Review of Freeway Planning at Downtown Minneapolis
This page lists excerpts from Chapters 3 and 5 of the study, "Review of Freeway Planning at Downtown Minneapolis", which was conducted by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc in 1963. My own notes will be italicized and listed in brackets.
I have also created a map showing rough locations of the freeways that were proposed in Minneapolis in the 1960s.
Chapter 3: State Design Considerations
Additional Freeways and Expressways
The Department of Highway's immediate assignment is to design and build the links in the Interstate Highway System which extends through the Twin Cities area. This nationwide system of freeways, financed 90 percent from Federal funds, is to be completed in the early 1970s. To fulfill its assignment, the state had to know what other freeways, expressways, and arterial streets would be built in the Minneapolis area during the next 20 years in order to provide for junctions at the proper locations along the Interstate System and to determine the share of the metropolitan traffic load that this system would be required to handle. These decisions necessarily precede the final designs of the Interstate routes.
The additional high-capacity roads were selected in conference with the technical staff of Minneapolis. In this manner, the following freeways and expressways were added to the city's planned highway transportation system:
[Webmaster's Note: The original document only showed a list of those freeways that were proposed. I have included rough location information, and the ultimate disposition of each proposal into the following table.]
|North Ring Route||I-94 near Plymouth Ave N to I-35W near Hennepin Ave||Became I-335 proposal in 1964. Cancelled in 1978.|
|Southwest Diagonal||I-394/US 12 near Dunwoody Blvd southwest to MN 100 near MN 7||Proposed as US 169. Never built. Stub ramps at I-94/US 12 interchange were removed with I-394 construction.|
|3rd Ave North Distributor||12th St/Wayzata Blvd to 3rd Ave N/Washington Ave||Constructed in early 1990s as I-394.|
|28th Street Crosstown||Proposed Southwest Diagonal near Lake St/France Ave east to I-94 at MN 280.||Proposed as MN 280. Never built. I-94/MN 280 interchange was originally constructed to accommodate the freeway. Extra bridges at the interchange were removed in the early 1980s.|
|Cedar Ave Freeway||Along Cedar Ave south of I-94/MN 55||Proposed as MN 36. Constructed south of 57th St during the 1960s. Segment between 57th St and I-94/MN 55 cancelled in 1970.|
|Hiawatha Freeway||Along MN 55/Hiawatha Ave from I-94/I-35W to MN 5 and beyond.||Small portions built north of Cedar Ave and southeast of MN 62 during the 1960s. Segment in between finally cancelled with the Hiawatha Ave EIS in 1985.|
|62nd Street Crosstown||Present-day MN 62 from I-494 to MN 55||Planned, designed, constructed, and operated as Hennepin CSAH 62. Converted to MN 62 in 1988.|
|Northwest Diagonal||I-94 near Plymouth Ave N north and west to W Broadway/Lowry Ave/Wirth Pkwy and beyond.||Proposed as US 52. Only portion that made it to construction was the interchange at Wirth Pkwy/Lowry Ave, replacing the old Lowry Circle.|
|Trunk Highway 65||I-35W near Johnson St to I-694/MN 65||Proposed freeway roughly along Central Ave N. The long directional ramps on I-35W at Johnson St are the only vestige of this proposal.|
|Wayzata Blvd/US 12 raised to freeway standards||I-494/US 12 to I-94/US 12||Constructed in the late 1980s/early 1990s as I-394.|
|Olson Highway/MN 55 raised to freeway standards||I-494/MN 55 to I-94/MN 55||Proposed freeway upgrade of the Olson Hwy/MN 55 expressway. Freeway upgrade cancelled likely because of the proximity to I-394/US 12.|
|MN 100 raised to freeway standards||I-494/MN 100 to I-94/I-694/MN 100||Ongoing freeway upgrade of former "Beltline" since the 1960s. Final sections between I-394 and Brooklyn Blvd now under reconstruction.|
|Eustis Ave Freeway||Present-day MN 280 from I-94 to I-35W.||Ongoing freeway upgrade of MN 280 corridor. Reconstructed between University Ave and Como Ave in the early 1990s.|
[Webmaster's Notes: Of the 13 freeways listed above, only 5 saw any significant construction, 6 if you include Cedar Ave south of MN 62. This is one reason why the freeways within the metro seem small and have heavy congestion...they were designed and mostly constructed under the assumption that all of the above freeways would be built and handling traffic loads. The only exceptions to this are I-394, constructed largely during the 1980s but limited by law to 6 lanes, and I-94 through North Minneapolis, which was designed and built after most of the unbuilt freeways were cancelled.]
The projected traffic loads on the freeways near the business district for the peak hours are found to be extremely heavy. On various segments of the freeway ring and Interstate 35W, peak hour loadings range from 8,500 to 12,000 vehicles. The heaviest loads are found in the "Bottleneck"; at Loring Park the 1980 traffic loads on the express roads plus the two frontage roads will total nearly 12,000 vehicles in the evening peak hour. These will be virtually saturation loads for this improvement. The state concluded that it was impractical to provide more traffic lanes through this area because of the serious impact upon abutting property. Therefore, the capacity of the freeway through the area from Loring Park to 7th Street North was accepted as a fixed limitation on the potential capacity of the freeway system through this area.
The freeway system at Downtown Minneapolis is in several stages of development. Some parts, such as the improvement in the Bottleneck, have been approved by the city council. Other segments now are awaiting approval by the council. Still others are in the preliminary design stage and are to be submitted for concurrence. The downtown system as currently conceived appears in Figure 5 which is placed at the end of this report.
Accommodating Peak Movements
Roughly one-fourth of the day-long (24 hour) travel on the freeways near the Downtown Area will take place during one hour in the morning and one in the evening - the usual rush hours. The highway authorities determined, in accordance with standard practice, that the freeways should be designed to accommodate these peak loads and that critical overloads should be avoided during the times when the greatest number of citizens will desire to use the routes.
Ramps Along Freeways
As the number of ramps along a freeway is increased, additional traffic is enabled or encouraged to use the freeway. In view of the practical limitations on capacity through the Bottleneck area, the number of ramps to be provided along the freeway ring is especially critical since two types of additional traffic would be drawn to the freeway in this area. One is traffic distributing to downtown destinations. An example would be a vehicle traveling east on Wayzata Blvd, proceeding south through the Bottleneck, and turning east on the freeway ring to a destination near the Auditorium. The second type is short trips. An example would be a vehicle southbound on 3rd Ave South entering the freeway system and turning west on the ring in order to continue south on Hennepin or Lyndale. When ramps are included that allow for movements of these types, traffic loads exceeding the efficient capacity of the freeway would be produced for the year 1980.
Some of the more critical traffic loadings along the freeway ring are shown in Figure 4. These are the volumes produced after the deletion of the two ramps previously included near 3rd Ave South.
Interchange Between Freeways
At one stage in the freeway planning, an interchange was contemplated between Interstate 35W and the 28th Street Crosstown Expressway. As traffic was assigned to the freeway network, it was found that this interchange encouraged further traffic on I-35W between 28th Street and the Downtown Area and along the freeway ring. An example of the type of freeway usage stimulated by this connection would be a vehicle starting from a point near Nicollet and Lake St, getting on the 28th Street Crosstown at Nicollet, proceeding east to I-35W, and turning north on the freeway to reach the City Hall. When the design permitted this type of trip on I-35W, its capacity was exceeded. To avoid this, connections between the Crosstown Expressway and I-35W were eliminated from the design. Similarly, a direct connection between the North Ring Route and I-94 was eliminated to help hold traffic volumes on the freeway through the Bottleneck to a workable magnitude.
As a rule, when the Department of Highways verifies the accuracy of a traffic assignment that produces an overload and also finds that the roadway cannot be designed to handle all the assigned traffic, an effort is made to divert the shortest trips or those for which an alternate routing with nearly equal time advantages is available.
Freeway Ring as a Distributor
Prior to the current plans reflecting up-to-date traffic forecasts, previous designs for the freeway ring had presumed its extensive use as a distributor for the Downtown Area. In view of the extremely heavy loads now foreseen along the ring, the Department of Highways is following the principle of providing one primary access route to the Downtown Area for each of the radial freeways approaching the area. For example, a driver approaching from the south on I-35W primarily will continue through the central interchange and enter the business district at its southeast corner on 11th St or 5th Ave South. In addition, he may turn west along the freeway ring and get off at Lyndale to enter the CBD via Harmon, or he may continue to Olson Highway or 7th St North. He can turn east along the freeway ring and enter the Central Area from the east on 3rd St or Washington Ave. To a great extent, however, it is intended that traffic from a radial freeway will continue across the freeway ring directly into downtown and circulate over CBD streets to desired destinations.
An important objective of the state has been to plan, through TCATS, a balanced highway system. After certain ramps at the Downtown Area and connections between certain of the freeways were omitted, traffic was assigned to the complete highway network - freeways and primary surface streets. By this means it was found that a balanced system had been produced. A greatly improved level of transportation to all parts of the Minneapolis area was provided without excessive overloadings in certain areas or surplus capacity in others.
Interchange at 28th Street
As previously mentioned, current freeway designs omit the interchange between I-35W and the proposed 28th Street Crosstown Freeway. This will require that traffic from the Crosstown destined to the CBD, as well as to the fringe area between downtown and 28th, use primary streets such as Hennepin, Lyndale, Nicollet, and Park-Portland rather than the freeway system from 28th Street northward.
Interchange at North Ring
Currently, no direct interchange is contemplated between the North Ring Route and the west leg (I-94). This connection was eliminated to avoid unworkably heavy traffic loads on the west leg southward through the Bottleneck. Consequently, this may induce some crosstown traffic to drift through the CBD.
There are two matters of importance in the design of this interchange: (1) the manner in which it distributes traffic at its downtown terminus, and (2) the movements permitted at the junction with the freeway ring. At its terminus, CBD traffic is distributed directly over 10th, 11th, 12th Sts and 4th and 5th Aves South. In the area roughly bounded by 9th St, 3rd Ave South, 12th St, and 5th Ave South, the traffic moving to and from the freeway will impose loads much heavier than the streets are carrying today. With appropriate rush-hour restrictions on curb parking, the loadings are feasible. Beyond this critical area, loads on the perimeter streets will diminish rapidly as traffic goes into perimeter parking.
At the junction of I-94 and I-35W, connections will be lacking for certain movements. Essentially, these are the movements from the west on the freeway ring to go north into the CBD and the reverse movement. In view of the heavy loadings on the freeway ring and the high volumes already contemplated in the critical area defined in the preceding paragraph, these omissions appear unavoidable.
There has been a recent modification in the design of the Hiawatha Interchange. Previously, traffic approaching the Downtown Area from the east on I-94 or from the southeast on Hiawatha could reach either 7th or 5th Sts as shown in Figure 7. The latest design (Figure 8) places the Hiawatha traffic on 7th St and the I-94 traffic on 5th St. The outbound traffic previously had the choice of using 6th or 8th Sts. Sixth now connects only to I-94 and 8th St connects to Hiawatha. To at least partly offset this limitation, improved connections are provided into 3rd St, 4th St, and Washington Ave.
The elimination of the more flexible connections will cause traffic to be redistributed on the surface streets after it comes off the freeways. For example, the inbound traffic on Hiawatha destined to a point along 5th St will have to travel north from 7th to 5th at some point west of the freeway. Another result will be less even distribution of traffic on 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Sts. The outbound traffic on 8th St in the evening peak will approximate 2,200 vehicles an hour while the load on 6th St will be 1,200. These loads can be accommodated with curb parking restrictions applied.
Relationships to Fringe Areas
In the area south of the business district, nearly every continuous north-south street today is used as a traffic carrier during the peak hours. This has not been a happy situation from the viewpoint of stabilizing or enhancing property values. With the comprehensive system of freeways and expressways now proposed, such movements can be concentrated on the primary thoroughfares as indicated by Figure 9. Even in the area north of the 28th Street Crosstown, the 1980 loadings along the primary streets will be 10 to 30 percent less than in 1958.
The plan for the Hiawatha Interchange and the 3rd-4th St connections to the new Washington Ave bridge contemplate the continued use of Washington, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Sts from the east freeway ring to the core area as primary traffic carriers. Traffic loadings on some of these will be so high as to necessitate rush-hour parking restrictions.
Dedicate an additional 0.75% to Greater Minnesota Transit, an additional 5.5% to Metro Transit, and the remaining 38% to the HUTDF. In addition, add a Constitutional Amendment dedicating the MVST to these purposes; 70% total to the HUTDF, and 30% total to transit.
Ramps along Ring
Certain ramps have been dropped near the Central Interchange at the south side of the business district, as shown in Figure 4. One omission eliminates the possibility of drivers traveling around the freeway ring from the north and west and turning into 3rd Ave South in order to reach the central business district. Similarly, it would not be possible for traffic originating in the southern part of the business district to enter the freeway near 3rd Ave South to proceed west along the freeway ring.
Problem of Peak Movements
The elimination of ramps leading to and from the Downtown Area as well as the omission of interchange between intersecting freeways is for the purpose of avoiding overloads that would exist two or three hours a day, five days a week. These limitations, occasioned by the peak loadings which exist 10 to 15 hours a week, unfortunately restrict the usefulness of the freeways during hte remaining 155 hours a week.
Crosstown Travel on Freeways
Though the pattern of freeways is generally radial -- i.e. they are focused on the CBD -- a high proportion of the traffic that will be using the freeways will be crosstown movement or "through traffic" unrelated to the Downtown Area. This is especially true on the freeway ring through the Bottleneck Area.
As the Department of Highways studied future travel patterns, it preserved its findings regarding certain highly significant links in the proposed freeway system. By this means it is possible to distinguish where people who use these links would be coming from and going to. Figure 10 illustrates the origins and destinations of vehicles southbound along I-94 (the Bottleneck) near Glenwood Ave. It is evident that this segment of freeway, though located at the edge of the Downtown Area, will be serving metropolitan travel needs primarily and downtown quite secondarily.
|Proportion of Travel on the Freeways That Will Be Related to Downtown|
|Location on Freeway||Total 24 hour traffic||Traffic destined to CBD||Percent of Traffic Downtown Oriented|
|Eastbound on US 12 near Penn Ave||46,500||10,624||22.8|
|Northbound on I-35W near Lake St||43,400||13,568||31.3|
|Northbound on Cedar-Hiawatha near Franklin Ave||53,400||12,904||24.2|
|Southbound on I-94 near Glenwood Ave ("the Bottleneck")||45,900||1,368||3.0|
These data relate to the "System 5 Assignment". This system has been somewhat modified.
The CBD contemplated in this table is the area bounded by 3rd Ave North, the Mississippi River, Portland Ave, and 12th Street. In addition, a significant number of freeway users would be destined to the important areas just outside the CBD, as defined. It is essential that they be afforded freeway service because otherwise they would constitute the traffic most likely to filter through the heart of the business district.
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations
1. The planning and design of highways in the Minneapolis area is being strongly influenced by the findings of the Twin Cities Area Transportation Study. Since this study has employed the best research and analytical techniques and is based on sound principles, its data and findings are readily accepted as the best available and regarded fully competent.
2. The findings of TCATS, the recommendations of the Department of Highways, and this appraisal presuppose that an extensive system of freeways and expressways, in addition to the Interstate routes, will be approved, financed, and built prior to 1980. If this is not done, current highway planning for the Minneapolis area will be largely vitiated, and the other conclusions and recommendations offered herein will have little meaning.
3. Experience has taught that there is a definite, predictable limit to the capacities of the freeways. As volumes approach this limit, travel speeds on the freeway begin to drop. When this point is reached, the introduction of a small percentage of additional traffic causes speeds to drop rapidly. As speeds approach zero, capacity approaches zero. Therefore, it is essential for the CBD and for the entire community that any additional traffic that would produce these breakdowns be avoided.
A primary objective of the freeway designers has been to hold the maximum loadings on the freeways to workable limits by means of engineering design. This design principle has not been carefully applied in some of the existing urban freeway systems. The effect is plainly visible in some of the metropolitan cities. At the evening peak hour, it is not unusual to find the freeways loaded beyond capacity with cars standing on the downtown streets waiting to get on the freeways.
It is significant that in communities where freeways are subject to frequent breakdowns, these communities now are studying methods for metering traffic onto the freeways by the control of ramp usage or the elimination of ramps.
4. It is desirable that the freeway ring serve as fully as possible as
a distributor for downtown-destined traffic, with these limitations:
a. Distributing traffic should not be permitted when it would cause total loadings on the freeway to exceed the maximum potential capacity.
b. Distributing traffic should not be permitted when to do so would require so great a reduction in design standards (weaving distances, operating speeds, and signing capabilities) as to impair the usefulness of the freeway.
c. Distributing traffic should not be permitted when its introduction would necessitate the shifting of longer trips unrelated to the Downtown Area onto the local or surface streets of the Central Area.
In view of the high volumes now forecast for the ring, it evidently cannot assume a more important role as a distributor unless city-wide travel (cross-town movement) is provided with other alternatives.
5. It is desirable that there be complete interchange between intersecting or connecting freeways to permit the users to circulate simply and freely throughout the system.
6. It would be regrettable if restrictions necessary to meet the exigencies of the rush-hour situation should impair the usefulness of the freeway system during the remainder of the 24 hours and on weekends.
7. It would be undesirable, if not impractical, to contemplate a design that at rush-hours would pour additional traffic into certain critical areas of the CBD where freeways terminate. This is particularly true in the area at the southeast corner of the business district where the Central Interchange terminates. Distribution over other north-south primary streets is essential especially in the area north of the 28th Street Crosstown.
8. The retention of the ramps on the South Ring near 3rd Avenue South to accommodate movement to and from the west on the freeway would offer several advantages. The total average daily traffic on these two ramps would be approximately 20,000 vehicles, indicating potential major usage.
A significant number of the users would originate in the commercial and industrial area south of the freeway and be destined to the north and northwest. A high proportion of these, in the absence of the ramps, would be passing through the Bottleneck on the frontage roads. With the ramps, the movements would be shifted to the express lanes. Since each of the frontage roads would be handling loads of 22,000 to 27,000 vehicles per day, it is better that a portion of the loading be transferred onto the express lanes.
The ramps would have a value in emergencies. In the absence of the proposed ramps near 3rd Avenue South, the closest access to the tunnels under Lyndale would be at the Hiawatha Interchange near 15th Avenue South. For emergencies within the tunnel, this distance may prove critical.
Whatever CBD traffic is drawn to these ramps is advantageous in that it would relieve the surface streets near the northern terminus of the Central Interchange. Finally, these ramps would be highly useful for the expanded Municipal Auditorium and its associated parking.
9. The section of Lyndale Avenue from Franklin Street north to Glenwood Avenue or possibly 7th Street has been known as the "Bottleneck" for at least the past decade. The freeway plan calls for an elaborate and expensive improvement consisting of six express lanes in a tunnel plus broad frontage roads at each side. Even so, in the light of current traffic projections, it is apparent that the increased travel in the Minneapolis metropolitan area will cause this improvement to be a limitation in the freeway system by 1980.
An examination of the location of the river, the position of river bridges, the angles of the downtown streets, and the availability of continuous north-south arteries shows why this should be true. (See Figure 11.) Except for streets which pass through the heart of the business district such as Hennepin and 3rd Avenue South, Lyndale is the only truly continuous and efficient north-south route from the east city limits of Minneapolis to Highway 100.
There long has been a need for a north-south thoroughfare at some point in the three-mile distance which separates Lyndale from Highway 100. This need has been more clearly emphasized with the development of the freeway system and the assignment of 1980 traffic to it. This assignment disclosed that the west leg of the freeway ring (the Bottleneck) will be serving 123,000 vehicles a day even with limitations on its use for downtown distribution, and also that the loads on Highway 100 will exceed 61,000 cars a day. The welfare of the metropolitan area and especially of the Downtown Area demands a more definitive solution to this problem.
10. The plan of freeways for Minneapolis, refined through the superior study by TCATS, and this review of principles are focused on the year 1980. In terms of the long-range future of hte Twin Cities, the year 1980 is "tomorrow". If the freeways now contemplated are nearing saturation by 1980, what thereafter? It is to be hoped that developments in the field of rapid transit will meet the need for increased travel to the Downtown Area in the subsequent decades. It appears certain, however, that transit cannot also satisfy the growing need for metropolitan-wide circulation and cross-town movement between widely diverse origins and destinations. A recognition of this fact lends further weight to the necessity for finding a more adequate plan to accommodate north-south circulation through the corridor bounded by Highway 100 and Lyndale Ave.
1. It is recommended that immediate and intensive study be given to an express route extending from the proposed Northwest Diagonal Freeway to the 28th Street Crosstown with interchanges at Olson Highway and Wayzata Blvd. In view of the topography and the nature of the communities affected, the identification of a suitable route location will demand thoughtful study and ingenuity. If it were not for these difficulties, such a route undoubtedly would have been provided long ago because its need has been clearly recognized for years by the planners and engineers of the Minneapolis area.
If such a route is created, it, in combination with the 28th Street Crosstown and Trunk Highway 280, will form a middle ring for central Minneapolis, as indicated by Figure 12. This ring may then be able to accommodate a significant proportion of the cross-town travel now assigned to the inner ring and allow it to become more flexible in its service to central Minneapolis.
After a location has been identified, the effect of its addition to the highway system should be tested by traffic assignment techniques. It is strongly believed that this test will disclose the practicability of restoring or adding certain ramps on the inner ring and of allowing it to assume a somewhat greater role in downtown distribution. It is unlikely, however, that this will relieve the traffic concentration of the northern terminus of the Central Interchange sufficiently to permit the introduction of additional traffic loads at this point at peak hours.
2. It is recommended that the freeway ring (inner) not be designed and built so as to preclude the later addition of desirable ramps, especially those near 3rd Avenue South and near Hennepin or the 3rd Avenue North distributor. Circumstances that could allow their inclusion would be the construction of the middle ring as urged in the preceding paragraph or agreement on a program of peak hour regulation.
3. It is recommended that the city and state study the application of peak hour regulations to potential ramps and interchanges which otherwise would produce unacceptable overloads on sections of the freeway. If such an unprecedented approach (metering of ramp usage) can be approved, traffic entering the freeway could be regulated so as to avoid excess loads during the brief peak hours, and still permit these desirable features to be used for the vast majority of the time. They would be particularly useful for visitors and downtown patrons who are least involved in rush-hour movements.
Probably this approach offers the greatest opportunity for achieving desirable interchange between the 28th Street Crosstown and I-35W.
4. It is recommended that further study be given to interchange between the north and west sides of the inner freeway ring. The acceptance of the "middle ring" concept should facilitate its inclusion.
5. Approval of the design of the Central Interchange as submitted is recommended.
6. Approval of the design of the section of I-35W between the Central Interchange and 31st Street is recommended, assuming that it will continue to allow the later addition of interchange at the 28th Street Crosstown. If the concept of rush-hour regulation of ramp usage is approved, presumably the design of the interchange could be materially simplified.
7. Approval of the design of I-94 (South Ring) from the Hiawatha Interchange to the Bottleneck is recommended, assuming that the design will not preclude the later addition of on-and-off ramps near 3rd Avenue South as contemplated in previous designs. This recommendation also presupposes adoption of the middle ring concept and/or a program of rush-hour metering.
8. Plans for the Central Area of Minneapolis have contemplated the development of "Industrial Square", and an institutional grouping which includes the existing hospitals, in the area between the downtown core and the east freeway ring. If these concepts are no longer at issue, approval of the Hiawatha Interchange design is recommended.
If these land developments have status, it is urged that they promptly proceed through preliminary design so that approval of the interchange can be forthcoming. It is highly possible that such site design studies will conclude that no more than minor adjustments in the interchange design will be involved.
9. It is recommended that an efficient extension of Olson Highway eastward to connections with Washington Street and appropriate intervening streets be definitely and specifically included in the downtown plan. One essential purpose will be to reduce traffic loads on the vital core streets - 7th and 8th.
10. It is recommended that planning -- both fiscal and physical -- for other primary highways such as those listed on page 7 be expedited. Without them the system of Interstate Highways now being designed and built will fall far short of meeting the needs of the growing Minneapolis area in the years ahead.
11. Throughout this appraisal, evidence has been presented as to the need for more intensive transportation planning by the City of Minneapolis. This need ranges all the way from broad public transportation issues to the detailed specifics of the design of street and highway projects. The extensive network of freeways and expressways now envisaged represents a public investment of hundreds of millions of dollars. Further millions are involved in the replanning and redesign of the primary surface arteries to make them the more efficient traffic carriers they must be during the coming decades and to bring them into greater compatibility with adjacent land uses. And further millions are involved as the city moves ahead with its renewal program in which transportation and circulation are such a vital element. A pertinent example of this is offered in Recommendation 8, above.
It would be highly regrettable if the city were to face this period of vast public expenditures in which transportation will be such a dominant factor without the facilities to help assure the wise application of these funds. It therefore is recommended that the City of Minneapolis assure that it is organized, staffed, and equipped to provide this vital service.
Comments are welcomed.
Back to Froggie's Minnesota Rant.
Click here to go to a map of my suggested system changes.
Click here to go to interchange upgrade ideas.
Return to Twin Cites Highways
Page last modified 31 May, 2004