Like my Sunflower Rantings page, this page shows my opinions on what could be done to improve the freeway/expressway system in the Twin Cities metro area. (NOTE: these opinions are my own and DO NOT reflect those of the Minnesota Department of Transportation)
After a period of significant expansion, improving the freeway system in the Twin Cities has leveled off since the early '80s. Unfortunately, as the Twin Cities area has grown, traffic levels have increased significantly, and much of the system experiences congestion, some of it severe congestion. The Twin Cities, MnDOT, and the state are 15 years behind the 8-ball as far as improving the transportation system in the Twin Cities, and there is much that needs to be done. This page documents the highway system improvements I recommend.
Although transit has the potential to divert some vehicle trips in some corridors and will provide an alternate choice, much of the freeway system is to the point where significant expansion is still needed. Some sections of the system require major expansion, far beyond what MnDOT or the Metropolitan Council are currently considering.
The following table lists various sections of the metro area's Interstate and Trunk Highway systems, my recommended investment level, and what MnDOT is currently planning. Investment levels fall under six categories:
- Preservation: Those projects necessary to maintain the highway system. Primarily includes pavement resurfacing or replacement, bridge repair or replacement, and signage/light/signal/guardrail replacement.
- Management: Those projects necessary to effectively manage traffic, or improve traffic conditions. Includes Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies, access management, jurisdictional reassignment, travel demand management (TDM) strategies, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and corridor preservation. Includes Preservation-level strategies.
- Improvement: Those projects necessary to upgrade a highway corridor. Generally involves reconstruction, geometric improvements, and interchange upgrades. Auxiliary lanes are sometimes included, but significant capacity increases are not. Includes Management-level strategies.
- Expansion: Defined here as one of three types of project: adding one through lane in each direction, upgrading an existing expressway to a freeway (but keeping the same number of lanes), or constructing a new expressway or freeway on new alignment. Includes Improvement-level strategies.
- Major Expansion: This is one of my own categories, defined here as adding two or more through lanes in each direction, or upgrading an existing expressway to a freeway AND adding additional lanes in the process. Includes Improvement-level strategies.
- IRC: This corridor has been identified by MnDOT as an Interregional Corridor (IRC). IRC Corridors will be improved pursuant to the corridor's management plan and funding availability. Any of the other five investment levels may apply to a specific section of an IRC Corridor. I have added the likely investment level to each IRC Corridor listing.
| ROUTE | LOCATION | CURRENTLY | FROGGIE'S INVESTMENT LEVEL | MNDOT'S PROPOSED INVESTMENT LEVEL |
| MN 3 | Fairbault to Dakota CSAH 32 | 2 lane road | Expansion | Preservation |
| MN 3 | Dakota CSAH 32 to US 52/MN 55 | 2 lane road (to I-494) | Major Expansion Note 1 |
Preservation |
| MN 5 | US 212 to MN 41 | 2 lane road | Expansion | Preservation |
| MN 5 | Stillwater Blvd to MN 36 | 2 lane road | Expansion | Preservation |
| MN 7 | Hutchinson to MN 41 | 2 lane road | Expansion Note 2 |
Management |
| MN 7 | Excelsior to MN 100 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 1 |
Management |
| US 8 | US 61 to WI 46 | 2 lane road | Major Expansion Notes 1,3 |
IRC (likely Management with limited Improvement) |
| US 10/US 169 | Elk River to Anoka CSAH 57 | 4 lane expressway | Major Expansion | IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 10/US 169 | Anoka CSAH 57 to US 169/MN 47 | 4 lane expressway | Major Expansion Note 1 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 10/MN 47 | US 169/MN 47 to MN 47/MN 610 split | 4 lanes | Major Expansion Note 1 |
IRC (likely Management with Improvement or Expansion east of Anoka CSAH 9) |
| US 10 | County Road J to I-35W | 4 lanes | Expansion Note 4 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 12 | Willmar to Delano | 2 lane road | Improvement | Management with some Improvement possible |
| US 12 | Delano to near Hennepin CSAH 15 | 2 lane road | Major Expansion Note 4, 6 |
Expansion east of CSAH 6, Management west |
| MN 13 | MN 282 to Scott CSAH 42 | 2-3 lane road | Expansion Note 1 |
Preservation with some Management possible |
| MN 13 | US 169 to I-35W | 4 lane expressway | Major Expansion Note 1 |
Management with some Improvement possible |
| MN 13 | MN 77 to I-494 | 2 lane road | Expansion | Preservation |
| MN 13/MN 19 | New Prague to MN 13/MN 19 split | 2 lane road | Expansion | Management |
| MN 19 | I-35 to Northfield | 2 lane road | Expansion | IRC (Management likely) |
| MN 25 | Buffalo to US 10 | 2 lane road (4 lanes through Monticello) | Expansion | Expansion south of Monticello, likely Management north |
| MN 36 | I-35W to US 61 | 4 lanes | Expansion Note 1 |
Expansion west of I-35E, Management east |
| MN 36/WI 64 | US 61 to New Richmond, WI | 2 lane road/4 lane expressway | Expansion Notes 1, 7, 10 |
IRC (Expansion planned from Stillwater east, Management likely US 61 to Stillwater) |
| MN 41 | US 169 to Future US 212 | 2 lane road/4-lanes in parts of Chaska | Expansion on new alignment Notes 1,8 |
IRC (likely Management) |
| MN 41 | Future US 212 to MN 7 | 2 lane road | Expansion on new alignment Note 1 |
Preservation |
| MN 50 | US 52 to US 61 | 2 lane road | Expansion | IRC (likely Management) |
| US 52 | North side of Rochester to Dakota CSAH 42 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 10 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 52/MN 55 | Dakota CSAH 42/Relocated MN 55 EAST to US 52/MN 55 split | 4 lane expressway/freeway | Expansion | IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 52 | I-494 to I-94 | 4 lanes | Expansion Notes 1,9 |
Improvement north of Concord St, Management south |
| MN 55 | Kimball to Hennepin CSAH 116 | 2 lane road | Expansion | Management with some Improvement possible |
| MN 55 | US 52 @ Dakota CSAH 42 to Hastings | 2 lane road | Expansion | Management with some Improvement possible |
| US 61 | MN 316 to Hastings | 2 lane road | Expansion | Management |
| US 61 | Western Hastings Bypass | Nothing | New 4-lane freeway
corridor Notes 1, 12 |
N/A |
| US 61 | Hastings river bridge | 2 lanes | Expansion | Expansion |
| US 61/US 10 | Hastings river bridge to Washington CSAH 19 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion | Management |
| US 61/US 10 | Carver Ave to I-94 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 1 |
Management |
| MN 62/CSAH 62 | Mitchell Rd to Shady Oak Rd | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Notes 1,4 |
Management |
| MN 62 | US 212 split to I-35W | 4 lanes | Expansion Note 1 |
Improvement |
| MN 62 | I-35W to MN 77 | 4 lanes | Expansion Note 1 |
Improvement |
| MN 65 | I-694 to MN 242 | 4 lane expressway | Major Expansion Note 1 |
Management |
| MN 65 | MN 242 to Anoka/Isanti County line | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 1 |
Management |
| MN 77 | I-494/MOA to MN 62 | 4 lanes | Expansion | Management |
| MN 95 | Princeton to North Branch | 2 lane road | Expansion | Preservation |
| MN 100 | I-494 to I-394 | 4-6 lanes | Improvement (Expansion north of Excelsior Blvd) | Management (Expansion north of Excelsior Blvd) |
| US 169 | Mankato to Shakopee bypass | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 10 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 169 | Old Shakopee Rd to I-494 | 4 lane expressway | Major Expansion Note 4 |
IRC (Expansion planned) |
| US 169 | I-494 to Hennepin CSAH 81 | 4 lanes | Expansion Note 1 |
Improvement |
| US 169 | CSAH 81 to Future MN 610 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion | IRC (Expansion planned) |
| US 169 | Future MN 610 to Hennepin CSAH 12 | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 1 |
IRC (likely Management) |
| US 212 | Granite Falls to Plato | 2 lane road/4 lane expressway | Expansion Notes 1, 2 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement) |
| US 212 | Plato to Carver | 2 lane road/4 lane expressway | Expansion/Major Expansion Notes 1, 10 |
IRC (likely Management with some Improvement or Expansion) |
| New US 212 | Carver (CR 147) to MN 5 | New 4-lane freeway corridor proposal | Completion | IRC/Completion |
| MN 242/CSAH 14 | US 10 to I-35W | 2 lane road | Expansion Note 1 |
Management |
| MN 252 | I-94/694 to MN 610 | 4-6 lane expressway | Major Expansion Notes 1, 11 |
Expansion |
| MN 280 | Larpentur Ave to I-35W | 4 lane expressway | Expansion Note 1 |
Improvement |
| MN 352? | I-35 to US 52 or US 61 | Nothing | New 4-lane freeway
corridor Notes 1, 12 |
N/A |
| MN 610? | US 12 or MN 55 to I-94 | Nothing | New 4-lane expressway
corridor Notes 1, 12 |
N/A |
| MN 610 | I-94 to US 169 | New 4-lane freeway corridor proposal | Completion | Completion |
| MN 610 | US 169 to MN 252 | 4-lane freeway | Expansion | Management |
| ??? | I-94 to US 10/169 in Ramsey | New 4-lane expressway/freeway proposal | Completion Note 13 |
Dependant on funding |
| ??? | I-94 to US 10 near Clear Lake | New 4-lane freeway proposal | Completion Note 14 |
Completion |
Table notes
1 - ROW will be expensive. NIMBYism also possible.
2 - Possible Super-2 corridor.
3 - Corridor is currently being studied.
4 - Should have been built this way to begin with.
5 - Semi-super 2 to be complete in Wright County by 2002.
6 - Original proposal was for a 4-lane expressway/freeway. Western Hennepin
County did not want this for fear of rapid uncontrolled development.
7 - New Stillwater bridge is planned as a freeway, but is controversial and has been
delayed. Bridge would include nearby improvements to MN 36 and WI 64.
8 - Based on an early proposal from the 1970s. Has been brought back to
life with a new river crossing study underway.
9 - New lanes across river are possible when Lafayette Bridge gets rebuilt after 2006.
Improvements along corridor are likely by 2020. Current law prohibits more
than 4 lanes along corridor, so extra lanes are impossible unless law gets repealed.
10 - My idea is for a uniform 4-lane freeway.
11 - My idea is for a 6-lane freeway. The current long-range plan calls
for a 6-lane expressway or 4-lane freeway instead.
12 - These proposals are my own and do not officially exist.
13 - This is a proposed state highway corridor being studied under the Northwest
River Crossing Study, which would build a corridor and river bridge connecting
I-94 in Dayton to US 10/169 in Ramsey.
14 - This is the proposed connector between I-94 south of Clearwater and US 10
north of Clear Lake. The connector is proposed as a 4-lane freeway.
Click here
to go to the Interstates.
Click here
to go to a map of my suggested changes.
Click here to go
to interchange upgrade ideas.
Return to Twin
Cites Highways
Page last modified 31 May, 2004