01-814�v�SZ 1Tv'�E
2
A�w�� �- a-pe,i Council File # ��_^�' 1�
Resolution #
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Strategy" (MIS), initiated in Fall,
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be used for a busway
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council declared that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed for transit in the Riverview Corridor and
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and
15 WHEREAS, in response to the alternatives presented in the "Riverview Corridor MIS" the Saint Paui City
16 Council passed Resolution 00-970 on October 18, 2000 recommending that the alternative identified as #7
17 "modified BRT CPR Corridor" be selected for further examination subject to the condition that more citizen
18 participation was required before finai implementation; and
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing
and making recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that an exclusive right-of-way Bus Rapid Transit (BR� lane is
not appropriate for West 7th Street, given the extensive loss of parking and the disruption to traffic;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, given the current amount of traffic on West 7th Street
between the TH 5 bridge and I-35E interchange, BRT diamond lanes are not appropriate unless
thru traffic is diverted to Shepard Road in this segment which may create sufficient capacity on
West 7th Street for diamond lanes in the future; and
WHEREAS, the CP Rail alignment alternative between Alton and Toronto Streets does a poorjob
of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street, is expensive and requires unnecessary intrusion
into residential areas; and
WHEREAS, the Shepard Road alignment for BRT between TH 5 and downtown serves only longer
trips, not West 7th neighborhoods, has poor access from West 7th neighborhoods to downtown,
the Airport and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult;
and
Green Sheet # \ l O� Si
a�-�i�
42 WHEREAS, the I-35E alternative does a poor job of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street,
43 and does not improve transit access from the West 7th neighborhoods to downtown, the Airport
44 and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult; and
45
46 WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, following the decision by the Metropolitan
47 Council to pursue an Environmental Impact Statement process, found that:
48
49 •
50
51 •
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71 •
72
73
74 •
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
The current Scoping Process portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
There is an alternative, not previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7 , East 7 and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
�
c.
�
f�
Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoods
Riders be within walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit links downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors, with the end points
in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davern area and Hillcrest Shopping Center
Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
Plan" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission, if selected, should not require an
Environmental Impact Statement to proceed with implementation; and
If Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a diamond lane or exclusive bus
lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E interchange then the
Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical improvements would be
required to divert through traffc from West 7 Street to Shepard Road between the
Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement
process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, notwithstanding technical analyses yet to be
completed as part of the Scoping Phase, the Saint Paul City Council recommends that the primary
build alternative for the Riverview Corridor consist of BRT in mixed traffic from TH 5 to I-35E, on
diamond lanes from I-35E on 7th Street and possibly Smith Avenue, continue through downtown
on the existing 5th/6th diamond lanes, in mixed traffic on East 7th and Arcade Streets to Phalen
Boulevard, on exclusive BRT lanes to Johnson Parkway, and in mixed traffic on Prosperity Avenue,
Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT if the Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a
diamond lane or exclusive bus lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-
35E interchange then the Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical
improvements would be required to divert through traffic from West 7` Street to Shepard Road
between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E; and
.
.,
.
.':
ot-8�y
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT any recommendation to widen West 7` street or remove a
lane of traffic to accommodate a diamond land between the Highway 5 bridge and 1-35E
interchange is not acceptable to the City Council; and
99 BE IT FUf2THER RESOLVED THAT any recommended physica{ improvements for diverting tra�c
100 to Shepard Road be forwarded to the City of Saint Paul for review by Public Works and PED staff
101 and approval by the City Council; and
102
103 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City recommends that the best Riverview Corridor Transit
104 Project should contain the added elements of quality station area planning and development
105 preparation and these elements will not jeopardize implementation schedules; and
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Saint Paul through iYs Department of Planning and
Economic Development and Department of Public Works will be responsible for implementing any
residential or commercial redevelopment efforts, changes in Land Use Plans and local traffic
adjustments, therefore, the Metropolitan Council should consider using the City of St. Paul as an
implementing agent for the parts of the Riverview Corridor Project, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council authorizes city staff to negotiate an
interagency agreement with the Metropolitan Council outlining roles and responsibilities with the
goal of quick implementation of the Riverview Corridor Transit Project; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the dedicated bus fleet serving the Riverview Corridor should
be comprised of the environmentally friendly buses with low floor boarding such as Hybrid Electric
Bus, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT where street reconstruction is required for the incorporation of
the diamond lanes and to avoid repeated construction intervention, the Riverview Corridor Project
should complete construction improvements of the entire public right of way including curb
replacements, mill overlay, new sidewalk enhancements, twin lantern lighting; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the City Council urges that, if selected, the aforementioned
build alternative be implemented as quickly as possible.
130
Requested by Department of:
Plannin4 & ECOnoIDiC Develonment
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
139Adopted by Council: Date r�,v-.._,� �S', 300�
'� Form Apprwed by City Attomey
1Q�QAdoption Cextifie by Council Secretary
g�, \ T � 1 By:
Approved by Mayox: Date ` J���
Appro�ed by Mayor for Submission to Council
By �_ i/N
By:
, DF DATE IlVITIATED ; GRE�EN SliL` ET No.:110651 �`'� ��,
Dept of Planning & Econ Develop 6/26/O1
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE: IM ATE IMTTAl1DATE
Tony Schertler 266-6593 � 1 DEPARTMENT DIR. � crrr counrcn.
MUST BE ON COUNCII. AGEIQDA BY (DATL� �IGN ? CTTY ATTORNEY 4 C1TY CLERK
NUMBER FINANCfALSERV DII2. _ FINANCL4LSERV/ACCTG
FOR 3 MAYOR(ORASST.) " CIVII.SERVICE - .
�' .� �� ROUTING COMMLSSION _ Other. Tony Schertler, PED
� _ ORDER
- TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAG _1_(CLIP ALL LOCATTONS FOR SIGNATORE)
,; ncriox tzEQ�s�n: Consider recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding Riverview Corridor transit
, alternatives and then adopt the a�tached resolution.
� RECObIMENDAITOYS: Approve (A) ot Reject (R) pERSONAI, SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING
QUESTIONS: NA
' _ A_ PLANNING C(JMMISSION 1. Has this person/finn ever worked under a contract for this departmen[?
. CI8 COMMiTTEE Yes Nu
CNII, SERtiICE COMMISSION 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
� 3. Does tl�is persoNfirtn possess a ski(1 no[ normally possessed by any cutren[ city employee?
— Yu No
� _ Expla�n all yes answers an separate sheet and attach to green sheet
�' INITIAII��OBLEM, ISSDE, OPPOR2IIIVITY (R'ho, What, Wheu, Where, Why): MCtI'O TCHRSkX 1185 Ii11C11YC(1 2ll 011V1LOIlTT10IIt31 1fl1PaCY
�' snidy of transit in the Riverview Corridor. The process is currently in the "Scoping Prase" wherein suggestions for
'�. transit alterna:ives 1re solicited. Public comments aze due ttr be ta?;en on July �1. It is appropriate and Cimely that
3�. the City shoiild comme.r.t on the Scoping work with specific suggestions for alternative routes and [echnologies.
;' nDVaxzacES iF nri�xovEV. The policy directives of the City may be incorporated into the environmental review
?�' process. Such action should be taken by 3uly 31, 2001
:».
� � �@`dTC�E �e9C?t2f
A�l� �� �. 2009
4� DISAAVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: NOIlO
�.:
^ nisanvnNTncES � roT nrrxovEn: The policy of the City is not ensured to be included into the deliberations on transit
'., solutions unless the City Council is clear about its intenY.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION: $ COST/REVEN!)E BUDGETED:
F[JNDING SOURCE: ACTIVITY N[L�vffiER:
FINANCIAL INFORifATION: (EXPLAI�
� [c�sna��oveior�������n�r�
�
Council File # a�—r��
Resolution #
Green Sheet # l Lc GS �.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
��
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
CITY
Presented By
Referred To
33
Committee: Date
RIVERVIEW CORRIDOR: RESPONSE TO PRELIMINARY
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment :
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and �
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS",
Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed f�
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and /
WORK
:ral Transit
(MIS), initiated in Fall,
funding to be used for a busway
opolitan Council declared that an
in the Riverview Corridor and
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Co cil passed Resolution 00-970, responding to the
"Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating t preferred alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corridor",
as well as declaring a desire to participate in subseq ent Riverview Corridor transportation pianning
processes; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiate an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Adviso Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing and making
recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning ommission, following the decision by the Metropolitan Council
to pursue an Environmental impac tatement process, found that:
• The current Scoping Proce portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
• There is an alternative, no previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor IS", that facuses BRT on West 7'" , East 7"', and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Ma land Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the foliowing
objectives are maxi ' ed:
a.
b,
c.
e.
�
Transit sta ' ns be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoads
Riders be ithin walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit I' ks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of inerica to workers in the Riverview and Phafen Corridors, with the end points
in S" t Paul being the Shepard Davem area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
De 'gn and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
n ghborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
an" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
44
45 •
46
47
48
49 •
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
5'7
58
59
h. ' Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission should be treated as a"Baseline
Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts" criteria, such that t is "Baseline
Altemative", if selected, not require an Environmental Impact Statement to roceed with
implementation; and
The Minnesota Department of Transportation should pursue physical i rovements fhat
would divert through traffic from West 7�' Street to Shepard Road bet een the Mississippi
River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Im ct Statement process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul City uncil endorse the findings
and recommendations of the Saint Paul Planning Commission wi regard to the Riverview
Corridor EIS Scoping Process; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council forw ds the Planning Commission's findings
and recommendations to Metro Transit as the official po ion of the Cify regarding the EIS Scoping
Process.
Requested by Department
Plannin & Economic Develo �ment
♦
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
Adopted by-CO ci1
Adoption Ce ti£ied
By: —
Approve_ by Mayor:
� B y ° —
. DaCe�� Form Approved�by Attorne �
by Council Secretary /'�'S/ rf'/ �
� r��vvL i
By:
Date Approved by Mayor f r S�b 'ssion to Council
By: _
��'
interdepartmental Memorandum
CITY OF SAINi' PAUL
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
August 8, 2001
St. Paul City Council
Tony Schertler, Project Manager
Riverview Transit Corridor
Applyin� the principles the City has recommended, the following improvements to the
Riverview Corridor could be accomplished.
Assuming a budget of $44 Million.
I. New Buses - 20 buses to maintain 4 minute head ways
II. New Starions - 14 stations
III. Roadway Improvements:
IV. Contingency
Attachments:
M317��i1
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$24,000,000
$2,000,000
$44,000,000
8 � -b `i
� �:S ..�� l.� ��-
� _. .. O ' i `.
1 8
u� i fa��
� ��� ,�.�;��� .' :�
t1i :
�.;� �
�
I.. t.:
I .'"."
J *�_",:�":
�
/
+'w :' /
ru �a . � .
��`• �
i
4 �,�z _ .
A � �a I
�
.t �. �
i
4 �y... ; .
Cr:
T :
lCf �'�` 1 .':
y{ ; , �.
�� {..
SS
sa u
' �
.1;. ���� O ..
t�
� F 1 Z
� F �� �. ,
° r
Yu rL I t
� � ;;1. 3 O
�,..���� c; 4�
�,� � ; 7C
���,�� i �
�:_ �,� co
.��� �
t a
e
l E '�
80' R/V
11' il' i 11' 1':
4NE LANE LANE LAhE
O � 0
WITH PFRKING
�i
COST PER F00T= 5 602.92
COSTPERFOOT= S911d0
SECTI�N 7
SECTI�N 8
BRT ALTERNATIVES
TYPICAL SECTI�NS
DIAMOND �ANE DESIGN
V D.
�
LEFT
LANE
V
l � PtGk�y�Fi�..J i � l `�
BLV D.
� .. _�
W/ LEFT 7URNS W/❑ PARKING N � TE lOFT MINIMUM BOULEVARD VID
■ DESIGN ADT_>15,000 VPD__
r
7th Street
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Configuration Options
�
s1�C��� � ��J �cr �
—
�
� � (� �; ,� �R �
May 21, 2001
� MetrroTransit
�� R'rverview Corridor
ta�-8"�y
!/i�r7 nc
Characteristics
of B RT Systems
Consistent ltems:
Characteristics that may be
consistent along the BRT corridor
0
.
Bus ldentity
Signatu�e Shelters
Level Boarding
■ Platform Fare
Collection System
Variable Items:
o�-��y
Characteristics that may
vary along the BRT corridor
■ Exclusive Lanes
■ Station Amenities
- Signs
- Lighting
- Seating
- Travel lnformation
Displays
■ Signal Priority
■ Station Spacing
� MetrvTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
May 21, 2001
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Chatacteristics
7'^ S[reet BRT ConfigureUOn
vi47 m�
��t, - ��i�ti:ng Gonditions.
��
�,
. . ,.. . -.� , . .. . ..
. F1'_°-1�.�� . _
' _'. ' , . _ . . . ._ _ '. . '. �
�'_ -�
_��
��auY "'�
�
"_ ��=;
���
�°°^� �
�� t�.. —
���=:=
` " � 'c .; '��`�„ . ;; �°�% � •
� �� � �1�1j \ .
y S �/,
�i: \ � . 'o E,1>� � � .� -l'�
� �t�a'i1,: � ` �
�9� ��-' < �\� �� <b ,4 �.. •�. ` /� .
��t,�>��r..s+c�s��«+°l ;: `� �- v�`�e�4
A
4..�: . 'v++v-,-�-a••..---. ..�,..�:..' �� ... .�,...a,.�
/, t
C �' � �� a,«"} .. / �,' .�
\l
� �
�
�'•
�i ��
r �
E5j
�;,��—=+� i a �
zry , '.: � � _
,� _ -_
- '-_..
- <-?^.:
9 ���� _
�, � �
�� '��
/ / �'i . • �\
� `� ,, •i
o " ti w '- e `��.
/ r � .
L� Z u �"�� Q __ �..
..•.._ . _ 4 {Y�
�. @x � . it,." � ♦ �r,. d � �'a�'f. ... ��w �c{.1c�'��
�
�� ♦ � �• '� .� '� '
�'•�i. . �� . �- � ��
�� d�/! •�..o �,. r o : m,� �.� „ . `
� �,.,, f `t�. �A/.� .. '� \ .�
. �� .
/�
y �' � �...j�� •^ �., i � .l j -: � � �.
_ +v. 1 . $ _ s � �.�.. ?�' � r �`� �y'. :�:� .
.7/IMe4opolitan Council
�I io,��—.,.,.,,,,.., mn...a
I I� S
T xY>:
e1`�\
�'
p
L
Center PlatForms
� ContraflowBus Lanes / No Parking
/'��:
\ �
� �
�� ~�
n
F - �' 3 L /d �sY'a. � +�°-�\. 9 '
�'� �i`7� i'i' 1���,�1
� � � �� 1 �
46 r � �/ �� �1
v �
� , �
� `�:� . `
..: ' ..°i.
�
`
' s
�
ye�: � .
��- ``� 1
^4t
� � ' �
��3�.. �
y�Metrop Councll
��
O p t i o n
A-1
�
o �� �MehoTransit
o \ Riverview Corridor
o � -�i'i
Proposed a so FeQ1
Plan n�uuumuuuwun�
Option: B-1
Side PlaHorms �
Exclusive Bus Lanes / Parking Bays
BRVJ, InG
May 21, 2001 7'� Street BRT Configura6on
EnlstingSectlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii2i Feet
Pro osed Section o ,o zo Fee�
p i�iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
o�-�iy
P�opOSedSeCtion iiiiiiii�i'iiiiiiiiii�i `
Option: B-2
�MetroTransit Side Platforms / Ezclusive Bus Lanes ��
° �� Riverview Corridor Left-Tum Lane / No Parking eRw, Inc
May 27 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsting SecBon I I I I I I I I I I�1 I I I I I I I I I z l Fee�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan m�un�uuun�unuu
01-���
PrOp0.SedSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiiii
Option: 6-3
Side Platforms ��
� MetroTiansit � Exclusive Bus Lanes / No Parking
� Riverview Corridor �`"• �"`
May 21, 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configura[ion
Existin Section o ,o zoFee�
9 iiiiiiiiiiiiiii u iiii
Proposed o so FeP
Plan uuwmwuwunnn
o �� � Me�oTransit
� Riverview Corridw
�Ml'YSOfO{IfBR COLLIICII
June 4, 2007
6t-�IY
Proposed p sa Fee
Plan mimnuuinmmnu
Option: B-4
Side PlaHorms / Exclusive Bus Lanes
Exclusive Bicycle Lanes / No Parking
7'^ Street BRT Confgura6on
� Inc
F�dsting SecUon j � I I I 1 I I I I�1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I 21 Feet
P�OpoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
1 1��-0": 58•_0" I17
80._�..
o � -8�� �(
Pioposed
P!o osed SeCtlon o �o zo Fee� o so ree�
P iiiiiiiiii�,iii�iiiii Plan nnwuuuminnuw
Option: G1
O w,i��-r�� lt Side Platforms �
ivi Buses in Miz¢tl Traffic / Parking Bays
Riverview Corridor eaw, mG
May 2�, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Confguration
ExistingSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fa "
�d,- so ,�., �
� ' so ._ o .. �
o�-��y
PropoSed o so Fee�
Plan nuunumnnnmuu
� MetroTransit
° �� Riverview Corridw
�nxet�oPOlitan councit
'7� ................,
May2�,200'f
Option: G2
Side PlaHorms/euses in Mixed Treffic
Left-Turn Lane / No Parking
7�" S[ree[ BR7 Configurafion
ViW M
ExistingSeCtion iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
P�op0.sedSeCf/on i:iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
i z-o°I ss-o� nz•=o
i ' 80. �.� , ��,
v�-�iy
� -
6'-0"
Existing Section
<. =:;
�...,
��;�
<��x . :� .
�.
r.
�
�
iJ
a 10 2oFeec
nii�iiiiiiiuiiiiii�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan n�nu�unun�nuwu
� Option: G3 �
Side PlaHortns
�MetrroTransit Buses in Mized Traffic / No Parking �
o �� Rrv2rview Corridw May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BR7 Con6guretion
•17'-07 as'-o^ 'aT-o^,
� ' 80 �_��. �
PlOpOSedSBCt1011 °iiii�i�ii'iiiiiii�iiziFee�
ao� o°
P/opoSedSectfon i;iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i
o � -�i�!
Option: D-1
Side Platform5/ Exclusive Bus Lanes �S
OM2tCOT1'allSlt � Parking Bays One Side
Riverview Corridor BF "" . �°`
May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsttng SecUon � I I I I � � � � ��� � I � I � I I I 1 F¢¢I
Proposed a so Fee
Plan uiunuuwnuunun
0 � - �i �t
Option: D-2
Side Piatforms / Buses in Mixed Traffic �
�MetroTransit � Parking Bays One Side g�r,inc
F21V2NIBW COf(IdOf I May 21, 2DD7 7�^ Street BRT Conhguration
EXIstingSecUon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i F8e
P/opoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
Proposed o so Feet
Plan uuuu�muu�uunw
��
���-ri-.-i -i
� �����
j 1
� �:' �
` � • �
ti '_��4 .. ..-�
., - f ����..(. ' _ ..
.�/tMetropoHfaa C6uncit
'�!I'.'..ne..e_..=...n.,.r.n...,a
3
2. Section with BRT East of 1-35E
� MehnTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
, R �� -- — � . ,�
2. Exlsting Vew Easi of I-35E — Looking Northeast
June 78, 2001
o ,o z vao�
� � i i, i
Shepard Road
BRT Alignment Option '�
BRW, InG
Rivernew Alignment Options
. o �-�iy
1. Existing �ew @ Homer SVeet — Looking NoKheast
1. Section with BRT East of Homer Street i i � �� i � 'i ��, �, i� ��, 'i `a°,
-�
S: .
�yMe4opofiFatt Council
'L �:,
Opt�on
��.
� �\�� _ � ���
r.��. .� �
_ , I�
� .
o�..�►�
CI�I�Y Or" .�L1� Pf��.. 390 Ciry Hall Telephone: 65I-266-85I0
Norm Co[eman, Mayor IS West Kellagg Boulward Facsimile: 65I-228-SSI3
Samt Paul, MN55702
July 31, 2001
City Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council
320B City Ha11
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the Council;
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regarding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This acfion is particulazly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Comdor as a major transit corridor, primarily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the corridor be viewed in a regional
context, estending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
I recommend the Planning Commission action to you. A draft City Council Resolution is
enclosed.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
, � ��
orm Co eman, Mayor
�
DEPAR't'MENT OF PLANNING
&. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Brian 5weeney, Director
CITY OF SAIlVT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
1UTle LS, 2001
Mayor Norm Coleman
390 City Hali
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
25 West Fourth Sbeet
Saint P¢ul, MN SSIO2
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Deaz Mayor Coleman;
o��rty
Te[ephone: 65I-266-6565
Facsimile: 65]-228-326I
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regazding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This action is particularly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Corridor as a major transit corridor, primazily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the conidor be viewed in a regional
context, extending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
Piease sign the attached letter to the City Council and send forwazd.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
��S�-
Tony Schertler
Department of Planning and Economic Development
c.c. Tom Eggum, Director, Department of Public Works
Brian Sweeney, Director, Department of Planning and Economic Development
�
v� �r��
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
f►le number o1-54
date June z2, Zooi
Riverview Corridor: Response to Preliminary Scoping Work
W HEREAS, the Saint Paui Pianning Commission acts as an advisory body to the Mayor
and City Council on municipal planning matters as required by the Land Planning Act,
including matters related to transportation and transit; and
W HEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Raiiroad Authority (RCRRA)� w�th the
assistance of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Councii, Metro
Transit and City of Saint Paul, commissioned the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I,"
completed in 1998, which called for the development of a Major Investment Study (MIS};
and
W HEREAS, the RCRRA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sponsored the
Riverview Corridor MIS", initiated in Fall, 1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be
used for a busway in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council
de �„e r Rivervi w Corridor and T ansiEas the�le agency�and for transit
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Councii passed Resolution 00-970,
responding to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating the preferred
alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corrido�', as well as declaring a desire to participate in
subsequent Riverview Corridor transportation planning processes; and
moved byi
seconded by
in favor Unan_ 1 ��-
against_
G
�
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2001 the Metropolitan Council adopted a new -
"Transportation Policy Plan" stating that:
"Arterial Transit Corridors along selected high-volume streets [including West
7'" Street, East 7"' Street, Payne Avenue, Maryland Avenue and White Bear
Avenue] would receive the highest level of local bus service...These arteriais
wduid receive very frequent, 7-day, up-to-24-hour service'rf not afready provided.
There would be highly visible facilities at major stops...ln selected cases, limited-
stop bus routes may he added to complement frequent local routes -- for
exampie, Route 50 in coordination with Route 16 on University Avenue."
"Dedicated Transitways would provide a travel-time advantage over the singie-
occupant vehicle, improve transit service reliability and maximize the potential for
transit-oriented development and redevelopment" [Included in the listing of
potential transitways are West 7'" Street, and the Northeast Corridor from
downtown Saint Paul to downtown White Bear Lake.]; and
W HEREAS, in response to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and the new regional
"Transportation Policy Plan", the Metropolitan Council directed Metro Transit to proceed
to develop an Environmental Impact Statement with the general understanding that
consideration within the EIS should not be limited to only those alternatives
inciuded in the MIS; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with
a Corridor Management Committee, a 7echnical Advisory Committee and a Citizens
Workgroup reviewing and making recommendations on the EIS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul Planning
Commission, fiollowing the decision by the Metropolitan Council to pursue an
Environmental Impact Statement process, finds that the EIS should not be bound
by the afternatives set out in the "Riverview Corridor MIS", and further finds fhat
the current Scoping Process seeks input on all reasonable alternatives; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TMAT there is an alfernative, not previous y u
defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in the "Riverview Corridor
MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7' , East 7"', and Arcade Streets, Phalen "
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
a. Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent
neighborhoods
b, Riders be within walking distance (t/4 to'h mile) of the stations
2
o �-Y��t
c. Transit tinks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul Intemational
Airport and Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen -
Corridors, with the end points in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davem
area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
d. Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment
concepts of the neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan" (analysis attached)
e. Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be acceferated
using the impetus of the tran`sit investments
{, (ncrease use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan
Council's "Transportation Policy Plan"
g. Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
h. Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the aiternative defined herein should be
treated as a"Baseline Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts"
criteria, such that this "Baseline Aiternative", if selected, an Environmental
Impact Statement is not necessary to proceed with implementation; and
BE I? FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the Minnesota Department of Transportation
should pursue physicai improvements that would divert through traffic from West
7' Street to Shepard Road between the Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless
of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement process.
3
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNTNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELOP�NT
Brian Sweeney, Director
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Cn[eman, Mayor
zs wes: na�nh saeet
Saint Paul, MN 55102
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
June 26, 2001
Planning Commission
Allen I.ovejoy
Riverview Corridor Resolution
� (�d'1�
Telephone: 651-266-6700
Focsimile: 65I-22&3210
The Comprehensive Planning Committee is recommending adoption of the attached resolution
on the Riverview Conidor Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS). Also attached is a review of
the portions of the Comprehensive Plan that pertain to the Riverview Corridor.
There is a complex set of issues that prompt such action now. And the best way I could find to
describe them is through a series of questions. I am sure you will have some for the Commission
meeting as weil. If you are confused after reading the materials, please call me at 266-6576 - but
please do not all call at once!
Questions and Answers:
Planning Commission Resolution on the Riverview Corridor
I. What is the alternative referenced in the Resolution?
In May, staff presented a description of the altemative to the Riverview Citizens Workgroup.
The following aze some excerpts:
This alternative adopts the definition of Bus Rapid Transit as set out by the Federal Transit
Administration: "BRT combines the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses. It can
operate on exclusive transitways, HOV lanes, expressways, or ordinary streets." To acfiieve
these objectives, these principies are suggested:
Buses (rolling stock) - Commitment to state-of-the-art buses featuring low platform
boarding and hybrid power plants that reduce diesel emissions.
Transit Stations - Stations spaced so they aze within walking distance of the community
surrounding them, with real time information about buses en route, and with unique design
using distinctive colars, images and ongoing marketing.
�
Schedule (headways) - High frequency service during peak hours and good weekend
service. For example, buses every 5 minutes during peak commuting hours, every 10
minutes in midday, every 15 minutes in the evening, and every half-hour in the eazly morning
and late night. On weekends, frequency would be 15 minutes aII day and eazly evenings.
Route and alignment - This should be deterntined by the following considerations:
— Population density
— Potential for transit-oriented development
— Speed enhancement possibilities (e.g. signal preference, diamond lanes, dedicated
guideways, travel time reliability.
The Suggested Route: West 7�' Street fram Highway 5 bridge to downtown on diamond
lanes/mixed traffic, 5"` and 6�' Streets diamond lanes through downtown, East 7�' Street in
mixed traffic, Arcade Street in mixed traffic, Phalen Boulevazd on exclusive right-of-way,
Prosperity Avenue in mixed traffic, MaryIand Avenue in mixed tr�c, and White Beat
Avenue in mixed traffic. •
2. The Planning Commission/City Council declared a preferred atternative last Fall. Why
are we doing this again?
In October, 2000 both the Planning Commission and City Council adopted resolutions
responding to the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Study." That study laid out a series
of seven altematives and the City was askec3 to declaze a preference among them: However,
since the Metropolitan Council initiated the ETS in April, 2001 the clear understanding has
been that the community need not be bound by only those seven altematives. We believe
there may be a better alternative than any previously defined.
3. What is the Planning Commission's official role in this EIS proces?
Unlike Ayd Mill Road or Phalen Boulevazd Road, the City is not the lead for this EIS —
Metro Transit is. Therefore, the City's official positions aze advisory to Metro Transit and
rhP �„ rnrvc anA arP ntit hinclin� Howev� Metro Transit Metropolitan Council _
MnDOT and the I.egislature will surely look closely at any official City position.
Specifically, the Planning Commission's role is to review planning actions for consistency
with Comprehensive Plan elements and advise the Mayor and City Council. That is why we
have attached a summary of Comprehensive Plan elements to the Resolution. The ResoIution
is intended to reflect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
4. Why take action now? Isn't the EIS process just beginning?
There are two basic reasons why action now is particularly important. First, the EIS process
is in the "Scoping Phase", a phase that seeks to define all reasonable alternatives. We believe
2
bi-�s�y
that the alternative described in the Resolution is one not previously considered, does a better
job of ineeting the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, should be considered
during the "Scoping Phase:'
Secondly, it is important that the Commission's cunent opinions on these matters be clarified
sooner rather than later.
5. Will this action preempt the citiZen review process? And if not, won't it at Zeast appear to
be?
This action will not preempt the citizen review process. The EIS process encourages
individuals, agencies and organizations to submit alternatives to the sponsoring agency, in
this case Metro Transit. As for appearing to preempt the process, the Resolution is cazefully
written so as not to exclusively endorse the new alternative at this time, but to put it forwazd
for consideration in the Scoping Phase. It could be that at some future date, the Planning
Commission and/or City Council may want to make this alYernative the preferred one of the
City.
6. What factors entered into forming the recommended alternative?
The factors are generally listed in the Resolution under the second "resolved." The primary
elements in this alternative that aze missing from all others is that it does not require an
exclusive, sepnrated lane on West 7"` Street, but rather uses signage and striping to reserve
the bus lane. This allows for some preferences for the bus (signal preference, rush hour bans
in some segments) without doing irreprable harm to current operations of West 7�' Street.
Furthermore, this alternative treats the corridor in a more regional context (Mall of America
to downtown White Bear Lake) running diagonally from the Mississippi River crossing at
Shepard Davern to the Hillcrest Shopping Center. And, it replicates the service plan that was
approved for the Northeast Corridor by Metro Transit more than five years ago — limited stop
service to Maplewood Mall from downtown on East 7`� Street, Arcade Street, Phalen
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue. Finally, the route does the best job at
encouraging transit-oriented redevelopment as detailed in the Citywide elements and Small
Area Plans of the Comprehensive Plan
7. What happens if this alternative is not seleeted by the Metropolitan Council/Melro
Transit? By doing this now, haven't we taken our voice out of alternative preference
diseussions farther down the Zine?
Technically, all we aze doing at this point is suggesting an alternative approach to all others
previously suggested. If by some chance, the alternative is not included in the Environmental
Impact Statement analysis, the Commission may choose to recommend it as the preferred
altemative during the EIS public hearing phase. Or, the Commission may decide to choose a
preference among those altematives that remain.
�
8. What is a"baseline alternative" and why is that definition imporfant?
A"baseline altemative" is a relatively new term used by the Federal Transit Administration,
and includes all non-exclusive right-of-way options (e.g. all but exclusive Busway and LRT)
that aze defined in the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan. That is why the
Transportation Policy Plan is quoted in the Resolution. Staff believes that the altemative
outlined in the Resolution fits the definition of "Arterial Transit Corridors" and therefore, is a
"baseline altemative."
The significance of this definition is that "baseline alternatives" do not constitute FTA "New
Starts" and, therefore, are not required to have an EIS completed in order to proceed. As a
result, if this alternative is selected, this project potentialiy could proceed later this Fall. Of
course, the City and Metro Transit would want to continue tY�e public input as the project
proceeds, but it would not require t1�e time and expense of a full EIS process.
At the same time, proceeding in this manner would not allow for Yhe project to seek FTA
funding. However, we believe the likely capital costs of this altemative could fit within the
$44 million to $50 miIlion range.
9. What are the factors related to diverting through traffic off of West 7"` Street?
When the Major Investment Strategy was being prepazed in 1999 and 2000 neighbors along
the Corridor voiced concerns that unwanted through traffic was creating congestion and
higher speeds. The concepts of having walkable mixed use developments and pedestrian
amenities along West 7�' Street would be compromised by the existing volume and speed of
traffic.
As a possible partial remedy to the situation, it has been proposed that traffic be diverted to
Shepard Road from West 7�' Street between I-35E and Mississippi River Boulevazd. This is
the segment where through traffic seems to be the worst. Two new connections (at the very
southwest end of West 7�' Street and at I-35E and Shepazd Road) would have to be developed
t�t�2f•-E�ffe1�g��'� tnhP�lrv d 4
Cleazly, there are important environmental, engineering and cost issues that need further
study, so the Resolution recommends such study proceed irrespective of the alternative
selected in the Riverview Corridor.
0
o►-P►y
City Plans and the Riverview Corridor
Compiled June, 2001
Introduction:
The Riverview Transit Corridor (as defined for the current EIS work) stretches from the Trunk
Highway 5 bridge across the Mississippi River at Fort Snelling northeast through downtown and
to East 7�' Street at the Earl5treet bridge. Probably more useful is to understand this conidor
segment within the context of a transit corridor that starts at the Mall of America, through the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, along West 7`" and East 7�' Streets then north through
Maplewood to downtown White Bear L,ake. Within this broader corridor: there are three of the
five lazgest employment centers in the Metro Area (MOA, MSP and downtown St. Paul}; it
interfaces with no less than 8 neighborhood redevelopment azeas; and it has potential for great
interconnections with the Central Transit Corridor and Metro Transit bus services.
Within the context of Riverview Corridor transit investments, it is important to understand the
policy directives of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. However, due to the size and length of
the Corridor there are at least 10 Plan elements that pertain to transportation and redevelopment
issues. The following excerpts aze, first, from citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan and
second, from Small Area Plans within the Conidor.
Citywide Elements:
Land Use Plan: We begin with the Land Use Plan because it "...is the "floor plan" for the City...
[which acts to] encourage private investment in the city and to guide public investment within a
framework that enhances existing communities and the natura] environment "
Two of the four Strategies for the Plan are relevant here:
Strategy 2: Neighborhoods ad Urban Villages whereby each neighborhood should have a
range of housing types, should have transportation altematives to the automobile, and
shouid preserve streetcar era commercial strips. Specifically, this Strategy designates
"Pedestrian Neighborhood Commercial Centers" including West 7"' at Randolph Avenue,
West 7�' between Grand/Ramsey and Kellogg Boulevazd, East 7�' at Arcade and Maryland
Avenue at Prosperity Avenue. In addition, "Potential Housing Development Site"
designations include: Shepazd Davern Gateway, Koch/Mobile site, and Phalen Village.
Finally, "Anchoring Tnstitutions and Employers" (which aze central to the success of
transit} designated in the Plan include: Saint Paul School District Headquarters, United
and Children's Hospital, RiverCentre/Science Museum of Minnesota entertainment
center, downtown business core, Metropolitan State University, and 3M.
Strategy 3: Corridors for Growth whereby redevelopment efforts over the next 20
years should focus on five corridors, inciuding the Riverview Corridor (aka `Vest
Seventh and Phalen Corridors). The conidors include many lazge redevelopment sites
that can link new housing, jobs and transportation. New urban housing near transit
�
services will help support neighborhood business centers as weil. Corridor planning and
redevelopment seeks to work with community and business groups towazd a better
integrafion of business and industriai job creation, housing development and overall
neighborhood improvement.
The Plan notes the importance of Ramsey County's designation of the West Seventh
Corridor as one of two priority corridors for public transportation improvements.
The Corridor is "L.ocated on a�aad terrace between the river valley and the upper bluffs
[and is a] "thin" strip of neighborhoods" with high potential for residential development.
"A primary goal of redevelopment planning for the Riverview Conidor is transit-oriented
development...Any major transit developments within the Riverview corridor should be
incorporated into the existing residentiai, commercial and environmental character of the
corridor. In particular, physical changes should respect and complement natural
amenities in the corridor, such as Crosby Park, Hidden Falls Pazk and the Mississippi
River Boulevazd Pazk and should avoid unnecessary intrusion."
On the East Side, the Phalen Conidor is listed as "a model for neighborhood
revitalization work [due to its] community partnership among residents, businesses,
service agencies and different levels of government: '"The City will support the
strengthening of the urban village chazacteristics...by making good connections
(pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, as well as vehicles) between the corridor and
neighborhoods. As an emerging major employment center, good access by public transit
is a high priority..: '
Transportation Policv Plan: The Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is a comprehensive set of
policies subsumed under one of three strategies: `1) Travel and System Management: A System
that Works Technically'; `2) Neighborhood Quality & Economic Development: A System that
Works for the Community'; and `3) Travel Mode Choice: A System that Works for the
Individual'.
Generalty, the transit recommendations are in the third strategy: `Travel Mode Choice'.
The overriding abjective is to: "Work with regional transit agencies to recapture
e transiY-de endent b matching transit ser�7ce with travel
need." Echoing the Land.Use Plan, the TPP notes that "...uansit compiements ur an
neighborhood development pattems that support safe and cohesive communities and can
spur economic growth." Among the policies of the Plan are:
• Support of a significant, long-term commitment by the State to reinvest in the
regional transit system...
• Support of adequate funding of both the bus system and LRT...
• Support for redesign of the bus system to provide excellent service along
major corridors (limited stop "spines") and better intra- and infer-
neighborIiood`service... _._ ,. _ _ - _.
• Promote the focns of reverse commuting services on major suburban employers
and city neighborhoods with high unemployment...
2
o►-��y
• Support the Central Corridor...as the top priority for development of transitways —
busways and/or LRT — in the region.
• Forward Saint Paul interests in economic development, support of neighborhoods,
and serious improvement of the bus service in future regional transitway
pianning..."
• West 7�' Street is designated as an "A" Minor Arterial (streets that are main access
routes to freeways for people beginning or ending their trip within Saint Paul, and
are main access routes to employment centers).
• Shepard Road is designated as a"B" Minor Arterial (streets that provide access
from neighborhoods to "A" Minor Arterials and freeways) from Mississippi River
Boulevard to I-35E. From I-35E to downtown Shepard Road is designated as a
Principal Arterial (roads - including freeways - that are on the metropolitan
highway system). Shepard Road's west end designatio� recognizes that the
bulk of through traffic uses 7 Street from the Hwy 5 bridge to I-35E.
In summary, the Land Use Plan and Transportation Poticy Plan sz�pport the close relationship
between transit invesdments and neighborhood redevelopment. Further, there is emphasis on
corridor investments, both in terms of transit inveslments and rzeighborhood redevelopment.
Third, there is a recognition of the importance of access lo transit by walking, suggesting that
the location of redevelopment activities and transit stops must be in close proximity to be
successful. And finally, the TPP Transit Corridor map shows the Riverview Corridor using
West 7"` Street.
Small Area Plans/Corridor Plans
Smail Area Plans and Conidor Plans have well-defined geographic foci, wherein the scope of
inquiry is set by a combination of residential, business and citywide interests. These planning
processes generally use an interdisciplinary approach which focuses on the practicality of
implementation as well as mindful of the broader aspirations of the neighborhood. However,
within the context of adopted plans, smali area and corridor plans must be in concert with the
broader policies of citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan (discussed above).
But beyond that provision, there is substantial latitude in the scope and recommendations of
these plans.
We begin at the southwest end of the Corridor and work northeastward.
Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan: The "Small Area Plan covers a broad area, which
has been addressed as several specific plan araas as follows:
• the Gateway area, where the Hwy 5 bridge crosses the Mississippi River into St. Paul;
• the major West Seventh Street and Shepard Road conidors;
• the redevelopment of existing industrial properties around Davern and Shepard; and
• the development of new housing within existing residential areas.
��
"The plan envisions the rediscovery of the resources of this unique area:
• Shepard Road as a river road paskway, offering scenic views and access to a restored
natural environment;
• West Seventh Street as Fort Road, lined with mixed-use retail/residential buildings
inviting for strolling or shopping;
• new high gualiiy development along Davem and Shepard Road accommodating mixed
use commercial, residential, hotel and conference facilities along park like streets; and
• the redevelopment of existing residential azeas to create urban vilZages and "green"
streets and commons with over 1000 new units of housing."
The plan focuses mixed-use buiidings lining 7`" Street and street improvements that "calm"
traffic. Sibley Piaza is designated as an ideallocation for transit connections. "...improvements
could include a new pedestrian plaza with well designed bus shelters, lighting and landscaping,
and a newsstand or coffee shop."
"Shepazd Road is also envisioned in reconfigured form, as an extension of the Mississippi River
Road with the winding curves, traditional lighting and the pedestrian amenities of a true
parkway..: ' and design chazacteristics that allow easy pedestrian access from the new
development to amenities along the river bluffs.
The focus of major redevelopment is on the sites along Shepazd and Davern "...as a mixed-use
district combining commercial, hospitality and possibly higher density housing."
In summary, the Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan envisions transit on West 7"` with
specific accommodations for transit and mixed-use redevelopment found in typical transit-
oriented development. For Shepard Road it envisions a primary street serving hotels and
other high intensily uses at the west end and a slower-speed parkway with pedestrian crossings
to the river bluffs.
The Brewery/Ran-View neighborhood ]ies between West
7`" Street and the Mississippi River, bounded on e no y raz roa rac s an 7��h�'bp'
the Crosby Lake Business Pazk and I-35E. The Plan's vision is to create "...a safe and attractive
mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhood..: ' The Plan calls for new neighborhood-scale
commerciaUoffice on West 7`" Street, similaz to that of the surrounding commercial azeas.
Although there is the objective of creating commercial pazking behind or under new buildings,
there is a recognition that this could be di�cult. Redevelopment should be pedestrian-oriented
and heaviIy landscaped. As for Shepazd Road, the Plan envisions improved pedestrian access to
the river bluffs across Shepazd.
In summary, the Brewery/Ran-View Small Area Plan calls for transit-oriented type
redevelopment along West 7` with major, intensified redevelopment of the Koch-Mobile site as
primarily housing and mixed residential-commercial use on the Randolph Industrial site.
CI
di-t�`�
Seven Corners Gatewav Urban Desi�n Plan: The Plan area includes a rich variety of land uses
and challenging pazking issues. It covers a 10-block area bounded by Kellogg Boulevazd, I-35E
Pazkway, Grand Avenue and Exchange Street. Due to the development of the
entertainmenUcultural venues along Kellogg Boulevazd, this neighborhood is beginning to
experience substantial redevelopment pressure. The Plan is framed azound three fundamental
urban village components: the Medical Campus; the Main Street Commercial Corridor; and
Irvine Park neighborhood, and includes recommendations relating to transportation.
The Plan envisions major redevelopment, particularly south of West 7"' Street, using new
urbanism cancepts of interior-block parking structures, mixed uses, pedestrian orientation, close
relationships between land uses and transit accommodations and intensificatian of land uses
generally.
Specifically related to transit, the Plan states that:
• "Transit routes should continue to focas on West Seventh Street as the dominant transit
corridor through the Gateway" ,
• The Smith Avenue Transit Hub development "...should re-open 5mith Avenue to connect
with Fifth Street."
• "Transit stops should be strategically placed to encourage and celebrate transit use."
In summary, the Seven Corners Gateway Urban Design Plan views transit as integral to the
design and function of the "main street" concept along West 7` Street. Trmtsit stop Zocations
are important in supporting the pedestrian realm and redevelapment.
Phalen VillaEe Small Area Plan: The Plan area is centered on Prosperity and Maryland and
includes the old Phalen Shopping Center (now reclaimed Ames Lake), six residential blocks to
the south, and the blocks north of Maryland from Lake Phalen to Herbert. The general goal of
the Plan is to transform the area from one that is a blighting influence harmful to property values
into a safe, stable, attractive community center that meets neighborhood needs and is an asset to
the East Side.
Much has already happened in this area including demolishment of the Phalen Shopping Center,
filled in with a wetland, health care facility and services at Prosperity and Maryland, new senior
housing, and start of construction of the state headquarters for the Criminai Bureau of
Apprehension. The redevelopment along Maryland has been with enhanced transit in mind. The
Plan calls for "...express bus service connecting Phalen Village to downtown St Paul, with
possible stops serving the 3M1Seeger Squaze, Metro State University and Lafayette Puk areas..."
Such "express bus service can provide for improved transit service and can be connected to
major activity nodes in the conidor (Phalen Corridor)." The service "can and should be provided
quickly, economically and effectively with buses."
1�
In summary, the Phalen Village Small Area Plan envisions a new urban village focused on
Maryland with high amenities of wetlands and the Phalen Regional Park, with transit
intersecting the core area. The limited-stop bus service to downtown suggests expanded
service, particularly in the peak hour.
White Bear Avenue Small Area Ptan: The Plan's azea encompasses one biock either side of
White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur on the north to I-94 on the south. The Plan's goal is to
make the Avenue "...a safer, more attractive and inviting street for residents, businesses,
shoppers, and motorists and a greater asset to the neighborhood through which it runs" In
particulaz, the Plan focuses on redevelopment options for the Hillcrest Shopping area at the north
end of the study area. Although there is a focus on street reconfiguration, the Plan does make
transit recommendations including the need to improve transit service atong the Avenue that will
help maintain its "main street" function. The community will work with Metro Transit to
improve the major transit stops at Maryland and the HillcresT hub at Larpenteur.
The Redevelopment Plan for Hillcrest Village adopts the policies of the Land Use Plan that relate
to transit development including a focus on smaller, infill development with new housing neaz
bus service. In addition, the Plan endorses pedestrian-scale, walkable neighborhood commercial
azeas.
In summary, the White BearAvenue Small Area Plan echos the call for transit-oriented
development, increased transit service and major stops/stations.
Unaer Landin2 Master Plan
Historic Lowertown Small Area Plan
North Ouadrant Master Plan
Lower Davton's Bluff Small Area Plan
Phalen Corridor Develonment StraYegy
Railroad Island Small Area Plan
These plans do not specifically relate their redevelopment objectives to e provision o region �`�
transit or are not focused on the transit corridor. In most instances this is a result of scope and
focus rather than a rejection of the need for uansit.
C�
�v�SZ 1Tv'�E
2
A�w�� �- a-pe,i Council File # ��_^�' 1�
Resolution #
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Strategy" (MIS), initiated in Fall,
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be used for a busway
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council declared that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed for transit in the Riverview Corridor and
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and
15 WHEREAS, in response to the alternatives presented in the "Riverview Corridor MIS" the Saint Paui City
16 Council passed Resolution 00-970 on October 18, 2000 recommending that the alternative identified as #7
17 "modified BRT CPR Corridor" be selected for further examination subject to the condition that more citizen
18 participation was required before finai implementation; and
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing
and making recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that an exclusive right-of-way Bus Rapid Transit (BR� lane is
not appropriate for West 7th Street, given the extensive loss of parking and the disruption to traffic;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, given the current amount of traffic on West 7th Street
between the TH 5 bridge and I-35E interchange, BRT diamond lanes are not appropriate unless
thru traffic is diverted to Shepard Road in this segment which may create sufficient capacity on
West 7th Street for diamond lanes in the future; and
WHEREAS, the CP Rail alignment alternative between Alton and Toronto Streets does a poorjob
of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street, is expensive and requires unnecessary intrusion
into residential areas; and
WHEREAS, the Shepard Road alignment for BRT between TH 5 and downtown serves only longer
trips, not West 7th neighborhoods, has poor access from West 7th neighborhoods to downtown,
the Airport and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult;
and
Green Sheet # \ l O� Si
a�-�i�
42 WHEREAS, the I-35E alternative does a poor job of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street,
43 and does not improve transit access from the West 7th neighborhoods to downtown, the Airport
44 and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult; and
45
46 WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, following the decision by the Metropolitan
47 Council to pursue an Environmental Impact Statement process, found that:
48
49 •
50
51 •
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71 •
72
73
74 •
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
The current Scoping Process portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
There is an alternative, not previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7 , East 7 and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
�
c.
�
f�
Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoods
Riders be within walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit links downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors, with the end points
in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davern area and Hillcrest Shopping Center
Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
Plan" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission, if selected, should not require an
Environmental Impact Statement to proceed with implementation; and
If Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a diamond lane or exclusive bus
lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E interchange then the
Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical improvements would be
required to divert through traffc from West 7 Street to Shepard Road between the
Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement
process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, notwithstanding technical analyses yet to be
completed as part of the Scoping Phase, the Saint Paul City Council recommends that the primary
build alternative for the Riverview Corridor consist of BRT in mixed traffic from TH 5 to I-35E, on
diamond lanes from I-35E on 7th Street and possibly Smith Avenue, continue through downtown
on the existing 5th/6th diamond lanes, in mixed traffic on East 7th and Arcade Streets to Phalen
Boulevard, on exclusive BRT lanes to Johnson Parkway, and in mixed traffic on Prosperity Avenue,
Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT if the Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a
diamond lane or exclusive bus lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-
35E interchange then the Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical
improvements would be required to divert through traffic from West 7` Street to Shepard Road
between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E; and
.
.,
.
.':
ot-8�y
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT any recommendation to widen West 7` street or remove a
lane of traffic to accommodate a diamond land between the Highway 5 bridge and 1-35E
interchange is not acceptable to the City Council; and
99 BE IT FUf2THER RESOLVED THAT any recommended physica{ improvements for diverting tra�c
100 to Shepard Road be forwarded to the City of Saint Paul for review by Public Works and PED staff
101 and approval by the City Council; and
102
103 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City recommends that the best Riverview Corridor Transit
104 Project should contain the added elements of quality station area planning and development
105 preparation and these elements will not jeopardize implementation schedules; and
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Saint Paul through iYs Department of Planning and
Economic Development and Department of Public Works will be responsible for implementing any
residential or commercial redevelopment efforts, changes in Land Use Plans and local traffic
adjustments, therefore, the Metropolitan Council should consider using the City of St. Paul as an
implementing agent for the parts of the Riverview Corridor Project, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council authorizes city staff to negotiate an
interagency agreement with the Metropolitan Council outlining roles and responsibilities with the
goal of quick implementation of the Riverview Corridor Transit Project; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the dedicated bus fleet serving the Riverview Corridor should
be comprised of the environmentally friendly buses with low floor boarding such as Hybrid Electric
Bus, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT where street reconstruction is required for the incorporation of
the diamond lanes and to avoid repeated construction intervention, the Riverview Corridor Project
should complete construction improvements of the entire public right of way including curb
replacements, mill overlay, new sidewalk enhancements, twin lantern lighting; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the City Council urges that, if selected, the aforementioned
build alternative be implemented as quickly as possible.
130
Requested by Department of:
Plannin4 & ECOnoIDiC Develonment
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
139Adopted by Council: Date r�,v-.._,� �S', 300�
'� Form Apprwed by City Attomey
1Q�QAdoption Cextifie by Council Secretary
g�, \ T � 1 By:
Approved by Mayox: Date ` J���
Appro�ed by Mayor for Submission to Council
By �_ i/N
By:
, DF DATE IlVITIATED ; GRE�EN SliL` ET No.:110651 �`'� ��,
Dept of Planning & Econ Develop 6/26/O1
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE: IM ATE IMTTAl1DATE
Tony Schertler 266-6593 � 1 DEPARTMENT DIR. � crrr counrcn.
MUST BE ON COUNCII. AGEIQDA BY (DATL� �IGN ? CTTY ATTORNEY 4 C1TY CLERK
NUMBER FINANCfALSERV DII2. _ FINANCL4LSERV/ACCTG
FOR 3 MAYOR(ORASST.) " CIVII.SERVICE - .
�' .� �� ROUTING COMMLSSION _ Other. Tony Schertler, PED
� _ ORDER
- TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAG _1_(CLIP ALL LOCATTONS FOR SIGNATORE)
,; ncriox tzEQ�s�n: Consider recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding Riverview Corridor transit
, alternatives and then adopt the a�tached resolution.
� RECObIMENDAITOYS: Approve (A) ot Reject (R) pERSONAI, SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING
QUESTIONS: NA
' _ A_ PLANNING C(JMMISSION 1. Has this person/finn ever worked under a contract for this departmen[?
. CI8 COMMiTTEE Yes Nu
CNII, SERtiICE COMMISSION 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
� 3. Does tl�is persoNfirtn possess a ski(1 no[ normally possessed by any cutren[ city employee?
— Yu No
� _ Expla�n all yes answers an separate sheet and attach to green sheet
�' INITIAII��OBLEM, ISSDE, OPPOR2IIIVITY (R'ho, What, Wheu, Where, Why): MCtI'O TCHRSkX 1185 Ii11C11YC(1 2ll 011V1LOIlTT10IIt31 1fl1PaCY
�' snidy of transit in the Riverview Corridor. The process is currently in the "Scoping Prase" wherein suggestions for
'�. transit alterna:ives 1re solicited. Public comments aze due ttr be ta?;en on July �1. It is appropriate and Cimely that
3�. the City shoiild comme.r.t on the Scoping work with specific suggestions for alternative routes and [echnologies.
;' nDVaxzacES iF nri�xovEV. The policy directives of the City may be incorporated into the environmental review
?�' process. Such action should be taken by 3uly 31, 2001
:».
� � �@`dTC�E �e9C?t2f
A�l� �� �. 2009
4� DISAAVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: NOIlO
�.:
^ nisanvnNTncES � roT nrrxovEn: The policy of the City is not ensured to be included into the deliberations on transit
'., solutions unless the City Council is clear about its intenY.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION: $ COST/REVEN!)E BUDGETED:
F[JNDING SOURCE: ACTIVITY N[L�vffiER:
FINANCIAL INFORifATION: (EXPLAI�
� [c�sna��oveior�������n�r�
�
Council File # a�—r��
Resolution #
Green Sheet # l Lc GS �.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
��
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
CITY
Presented By
Referred To
33
Committee: Date
RIVERVIEW CORRIDOR: RESPONSE TO PRELIMINARY
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment :
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and �
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS",
Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed f�
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and /
WORK
:ral Transit
(MIS), initiated in Fall,
funding to be used for a busway
opolitan Council declared that an
in the Riverview Corridor and
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Co cil passed Resolution 00-970, responding to the
"Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating t preferred alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corridor",
as well as declaring a desire to participate in subseq ent Riverview Corridor transportation pianning
processes; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiate an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Adviso Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing and making
recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning ommission, following the decision by the Metropolitan Council
to pursue an Environmental impac tatement process, found that:
• The current Scoping Proce portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
• There is an alternative, no previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor IS", that facuses BRT on West 7'" , East 7"', and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Ma land Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the foliowing
objectives are maxi ' ed:
a.
b,
c.
e.
�
Transit sta ' ns be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoads
Riders be ithin walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit I' ks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of inerica to workers in the Riverview and Phafen Corridors, with the end points
in S" t Paul being the Shepard Davem area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
De 'gn and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
n ghborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
an" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
44
45 •
46
47
48
49 •
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
5'7
58
59
h. ' Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission should be treated as a"Baseline
Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts" criteria, such that t is "Baseline
Altemative", if selected, not require an Environmental Impact Statement to roceed with
implementation; and
The Minnesota Department of Transportation should pursue physical i rovements fhat
would divert through traffic from West 7�' Street to Shepard Road bet een the Mississippi
River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Im ct Statement process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul City uncil endorse the findings
and recommendations of the Saint Paul Planning Commission wi regard to the Riverview
Corridor EIS Scoping Process; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council forw ds the Planning Commission's findings
and recommendations to Metro Transit as the official po ion of the Cify regarding the EIS Scoping
Process.
Requested by Department
Plannin & Economic Develo �ment
♦
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
Adopted by-CO ci1
Adoption Ce ti£ied
By: —
Approve_ by Mayor:
� B y ° —
. DaCe�� Form Approved�by Attorne �
by Council Secretary /'�'S/ rf'/ �
� r��vvL i
By:
Date Approved by Mayor f r S�b 'ssion to Council
By: _
��'
interdepartmental Memorandum
CITY OF SAINi' PAUL
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
August 8, 2001
St. Paul City Council
Tony Schertler, Project Manager
Riverview Transit Corridor
Applyin� the principles the City has recommended, the following improvements to the
Riverview Corridor could be accomplished.
Assuming a budget of $44 Million.
I. New Buses - 20 buses to maintain 4 minute head ways
II. New Starions - 14 stations
III. Roadway Improvements:
IV. Contingency
Attachments:
M317��i1
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$24,000,000
$2,000,000
$44,000,000
8 � -b `i
� �:S ..�� l.� ��-
� _. .. O ' i `.
1 8
u� i fa��
� ��� ,�.�;��� .' :�
t1i :
�.;� �
�
I.. t.:
I .'"."
J *�_",:�":
�
/
+'w :' /
ru �a . � .
��`• �
i
4 �,�z _ .
A � �a I
�
.t �. �
i
4 �y... ; .
Cr:
T :
lCf �'�` 1 .':
y{ ; , �.
�� {..
SS
sa u
' �
.1;. ���� O ..
t�
� F 1 Z
� F �� �. ,
° r
Yu rL I t
� � ;;1. 3 O
�,..���� c; 4�
�,� � ; 7C
���,�� i �
�:_ �,� co
.��� �
t a
e
l E '�
80' R/V
11' il' i 11' 1':
4NE LANE LANE LAhE
O � 0
WITH PFRKING
�i
COST PER F00T= 5 602.92
COSTPERFOOT= S911d0
SECTI�N 7
SECTI�N 8
BRT ALTERNATIVES
TYPICAL SECTI�NS
DIAMOND �ANE DESIGN
V D.
�
LEFT
LANE
V
l � PtGk�y�Fi�..J i � l `�
BLV D.
� .. _�
W/ LEFT 7URNS W/❑ PARKING N � TE lOFT MINIMUM BOULEVARD VID
■ DESIGN ADT_>15,000 VPD__
r
7th Street
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Configuration Options
�
s1�C��� � ��J �cr �
—
�
� � (� �; ,� �R �
May 21, 2001
� MetrroTransit
�� R'rverview Corridor
ta�-8"�y
!/i�r7 nc
Characteristics
of B RT Systems
Consistent ltems:
Characteristics that may be
consistent along the BRT corridor
0
.
Bus ldentity
Signatu�e Shelters
Level Boarding
■ Platform Fare
Collection System
Variable Items:
o�-��y
Characteristics that may
vary along the BRT corridor
■ Exclusive Lanes
■ Station Amenities
- Signs
- Lighting
- Seating
- Travel lnformation
Displays
■ Signal Priority
■ Station Spacing
� MetrvTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
May 21, 2001
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Chatacteristics
7'^ S[reet BRT ConfigureUOn
vi47 m�
��t, - ��i�ti:ng Gonditions.
��
�,
. . ,.. . -.� , . .. . ..
. F1'_°-1�.�� . _
' _'. ' , . _ . . . ._ _ '. . '. �
�'_ -�
_��
��auY "'�
�
"_ ��=;
���
�°°^� �
�� t�.. —
���=:=
` " � 'c .; '��`�„ . ;; �°�% � •
� �� � �1�1j \ .
y S �/,
�i: \ � . 'o E,1>� � � .� -l'�
� �t�a'i1,: � ` �
�9� ��-' < �\� �� <b ,4 �.. •�. ` /� .
��t,�>��r..s+c�s��«+°l ;: `� �- v�`�e�4
A
4..�: . 'v++v-,-�-a••..---. ..�,..�:..' �� ... .�,...a,.�
/, t
C �' � �� a,«"} .. / �,' .�
\l
� �
�
�'•
�i ��
r �
E5j
�;,��—=+� i a �
zry , '.: � � _
,� _ -_
- '-_..
- <-?^.:
9 ���� _
�, � �
�� '��
/ / �'i . • �\
� `� ,, •i
o " ti w '- e `��.
/ r � .
L� Z u �"�� Q __ �..
..•.._ . _ 4 {Y�
�. @x � . it,." � ♦ �r,. d � �'a�'f. ... ��w �c{.1c�'��
�
�� ♦ � �• '� .� '� '
�'•�i. . �� . �- � ��
�� d�/! •�..o �,. r o : m,� �.� „ . `
� �,.,, f `t�. �A/.� .. '� \ .�
. �� .
/�
y �' � �...j�� •^ �., i � .l j -: � � �.
_ +v. 1 . $ _ s � �.�.. ?�' � r �`� �y'. :�:� .
.7/IMe4opolitan Council
�I io,��—.,.,.,,,,.., mn...a
I I� S
T xY>:
e1`�\
�'
p
L
Center PlatForms
� ContraflowBus Lanes / No Parking
/'��:
\ �
� �
�� ~�
n
F - �' 3 L /d �sY'a. � +�°-�\. 9 '
�'� �i`7� i'i' 1���,�1
� � � �� 1 �
46 r � �/ �� �1
v �
� , �
� `�:� . `
..: ' ..°i.
�
`
' s
�
ye�: � .
��- ``� 1
^4t
� � ' �
��3�.. �
y�Metrop Councll
��
O p t i o n
A-1
�
o �� �MehoTransit
o \ Riverview Corridor
o � -�i'i
Proposed a so FeQ1
Plan n�uuumuuuwun�
Option: B-1
Side PlaHorms �
Exclusive Bus Lanes / Parking Bays
BRVJ, InG
May 21, 2001 7'� Street BRT Configura6on
EnlstingSectlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii2i Feet
Pro osed Section o ,o zo Fee�
p i�iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
o�-�iy
P�opOSedSeCtion iiiiiiii�i'iiiiiiiiii�i `
Option: B-2
�MetroTransit Side Platforms / Ezclusive Bus Lanes ��
° �� Riverview Corridor Left-Tum Lane / No Parking eRw, Inc
May 27 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsting SecBon I I I I I I I I I I�1 I I I I I I I I I z l Fee�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan m�un�uuun�unuu
01-���
PrOp0.SedSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiiii
Option: 6-3
Side Platforms ��
� MetroTiansit � Exclusive Bus Lanes / No Parking
� Riverview Corridor �`"• �"`
May 21, 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configura[ion
Existin Section o ,o zoFee�
9 iiiiiiiiiiiiiii u iiii
Proposed o so FeP
Plan uuwmwuwunnn
o �� � Me�oTransit
� Riverview Corridw
�Ml'YSOfO{IfBR COLLIICII
June 4, 2007
6t-�IY
Proposed p sa Fee
Plan mimnuuinmmnu
Option: B-4
Side PlaHorms / Exclusive Bus Lanes
Exclusive Bicycle Lanes / No Parking
7'^ Street BRT Confgura6on
� Inc
F�dsting SecUon j � I I I 1 I I I I�1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I 21 Feet
P�OpoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
1 1��-0": 58•_0" I17
80._�..
o � -8�� �(
Pioposed
P!o osed SeCtlon o �o zo Fee� o so ree�
P iiiiiiiiii�,iii�iiiii Plan nnwuuuminnuw
Option: G1
O w,i��-r�� lt Side Platforms �
ivi Buses in Miz¢tl Traffic / Parking Bays
Riverview Corridor eaw, mG
May 2�, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Confguration
ExistingSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fa "
�d,- so ,�., �
� ' so ._ o .. �
o�-��y
PropoSed o so Fee�
Plan nuunumnnnmuu
� MetroTransit
° �� Riverview Corridw
�nxet�oPOlitan councit
'7� ................,
May2�,200'f
Option: G2
Side PlaHorms/euses in Mixed Treffic
Left-Turn Lane / No Parking
7�" S[ree[ BR7 Configurafion
ViW M
ExistingSeCtion iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
P�op0.sedSeCf/on i:iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
i z-o°I ss-o� nz•=o
i ' 80. �.� , ��,
v�-�iy
� -
6'-0"
Existing Section
<. =:;
�...,
��;�
<��x . :� .
�.
r.
�
�
iJ
a 10 2oFeec
nii�iiiiiiiuiiiiii�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan n�nu�unun�nuwu
� Option: G3 �
Side PlaHortns
�MetrroTransit Buses in Mized Traffic / No Parking �
o �� Rrv2rview Corridw May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BR7 Con6guretion
•17'-07 as'-o^ 'aT-o^,
� ' 80 �_��. �
PlOpOSedSBCt1011 °iiii�i�ii'iiiiiii�iiziFee�
ao� o°
P/opoSedSectfon i;iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i
o � -�i�!
Option: D-1
Side Platform5/ Exclusive Bus Lanes �S
OM2tCOT1'allSlt � Parking Bays One Side
Riverview Corridor BF "" . �°`
May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsttng SecUon � I I I I � � � � ��� � I � I � I I I 1 F¢¢I
Proposed a so Fee
Plan uiunuuwnuunun
0 � - �i �t
Option: D-2
Side Piatforms / Buses in Mixed Traffic �
�MetroTransit � Parking Bays One Side g�r,inc
F21V2NIBW COf(IdOf I May 21, 2DD7 7�^ Street BRT Conhguration
EXIstingSecUon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i F8e
P/opoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
Proposed o so Feet
Plan uuuu�muu�uunw
��
���-ri-.-i -i
� �����
j 1
� �:' �
` � • �
ti '_��4 .. ..-�
., - f ����..(. ' _ ..
.�/tMetropoHfaa C6uncit
'�!I'.'..ne..e_..=...n.,.r.n...,a
3
2. Section with BRT East of 1-35E
� MehnTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
, R �� -- — � . ,�
2. Exlsting Vew Easi of I-35E — Looking Northeast
June 78, 2001
o ,o z vao�
� � i i, i
Shepard Road
BRT Alignment Option '�
BRW, InG
Rivernew Alignment Options
. o �-�iy
1. Existing �ew @ Homer SVeet — Looking NoKheast
1. Section with BRT East of Homer Street i i � �� i � 'i ��, �, i� ��, 'i `a°,
-�
S: .
�yMe4opofiFatt Council
'L �:,
Opt�on
��.
� �\�� _ � ���
r.��. .� �
_ , I�
� .
o�..�►�
CI�I�Y Or" .�L1� Pf��.. 390 Ciry Hall Telephone: 65I-266-85I0
Norm Co[eman, Mayor IS West Kellagg Boulward Facsimile: 65I-228-SSI3
Samt Paul, MN55702
July 31, 2001
City Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council
320B City Ha11
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the Council;
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regarding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This acfion is particulazly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Comdor as a major transit corridor, primarily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the corridor be viewed in a regional
context, estending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
I recommend the Planning Commission action to you. A draft City Council Resolution is
enclosed.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
, � ��
orm Co eman, Mayor
�
DEPAR't'MENT OF PLANNING
&. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Brian 5weeney, Director
CITY OF SAIlVT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
1UTle LS, 2001
Mayor Norm Coleman
390 City Hali
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
25 West Fourth Sbeet
Saint P¢ul, MN SSIO2
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Deaz Mayor Coleman;
o��rty
Te[ephone: 65I-266-6565
Facsimile: 65]-228-326I
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regazding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This action is particularly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Corridor as a major transit corridor, primazily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the conidor be viewed in a regional
context, extending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
Piease sign the attached letter to the City Council and send forwazd.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
��S�-
Tony Schertler
Department of Planning and Economic Development
c.c. Tom Eggum, Director, Department of Public Works
Brian Sweeney, Director, Department of Planning and Economic Development
�
v� �r��
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
f►le number o1-54
date June z2, Zooi
Riverview Corridor: Response to Preliminary Scoping Work
W HEREAS, the Saint Paui Pianning Commission acts as an advisory body to the Mayor
and City Council on municipal planning matters as required by the Land Planning Act,
including matters related to transportation and transit; and
W HEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Raiiroad Authority (RCRRA)� w�th the
assistance of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Councii, Metro
Transit and City of Saint Paul, commissioned the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I,"
completed in 1998, which called for the development of a Major Investment Study (MIS};
and
W HEREAS, the RCRRA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sponsored the
Riverview Corridor MIS", initiated in Fall, 1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be
used for a busway in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council
de �„e r Rivervi w Corridor and T ansiEas the�le agency�and for transit
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Councii passed Resolution 00-970,
responding to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating the preferred
alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corrido�', as well as declaring a desire to participate in
subsequent Riverview Corridor transportation planning processes; and
moved byi
seconded by
in favor Unan_ 1 ��-
against_
G
�
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2001 the Metropolitan Council adopted a new -
"Transportation Policy Plan" stating that:
"Arterial Transit Corridors along selected high-volume streets [including West
7'" Street, East 7"' Street, Payne Avenue, Maryland Avenue and White Bear
Avenue] would receive the highest level of local bus service...These arteriais
wduid receive very frequent, 7-day, up-to-24-hour service'rf not afready provided.
There would be highly visible facilities at major stops...ln selected cases, limited-
stop bus routes may he added to complement frequent local routes -- for
exampie, Route 50 in coordination with Route 16 on University Avenue."
"Dedicated Transitways would provide a travel-time advantage over the singie-
occupant vehicle, improve transit service reliability and maximize the potential for
transit-oriented development and redevelopment" [Included in the listing of
potential transitways are West 7'" Street, and the Northeast Corridor from
downtown Saint Paul to downtown White Bear Lake.]; and
W HEREAS, in response to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and the new regional
"Transportation Policy Plan", the Metropolitan Council directed Metro Transit to proceed
to develop an Environmental Impact Statement with the general understanding that
consideration within the EIS should not be limited to only those alternatives
inciuded in the MIS; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with
a Corridor Management Committee, a 7echnical Advisory Committee and a Citizens
Workgroup reviewing and making recommendations on the EIS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul Planning
Commission, fiollowing the decision by the Metropolitan Council to pursue an
Environmental Impact Statement process, finds that the EIS should not be bound
by the afternatives set out in the "Riverview Corridor MIS", and further finds fhat
the current Scoping Process seeks input on all reasonable alternatives; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TMAT there is an alfernative, not previous y u
defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in the "Riverview Corridor
MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7' , East 7"', and Arcade Streets, Phalen "
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
a. Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent
neighborhoods
b, Riders be within walking distance (t/4 to'h mile) of the stations
2
o �-Y��t
c. Transit tinks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul Intemational
Airport and Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen -
Corridors, with the end points in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davem
area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
d. Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment
concepts of the neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan" (analysis attached)
e. Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be acceferated
using the impetus of the tran`sit investments
{, (ncrease use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan
Council's "Transportation Policy Plan"
g. Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
h. Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the aiternative defined herein should be
treated as a"Baseline Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts"
criteria, such that this "Baseline Aiternative", if selected, an Environmental
Impact Statement is not necessary to proceed with implementation; and
BE I? FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the Minnesota Department of Transportation
should pursue physicai improvements that would divert through traffic from West
7' Street to Shepard Road between the Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless
of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement process.
3
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNTNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELOP�NT
Brian Sweeney, Director
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Cn[eman, Mayor
zs wes: na�nh saeet
Saint Paul, MN 55102
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
June 26, 2001
Planning Commission
Allen I.ovejoy
Riverview Corridor Resolution
� (�d'1�
Telephone: 651-266-6700
Focsimile: 65I-22&3210
The Comprehensive Planning Committee is recommending adoption of the attached resolution
on the Riverview Conidor Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS). Also attached is a review of
the portions of the Comprehensive Plan that pertain to the Riverview Corridor.
There is a complex set of issues that prompt such action now. And the best way I could find to
describe them is through a series of questions. I am sure you will have some for the Commission
meeting as weil. If you are confused after reading the materials, please call me at 266-6576 - but
please do not all call at once!
Questions and Answers:
Planning Commission Resolution on the Riverview Corridor
I. What is the alternative referenced in the Resolution?
In May, staff presented a description of the altemative to the Riverview Citizens Workgroup.
The following aze some excerpts:
This alternative adopts the definition of Bus Rapid Transit as set out by the Federal Transit
Administration: "BRT combines the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses. It can
operate on exclusive transitways, HOV lanes, expressways, or ordinary streets." To acfiieve
these objectives, these principies are suggested:
Buses (rolling stock) - Commitment to state-of-the-art buses featuring low platform
boarding and hybrid power plants that reduce diesel emissions.
Transit Stations - Stations spaced so they aze within walking distance of the community
surrounding them, with real time information about buses en route, and with unique design
using distinctive colars, images and ongoing marketing.
�
Schedule (headways) - High frequency service during peak hours and good weekend
service. For example, buses every 5 minutes during peak commuting hours, every 10
minutes in midday, every 15 minutes in the evening, and every half-hour in the eazly morning
and late night. On weekends, frequency would be 15 minutes aII day and eazly evenings.
Route and alignment - This should be deterntined by the following considerations:
— Population density
— Potential for transit-oriented development
— Speed enhancement possibilities (e.g. signal preference, diamond lanes, dedicated
guideways, travel time reliability.
The Suggested Route: West 7�' Street fram Highway 5 bridge to downtown on diamond
lanes/mixed traffic, 5"` and 6�' Streets diamond lanes through downtown, East 7�' Street in
mixed traffic, Arcade Street in mixed traffic, Phalen Boulevazd on exclusive right-of-way,
Prosperity Avenue in mixed traffic, MaryIand Avenue in mixed tr�c, and White Beat
Avenue in mixed traffic. •
2. The Planning Commission/City Council declared a preferred atternative last Fall. Why
are we doing this again?
In October, 2000 both the Planning Commission and City Council adopted resolutions
responding to the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Study." That study laid out a series
of seven altematives and the City was askec3 to declaze a preference among them: However,
since the Metropolitan Council initiated the ETS in April, 2001 the clear understanding has
been that the community need not be bound by only those seven altematives. We believe
there may be a better alternative than any previously defined.
3. What is the Planning Commission's official role in this EIS proces?
Unlike Ayd Mill Road or Phalen Boulevazd Road, the City is not the lead for this EIS —
Metro Transit is. Therefore, the City's official positions aze advisory to Metro Transit and
rhP �„ rnrvc anA arP ntit hinclin� Howev� Metro Transit Metropolitan Council _
MnDOT and the I.egislature will surely look closely at any official City position.
Specifically, the Planning Commission's role is to review planning actions for consistency
with Comprehensive Plan elements and advise the Mayor and City Council. That is why we
have attached a summary of Comprehensive Plan elements to the Resolution. The ResoIution
is intended to reflect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
4. Why take action now? Isn't the EIS process just beginning?
There are two basic reasons why action now is particularly important. First, the EIS process
is in the "Scoping Phase", a phase that seeks to define all reasonable alternatives. We believe
2
bi-�s�y
that the alternative described in the Resolution is one not previously considered, does a better
job of ineeting the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, should be considered
during the "Scoping Phase:'
Secondly, it is important that the Commission's cunent opinions on these matters be clarified
sooner rather than later.
5. Will this action preempt the citiZen review process? And if not, won't it at Zeast appear to
be?
This action will not preempt the citizen review process. The EIS process encourages
individuals, agencies and organizations to submit alternatives to the sponsoring agency, in
this case Metro Transit. As for appearing to preempt the process, the Resolution is cazefully
written so as not to exclusively endorse the new alternative at this time, but to put it forwazd
for consideration in the Scoping Phase. It could be that at some future date, the Planning
Commission and/or City Council may want to make this alYernative the preferred one of the
City.
6. What factors entered into forming the recommended alternative?
The factors are generally listed in the Resolution under the second "resolved." The primary
elements in this alternative that aze missing from all others is that it does not require an
exclusive, sepnrated lane on West 7"` Street, but rather uses signage and striping to reserve
the bus lane. This allows for some preferences for the bus (signal preference, rush hour bans
in some segments) without doing irreprable harm to current operations of West 7�' Street.
Furthermore, this alternative treats the corridor in a more regional context (Mall of America
to downtown White Bear Lake) running diagonally from the Mississippi River crossing at
Shepard Davern to the Hillcrest Shopping Center. And, it replicates the service plan that was
approved for the Northeast Corridor by Metro Transit more than five years ago — limited stop
service to Maplewood Mall from downtown on East 7`� Street, Arcade Street, Phalen
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue. Finally, the route does the best job at
encouraging transit-oriented redevelopment as detailed in the Citywide elements and Small
Area Plans of the Comprehensive Plan
7. What happens if this alternative is not seleeted by the Metropolitan Council/Melro
Transit? By doing this now, haven't we taken our voice out of alternative preference
diseussions farther down the Zine?
Technically, all we aze doing at this point is suggesting an alternative approach to all others
previously suggested. If by some chance, the alternative is not included in the Environmental
Impact Statement analysis, the Commission may choose to recommend it as the preferred
altemative during the EIS public hearing phase. Or, the Commission may decide to choose a
preference among those altematives that remain.
�
8. What is a"baseline alternative" and why is that definition imporfant?
A"baseline altemative" is a relatively new term used by the Federal Transit Administration,
and includes all non-exclusive right-of-way options (e.g. all but exclusive Busway and LRT)
that aze defined in the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan. That is why the
Transportation Policy Plan is quoted in the Resolution. Staff believes that the altemative
outlined in the Resolution fits the definition of "Arterial Transit Corridors" and therefore, is a
"baseline altemative."
The significance of this definition is that "baseline alternatives" do not constitute FTA "New
Starts" and, therefore, are not required to have an EIS completed in order to proceed. As a
result, if this alternative is selected, this project potentialiy could proceed later this Fall. Of
course, the City and Metro Transit would want to continue tY�e public input as the project
proceeds, but it would not require t1�e time and expense of a full EIS process.
At the same time, proceeding in this manner would not allow for Yhe project to seek FTA
funding. However, we believe the likely capital costs of this altemative could fit within the
$44 million to $50 miIlion range.
9. What are the factors related to diverting through traffic off of West 7"` Street?
When the Major Investment Strategy was being prepazed in 1999 and 2000 neighbors along
the Corridor voiced concerns that unwanted through traffic was creating congestion and
higher speeds. The concepts of having walkable mixed use developments and pedestrian
amenities along West 7�' Street would be compromised by the existing volume and speed of
traffic.
As a possible partial remedy to the situation, it has been proposed that traffic be diverted to
Shepard Road from West 7�' Street between I-35E and Mississippi River Boulevazd. This is
the segment where through traffic seems to be the worst. Two new connections (at the very
southwest end of West 7�' Street and at I-35E and Shepazd Road) would have to be developed
t�t�2f•-E�ffe1�g��'� tnhP�lrv d 4
Cleazly, there are important environmental, engineering and cost issues that need further
study, so the Resolution recommends such study proceed irrespective of the alternative
selected in the Riverview Corridor.
0
o►-P►y
City Plans and the Riverview Corridor
Compiled June, 2001
Introduction:
The Riverview Transit Corridor (as defined for the current EIS work) stretches from the Trunk
Highway 5 bridge across the Mississippi River at Fort Snelling northeast through downtown and
to East 7�' Street at the Earl5treet bridge. Probably more useful is to understand this conidor
segment within the context of a transit corridor that starts at the Mall of America, through the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, along West 7`" and East 7�' Streets then north through
Maplewood to downtown White Bear L,ake. Within this broader corridor: there are three of the
five lazgest employment centers in the Metro Area (MOA, MSP and downtown St. Paul}; it
interfaces with no less than 8 neighborhood redevelopment azeas; and it has potential for great
interconnections with the Central Transit Corridor and Metro Transit bus services.
Within the context of Riverview Corridor transit investments, it is important to understand the
policy directives of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. However, due to the size and length of
the Corridor there are at least 10 Plan elements that pertain to transportation and redevelopment
issues. The following excerpts aze, first, from citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan and
second, from Small Area Plans within the Conidor.
Citywide Elements:
Land Use Plan: We begin with the Land Use Plan because it "...is the "floor plan" for the City...
[which acts to] encourage private investment in the city and to guide public investment within a
framework that enhances existing communities and the natura] environment "
Two of the four Strategies for the Plan are relevant here:
Strategy 2: Neighborhoods ad Urban Villages whereby each neighborhood should have a
range of housing types, should have transportation altematives to the automobile, and
shouid preserve streetcar era commercial strips. Specifically, this Strategy designates
"Pedestrian Neighborhood Commercial Centers" including West 7"' at Randolph Avenue,
West 7�' between Grand/Ramsey and Kellogg Boulevazd, East 7�' at Arcade and Maryland
Avenue at Prosperity Avenue. In addition, "Potential Housing Development Site"
designations include: Shepazd Davern Gateway, Koch/Mobile site, and Phalen Village.
Finally, "Anchoring Tnstitutions and Employers" (which aze central to the success of
transit} designated in the Plan include: Saint Paul School District Headquarters, United
and Children's Hospital, RiverCentre/Science Museum of Minnesota entertainment
center, downtown business core, Metropolitan State University, and 3M.
Strategy 3: Corridors for Growth whereby redevelopment efforts over the next 20
years should focus on five corridors, inciuding the Riverview Corridor (aka `Vest
Seventh and Phalen Corridors). The conidors include many lazge redevelopment sites
that can link new housing, jobs and transportation. New urban housing near transit
�
services will help support neighborhood business centers as weil. Corridor planning and
redevelopment seeks to work with community and business groups towazd a better
integrafion of business and industriai job creation, housing development and overall
neighborhood improvement.
The Plan notes the importance of Ramsey County's designation of the West Seventh
Corridor as one of two priority corridors for public transportation improvements.
The Corridor is "L.ocated on a�aad terrace between the river valley and the upper bluffs
[and is a] "thin" strip of neighborhoods" with high potential for residential development.
"A primary goal of redevelopment planning for the Riverview Conidor is transit-oriented
development...Any major transit developments within the Riverview corridor should be
incorporated into the existing residentiai, commercial and environmental character of the
corridor. In particular, physical changes should respect and complement natural
amenities in the corridor, such as Crosby Park, Hidden Falls Pazk and the Mississippi
River Boulevazd Pazk and should avoid unnecessary intrusion."
On the East Side, the Phalen Conidor is listed as "a model for neighborhood
revitalization work [due to its] community partnership among residents, businesses,
service agencies and different levels of government: '"The City will support the
strengthening of the urban village chazacteristics...by making good connections
(pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, as well as vehicles) between the corridor and
neighborhoods. As an emerging major employment center, good access by public transit
is a high priority..: '
Transportation Policv Plan: The Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is a comprehensive set of
policies subsumed under one of three strategies: `1) Travel and System Management: A System
that Works Technically'; `2) Neighborhood Quality & Economic Development: A System that
Works for the Community'; and `3) Travel Mode Choice: A System that Works for the
Individual'.
Generalty, the transit recommendations are in the third strategy: `Travel Mode Choice'.
The overriding abjective is to: "Work with regional transit agencies to recapture
e transiY-de endent b matching transit ser�7ce with travel
need." Echoing the Land.Use Plan, the TPP notes that "...uansit compiements ur an
neighborhood development pattems that support safe and cohesive communities and can
spur economic growth." Among the policies of the Plan are:
• Support of a significant, long-term commitment by the State to reinvest in the
regional transit system...
• Support of adequate funding of both the bus system and LRT...
• Support for redesign of the bus system to provide excellent service along
major corridors (limited stop "spines") and better intra- and infer-
neighborIiood`service... _._ ,. _ _ - _.
• Promote the focns of reverse commuting services on major suburban employers
and city neighborhoods with high unemployment...
2
o►-��y
• Support the Central Corridor...as the top priority for development of transitways —
busways and/or LRT — in the region.
• Forward Saint Paul interests in economic development, support of neighborhoods,
and serious improvement of the bus service in future regional transitway
pianning..."
• West 7�' Street is designated as an "A" Minor Arterial (streets that are main access
routes to freeways for people beginning or ending their trip within Saint Paul, and
are main access routes to employment centers).
• Shepard Road is designated as a"B" Minor Arterial (streets that provide access
from neighborhoods to "A" Minor Arterials and freeways) from Mississippi River
Boulevard to I-35E. From I-35E to downtown Shepard Road is designated as a
Principal Arterial (roads - including freeways - that are on the metropolitan
highway system). Shepard Road's west end designatio� recognizes that the
bulk of through traffic uses 7 Street from the Hwy 5 bridge to I-35E.
In summary, the Land Use Plan and Transportation Poticy Plan sz�pport the close relationship
between transit invesdments and neighborhood redevelopment. Further, there is emphasis on
corridor investments, both in terms of transit inveslments and rzeighborhood redevelopment.
Third, there is a recognition of the importance of access lo transit by walking, suggesting that
the location of redevelopment activities and transit stops must be in close proximity to be
successful. And finally, the TPP Transit Corridor map shows the Riverview Corridor using
West 7"` Street.
Small Area Plans/Corridor Plans
Smail Area Plans and Conidor Plans have well-defined geographic foci, wherein the scope of
inquiry is set by a combination of residential, business and citywide interests. These planning
processes generally use an interdisciplinary approach which focuses on the practicality of
implementation as well as mindful of the broader aspirations of the neighborhood. However,
within the context of adopted plans, smali area and corridor plans must be in concert with the
broader policies of citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan (discussed above).
But beyond that provision, there is substantial latitude in the scope and recommendations of
these plans.
We begin at the southwest end of the Corridor and work northeastward.
Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan: The "Small Area Plan covers a broad area, which
has been addressed as several specific plan araas as follows:
• the Gateway area, where the Hwy 5 bridge crosses the Mississippi River into St. Paul;
• the major West Seventh Street and Shepard Road conidors;
• the redevelopment of existing industrial properties around Davern and Shepard; and
• the development of new housing within existing residential areas.
��
"The plan envisions the rediscovery of the resources of this unique area:
• Shepard Road as a river road paskway, offering scenic views and access to a restored
natural environment;
• West Seventh Street as Fort Road, lined with mixed-use retail/residential buildings
inviting for strolling or shopping;
• new high gualiiy development along Davem and Shepard Road accommodating mixed
use commercial, residential, hotel and conference facilities along park like streets; and
• the redevelopment of existing residential azeas to create urban vilZages and "green"
streets and commons with over 1000 new units of housing."
The plan focuses mixed-use buiidings lining 7`" Street and street improvements that "calm"
traffic. Sibley Piaza is designated as an ideallocation for transit connections. "...improvements
could include a new pedestrian plaza with well designed bus shelters, lighting and landscaping,
and a newsstand or coffee shop."
"Shepazd Road is also envisioned in reconfigured form, as an extension of the Mississippi River
Road with the winding curves, traditional lighting and the pedestrian amenities of a true
parkway..: ' and design chazacteristics that allow easy pedestrian access from the new
development to amenities along the river bluffs.
The focus of major redevelopment is on the sites along Shepazd and Davern "...as a mixed-use
district combining commercial, hospitality and possibly higher density housing."
In summary, the Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan envisions transit on West 7"` with
specific accommodations for transit and mixed-use redevelopment found in typical transit-
oriented development. For Shepard Road it envisions a primary street serving hotels and
other high intensily uses at the west end and a slower-speed parkway with pedestrian crossings
to the river bluffs.
The Brewery/Ran-View neighborhood ]ies between West
7`" Street and the Mississippi River, bounded on e no y raz roa rac s an 7��h�'bp'
the Crosby Lake Business Pazk and I-35E. The Plan's vision is to create "...a safe and attractive
mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhood..: ' The Plan calls for new neighborhood-scale
commerciaUoffice on West 7`" Street, similaz to that of the surrounding commercial azeas.
Although there is the objective of creating commercial pazking behind or under new buildings,
there is a recognition that this could be di�cult. Redevelopment should be pedestrian-oriented
and heaviIy landscaped. As for Shepazd Road, the Plan envisions improved pedestrian access to
the river bluffs across Shepazd.
In summary, the Brewery/Ran-View Small Area Plan calls for transit-oriented type
redevelopment along West 7` with major, intensified redevelopment of the Koch-Mobile site as
primarily housing and mixed residential-commercial use on the Randolph Industrial site.
CI
di-t�`�
Seven Corners Gatewav Urban Desi�n Plan: The Plan area includes a rich variety of land uses
and challenging pazking issues. It covers a 10-block area bounded by Kellogg Boulevazd, I-35E
Pazkway, Grand Avenue and Exchange Street. Due to the development of the
entertainmenUcultural venues along Kellogg Boulevazd, this neighborhood is beginning to
experience substantial redevelopment pressure. The Plan is framed azound three fundamental
urban village components: the Medical Campus; the Main Street Commercial Corridor; and
Irvine Park neighborhood, and includes recommendations relating to transportation.
The Plan envisions major redevelopment, particularly south of West 7"' Street, using new
urbanism cancepts of interior-block parking structures, mixed uses, pedestrian orientation, close
relationships between land uses and transit accommodations and intensificatian of land uses
generally.
Specifically related to transit, the Plan states that:
• "Transit routes should continue to focas on West Seventh Street as the dominant transit
corridor through the Gateway" ,
• The Smith Avenue Transit Hub development "...should re-open 5mith Avenue to connect
with Fifth Street."
• "Transit stops should be strategically placed to encourage and celebrate transit use."
In summary, the Seven Corners Gateway Urban Design Plan views transit as integral to the
design and function of the "main street" concept along West 7` Street. Trmtsit stop Zocations
are important in supporting the pedestrian realm and redevelapment.
Phalen VillaEe Small Area Plan: The Plan area is centered on Prosperity and Maryland and
includes the old Phalen Shopping Center (now reclaimed Ames Lake), six residential blocks to
the south, and the blocks north of Maryland from Lake Phalen to Herbert. The general goal of
the Plan is to transform the area from one that is a blighting influence harmful to property values
into a safe, stable, attractive community center that meets neighborhood needs and is an asset to
the East Side.
Much has already happened in this area including demolishment of the Phalen Shopping Center,
filled in with a wetland, health care facility and services at Prosperity and Maryland, new senior
housing, and start of construction of the state headquarters for the Criminai Bureau of
Apprehension. The redevelopment along Maryland has been with enhanced transit in mind. The
Plan calls for "...express bus service connecting Phalen Village to downtown St Paul, with
possible stops serving the 3M1Seeger Squaze, Metro State University and Lafayette Puk areas..."
Such "express bus service can provide for improved transit service and can be connected to
major activity nodes in the conidor (Phalen Corridor)." The service "can and should be provided
quickly, economically and effectively with buses."
1�
In summary, the Phalen Village Small Area Plan envisions a new urban village focused on
Maryland with high amenities of wetlands and the Phalen Regional Park, with transit
intersecting the core area. The limited-stop bus service to downtown suggests expanded
service, particularly in the peak hour.
White Bear Avenue Small Area Ptan: The Plan's azea encompasses one biock either side of
White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur on the north to I-94 on the south. The Plan's goal is to
make the Avenue "...a safer, more attractive and inviting street for residents, businesses,
shoppers, and motorists and a greater asset to the neighborhood through which it runs" In
particulaz, the Plan focuses on redevelopment options for the Hillcrest Shopping area at the north
end of the study area. Although there is a focus on street reconfiguration, the Plan does make
transit recommendations including the need to improve transit service atong the Avenue that will
help maintain its "main street" function. The community will work with Metro Transit to
improve the major transit stops at Maryland and the HillcresT hub at Larpenteur.
The Redevelopment Plan for Hillcrest Village adopts the policies of the Land Use Plan that relate
to transit development including a focus on smaller, infill development with new housing neaz
bus service. In addition, the Plan endorses pedestrian-scale, walkable neighborhood commercial
azeas.
In summary, the White BearAvenue Small Area Plan echos the call for transit-oriented
development, increased transit service and major stops/stations.
Unaer Landin2 Master Plan
Historic Lowertown Small Area Plan
North Ouadrant Master Plan
Lower Davton's Bluff Small Area Plan
Phalen Corridor Develonment StraYegy
Railroad Island Small Area Plan
These plans do not specifically relate their redevelopment objectives to e provision o region �`�
transit or are not focused on the transit corridor. In most instances this is a result of scope and
focus rather than a rejection of the need for uansit.
C�
�v�SZ 1Tv'�E
2
A�w�� �- a-pe,i Council File # ��_^�' 1�
Resolution #
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Strategy" (MIS), initiated in Fall,
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be used for a busway
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council declared that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed for transit in the Riverview Corridor and
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and
15 WHEREAS, in response to the alternatives presented in the "Riverview Corridor MIS" the Saint Paui City
16 Council passed Resolution 00-970 on October 18, 2000 recommending that the alternative identified as #7
17 "modified BRT CPR Corridor" be selected for further examination subject to the condition that more citizen
18 participation was required before finai implementation; and
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing
and making recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that an exclusive right-of-way Bus Rapid Transit (BR� lane is
not appropriate for West 7th Street, given the extensive loss of parking and the disruption to traffic;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, given the current amount of traffic on West 7th Street
between the TH 5 bridge and I-35E interchange, BRT diamond lanes are not appropriate unless
thru traffic is diverted to Shepard Road in this segment which may create sufficient capacity on
West 7th Street for diamond lanes in the future; and
WHEREAS, the CP Rail alignment alternative between Alton and Toronto Streets does a poorjob
of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street, is expensive and requires unnecessary intrusion
into residential areas; and
WHEREAS, the Shepard Road alignment for BRT between TH 5 and downtown serves only longer
trips, not West 7th neighborhoods, has poor access from West 7th neighborhoods to downtown,
the Airport and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult;
and
Green Sheet # \ l O� Si
a�-�i�
42 WHEREAS, the I-35E alternative does a poor job of serving redevelopment along West 7th Street,
43 and does not improve transit access from the West 7th neighborhoods to downtown, the Airport
44 and Mall of America, and makes access from cross-town buses unnecessarily difficult; and
45
46 WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, following the decision by the Metropolitan
47 Council to pursue an Environmental Impact Statement process, found that:
48
49 •
50
51 •
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71 •
72
73
74 •
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
The current Scoping Process portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
There is an alternative, not previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7 , East 7 and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
�
c.
�
f�
Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoods
Riders be within walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit links downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors, with the end points
in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davern area and Hillcrest Shopping Center
Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
Plan" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission, if selected, should not require an
Environmental Impact Statement to proceed with implementation; and
If Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a diamond lane or exclusive bus
lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E interchange then the
Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical improvements would be
required to divert through traffc from West 7 Street to Shepard Road between the
Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement
process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, notwithstanding technical analyses yet to be
completed as part of the Scoping Phase, the Saint Paul City Council recommends that the primary
build alternative for the Riverview Corridor consist of BRT in mixed traffic from TH 5 to I-35E, on
diamond lanes from I-35E on 7th Street and possibly Smith Avenue, continue through downtown
on the existing 5th/6th diamond lanes, in mixed traffic on East 7th and Arcade Streets to Phalen
Boulevard, on exclusive BRT lanes to Johnson Parkway, and in mixed traffic on Prosperity Avenue,
Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT if the Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit wish to pursue a
diamond lane or exclusive bus lanes on West Seventh Street between the Highway 5 bridge and I-
35E interchange then the Minnesota Department of Transportation will study what physical
improvements would be required to divert through traffic from West 7` Street to Shepard Road
between the Highway 5 bridge and I-35E; and
.
.,
.
.':
ot-8�y
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT any recommendation to widen West 7` street or remove a
lane of traffic to accommodate a diamond land between the Highway 5 bridge and 1-35E
interchange is not acceptable to the City Council; and
99 BE IT FUf2THER RESOLVED THAT any recommended physica{ improvements for diverting tra�c
100 to Shepard Road be forwarded to the City of Saint Paul for review by Public Works and PED staff
101 and approval by the City Council; and
102
103 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City recommends that the best Riverview Corridor Transit
104 Project should contain the added elements of quality station area planning and development
105 preparation and these elements will not jeopardize implementation schedules; and
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Saint Paul through iYs Department of Planning and
Economic Development and Department of Public Works will be responsible for implementing any
residential or commercial redevelopment efforts, changes in Land Use Plans and local traffic
adjustments, therefore, the Metropolitan Council should consider using the City of St. Paul as an
implementing agent for the parts of the Riverview Corridor Project, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council authorizes city staff to negotiate an
interagency agreement with the Metropolitan Council outlining roles and responsibilities with the
goal of quick implementation of the Riverview Corridor Transit Project; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the dedicated bus fleet serving the Riverview Corridor should
be comprised of the environmentally friendly buses with low floor boarding such as Hybrid Electric
Bus, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT where street reconstruction is required for the incorporation of
the diamond lanes and to avoid repeated construction intervention, the Riverview Corridor Project
should complete construction improvements of the entire public right of way including curb
replacements, mill overlay, new sidewalk enhancements, twin lantern lighting; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the City Council urges that, if selected, the aforementioned
build alternative be implemented as quickly as possible.
130
Requested by Department of:
Plannin4 & ECOnoIDiC Develonment
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
139Adopted by Council: Date r�,v-.._,� �S', 300�
'� Form Apprwed by City Attomey
1Q�QAdoption Cextifie by Council Secretary
g�, \ T � 1 By:
Approved by Mayox: Date ` J���
Appro�ed by Mayor for Submission to Council
By �_ i/N
By:
, DF DATE IlVITIATED ; GRE�EN SliL` ET No.:110651 �`'� ��,
Dept of Planning & Econ Develop 6/26/O1
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE: IM ATE IMTTAl1DATE
Tony Schertler 266-6593 � 1 DEPARTMENT DIR. � crrr counrcn.
MUST BE ON COUNCII. AGEIQDA BY (DATL� �IGN ? CTTY ATTORNEY 4 C1TY CLERK
NUMBER FINANCfALSERV DII2. _ FINANCL4LSERV/ACCTG
FOR 3 MAYOR(ORASST.) " CIVII.SERVICE - .
�' .� �� ROUTING COMMLSSION _ Other. Tony Schertler, PED
� _ ORDER
- TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAG _1_(CLIP ALL LOCATTONS FOR SIGNATORE)
,; ncriox tzEQ�s�n: Consider recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding Riverview Corridor transit
, alternatives and then adopt the a�tached resolution.
� RECObIMENDAITOYS: Approve (A) ot Reject (R) pERSONAI, SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING
QUESTIONS: NA
' _ A_ PLANNING C(JMMISSION 1. Has this person/finn ever worked under a contract for this departmen[?
. CI8 COMMiTTEE Yes Nu
CNII, SERtiICE COMMISSION 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
� 3. Does tl�is persoNfirtn possess a ski(1 no[ normally possessed by any cutren[ city employee?
— Yu No
� _ Expla�n all yes answers an separate sheet and attach to green sheet
�' INITIAII��OBLEM, ISSDE, OPPOR2IIIVITY (R'ho, What, Wheu, Where, Why): MCtI'O TCHRSkX 1185 Ii11C11YC(1 2ll 011V1LOIlTT10IIt31 1fl1PaCY
�' snidy of transit in the Riverview Corridor. The process is currently in the "Scoping Prase" wherein suggestions for
'�. transit alterna:ives 1re solicited. Public comments aze due ttr be ta?;en on July �1. It is appropriate and Cimely that
3�. the City shoiild comme.r.t on the Scoping work with specific suggestions for alternative routes and [echnologies.
;' nDVaxzacES iF nri�xovEV. The policy directives of the City may be incorporated into the environmental review
?�' process. Such action should be taken by 3uly 31, 2001
:».
� � �@`dTC�E �e9C?t2f
A�l� �� �. 2009
4� DISAAVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: NOIlO
�.:
^ nisanvnNTncES � roT nrrxovEn: The policy of the City is not ensured to be included into the deliberations on transit
'., solutions unless the City Council is clear about its intenY.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION: $ COST/REVEN!)E BUDGETED:
F[JNDING SOURCE: ACTIVITY N[L�vffiER:
FINANCIAL INFORifATION: (EXPLAI�
� [c�sna��oveior�������n�r�
�
Council File # a�—r��
Resolution #
Green Sheet # l Lc GS �.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
��
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
CITY
Presented By
Referred To
33
Committee: Date
RIVERVIEW CORRIDOR: RESPONSE TO PRELIMINARY
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) and
Administration (FTA) sponsored the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment :
1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and �
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of
in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon compietion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS",
Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS) should be developed f�
selected Metro Transit as the lead agency; and /
WORK
:ral Transit
(MIS), initiated in Fall,
funding to be used for a busway
opolitan Council declared that an
in the Riverview Corridor and
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Co cil passed Resolution 00-970, responding to the
"Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating t preferred alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corridor",
as well as declaring a desire to participate in subseq ent Riverview Corridor transportation pianning
processes; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiate an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with a Corridor
Management Committee, a Technical Adviso Committee and a Citizens Workgroup reviewing and making
recommendations on the EIS; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning ommission, following the decision by the Metropolitan Council
to pursue an Environmental impac tatement process, found that:
• The current Scoping Proce portion of the EIS seeks input on all reasonable alternatives;
• There is an alternative, no previously defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in
the "Riverview Corridor IS", that facuses BRT on West 7'" , East 7"', and Arcade Streets,
Phalen Boulevard, Ma land Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the foliowing
objectives are maxi ' ed:
a.
b,
c.
e.
�
Transit sta ' ns be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent neighborhoads
Riders be ithin walking distance (1/4 to'/z mile) of the stations
Transit I' ks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and
Mall of inerica to workers in the Riverview and Phafen Corridors, with the end points
in S" t Paul being the Shepard Davem area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
De 'gn and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment concepts of the
n ghborhoods and the City as described in the "City of Saint Paul Comprehensive
an" (analysis attached)
Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be accelerated using the
impetus of the transit investments
Increase use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan Council's
"Transportation Policy Plan"
Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
44
45 •
46
47
48
49 •
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
5'7
58
59
h. ' Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
This alternative defined by the Planning Commission should be treated as a"Baseline
Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts" criteria, such that t is "Baseline
Altemative", if selected, not require an Environmental Impact Statement to roceed with
implementation; and
The Minnesota Department of Transportation should pursue physical i rovements fhat
would divert through traffic from West 7�' Street to Shepard Road bet een the Mississippi
River and I-35E, regardless of disposition of the Environmental Im ct Statement process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul City uncil endorse the findings
and recommendations of the Saint Paul Planning Commission wi regard to the Riverview
Corridor EIS Scoping Process; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council forw ds the Planning Commission's findings
and recommendations to Metro Transit as the official po ion of the Cify regarding the EIS Scoping
Process.
Requested by Department
Plannin & Economic Develo �ment
♦
By:
Approved by Financial Services
By:
Adopted by-CO ci1
Adoption Ce ti£ied
By: —
Approve_ by Mayor:
� B y ° —
. DaCe�� Form Approved�by Attorne �
by Council Secretary /'�'S/ rf'/ �
� r��vvL i
By:
Date Approved by Mayor f r S�b 'ssion to Council
By: _
��'
interdepartmental Memorandum
CITY OF SAINi' PAUL
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
August 8, 2001
St. Paul City Council
Tony Schertler, Project Manager
Riverview Transit Corridor
Applyin� the principles the City has recommended, the following improvements to the
Riverview Corridor could be accomplished.
Assuming a budget of $44 Million.
I. New Buses - 20 buses to maintain 4 minute head ways
II. New Starions - 14 stations
III. Roadway Improvements:
IV. Contingency
Attachments:
M317��i1
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$24,000,000
$2,000,000
$44,000,000
8 � -b `i
� �:S ..�� l.� ��-
� _. .. O ' i `.
1 8
u� i fa��
� ��� ,�.�;��� .' :�
t1i :
�.;� �
�
I.. t.:
I .'"."
J *�_",:�":
�
/
+'w :' /
ru �a . � .
��`• �
i
4 �,�z _ .
A � �a I
�
.t �. �
i
4 �y... ; .
Cr:
T :
lCf �'�` 1 .':
y{ ; , �.
�� {..
SS
sa u
' �
.1;. ���� O ..
t�
� F 1 Z
� F �� �. ,
° r
Yu rL I t
� � ;;1. 3 O
�,..���� c; 4�
�,� � ; 7C
���,�� i �
�:_ �,� co
.��� �
t a
e
l E '�
80' R/V
11' il' i 11' 1':
4NE LANE LANE LAhE
O � 0
WITH PFRKING
�i
COST PER F00T= 5 602.92
COSTPERFOOT= S911d0
SECTI�N 7
SECTI�N 8
BRT ALTERNATIVES
TYPICAL SECTI�NS
DIAMOND �ANE DESIGN
V D.
�
LEFT
LANE
V
l � PtGk�y�Fi�..J i � l `�
BLV D.
� .. _�
W/ LEFT 7URNS W/❑ PARKING N � TE lOFT MINIMUM BOULEVARD VID
■ DESIGN ADT_>15,000 VPD__
r
7th Street
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Configuration Options
�
s1�C��� � ��J �cr �
—
�
� � (� �; ,� �R �
May 21, 2001
� MetrroTransit
�� R'rverview Corridor
ta�-8"�y
!/i�r7 nc
Characteristics
of B RT Systems
Consistent ltems:
Characteristics that may be
consistent along the BRT corridor
0
.
Bus ldentity
Signatu�e Shelters
Level Boarding
■ Platform Fare
Collection System
Variable Items:
o�-��y
Characteristics that may
vary along the BRT corridor
■ Exclusive Lanes
■ Station Amenities
- Signs
- Lighting
- Seating
- Travel lnformation
Displays
■ Signal Priority
■ Station Spacing
� MetrvTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
May 21, 2001
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Chatacteristics
7'^ S[reet BRT ConfigureUOn
vi47 m�
��t, - ��i�ti:ng Gonditions.
��
�,
. . ,.. . -.� , . .. . ..
. F1'_°-1�.�� . _
' _'. ' , . _ . . . ._ _ '. . '. �
�'_ -�
_��
��auY "'�
�
"_ ��=;
���
�°°^� �
�� t�.. —
���=:=
` " � 'c .; '��`�„ . ;; �°�% � •
� �� � �1�1j \ .
y S �/,
�i: \ � . 'o E,1>� � � .� -l'�
� �t�a'i1,: � ` �
�9� ��-' < �\� �� <b ,4 �.. •�. ` /� .
��t,�>��r..s+c�s��«+°l ;: `� �- v�`�e�4
A
4..�: . 'v++v-,-�-a••..---. ..�,..�:..' �� ... .�,...a,.�
/, t
C �' � �� a,«"} .. / �,' .�
\l
� �
�
�'•
�i ��
r �
E5j
�;,��—=+� i a �
zry , '.: � � _
,� _ -_
- '-_..
- <-?^.:
9 ���� _
�, � �
�� '��
/ / �'i . • �\
� `� ,, •i
o " ti w '- e `��.
/ r � .
L� Z u �"�� Q __ �..
..•.._ . _ 4 {Y�
�. @x � . it,." � ♦ �r,. d � �'a�'f. ... ��w �c{.1c�'��
�
�� ♦ � �• '� .� '� '
�'•�i. . �� . �- � ��
�� d�/! •�..o �,. r o : m,� �.� „ . `
� �,.,, f `t�. �A/.� .. '� \ .�
. �� .
/�
y �' � �...j�� •^ �., i � .l j -: � � �.
_ +v. 1 . $ _ s � �.�.. ?�' � r �`� �y'. :�:� .
.7/IMe4opolitan Council
�I io,��—.,.,.,,,,.., mn...a
I I� S
T xY>:
e1`�\
�'
p
L
Center PlatForms
� ContraflowBus Lanes / No Parking
/'��:
\ �
� �
�� ~�
n
F - �' 3 L /d �sY'a. � +�°-�\. 9 '
�'� �i`7� i'i' 1���,�1
� � � �� 1 �
46 r � �/ �� �1
v �
� , �
� `�:� . `
..: ' ..°i.
�
`
' s
�
ye�: � .
��- ``� 1
^4t
� � ' �
��3�.. �
y�Metrop Councll
��
O p t i o n
A-1
�
o �� �MehoTransit
o \ Riverview Corridor
o � -�i'i
Proposed a so FeQ1
Plan n�uuumuuuwun�
Option: B-1
Side PlaHorms �
Exclusive Bus Lanes / Parking Bays
BRVJ, InG
May 21, 2001 7'� Street BRT Configura6on
EnlstingSectlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii2i Feet
Pro osed Section o ,o zo Fee�
p i�iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
o�-�iy
P�opOSedSeCtion iiiiiiii�i'iiiiiiiiii�i `
Option: B-2
�MetroTransit Side Platforms / Ezclusive Bus Lanes ��
° �� Riverview Corridor Left-Tum Lane / No Parking eRw, Inc
May 27 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsting SecBon I I I I I I I I I I�1 I I I I I I I I I z l Fee�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan m�un�uuun�unuu
01-���
PrOp0.SedSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiiii
Option: 6-3
Side Platforms ��
� MetroTiansit � Exclusive Bus Lanes / No Parking
� Riverview Corridor �`"• �"`
May 21, 2001 7�^ Street BRT Configura[ion
Existin Section o ,o zoFee�
9 iiiiiiiiiiiiiii u iiii
Proposed o so FeP
Plan uuwmwuwunnn
o �� � Me�oTransit
� Riverview Corridw
�Ml'YSOfO{IfBR COLLIICII
June 4, 2007
6t-�IY
Proposed p sa Fee
Plan mimnuuinmmnu
Option: B-4
Side PlaHorms / Exclusive Bus Lanes
Exclusive Bicycle Lanes / No Parking
7'^ Street BRT Confgura6on
� Inc
F�dsting SecUon j � I I I 1 I I I I�1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I 21 Feet
P�OpoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
1 1��-0": 58•_0" I17
80._�..
o � -8�� �(
Pioposed
P!o osed SeCtlon o �o zo Fee� o so ree�
P iiiiiiiiii�,iii�iiiii Plan nnwuuuminnuw
Option: G1
O w,i��-r�� lt Side Platforms �
ivi Buses in Miz¢tl Traffic / Parking Bays
Riverview Corridor eaw, mG
May 2�, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Confguration
ExistingSectiOn iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fa "
�d,- so ,�., �
� ' so ._ o .. �
o�-��y
PropoSed o so Fee�
Plan nuunumnnnmuu
� MetroTransit
° �� Riverview Corridw
�nxet�oPOlitan councit
'7� ................,
May2�,200'f
Option: G2
Side PlaHorms/euses in Mixed Treffic
Left-Turn Lane / No Parking
7�" S[ree[ BR7 Configurafion
ViW M
ExistingSeCtion iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
P�op0.sedSeCf/on i:iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
i z-o°I ss-o� nz•=o
i ' 80. �.� , ��,
v�-�iy
� -
6'-0"
Existing Section
<. =:;
�...,
��;�
<��x . :� .
�.
r.
�
�
iJ
a 10 2oFeec
nii�iiiiiiiuiiiiii�
Proposed o so Fee�
Plan n�nu�unun�nuwu
� Option: G3 �
Side PlaHortns
�MetrroTransit Buses in Mized Traffic / No Parking �
o �� Rrv2rview Corridw May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BR7 Con6guretion
•17'-07 as'-o^ 'aT-o^,
� ' 80 �_��. �
PlOpOSedSBCt1011 °iiii�i�ii'iiiiiii�iiziFee�
ao� o°
P/opoSedSectfon i;iiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i
o � -�i�!
Option: D-1
Side Platform5/ Exclusive Bus Lanes �S
OM2tCOT1'allSlt � Parking Bays One Side
Riverview Corridor BF "" . �°`
May 21, 2001 7'^ Street BRT Configuration
Exlsttng SecUon � I I I I � � � � ��� � I � I � I I I 1 F¢¢I
Proposed a so Fee
Plan uiunuuwnuunun
0 � - �i �t
Option: D-2
Side Piatforms / Buses in Mixed Traffic �
�MetroTransit � Parking Bays One Side g�r,inc
F21V2NIBW COf(IdOf I May 21, 2DD7 7�^ Street BRT Conhguration
EXIstingSecUon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i F8e
P/opoSedSeCtlon iiiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiii�i Fee
Proposed o so Feet
Plan uuuu�muu�uunw
��
���-ri-.-i -i
� �����
j 1
� �:' �
` � • �
ti '_��4 .. ..-�
., - f ����..(. ' _ ..
.�/tMetropoHfaa C6uncit
'�!I'.'..ne..e_..=...n.,.r.n...,a
3
2. Section with BRT East of 1-35E
� MehnTransit
�� Riverview Corridor
, R �� -- — � . ,�
2. Exlsting Vew Easi of I-35E — Looking Northeast
June 78, 2001
o ,o z vao�
� � i i, i
Shepard Road
BRT Alignment Option '�
BRW, InG
Rivernew Alignment Options
. o �-�iy
1. Existing �ew @ Homer SVeet — Looking NoKheast
1. Section with BRT East of Homer Street i i � �� i � 'i ��, �, i� ��, 'i `a°,
-�
S: .
�yMe4opofiFatt Council
'L �:,
Opt�on
��.
� �\�� _ � ���
r.��. .� �
_ , I�
� .
o�..�►�
CI�I�Y Or" .�L1� Pf��.. 390 Ciry Hall Telephone: 65I-266-85I0
Norm Co[eman, Mayor IS West Kellagg Boulward Facsimile: 65I-228-SSI3
Samt Paul, MN55702
July 31, 2001
City Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council
320B City Ha11
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the Council;
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regarding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This acfion is particulazly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Comdor as a major transit corridor, primarily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the corridor be viewed in a regional
context, estending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
I recommend the Planning Commission action to you. A draft City Council Resolution is
enclosed.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
, � ��
orm Co eman, Mayor
�
DEPAR't'MENT OF PLANNING
&. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Brian 5weeney, Director
CITY OF SAIlVT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
1UTle LS, 2001
Mayor Norm Coleman
390 City Hali
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
25 West Fourth Sbeet
Saint P¢ul, MN SSIO2
RE: Planning Commission Action on Riverview Corridor
Deaz Mayor Coleman;
o��rty
Te[ephone: 65I-266-6565
Facsimile: 65]-228-326I
Enclosed is the Planning Commission packet regazding its action on June 22, 2001 on Riverview
Corridor transit improvements. This action is particularly timely because next month Metro
Transit will decide on the transit alternatives to be included in the EIS analysis.
The essence of the Planning Commission's action is to recommend to Metro Transit that an
additional transit alternative should be included in the EIS — one that establishes the Riverview
Corridor as a major transit corridor, primazily uses current City-controlled street right-of-way and
could begin implementation this Fall. In addition, it recommends that MnDOT continue to
analyze roadway improvements to divert through traffic off of West Seventh Street and on to
Shepard Road. Finally, the Commission recommends that the conidor be viewed in a regional
context, extending the full diagonal distance in the City from the Highway 5 bridge to Hillcrest
Shopping Center on the East Side.
Piease sign the attached letter to the City Council and send forwazd.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
��S�-
Tony Schertler
Department of Planning and Economic Development
c.c. Tom Eggum, Director, Department of Public Works
Brian Sweeney, Director, Department of Planning and Economic Development
�
v� �r��
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
f►le number o1-54
date June z2, Zooi
Riverview Corridor: Response to Preliminary Scoping Work
W HEREAS, the Saint Paui Pianning Commission acts as an advisory body to the Mayor
and City Council on municipal planning matters as required by the Land Planning Act,
including matters related to transportation and transit; and
W HEREAS, the Ramsey County Regional Raiiroad Authority (RCRRA)� w�th the
assistance of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Councii, Metro
Transit and City of Saint Paul, commissioned the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I,"
completed in 1998, which called for the development of a Major Investment Study (MIS};
and
W HEREAS, the RCRRA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sponsored the
Riverview Corridor MIS", initiated in Fall, 1998 and concluded in August, 2000; and
WHEREAS, in Spring, 2000 the Legislature approved $44 million of State funding to be
used for a busway in the Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the "Riverview Corridor MIS", the Metropolitan Council
de �„e r Rivervi w Corridor and T ansiEas the�le agency�and for transit
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2000 the Saint Paui City Councii passed Resolution 00-970,
responding to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and its alternatives, stating the preferred
alternative was #7 "BRT CPR Corrido�', as well as declaring a desire to participate in
subsequent Riverview Corridor transportation planning processes; and
moved byi
seconded by
in favor Unan_ 1 ��-
against_
G
�
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2001 the Metropolitan Council adopted a new -
"Transportation Policy Plan" stating that:
"Arterial Transit Corridors along selected high-volume streets [including West
7'" Street, East 7"' Street, Payne Avenue, Maryland Avenue and White Bear
Avenue] would receive the highest level of local bus service...These arteriais
wduid receive very frequent, 7-day, up-to-24-hour service'rf not afready provided.
There would be highly visible facilities at major stops...ln selected cases, limited-
stop bus routes may he added to complement frequent local routes -- for
exampie, Route 50 in coordination with Route 16 on University Avenue."
"Dedicated Transitways would provide a travel-time advantage over the singie-
occupant vehicle, improve transit service reliability and maximize the potential for
transit-oriented development and redevelopment" [Included in the listing of
potential transitways are West 7'" Street, and the Northeast Corridor from
downtown Saint Paul to downtown White Bear Lake.]; and
W HEREAS, in response to the "Riverview Corridor MIS" and the new regional
"Transportation Policy Plan", the Metropolitan Council directed Metro Transit to proceed
to develop an Environmental Impact Statement with the general understanding that
consideration within the EIS should not be limited to only those alternatives
inciuded in the MIS; and
WHEREAS, in April, 2001 Metro Transit initiated an EIS for the Riverview Corridor, with
a Corridor Management Committee, a 7echnical Advisory Committee and a Citizens
Workgroup reviewing and making recommendations on the EIS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Saint Paul Planning
Commission, fiollowing the decision by the Metropolitan Council to pursue an
Environmental Impact Statement process, finds that the EIS should not be bound
by the afternatives set out in the "Riverview Corridor MIS", and further finds fhat
the current Scoping Process seeks input on all reasonable alternatives; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TMAT there is an alfernative, not previous y u
defined in the "Riverview Corridor Study, Phase I" or in the "Riverview Corridor
MIS", that focuses BRT on West 7' , East 7"', and Arcade Streets, Phalen "
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue such that the following
objectives are maximized:
a. Transit stations be readily accessible to pedestrians from the adjacent
neighborhoods
b, Riders be within walking distance (t/4 to'h mile) of the stations
2
o �-Y��t
c. Transit tinks downtown Saint Paul, the Minneapolis/St. Paul Intemational
Airport and Mall of America to workers in the Riverview and Phalen -
Corridors, with the end points in Saint Paul being the Shepard Davem
area and Hilicrest Shopping Center
d. Design and specific location of stations conform to the redevelopment
concepts of the neighborhoods and the City as described in the "City of
Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan" (analysis attached)
e. Redevelopment in the Riverview and Phalen Corridors be acceferated
using the impetus of the tran`sit investments
{, (ncrease use of limited stop bus service as described in the Metropolitan
Council's "Transportation Policy Plan"
g. Seek the most cost-effective alternatives for new transit service
h. Ease the traffic on West 7th Street by diverting traffic onto Shepard Road;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the aiternative defined herein should be
treated as a"Baseline Alternative" under the provisions of the FTA's "New Starts"
criteria, such that this "Baseline Aiternative", if selected, an Environmental
Impact Statement is not necessary to proceed with implementation; and
BE I? FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the Minnesota Department of Transportation
should pursue physicai improvements that would divert through traffic from West
7' Street to Shepard Road between the Mississippi River and I-35E, regardless
of disposition of the Environmental Impact Statement process.
3
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNTNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELOP�NT
Brian Sweeney, Director
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Cn[eman, Mayor
zs wes: na�nh saeet
Saint Paul, MN 55102
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
June 26, 2001
Planning Commission
Allen I.ovejoy
Riverview Corridor Resolution
� (�d'1�
Telephone: 651-266-6700
Focsimile: 65I-22&3210
The Comprehensive Planning Committee is recommending adoption of the attached resolution
on the Riverview Conidor Environmentai Impact Statement (EIS). Also attached is a review of
the portions of the Comprehensive Plan that pertain to the Riverview Corridor.
There is a complex set of issues that prompt such action now. And the best way I could find to
describe them is through a series of questions. I am sure you will have some for the Commission
meeting as weil. If you are confused after reading the materials, please call me at 266-6576 - but
please do not all call at once!
Questions and Answers:
Planning Commission Resolution on the Riverview Corridor
I. What is the alternative referenced in the Resolution?
In May, staff presented a description of the altemative to the Riverview Citizens Workgroup.
The following aze some excerpts:
This alternative adopts the definition of Bus Rapid Transit as set out by the Federal Transit
Administration: "BRT combines the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses. It can
operate on exclusive transitways, HOV lanes, expressways, or ordinary streets." To acfiieve
these objectives, these principies are suggested:
Buses (rolling stock) - Commitment to state-of-the-art buses featuring low platform
boarding and hybrid power plants that reduce diesel emissions.
Transit Stations - Stations spaced so they aze within walking distance of the community
surrounding them, with real time information about buses en route, and with unique design
using distinctive colars, images and ongoing marketing.
�
Schedule (headways) - High frequency service during peak hours and good weekend
service. For example, buses every 5 minutes during peak commuting hours, every 10
minutes in midday, every 15 minutes in the evening, and every half-hour in the eazly morning
and late night. On weekends, frequency would be 15 minutes aII day and eazly evenings.
Route and alignment - This should be deterntined by the following considerations:
— Population density
— Potential for transit-oriented development
— Speed enhancement possibilities (e.g. signal preference, diamond lanes, dedicated
guideways, travel time reliability.
The Suggested Route: West 7�' Street fram Highway 5 bridge to downtown on diamond
lanes/mixed traffic, 5"` and 6�' Streets diamond lanes through downtown, East 7�' Street in
mixed traffic, Arcade Street in mixed traffic, Phalen Boulevazd on exclusive right-of-way,
Prosperity Avenue in mixed traffic, MaryIand Avenue in mixed tr�c, and White Beat
Avenue in mixed traffic. •
2. The Planning Commission/City Council declared a preferred atternative last Fall. Why
are we doing this again?
In October, 2000 both the Planning Commission and City Council adopted resolutions
responding to the "Riverview Corridor Major Investment Study." That study laid out a series
of seven altematives and the City was askec3 to declaze a preference among them: However,
since the Metropolitan Council initiated the ETS in April, 2001 the clear understanding has
been that the community need not be bound by only those seven altematives. We believe
there may be a better alternative than any previously defined.
3. What is the Planning Commission's official role in this EIS proces?
Unlike Ayd Mill Road or Phalen Boulevazd Road, the City is not the lead for this EIS —
Metro Transit is. Therefore, the City's official positions aze advisory to Metro Transit and
rhP �„ rnrvc anA arP ntit hinclin� Howev� Metro Transit Metropolitan Council _
MnDOT and the I.egislature will surely look closely at any official City position.
Specifically, the Planning Commission's role is to review planning actions for consistency
with Comprehensive Plan elements and advise the Mayor and City Council. That is why we
have attached a summary of Comprehensive Plan elements to the Resolution. The ResoIution
is intended to reflect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
4. Why take action now? Isn't the EIS process just beginning?
There are two basic reasons why action now is particularly important. First, the EIS process
is in the "Scoping Phase", a phase that seeks to define all reasonable alternatives. We believe
2
bi-�s�y
that the alternative described in the Resolution is one not previously considered, does a better
job of ineeting the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, should be considered
during the "Scoping Phase:'
Secondly, it is important that the Commission's cunent opinions on these matters be clarified
sooner rather than later.
5. Will this action preempt the citiZen review process? And if not, won't it at Zeast appear to
be?
This action will not preempt the citizen review process. The EIS process encourages
individuals, agencies and organizations to submit alternatives to the sponsoring agency, in
this case Metro Transit. As for appearing to preempt the process, the Resolution is cazefully
written so as not to exclusively endorse the new alternative at this time, but to put it forwazd
for consideration in the Scoping Phase. It could be that at some future date, the Planning
Commission and/or City Council may want to make this alYernative the preferred one of the
City.
6. What factors entered into forming the recommended alternative?
The factors are generally listed in the Resolution under the second "resolved." The primary
elements in this alternative that aze missing from all others is that it does not require an
exclusive, sepnrated lane on West 7"` Street, but rather uses signage and striping to reserve
the bus lane. This allows for some preferences for the bus (signal preference, rush hour bans
in some segments) without doing irreprable harm to current operations of West 7�' Street.
Furthermore, this alternative treats the corridor in a more regional context (Mall of America
to downtown White Bear Lake) running diagonally from the Mississippi River crossing at
Shepard Davern to the Hillcrest Shopping Center. And, it replicates the service plan that was
approved for the Northeast Corridor by Metro Transit more than five years ago — limited stop
service to Maplewood Mall from downtown on East 7`� Street, Arcade Street, Phalen
Boulevard, Maryland Avenue and White Bear Avenue. Finally, the route does the best job at
encouraging transit-oriented redevelopment as detailed in the Citywide elements and Small
Area Plans of the Comprehensive Plan
7. What happens if this alternative is not seleeted by the Metropolitan Council/Melro
Transit? By doing this now, haven't we taken our voice out of alternative preference
diseussions farther down the Zine?
Technically, all we aze doing at this point is suggesting an alternative approach to all others
previously suggested. If by some chance, the alternative is not included in the Environmental
Impact Statement analysis, the Commission may choose to recommend it as the preferred
altemative during the EIS public hearing phase. Or, the Commission may decide to choose a
preference among those altematives that remain.
�
8. What is a"baseline alternative" and why is that definition imporfant?
A"baseline altemative" is a relatively new term used by the Federal Transit Administration,
and includes all non-exclusive right-of-way options (e.g. all but exclusive Busway and LRT)
that aze defined in the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan. That is why the
Transportation Policy Plan is quoted in the Resolution. Staff believes that the altemative
outlined in the Resolution fits the definition of "Arterial Transit Corridors" and therefore, is a
"baseline altemative."
The significance of this definition is that "baseline alternatives" do not constitute FTA "New
Starts" and, therefore, are not required to have an EIS completed in order to proceed. As a
result, if this alternative is selected, this project potentialiy could proceed later this Fall. Of
course, the City and Metro Transit would want to continue tY�e public input as the project
proceeds, but it would not require t1�e time and expense of a full EIS process.
At the same time, proceeding in this manner would not allow for Yhe project to seek FTA
funding. However, we believe the likely capital costs of this altemative could fit within the
$44 million to $50 miIlion range.
9. What are the factors related to diverting through traffic off of West 7"` Street?
When the Major Investment Strategy was being prepazed in 1999 and 2000 neighbors along
the Corridor voiced concerns that unwanted through traffic was creating congestion and
higher speeds. The concepts of having walkable mixed use developments and pedestrian
amenities along West 7�' Street would be compromised by the existing volume and speed of
traffic.
As a possible partial remedy to the situation, it has been proposed that traffic be diverted to
Shepard Road from West 7�' Street between I-35E and Mississippi River Boulevazd. This is
the segment where through traffic seems to be the worst. Two new connections (at the very
southwest end of West 7�' Street and at I-35E and Shepazd Road) would have to be developed
t�t�2f•-E�ffe1�g��'� tnhP�lrv d 4
Cleazly, there are important environmental, engineering and cost issues that need further
study, so the Resolution recommends such study proceed irrespective of the alternative
selected in the Riverview Corridor.
0
o►-P►y
City Plans and the Riverview Corridor
Compiled June, 2001
Introduction:
The Riverview Transit Corridor (as defined for the current EIS work) stretches from the Trunk
Highway 5 bridge across the Mississippi River at Fort Snelling northeast through downtown and
to East 7�' Street at the Earl5treet bridge. Probably more useful is to understand this conidor
segment within the context of a transit corridor that starts at the Mall of America, through the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, along West 7`" and East 7�' Streets then north through
Maplewood to downtown White Bear L,ake. Within this broader corridor: there are three of the
five lazgest employment centers in the Metro Area (MOA, MSP and downtown St. Paul}; it
interfaces with no less than 8 neighborhood redevelopment azeas; and it has potential for great
interconnections with the Central Transit Corridor and Metro Transit bus services.
Within the context of Riverview Corridor transit investments, it is important to understand the
policy directives of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. However, due to the size and length of
the Corridor there are at least 10 Plan elements that pertain to transportation and redevelopment
issues. The following excerpts aze, first, from citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan and
second, from Small Area Plans within the Conidor.
Citywide Elements:
Land Use Plan: We begin with the Land Use Plan because it "...is the "floor plan" for the City...
[which acts to] encourage private investment in the city and to guide public investment within a
framework that enhances existing communities and the natura] environment "
Two of the four Strategies for the Plan are relevant here:
Strategy 2: Neighborhoods ad Urban Villages whereby each neighborhood should have a
range of housing types, should have transportation altematives to the automobile, and
shouid preserve streetcar era commercial strips. Specifically, this Strategy designates
"Pedestrian Neighborhood Commercial Centers" including West 7"' at Randolph Avenue,
West 7�' between Grand/Ramsey and Kellogg Boulevazd, East 7�' at Arcade and Maryland
Avenue at Prosperity Avenue. In addition, "Potential Housing Development Site"
designations include: Shepazd Davern Gateway, Koch/Mobile site, and Phalen Village.
Finally, "Anchoring Tnstitutions and Employers" (which aze central to the success of
transit} designated in the Plan include: Saint Paul School District Headquarters, United
and Children's Hospital, RiverCentre/Science Museum of Minnesota entertainment
center, downtown business core, Metropolitan State University, and 3M.
Strategy 3: Corridors for Growth whereby redevelopment efforts over the next 20
years should focus on five corridors, inciuding the Riverview Corridor (aka `Vest
Seventh and Phalen Corridors). The conidors include many lazge redevelopment sites
that can link new housing, jobs and transportation. New urban housing near transit
�
services will help support neighborhood business centers as weil. Corridor planning and
redevelopment seeks to work with community and business groups towazd a better
integrafion of business and industriai job creation, housing development and overall
neighborhood improvement.
The Plan notes the importance of Ramsey County's designation of the West Seventh
Corridor as one of two priority corridors for public transportation improvements.
The Corridor is "L.ocated on a�aad terrace between the river valley and the upper bluffs
[and is a] "thin" strip of neighborhoods" with high potential for residential development.
"A primary goal of redevelopment planning for the Riverview Conidor is transit-oriented
development...Any major transit developments within the Riverview corridor should be
incorporated into the existing residentiai, commercial and environmental character of the
corridor. In particular, physical changes should respect and complement natural
amenities in the corridor, such as Crosby Park, Hidden Falls Pazk and the Mississippi
River Boulevazd Pazk and should avoid unnecessary intrusion."
On the East Side, the Phalen Conidor is listed as "a model for neighborhood
revitalization work [due to its] community partnership among residents, businesses,
service agencies and different levels of government: '"The City will support the
strengthening of the urban village chazacteristics...by making good connections
(pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, as well as vehicles) between the corridor and
neighborhoods. As an emerging major employment center, good access by public transit
is a high priority..: '
Transportation Policv Plan: The Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is a comprehensive set of
policies subsumed under one of three strategies: `1) Travel and System Management: A System
that Works Technically'; `2) Neighborhood Quality & Economic Development: A System that
Works for the Community'; and `3) Travel Mode Choice: A System that Works for the
Individual'.
Generalty, the transit recommendations are in the third strategy: `Travel Mode Choice'.
The overriding abjective is to: "Work with regional transit agencies to recapture
e transiY-de endent b matching transit ser�7ce with travel
need." Echoing the Land.Use Plan, the TPP notes that "...uansit compiements ur an
neighborhood development pattems that support safe and cohesive communities and can
spur economic growth." Among the policies of the Plan are:
• Support of a significant, long-term commitment by the State to reinvest in the
regional transit system...
• Support of adequate funding of both the bus system and LRT...
• Support for redesign of the bus system to provide excellent service along
major corridors (limited stop "spines") and better intra- and infer-
neighborIiood`service... _._ ,. _ _ - _.
• Promote the focns of reverse commuting services on major suburban employers
and city neighborhoods with high unemployment...
2
o►-��y
• Support the Central Corridor...as the top priority for development of transitways —
busways and/or LRT — in the region.
• Forward Saint Paul interests in economic development, support of neighborhoods,
and serious improvement of the bus service in future regional transitway
pianning..."
• West 7�' Street is designated as an "A" Minor Arterial (streets that are main access
routes to freeways for people beginning or ending their trip within Saint Paul, and
are main access routes to employment centers).
• Shepard Road is designated as a"B" Minor Arterial (streets that provide access
from neighborhoods to "A" Minor Arterials and freeways) from Mississippi River
Boulevard to I-35E. From I-35E to downtown Shepard Road is designated as a
Principal Arterial (roads - including freeways - that are on the metropolitan
highway system). Shepard Road's west end designatio� recognizes that the
bulk of through traffic uses 7 Street from the Hwy 5 bridge to I-35E.
In summary, the Land Use Plan and Transportation Poticy Plan sz�pport the close relationship
between transit invesdments and neighborhood redevelopment. Further, there is emphasis on
corridor investments, both in terms of transit inveslments and rzeighborhood redevelopment.
Third, there is a recognition of the importance of access lo transit by walking, suggesting that
the location of redevelopment activities and transit stops must be in close proximity to be
successful. And finally, the TPP Transit Corridor map shows the Riverview Corridor using
West 7"` Street.
Small Area Plans/Corridor Plans
Smail Area Plans and Conidor Plans have well-defined geographic foci, wherein the scope of
inquiry is set by a combination of residential, business and citywide interests. These planning
processes generally use an interdisciplinary approach which focuses on the practicality of
implementation as well as mindful of the broader aspirations of the neighborhood. However,
within the context of adopted plans, smali area and corridor plans must be in concert with the
broader policies of citywide elements of the Comprehensive Plan (discussed above).
But beyond that provision, there is substantial latitude in the scope and recommendations of
these plans.
We begin at the southwest end of the Corridor and work northeastward.
Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan: The "Small Area Plan covers a broad area, which
has been addressed as several specific plan araas as follows:
• the Gateway area, where the Hwy 5 bridge crosses the Mississippi River into St. Paul;
• the major West Seventh Street and Shepard Road conidors;
• the redevelopment of existing industrial properties around Davern and Shepard; and
• the development of new housing within existing residential areas.
��
"The plan envisions the rediscovery of the resources of this unique area:
• Shepard Road as a river road paskway, offering scenic views and access to a restored
natural environment;
• West Seventh Street as Fort Road, lined with mixed-use retail/residential buildings
inviting for strolling or shopping;
• new high gualiiy development along Davem and Shepard Road accommodating mixed
use commercial, residential, hotel and conference facilities along park like streets; and
• the redevelopment of existing residential azeas to create urban vilZages and "green"
streets and commons with over 1000 new units of housing."
The plan focuses mixed-use buiidings lining 7`" Street and street improvements that "calm"
traffic. Sibley Piaza is designated as an ideallocation for transit connections. "...improvements
could include a new pedestrian plaza with well designed bus shelters, lighting and landscaping,
and a newsstand or coffee shop."
"Shepazd Road is also envisioned in reconfigured form, as an extension of the Mississippi River
Road with the winding curves, traditional lighting and the pedestrian amenities of a true
parkway..: ' and design chazacteristics that allow easy pedestrian access from the new
development to amenities along the river bluffs.
The focus of major redevelopment is on the sites along Shepazd and Davern "...as a mixed-use
district combining commercial, hospitality and possibly higher density housing."
In summary, the Shepard Davern Gateway Small Area Plan envisions transit on West 7"` with
specific accommodations for transit and mixed-use redevelopment found in typical transit-
oriented development. For Shepard Road it envisions a primary street serving hotels and
other high intensily uses at the west end and a slower-speed parkway with pedestrian crossings
to the river bluffs.
The Brewery/Ran-View neighborhood ]ies between West
7`" Street and the Mississippi River, bounded on e no y raz roa rac s an 7��h�'bp'
the Crosby Lake Business Pazk and I-35E. The Plan's vision is to create "...a safe and attractive
mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhood..: ' The Plan calls for new neighborhood-scale
commerciaUoffice on West 7`" Street, similaz to that of the surrounding commercial azeas.
Although there is the objective of creating commercial pazking behind or under new buildings,
there is a recognition that this could be di�cult. Redevelopment should be pedestrian-oriented
and heaviIy landscaped. As for Shepazd Road, the Plan envisions improved pedestrian access to
the river bluffs across Shepazd.
In summary, the Brewery/Ran-View Small Area Plan calls for transit-oriented type
redevelopment along West 7` with major, intensified redevelopment of the Koch-Mobile site as
primarily housing and mixed residential-commercial use on the Randolph Industrial site.
CI
di-t�`�
Seven Corners Gatewav Urban Desi�n Plan: The Plan area includes a rich variety of land uses
and challenging pazking issues. It covers a 10-block area bounded by Kellogg Boulevazd, I-35E
Pazkway, Grand Avenue and Exchange Street. Due to the development of the
entertainmenUcultural venues along Kellogg Boulevazd, this neighborhood is beginning to
experience substantial redevelopment pressure. The Plan is framed azound three fundamental
urban village components: the Medical Campus; the Main Street Commercial Corridor; and
Irvine Park neighborhood, and includes recommendations relating to transportation.
The Plan envisions major redevelopment, particularly south of West 7"' Street, using new
urbanism cancepts of interior-block parking structures, mixed uses, pedestrian orientation, close
relationships between land uses and transit accommodations and intensificatian of land uses
generally.
Specifically related to transit, the Plan states that:
• "Transit routes should continue to focas on West Seventh Street as the dominant transit
corridor through the Gateway" ,
• The Smith Avenue Transit Hub development "...should re-open 5mith Avenue to connect
with Fifth Street."
• "Transit stops should be strategically placed to encourage and celebrate transit use."
In summary, the Seven Corners Gateway Urban Design Plan views transit as integral to the
design and function of the "main street" concept along West 7` Street. Trmtsit stop Zocations
are important in supporting the pedestrian realm and redevelapment.
Phalen VillaEe Small Area Plan: The Plan area is centered on Prosperity and Maryland and
includes the old Phalen Shopping Center (now reclaimed Ames Lake), six residential blocks to
the south, and the blocks north of Maryland from Lake Phalen to Herbert. The general goal of
the Plan is to transform the area from one that is a blighting influence harmful to property values
into a safe, stable, attractive community center that meets neighborhood needs and is an asset to
the East Side.
Much has already happened in this area including demolishment of the Phalen Shopping Center,
filled in with a wetland, health care facility and services at Prosperity and Maryland, new senior
housing, and start of construction of the state headquarters for the Criminai Bureau of
Apprehension. The redevelopment along Maryland has been with enhanced transit in mind. The
Plan calls for "...express bus service connecting Phalen Village to downtown St Paul, with
possible stops serving the 3M1Seeger Squaze, Metro State University and Lafayette Puk areas..."
Such "express bus service can provide for improved transit service and can be connected to
major activity nodes in the conidor (Phalen Corridor)." The service "can and should be provided
quickly, economically and effectively with buses."
1�
In summary, the Phalen Village Small Area Plan envisions a new urban village focused on
Maryland with high amenities of wetlands and the Phalen Regional Park, with transit
intersecting the core area. The limited-stop bus service to downtown suggests expanded
service, particularly in the peak hour.
White Bear Avenue Small Area Ptan: The Plan's azea encompasses one biock either side of
White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur on the north to I-94 on the south. The Plan's goal is to
make the Avenue "...a safer, more attractive and inviting street for residents, businesses,
shoppers, and motorists and a greater asset to the neighborhood through which it runs" In
particulaz, the Plan focuses on redevelopment options for the Hillcrest Shopping area at the north
end of the study area. Although there is a focus on street reconfiguration, the Plan does make
transit recommendations including the need to improve transit service atong the Avenue that will
help maintain its "main street" function. The community will work with Metro Transit to
improve the major transit stops at Maryland and the HillcresT hub at Larpenteur.
The Redevelopment Plan for Hillcrest Village adopts the policies of the Land Use Plan that relate
to transit development including a focus on smaller, infill development with new housing neaz
bus service. In addition, the Plan endorses pedestrian-scale, walkable neighborhood commercial
azeas.
In summary, the White BearAvenue Small Area Plan echos the call for transit-oriented
development, increased transit service and major stops/stations.
Unaer Landin2 Master Plan
Historic Lowertown Small Area Plan
North Ouadrant Master Plan
Lower Davton's Bluff Small Area Plan
Phalen Corridor Develonment StraYegy
Railroad Island Small Area Plan
These plans do not specifically relate their redevelopment objectives to e provision o region �`�
transit or are not focused on the transit corridor. In most instances this is a result of scope and
focus rather than a rejection of the need for uansit.
C�