Street, Road and Highway Projects

[Hero]

Now that the 35W reconstruction is finished I wonder if Park and Portland can be turned into two way streets instead of one ways.

[twincitizen]

Absolutely. If the County and City were both interested, I’d envision a “phase 1” project of turning back Park Avenue (46th to Lake St), which is currently CSAH-33, to city ownership. Assuming the city would plan for reconstruction of Park as a two way street, the county would do the same for Portland.

Lots of details to sort out in terms of what Park could look like with a lot less traffic, and what Portland will look like with more. And many options for bike infrastructure. Add northbound bike lanes to Portland? Make Park Avenue a parkway/greenway extending north from Minnehaha Creek?

[Hero]

Make Park Avenue a parkway/greenway extending north from Minnehaha Creek?

This is exactly where I was going. It is already called Park why not make it one? Connecting the river and trails to the creek and trails to the parks along the way would be awesome. I'd go so far as to only allow traffic across Park at traffic signals.

[mattaudio]

Long ago before D-Line planning, I dreamed of Park Ave becoming a rail tram + two-way cycletrack corridor, with one lane + parking for local residents. I'm not sure what speeds LRT/trams can go where they are using signaling tied to stoplights rather than full freight rail style grade crossings. But assuming you could get a tram going 40+ mph quietly down the street, have signalized intersections every two blocks on the even cross streets, it could have worked out well. Only a few hundred feet west of Chicago Ave destinations.

Then hop the creek and connect somehow to the west side of Portland along Pearl Park and Diamond Lake, then somehow connect west to the old MN&S Dan Patch corridor that ends at 60th and Pleasant. Then it could use the Pleasant Ave RR corridor to hit Downtown Richfield, Oxboro, and other destinations.

[Korh]

I was thinking about the idea of highway removals through cities and I don't know if this is better suited for fantasy maps but if you could greenlight them how far would you remove them?
Take 35W and 35E for example would you just remove the sections that cut through the centers of Minneapolis and St. Paul respectively, go as far north/south as the 694/494 interchanges, try to remove all of I-35 from the state, etc.

[Hero]

I'd rather see caps. Before work on the new bus garage started I had thought it would have made a nice cap for I94. Then use the space where the garage was to be built to daylight the creek.

[alexschief]

I was thinking about the idea of highway removals through cities and I don't know if this is better suited for fantasy maps but if you could greenlight them how far would you remove them?
Take 35W and 35E for example would you just remove the sections that cut through the centers of Minneapolis and St. Paul respectively, go as far north/south as the 694/494 interchanges, try to remove all of I-35 from the state, etc.

Imo I'd like to remove all the "loop" portions of I-94 in downtown Minneapolis. You'd still have I-94, I-35W, I-394, and MN-55 stub end into downtown, so access wouldn't be a problem. But access through the downtown would require getting off a highway. (I-94 between the downtowns would also lose a lot of its reason for being and so this concept is complimentary with the efforts surrounding Rethinking 94.)

I don't think any other removal would have so much value for cost, because the actual length of highway in question is relatively small, but it's adjacent to some of the most valuable land in the entire metro area. So removing the highway, restoring the street grid, and loosening the highway collar on downtown would not just create new valuable land, but it would also raise the value of the land that is depressed by virtue of being adjacent to the highway. I'm convinced that if you took away the highway, the area just south of Loring Park and east of Kenwood would rapidly become an extremely valuable residential and retail area.

[SurlyLHT]

I am sort of confused as to where they want this or why..given 94 is right there.

Maple Grove seeks to extend heavily traveled Hwy. 610
Three online open houses outlining plans will be held Wednesday.

"The first segment of Hwy. 610 was built in 1986 with a Mississippi River crossing connecting Hwy. 252 in Brooklyn Park with Hwy. 47 in Coon Rapids.

Now, more than 40 years later, Maple Grove is seeking to finish what's been dubbed the "North Crosstown" by adding missing connections at the Interstate 94 interchange and extending the heavily traveled road west to County Road 30."
https://www.startribune.com/maple-grove ... 600157817/

[Trademark]

I am sort of confused as to where they want this or why..given 94 is right there.

Maple Grove seeks to extend heavily traveled Hwy. 610
Three online open houses outlining plans will be held Wednesday.

"The first segment of Hwy. 610 was built in 1986 with a Mississippi River crossing connecting Hwy. 252 in Brooklyn Park with Hwy. 47 in Coon Rapids.

Now, more than 40 years later, Maple Grove is seeking to finish what's been dubbed the "North Crosstown" by adding missing connections at the Interstate 94 interchange and extending the heavily traveled road west to County Road 30."
https://www.startribune.com/maple-grove ... 600157817/

I think extending Dayton Parkway to 109th Ave would provide a much better utility for drivers coming from western Hennepin and Wright County.

[SurlyLHT]

So, who gets to tell Wisconsin they're losing Interstate 535 and you don't you think they'd raise enough stink over it that the federal government would never allow us to remove the interstate designation and build a ramp with signals?

I agree, 610 just kinda loses it's purpose past 94. There isn't anything over there to anchor it to the west and I'm not sure those more rural communities want an interstate. The main population centers on on 94 to the NW, not due west. Unless they want to extend 610 all the way to Buffalo.

[thespeedmccool]

I agree, 610 just kinda loses it's purpose past 94. There isn't anything over there to anchor it to the west and I'm not sure those more rural communities want an interstate. The main population centers on on 94 to the NW, not due west. Unless they want to extend 610 all the way to Buffalo.

They're growing quickly, and I actually think the 610 extension makes a lot of sense. Besides, this isn't a freeway extension, just an arterial connection.

[alexschief]

An important question here that obviously won't get asked is whether it's a good thing that these areas grow quickly. Because adding lane miles will not have a neutral impact on that growth.

[Trademark]

I agree, 610 just kinda loses it's purpose past 94. There isn't anything over there to anchor it to the west and I'm not sure those more rural communities want an interstate. The main population centers on on 94 to the NW, not due west. Unless they want to extend 610 all the way to Buffalo.

They're growing quickly, and I actually think the 610 extension makes a lot of sense. Besides, this isn't a freeway extension, just an arterial connection.

I think it makes sense to save space for a future 610 extension. But the Dayton Parkway extension should be a higher priority especially considering we just built a whole new entrance ramp and fancy diverging diamond that for a road that goes less than a mile.

[Trademark]

An important question here that obviously won't get asked is whether it's a good thing that these areas grow quickly. Because adding lane miles will not have a neutral impact on that growth.

Extend 610 as a full freeway to Buffalo. Induced Demand doesn't exist. Sprawl forever.

[thespeedmccool]

An important question here that obviously won't get asked is whether it's a good thing that these areas grow quickly. Because adding lane miles will not have a neutral impact on that growth.

That's a fair question, and I would probably agree that Corcoran doesn't need to start developing before, say, Brooklyn Park is full.

That said, if you're Maple Grove and the 2040 MUSA is basically outside of your control, it's just smart planning to "finish" 610 now. It's not really "on" Maple Grove to individually take a stand against sprawl beyond its borders (or, under the current status quo, within its borders.)

[DanPatchToget]

If Maple Grove had any sense of climate change and the climate crisis we're facing, they wouldn't build anymore roads and there would be little if any future development on land that's currently undeveloped.

[Mdcastle]

An important question here that obviously won't get asked is whether it's a good thing that these areas grow quickly. Because adding lane miles will not have a neutral impact on that growth.

I thought we had a housing shortage in the area.

[DanPatchToget]

An important question here that obviously won't get asked is whether it's a good thing that these areas grow quickly. Because adding lane miles will not have a neutral impact on that growth.

I thought we had a housing shortage in the area.

Affordable housing shortage. The typical housing in the Maple Grove and Corcoran area is not something people with below average income can afford, and even if they could there's the additional cost of needing at least one vehicle because transit service is very limited.

[Mdcastle]

So, if a person can't buy a house in Maple Grove or Corcoran that's to their liking, they're going to buy an affordable house in Richfield or Minneapolis and bulldoze it to build their dream home there, removing a house that is affordable.

[DanPatchToget]

Are they buying and tearing down a house in Minneapolis or Richfield because of the "affordable" price, or is it the location they like but want a bigger house in its place? I can't imagine there's many people thinking that their options are either buying a McMansion in a place like Maple Grove or buy, tear down, and replace a house in an inner ring suburb or the urban center.