Transportation projects booming in south metro

  • Article by: DAVID PETERSON , Star Tribune
  • Updated: February 12, 2013 - 4:19 PM

We're in the midst of a series of transportation advances as momentous, collectively, as the 90's arrival of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge.

  • 7
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 7 of 7
MorgFeb. 13, 13 6:08 PM

Too bad our brilliant planners, who have never shown any foresight whatsoever as to being ready for the future, didn't set aside some land to build a major east-west connection across Dakota County that didn't have stoplights every block like existing Cty. roads 42 and 46 do. Before all the land is developed how about building a toll freeway.

1
2
mdcastleFeb. 13, 1311:54 PM

Highway 13: When all the projects are done they'll have taken away two stoplights and put two new ones in so I don't see the big improvement, unlike US 169 where they (eventually) took away all 5 and put in zero. Bus Rapid Transit. Calling it "almost Light Rail" is putting lipstick on a pig and they shouldn't cheapen the LRT by putting it on the same map. It's still a stinky, low class diesel bus running on roads, not a sleek, clean train on rails. I'm also not sure the plan to put a roundabout in at the "Y" at 101 and Flying Cloud Drive is the best idea. A toll freeway across Dakota County: yeah, it's a good idea as is a complete outer beltway, but environmentalists go absolutely bonkers at the idea, so it's not even being talked about right now.

5
0
copper88Feb. 14, 1311:59 AM

Bus Rapid Transit is nothing like rail. I don't know why you would pick a bus to move high volumes of people. Trains work much better at that. Buses should be left for routes that have lower volumes and could be subject to change. Those people in Apple Valley got jobbed by the Met Council and their BRT fantasies.

3
0
mdcastleFeb. 14, 13 2:21 PM

The right way to do it would be to extend the Hiawatha line over the river by building a new bridge to the east of the existing Cedar Bridge. I'm thinking two light rail tracks and three northbound general traffic lanes. The existing northbound bridge could then be converted to three reversable lanes so you'd have double the existing capacity going the peak direction.

2
1
MorgFeb. 16, 13 9:40 AM

Once they get the interchange built at 13 and Cty Rd 5 in Burnsville it will create another slew of problems. Even though that corner is accident-plagued--mostly by A-hole red-light runners--it does serve one purpose in that it meters the flow of cars into the loop onto NB 35W. With no light to slow the flow the loop will be backed up for a mile.

1
0
mdcastleFeb. 18, 13 8:48 AM

MN 13 east of the interchange is being loooked at in a seperate study, which is mostly stalled for the time being because of a complete lack fo money and Burnsville not being able to decide if they want 13 to be a freeway or a quaint street with people sipping lattes next to it on a sidewalk cafe. The options range from building a high powered interchange at I-35W and an interchange at Nicollet to downgrading the I-35W interchange to one with stoplights and leaving the light on Nicollet. All options though at least have a high speed flyover ramp from 13 east to I-35W north to replace the loop.

0
0
jackpinesavFeb. 19, 13 8:33 AM

Interesting how Scott County is now getting all the road projects with a progressive governor when the elected representatives there have fought and stalled road budgets for years, citing "tax" issues. Watch how they jump in front of the successful parade and then exhalt themselves for "strong leadership". Staff like Vermillion do well in spite of such poor elected leadership.

0
0
  • 1 - 7 of 7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT