Mailbag: A new highway, and an old one
Posted on July 17th, 2008 – 6:05 AMBy Roadguy
A few of Roadguy’s alert readers are itching to talk about the new Hwy. 212, among them alert reader Brian:
Don’t forget about the west metro! The final leg of the new 212 is open (although the project isn’t finished). Take a drive out west and maybe post few pics on your blog. 
… and alert reader Joe G.:
A new major freeway segment has now been open for three days, and no posts, references, or CrapCam pictures yet? I assumed you’d be all over that…. Being a road geek myself, I just had to drive it on the first day.
I know, we seem to get new freeways only every half-decade around here. But if I told my many bosses that I was going to take a few hours to drive to Chaska to have a look at a road, I’m pretty sure there’d be frowns of disapproval. If some rusty gusset plates turn up in the greater Carver area, however, I’ll be dispatched to the scene immediately and can enjoy 212 along the way.
Meanwhile, alert reader Mike also wants me to fire up my camera — last week he sent me a quick e-mail with the subject line “Something for you to take a picture of”:
If you are heading north on 35W, after Lake Street, a portable light sign is displaying that 35W at 65 is going to be closed. Thought it was interesting to mention a trunk highway that is now gone.
He included a link to this Roadguy post, the one about how Hwy. 65 no longer goes through downtown Minneapolis. There’s still a detached part of 65 south of downtown, between 11th Street and roughly the 24th Street pedestrian bridge, but the only indications that it’s called 65 are on the mile markers. Nobody except MnDOT thinks of it as 65, but here’s one of the signs announcing the closure:
(Added fun: It’ll be shut down this weekend, too.)
If you have thoughts or photos of 212 to share, are losing your mind every time 35W closes, or want Roadguy to take a picture along some other freeway, please make use of the comments below.
28 Responses to "Mailbag: A new highway, and an old one"
I’ll be heading out to 212 this weekend for some picture taking/ roadgeeking fun
It’s about time the new 212 opened. It’s awesome zipping through Chaska/Chanhasen/Eden Prairie now without all those stoplights.
What Marty said. Plus the traffic on side roads, like Pioneer Trail, is much lighter now. C’mon, Roadguy, surely you’re way overdue for your annual visit to Eden Prairie!
I agree with what my neighbor, Amy, said.
Also, one interesting side effect of an efficient road to the southwest and beyond is that the I-494 West (or is it North) intersection with MN-5 and (now) US-212 (exit 11C) now gets pretty badly congested in the afternoon rush hour.
If you build it, they will come… and then some, for US-212.
But, it sure beats the two lanes and traffic lights on MN-5 from 18 years ago. I’m glad US-212 has finally opened.
Yes, and you can take pictures too of all the new road signs that Eden Prairie invested in so that people don’t get lost so often!
a new highway makes Eden Prairie a less desirable location for me… I think I’ll skip it.
What is the old 212 officially called now? I’m sure it will be called “Old 212″ for a few years, but is it a now a county road?
How about naming the new 212 the “Molnaubahn”?
The Hennepin County segment is County Road 61. Don’t know if Carver County numbered their segment to match.
The bridge that carries the realignment of Old 212 over new 212 in Carver County has a sign that says “County 61″, so I assume that’s what they’ll do. I also saw some old plans though where it was labeled “CSAH 112″, but maybe that was just conjecture from a few years ago.
Is there a hot-off-the-press current map of the new highway? I haven’t been out there in years and I can’t find a *current* map of the space online yet.
Yeah, what drivingwithakilt said. Where does this road run? Is it an extension off of what maps.google.com calls 312? Looks, on the map, like a right of way continues through the area up to the carver/cologne area.
Glad someone’s getting new roads. We seem to be losing roads and lanes left and right here in the St. Paul/Roseville/Falcon Heights area. There’s construction on MN-36 which bleeds onto MN-280, Northbound Snelling is down to one lane near Har-Mar Mall and a new project just opened up across the road from the state fairgrounds, Hamline Ave north of Larpenteur has work going on, and Raymond is closed between Energy Park and Como Ave. Its like the detour to the detour to the detour of I-35W is now detoured, all while we’ve got a motor-home/RV convention going on at the fairgrounds… I’ve never seen so many different projects so close together outside of a downtown before.
I may be getting photos of the new Hwy 212 before too long…if so, they’ll be on my website shortly thereafter.
As someone else mentioned, Old 212 through Eden Prairie will be County 61.
Per an E-mail I recived sometime back from the county, “CSAH 112″ (County 112 in layman’s terms) is the designation that will be given to old Hwy 12 through Long Lake when the Long Lake bypass opens.
bsimon/kilt: yes, this road is an extension of 312. 312 was always considered as a “temporary designation”. The project website has a couple overall maps (including one showing a non-peak travel time comparison), plus detailed section-by-section maps.
I’ve been commuting on the new highway every day this week, and have a questions / comments about a couple of things I noticed.
First, the westmost stretch of new highway from the bridge over Chaska Creek (just west of Engler Blvd) to the tie-in with Old 212 in Carver is paved with asphalt, rather than the concrete used to the east. Why? Traffic counts are undoubtedly lower (fewer commuters that far west), but how do the costs of increased maintenance compare to the savings in initial cost, and what’s the expected life of that pavement?
Second, installation of marker signs on the intersecting roads is a confusing hodgepodge of old and new, especially in Eden Prairie. (Surprise, surprise.) For instance, the westbound onramp for northbound traffic on Dell Road is marked as US 212. For southbound traffic, the eastbound onramp is marked MN-312. At Mitchell Road, all signs are still MN-312. On northbound 494, the US-212 shield is covered with a MN-312 shield. And at the westbound split of 212 and 5, the old “312″ shield was removed from the overhead sign but not replaced, leaving it reading “To MN-41″.
Who’s to blame for that mess?
froggy- thanks for the info.
project page is here:
http://projects.dot.state.mn.us/zrc/212/index.html
Mulad, I feel your pain. It’s ridiculous isn’t it? Both arteries going east, 694 (unweave the weave) and now 36 are one lane. Some of the worst planning my incompetent MN Dot than I have ever seen.
And, doesn’t it seem ironic that all of these things are occuring in perfect timing for the RNC? Must just be a *strange* coincidence. Even the 35W bridge will be done by September! Do you think this would have been paid for and pushed for were it not for the RNC? Methinks not.
To answer kieth’s question about pavements, the reason MNDOT paved the connection to the old 2 lane section past the creek asphalt is probably in relation to the new 41 bridge that is planned to be built in the future. Asphalt lasts about 20 years, then with a mill and overlay you can get another 20 years. In this process they grind off the first inch to upwards of two inches and repave it with asphalt. Many states, including Minnesota, do a second mill and overlay where they try to get another 15 years. Concrete even on an urban section with proper maintenance will last 50-60 years. Granted those are very general time frames that do vary between each state and Minnesota is a state where obviously pavements do not last as long. They probably determined if they paved the highway concrete the pavement would be torn up prematurely for the bridge connection. As for the signs, MNDOT is probably aware of the improper signage, but it can sometimes take months from the time they order signs to receive them. That certainly is a case of some poorer planning although MNDOT probably plans to fix it soon.
Hey Jim (Roadguy),
I suggest you take some photos of the massive freeway viaduct wasteland in the center of downtown Milwaukee. It must take up about 5 square blocks in the heart of the city. It’s kind of like our spot between the U and the Metrodome on steroids.
I had the pleasure of experiencing it yesterday on my marathon journey on the Megabus to Chicago. Here in Chicago, there are fewer freeways cutting things up in the central city (although there are a couple). Well, I’m off to a late breakfast before some relaxing on the beach.
Enjoy the new road in Eden Prairie while I’m gone (and while it’s not congested).
I found a $10 bill on the Oak Street Beach when I lived in Chicago 10 years ago. I bought my friends vodka tonics with it, the proceeded to my one-woman show at the Annoyance Theater.
We’re staying just a couple of blocks to the west of Oak Street Beach–it’s pretty swanky over here in the Gold Coast n’hood. No $10 bills yet, but there will be a couple of gin and tonics in our future.
On the transportation front, Chicago is wonderful. There’s so much congestion that it reduces unnecessary driving trips because they are so difficult to take. We just witnessed a man running down the middle of State Street with some sort of spring shoes on that I haven’t seen before. He was moving just as fast as traffic so he took the lane. He did almost get doored by a guy getting out of a cab though. Like most places the taxi cabs are the biggest problem on the roads with their impatient and aggressive driving.
We also chatted with a woman who just dismounted her bicycle imported from Holland. That was a nice vehicle. Very utilitarian.
See you next week Twin Cities.
Matty - I forgot to ask: How was your Megabus experience? I’ve been contemplating taking it to Chicago for some more beachcombing and have heard mixed experiences. How was the clientele (i.e. screaming babies, goats, souvlaki vendors running rampant?)
Roadguy: Maybe a separate Megabus topic would be in order?
beaarthur,
While the Megabus was by far the most economical option, you do get what you pay for it seems. Our scheduled driver didn’t show up for work so by the time the replacement driver arrived and found the way to the U of M stop (this took a couple of backtracking maneuvers because the driver didn’t know how to get there we departed we hit I-94 two hours after scheduled departure.
The next adventure happened in Milwaukee where our driver decided to bypass the downtown stop and instead headed directly to a stop at a park and ride on the south end of Milwaukee. After a long wait and much confusion we headed back into Milwaukee to make the downtown stop before finally heading towards Chicago where we were just in time for some nice rush hour traffic on 94.
We arrived in Chicago at 7 pm, about 4 hours later than scheduled. It seemed that at least a couple of passengers had hoped to connect with another Megabus in Chicago. These folks had to make other plans, unfortunately.
The passengers were very well behaved (even a couple of young children with only about 30 seconds of whining). The bus was clean and nice, etc. and we had a good view up top of the double decker.
The Megabus cost us $90 for two passengers round trip. Amtrak would have cost us $440, but all the trains were sold out well into August when we were making plans about a month ago. NWA was around $900 if memory serves me.
This experience demonstrates our need for a high speed rail line between St. Paul and Chicago. We need this investment in the worst way.
As for the asphalt, I think the simplest explanation, that Mn/DOT is being shortsightedly cheap is probably right. A preferred alignment for the new MN 41 bridge hasn’t even been identified yet, and previous thinking was that it would be east of the present MN 41.
In days past they would use asphalt on soft soils, like the center section of I-394, but now if the soil is soft they’ll put down a layer of asphalt and then one of concrete to build a road for the long term.
Monte’s explanation for the asphalt vs. concrete is probably mostly correct. It SHOULD have been concrete at least to the west end of the CR 147 interchange.
West of that point, I could see asphalt because it’s A) the end of the 4-lane, and B) preliminary options for extending the 4-lane out to Cologne have it running north of existing 212 for the first part west of CR 147.
On a related note, I know the road at the west end used to be CR 147, and it’s labeled as such in most of the construction project correspondence, but MnDOT’s County and Twin Cities street series maps show it as a realigned CR 11 instead. My question is how is it signed in the field?
As for Keith’s question on signage: the contractor is the main party responsible for signage, with MnDOT oversight. A quick phone call or E-mail to the project manager should get you an answer to the problem.
A small side post back toward the original 35Wish thread.
Why, on the weekends when 35W is completely shut down, does MN-DOT shut down the 11th Street exit into downtown also? Actually, I get that–they want to force people onto the detour rather than onto city streets. (I live on Portland, so I’m thankful they’re trying to keep it from becoming an expressway.) BUT, why the heck don’t they warn you anywhere?
On “35W is closed” weekends, I’ve assumed I’ll just home via 11th to find it’s closed–no warning at all, just barricades and barrels (and there doesn’t seem to be evidence of work done during the closures after the fact). Shouldn’t they warn people the exit is also closed? Then at least I could get off an exit earlier to get home.
Does anyone know the reasoning behind this? Maybe to throw off people who think 11th is a perfect back-up plan and resign them to taking the official detour out onto 100? It’s so frustrating to be surprised by the closure of a fairly major exit without being warned.
MNDOLT being shortsighted & cheap = par for the course.
I did find out a while back that the road marked as county road 61 was county road 112 at one point. A road closure was listed on the 212 website as being at 112. I emailed to find out where that was, and I was told that the road was being renamed to 61. I wonder if that was actually just a case of someone getting the two projects confused.
As far as the confusing signage to the east of Eden Prairie Road: that portion had been built as a previous project and was marked as 312 with no immediate plans to change it to 212. To the west, all the signs were put up as 212 with temporary 312 markers over the top. Switching those to 212 only involved removing the 312 signs. For the portion east of EP Road, new signs are needed. I think someone forgot to inform the sign shop!
Hopefully, the signs will be fixed soon. The one where 212 and 5 split should be the first priority, I think.
