DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment of Three Infill Stations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

This Page Intentionally Left Blank ABSTRACT The Metropolitan Council on behalf of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the lead federal agency, has prepared this Infill Stations Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Project (the Project) pursuant to 23 CFR 771.130(c). The Project is10.9 miles long (9.7 miles of new alignment, 1.2 miles on shared alignment) and consists of 20 Central Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) stations – 15 new stations and five shared with the Hiawatha LRT. A total of three potential infill stations have been identified in the City of St. Paul within the Midway East Project segment between Snelling Avenue and Rice Street. Potential infill station locations are at Hamline Avenue, Victoria Street, and Western Avenue. This Infill Stations EA analyzes the social, economic, and environmental impacts associated with the construction of above-grade elements of these three stations. The June 2009 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Project analyzed its social, economic, and environmental impacts, including the construction of below-grade infrastructure for three potential infill stations. Recently, the project sponsors obtained a commitment for local funding to build one above-grade infill station at Hamline Avenue, Victoria Street, or Western Avenue. Consequently, an evaluation of the social, economic, and environmental impacts for the construction of an above-grade station is required in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The above- grade construction of all three infill stations is included in this Infill Stations EA. A public comment period was established for this document. Comments were submitted in writing, via e-mail, or in person at two public hearings held on January 27, 2010 at the Hallie Q. Brown Community Center at 270 N. Kent Street in St. Paul. Two hearings were held that day, one starting at 11:00 a.m., and one starting at 6:00 p.m. This Page Intentionally Left Blank Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Environmental Assessment Three Infill Stations Western, Victoria, and Hamline Metropolitan Council February 2010 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Central Corridor LRT Project Table of Contents Table of Contents ES 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................. 1 ES 1.1 BASIS FOR THE EA ........................................................................................................... 1 ES 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED ....................................................................................................... 4 ES 1.3 SUMMARY OF AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS .............................................................. 5 ES 1.4 SUMMARY OF UNAFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS ......................................................... 8 ES 1.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................ 1-1 1.1 PROJECT HISTORY AND TIMELINE .............................................................................. 1-2 1.1.1 Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (AA/DEIS), 2006 ...................... 1-2 1.1.2 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), 2008 ..................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), Record of Decision (ROD), and Adequacy Determination, 2009 ............................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 BASIS FOR THIS INFILL STATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) .............. 1-6 1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................................... 1-7 1.4 SUMMARY OF AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS ........................................................... 1-8 1.5 SUMMARY OF NON-AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS .................................................. 1-8 2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ................................................................. 2-1 2.1 NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 BUILD ALTERNATIVE ..................................................................................................... 2-1 3.0 SOCIAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Land Use and Socioeconomics ............................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Neighborhoods, Community Services, and Community Cohesion .......................................... 3-3 3.1.3 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3-4 3.1.4 Visual Quality and Aesthetics .................................................................................................. 3-5 3.1.5 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................. 3-6 3.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................. 3-7 3.2.1 Acquisitions and Displacements/Relocations .......................................................................... 3-7 3.2.2 Parklands and Recreation Areas ............................................................................................. 3-8 3.2.3 Safety and Security ................................................................................................................. 3-8 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ..................................................................... 4-1 4.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Noise ....................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.3 Vibration .................................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................. 4-3 4.2.1 Groundwater and Soil Resources............................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.2 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.3 Biota and Habitat ..................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species ..................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.5 Hazardous/Regulated Materials .............................................................................................. 4-5 4.2.6 Electromagnetic Fields and Utilities......................................................................................... 4-7 Environmental Assessment i February 2010 Central Corridor LRT Project – Three Infill Stations Table of Contents 4.2.7 Energy .................................................................................................................................... 4-8 5.0 ECONOMIC EFFECTS ................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Station Area Development ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................ 5-2 5.2.1 Output, Earnings, and Employment Effects from Capital Expenditures.................................. 5-2 5.2.2 Output, Earnings, and Employment Effects from Operations and Maintenance Expenditures ..................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.3 Tax Revenue Effects .............................................................................................................. 5-3 6.0 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Transit Effects ........................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.1.2 Other Transportation Impacts ................................................................................................. 6-2 6.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................ 6-3 6.2.1 Effects on Roadways .............................................................................................................. 6-3 7.0 SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION ...................................................................... 7-1 8.0 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................. 8-1 9.0 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION AND COMMENTS/PERMITS AND APPROVALS ............................................... 9-1 9.1 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION AND COMMENTS .......................................
Recommended publications
  • Routes with Major Changes Or Improvements LITTLE CANADA

    Routes with Major Changes Or Improvements LITTLE CANADA

    Routes with major changes or improvements LITTLE CANADA To LEGEND 87 Shoreview County Road B2 Rosedale METRO Green Line St. Anthony 65 84 36 METRO Blue Line Rosedale Target 36 Transit 83 Commerce Center 84 Bus Routes County Road B 18th Ave NE 65 65 94 Bus Routes - Weekday Only Har Pascal Skillman Rail stations 35W Mar Mall Johnson St NE 83 Broadway 87 30 30 0 0.5 1 Roseville 84 65 62 71 Miles St Godward Lauderdale 262 Spring St Fairview 71 Lexington Stinson Blvd NE 280 Snelling Jackson Hennepin Hoover St Larpenteur Larpenteur 68 1st 2 8th Falcon 35E Edgerton Como Eustis Westminster 4th 3 Gortner Heights University Cleveland Dale St 5th University of Timberlake 6 Eckles Minnesota Target Field 6 Elm Kasota Buford St 7th 10th 3 Carter Hamline Warehouse/Hennepin 84 2 University Como 94 4th State Fair Nicollet Mall 6 15th of Minnesota Park L’orient 134 3 Rice Government3 Plaza Como Horton Maryland Downtown East 3 6 7th Stadium Village 3 East River East Raymond East Bank 83 5th 35W 6 30 Gateway 6th West Bank Hennepin 129 2 Prospect Park 3 Nicollet Mall 94 16 Arkwright Oak Energy Park Dr 62 Downtown 134 Front Washington Fulton Case 129 Jackson Minneapolis 27th 87 3 262 11th 2 Riverside Pierce Butler University Westgate Huron Como Cedar 68 Territorial 84 71 Augsburg 94 94 Cedar- College 25th Phalen Blvd Franklin Raymond Fairview Hamline Cayuga Riverside55 67 Franklin 16 University Minnehaha 2 2 67 3 280 30 67 67 63 Prior 68 26th 67 M 87 Thomas 71 35W Franklin I S 94 S 67 I S S Fairview I P Hamline Lexington Capitol/Rice P Snelling Victoria Dale Western 53 I 134 Gilbert University 35E R I V 7th St E 16 16 16 Robert Minneapolis R State 83 65 Capitol Midway 21 12th St 94 87 Marion 94 63 94 94 10th St Concordia Warner Rd To Uptown Lake Union Depot Lake Lake Marshall Marshall University St Paul 21 53 53 21 College Selby Dale St Central 21 6th St Como 68 Downtown St.
  • Metro Transit Schedule Green Line

    Metro Transit Schedule Green Line

    Metro Transit Schedule Green Line Clemmie usually overprice tetragonally or recommit abiogenetically when whole-wheat Nev chaws unsympathetically and diversely. calksFree-hearted it nobbily. Lou fractured irresponsibly or bowsing head-on when Randall is sighted. Anson please her apriorists hand-to-hand, she Also angers you as scheduled departures from? Metro green line train at metro green line entered service schedule for campus including a project in minnesota? Paul connection seemed most visible on. Trains are their green line. Reduce the schedules with muni transit officials that perfect is the green line connects the metro transit system. Battle creek apartments, every time does deter on gull road rapid station in south near vehicle and healthy travel times in a tough. Washington avenue bridge was a metro transit, and schedules and has provided during harsh minnesota? Anderson center can directly. Upcoming holidays and schedules unless public locations and lake calhoun in our competitors order these trains. Metro transit planners chose university, metro transit agency will follow signs last? Metro transit and metro transit, schedule in downtown minneapolis. Turns out schedules vary by the metro green line is no regular saturday schedules beginning wednesday that litter is currently available. Transit riders will continue to downgrade reqeust was a vacant lot next to change. Metro transit report said engineers have been personalized. Paul and schedules beginning wednesday that make it back door. Paul with metro transit. You need to discuss the metro area in cardiac surgery at afrik grocery. Please visit one part in minnesota transportation systems to get from the downtown minneapolis guide to have collaborated on weekends; please enable scripts and take? Green line green hop fastpass is considered time improvements for metro transit projects along university avenue.
  • Central Corridor FEIS Chapter 5: Economic Effects

    Central Corridor FEIS Chapter 5: Economic Effects

    Central Corridor LRT Project Chapter 5 Economic Effects 5.0 ECONOMIC EFFECTS This chapter focuses on the potential economic effects of the Central Corridor Light Rail Transit project and its impact on the local economy. With implementation of the Preferred Alternative, direct, indirect, and induced economic benefits related to the construction and long-term expenditures for operations and maintenance (O&M) of the selected alternative will occur. These effects would be realized to varying degrees throughout the region in terms of increased economic output, earnings, and employment. This chapter also describes the potential effects on station area development and land use and policy decisions aimed at encouraging transit-oriented development (TOD). Section 5.1 provides an overview of the methodology and anticipated effects of the project on the local economy. This section summarizes the anticipated economic impacts from capital operations and maintenance expenditures. Section 5.2 provides an overview of the potential economic effects of the project on commercial and residential development located near transit stations and programs and policies that have been developed to encourage development. This section provides a description of the potential development effects related to the Preferred Alternative. Section 5.3 considers the development effects associated with the implementation of the Preferred Alternative. Final EIS 5-1 June 2009 Central Corridor LRT Project Economic Effects Chapter 5 5.1 Economic Conditions In preparing the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), legislators specifically included language for economic development as a selection criterion for fixed-guideway transit projects. This legislation called for documentation of the degree to which the project would have a positive impact on local economic development as part of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) review process.
  • Metro Transit Police Department Safety & Security Update

    Metro Transit Police Department Safety & Security Update

    Metro Transit Police Department Safety & Security Update House Transportation Finance & Policy Committee September 25, 2018 Mission Protecting our community through innovation and problem solving Vision A department that is reflective of and responsive to the community we serve 2 Broad geographic service area – East and West commands – Dispatch center (TCC) – Minneapolis, Saint Paul footbeats – Substations • Downtown Minneapolis • Downtown Saint Paul • Mall of America – Patrol squads – Bike rapid response team – Special events 3 Metro Transit Police Staffing 185 Sworn police officers 115/115 Full-time 60/100 Part-time 18/20 CSO 17/17 Admin support Demographic Women 38 Latino 11 Asian-American 21 African-American 32 Native American 2 4 Metro Transit ridership compared to reports of crime incidents 2015 – July 31, 2018 More than 296.6 million rides given Reported Total Incidents vs. classification 500,000 Rides Part I 2,542 3 Part II 21,392 25.4 Total 23,934 28.4 5 2018 Enforcement by the numbers • Proactive times on board buses: 17,111 • Proactive times on board light rail and commuter rail vehicles: 28,287 • Fare checks: – Light rail and commuter vehicles: 1.2 million – A Line and Red Line BRT vehicles: 61,000 • Special events 109 • Responses by patrol squads: 36,071 calls 6 Five E’s of public safety and security • Evidence – Predictive policing • Engagement – Community and professional partnership • Education- Public information and crime prevention • Engineering- Crime prevention through environmental design • Enforcement – Uniform
  • Minneapolis-Visitor-S-Guide.Pdf

    Minneapolis-Visitor-S-Guide.Pdf

    Minneapolis® 2020 Oicial Visitors Guide to the Twin Cities Area WORD’S OUT Blending natural beauty with urban culture is what we do best in Minneapolis and St. Paul. From unorgettable city skylines and historic architecture to a multitude o award-winning ches, unique neighborhoods and more, you’ll wonder what took you so long to uncover all the magic the Twin Cities have to o er. 14 Get A Taste With several Minneapolis ches boasting James Beard Awards, don’t be surprised when exotic and lavor-packed tastes rom around the globe lip your world upside down. TJ TURNER 20 Notable HAI Neighborhoods Explore Minneapolis, St. Paul and the surrounding suburbs LANE PELOVSKY like a local with day trip itineraries, un acts and must-sees. HOSKOVEC DUSTY HAI HAI ST. ANTHONY MAIN ANTHONY ST. COVER PHOTO PHOTO COVER 2 | Minneapolis Oicial Visitors Guide 2020 COME PLAY RACING•CARDS•EVENTS Blackjack & Poker 24/7 Live Racing May - September • Smoke - Free Gaming Floor • • Chips Bar Open Until 2 AM • In a fast food, chain-driven, cookie-cutter world, it’s hard to find a true original. A restaurant that proudly holds its ground and doesn’t scamper after every passing trend. Since 1946, Murray’s has been that place. Whether you’re looking for a classic cocktail crafted from local spirits or a nationally acclaimed steak, we welcome you. Come in and discover the unique mash-up of new & true that’s been drawing people to our landmark location for over 70 years–AND keeps them coming back for more. CanterburyPark.com 952-445-7223 • 1100 Canterbury Road, Shakopee, MN 55379 mnmo.com/visitors | 3 GUTHRIE THEATER 10 Marquee Events 78 Greater Minneapolis Map 74 Travel Tools 80 Metro Light Rail Map 76 Downtown Maps 82 Resource Guide ST.
  • Connecting Routes to the METRO Green Line LITTLE CANADA

    Connecting Routes to the METRO Green Line LITTLE CANADA

    Connecting routes to the METRO Green Line LITTLE CANADA To LEGEND 87 Shoreview County Road B2 Rosedale METRO Green Line St. Anthony 65 84 36 METRO Blue Line Rosedale Target 36 Transit 83 Commerce Center 84 Bus Routes County Road B 18th Ave NE 65 65 94 Bus Routes - Weekday Only Quarry Center Har Pascal Skillman Rail stations 35W Mar Mall Johnson St NE 83 Broadway 87 0 0.5 1 30 30 NE Minneapolis Industrial Center Roseville 84 65 62 71 Miles St Godward Lauderdale 262 Spring St Fairview 71 Lexington Stinson Blvd NE 280 Snelling Jackson Hennepin Hoover St Larpenteur Larpenteur 68 1st 2 8th Falcon 35E Edgerton Como Eustis Westminster 4th 3 Gortner Heights University Cleveland Dale St 5th University of Timberlake 6 Eckles Minnesota Target Field 6 Elm Kasota Buford St 7th 10th 3 Carter Hamline Warehouse/Hennepin 84 2 University Como 94 4th State Fair Nicollet Mall 6 15th of Minnesota Park L’orient 134 3 Rice Government3 Plaza Como Horton Maryland Downtown East 3 6 7th Stadium Village 3 East River East Raymond East Bank 83 5th 35W 6 30 Gateway 6th West Bank Hennepin 129 2 Prospect Park 3 Nicollet Mall 94 16 Arkwright Oak Energy Park Dr 62 Downtown 134 Front Washington Fulton Case Minneapolis 129 27th 87 262 Jackson 11th 3 2 Riverside Berry Pierce Butler University Westgate Huron Como Cedar 68 Territorial 84 71 Augsburg 94 94 Cedar- College 25th Phalen Blvd Franklin Raymond Fairview Hamline Cayuga Riverside55 67 Franklin 16 University Minnehaha 2 2 67 3 280 67 67 Eustis 63 Prior 68 26th 67 M 87 Thomas 71 35W Franklin I S 94 S 67 I S S Fairview I P Hamline Lexington Capitol/Rice P Snelling Victoria Dale Western 53 I 134 Gilbert University 35E R I V 7th St E 16 16 16 Robert Minneapolis R State 83 65 Capitol Midway 21 12th St 94 87 Marion 94 63 94 94 10th St Concordia Warner Rd To Uptown Lake Union Depot Lake Lake Marshall Marshall University St Paul 21 53 53 21 College Selby Dale St Central 21 6th St Como 68 Downtown St.
  • Station Design Presentation

    Station Design Presentation

    LRT STATION DESIGN March 24, 2015 1 Today’s Topics • LRT Station 101 § Station Site Elements § Station Platform Elements • Station Design Approach • Station Open Houses 2 LRT Station 101 Station Site Elements 3 Station Site Elements • Park-and-Ride • Kiss-and-Ride • Bus Facilities • Landscape/Streetscape • Stormwater BMPs • Wayfinding • Site Lighting • Bike Parking • Vertical Circulation 4 Station Site Blue Line 28th Avenue Station 5 Park-and-Ride (surface lot) North Star Anoka Station 6 Parking Structure Blue Line 28th Ave Station 7 Passenger Drop Off Blue Line 38th Street Station 8 Bus Facilities Blue Line 46th Street Station 9 Bus Operator Facilities Blue Line 46th Street Station 10 Landscape/Streetscape Green Line Capitol/Rice Street Station 11 Stormwater BMPs: Rain Garden Green Line 12 Site Lighting North Star Coon Rapids Station 13 Bike Parking Green Line 14 Bike Parking Blue Line 46th Street Station 15 Vertical Circulation Green Line West Bank Station 16 LRT Station 101 Station Platform Elements 17 Platform: Center Blue Line 38th Street Station 18 Platform: Side Blue Line 50th St/Minnehaha Park Station 19 Station Elements: Defining Features • Canopy • Overhead Catenary System • Structure • Communication Cabinet • Enclosure • Identification Sign • Platform • Kiosk Map & Schedule • Lighting • Smart Card Validator & • Access Ramp & Railings Ticket Vending Machine • Tactile Warning Edge • Variable Message Signs • Emergency Phone • Speakers • Security Cameras • Heaters • Intertrack Fencing • Furnishings • Active Warning Devices • Integrated
  • Guide for Transit-Oriented Development

    Guide for Transit-Oriented Development

    Guide for Transit-Oriented Development GUIDE FOR TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW This guide highlights key ideas about transit-oriented development. and shows how local Twin Cities projects have put these ideas to work. The suggestions outlined in this guide are advisory only and are not part of requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. Please direct comments about this guide to Connie Kozlak at the Metropolitan Council. Across the country, communities are “putting two and two What’s in a name? together” and getting more than the usual answer. Over the past “Transit-oriented development” is several decades, cities have been combining clusters of mixed land the term most commonly used, but several others are also in play uses with transit stations and producing prime examples of efficient – “transit-supportive development” and livable growth patterns that make walking and transit use more and “transit-friendly development.” convenient. ▪ Definitions of TOD These transit-oriented developments (TODs) have appeared in urban and suburban settings from Seattle to Atlanta, from Chicago ▪ Topic index to Dallas. ▪ Twin Cities project descriptions ▪ Information resources August 2006 1 Guide for Transit-Oriented Development Au POTENTIAL TWIN In the Twin Cities area, changing demographics, individual CITIES MARKET FOR preferences and highway congestion have created a potential TOD market for TOD-type projects. Mirroring a national trend, the Twin Cities area is seeing population changes that are affecting the real estate market. Smaller homes close to amenities are becoming more attractive to members of the aging baby-boom generation who have graduated from child-rearing to empty-nest status.

  • Operator's View

    Spring 2014 Operator’s view METRO Green Line light- rail trains are undergo- ing full-schedule testing, running as often as every 10 minutes throughout the day and evening. During the pe- riod leading up to open- ing day on June 14, 61 rail operators will be- come certified on the line and rail systems will undergo final testing. In this photo, an opera- tor of a westbound test train is seen from behind in silhouette as he pre- pares to pass an east- bound test train at Robert Street Station. Celebrations planned at nine locations for opening day June 14 Opening day celebration planning is well underway for the METRO Green Line’s first day of service Satur- day, June 14, when all rides will be free that day and June 15. Community planning partners are bringing local leaders, businesses, nonprofits, artists and neighbors together to develop unique events at nine locations from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. June 14 following the 9 a.m. ribbon cutting for the line at Union Depot Station. For details on the events, check http://www.metrotransit.org/greenline periodically in the coming weeks for the latest details on opening day. Some highlights follow on the next two pages of this newsletter, the last issue before opening day. One more newsletter will follow with photos from the opening day. Downtown Downtown Minneapolis St. Paul Anchor event highlights Union Depot | Discover Lowertown: Home of Arts, Entertainment & Fabulous Food Following the official ribbon cutting, Lowertown businesses and Met Council staff are planning a Lower- town celebration featuring a full day of live music programming by The Current public radio station, a gallery of Lowertown artists, a Green Line commemorative poster art display and local entertainment.
  • 2.0 Alternatives Considered

    2.0 Alternatives Considered

    Central Corridor LRT Project Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered 2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED This chapter describes the alternatives considered for the Central Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project and the process used to select them. The alternatives under consideration in this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) consist of a No-Build Alternative, which serves as a basis for the evaluation of transportation and environmental impacts, and the locally preferred alternative (LPA) providing for the implementation of LRT service in the Central Corridor. This chapter also describes the alternatives development and screening process that resulted in the build alternative evaluated in the Alternatives Analysis and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (AA/DEIS) and the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS). Section 2.1 provides an overview of the alternatives developed and screened in the early phases of project development and a detailed description of the AA/DEIS LPA that was selected for the Central Corridor LRT Project. This section also discusses the process of developing and examining numerous design alternatives developed since adoption of the AA/DEIS LPA. These proposed changes to the AA/DEIS LPA were evaluated in the SDEIS. The AA/DEIS and the SDEIS are incorporated by reference and are considered a part of this FEIS. Section 2.2 provides a description of the adopted Preferred Alternative evaluated in this FEIS. 2.1 Alternatives Previously Considered 2.1.1 Alternatives Analysis Process The Central Corridor Transit Study (Transit Study) was initiated in 1999. The Transit Study process was done in two parts: 1) a feasibility study for commuter rail, which was completed in 2001, and 2) an AA/DEIS for baseline, LRT, and bus rapid transit (BRT) in the corridor, which was completed in 2006.
  • Snelling Avenue Station the Intersection of University and Snelling Avenues Is One of the Busiest in All of the Twin Cities

    Snelling Avenue Station the Intersection of University and Snelling Avenues Is One of the Busiest in All of the Twin Cities

    SELECTED RESTAURANTS AND POINTS OF INTEREST (moving west to east from Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity/Fairview Station) Snelling Avenue Station The intersection of University and Snelling Avenues is one of the busiest in all of the Twin Cities. Recently Snelling Avenue north of University has been branded Little Africa due to the prevalence of African themed restaurants and markets. These include stellar Ethiopian restaurants Fasika (510 Snelling Ave) and Ghebre’s (512 Snelling Ave). Additionally, some say the best Thai food in all the Twin Cities is at On’s Thai Kitchen (1613 University Ave). And if a burger and great music is your thing, head into the Turf Club (1601 University Ave). Hamline Avenue Station Hamline Station, which shares the name of the actual station, is one of the larger transit- oriented, affordable, mixed-use developments in the Twin Cities, occupies the northeast corner of Hamline and University. For more East African dining options, go to Flamingo (490 N. Syndicate Ave.), which is co-owned by an Ethiopian and Eritrean woman. Lexington Parkway Station Minor League baseball used to be played on the southwest corner of Lexington and University Avenues until 1956. This is now the location of the Wilder Foundation which provides many essential services to low-income and refugee populations in the East Metro. Hoa Bien (1105 University Ave W) is a good spot for Vietnamese food, especially if planning for a large group. Victoria Street Station This is the heart of the Historic Rondo neighborhood, which was the center of Saint Paul’s African-American population for many years before Interstate 94 destroyed many homes and businesses – check out the station platform artwork.
  • Station Architecture

    Station Architecture

    Southwest Community Works Steering Committee Sarah Ghandour March 19, 2015 1 Today’s Topics • LRT Stati on 101 . Station Site Elements . Sta tion Pl a tform El ement s • Station Design Approach • Station Design Input . Where have we been? . Where are we going? 2 LRT St ati on 101 Station Site Elements 3 Station Site Elements • Park-and-Ride • Kiss-and-Ride • Bus Facilities • Landscape/Streetscape • Stormwater BMPs • Wayfinding • Site Lighting • Bike Storage • Vertical Circulation 4 Station Site Blue Line 28th Avenue Station 5 Park-and-Ride (surface lot) Northstar Anoka Station 6 Parking Structure Blue Line 28th Ave Station 7 Kiss-and-Ride Blue Line 38th Street Station 8 Bus Facilities Blue Line 46th Street Station 9 Bus Operator Facilities Blue Line 46th Street Station 10 Landscape/Streetscape Green Line Capitol/Rice Street Station 11 Stormwater BMPs: Rain Garden Green Line 12 Site Lighting Northstar Coon Rapids Station 13 Bike Storage Green Line 14 Bike Storage Blue Line 46th Street Station 15 Vertical Circulation Green Line West Bank Station 16 LRT St ati on 101 Station Platform Elements 17 Platform: Center Blue Line 38th Street Station 18 Platform: Side Blue Line 50th St/Minnehaha Park Station 19 Station Elements: Defining Features • Canopy • Overhead Catenary System • Structure • Communication Cabinet • ElEnclosure • Iden tifica tion Sign • Platform • Kiosk Map & Schedule • Lighting • Smart Card Validator & • Access Ramp & Railings Ticket Vending Machine • Tactile Warning Edge • Variable Message Signs • Emergency Phone • Speakers •