Street, Road and Highway Projects

[Tcmetro]

I'm a supporter of in-lane bus stops, I'm just pointing out a problem that needs to be addressed in future construction of bus stops in that style. Without barriers it's likely that these bus stops will end up causing more collisions.

[Trademark]

On Penn and Plymouth traffic islands were installed to stop people from driving around the bus, which suggests that there's been some dangerous driving activity.

From my experience of driving over north about every other time I've been on Penn Ave I've seen cars trying to drive around the bus. Hopefully the dividers they put on Fremont will help this.

[alexschief]

You can throw out objections to everything, there's no such thing as a free lunch, someone eventually gets stuck with the bill.

If MSP wants to improve transit service and increase transit ridership, it needs to take tangible steps to prioritize transit over other modes, especially private vehicles. City streets have space constraints, there's not going to be a way to let traffic flow all the time, you have to choose who waits. Is it going to be the bus or the cars? That's ultimately all there is to it.

[mister.shoes]

I’ve long had a wild idea in my head in which 77 gets the flyover and 62 gets widened — but in exchange for supporting freeway capacity, Minneapolis gets a calmed and pleasant Cedar Ave. That is, the connection from 77 to Cedar is severed, the viaduct over Nokomis goes away, and the grid is re-established between the lake and the highway. Through traffic on Cedar will be routed to the Bloomington Ave bridge over 62 and the extra ramps to/from the highway at Bloomington get removed to discourage using it as a shortcut.

Cedar has been severed for about a week now.
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/news/2022/0 ... hwy77.html

Heaven help me I'm arguing with people on NextDoor about this project :facepalm:

[amiller92]

I’ve long had a wild idea in my head in which 77 gets the flyover and 62 gets widened — but in exchange for supporting freeway capacity, Minneapolis gets a calmed and pleasant Cedar Ave. That is, the connection from 77 to Cedar is severed, the viaduct over Nokomis goes away, and the grid is re-established between the lake and the highway. Through traffic on Cedar will be routed to the Bloomington Ave bridge over 62 and the extra ramps to/from the highway at Bloomington get removed to discourage using it as a shortcut.

Cedar has been severed for about a week now.
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/news/2022/0 ... hwy77.html

Heaven help me I'm arguing with people on NextDoor about this project :facepalm:

Cedar is so much better now!

[MNdible]

And 28th is so much worse.

[Hero]

I’ve long had a wild idea in my head in which 77 gets the flyover and 62 gets widened — but in exchange for supporting freeway capacity, Minneapolis gets a calmed and pleasant Cedar Ave. That is, the connection from 77 to Cedar is severed, the viaduct over Nokomis goes away, and the grid is re-established between the lake and the highway. Through traffic on Cedar will be routed to the Bloomington Ave bridge over 62 and the extra ramps to/from the highway at Bloomington get removed to discourage using it as a shortcut.

Cedar has been severed for about a week now.
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/news/2022/0 ... hwy77.html

Heaven help me I'm arguing with people on NextDoor about this project :facepalm:

I almost commented on that post. If it is the one that claimed traffic would be backed up to 494 if a turn lane wasn't included in the rebuild. Traffic doesn't back up to 494 now so maybe it would be better to leave Cedar severed at 62 to prevent that from happening?

There was another Nextdoor post about the park department considering shutting down West River road to cars that really got people worked up. I wonder if closing just the northbound lane would appease the people who just want to drive in a park?

[thespeedmccool]

I don't think this has been posted yet: MNDOT is asking for comments on their upcoming Central and University project. Options include freeway conversion (seemingly north of 494,) three- or two-lane streets (presumably south of 494,) bus lanes for the F Line, and a plethora of pedestrian improvements.

It could be a real egg-on-face moment for Minneapolis if MNDOT adds bus lanes to Central before the city adds them to Hennepin. My guess is that they're dangling the possibility, but really have no intention of adding them.

Take the survey: https://talk.dot.state.mn.us/hwy-47-hwy ... ii-survey

[mamundsen]

*694. Not 494.

[Silophant]

Eh, I don't know. Hennepin County has (deservedly) taken a bunch of crap in the past for only thinking about car throughput in their road projects, but they're very serious about adding bus and bike lanes to their upcoming redesign of Hennepin and First. The thing about the county, and to an even larger extent the state, is that there's less likelihood of political interference once the PW planning department is convinced of a plan. There's not much chance that Fernando is going to lose reelection in her district that spans from NE Minneapolis to Plymouth specifically because a couple dozen business owners are mad about a loss of street parking, and that goes extra for Walz.

This is not to say that Central and University are going to be rebuilt into bike-ped dreamscapes, but I do think it's worth taking the survey and making your voice heard. Significant improvements are very possible.

[thespeedmccool]

This is not to say that Central and University are going to be rebuilt into bike-ped dreamscapes, but I do think it's worth taking the survey and making your voice heard. Significant improvements are very possible.

For sure! I really just mean to cast doubt on the more progressive possibilities like bus lanes and bike lanes. I think MNDOT recently lost their ability (thanks to Senate Republicans) to use the trunk highway fund for anything other car infrastructure.

Looking at MNDOT's recent Main Street projects outstate, it's clear they've come to favor 3-lane configurations and pedestrian experience over throughput.

[StandishGuy]

On August 25 the Minneapolis City Council Public Works & Infrastructure Committee endorsed a plan by MNDOT to reconstruct the I394 & Washington Avenue intersection. It includes some improvements including removal of the pork chop island, bump-outs and narrowing the crossing at a cost of up to $1.5 million. While better for pedestrians, it is disappointing that Minneapolis and MNDOT didn't consider removing the intersection altogether. https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/RCA/10022#content

There's already an entrance to 394 along 3rd Avenue N. and multiple exits off the freeway on nearby streets making this overbuilt connection redundant. Plus that huge area taken up by the freeway and surrounding fallow land could be redeveloped into much more productive housing and commercial uses that contribute tax revenue. Instead, this intersection is likely to stay in place for another 50 years.

By the way I watched the meeting on Youtube, and one of Minneapolis' traffic engineers claimed that maintaining the 394 connection there was the best thing for walkability. Only traffic engineers could spout such nonsense without understanding any of the irony of maintaining a freeway entrance into one of the City's premier neighborhoods.

[Trademark]

On August 25 the Minneapolis City Council Public Works & Infrastructure Committee endorsed a plan by MNDOT to reconstruct the I394 & Washington Avenue intersection. It includes some improvements including removal of the pork chop island, bump-outs and narrowing the crossing at a cost of up to $1.5 million. While better for pedestrians, it is disappointing that Minneapolis and MNDOT didn't consider removing the intersection altogether. https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/RCA/10022#content

There's already an entrance to 394 along 3rd Avenue N. and multiple exits off the freeway on nearby streets making this overbuilt connection redundant. Plus that huge area taken up by the freeway and surrounding fallow land could be redeveloped into much more productive housing and commercial uses that contribute tax revenue. Instead, this intersection is likely to stay in place for another 50 years.

By the way I watched the meeting on Youtube, and one of Minneapolis' traffic engineers claimed that maintaining the 394 connection there was the best thing for walkability. Only traffic engineers could spout such nonsense without understanding any of the irony of maintaining a freeway entrance into one of the City's premier neighborhoods.

Im only in favor of not developing that plot of land because of my imagined future rail line that takes over the 394 trench. Runs cut/cover or elevated down 3rd avenue north and crosses the river to Northstar / Mpls-St Paul heavy rail line / Central Avenue LRT line.

One can dream.

[DanPatchToget]

On August 25 the Minneapolis City Council Public Works & Infrastructure Committee endorsed a plan by MNDOT to reconstruct the I394 & Washington Avenue intersection. It includes some improvements including removal of the pork chop island, bump-outs and narrowing the crossing at a cost of up to $1.5 million. While better for pedestrians, it is disappointing that Minneapolis and MNDOT didn't consider removing the intersection altogether. https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/RCA/10022#content

There's already an entrance to 394 along 3rd Avenue N. and multiple exits off the freeway on nearby streets making this overbuilt connection redundant. Plus that huge area taken up by the freeway and surrounding fallow land could be redeveloped into much more productive housing and commercial uses that contribute tax revenue. Instead, this intersection is likely to stay in place for another 50 years.

By the way I watched the meeting on Youtube, and one of Minneapolis' traffic engineers claimed that maintaining the 394 connection there was the best thing for walkability. Only traffic engineers could spout such nonsense without understanding any of the irony of maintaining a freeway entrance into one of the City's premier neighborhoods.

Redundancy is good when it involves roads. Only when it has to do with bike lanes, trails, and transit routes is redundancy bad. (sarcasm intended)

Seems like for the land to be developable you would need to remove the 3rd Street viaduct in addition to the entrance/exit ramps for Washington Avenue.

[nBode]

Im only in favor of not developing that plot of land because of my imagined future rail line that takes over the 394 trench. Runs cut/cover or elevated down 3rd avenue north and crosses the river to Northstar / Mpls-St Paul heavy rail line / Central Avenue LRT line.

One can dream.

Yesss I've had this same thought for years—also demolishing the C Ramp and utilizing the space between 2nd/3d Ave and 3rd/5th St for a shiny new Minneapolis Central station.

[StandishGuy]

Apparently, no one at the Minneapolis Public Works or Community Planning & Economic Development (CPED) Departments could conceive of doing something else with this prime plot of land in the middle of downtown. Once a freeway, always a freeway. It really bothers me that this project is going to cost up to $1.5 million, which seems really high.

[Trademark]

Amazing plan for the 1st Avenue South street reconstruction from Lake street to Grant street.

Highlights include: 2 way cycle track included on the whole right of way. 11 foot buffer between road and bike traffic north of 94. Closing off 16th street east of 1st avenue. Curb cuts at all intersections to make crossing 1st avenue and cross-streets easier. Protected bike lanes on 26th and 28th when they approach 1st avenue.

Love to see the impacts of the Minneapolis Street Design Guide making our streets much safer! Construction is planned in 2024 and 2025.

https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/download ... t%20Layout

[Hero]

I wonder if we could get rid of more of these short useless streets without waiting for road reconstruction?

[BoredAgain]

Amazing plan for the 1st Avenue South street reconstruction from Lake street to Grant street.

Highlights include: 2 way cycle track included on the whole right of way. 11 foot buffer between road and bike traffic north of 94. Closing off 16th street east of 1st avenue. Curb cuts at all intersections to make crossing 1st avenue and cross-streets easier. Protected bike lanes on 26th and 28th when they approach 1st avenue.

Love to see the impacts of the Minneapolis Street Design Guide making our streets much safer! Construction is planned in 2024 and 2025.

https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/download ... t%20Layout

The bike lanes shown north of 28th are basically the permanent versions of the bike lines that were put in most recently. This is great because even though the two way bike lane on 1st is much better than what was there before, the road surface is just terrible. Reconstruction was badly needed. South of 28th, this should help to remove some of the traffic mixing problems, but I can almost guarantee that there will be crashes from people in cars hitting cyclists as they turn onto Cecil Newman lane just north of the greenway.

I'm curious about the permanent change to the road alignment for 15th/16th. The porkchop island was there because of the geometry of the intersection. I'm generally against porkchop islands, but I thought this one was actually required for large vehicles to make that corner. Large vehicles are present because of the convention center loading dock and nearby freeway access.

[DanPatchToget]

Provide feedback on plans for the 98th & Lyndale area in Bloomington: https://letstalk.bloomingtonmn.gov/west ... l#tool_tab

One concept even includes bus lanes! I assume they would only be a short distance, and I'm not sure if a general lane in each direction would be removed for it, but still surprising that it's being considered.