Bloomington - General Topics

[Mdcastle]

Short three block section of Bush Lake Road just north of Old Shakopee Road has been road-dieted from four lanes to three lanes and shoulders with the county mill and overlay project.

[wingedmolotov]

Great access to Caliber Collision from the Hyland Trail!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanPatchToget]

I'm quite happy with the short extension of the bike/shoulder lanes on Bush Lake Road, especially since it continues through the pedestrian crossing at Maryland Avenue where there's a refuge island and the road narrows, so now you don't have to either go into the car lane or hop the curb and go on the sidewalk for that short stretch. I only wish it continued all the way to the intersection at Old Shakopee so you're not just dumped into a car lane and have to figure out whether you want to continue on the road or quickly hop onto the sidewalk. Same with Nesbitt Avenue at Old Shakopee, especially going north where the bike/shoulder lane ends while at the same time the road widens, but both cyclists and motorists aren't sure what to do/where to be when sharing that space.

[wingedmolotov]

I'm quite happy with the short extension of the bike/shoulder lanes on Bush Lake Road, especially since it continues through the pedestrian crossing at Maryland Avenue where there's a refuge island and the road narrows, so now you don't have to either go into the car lane or hop the curb and go on the sidewalk for that short stretch.

Good to hear!

Also, here are some pictures of SICK Phase II near the Mall of America (office building and city-built parking ramp.








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mdcastle]

As far as Normandale / 84th, after review by Hennepin County staff they've selected a "Modified" Alternative 2, with the four modified "low angle entry" slip lanes of Options 2 and incorporating the removal of northbound and westbound double left turn lanes and westbound through lane and eastbound acceleration lane from Alternative 1 The only reason the third eastbound lane is there is for turning trucks, they found replacing it with a 6 foot "truck apron" would be sufficient.

There's also an answer to the question someone asked "why not eliminate all the slip lanes". Seems traffic modeling predicted a single conventional right turn lane for the northwest and northeast would be so catastrophic to traffic operations that it would "gridlock" the interesection. Not sure if they mean failed cycles, traffic in the right turn lanes would back up to the point it starts blocking the through lanes, or traffic would back up to block adjacent intersections, or some combination.

https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/b ... 625034.pdf

[wingedmolotov]

Yeah, I’m pretty disappointed with that. I’ve sent an email to the Planning Commission asking then to recommend option #4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanPatchToget]

I wouldn't mind it as much if it included a proper underpass at Nine Mile Creek like I mentioned earlier in this thread.

[wingedmolotov]

Two concept designs for Nicollet Avenue and a survey, along with a third open house on the 14th of October, 4:30-6:30.

The first concept is kind of a dud and has a shared use path and sidewalk, and the second has a sidewalk-level protected bike lane on each side.

This is a pretty rare opportunity to get good infrastructure on a long stretch of roadway in Bloomington- please fill out the survey if you are able!
https://beheardhennepin.org/nicollet-bl ... pts-survey


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[COLSLAW5]

I wonder if they will be adding round abouts like they are doing on Nicollet in Richfield

[Mdcastle]

I voted for the shared use path option. I get that some people think they're inappropriate for areas with high pedestrian volumes like the Lydale project in MInneapolis, but Nicollet in Bloomington is not Lyndale in Minneapolis and it's ridiculous to expect a kid to have to cross Nicollet twice if they're just visiting their friend a couple of blocks down Nicollet. Added we need street trees, underground street lighting, and removal of free right turn lanes.

As for roundabouts, I hate the two lane roundabouts in Richfield with a passion both on car and bicycle. I don't have as strong of opinion on single lane roundabouts at some of the lesser intersections like say 82nd but I do prefer regular traffic signals when on my bicycle since red lights force motorists to stop. In Richfield they're obviously building a lot of roundabouts but I'm wondering how much influence is coming from the city. Bloomington hasn't shown the least bit of enthusiasm, the limit is one planned someday at 106th and Xerxes whenever the house in the northeast corner decides they want to move and sell to the city. A roundabout at the city initiated Old Shakopee Road and Old Cedar project was considered and rejected.

[wingedmolotov]

Can you share a bit more about Xerxes and 106th? Anyway, I personally think the shared use path is a downgrade from separated bike and pedestrian facilities. I see dozens of kids walking and biking to Kennedy and I couldn’t imagine trying to mix the clusters of walkers with the faster bikers, the people waiting for a MT bus, etc. Also, I don’t know a kid that would cross the street and back just for the shared use path.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanPatchToget]

...red lights force motorists to stop.

In theory, yes, they're an invisible barrier. However, as I've seen in recent years, they're very easy to ignore and do a rolling stop or just completely blow through. Roundabouts on the other hand are a physical barrier that force motorists to slow down and be attentive to what's going on at the intersection.

Not every intersection can have a roundabout, but where ever it's feasible I say do it.

As for the survey, I'm in favor of the bike lane option. I suggested that, if possible, the bike lane and sidewalk should be physically separated to make it more clear where bikers should be and where pedestrians should be. Along 66th Street in Richfield, while the bike lanes are nice, I've seen people treat it as a wide sidewalk and walk in the bike lane. I've also seen people biking against the flow of traffic, and that will probably always be an issue with one-way bike lanes unless there's enough bike traffic that people can't do that, but it can be less of a problem if there's plenty of places to safely cross the street so people don't feel the need to bike against the flow of traffic.

[Mdcastle]

I'm at work so I can't go wading into old agendas now, but about 4-5 years ago when the city was developing the project to add turn lanes to Xerxes off OSR they were also looking at doing something at 106th in the future. After considering the option of having Xerxes curve into 106th, they came up with a roundabout instead which would require acquiring the house in the northeast corner. At the time the city wasn't ready to do the project; the house was homesteaded and the unlike Richfield the city has in the past showed no eagerness to evict people out of their family homes, not even for clear transportation purposes. City told the residents to "live their lives and call us when you're ready to sell".

I just checked GIS and the house was in fact sold in 2023, to another homesteader. Whether the city still wasn't ready for the project / ready to acquire the house, backed away from the project, or if the owner decided to sell on the open market instead and the city got outbid (at the time houses were still routinely selling for above asking and isn't there something about cities not being able to pay more than appraised value) I don't know.

Recently there were rumors about the city threatening eminent domain for a now cancelled plan to build a parking lot for the new community center so the current administration might be more willing. If they're going to need to acquire property for Nicollet this could be a factor too.

[twincitizen]

I don’t have an issue with the shared use path plan in a vacuum, and I agree with mdcastle that pedestrian & bike volumes in Bloomington are quite low, so a shared use path is not problematic like it is for Lyndale between Lake & Franklin.

But my major holdup is that the county is going to build the one way cycle track layout in Richfield. I’m having trouble accepting that the layout should change at 494 just because it’s a different city and separate construction project / separate public input process. For me, the one way cycle track layout should be the default option since its already been chosen for Richfield’s portion of Nicollet. But I’m willing to be convinced otherwise.

[Mdcastle]

Design consistancy- If I recall correctly Nicollet is going to have a pair of really wide sidewalks- functionally a pair of MUPS- over 494. Despite that, after the bridge was designed, we decided to have a change of design northward of that with one-way cyceltrack.

Southward, you could argue that extending one of the MUPS and one wide sidewalk that's going to be functionally a MUP if you're going a short way on that size is more consistant with what's being built over the bridge than one way cycletracks would be.

Meanwhile Portland is going to have a change of design with a pair of one way cycletracks over 494 as opposed to the pre-existing one-side MUP / one side sidewalk on Portland north of 77th so it's not like we're caring about design consistancy there.

As for Kennedy, yes it gets busy but right now we have byclists and pedestrians sharing a pair of 4 foot sidewalks as opposed to a presumably 6 foot sidewalk and 8 foot MUP, and I'm not aware of an epidemic of bicyclists hitting pedestrians.

[wingedmolotov]

Design consistancy- If I recall correctly Nicollet is going to have a pair of really wide sidewalks- functionally a pair of MUPS- over 494. Despite that, after the bridge was designed, we decided to have a change of design northward of that with one-way cyceltrack.

Southward, you could argue that extending one of the MUPS and one wide sidewalk that's going to be functionally a MUP if you're going a short way on that size is more consistant with what's being built over the bridge than one way cycletracks would be.

Meanwhile Portland is going to have a change of design with a pair of one way cycletracks over 494 as opposed to the pre-existing one-side MUP / one side sidewalk on Portland north of 77th so it's not like we're caring about design consistancy there.

As for Kennedy, yes it gets busy but right now we have byclists and pedestrians sharing a pair of 4 foot sidewalks as opposed to a presumably 6 foot sidewalk and 8 foot MUP, and I'm not aware of an epidemic of bicyclists hitting pedestrians.

Portland has painted bike lanes in Richfield and Nicollet will have them on the bridge over 494. I get the point with the wider paths but between these two choices I really don’t see a big downside to having separated uses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mdcastle]

Being guaranteed to have to cross Nicollet twice no matter how long or short your round trip is would seem to be a downside.

[wingedmolotov]

The only people that would have to cross twice are those on bikes. Which is addressed with proper separated modes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mdcastle]

How does "properly seperated mode" prevent bicylists from having to cross twice no matter how short their trip is. As opposed to potentially not having to cross at all with a two way multi-use path.

[LakeCharles]

I feel like I'm missing something with "not having to cross the street twice" thing.

If I start at 90th and head north to 7/8 Liquors, and then return home, my journey in the two scenarios looks like so:

if I live on the east side of Nicollet, it's exactly the same

• with separated one-ways, on the way there I have to cross once, on the way back I have to cross once, for a total of two times

• with a MUP on either side, i have to cross once on the way there, and once on the way back, for a total of two times

if I live on the west side of Nicollet

• with separated one-ways, on the way there I have to cross twice, on the way back I have to cross zero times, for a total of two times

• with a MUP, if it's on the west side, I have to cross zero times total, but if it's on the east side, I have to cross four times: twice on the way there, and twice on the way back. for the average user, that's then an average of two times

But again, I'm sure I'm mis-thinking of something.