads? I'd be curious to take a look at this.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby David Greene » July 31st, 2013, 11:41 am

Is there a map anywhere of county roads? I'd be curious to take a look at this.
Not a map, but there's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_roa ... _Minnesota

Are many (most?) section roads county roads?

PhilmerPhil
Moderator
Posts: 1064
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 11:38 am
Location: SOUP: SOuth UPtown

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby PhilmerPhil » July 31st, 2013, 11:45 am

Who wants to take the time to map all of those on Google?

MSPtoMKE
Rice Park
Posts: 496
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 8:15 pm
Location: Loring Heights
Contact:

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby MSPtoMKE » July 31st, 2013, 12:11 pm

My flickr photos.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1242
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby woofner » July 31st, 2013, 12:40 pm

I want a cycle track on Washington because they are businesses on Washington and cycle tracks are good for businesses;
The trouble with comparing that NYC study to Washington Ave is that the 8th/9th Ave cycle tracks have few competitors for high-quality comfortable cycle facilities traveling in their direction. In contrast, the Washington Ave facilities have the aforementioned 2nd St facility as well as lanes on 3rd & 4th. In this sense the Washington Ave cycle tracks will be a good opportunity to measure the degree to which cyclists prefer higher levels of separation, but on the other hand, the 2nd & 3rd/4th lanes are actually much more connective than Washington (which isn't actually very connective to anything but 7 corners).

Personally, I've never bought the business access argument for cycle tracks. This type of facility is best suited for regional travel, if all you're doing is accessing a local business what is the problem with riding a nearby parallel route, then taking a cross-street to Washington and dismounting and walking the rest of the way?

Regarding the new off-ramp and freeway-widening project, I've said more than I deserve to already on Minnescraper and my blog, but I think we can all agree that it's irresponsible to construct this offramp without considering larger changes to the interchange and its surroundings.
"Who rescued whom!"

Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby Mdcastle » August 1st, 2013, 6:31 am

As a datapoint I won't ride on the street for any reason, even with bicycle lanes, but I do on off-road trails (and sidewalks where it's legal).

There's the mindset of some message boards that every single street should be something like two 10 foot lanes for two way traffic, bump-outs, no turn lanes, 15 mph speed limit, bike lanes, etc. If we want Washington to be like that it's worth discussing, but traffic has to go some where, Another post on another message board suggested it was no big deal if it took drivers and extra 15 minutes to get out of downtown, and they should be sticking around after work and going to the downtown bars and restaraunts anyway. (apparently as opposed to going home to spending time with their family.).

One thing I've thought of, if the Washington Ave underpass ever gets rebuilt you could have the new ramp meet another new ramp from westbound Washington to southbound I-35W in sort of a kitty-corner half-SPUI. The two movements wouldn't interfere with each other and you could eliminate the loop and have that available for development. I'm not convinced the flyover from the south is really needed either with all the other entrances to downtown from the south.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby RailBaronYarr » August 1st, 2013, 8:47 am

There's the mindset of some message boards that every single street should be something like two 10 foot lanes for two way traffic, bump-outs, no turn lanes, 15 mph speed limit, bike lanes, etc. If we want Washington to be like that it's worth discussing, but traffic has to go some where, Another post on another message board suggested it was no big deal if it took drivers and extra 15 minutes to get out of downtown, and they should be sticking around after work and going to the downtown bars and restaraunts anyway. (apparently as opposed to going home to spending time with their family.).
http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2013/07/ ... seriously/

In your world, that "traffic" means "cars" and you also assume it won't go away. Ignoring VMT trends. Ignoring that creating places people actually want to live in with a more walkable environment (plus bike facilities and access to good transit) has a significant effect on car traffic. Expecting free-flowing vehicles to travel between 15-25 mph is not outlandish - it's safer and quieter. I think in the Washington Ave thread it was discussed that the County was keeping an extra WB lane to save 2-3 minutes of travel time at peak rush hour, not 15 minutes.

orangevening
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 137
Joined: June 18th, 2013, 12:18 pm

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby orangevening » August 1st, 2013, 9:48 am

I want a cycle track on Washington because they are businesses on Washington and cycle tracks are good for businesses;
The trouble with comparing that NYC study to Washington Ave is that the 8th/9th Ave cycle tracks have few competitors for high-quality comfortable cycle facilities traveling in their direction. In contrast, the Washington Ave facilities have the aforementioned 2nd St facility as well as lanes on 3rd & 4th. In this sense the Washington Ave cycle tracks will be a good opportunity to measure the degree to which cyclists prefer higher levels of separation, but on the other hand, the 2nd & 3rd/4th lanes are actually much more connective than Washington (which isn't actually very connective to anything but 7 corners).

Personally, I've never bought the business access argument for cycle tracks. This type of facility is best suited for regional travel, if all you're doing is accessing a local business what is the problem with riding a nearby parallel route, then taking a cross-street to Washington and dismounting and walking the rest of the way?
I think the theory behind why cycle tracks are good for businesses is that by making the street more walkable and bikeable businesses are more visible (for lack of better term). One is not flying by in a car (or bus for that matter) to get though instead (relatively) slowly meandering by actually experiencing what the street has to offer.

I bike in downtown ALL the time. Even as a experienced biker comfortable riding in traffic, 3rd and 4th are hardly comfortable- both left hand side riding with 3 lanes of traffic, plus 4th you have buses driving RIGHT at you. 2nd is nice, but just because there isn't much auto traffic- but then you have to either take Washington anyway or take the path along the river. And I don't understand, at all, your statement about 3rd/4th being more connected. Connected to what? The Metrodome for 4th and the library for 3rd, but what else? 4th takes you the DT bike connector which take you to 11th which takes you to the goat path which takes you to..... the light rail station behind Cedar/ Riverside. Yes Washington takes you to *just* 7 corners (going east bound), which you can go to the West Bank (or Cedar/ Riverside) then West Bank campus then East Bank campus then DinkyTown or Stadium Village. Taking your parallel route option to Washington doesn't work for me either. What if you don't remember if Grumpy's (or Open Book or Big Brain Comics or ___ etc.) is on 11th or Chicago? I have to pull out a map or look it up on my phone so I go on the exact cross street instead of simply going down Washington til I see it?!? Plus there are still a few one-way couplets on that side of town- so I should north on 5th ave (or so say Park) then go to 2nd street, then loop back south on 4th ave (or Portland) to get to somewhere on 4th (or Portland) and Washington?

Another reason I want cycle tracks is that drivers only give lines of paint on the ground the respect that they want to give them. EVERY EFFING DAY I see someone parked (in my way) in the bike lane- which is a big pet peeve of mind. Plus there are very few bike lanes in the city that I would feel comfortable having a kid ride on- and this is one of the most bike friendly cities in the country.

PhilmerPhil
Moderator
Posts: 1064
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 11:38 am
Location: SOUP: SOuth UPtown

Re: I-35W - New S 4th St ramp and northbound aux lane

Postby PhilmerPhil » August 1st, 2013, 11:24 am

Don't really want to get into this too in depth right now, but just wanted to add that I think the placemaking that cycle tracks could bring to Washington Ave should not be ignored.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby twincitizen » February 6th, 2014, 9:45 am

Presentation to the PAC regarding replacement of the bike/ped bridge at 24th Street: http://www.35lake.com/presentations-pac/

I'd prefer a design that accomodates bikes/ADA as well as stairs for pedestrians. Due to ADA ramp grading requirements, sometimes these things end up super long and overbuilt to the point that they're inconvenient for peds due to the additional 1/4-mile trip.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby mattaudio » February 6th, 2014, 9:58 am

Seems like we're missing an opportunity to build an at-grade connection. The reason why that ped bridge has to be up so high is because of the braid bridge underneath it. And the braid bridge is one of the lowest rated bridges in the state, and it doesn't accommodate a continuous southbound HOT lane. Time to reimagine what this stretch could be like, and use it as a way to reconnect Whittier with Phillips. http://goo.gl/maps/I58Dz

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby RailBaronYarr » February 6th, 2014, 10:01 am

Seems like concept 6 is the best compromise. If stairs are added on each end, pedestrians don't add a bunch of travel to their journey. It's not as good for bikes since the double back ramps cause the turning pinch point, which is too bad since 34th is identified as a bike connection. But that's a relatively small price to pay for direct bridge access, a developable lot, and fairly low price tag.

edit: that, or if this is taken more holistically with a larger project, then what mattaudio says.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby MNdible » February 6th, 2014, 10:28 am

Seems like we're missing an opportunity to build an at-grade connection. The reason why that ped bridge has to be up so high is because of the braid bridge underneath it. And the braid bridge is one of the lowest rated bridges in the state, and it doesn't accommodate a continuous southbound HOT lane. Time to reimagine what this stretch could be like, and use it as a way to reconnect Whittier with Phillips. http://goo.gl/maps/I58Dz
I think all of these options assume that the braid bridge is gone, and I think all of them have the ped bridge at a lower elevation than what's currently there. It's a little deceptive, since the new ADA requirements force ramps to be at a very shallow pitch, much less than what's currently there.

Also, it appears that Option 5 does have the ped bridge at grade (or very close to it), as it proposes depressing the freeway by 20'. Seems like that's the best option, but costs and other impacts may make me think otherwise.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1242
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby woofner » February 7th, 2014, 12:37 pm

At one of the TransitAccess meetings a year or two ago, I talked to one of the SEH people about the possibility of replacing the bike/ped bridge with a full roadway overpass. While a novel idea to him, he seemed to think that it was something that could be considered, so I wonder if it ever was.

Do you guys think a 24th St overpass with motor vehicle access could be used as a trade-off to do a 4-to-3 on Franklin and (dare I dream) convert 26th & 28th to two-ways? The segment between 3rd and Portland is clearly a "chokepoint" on Franklin, so I think it would be the big obstacle to continuing the 4-to-3 all the way to Hennepin. The only even-somewhat congested segments of 26th and 28th are just a bit east, between Portland and Chicago, but still having 24th as a reliever may be enough for those with a iron grip on postwar transportation planning to ease up a bit. Eh? Eh?
"Who rescued whom!"

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby mattaudio » February 7th, 2014, 12:46 pm

I agree, there should be a full connection at 24th. It would help connect Whittier and Phillips.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1767
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby Tcmetro » February 7th, 2014, 2:23 pm

It would be a wonderful addition, IMO.

Wedgeguy
Capella Tower
Posts: 3404
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 6:59 am

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby Wedgeguy » February 7th, 2014, 4:01 pm

I'd say good luck with getting that without some major obstacles. Right below 24th is where the 35W and the downtown exits split apart. This would be both the widest bridge over 35W, but also you would have to raise the bridge or dig down the freeway for proper clearance. But I doubt they are going to pay for a 4th bridge over a tight freeway that's close to 3 other bridges.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby mattaudio » February 7th, 2014, 4:13 pm

After looking at the plans, they are planning to move the braid bridge further north - probably bringing southbound 35W over southbound old-65 right where it curves. So the grade will be less of an issue. Granted, an at-grade street bridge would require 35W to be graded slightly lower, but it would be worth it. A half mile scar between two dense neighborhoods is far too long.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby twincitizen » February 7th, 2014, 4:19 pm

I appreciate woofner's point about how it could help with the 2-way conversion of 26/28th to two-ways, politically speaking.
I also agree with mattaudio that a vehicle connection could bring the two sides of 35W closer together.

It seems that it isn't in the budget, and it's probably too late to change that. I'd definitely still want to hear what the cost difference would be between the average bike/ped option and a vehicular connection.

Regarding 26/28th, I'm hopeful we can make that two-way conversion happen regardless, even if wedgeguy will be at the barricades with a bullhorn.

Wedgeguy
Capella Tower
Posts: 3404
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 6:59 am

Re: Interstate 35W

Postby Wedgeguy » February 8th, 2014, 8:18 pm

I appreciate woofner's point about how it could help with the 2-way conversion of 26/28th to two-ways, politically speaking.
I also agree with mattaudio that a vehicle connection could bring the two sides of 35W closer together.

It seems that it isn't in the budget, and it's probably too late to change that. I'd definitely still want to hear what the cost difference would be between the average bike/ped option and a vehicular connection.

Regarding 26/28th, I'm hopeful we can make that two-way conversion happen regardless, even if wedgeguy will be at the barricades with a bullhorn.
I would hope that they would not need barricade's. I'd just use logic and economics!! LOL


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JT$ and 51 guests