The URL can be used to link to this page

96-274Q � � � � �!� � Presented By Referred To Council File # �� Green Sheet # � J��1Z RESOLUTION SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 13 Committee: Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WHEREAS, development of Phalen Boulevazd has been an objective of the CiTy of Saint Paul since 1979; and WHEREAS, in November 1994, the City initiated an Environmental Impact Statement for proposed Phalen Boulevard and requested Planning Commission review and comment; and WHEREAS, in November 1994, the Planning Commission, to provide for representation of potentially affected neighborhoods and interests in the EIS preparation process, convened the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, comprising residential, commercial, institutional and public interests, to assist the staff and consultant during the scoping and prepazation of the EIS; and WHEREAS, the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force has been meeting since February 1995; and WI3EREAS, the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force has now completed its work on the Scoping Phase of the EIS and is recommending alternatives far further study in the EIS; and WIIEREAS, the document entitled, 'Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document," describes the purpose, goals and need for the project, the alternatives development process and outcome, the social, economic and environmental issues to be studied in the EIS, public and agency involvement, and governmental permits and approvals, and presents the Task Force scoping recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Environmentai Quality Board Rules (Chapter 4410.2100, Subpart 3) require that a public meeting be held during the Scoping public comment period and prior to the Scoping Decision; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council release the "Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" for public comment and set April 30, 1996 as the date for a public meeting on the document; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council hereby releases the °°Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" for public comment; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ciry Council sets April 25, 1996 as the date for a joint Planning Commission/City Council public meeting on the "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document". a �-�.�� I��°�L Requested by Department o£: By: Pla in & Ec mic D velo ment By : G�_ Form Approved by City Attorney By: � /�- //� Approve Mayor for Submission to Approved y Mayor: Date �! Counci G BY= l��i�lb� (III' ARf/1 � g �i i � � r . - Adoption Certified by Council Secretary �e a�� J DEPARTMENT/OFFIGE/COUNCIL DATE INITIATED N� 3 3 0 4 2 • PED - Planning 3/5/96 GREEN SH T __ __ CANTACi PERSON & PHONE INITIA INRIAVDATE �OEPARTMENTOIFECTOfl OCfiYCOUNCIL Nancy Frick - 66554 "��N �aTVnrronNEV ,3_ �crtrc�aK MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA BY (DATE) MUYBER iOP O BUDGET DIRECTOR O FlN. & MGT. SEHVICES Dlq. ROUi1NG 3/20/96 ONDER �MpVOR(ORASSISTANT) QDiv-Mar. TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) ACTION REQUE5TED: Adopt resolution releasing "Phalen Boulevard Sco�+ing Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" for public comment and setting April ZSy, 1996, as the date for a joint Planning Commission/City Council public meeting on the document. RECOMMENDA710NS: Approve (A) or peject (R) pER50NAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: A PLANNING CAMMISSION _ CIVIL SEfiVICE COMMISSION �� Has ihis persoNfirm ever worked under a conhac[ for this depar[ment? - _ CIB CAMMITfEE _ YES NO A �� F ' 2. Has this person�rtn ever been a ciry employee? — — YES NO _ OISTRICT COUR7 _ 3. Does Mis pZfSOndirm ossess a skill not normall p y possessed by any curtent ciry employee? SUPPORTSWHICHCOUNCILOBJECTIVE7 YES NO Explain all yes answers on saparete sheet and attaeh to green sheet INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE. OPPORTUNIN (Who, What, When, Whare. Why). In November 1994, the Administration initiated the Phalen Boulevard Environmente.l Impact Statement (EIS), requesting Planning Commission review and comment. _Tn Fear�u<-� 1a95, the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, convened by the Commission, began work, witl: t::e City/consultant project team, on the Scoping Phase of the EIS. The task force has complete its Scoping study and made its recommendations for further analysis in a Scoping Document. The City must release the document for public review, hold a public meeting and make a final Scoping Decision before proceeding. ADVANTAGES IF APPflOVEO: The Phalen Boulevard EIS process ��ill continue. The City will meet the requirements of the Minnesota Environmental Oualitp Board regarding review of impacts of major road projects. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: � None ��A€� 06 l9°6 �� '�� DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: The Phalen Boulevard EIS process will not proceed. 6a�� °� �' � ,� x� l�{:. b m t4w�s TOTAL AMOUNT OFTFiANSACTION S N�A COS7/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO FUNDIfdG SOURCE ACTIVI7Y NUMBER FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (E%PLAIN) �b��y city of sain# paui pianning commission resolution file number 96-10 (�te March 8, 1996 REVISED RESOLUTION RECOMNIENDING RELEASE OF PHALEN BOULEVARD SCOPING DOCUMENT AND DRAFT SCOPING DECISION DOCUMENT WHEREAS, in November 1994, the City uritiated an Environmental Impact Statement far proposed Phalen Boulevard and requested Planning Commission review and comment; and WHEREAS, in November 1994, the Planning Commission, to provide for representation of potentially affected neighborhoods and interests in the EIS preparation process, convened the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, finally comprising 15 residential, commercial or institutional interests, to assist the staff and consultant during the scoping and preparation of the EIS; and WHEREAS, the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force has been meeting since February 1995; and WHEREAS, the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force has now completed its work on the Scoping Phase of the EIS and is recommending alternatives for further study in the EIS; and WHEREAS, the document entitled, "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document," describes the purpose, goals and need for the project, the alternauves development process and outcome, the social, economic and environmental issues to be studied in the EIS, public and agency involvement, and governmental permits and approvals, and presents the Task Force scoping recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Environmental Qualiry Board Rules (Chapter 4410.2100, Subpart 3) require that a public meeting be held during the Scoping public comment period and prior to the Scoping Decision; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul Planning Commission hereby recomends to the Saint Paul City Council that the "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" be released for public comment; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission recommends April 30, 1996 as the date for a joint Planning Commission/Ciry Council public meeting on the "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document". moved by �ddoX secor�ded by in favor Unanimous against DEPARTMEN'C OF PI.ANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CTTY OF SAII�]'f PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor March 8, 1996 TO: FROM: RE: BACKGROUND Mayor Norm Coleman Saint Paul City Council Ken Ford Ysr Divisiors ofP7anning 25 Wesi Fourih Sheet Saint Paul, MN Si102 �� Z`►'� Telephone: 612-266-6565 Facrimile� 6l2-2283314 Release of the "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" for Public Comment In November 1994, the Administration initiated the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Phalen Boulevard and asked the Saint Paul Planning Commission for its review and comment. The Planning Commission convened the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force to advise the City upon the preparation of the EIS. The task force comprises representatives from Districts 2, 4, 5, and 6, the Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association, Payne-Arcade Business Association, East Side Area Business Association, Phalen Village Business Association, East Seventh Business Communiry, East Side Neighborhood Development Company, North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation, Ramsey County Regional Rail Authoriry, Saint Paul Parks Commission, and the Bicycle Advisory Board, as well as staff participants from Minnesota Department of Transportation, Ramsey County Public Works, Saint Paul Parks Division, and the Saint Paul Port Authority. (The District 7 Planning Council was invited to participate, but has not to date, though it receives all materials.) Planning Commissioner Gladys Morton chairs the Task Force; Paul Haugen from Stroh Brewery is the co-chair. The staff team includes PED and Public Works, as well as consultants. Since beginning its work in February 1995, the task force has met eleven tunes, held four tours of the project area, and sponsored a well-attended communiry meeting on its preliminary recommendations. The work of the task force has included • development of a wide range of alternatives and issues • development of project goals • review of technical analyses and recommendations • screening of alternauves against project goals • preparation of scoping recommendations in draft document form for consideration by the City � Mayor Coleman and Saint Paul Ciry Council March 8, 1996 Page Two THE PfIALEN BOULEVARD SCOPING DOCUMENT AND DRAF1' SCOPING DECLSION DOCUMENT - TASK FORCE RECOD�IlI�IENDATION The enclosed Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document presents the consensus of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force regarding the project goals, and the alternafives and social, economic and environmental issues recommended for analysis in the EIS. Alternatives Three types of alternatives must be studied in the EIS. 1. "No-Build": taking no action beyond already planned transportation unprovements 2. "TSM": implementing transportation system management measures, such as street system upgrades, minor street widening, ntrning lanes at intersections, signal optimization, upgraded transit stops, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc., rather than building Phalen Boulevard 3. "Build": building Phalen Boulevard, comparing a number of different road alignment alternatives The project area, which extends from I-35E to Johnson Parkway, is divided into three segments for purposes of presenting the "Build" alternatives. The boundary between the Western and Central segments is Burr Street; the boundary between the Central and Fastern segments is Earl Street. In general, any alternative within a segment can be connected with any altemative in an adjoining segment. The table below lists the recommended "Build" alternatives by project area segment. PROJECT AREA SEGMENTS Western Segment Central Segment Eastern Segment W-1. Pennsylvania f Gl. Union Pacific Freewav Connection � Route ALTERNATIVES W-2. Cayuga Freeway Connecuon C-4. Upper Middle Route C-5. North B2uff Route E-i. Phalen Village Connection gb-Z.1� Mayor Coleman and Saint Paul City Council March 8, 1996 Page Three Issues The EIS must address each of the following issues. The scoping report describes the degree of concem for each issue and, on that basis, recommends the ]eve] of analysis and study methodology for each. 1. Issues of major concem, requiring in-depth study • Bicycle and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic • Visual qualiry • Water quality 2. Issue of moderate concern, requiring analysis • Air quality • Construction activities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy • Erosion control and excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetauon • Wetlands 3. Issues included by Iaw, but not requiring detailed analysis • Federal and/or state-designated critical areas • Stream modification • Farmland • WIld and scenic rivers At its March 8, 1996 meeting, the Ptanning Commission will recommend that the enclosed "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" be released for public comment and that April 30, 1996 be set as the date for a joint Planning Commission/City Counci] public meeting on the docwnent. ��:�� Mayor Coleman and Saint Pau1 Ciry Council Mazch 8, 1996 Page Four T`sE N�r S'rEr The next step is for tfie City Council to release the document for pubiic comment and set the pubiic meeting date. Council action is scheduled for March 20, 1996. Based upon this schedule and state-required notice procedures, the official hearing period will likely conclude May 8, 1996. Foliowing task force and staff consideration of comments, a Final Scoping Decision wili be forwarded ttu�ough the Pl�nning Commission to the Mayor and City Council. The EIS can begin following adoptian of the Final Scoping Decision by the Ciry Council. RECO�IltitENDATTON It is recommended that the Saint Paul City Council release the document entitled, "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document" for public comment and set April 30, 1996 as the date far a public meering on the document. A resolution is attached. cc: Larry Buegler Stacy Becker Attachments G � � � � � � �� `'� Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Prepared for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Bartnn-Aschman Associates Genereux Research The 106 Group Ltd. Malcolm Pirnie ��-a��G � Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants Co-Chairs Gladys Morton Paul Haugen Representatives Toni Kaspazek Donavan Cummings Greg Copeland Martha McBride Bernie Baumann John Kempe Susan Omoto Arnie Eliason Karen Swenson Cliff Cazey Jill Danner Jim sartol John Finley Gary Spray Aitemates AI Oertwig LaVonne Kirscher Bob Braatz Paul Gilliland Angela DuPaul Richard Newmark Liaison Staff John Wirka David Stokes Kathy DeSpiegelaere Mazc Gcess Pro�ect Team Nancy Frick Allen Lovejoy Michael Klassen Garneth Peterson David Warner Deborah Porter John Genereux From Saint Paul Planxung Commission East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) District 2 Coinmunity Councfl Dayton s Bluff Center for Civic Life District 5 Planning Council District 6 Planning Council East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) Payne Arcade Area Business Association (PABA) East Seventh Business Community Phalen Village Business Association (PVBA) North East Neighborhoods Development Corpora6on (NENDC) Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association {USHNA) Saint Paul Parks Commission Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) East Side Neighborhood Development Company (ESNDC) District 5 Planning Council I3istrict 6 Planning Council Phalen Village Business Association (PVBA) North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation (NENDC) Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood A ssociation (USHNA) Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Division Saint Paul Port Authority Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA), Public Works Minnesota Department of Transpoftation Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED) Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED} Saint Paal Public Works Saint Paul Public Works Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. Genereux Research (Thomas Dale/District 7 Planning Council is named as an organization to pazticipate in the task � force; no representative has been submitted to date.) � �� y � � �� ,� � � � qb-�� City of Saint Paul Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Phalen Boulevard I-35E to Johnson Parkway Saint Paul, Minnesota Prepared by: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Barton Aschman Associates, lnc. Genereux Research 106 Group, Ltd. Malco/m Pirnie, /nc. March 8, 1996 � � � � � � ��, � � � ;� � � ,� � � � :� ;� � �J �i� - ��+� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Table of Contents Pa e Table of Contents .............................................................i Figures i�i Tables ..................................................................... iv Appendices ................................................................. v EXECUT4VE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................... Purpose ofthe Scoping Document ............................................. Project Description .......................................................... PublicInvolvement ......................................................... ProjectSchedule ............................................................ Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Costand Fund Source ....................................................... 6 6 6 9 9 10 11 2. PURPOSE, GOALS, AND NEED FOR PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Phalen Corridor Initiative .................................................... 12 Project ............................................................... 13 Goals DevelopmentPxocess .................................................. 13 3. ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Overview .................................................................. lb Universe of "Build" Alternatives .............................................. 17 Screening Process ........................................................... 21 Screening Based on Project Goals ....................................... 21 Screening Based on Logic .............................................. 23 Screening Based on Technical Analysis .................................. 24 Screening Based on PublicInformation Meeting Feedback ................. 24 Alternatives Selected for Analysis in EIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Western Segment - I-35E to Burr Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection ......................... 25 W-2: Cayuga Freeway Connection .............................. 25 Central Segment - Burr Street to Earl Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 C-1: Union Pacific (old CNW) Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 C-4: Upper Middle Route ...................................... 26 C-5: North Biuff Route ......................................... 26 Eastem Segment - Earl Street to Johnson Parkway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 E-1: Phalen Village Connection ................................. 27 4. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 IssuesIdentification Process .................................................. 34 Issues Proposed To Be Studied in EIS .......................................... 34 Issues Of Major Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Bicycle and Pedestrian Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Economic ..................................................... 36 f� City of Saint Paul Page i � � �� Hazardous Materials, Contaminated Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Historicaland Archaeological Resouices .......................... 38 Land Use ..................................................... 39 Noise ........................................................ 40 Pazksand Recreational Areas .................................... 40 Right-of-Way Acquisition and Relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Social ........................................................ 41 Traffic ........................................................ 43 Visual Quality ................................................. 44 Water Quality ................................................. 45 Issues Of Moderate Concem, Requiring Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Air Quality ................................................... 45 Construction Activities ......................................... 45 Endangered and Threatened Species ............................. 46 Energy Impacts ................................................ 47 Erosion Controland Excess Material ............................. 47 Fish and Wildlife .............................................. 47 Floodpiains ................................................... 48 Handicapped Accessibility ...................................... 48 Transit ....................................................... 48 Vegetation .................................................... 49 Wetlands ..................................................... 50 Issues Not Requiring Detailed Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Federal and/or State-Designated Crirical Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Farmlands .................................................... 50 Stream Modification ........................................... 51 Wild and Scenic Rivers ......................................... 51 5. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVHMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 � Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force :::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. 52 Citizen Participation Program . . 53 Public Agency Coordinafion .................................................. 54 � 6. GOVERNMENTAI PERMI7S AND APPROVALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 � �\ �� -a.�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Table of Contents, cont ... 7. DRAFT SCOPING DECISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Task Force Scoping Recommendation ......................................... 58 Altematives To Be Studiedin the EIS .......................................... 58 Alternatives Considered and Re}ected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Issues To Be Studiedin the EIS ................ .. .. 59 Issues Determined to be Not Significant in this Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 � City of Saint Paul Page ii � � �� ,� �� ,. �' � �� 7' �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft S coping Decision Document Fiqures Figure'i Location Map Figure 2 Project Area Figure 3 Coriidor Segments Figure 4 Wide Range of Alternatives Figure 5 Alternative W-1, Pennsylvania Freeway Connection Figure 6 Alternative W-2, New Cayuga Freeway Connection Figure 7 Alternative Gl, Union Pacific (old CNW} Route) Figure 8 Alternative C-4, Upper Middle Route Figure 9 Alternative C-5, North Bluff Route Figure 10 Alternarive E-1, Phalen Village Connection Paae 2 0 18 � ►��'•3 29 30 31 32 33 � City of Saint Paul Page iii I � � � � � � � � �� !Y � �/ � ��. � � � � G�-�.�y Phalen Boulevard 5coping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Tabfes Tabte 1 Build Altemative Alignment Options Table 2 Project Goal Summary City of Saint Paul Paae 3 15 Page iv � i :� �' � � � � ,� �� ' � � � � r � t �� q�-a.�y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Appendices Appendix A Resource Documents Appendix B Sununary of Social/Economic Surveys Appendix C Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants Appendix D Summary of Phase I Environmental Assessment Appendix E Travel Demand Forecasts Appendix F Scoping Document Distribution Appendix G Alternatives Selected for First Screening Appendix H Memorandum: Screening of Alternatives - Round 1 Appendix I Memarandum: Screening of Alternatives - Types of Alternatives Appendix J Memorandum: Screening of Alternatives - Round 2 Appendix K Memorandum: Additional Scoping of Location Alternatives � City of Saint Paul Page v � � � _� ,� � � � ;� � ,� � � � � � � � q� �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document Executive Summary �` City of Saint EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Description Phalen Boulevazd is a new roadway proposed by the City of Saint Paul to be constructed on the city's East Side between I-35E on the west and Johnson Parkway on the east (Figure 1). This new roadway would support an initiative by the City and area businesses and residents to encourage redevelopment of vacant and underutilized land in the corridor. The project will also significantly enhance access to the near East Side by providing a better connection to the regionai roadway system at I-35E and by providing a direct route from the Phalen Village area to I-35E north of Saint Paul's downtown. The road would generally foilow the Union Pacific (former CNW) and Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (former BN) railroad rights-of-way. The west end would be at an interchange with I-35E; the east end would be at an intersection with Johnson Parkway. The project will provide facilides for bicycle and pedestrian use, and will accommodate the future construction of light rail transit (LRT) on Ramsey County right-of-way. Purpose of Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document An environmental impact statement (EIS) will be prepared for this project The purpose of this Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document is to focus the EIS on a small number of potentially feasible build alternatives and to detennine which impact areas wIll be examined and at what level of detail they will be studied. Project Alternatives The EIS will include analysis of three types of altematives: No-Build Altema6ve: Within the EIS, analysis of the no- build condirion measures the effect of allowing the current Situation to continue. Page 1 � t � � � � � � ,� � � � � � � � � L'_____'___.__'_'_'_'" � � j Annka \ J` ^�� / r , • - -�_� . �� s+ �\ ;s � � \�� r ---- I �, j Hennepin _' —' _ _ _' _' _'.� 74 � I 4 I-------- --� I � � �81'VBC � . � •_� 1 � ` ^ s �� --�----- �,�;;� �. � , ;�<� e' I �E:�::. ----, _i � 5�� r _i — �� 3 � �� 't 1 . . / S .:, ... , ,,. Phalen Corridor f -a..� ti I � l as I � � -------- �. I � I � � Washington � . I '� I � /� I �`) � 6 � �, - —�._� -.:,> � � ^��. (� �s� ` ( �r 3s j % � �. ,\ /\� Dakota �'r d i — -� I _-_J � � ~ ~� _'—_—_—'� Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 1 Location Map � N �� Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. Genereux Research • The 106 Group, Lid. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc � � � � � � � � � � � �_7 � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document a� _�� Executive Summary � City of Saint Paul • Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative: The TSM altemafive includes relatively minor upgradings of the existing transportation system in order to determule whether small-scale improvements are more cost-efficient t1�az1 the complete project. • Build Alternatives: The build alternatives are different ways of consiructing the full-scale project, and are analyzed in comparison to one anothei, to the TSM alternative and to the No-Build alternative. Tn the Phalen Boulevard project, there are tcvo build options in the Western Segment, three build options in the Central Segment, and one build option in the Eastern Segment. The project would include consiruction of one of the options in each of the three segments. Phalen Boulevard build options are listed in Table 1 and described below. Table 1 In the Western Segment, Option W-1 would connect to Pennsylvania Avenue at I-35E. Option W-2 would terminate at a new I-35E interchange in the vicinity of Cayuga Avenue, which is located just south of the I-35E Cayuga Bridge. In the Central Segment, all options stay fairly close to the railroad right-of-way except in the area of the Stroh Brewery. The differences betcveen the three options are mainly in the alignment used to pass through the area where the grain brewery's elevators and malting house are located. Page 3 Build Altemative Alignment Options � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� °2 '�� Executive Summary � � � � � � � � � 11_J � � � � � � � City of Saint Paul r In the Eastern Segment, there is one alignment option which basically pazallels, and may use a portion of, the Ramsey County Regional 12ai1 Authority (RCRT2A) right-of-way, terminating at Johnson Pazkway at the proposed Prosperity Avenue intersection. Project Analysis Issues After careful consideration of existing conditions and likely impacts, the standard list of EIS analysis issues was divided into three categories. The issues, listed alphabetically within each category, are: Issues of Major Concern. Requiring In-Depth Study • Bicycle and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic • Visual quality • Water quality Issues of Moderate Concern. Requiring Analysis • Air quality • Construction activities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy • Erosion controland excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wetlands 4 � � L� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � q(o -�,�y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document Executive Summary Issues Not Requiring Analysis • Federal and/or state-designated critical areas • Stream modification • Farmlands • Wild and scenic rivers Public and Agency Invotvement A comprehensive, proactive program of community and agency involvement was initiated by the City of Saint Paul. The focus is on the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, a citizen committee created by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, which includes representatives of residential, business and institutional interests. The Task Force has been deeply involved in generating and reviewing much of the material used in the scoping process. The Task Force will continue to be involved throughout the remaindex of the EIS process. � City of Saint Paul Page 5 Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document a��.�y 1. Introduction 1 . INTRODUCTION Purpose of the �e National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires that social, economic, and environmental Scoping Document considerations be included in the planning of projects that receive federal funding. The Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document have been prepared as part of the federal NEPA process and State environmental review process to fulfill requirements of both 42 USC 4321 et. seq. and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.2000. The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) approved the format of this Scoping Document as an alternative to the standard Scoping EAW on December 15, 1995. A 30-day comment period will begin when the availability notice for the Scoping Document is published in the EQB Monitor. The Scoping Document witl be circulated fo the required MEQB disizibution list and will be made available to the public for review and comment. A Public Scoping Meeting will be held during the comment period, which will provide an opportunity for oral and written comments to be submitted. The Scoping Document provides a discussion of: Project Description • the need for and function of the proposed project. • alternatives considered. • potential social, economic and environmental impacts. • agencies and persons consulted during project review. The Scoping Document identifies the significant issues associated with the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives for fi.trHler study in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Draft Scoping Decision Document provides a siunmary of the Scoping Document and sufficient documentation to deterxnine the scope and focus of the EIS. These combined documents are distributed to federal, state and local agencies and the public to provide an opportunity for review and comment prior to the preparation of a Final Scoping Decision Document. A final scoping decision will be made by the Saint Paul City Council after the Public Scoping Meeting and the end of the comment period. Phalen Boulevard is a proposed roadway which would be located on Saint Paul's East Side. It would connect I-35E to City of Saint Paul Page 6 � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction L! L� � � � � � � � � � � � � � LJ ai�-a�� Johnson Pazkway near Phalen Village Shopping Center (Figure 2). It would be approximately two miles long. The roadway would be located roughly parallel and adjacent to or within the former Burlington Northem (BN) railroad right- of-way. T`he BN right-of-way was purchased by the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) for possible use as a light rail transit (LRT) right-of-way. Phalen Boulevard would be constructed to allow the future construction of LRT on Ramsey County right-of-way. The roadway may also use, for a portion of the route, vacant land formerly occupied by the Chicago Northwestern Railroad (now owned by the Union Pacific Railroad). The purpose of the project is to assist in the stimulation of economic redevelopment of the area by providing enhanced access for businesses and residents of the area, and to enhance access to the East Side of Saint Paui by providing a direct connection between I-35E and the Johnson Parkway/Maryland Avenue area which will make it possible for residents, businesses and visitors to move into, out of, and within the project area. Since the former railroad right-of-way is depressed below surrounding ground elevation, much of the road would be grade-separated from existing streets. Connections to the existing street system would be built at Westminster Street, Payne Avenue, Arcade Street and Earl Street to provide access to local residences and businesses. In 1979, the City of Saint Paul adopted Plan for SEreets and Highways which called for connection of I-35E and Johnson Parkway via the CNW Railroad corridor. (In that plan, it was called "East Como Boulevard.") At this time, the City is close to adopting a new Transportation Policy Plan which reconfirms the need for this connection. The name for this proposed road has been changed to "Phalen Boulevard." In addition, construction of Phalen Boulevard has been recommended in the District 5 Plan, the East Consolidated Small Area Plan, the Railroad Island Small Area Plan, and the Phalen Village Small Area Plan. These small area plans have all been adopted by the City as parts of the Comprehensive Plan. �, City of Saint Paul Page 7 � f � � � � � u !J � � r � � � � � ql�-�.�7� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction The economic shifts of the early eighties, with manufacturing plant closings and subsequent depazture of smaller businesses, has led to neighborhood decline in the corridor. In recent years, the need for economic redevelopment in the East Side has given a sense of urgency to the issues of access and land redevelopment. In the last year, there has been an effort to tum long-standing plans for Phalen Boulevard into reality, and to do so in the context of a major physical and economic redevelopment of the entire area. The Saint Paul City Council passed a resolution early in 1995 in support of the development of Phalen Boulevard as a community reinvestment/economic development project for the East Side. Through the efforts of East Side legislators, businesses and labor, the 1994 Legislaiure appropriated substantial funding for the first phase of development and infrastructure analysis for Phalen Conidor. State and federal regulations require that an environmental review be done for a project of this size. The potential social, economic and environmental issues associated with the proposed Phalen Boulevard project are significant enough to warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Scoping Document and the Draft Scoping Decision Document are important elements of the EIS process. Public Involvement The City of Saint Paul actively involves its citizens in the plaiuling of major projects. The community involvement program is described in Section 5 of the Scoping Document. Project Schedule The following is the anticipated schedule for completion of the Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study and Environmental Impact Statement Process: March 1996 Release of Scoping Document/Draft Scoping Decision Document for public comment; begiruiing the 30-day comment period. Apri11996 May 1996 Public Scoping Meeting. Scoping comment period ends. � City of Saint Paul Page 9 � 1 , � � � � lJ � � � �� a��y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction � Responsible � Governmental Unit (RGU) � � � � � City of Saint Paul May 1996 May 1996 City Council adopts Final Scoping Decision; Final Scoping Decision Document distributed. Publication of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation notice. December 1996 Release of Draft EIS for public comment; start of Draft EIS comment period. january 1997 January1997 March 1997 May 1997 June 1997 July 1997 Public Hearing on Draft EIS. Draft EIS comment period ends. Selection of Preferred Alternative by Saint Paul City Council. Release of Final EIS; start of Final EIS comment period. Final EIS comment period ends. City Council determines adequacy of the Final EIS. The City of Saint Paul Department of Planning and Economic Development (PED) is the designated Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the purposes of this Scoping Document and for the Environmental Impact Statement. The contact person for the RGU is: Contact Person: Nancy Frick Title: Project Manager - Phalen Boulevard Agency: Department of Planning & Economic Development City of Saint Paul Address: 1100 City Hall Annex 25 West 4th Street Saint Paul, MN 55102 Phone: (612) 266-6554 Fax: (612)228-3314 Page 10 � q� a.��{ � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction � Cost and Fund Cost estimates for the proposed project have not been � Source prepazed. The cost of the project will be estimated during the preparation of the EIS. � Implementation funding is expected to come from a combination of local, state and federal funds. The exact source is unknown at this time. , � � � � � � � � � � � i � City of Saint Paul Page 11 u � � � � � lJ � � i � � O � �J �J � f Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document g(�-��1 � 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project 2. PURPOSE, GOALS, AND NEED FOR PROJECT Phalen Corridor The Phalen Boulevazd project is one element of an overall effort by a cross-section of govemment, business, and Initiative neighborhood organizations to recover and preserve the vitality of the Phalen Corridor area. The effort is known as the Phalen Corridor Initiative. As described in the Phalen Corridor Initiative Bulletin No. 1, "the Phalen Corridor Initiative is a community partnership to improve the economic, social and physical prosperity of the Phalen Corridor, including the creation of good paying jobs, job training opportunities and support for existing businesses." Through its membezs, the Phalen Conidor Initiative has proposed programs which aze intended to improve the area's economy, housing and infrastructure, and to take advantage of the existing and historical nahxral features of Saint Paul's East Side. The Phalen Corridor Initiative is focusing its efforts in four key areas: • In the area of job training, the Phalen Corridor Initiative is identifying the existing and future labor force, existing and future job opportuniries, training needs and opporhznities, and is developing a program which would match workers with needed training and with employers. • The Phalen Corridor Initiative is working to attract new businesses to the area by making potential sites ariractive and environmentally and economically feasible for development. • The Phalen Corridor Initiative supports the provision of new infrastructure in the form of roadways which give existing and potential development sites direct access to the regional highway system. • Recognizing the value of a coordinated effort, the Phalen Corridor Initiative is working to build partnerships among segments of the community. � City of Saint Paul Page 12 � ,, � � L� � � i � � �J � � � � � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �(� 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project The Phalen Corridor Initiative successfully commenced its activities by obtainutg a legislative grant to fund environmental studies of the proposed Phalen Boulevard roadway project and soil cleanup studies for redevelopment of the underutilized railroad corridor. Phalen Boulevard supports the objectives of the Phalen Corridor Initiative. Its primary function is to provide a direct connecdon betcveen the areas planned for redevelopment and the regional highway system. The enhanced access will make the area moxe attractive to developers. In addition, Phalen Boulevard will make it easier for people living, working and shopping in the area to reach their destinations and to circulate within the neighborhood. Project Need The Phalen Corridor is an area one mile wide and over tuvo miles long stretching from northeast of downtown Saint Paul to the Maryland-Prosperity area. It encompasses four neighborhood retail areas, several residential neighborhoods, two industrial railroad corridors and three major parks. The construction of Phalen Boulevard has been a long- standing objective of the City because of a recognized need to: • provide access to land for redevelopment. • generally improve access in the northeast part of the city. • better link exisiing and fixture businesses to the regional highway system. • alleviate congestion on existing roads, parflcularly truck traffic, to improve neighborhood livability. Goals Development Goals for the Phalen Boulevard project were developed in a joint effort of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force and the PTOCeSS City with the assistance of the consultant team. They were developed in a process in which project issues, project goals and project altematives were all discussed. The process is described in detail in Section 3, Alternatives Development Process. � City of Saint Paul Page 13 � � q�-�, a� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project , � � , � � , � � � � � � 6� �J {_� The Phalen Boulevazd EIS Task Force and the project team reached agreement on a set of goaLs during the process. The goals are listed in Table 2. The EIS will assess how each of the alternatives perfarms relative to these project goals. , City of Saint Paul Page 14 , � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document "� �� 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project 1 � � , ' � � � i C' � �J � � � ' Table 2 Project Goal Summary � _ -=__ n�.�� Improve regional access to and from, and local access within the project area. Improve compatibility between traffic chazacter, street classification and land use in the atfected azea. Provide adequate land and infrastructure foi commercial/industrial redevelopment sites. Maintain and enhance mmmercial/industrial economic acrivity in the project area. Support preservafion and enhancement of existing neighbochoods. Maintain oprion of fuhxre light rail transit in the corridor. Provide for and encourage alternative modes of travel including biking, wallcing and transit. Minimize adverse environmental unpact. Enhance existing environmental features. Preseroe or enhance existing visual quality. Control adverse unpacts to visual quality. Provide adequate rail service for existing and potenrial users in the corridor. Provide adequate truck access for existing and potential users in the corridor. Be buildable. Optimize capital costs whIIe sarisfying other project goals. Optimize operating costs while satisfying other project goals. Capitalize on opporhinities to conseroe resources by coordinating construction of other infrasiructure needs. Enhance emergency vehicle access. Ensure safety of Phalen Boulevard users. , City of Saint Paul Page 15 � � 1 � � ' t� , � , ' ' L _J I_J � � ' rl I� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document � i� -�.�1'� 3. Alternatives Development Process 3. ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Overview The Phalen Boulevard Task Force, city staff and consultant team members worked together over several months to develop the Phalen Boulevard alternatives. The alternatives selected for analysis in the EIS were the result of (1) a thorough discussion of issues determined to be important to the community, (2) the formulation of project goals which respond to those issues, and (3) the identification of altematives which respond to the project goals. Input came from two principal sources: the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, and surveys of four groups within the Phalen Corridor neighborhoods. The Task Force, which was convened by the Saint Paul Plamung Commission, provided input throughout the scoping process. The Task Force was briefed on the results of the surveys of community groups. The four community subgroups surveyed regarding their perceptions of key concerns in the corridor were: • Managers of industrial operations in the corridor • Managers of commercial opera6ons in the carridor • Residents of the conidor • Community leaders The samples in each survey were statistically valid and the results are, therefore, representative of each of the surveyed groups. The Task Force previewed and pretested the questionnaires; several comments and suggestions made by members were incorporated. The details of the survey ptocedure are summarized in Appendix B to this report. Project altematives were developed in response to the needs of the community as expressed by the project goals. Alternatives development was an iterative process in that discussion of issues and goals generated thoughts of new alternatives, and consideration of potential alternatives generated thoughts of addiiionai issues. � City ot Saint Paul Page 16 LJ �� L� LJ ' , � � , � ' I1 u ' � ' ' � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� .1� 3. Alternatives Development Process Once the long list of alternafives was established, screening took place. The Task Force used three types of screens: • Project goals • Logic • Technical analysis Universe of "Build" Alternatives Alternative generation and screening overlapped during later stages of alternative development because the screening of one alternative often generated ideas for a new alternative. The documentation below does not reflect all of the iterations which occurred during the study, but does reflect the spirit of the process and the key considerations and decisions. The genera6on of the long list of alternatives took place, for the most part, during the first five meetings of the Phalen Boulevazd EIS Task Force. Meetingg 1 and 2- The Smping Process canied out the processes of issue identification and goal development concurrently. The Task Force used the first two meetings primarily to discuss project issues and goals (see Section 2). �et�e 3- At the third meeting, the Task Force and project staff worked together to develop a"universe of altematives." Participants were asked to draw all the alternatives they would like to have considered and describe how they thought their alternative responded to goals which had been identified to date. Participants were also asked to identify opportunities and constraints in the corridor which they thought may have an impact on, or be affected by, Phalen Boulevard. The exercise of drawing the proposed alternatives on maps also generated thought and discussion of additional issues and goals which were recorded by project staff. For the purpose of alternatives development and consideration, the Phalen Boulevard study area was divided into three segments (Figure 3): • Western �gment• I-35E to Burr Street: The key issues in this segment include making a roadway connection to I- 35E (location and access), future freeway operations, and ampact on existing and planned developments. ' City of Saint Pauf Page 17 I �� 1 1 Ll ' � ' ' , LI � � ' ' ' ' , L� i q(�'�.`�L-C Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Altematives Devefopment Process � City of Saint Paul Central Segment: Burr Street to Earl Street: In this segment, key issues include impact on existing industrial operations, relationship to the existing street system, relationship to the recreational trail and right-of-way needs. • Eastern Segment: Eazl Streef to Johnson Parkwav: Key issues to be assessed here include access to the local street system, impact on industrial development potential and right-of-way needs. Meeting 4- At this meeting, the Task Force was presented with a memorandum summarizing the results of the previous meeting. The alternatives generated by the participants included three significanfly ditferent concepts in the Westem Segment, three different concepts in the Central Segment, and four different concepts in the Eastern Segment (Figure 4). The uuflal pxoject concept was a corridor-long road, and most of the concepts generated by the Task Force were corridor- long. However, the alternatives also included a concept which called for roadway system unprovements at east and west ends of the corridor which served the principle redevelopable areas of the comidor, but not in the central part (Figure 4). Tn this concept, at the east end of the corridor, a new connection would be made direcfly from Johnson Parkway at Phalen Village to East 7th Street at Earl Street; East 7th Street could then be used for the rest of any corridor-length trips. At the west end, it was reasoned that if the purpose of the Phalen Boulevard project was to provide access to potential industrial redevelopment projects, a connection betcveen Mississippi Street and the largest of the redevelopment sites located west of Payne Avenue might suffice. Connections to the possible redevelopment sites were made via Westrnuister Street and Whitall Street. The Task Force also received a presentation of the goals which the Task Force had been discussing during the previous meetings. The Task Force discussed the goals and made a few refinements. The resulting goals are listed in Table 2. Page 19 � � � r � � � � � � � � � � � � t� � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� -�� 3. Aiternatives Development Process Meetine 5- Additional information was presented to the Task Force regarding the resuits of the survey of four subgroups in the corridor study area (see Appendix B}. The Task Force discussed the survey results but made no changes in project goals. The consultant team present�ed a refined set of alternatives which included four alternatives in the Western Segment (including two short west-end alternatives), seven alternatives in the Central Segment, five aitematives in the Eastern Segment and three alternatives in the Earl Street Segment (the Earl Street segment included short, east-end alternatives which connecEed Johnson Parkway at Phalen Village to East 7th Street at Earl Street). These alternatives are illustrated in Appendix G. Screening Process The Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force conducted most of the alternatives screening process during Meetings 6 through S. As discussed above, the Task Force also added ar refined al4ernatives daring this time. All are described below. ti - In the sixth meeting, the Task Force began Screening Based on Project screening alternatives. The Task Force was provided with Goals information regarding the types of alternatives that would be considered in the EIS: no-build alternative, transportation system management (TSM) alternafrve, and buiid altematives (Appendix H). The Task Force was also told that while screening alternatives out of the EIS preserves project resources, it is also important that the ELS examine all reasonable altematives in order to examine a full range of potential project impacts. The first screen ot alternatives was based on project goals. The Consuitant Team prepared an informarion packet (Appendix H} which assessed the performance of each alternative relative to the project goals. T'he assessment was essentially comparafive in nature. Where no difference could be identified, no distinction was drawn. The Consuitant Team recommended that the following alternatives be dropped trom further consideration because they were inconsistent with project goals: • Western Segment -- Westminster Connection Line i City of Saint Paul Page 21 � � � � � � � � � � �� n "�� Phalen Bouievard Scoping Document 3. Aiternatives Development Process � City of Saint Paul • Central Segment — Line 1 • Eastern Segment — Ames Avenue Connection • Eastem Segment — West Side Connection • Earl Street Segment — Line 2 • Eazl Street Segment — Line 3 The Consultant Team recommended that the following alternatives be retained for consideration as elements of a transportation system management (TSM) alternative: • Western Segment — Westminster Connection Line 2 • Earl Street Segment — Line 1 The Consultant Team recommended that analysis be conducted of four issues to assise in further screening of aiternatives. The four issues were: • Operational feasibility of an interchange with I-35E at Cayuga Street. • Geometric restrictions between Forest Sfreet and Edgerton Street. • Potential for conflict between present alternatives and potential future LRT line. : • Traffic service and operations at the east end of the project. The Task Force recommended two modifications of the Consultant Team recommendations: • Central Seginent — Line 1 should be retained. In spite ot its apparenf high construction cost, it may offer advantages in terms of minimizing impacts on existing neighborhoods and businesses that outweigh its high cost. • Eastem Segment — Maryland Connection should be dropped at this time because it requires acquisition of active commercial property while it provides no real improvement in traffic service. At Meeting 6, the Task Force also considered an alternative connection to I-94 which caIled for ramp connections to Mississippi Street. The consultant team presented the finding Page 22 � � � � � �� ,� � � �� -a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process that, given e�cisting bridge and roadway locations and elevations, it would not be possible to construct safe and effective connections. MeetinQ 7- T'he Task Force continued screening alternafives (Appendix n. The consuItant team presented a re-evaluation of some elements of the sereenuig (Appendix J). Based on the re-evaluation, it was recommended that Western Segment - Westminsfer Line 1 also be dropped as a build alternative; but, as with Westminster Line 2, be considered as a candidate for the TSM alternative. Tt was also recommended that the Central Segment - Line 2 Bush Avenue be dropped due to fhe si�ificant impact on the adjacent neighborhood, and because it would be very difficult to provide access to potential redevelopment sites near Payne Avenue. As a clarification, Central Segment Alternatives were reorganized and renamed. Alternatives retained by the Task Force for possible analysis in the EIS at this point in the processincluded: • Line C-1: Union Pacific Route - bridges railroad tracks through Stroh Brewery area. • Line G3: Lower Middle Route - through the Stroh Brewery storage elevator building. • Line C-4 {6): Upper Middle Route - around the 5troh Brewery storage elevator build'utg. • Line G5 {7): North Biuff Route - around the RCIZRA right-of-way using Wadena right-of-way. Meeting_7 - Further consideration of alternatives in the Screening Based on Logic Eastern Segment revealed that only the Phalen Village Connection alternative (now referred to as Aitemative E-i) served the needs of the community as expressed by the project goals. All other alternatives were significant]y inferior to the Phalen Vfllage Connection in terms of traffic service, impact on the communify and support of economic redeveIopment. It was recommended that they be dropped. � City of Saint Paul Page 23 1 � � �� ` � � �' � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document ��-a.��-} 3. Alternatives Development Process Meetine 8- The Task Force considered ttie results of technical Screening Based on Technical analyses prepared by the Consultant Team to assess the Anatysis possibility of construction of a new interchange at Cayuga SfreeE. In order to construct the new interchange, the exisfing ramps at Pennsyivania Avenue would be removed, although the grade separation could remain. The analysis of operations using preliminary yeaz 2015 peak hour traffic forecasts indicated that the key movements would operate at Level of Service "D" or "E" provided that the new interchange was configured as a folded-diamond with aii ramps to the north of Cayuga Street. This is generally considered an acceptable level of service provided nnportant traffic access or other goals are achieved. The remaining Western Segment alignments were named: • W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection • W-2: Cayuga Freeway Connection Meetine 9- The Task Force reviewed the goals, alternatives and issues which would be presented at the Public Information Meeting. A public information meeting was held on Wednesday, Screening Based on Public October 25, 1995 at Metropolitan Sta4e Universiry on Saint Information Meeting Feedback Paul's East Side. The purpose was to inform the community-at- large ot the efforts of the Task Force in examining and screening altemaHves and issues during the previous nine months. In general, the meeting attendees were receptive to the work of the Task Force. There were a number of comments questioning the advisability of conHnued consideration of Alternative G3, the Lower Middle Route in the Central Segment. For this reason and others described in the Appendix K memorandum, the Task Force, at its 10th meeting, recommended that Altemafive C-3 not be studied in the EIS. Alternatives The alternatives development process resulted in the identification of six aligrunenf segment opiions which have Selected for been recommended for detailed analysis in the EIS. Analysis in EIS City of Saint Paul Page 24 Phalen 8oulevard Scoping Dacument q�-a�� 3. Alternatives Development Process All segments are compatible, such that either Western Segment option can be matched with any Central Segment option, any of which can be matched with the Eastern Segment option. For the purposes of assisting in the screening of altematives and consideration of the likely level of impact, preliminary traffic forecasts for the Year 2015 have been prepared. The methodology and resuits of the travel demand forecasting process are presented in Appendix E. Each of the corridor segment options are described in the following sections. W-1: Penns,ylvania Freewa� ConnecHon F( i�ure 51 Western Segment - I-35E to Burr Street Under this optian, access to I35E would occur at the existing Pennsylvania Avenue interchange. Phalen Boulevard would be an extension of Pennsylvania Avenue. As the concept is now proposed, Mississippi Street would be grade-separated from Pennsylvania Avenue. It and when constructed, the East Centra] Business District (CBD) $ypass would intersect with Phalen Boulevard to allow traffic from the Bypass to reach I-35E. From Pennsyivania Avenue, Phalen Boulevard would tum to the north, pass through the northern part of the Saint Paul Port Authoriiy's proposed Williams Hill development, pass over to the BN and UP raitroad tracks, and run parallel to and north of the UP railroad tracks to Burr Street. W-�vupa Freewa� Connection (Figur�6� The connection to I-35E under Alternarive W-2 would take place at a new interchange in the vicinity of Cayuga Street, just south of the existing I-35E Cayuga Bridge. The interchange would probably be a folded-diamond type, with the ramps located on the north side of Cayuga Street. The ramps at the existing Pennsylvania Avenue interchange would be removed. Vehicles accessing I-35E at the new interchange would be able to go north or south on I-35E or east or west on I-94. Phalen Boulevard would go to the east from the interchange, crossing Weshninster Street at-grade, and then go slightiy south to run parallel to the UP railroad tracks to Burr Street. The East CBD Bypass would connect to � City of Saint Paul Page 25 � � � � � ,� � �' ,� �� ; 1� � ,� � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document ��-�.�� 3. Alternatives Development Process Central Segment - Burr Streef Phalen Bouievard at abaut Westuiinster Street, and connect to I-35E via Phalen Boulevatd. C�.�f�.SiT�:t:i2.I[[ �� ' . - - ] to Earl Street This alignment option runs basicaily parallel to the LTI' railroad track from Burr Streef to Eatl Street. The primary feature is that, from west of Payne Avenue to west of Arcade Street, the roadway would be built on a structure above the IJP railroad tracks. The purpose of the structure is to avoid ail impacts on adjacent property and development. The structure wouid intersect Payne Avenue. The infersection would be on a bridge above the elevafion of the ground. The roadway profile would remain elevated to the west of Payne Avenue, intersecting Edgerton Street at its existing elevation, and then drop down to pass under Burr Street. A connection between Phalen Boulevard and Arcade Street would be made through the site of Whirlpool Building 17 (on the west side of Arcade Street, unmediately north of the railroad corridor; the building was demolished in 1995). C-4• Upper Middle Route (FiQUre 8� After passing under Arcade Street, this alignment diverts away from the LTI'railroad track to the north to pass north of the Stroh Brewery storage elevators. Two subalternatives are proposed at Payne Avenue. Under the flrst, Phalen Boulevard would be grade-sepazated from Payne; connections to the local street system would be made via a second parallel access roadway running beiween at-grade intersections with Payne and Arcade. Under the second, Phalen Boulevard would intersect Payne Avenue at-grade; a connecUon between Phalen Boulevard and Arcade Street would be made through the Whirlpool Building 17 site. G5: North Bluff Rout�FiQUre 9� After passing under Arcade Street, this alignment diverts away from the LTP railroad track to the north to pass to fihe north of the RCBRA right-of-way at about the Wadena Street right-of-way. Two subalternatives are proposed at Payne Avenue. Under the first, Phalen Boulevard would intersect Payne Avenue at-grade; a connection between Phalen Boulevard and Arcade Street would be made through the Whirlpool Building 17 site. Under the second, Phalen City of Saint Paul Page 26 ! � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Documeni �� a�� 3. Alternatives Development Process � Eastern Segment - EarI Street to Johnson Parkuny � � � � � � �! � � � � Boulevard would be grade-separated from Payne; connections to the local street system would be made via two connectors: one to the west of Payne Avenue and one to the west of Arcade Avenue. E-1: Phalen Village Connection (�gure 10) The alignment of the Phalen Village Connection runs parallel to and mostly within the RCRRA right-of-way from Eari Street nearly to Johnson Parkway. At EhaE point, the aligtmient tums to the east to intersect Johnson Parkway at the point where Prosperity Avenue (extended) is planned Eo intersect Johnson Parkway. This alignment runs at the existing ground elevation. It would pass under Earl Street, which is elevated. A connection to Earl Street would be made via RusselI Street or Frank Street. � City of Saint Paul Page 27 �l i [�i '+ , ; � ..;. .- .... . - s �,...J q a.+r s , ..j T ,.:'.�! . .�. u Ka ° t '\ .�� : .kx ^�� - �i. ., .. �f _ ♦"+ '.} e.�f�a�!i' 4 a ^y 1. -�II� � � i . d dnR <"S .. t �Y< � � ; ', ' � j c��.1��R :s e�{ro� �tb �� y � � N �i f � '�� -; ' e:" l . ° � �i}�".sc --`:�� 1 4Y .°; ..[' c � ` � .��• � � •.S°�'- 11HH R S fe. H g a � ; .. i . a .:� � �"`�' �'^��g1,1�. � .�.�- � _ , �� . � . � .-„ .rt" � G '�+ � v ` - a?� 1 : w�t at(t`�u1Y�+*'�. - � ��. s� ... �. +.�... � .... .�.. -�. � _ ._ .. .i � t '_ �Y � . ♦ + s • � • � J ' ,.a � !�'. '. r _ 1 a 1 •�� _ �•f.l�ixiyau �1 4'.� Li � i �. ��?. � �a_f?L1a2 ��fm1U"710� . _.•_ � r .. .>.� 1 i : f. � • �r .Mnli34� � t� .3a y � . o �" .. __-. � . ► ti 2-� . �. �� ' 's<.. . "':.. T v�_,^.,_^' . ..' '. � �..a.._�.[. wn �w�. <.-_�.�r . �J?c+a..�. �t Nun�� .� s�u. n J � � �, "� ; _ i_ ti . ,� � .... �- ,� �y ..ya _ _ . l : 1 _s�..�:t t �' . _ 1 �''ul �. � j ti hs �i iw a�+�� 2, - � , _ _ y � .. a S i• ' .. �tMt� .. :: �. t 9 di J�IT L } f' j� i : A� W £ � J:. + (Ii�+�� 6 a e � � � n w -a 4 ea i• � - s fi.:�' S S wf i:{�' ,� +�� 9 i .�} i i ia � �•: i i. _ S . � �` .• � � :. � � � -_�-� MH esE m 'G �. C� 4 � ,� a A}i�� - F � 1 3,`.. " .i � , Y .L S3.+i � .�. . s ��s?[� .. .. � i � S.a� s .�, { P� Ji i � ; e ti b r .,i � t � '� } � �. LS 4 F+-I 1 . ;Y . �a,J ; ls a. .^� :. f $Ii��Lh �` � s ; � ' ' : - s•v. i-x'S, x . - .r++ ., `ri ��jiXNlv ��• : . .. � k `� �� . j _ � 3 ll .��y,4.e M<.�x �' J � { �,� s,��G iit M L��: �a�-�r^Y f-.X,Y 1 -. i� �ee:,,� .: '�� . fq x � � t� , ��., :i� � �+�e � ��¢ � f � ii�,i A.f�. � �.:� �.-.. ( � �,( . y . ' -m _ '�-r . . . . 3 aw � 0 Y' k�`4 a_� aLe '°i' 64T" Y „y�LY i �'.t ZM S�� i�r F.�L�,+K„ !�r:d'� 3 4�4 a' �i � a� �, . )� $3LF �f� t Ys �b 3 ,fNaK l � 4 y f f 1 (�{" 5 { � 1 i faf �� 1^ � ��. 1 1 ' � :� � Y . � f �... ��. �}'...:� � T .4 ��R.Y �. � ��('�� x = r -� `, t sa 1._`� �Mi»��, E-. n4:� z f " ', '..� t ��q e �� `"'�i # { H u. � c � r � � . ... , �k i � e�� ss-.rii. W`itA.a»i .:' �,. � a " ,.'_ � �.;].� ''i.�s+ �� V .�,,ep,t�� r� �,;.� fi �1 i $ � :�� ~ q. ? "� � � . � 7 a � i"'_1aS'+ti..L ,.Cr`aSP.��11�- i� ��y'w_,C. uaf �� }• ��. � .,,, F �1t.a. V �.. �, � i: s� ^:�: L` .. "...: ..�� x _:.,.a �� "'i � ,� r v., s M�� ,W� iir.�.. � �`:f-�.t * ' -' ' ,�g � ..� i' ^" � �' � � i � 1►:�i1�.:3�` ` ��.� ��'f. a, i� �� „ " ,. E ��inste��ii�"r�tl .�� .�' ,�. r �q�.k. { ^ �, t kF�' � r . �.r' x-,: "'�„ ^� "4,� , , 3,.-a�' .`.�� ".., �" ^. � 1 "� 3 , . , �� y s,.� F . �.i.�, ` �+, �:" -�` � s � � � .� kFte"rch. e � .�,.� t F �� •°' t ,�� _, �� •� /�+ � 1� � ~"�� { 3 .x �i!�i� .a� "� �a� : �� n 'zi� � � n �u ,- f rn � . .y M,,... 6+T'k':� �iai..y..�.+P��'�. _ ' � � �� G1,!'.�y ��. Illi�iYl�YJi'.!� 3�ff,�,r.�- e e ��.v �:6i � . � ta � r` M'� r �k,R w. 6 � �.�a� � e r � { r 'ksv� t z� i� '� 1 4' �(� "��y- tl � . , .. ` 4 �.� � r "7' ��'� `�'�„�._+'+,'�� 3'"��+� �:.;_�� y , .a ' ,;,,, _' ., ; ` t �:;, y ,s:_� {',k �; � ��na "`\ lrli �. � � t � ��.i �.;4 r ♦ � _ "'t.. >� �' ��'w- x. ��_" � — ' r ' � x ' . 4 ,�, k'"' - �,�e s — - �.�. �.!'* ..; - R E �-- �' .«cr� , a,- , - ._:=�.a -"� F ` ��,�t� + �'' ��' a " [ ) �`� �� 'al� `�_ a'.F .�..7i . �=? '�a� . , �1r�� '� ,� ,� � }� hh� .. , �dH•�a'1�;'�n�.�' �3 ! ��'._ i .o ,c �4 � �� V �� .. r. Y�.. � R p � .A � L* � S �� ti1 t � k r � r� x� _I�Y.A��- 4 :��—�3 r�� ' �:- ,� r �� ,�?�, �; � � :,�, s:a V �' : ...�` � a.+ � . ',� J `� T � � �, i v y r� r i � ��¢� � , �C � FtF�<< ! ��"' }�' ' � �� f �c � � �' / 4 ir�' � f J ..( � �� j .�. S.'�,� i �,�, e�'� �. �� / � . � ._ �. '�' . ,'{+! �� \�� 1 �� P � v��r � °�r - ka€� , C � � � ,_$t ...c4��. 9 � t �I .' r �.c _Y �yw: s:�s,.. � :F...'� � a i��` S1 - �. ' 'z Jn. i � r $ .'.. � � , �� : '�.[ , _. � 3 ..�/"�� ` I .� y . `ii� � l .�" I � . . ,. �. y y �y i 15n3 xJ ' �l ..: MS� �` ��rri�J J i�y ' - . � 4 " ` f- ' s x �,.- r.� { e . � , - . i ,��r�� 3 z• #- 8 � ' t � E ` �' S.. V —: a � � ts. �.. ex1+I � N[�1'�t.s i ft ✓ 'w+Y 't � � :3 ��..t. E � '. �s•.�M � I�F I! J � i.al�H.. _! aa.0 W_ 3�... S� �+ �y�.a J r Y ii. . . � . 4 -y � ..�:�: �y '/� , . N �� f.�n M..."�F-'� � ' { . �"� � �'�" ��.�1.. � "� 4 ; . �!iSY� 5'..`��s. �.�� a" ��a..�L�� }�.t l .i'� .f � � _ ` "_i�� , •� - 9F �, - � � ) f f .: Y t � , j • • J . � }� fi h ` 1l ` O` �l / � � �� J r � �.f.w��l� LT ♦ . .ad . �' ,�+� P wa �f � �Q.�I4e 4 � � 1 I J: aMY� , «4 .- w y � 2`s; �� .: a-,.nm� :.. �c�..:;�--^*'piRt` * .. � / -�t' ' "1 � Y� � pY. +1...�1 •., �� iY� l �_. �� T�.1' L .�" b3 ..s�.�� . �rK�.r.�.. a . �ES� a �;.� �: i yA' ��.� �a�+e.:_F;'w��-�� ' s � ¢�.. � _- . ""�`, f ,� �: ".�.: .��. 3,� _�� h`dl� 1/x1l�ge� . $� y � � R 'E,-,'.iw 2:..x_�>-� W�'+ `��Y„ i 1 i.° -� (�� i.i'dr.yxa�` �,�_. _i ' �+:� ' � ��" j' '�Ifi12�'"��hf, ' � �:9 �f} �.. y *. � �fl •! i h J r . � Iw1� �f l � i � � t r / y � y �. .�^ � . �x: ;f.�.,.�" �R 1. F'�tr .� y i . �� v g� / ` �� !N'� � :i � � a. � "'' 7 ` ;-.' � � i � r � -'^ ,� d ��, y { ...:�,.-�.� > r: . } .� .: • ,�, ` W- 0. �"°'' %�� ' � � � : ;' ." � ., � /� �'' '� _. � ^ `,�,�._�_ � '� 'Y� 4M X .a(�. � •h',+wty�p`� - � � t [ � � 'q 'a-.E' �. � +�Y f' ' 1 � i _.N- y -as `t' $ F � + .b'� M � �lc: 5 _ � f �' �.� . �� ,-,=".� • = � "`nG ,- .., i t . aW.Y\r '�P a .. . R iivis��tri .a,4:: �t � . +,t � , , i i �r..ti ��. �.. -S q � H »r��+S � 2A7': ; i �f. a :'l+ if� yr �, e j � � �.a.' '�a'�'. £b vs fs. �{ b �a)y��W}�^� tiW x' . �9vFX- �d � �.y ��3�.S.w:-a. . � �s � !�ti . . F.� ri� S SI�W'�-�� 1. 3_ �� #3V d �3 4 � � 01 ir ��t+�t � -w' � r � ,,j, "'�*' ;:; ° ^�, nt `' �*� ��,� ^��«��„'.at-� ' ` 3 N,.�,: a •. �n�ra ,� �.,,s ..� > � � �s� �- ? . � �'+Y - �.TiiY ... .j�4�� {'��};.'.,� s'f ��i'i''�S'!�t.T�'� ' A� �� ' i. anilR . .u� ni ��.. a .fT•w ,.+Wy�ni+�: ioc.y e. � �� 4a1a a _a �� -' .1 � rs• � y��x� �'�" �� '�-�`-�' ' � '�:�� a a �ad ' wmtt Wt {% 4] I� . N- it a 'JS� F'� 7 � .y�Sq�.� � � {��f +y. ° .�1� a. .!i � 3 ",�, '� «t� ri"�� _ ti _ 3 3 , y � �•'�"6A3t i� ��.� � i i. ),'",.' � � �� jit>J44 t. ui�a .� '� �',� 1� . `�p . ,��14.M 'JYL.3.�'f�13M � '� lA�VL `,ry 5 sf' ;�� r �� I '�`� �� +�+ � ' r � irtilr,;ia � �; � � � r"J •J �{�� `.f,h � 4 � � �� e a.�'}Y,Ri.... '� i�' x# ��4' .�,� �ui �.i .�.. . ..._.,. . < - . . � �. � � � = �",�; `"" t � . � .�` � � -_ a � M :TR� �. i D� z� ��•��_ �p ��:�. •.. _ �, !�±�+tt ., � .'� _ r'7.R a:.+ .... {� . i+.... . �Jl� a ,,: C � i 1�.+.n }' . �°' . O . "4' � ✓ ":� . . � .x � � e '+�^-ea.. � ,. ... �' -�� , 3 L�: sn� 1 .ri�� ..s C w!: � �u'•�.+�� 1�v '�"e . �n+'"�''�L •.. * l XII l 4 Y!�1a.� � (' � �� T � l �� ( y P_ ' �4 � �°� f �� .'�a s�nx�, ♦ -.:.,�. �� . .. _ .,... �o eav�titl� �! �;e� Ti .�'s� a 3 `�e o¢G o¢Gj � °'if � r _I� o v.s„ r�i � II �� [_ � � � I � ._� E �� q� ��—il � ��oa��L`�api a G p � — ��o c �� a � ��0 a o o ��C''J ��j�1QOD�o 3°.'� �� °�a�� . toy ,�,� a ' h � Iv` �n� 'J' �.f � � P .�•�— ° �° °� �T ,. � � a A�e � � U Qen c, ° � � � ( � � �� , � �� a � ' ��i i �O� � �� , � � � �- �� Q � � � C7 ."�' P � � � � � � � � � P�� e� � O � W {t7 M � , � �� a � �H N �� _ �, � �_ �� f� � ,e ;G 4 �" i i , � ` � �r ,\ ` ; � soQO � u "' �m i _J €[.'.?�� ^_ j' _� r fy ^� �� —� 1 �t Q �1 � bl{.. �C)�� ` yr cr s;G Dpj� ��^�( a �y �ti �� I� C '�20 �oJ'DC� �"�� ¢ �._ m�,£o �°�r�6��- � ' � lOC j iP " .. d � ( t� o � ^.. ct o,c?t�' � i/J ❑ n cg 67 t�5'(jc, � 1�� o;� � � � � �r flll°�81�° c � �� f��0 1��t � j C '��, �� aa fl a� c�o`� r-,�^ _ .. ,.-. '_�"1 Whitall St. t _ o `� � °\�� , �� –�— � ` �� A � i \�Q� � ; ` � o � � �� \\ d � � �� 7��-' 0// ��e n �J O� a C � Op� .°J ) O aQI �� Y } L.3Yn� o� a�fl �{ 31 {1�¢ v � � � �b �J Ct E�a° ��mm�fl ��°°0 � �� , �a o�I a � a 4 a � e 0 ��fl{p tl � Q : , , 4�t'IS � (t ��c��oii� '�� -° � o � 3�� c !c � a�� } L, �L�t�L'C � i� . `-' , � � ai��•— ` y ° J� y� s c9�L Q �'tIC � �` � } &�� J�L°L Ji � � �€ O�� L_. � m � � '� ;:aUQaflJ� R � � a � ° a �': ; ( -��- a � � FL ��! 'O �SJB'u3�i��f C t W I�°�i a� ' �� a�' � �` t,� c i C a1` D �' E { �flG� `� o E� � o��D� �G�� l �, �..--�.._-- � '� �} a o � �} G �t11 �`� ` t r� - --�! 1 � ? - � UPRR j �..� • M'q IL�'� ------�—�' � ( ^� ) : � c � � j}� �t" �'�� o 'a�o��a� —r�j' f9�Q6S�0 ❑!'T �l1rs-i AnFlfL'L L L....n� �S ^ ,�3� � } O p � dcoo�µ� (I�i � D�+�� BcGC] � � � �� v (� _ 'o � � a 4 � � r ( � —{ a �i�� [t'�l� �€3�n,��*�-� �i �,�°� p af'� � �1 , �� .��o G E°,3 aC�s� �� o p ^i �Q3 � ��`�'�9� �� 0 7� �LZ"'"�C�jfl �p ° �3 p� � � g ^ ` �j� � OI. � G��R /!/ ;��. � / � rc�naa� � �� - j�� ./ � � . �� a � 1 dp J �,� 6 � � T�� ,oJ�� a �r �� 1` ��a[�t�� oc C =� t � o 7 i' t ` � �� a3. �� i 1 ;�� L °��'- �� ° 6'y � � ' ��'� �� ; �.��-�� ` �'� �� .�la��;� S ' �; � :� -a � �� J 't!' � � � f�� '� ��, � � � l� r� i��! ��1`v�e� � �� . �' - o �,o� �� ' � °' �� - �� .. �� `��\�� t ,�� t � 0 � Key Phalen Blvd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-6rade Intersections Interchange Bridge � o � •f a� �� .J..�_'.. --�; 1 �� ? e p ^ c�°° p� � � 4C€1 ' � �� V�' � nra 1 ! n?Mirf?l��irfi1 ,�._ �� q!� —� i�-j � .��, �� __._ �_`� O u � � k _ `l � � � �...�� ('--�� 1 �� v �! t�� ,.1 G= `�-' ' � r------ � � l 1-- �j `M} i`�� • � .�.�[�. � ,,,,, . ... � � ° ��AOO o� r � p6� I` � aiJca7��➢? a� �Q�3)� � a }�€to��joa ��i�nc �o� n eonaai �f a �a� m� nfler L s�JinL�s � � r. �=aj �n�� -__._.� �� °, o �a��r� a�a� � (� � cv ooll�y:�e l AV L�J � � '!Uti ° fl0"�Gfl J�3�(I3�J {0@[1 D i j `�p '�G' �%i �� , ,�� ` �p oC S � . �✓' /� a„ ��,r /%.� < �% � /�� n � %�� i a °� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 5 Alternative W-1 Pennsylvania Freeway ,_, Connection ��. � � 0 0 500' 1000' � N � Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. —�� Caenereux Researeh • The 106 Caroup, Lid. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. � i � � � � � , � � �� c , { � � � -,= a i _c�L ¢ 7 �o �cuc�oB o { � il 5 f ;� ��4� �:� li! t I� 0 k� ' C 0 �� I'i '� � ��1 E o �..r, n I �� a c . — a#. ,oa� �a� � � � 1 _t �� tc� � o � e �° a � E aoi� ��op�,�_�aa �,�p � �,� c�e i"_—` ;0 °�0_� d7" �n o�� o � —� � � � ,�� o�� a`i�i�� GDO �° o o f,�-. ' �.� ��\ `•� �� [C�ti"�y+'; {�'A •�'q�^ 0 � Q� �iy'St7 '`., �C&d� p� a �': � a� . � �.�._Jj gfi��a � � C� a a�t; '" D i ja-� I Q ' L ',%'�—~�-� � o q fl Q� �7�� a,�+.` �o0op Q � �� , ° ° ��Q r� �. �` � y a ��a p� � Pe� � °° U� J� � v '� � � � ��c'? � '� i1 � � � � � �� 'L"°'� k'r � A � � � -'- � �� C� ��— ��flf � `�° �L n � ^��,'�� .� . w7 L� �'`� .=3 � "��. � acao Q a 4 G �; ¢� o � `J �,�g�� % � � ��/% �� W � M � � � G I � ti ��'Q i Q 1 �� y ��N �� a� v/ � ��L�a�� .¢uuut .� noc� 'c �3 ---r' � e a cz l;� C�c � i� c J \ r �� p e•� � , � � � � � j � .,; �� co� i y � l3G� Y S7 n� =�i� d 'JCs � y i �� m o O � ��y�� n 1 � 07 ❑ o � � � fl o j� � o 1{ �� _.. � 3 i. ' �=�� _.� . ��;-, _ � o��o��"�'Y �` �1�r �(I� �41(�I :� 4 � c3�sr oo�Co`°E-i1�= ��to�731' o - ; =7co�°3� =��ze°'{c �� .� �Q J fa�v o �)s �,.� � .�J� ° GJ:coB� E Tc r -: °o�� r )i°c� �! 5��fl� 0 om�•i [ 2,�� o a ��Si` ,- � ° �j;�� o� � ��`�Q ��m cla�lffl�� ° ��r�� ;i; a..� -�f"��l C� o��;l�B-'` 6� 1 � �c� �-�2� Q . _ � a o 0 1;` � � —, 0 � _ � i L— ( � p v r L:�.� G a`�z cm W�QaJI� y j m�'31��L'�_ �� O tc ^£] ELz ° o::^ o � — � s �og� La _oi�n�soj�; ol� �� . m d s� J ��Q °� €G�cjL ° °3I[ ? a�! 'a ¶ 9�t�$ �li* C . e � e Qpi [L � W � a� � o a �n � Ee7i� �� o —��° �(c g �� p� a ac)to {� ��OS�Q(t c�, � o �so� �� 6a �� ao6.o6'. V c�u � ? � �� 4�n J �q �' �S`�c� t '�J l- ; a a ��41 �:��G i �L x � —�`. _ . .! ."' —'_? � _� o � � ( G t'�LII cs i�-r Whitall St. ' � � �� ..n� � �— -- I' �� € UPRR � � �an � �a � ' Ga ` o � o � a 's ond � ° �sa � / i : r�„Jf�-" � �'�°u ��'��c�r� Qa� � F4` CICn 0�(34 r c° a � � [�._._.�.. �,� � 1 �� CYf � s� I� s � )�° °��L�W o�.�e �_'�° � ;� � a`, �� G�i � --- �I �(� i �� ,� ry me .° a� � � ' I ;J �� ` d—� � 1,�� t I�� r;:� � a (c � :'t 1 � � ,; � i:J 1�,.�=, �—jfL a� t ��.+ 3 � \\, : a `� a V J�CJ�\ �� o o �c � ��t a 0 , �� i �� a � o �..� Q 4� � �t a � �t3�U �a� � �V-=� LJ a°� � �°n�3 � � �1 o � 3 a�� a �E�rs 6 i 1 � � ' ��o�?=�� li'�� ! �r'�Q �� 1 �I c� � ]44� � Q _ �� cc `�o�� R � (°� � }� c.�� f� �i � ac�;t f �� > I�`� `� E°� l �, �,�.�j ��`..� �� i�� r� � i � �� `�'J' � t �7 � � �, � �� ' o� � ', o `.� , � Q �� e _ \' 1\\\ / :�f 1 Key Phalen Blvd. Access Canoections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corndor At-Grade Intersections Interchange Bridge 9 � � 0 ��:t� o � Of (�•�o O �� / 0 4 0 � /� oO ! ��'° =`G C �``/ l O� �� '1 ,�r /�\� ` � � �n "�.�� L6H6�$$�III :�o:: ---'�--- � � 0 � �� _ � 1� � �"+ 3 � _� o ,� �' � � � � x �� ° � '��'t � �. . _.._�� i oamecaa• o � R �t�o�000 �o� � � �� Q �p�a� mc � a � �o� mo i YJ�J{�QJ � ; � �o� � _ -c L31 I �i [ �00 � ,! % ° o� , �` 4 y,/ 0_;�1? r � n �� ::: � ; r==-z; �{ )I 7�l u � �9� pa0[�ae� P �� L �M tl Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 6 Alternative W-2 New Cayuga Freeway ,—_-, Connection h� ,� � �< o soo� �ooa� ° � N / Barton-ASChman Associates, Ine. — Genereux Research • The 106 Group, Ltd. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. L �o��°� ��1�.� � .�`' ;�, ° � � � � � � � � ,� � � ��or� ;'c�� m; c � �; Cg� a� C�.1; n � � �C) O c t � � � ❑a'o i [; � � " � 5 �� `� ° a? ;�ft�'=� �� aj a6,� � n[�� n l� � � � �� ' 7t� L<} � ; � � ; � £ �bds �° 706� E € ^ i °Q�� °��< � � � � a ��; �Ja�a� °��(� �°x i � � (�fl� x�'� ...-��'t t g E� 1 � -, � Whita{I St. J ` d�aa�/`�/ � �� ;"� � � � J // t � j � � � ` � � � � � , � O� � o �u �Q�j{� a gy''�'.`� f,'�' a � ��'�'*,�'} "�` :`� � U1�Lt16f.�.1' L�tfSiStCdtta.tu� �J£3tiL'veC�C4�+�;:r�%tu#:-wu�� uv��t�ac..wvsnz� F "' �.� �,.,_ _ �� ,�� ty� '� �¢it��UJ' � ��3r�� i."��'3�€ ...�s �''o n �.�000 mm� �Eem au� ¢� y � ��-_..�- aa a a..an o � a c aa. o n � � � J� Q o?j � � ',� �� t'�3GCffi`i� ��U"S3{L �'.�.i:e�tL fLa�G � Sfcrltf`ilWi�4 4 at7a�?lecs y � � S ` j �ru � = V� � o € ' �nt1r � �n aa � j ( � � t�' , ^ R1�gQeGtl�r�t�i= IAff= L-1 a i � �� S E 6 � � C�7 � GttlG.(�'s� �m� �J��.i7 p �� U' � � �..mc� R., d� ,n t. T m Ga tieoIIto� mII A "� � i ,� � I �' c ��c-- a 'p'm'�'a'a'9' vn—a CO �o6ma aa4an� am y r �oco�s zoco �" G � �� _�7tT7�1`�k;Y_'7 G� tt ,��"�Ck?II�'v� li��G#'IS e�ffii37ift t�C'T�'I fa[I"sfl`,ktt�g[[�, �1� i . a{7{1�FI'i�1s:1i O G i � � � � R � � � � � m `�J�..� � o � �� = s o �! ° � � e �: D � i �?�� . ; �IPt�mb� j nma3� � [�° �� f#E1tG� �� u��iln4tr� u_ ; �� oa etA�[tt � o ra7� � } j� a1 .o (Q 1:'��-�a,•^�'*xn=� ��' -.�.��'] Wa¢Ila a o G�rmaso aao: .�n c m¢c �, Lz . Ly O[ G �"'�3E�'3 =L �� ° i{ b' 0 03 [9 °2Y BoSpSRfl a `� O'9 0 in a N ai C °' " 1 ��.� �� '8 � � � }� �1�4� ��3 s�Th�C� ��`3C.�(�2j,QCt�,{.�_ti[ y � �SiQ�(�UiIC�{Sc'€� Z�'iC1.�1G{s�Id�3 � �"aIIt{3flG�7MS31 �2G �S°!� � �'_ �...,. ('� � � n p �i� � =�CC3+ � � � � t,�L'� �Fi�'s��' � E ' ��IEIISG3Zt�`Y �l�f��(�325�$3fS �II6[SI11e��'11� 1' - D � a# s > {r, co�o a� e� o ae�i� °nanav � 6� a cao��gQ��au a � o� £ � � � Q6 �Wec �ag ��l�,�� Eo��s� �� . _ ia�3 tx�.Xt �� 1..; ea ��t�oa �:t�c�� oc��U�ccl�oa'�� r: o� i tt°Sd�^ 1 � I I.. !�. Fi� �� ( : m �`�dt'�'l F � S ^ i• r t�� t3 � � � 2a '�7°€ICt i'}Dt7D h II�4 p�3 GL3 C3 t 0 o t��'' ._..3 C'. t--. - CD c ps CC E� �y ' � �7``�R �»�' ,,..�` > �.._n II . Q�i?F � [�r_, a a 0�' p m. �F4_iTx—aTl. �# tE4665s� W._OII �ff'� C2 �a.� 65+0 CC ^.�«0 6sL3i= j � 7 ��ycraf4a a `� s� t� esg �`s�" �� nc+� t n a� p p G � t"a (`�, gt � � E :at7 �� o�OQ� a� C ,�� a a � bCx D Ot C llU �i` � �� ¢ .�£�� Il,I k� Ci CF* � �---'�__[� � �, a �� o � C��S��gfc°�� € 3€ �� ' $ � �°� s�Sp `b�� cA�� cns� .. � � S ° �t �� s�'3 3�" } �� € � � Ct ° �� , �,. ° a p D�$ W91�1{CS�'.2 �jD OB4G'g g uCl°Ra=� g1a6P�1CFO � �� ° Case Ave. �en � a� �, aa�crsr�a� =1 �a��9r�� nr� ��ac�a�� ¢� coe�ac � t a'"''� � [� �' �ma ` ^ � y j ��mn�n �c�fs;:'E�� a� ��€�1a�tt�3�� l�" � �� °�Pa�v�� y ( � toL_Ea�71� ��-Gl'-.'4�� `2� a.nnm ,O4Q S� �t�a]u 4C---) � i( C3 fl.e{R� �� y�--�°-�� m'_._.�� __��_�� __�.� � �� -� � 6��'i � � sflmL'�€t� �ti�ofllfl �'�Gti�t Il1(��a i3�1t7 [1tY�.�� 4i �C�t7�A3 �4flQ3 � ��,�°� ° " rcm�aR�QCe � ( �o ��--�- t r �[1�4��'4�SI2 : �i0 �r.�9 ��GG4S� t'1�-��ac� €� G�t� a n�U�� t� Qa� ° ° � � I �'t+si�an �t� W [ �e Q c � � o � ��3'��3S5SSp u�34�£3�Q�`s `t�'s�� '�� Ett; CI'�➢' �ts'13��E71a a�ti�7Q�4I3f1t33�3 �� , ��!?4776� CP�,6�GItt6',�L� t�`d�€�€#�t�"1 t".�r""4Q� �m��...� � � � �� `�� Welis Ave. � ��t�� :,,� u � ..-_-� �- ---.�-�' a� - -- — � a un ma `� �_ �� Si , a��s j a �� i��Jff i1c�iP�,� a ��°�°� ��a T ri4�i P '��o a E�t m� ;�� - �� ' ° � G �� 1 � ; � � �< � � �� o � � � I �� "C�_� .'�� ..� a'�.� p �, � � �� P 4 ��'�'� ��Q}� ^ t ��< S�� /� Q P G � . < i � Key Phalen Blvd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-Grade Intersections Interchaoge Bridge il� 8 vrdyT£: iL'U£C C "�t �one �r o �4��Q�nQCSd3y etivna�41 �t7G_�a�D a� � J€ � � . ir sL' O��E C J �/ � �, _.,�. � _ g�� .�� _ �y fl�t�u¢tY� m �` � 7 �nQ�tl at� �. �_.._1 ` " �,. � �� s� ; E an�� _` � � 5,_._./�t'"�e �S��Q�Qa� UIle4(�.11��[t� �� . �,� ��.��"_ � �,....` � "'�l�a� ��tr�c�tg�� ^— 4 4�}. p {I tlS£5 � q O P � ----L�p { � y ;� �_:� /� �+flL'!t'1� ��2i"€Q47� *�}��3� .� � � � �� .�__..� �1„�� ! � �l7C}iXi,� '�t]6t1€5��1�4�R6� ��.�...3` �w.� `� �_,� � s c�?�t3� t� `� ,,� g G�3na4�1ca��4�ot��t�C�� [{3 ;� �� a�ao �� '��%� �'� �sm �� i ct�m� � ��P�'°Q °°v�� aII a C�ma a n a o 4 om a� �� a c' n° aasa^ a av ay o ao=3o m ad a�svo� .. • � Corridor �-�, � .��.a�� Q�� a iL� � ,� � �� t' r �'s�� I�i�fl� �c+'� Cimr�"�� ,��U '� � S ��d 0 L o a�C6ACJ Ct a&e ¢ �5 C�Y4 '�ACpeeffiRS fio CcF a] f+Lj,yC� 5]0 ��' •�'�_,,�� t�l�Sa�c� ',�tts�a�c�za '��¢�s�� c�l��ar��c � a�� c ,��3 ��a�� '°� � � � acvaa a�ca a eaocaa a � a ax c� cs cc o. ��`�, � m��ap meann cas� po nQO z&$ aa a�ac a � �' ��, �� p �`� � �� C�� 7�4�fl�s4�+s� �1�tai�4�¢¢ �� CEttI�L+{t3G 30 ; r� � { �� a� (�'°trs�s�� o�� '��..�,� � �� l�j � 4.�---�..�� a�, �°no steQ� �� g � — � — o � n 4a om e va na ap � f�� p ' �� ,—r E', � ��II Qt��s'�iLt�t� � t(,-1 �4 �t� � CI �qRG�Ck ' �J ° o �,f4�` � � v�_�.�,._..... ��oc,�i'��"�\d� o��L[��,'�r ��t�i�a �cQ��l��lm � ��{3B c � 'A� �/_ ,il�� .at� �� c� mFAYI � ,�� ( n QFkt3m„iCfls2�� S� %' tttt"�3'?f3��s-,� �� ° es n �t1� � 3 Cft� i#]u s�� Q� �� 4 � --- �,__ O � . / � F f �2 a � F %r;/"'�'" i� y� � r�( �1. � t'se € �n �Y a � a � ( � 'S'�G1""4Ca"� :F's51_� _ �+ Q � m m�� , l ��f3t.�� y � w, �� . �1�QflI3Ltt R � sa�=.na � .:� : �p � oo.c� o` Q � (#3�D4Il(�II�tf �� E. Minnehaha Ave. � Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Doctunent and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 7 Alternative C-1 Union Pacific � (old CNW) Route 0 500' 1000' � N /�� Barton•Aschman Assaciates, Inc. r Genereux Researoh • The 106 Group, Ltd. — Malcolm Pimie, Inc. � � �� G v �i„-- ��t71i1.�7 �' � :"i�� 1�'a .��°� ; � 4 ��' ��,� � � � � � �� L� � � 1 � � �� -° ..oc,s I71�] °"' G��CI `[� 9 �wLt?,�� 'L"�''� . � t ; Cx7G{�AC� �J iL`',111CFjOJF9 D�J9J�•UU'=L'; fJ� �UU a`flu� ��uJf}}0 C� EAE c_ , a�= € Ha J� �.____�� - � �� a ;ti � �o�� c� j a �5��v �'cL��c7"� '' ��iaf!C4 D��o�� a � �c�n7� � o';4�s�[��c�c � �ae o � G° _ ' .l_:;.�1' �lg � �=�----- �i � �.��:a.€n�� i�o =eac�ec :.�a.vn�ccmc ..�aa�ao aa�� o R `I .�� z�T.e--T-� -�iirv e¢ � aaoa o:;o°o ca=a c �❑ j�{r a�Eo � tc ,-Na-JS 9 � , ��l.�.� � J •I [ Cil�� P4. p �t- � �r ijn i r �-^ 7 i - Y sP,�;.'�7P0' i- i] G + i. •-.Ji ��` )`Q—°�i._ �t`s'Yli .t�"��iO�;i3� �300`�12' �.uV➢G'�i�� LCQ �: .1�04Tr � l= .�. `-- _" � ^^��,� r(� r � y . t� 6 i � Tr r�Q ��C7']'�'iL4'�v .��"� !� L' L`�LO'. � r j 7. '�- ,��°� :� �� a o'' � i �e� � { D °O _c`> � ��Q�� '_J_!E=_a i�_:J $aGff��C.�� .,.�� i�s. T �m e n�ome?i dc VJ 5I �"� � "� � � ec � �i � -- ¢ '� �� t1�b- C�-sv-sm' � � � �ac_c�aoQaaa� �m i : .�coca�¢ 4--, 7�'_€ C CGG�tTr .1� �c� D p QLG� 0��`1Z o=4��G��Gf _n�ool�� '_� � m L63 o if� ��` o ��acu�chcr� m�:��____ �_____cF� zl6�p-��C;:]� � �? c�� o�� i�1.��7.iGa�� T;j fl � ?pp' �C7f13tf3f3 � ��^e� _ 1� rrU�I�oO� D��t��`-�:3�Q�i1� i.m9ra�6002'_9�� c � b� �� + � o� G �s �� CC a." cc - = - c� - �� o...i. .Qne➢o ` ¢�i'r°waC^n�a° °amam c au�a' fl� � � n� a � � +>' °° � o • � � �� C � T � � i ( '� fx ' rT CtD � �� J �..� � ..�L. �� L � � ;' u - � � o � � Ci'iO�LI,�� n Q� od n" o�$ 'a � � 4 } L tts�7`J :.� (J � G`�0[3� o�'-'.��'Co�- �� j GGe'�u`"i}�9C�1'r`�G( L�:�'rGts`.'�,}OL J�[�d70C�:,'F'�J:0.7��'�E3] ' 1� �� r3 �� W 3 0G!?7(��3 ; n I ' ' C�Q��aa�C 41u�'P�v y=�7o�C��oC�' I 64�laC�°�� f 4k'��uGG�OtA❑ �]_. RQ �j : { � a - i'r�oa 3e crsc n:;flr�faa aa�aa❑ •noanc� ao �9" ❑, � .� �C� �� IO � �= C]' cc- a tN � ��:� Q� �o i ' ' ¢ �� no^a�oa: oa nm xGa^� a¢oae �=0 'i � '� �� ,�,�� _�� °��.��p r � 6 enCh'.: U.*7fi3�OQ� � ' R�,�30CP�a� �@4Lt D�YuoC}1u^LUL��I7vi p�r�7f]��P¢e 4��7H L �;�3 � o�� a� �as I .� e � 3� �r� � '; � � ❑ ,�6�� ( � � � �'�'' C€..p °� , (��a�o � �� '' �0�7N��C�o j Oat7�JaD�s�ten! ��[k��l�j� �pp � m� �:g� �ad�� ;� Y ��l�- 1 �! LL—L_ /� a i�R�a��.�n:.�'..nQ mQO a m. Q aomc m `az� ow�� 4'oE8 � ��°��,, o c, � n�' � p 4a.SP. AVP.. ��. �� t �� c. 4.)°O flOG�� o€��QO ooeQoa, �o=mo�a�o J£76� C _ �k? � L.� � � � � il�k Qo U�€�a]D � RL1GD � ��° ��7E70�C� OL� GocL�{IC a � �G� 3• ��Su�l � C'�GY� � � � '�� ` � o a] � =. � � � u"—],,r^-. a g �"'_ � � f� .� 'v�"-�'� �h � Gt7�(]�3�} �4��it�{� i�a� �jaT�;+�l� L�.� � L1C16�M1iTt7 'Q�f'i�oi (o o j�-` Gr �€o� ��;.."�eG��cfl � [�7 (�� —� � - � 7 � -� D��Q �U .77i�'� �C13�'c p"�� "� '� 3 ir,.J �'"y�,� va�li,� � r a lLt�,.� i � oo�n�� o�. _ u r .�cl� �� . t a C�1{a ° "�'-�c�'��e� 3m � C a tP Ge] o pe ' re e �• cn �� o O�ro o.[ o[ o ; 3 r � � t�7T1��I1�, �in_ L+ca� � CLCIC➢COQ�] «� �io �3f`�-" °°"[�°O��v �� E�Cflsm . ii�Ct�0if3��o�.�CtL0i� �r7�o�� E73`�i�6C�.��it%CQt"x1';7 �3�� .��L_.,�� C Q ..'"]. � �. a � (( ��'� 1 �' �� 9 ��° °� ,� a c� �o n a] [� y "�`Q G. G ❑ o�7�Gx �i7 6'�E15� o i aoc;. t c? ��v:pf]l7�a uCE �...._:I a �� 0 =8 j� �c a� j ; o [' (7�3 � � JQ��''g{�flJt� GO{� � ��[�� S 7L�G � � SF� C3 'O I I w c a SI J'. � �_I� � `�^� ^ ^° -I S`m+�m n� �y ( l �C._ssu_._s�-LL_ • � ^ 4'a� � c �� ps `L. C €L��iB¢ o-z ca p ° c 7( P °a � � c f"�Q '�-�---� c o t+ p° � t3 ��( . ]� � `'+r- rnn' 3 rn n '`� C!�<. i � t �'s0 _ac,,m�C _ 17� Q �i � � ��1—��_"°_' -i �.,,I� �3'�6�(7�� Ja09{7o�J➢'J�IW �! � ar' 0>�.�., A a�� 0`�a` G r o o � m c. s.' � ' .-.. .... G° e � [_—_� a — �^ .___--� t? � 4� °n t r ^�, C1i r��':.�".�Cs i �{ �1 00� Q C m C] c fl a '� R(j'�l[;Lll�� I (�� r-�--,cec ae� a J ��` I ,.�� O a� � iP �Ci�J ,G�`S � c� f1 f�-'l t� � i� �� 31i ^� I cl ¢ m r p Lk f a �p -cJ � tco�ai_a c�� ca aO v 3" s'-i m �°�` �p o1 �88 co�QCO, =` a 0 �� ° o �ia o �r� WeIlsAve. "�°� � n � - _ � _� � ° � � C e 6 Jflg e ��e �tr�� ° fl 4 � aoj f❑ u�j� p �1 I�� fllii��,._ _ , —�� . ��' �0 `0 � � �F � y}. 1' G Eu� G'� fl�) �� da�� ' . �� , t .. � `.°g R�iio°�" L°��r (� 9t�0 `5� � `,`,r-i��QR�u °� �o �`Q 'f.5� aC£�}�-II �e �� .,-.,-, . '�' r . L€I� � � _.. 1 0o n.s i� m :: Whitall St. J l_ � — �tl� � 1iC � � ��=nn �� c a � J�� 6� � �Vp�� 3 °�� p�^. C11 � G � fi Ga' � o "..� � ❑ ca G��C��Q a- n , r�nniln � nm,i�G'T � i ' � �ao�` !,]�) i(�`l �npn7:� �kt�`� IIC!ri�f� 1�0�1CP+f'�€ €"�`"l��i [O�q ..�' Wells Ave. � �� ' � � �� m Sub-alternate °°�� Ke Phalen Bivd. Access Conneciions Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-Grade Intersections Interchange Bridge 7`��um t�+��c_:cumauw )t� m �oc�oo E£ e o � tc�tl00aQG�C��w3;�o�7 � y� °=�oC�or�O,nc ! I c a a �3 t � ^.a ciTO, CT R� � 1.4c�€!'�� 3 �� W4('�`r'n,_,.„•i'lf ii / �ff a�� , � a� -��y � � - — �--- O � // / � � � �� /� ��' � f I { 6 : p� � ❑�jj Yk p ' �`: �� o em� I e�_..��,�- ' a� l(7 � u't]QY P�� 4 �� 1� � � � �� 1 ��. [—� � � � Y a a ma " ��'--�--� � � ;`FC m� [ rt P �owaa •u � � __. s .ma � �� _ �,>.�,� � _ _ PC� � a9 �O 'Ct G{S tl!7a� a404QC ;CQ iS� t . j � � � � ' � �ro o� 4� ; , ao�qc, oeo�; ioG�o�� [��c��ati »-� � (�] � � � o e�J m n� r o c e¢ m a c o � a ❑ fl �t m� � �„�'� {' r �{' �'a 1 3 .� � ° t �"�"�" gu � , � ��'��_: a ° �, � :�1 J�..,S�l O'; ��00��0 �fl�L�i��°paoa ��lDC�SQ�a �7ri}L+�]oE7[ � �� ____ f� ��n€� `�'� ', � ' � i ¢� ( �% j7 _ �Q�oz�; ;, � �o>cp a�o�a3 a�or °�omooa:,aa�' �co�ooa� c � ^ � .�r=,—� �� fEi.�' ooGm Q e[a r. e coi a"� o m 'tlaeoaocc yP � � R � � § « � ! ��-- _-��_, �� t'�� i � � �S5 �� ,.� � '�� C1�S3L�aG� Q�C�Cl�+�Q9��y Q�L G�s �1�iG Q� iV0{�l�` �Glipo4GQjt{37Dc6G`�iJ�fl4 ¢ � 2�6t � � �� r � c 3 ��; , d� ��I� �.at7�e�[!� ��OCIS,��t�'v �7.�[ Gp O�GC��(��fli��^� ,,�� C i_�.r,n.a.md � � � % 7 ° ¢ acuCS�t_� tv mo� ca� oac�v e ra ❑ omo ao� q? , � ['�� i o ' a � �., 1 [��, "�'�"�a�r'^. � � � � ��' n ��—� i�i; �`,� _�t a�c�t o� Q_�' 4 .—...�J �_��--_—_�-�..�.t� b��Q�asz�a tr��oo��3�o=J �o�o��r�c� 1c�oQOo=��' ��m�oa�� -� � , �� o�r,o �� ' �� ° [�'_,_,[�� ❑ � c�omm no �� a��c� �� E. IVI11108h8h8�CVe. � �� a 6 0:� � �� t t o u�mo a o 0 o c�o �a d� GGa c, � a 1r n° onoo• e am a•ac cos)� c oo�e„p - � �' °�� Corri �01` r � } ��Q,�1` � om�?��7o am�6�:�Q�3Q G�'�a�(7�c�n Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document p [{�� r a7�o�t�s ��ffar��3�oL�� . �o��, ��+ andDraftScopingDecisionDocumeni [�' Q `� �(� o �u o SS =o+ v� i� w rvx7 a.'n �� a a � n� : co v a e � o0 31... � 7 � � ��n � � v t �2 O'✓aGCaC;(C ¢b�q21 q3tl pq�co6� HC ri4 S 04 GCp]LQ'�4 fi ure 8 `� f? �,� -��`s� '�'�� h�a��GG�7�r�i�J � =�mtk��33o:�r� oco��tlo��Q ;eQf��t 9 � �r� �•� � - ^ - ! � ! � P i �� q �� - � — � A y� J � �� $',,'"�}! �:� �° A L ` �� (��{`' �o� � y{f �I� Alternative C-4 G t% ✓ ��Yy a]6eiJ[fl�"�° 0� �4]O�� O p t_i: � C f9y � O�� W E6`1 c'il -°•1 a�� , � �� a o �G ao �� o�� n a� o�� m 3 ��, 9 a m o; o Upper Middle Route � ��;� / � Q p \\o ��,��L oo�o c?0� GG4oad�o�s�c a ,:m� et0a �o v �'.., o a --, r--_�.._ � ° �� ci): °��A�� pt�Ctl�no�� 'i t`;�Q�3c��3� a04� �C��a��eo= G p �.� � � �G o�) �oene4ae9STJ 3 o'3eea�ema a.� �aa `o ' P � O �� pc 6� fl v� f � �tT}IDOj f � o,J � � °o� L—,r--� 0� �� EeOr�a�� i I� � �,�af�4� �cc �ee�cc � � \ ° � ' /�0�:\ eb � )wl��j �/� Oo� ��O o°��E��CY' �La4)�1i.'�' R � ca".� '� `�F�,I (o�€7� L3C`� r� Cj�� /II� p �� o 't rj o anan p� o <� o� �� ) ��oun a� m 0 500' 1000� O 0 �..� o ��O O G+�o i ��j pl�� P ❑ am a�+l(Ca�� m�o,��,l�� ,� o t ° o oc�l n� c� n� �� .l r-. f, flt tn7rai�(D r.° :-e ro C£3(7a S�D6r,S !� .� n N / Barton-ASChman Associates, inc. — � Genereux Researeh • The 106 Group, Ltd. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. � � f � i ' � � � �' i � f � � � � ��'� n �fl �`L=�°��°�. °��`'` � �� -[ °a o ,..,�,`(^ t€l0 .� '-a a� �0 p9�j� o � � : n ;�c�i� c �CY �_� . 3G� �7:IIa O i ��'_ r �� J`. � Q— {7 � 5 r y ' �h o a �li c , fl� �F F�u..� 1'• (o c�S s a i f ci � � i3 �.... � ��n��m'��Io��o 77 D C C � � 4 CGS�U� i � � �� , D , o �J a � � a � p� p c GCJ��a��deoj o�� ?� o � a �;� C`—�'_� �� I � � . _ � r p e�' Q�v��QLtSE �j �tC�l C�.� �Ul�QCJ �� =�66�a ;oC+��i _j �O�L�`` ��5!�fl'07l'cS' c�� a�=� ' �'�'8 E,"' p P �,� 5�2� ep {[r o��z�3� R -ti-��r.-,� n � � o t � ( .� , 0 0l [ �'oo„ tJ�li =p�p��0oo�l�'a�;0 �4 € sa t o o)%^ g S °ziC�a°n ��9��5� 6 � �i� ! o o�}' � � ° o i �r,� ;a 07d' Q n C� 4 �� l� � �� .�..�.� � � � �o o�o Gl �� b , $ 4! [ o ° ��j ��bql€� �: e Z1 ❑ - n �a � ��Cl I��Svt� �p O O :-�o�"_IiQ '�.'`�l�Q ..��p ��iiaa�� [�o Whitall St. � ; � a p�- � .� -� v.,.�. - � ° � � °� T'o� ?�Cp � u �, � -- � 6 ,o ��_ � E �� i [ (ou � �7ao�)`�o� �� pJiop °no$ o��c �i { o -.�oo � Eo fi P�1 C1n��oo;'1 fl C1�L3+�f1��B{h 6 - � IF� �= s � —s fl�'�.��t33�"�„ � � fl�3`-!Y'; ... �� L(R' G ' � �31L C�tlil � aOR-� r.n� ll m � fa �II� � s � {,� �� 1� ! r� _ � � � � • ��_ �""�_ �-�'•��+ � r Kt�Si$ i t� � o c{ � i ,R e , � U �, �� ..�s tnf 2C �S�'+�� 7(�i�1GC�+_„ �j�..(��tC,� L4L��.LC . p�y�W�,[f? -ctutu �v uvL uvcizu+ �_, ��'�.—� ._! �� . �: � �..�._ � �. '� � c1',fi� ^' �"�6tA0a3? !] 4?[G� 0»�J��¢�3 aq�C ° I�L�app 3 � F��avC � o �e��au � �! ? r � = n.ShS �a Gccaace ° S;emae�ccce .a e_oeme { _ . �'aj7v ca o ca➢fl i�1:Ja6omII c F i ;L ° a ,. ` °q i ��l`�� i �C7�G�� `1 � ` .,��{ic�tv'o�caD,�;�oaeG�aw � �! � !.s � . N �-' r---' � n, m, m- � y' ! f E� �G=''�C'e�7 �, � o e��i,:� n�o c�r�_cna�D�aw :n;��_ i � : O N � �{ � Ki,�g�n�:_ d 'a.�0.. r a =C ^ COGma.; �la �� CAS oa '�'�-^'c76 IDT oamc _eee[co: rJ2 y � cc1'meoc � ° O y[F1 � 0� � i .�C:CI��'J� � `':7['�lU �i7 i i F, (P �'-�17 (C � (c �'C�1�J OQ�41 i [; rJ� i § L=.��r�' '-T�rt:;CGt l � i �[i3m� �.; � e;17�1tL�t�L� �c.�aQm �o`�1�r �Ss .0 �D F �i07tTi.3*C �Jfl[�G R?='t�".'?n4} �c�q C,ti's�t I, � 4! .- � lC �.� � a. ia s�_ Qj @oa0e c c 'FaSeR� 9us< I_m3�a o mac ^��.��i °�°aoIXl� m�.•aNO�C+zao �:°exOto: �ac �� W �'�'w C,�10 " � � (3C��4�r D �� ]tD(�CG;�� tL��[ y ��Q��7�G�t1 �X3z�7oCc7o� �iO�eG��Ot�+C[� t� �cY��'tli�G'!-' � � ��.�'ifl Ri�[� � � ��C�Ge�� r�y? i.33��`�-`D�'G'G �DCfr�+GL£6D€xQOJ[# €LT3C c �,.nor a q� c..,-.! ° �� •--�� Q� - �`.,S"a� aa�mo fl-'( �` oom .oa^oc�t o ., , �3 +�-�.-�-», �J'� � 'a ;`�C_ ¢ ewoo - c cc �mo°' a=on m c o•( a s ' �€ �at� �GG�7tT !� (� R CQ�� C�c�L�a�, OoGC7�L€f90o�je❑ Ca �� .�...t ��s U � �--�`..—�1—..`J U� � P B1 � � �� °��1 T ��I �..�' "'� C�6LO�a �� ne�# a� �fl6,n�]C�Ln Gat1�� G¢L�Gec ( 3�L�c� �5a4 IO C f t ti , � �SL�+, m�ano�.o�o:�. a ma� eno . �� ° a4�� . �a mo�cPO a � o� ��i �� Case Ave. �, a z � � f �� o��, o� �� _ J �tLC�� ti� ` oL.�a' _ �; �� ac��aa�m �—� � _.—�� . !-� r .� � �� GQ3E7 @� (1L�LUu� FI��J OC��'1If� 1 C��[PS7� L'� C00°"�i�uC��7 0 � ( a�ec, e EB .r,6�sD6L��?a �, j ' i�� . o � �n...,.. e, �� : a 4 4 L 80 1 f-y i £ � � � � � _ . s- �� u � 3 �c �� ' . v-a'P'vm -s'Y�+7 i cr �� e°o a E.�`�f1 0'�IDa�' i � �,� OG�CG ��9oL��J�3tb� iE2@7�fl�S!](} �t7fiChQ']C�cf 59�0�"�; >��o [�t1��Q 4��C��047 . o oa,�(° cc�ODDOC'�70 R � � �.L�� i �fl9c�+� s �?�tA �,�a� �o�'�o=� 4 a� c�7 � �rrm a �08� �ae acma � g ; ° �o � od�e�n�oGq �a W o �£� S L i n •��r C r1 �' �, t �y ' _� G ' � ( _ ' nr�r, - _� q ,� - t3�G,fi �36-t3 � �� U�7�if11��•0�I3SI�si�4�Q{kCfl j��o o °J�"i�,0..�� r+., ;� ��o ro�� €�an�nnr; r-E.---,��n o�a o � c�m�� a� �;� i 1 rf ;b � -- - - '�� a a � at n � c ;�� . _ Wells Ave. � �� [t �� —j�� . � �i Q � v E�� G� c- � t l° C �� h:[IIItA,..- UIL 0 i .x 1n 3 � a S � I��t� aC�i� UUVJ GLi�;j?� c' ��'' c' � � � �� o�' ��U � � o a ^ u�si i n�,°t �V� �irs�sm� �'�11 'i IU�yiI44t1( A ; i� Wells Ave. Sub-alternate �-'��; � N n..� � � c � Key Phalen Blvd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-Grade Intersections Interchange Bridge � U� c � wc`;.uilm v itv ��O6C�0: .�� p ao�t aoQOC�,�i (n a a�a�7 � l / F Cd o v � � fl �4� �� .� � { � � �t �, �� •�� '� f# ` � °�° w=•ff° f� CO�n�D'(f.iCUl," � �w��sJ � �# . a r...m � �� u'l g � G�Tt� ��m � m� Cs� a�° ` .��j`� � _ _s.��.�` �O�oo"a, ar�oDe�aa�x;�� .� _�� I' �� `� � �� f�r . ap➢�} � � q� t� qt��1 i:.�pe� ❑uQ�¢L? Odp s7t� �7cio�.� �y�yv �� ? q aPm G a� W 4 6c 2fl o m � �� Q �� tl__v.�—� ? _J� O[r�s�t�C�G°Q �{1��3� �.tfl� e�i�c �1�, r `— 1' p a o1 �6 ', i _._.,..-- i �..�-_ ! 5 a� act��, [ f =� ��a o�a�� S �c �r� �� caa�� a �o• L � � _ �. � f = m G1 �—_—.—� � �i �-, o , a c cear ce o oca aoema a a, r > :--�°^ � � «-� >� ] ;� aa�1�c� ��.—��.5�"�� ! �'aC�aGn�a �i�fre� � aa�aC��ca� � �__..�._..._� ._— � � �' � oaaa � �� ' ((('''�� " °,��,c4� � � �C�oww �� ptm�� r�� ❑� 0 ao � i j � ��l n�mo e ac n u a�o o i d �7a o a � a= c° ca�a^ a on acF n+0 4)a !� oc ac=�-.o - // [a p ! d� � Q a oe�� o � � - � p `a o(k�od,} i`�p� a` � w �, o� Q7 4J1�'30 I� � ��y � �� me�t � S'730L6D�� j,"�f:7D000000f � � :voocp ca� � I � � ��vanccoo R �3 �7aDLJi��?U6Sj�ceat10C6�: a 5 2Q�� .�9at��7D �r7�7f�Obu�]i � m 6 o ao ¢L.w a.n31f1 ••, m-! 1 : va � — '"n'";J cJ �a w j �soC{1Lacr�G ; r �=3"S�GGUD�U E. Minnehaha ave. �� Corri � or �''}'� ��'� � or�t�or�d aas�Q�7�}G��cj ��O�aaae Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document o� ,— °� 0��,�1G Q ��p + ��opmQC� E �; o��r,,;r�Q �m�� r}� and Draft Scoping Decision Document �� n�fi ' aT aml�eo69Efom`r � o aII aC �� ce ¢a ^py' mn vaav¢yrs,�c �von� oRa°�. avp�o po n�r on oa�c��o Figure9 �� s�7G� � 1i`� �� a�afi��r�en1 �(�n�[�L��s� o��eCo ��o�t�o��t � ��, ;� � � //�� \ ;� � . ��G�� a�� ,..�; ��; ��o� �� o�Q Alternative C-5 � `�� aaavooc¢ o loaacoa � o�isg o g oII= o a / /� a� ,,, 30 �a o� 3a m�a�n o�� B� �� n��a �m� � North Biuff Route �� -� `1 �� D�43�1�f;e3C�G�ld��{70; C,L�J��C�Cac$��,��i�Q{�3a Ca 7/" _� ._ =g) ` ��`,�°�� i � �°G��3=�oG�C� {}��G�7�Q �0� ` �1� /��.\ O \-` / o ._j��a mm � � a oc ia ra 'eG Q o� � °�( � co vm n �e¢oano ( m� q mo, �.� V/ � � ?�(�"�� ----.'_� tuij E� Ci �1CS�[i00a ({� �t ��LC �r't�`�70c � � � o Jl i o �� L�._—..-,..�� ...-_--- 7� � � � o '� �°�G��3� G4��J�7�: ��5�� °�a�� L�o�s � � �>� � os3 �� m 0 500� 1000' - pa p��o /OU �� p 9Fi � G` 31 ( �� lGBOa w'ri°9�11LY� /p aD UT� y £ C C i o O O �.,oA ,F�� t�� c� nZS7i`3� r-�, ��, i(lrflmnCfln° r+, �° L'" tt7c'i t�7�--�t rR ❑ r� q� -�.��-1 � � �� °-'�--- O 0 � N �RI m 0 � / Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. �� Genereuz Research • The 106 Group, Ltd. Malcolm Pimie, Inc. � � � � � � � � ,� � � � � r� � � � � � o �ao k� a o o m a v n� c o .. _. .,... ...(- a y II, r ^ .3�7ia�Si na�la�f�J � Pa�.t O Q��q 4�mv % �u:omoocoaoC�3 � e�d�oi� � Qt�c'� � '�Oo �mR^! a so n �� r.�.,.,.,.�'a�...... s� 6�o3,.'fief�I`� � �� [.Yt�06 m�.] =�0� 00 � [Aaoo[3?��+�D[,� P��_--�� _,,.�,� ° R � � . � �� Maryland Ave. nnrc�r: t M Ynv�nnrv-ir.in r ... � { a0�e4'i�7�0o`J � 60D�E1�[37 f�tcb��Ik�S70a €A�J i ��tpaipa�flo o A d �pS4ID � Dlopva 90 4amaCOOa pvo ]r S a�m p nm� oD�mmoaa �avgnaccPOO oa m mca { ) �Ceo C�`i}�i4o{1�1�7 �aO�t�t}��1�0 ooac�o��o �',A tim�t �( lUfl[��c�c�,g�o�ma3n�noo ao�� m ; aa��e�a � l mAwom Do3 ^ c Goo a m Q Ovmmaomo..a ommomop '[ y, �,a � Lnpop l 'acono�aaw c) Ba°0000xcw i-°�°�LV�vbja d� 00 W0�' 9�+i�11 Qt70CCJtpO �� r'�O ZCD�l1.�IOI.�GS7�0 I e" r i� i°�°��OQCAca 0000� .� op aocaoao�p mcac��Dp � �CJ C m0 p� 44 60' �O G� DIIt � � a � 9m6 m �'D�G60D ID � i 3 a ea o a p_ � ci �+ �j an ceo-{pme� ( emacuomc 0 J $�P�C�}�6 � m�Sb4�� CA � l 4ppp��3'�1653[7 ��'��6�Q� I� ��i 0�{��Ot7D �Q � 0'��f}5� �;I a o t�1IX3[la ��'1 6.'10'�OJn�000 z JJ .=�a e nflo ^��a e¢oon o a m o e 0 . �Gmo a� cc t 'Ja 6 O 6 S W '� ° a G UA CA W 0 O ' m�O [D 0 o IP n ,} �� £IQnp[1A � J ( r � .. aQ�otilopQ ` �E�a[Tioo� `� Lake Phalen / � � 7 � p o .� � �—�' � ....,.�.� f � o � � QO QO y U � a 0{ a 9na: e p '��cs[�o � � �¢va��$ A j . o j 7 ��o � � to8��.. �0e .I_ t4 m� @m�� " � •'1�a��j71 �7 � �f�Q �l�`[ '�� 60 Q C)� �}Q� CYDOD �vS7 ��q��❑l�QG�� L,J yo o�+3 � o o � p�,.'.il �� ae000 ��aoctoaa�am oa�moo atx� w� �av b G aax� mc� va o 0 oavmpw c � o oa m¢¢co a�a w nQW o op� oo' oom mo o@ o�v a]o � b n�� a��Q��a�aaa� �oflam�mm� s� �o�ot�uo aa40�o� o0C947o �aaao �� j cmo�a � LQQ � Q4 CSQ6� �JO}OOSfO �r�a� Oan � 9 QC �03l1�fl t'�{'�! 0 o Oa6`SO f70o� 0 7�6�9 � re[rJ7 o // iom n m000 avcyuccoom �� o i ��°ao=a o/: >e000 ��o�o� e Ae mno -on �m4 oa�aaaa oo �� LRT Corridor u� � 000�] �mrpa�OQOflo�C¢ oo CaopaoQ�ocKJ � o �a:� fl oo l }�a�,i4 4moa@60�D�o kLyR70a?70�7fl�W n pLy7na iPa� 4GOO�ea�� 7mouo .eaonom ooa�v.�qooaaa �� Q p a0o�` ma T��p�a<60�OLO�t 7fk �.c�npcac m o>�' ofqatlCO 09 pa�'P ovoan(A D°Op°nC£I ¢Z� Da�JQ Otiod�o�o f�Qa E �OFIQC67oo ° oa�a g��oact7nC1� (aoamor9J�f1 t �"+ • `� (p. o o � e go� o��oa a�Ao a Trai I OOflnc t1Ya9�� 6� 6 Q+�O�1C°Ci IHI � � QB oGD� �" OC Oo. '� oYGa <C c0e09 95bCb mOCt 0� Y d eD�[D n Q]0 :¢ ��I �e o=oa � U°aw�oc oa�a �o=waoc�G 601 ��o �[ o a C0�3 QO �oQ4LL�C��o�a� Q�Omo0a9ocJ�QGG4DL�aJOORT�71oOPaa�fi�0 1@tD�� p �oe B a; O�iaQOaoo Q g S7p0ot117 �o b � �.�.. x�c�mp �� ° °d °�� m��'.,L� a l �� Q� g�D� °�� o� OQ�QO o¢ Q(.w g 8� tl'�1 J[7 �� +L..c.+aa. o c�' ' al � j 9 � o S��S�90 ��o° � o� "��.i �..f�0 n g p p��OS�J ! � �3 ° D Q �[qoc a ` .. �� s y � � � ❑ 0 �� ^i! � ,� � p p3� � � � � � �� } � a ¢ O �� p v �id q7 � � �s.m�+•° � °a� f° d Q ° e �j i r' � � � �oGl .. �7 c R � (y S � � o v [ �j � � t O 61 O r eC�� — 1 p q l£ � o m ° �� o v � t o4p�(} �II Dt�1 ' s g f ''"�{, oo�,,.� � ope �,, � P 1 �� "4� � -� � tki O�Cra � C l,.�� wc o oU� _ �� S, u'''-"--' 4�_ � R � � r.T�y ` lY�Y �_� fl�a�anc�dl�7�a�5t��fla�oaaa�m�OnQR �4 anvaQ�,� � � �ilo �JO �° � �tl6��L� GdGQ '�a��t� �9ppi�� S�Gt��n� � � �� d � � @ ��' �� v m �� ac�e m m a a n e a a ta �� 2 � I ry ff, � 7 � y` /l . Oj� �aQo��6o ¢poQCY�O�poo� �GDO]oc�'i0�� nd�oGUa[;;, � C�� 6°0� y 1�� Y� ~' � "t�io�p �,00D�r�� o�4oaa�o��xao0bo��m �a00000a�� °aa� o' � oonm c am m o oa o6 6 a c� laoaaow mR �� }ceaaamco s, ovff"pm'esan � t7�defODa Dda4z.o �oaGG 0¢� ¢r7(lop �10 �Oi�lan��ff?i� 't17o�o�a6c a 1 a��o❑� �: t �� ff4�17� �� 'n nrn 71Zt rvt nn cxt nf nn 1I t�t1n �,Cli �tnnn� nnnnlStKt n� {�UOtJ;7Q� ��E[��j�10� Q j � , � �all� � f04 ��3j� �1 a�. _p9 iy i] �3[ �y4� � i�� 1 �� Lf ( � c '( ° a �� 'j,�''�J o ��IC � �� f r ff� 1 / ( Q � t�� Q'� � S� Q 6 � i Q�� i� � � �� 61�Q� (',�� 3 � �7( j E o �� ' [t7 a o I`�• Q i f� �� 1C nt �o c��f�i[��` f o`'� ��_ ° I� .� w ��. ❑ D� � �e� �. Q Ct ao o coc�o� � � a � ��j �,�OO _� �co, � ,, � QOD � �� D � C�OOo ,��R eali ned � �� ° a � � 9 �, � o � o'��° Prosperity Ave. � o ° ° o a ( f j j f p ° � � Y� I� O OO� � Gl �t �� p Il � a� ° n � � ° � � � °✓ �4 z '�r� � p �. 9 II, �'�� o 6�IC3 ,�fQn v � iS . O Key Phalen Blvd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corndor At-Grade Intersections Interchange Bridge �� 4� ` a � Q C7° oo�� `� � �� O �� UPRR � 4 �� _ na o � C3 a r`' 2� pQ.�.'%? a 6 ' � � a � � p � , �� a � � �r 6 0 � a a � �,❑ E7' aoA� a 9�] p0� 0� � � � � .�,—. ._..J �L1DOI� a a o �p pfl � 0 &�0 oat� po � d[��aoi i °, j °� fl a)[ i7 D[r�c . ] p�Q ��ic °7� ✓�G � j{ � 0 � o �?[ �� }}`GC�^❑.� oo��J a� Ct C[�t�C�df CR10 .�rC70�WC Il�� [�:"i � OD�3� a _ �"o[bo:r4E appQ p�� Ca d 3 �J n a o° oD��a[I� f o € e L Q � d oacij a�t3 �� E i � '�❑ a Oa��t �_ E. 7th St. � q pQ� q �° n � u7 � — Q �� D�� °� p � c $� p ° L' — _ _ � f.�3 6 � Q � s �= u -- � -- = w c I�� oofloc£[[ E. Minnehaha Ave. �� e � � O � 0 a ° ° Z 6 ,p p v�llG�+ Q OC ❑� p ppaa c� G °� o � v �., q �too �Cj O' OOC]p� C3 � gneo Escs ¢ �' d a R a� m � � II - Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 10 Alternative E-1 Phalen VillageConnection � 0 500' 1000' � � N / Bartan•Aschman Assaciates, Inc. —�� Genereux Research • The 706 Group, Ltd. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. -a� . _ ❑ 60 b L' �e ❑ ��❑ ao��$O ve � � � o 0 6 ❑ ❑ a�`o �on� a�o ❑flv omo ❑oa° � a a e G ID 6 ° Q CC:� C II �❑ � p6 ❑ o ] O�( e d �o � � �� LY' od . a � o O. O°�O� Qe O > �� V ♦ • •� ♦ ., � I/ �� _ � ,� e �_` - • � ,�..,, �� ' � �ss�� ' � .� n.�r � . T._____ _ _ f i� qt� -a.��--{ � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � i � L � � � � � � � � � � LJ 4. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Issues Identification A comprehensive review of a wide range of social, economic, and environmental (SEE) issues is required by federal and PTOCeSS state legislation as part of the environmental review process. Although a detaIled study of SEE unpacts is not required during the scoping phase, a preliminary assessment can be made of the potentially significant issues associated with the proposed project. A final determination of issues to be studied in the EIS will be made after the Public Scoping Meeting and the official comment period. Issues Proposed To Regulations regarding the preparation of an EIS list specific social, economic and environmental (SEE) issues which Be Studied in EIS should be considered. One of the primary purposes of a Scoping Report is to determine which of the issues are likely to be of significant concem in a particular project. This section of the document identifies the types of SEE impacts that will be discussed in the EIS. Methodologies which will be used to analyze these impacts are described. Each of the SEE issues has been identified as being of major, moderate, or minor concern based on the potential for significant impact due to the proposed project. The issues in each of the three categories are listed below in alphabetical order. Issues of Major Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study � City of Saint Paul The fol2owing social, economic, and environmental issues were determined to be potentially significant and require detailed analysis in the EIS. • Bicycle and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contazninated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic Page 34 � q�-a �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � � i � � � � � � � '�! � �� Issues OfMajor Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study • Visual quality • Water quality Issues of Moderate Concern, Requiring Anatysis Assessments conducted as a part of the scoping phase indicated that there is a potential for moderate impact with respect to the issues listed below. These issues will be analyzed at a moderate level in the EIS. • Air quality • Construction activities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy • Erosion controland excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wetlands Issues Not Requiring Analysis Based on information developed during scoping, it appears that the project will not result in any impacts in the areas listed below. These issues will not require analysis in the EIS. • Federal and/or state-designated critical areas • Stream modification • Farmlands • Wild and scenic rivers The methodology planned to be used for each issue analyzed in the EIS is described in the following paragraphs. Bicvcle and Pedestrian Movement The provision of a separate bicycle and pedestrian trail as part of the proposed project is considered a priority by the communiry. The EIS will evaluate the opportunities and constraints associated with providing for non-motorized travel within the project corridor. The EIS will also discuss the design guidelines and standards that apply to the bikeways and pedestrian crossings and how these , City of Saint Paul Page 35 � i � � i i � � � �� !� � � � ' �� -�,`�+� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul movements will be affected by each of the proposed alternatives. Potential vehicle/bicycle/pedestrian conflicts will be identified and design options analyzed to m;r,;m;�e these types of impacts. The EIS will discuss the relationship of the proposed project and associated bicycle and pedestrian trail to the existing BN Regional Trail Corridor and possible linkages within the study azea. Economic The EIS will include an examination of the following major economic issues: • Industrial development • Commercial development • Employment growth • Housing price changes • Property tax base changes It is assumed that any indirect changes in socio-economic indicators which occur as a result of construction of the Phalen Boulevard will depend on investments made there by businesses and individuals, assisted and stimulated by public planning and investments. Four sets of data will be used to d,efine the economic setting of the Phalen Corridor: • Data from surveys conducted among local residents, industrial managers, and retail trade owners. • Census data, house sales data, and other secondary economic data. • Business activity data, based on censuses, sales tax and unemployment tax data. • Income data, based on state and federal income tax information. The future without the project and with the project wili be described separately for the Phalen Boulevard alternatives and for the probable industrial development facilitated by the road. Since the project is designed to attract industrial users to the area, direct development of commercial property is unlikely. However, such commercial development is likely Page 36 t [� � � ' � � l_J O � � ' � � � � �J ' Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document q��-a�� 4. Sociai, Economic, and Environmentai Issues to be encouraged neaz the eastern terminus of the road, and is part of the land use plans for that azea. The effect of any changes in traffic volumes on retail trade levels will be estimated for construction and operation. This is likely to be especially unportant for Payne and Arcade during wnstruction, due to the potential disruption of bridges in the construction zone, and for East Seventh during operation, since a completed Phalen Boulevard may be a competing traffic route. Effects of these traffic changes for each altemative will be estimated, based on the existing sales of each important retail sector as provided in census data, reliance on local neighborhood business as identified in the surveys and in standard market area analysis, and dependence on traffirrelated business, as identified in standard market azea analysis. The effects of the alternate industrial developments will be studied using an IMPLAN model which uses existing economic trends in the Phalen Corridor area to estimate the unpact of the industrial development on such key economic indicators as local employment, retail trade changes, and demand for housing. Since the model can be run only at the level of the city of Saint Paul, not for the Phalen Corridor, outputs from the model will be scaled down based on appropriate ratios, such as the existing ratio of industrial employees to those who are also residents, and the ratio of local incomes to local retail sales. In addition, case studies of similar urban industrial redevelopments will be used to determine whether the outputs from the IIvII'LAN model are truly applicable to the setting of the Phalen Corridar. Areas for study will be chosen in the Twin Cities Metropolitan region, or similar regions if necessary. Hazardous Materials, Contaminated Properties The potential to encounter soil contamination for various routing alternarives has been evaluated. Results of the evaluation are presented in a Technical Memorandum included as Appendix D. Sites which have the highest potential for soil contamination will be further evaluated during prepararion of the EIS. , City of Saint Paul Page 37 � 1 L� LJ 'J � 11 � � � � L� t__1 � � i � � LJ a�-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Sociai, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul The evaluation process will involve addifional research and site reconnaissance once more specific road design information is developed. If the additional reseazch and reconnaissance indicate that there is a high potential to encounter significant soil contamination during roadway construction, Phase II investigation will be conducted to further define soil remediation requirements. Phase II investigation activifles may include one or more of the following: soil borings, soil gas surveys, surficial sampling, ground water sampling, geophysical surveying or analytical testing. A specific Phase II investigation plan will be designed based upon available information concerning the potential contamination site and the road design alternative. Historical and Archaeoloeical Resources During the Scoping Study, a preliminary investigation was conducted to iden6fy all areas exhibiting potential for archaeological sites and standing structures of potential historic significance within and adjacent to the proposed project. The study included documentary research, preparation of a preliminary predictive model outline for potential archaeological site locations, and recommendations forfurtherculiuralresourcesinvestigarions. Research indicates that 13 struchxres in the project area are considered "Historic Preservation Commission (Hl'C)-eligible" or as being of `majar significance." Four properties within one-quarter mile of the project area are known to be eligible National Register of Historic Places properties. In addition, there are 20 recorded sites which have potential value as archaeology sites. Also of potential interest are the historical aspects of the transportation corridors present in the study area. The EIS will continue cultural resources investigations to determine the possible effect of the project on the area's culharal resources. The first step in the EIS will complete the Phase I cultural resources investigation and will include: • Preliminary deterxnination of the "area of potential effecY' (APE). • Literature search. Page 38 , f � � , � � � � r � ' � � �� i �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �(�-a�� 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues • Photographic record and preliminary assessment of buildings of potential historic significance. • Geomorphological investigation to determine the potential for deeply buried sites. The second step in the EIS will be a Phase II cultural resources investigation conducted for a refined area of potential effect and will include: Evaluation of historic structures, corridors, and historic landscapes within the APE which have been determined in Phase I to have potential historic significance. Archaeological field investigation and evaluation of potentiai historic, Contact and Pre-Contact period sites. Documentation of this work wIll canform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation Activities (Federal Register, September 29, 1993, Vol. 48, No. 90, Part IV, (48FR44716- 44740). The geomorphological report will comply with Iowa guidelines for geomorphological investigations. Land Us� The project study area encompasses various types of urbanized land uses including residenrial, commercial, and industrial development. The dominant land uses within the corridor are the active and abandoned rail lines and adjacent industrial facIlities such as 3M, Stroh Brewery, and various manufacturing and salvage operations. Portions of the study corridor are vacant or underutilized industrial properties. There are also some commercial and multi-family residential areas in decline and in need of rehabilitation. As part of the alternatives screening analysis, a review was made of the small area plans and future land use goals for the affected districts throughout the conidor, as well as the specific objectives of the Phalen Corridor Initiative. These plans recognize the need for redevelopment and renewal of various properties within the districts and support efforts such as the proposed project which seeks to improve the basic infrastruchzre of the community. The EIS will examine in greater detail the consistency and compatibility of the project alternatives with the future land use plans for all � City of Saint Paul Page 39 , � LJ � �J � ' � , , � � � � f � � � �(� -�,�li-( Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul affected properties. Potential land use changes that occur as a result of right-of-way acquisition, and changes in access and traffic volumes, will be identified in the EIS. The impacts analyses will aLso include a review of related redevelopment plans and proposed environmental and natural resource reclamation projects that have been prepared by the local community groups, the Saint Paul Port Authority, and renewal efforts of the Phalen Corridor Initiative. The EIS will examine the impacts to land uses in the area resulting from right-of-way acquisition and changes in access to commercial and industrial sites within the project corridor. The EIS will also evaluate the potential ind'uect land use impacts that may occur as a result of changes in traffic volumes and traffic patterns on local roadways following construction of the proposed boulevazd. Induced or secondary land use impacts will be considered in terms of potential expansion of existing commercial and/or industrial operations, and other land use changes adjacent to the project study area. Noise Changes in existing noise levels within the project corridor for each of the altematives will be evaluated in the EIS using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model. Changes in ambient noise levels are associated, in part, with increases and decreases in traffic volumes on area roadways. Noise sensitive areas (residences, schools, parks, etc.) will be identified in the EIS and analyzed to detexmine the noise impacts of the project alternatives. Based on input from the Minnesota Pollution Confrol Agency (MPCA), selected areas throughout the corridor will be monitored to determine existing ambient noise levels. Future daytime and nighttime maximum noise levels will be calculated and compared with existing noise levels and federal and state noise standards. Mitigation measures for traffic-related noise will be identified for all areas which exceed the federal or state noise standards. Areas that may be impacted during construction phases will also be identified and temporary noise mitigation measures evaluated. Parks and Recreational Areas Impacts to public paik and recieational pxoperty will be evaluated to ensure compliance with federal and state regulations which limit the conversion of these types of Page 40 , � � Ll L� � , , � , L� fl' L �� J � � � � a(� -a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul properties to transportation use. Legislation commonly referred to as Section 4(� and Section 6(fl prohibits the use of such lands for roadway development unless there is no prudent and feasible alternative, and the project m;n;m�es harm to the resource. The Case/Duluth Rxreation Area located within the eastern segment of the project corridor is the only public recreational land that is adjacent to the proposed alternatives. Both Section 4(� and Section 6(f) requirements apply to this property. There is no intent to compromise the Case/Duluth Recreation Area in any way; however, if it is determined during the EIS design phase that this property will be impacted by the proposed project, the required Section 4(� and 6(fl evalua6ons will be prepared. The Section 4(fl and 6(fl requirements do not apply to the BN Regional Trail Corridor because it is designated as a transportation corridor in the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority. Right-of-Wav Acquisition and Relocation The EIS will include detailed analysis of right-of-way acquisition and relocation impacts to identify properties potentially affected by right-of-way acquisition. A property inventory will be conducted, and the availability of comparable housing and sites for business relocation will be determuled. The analysis will address the appropriate means of mitigating adverse impacts in accordance with state and federal requirements governing right-of-way acquisition and relocation. Available relocation assistance programs will be identified. Results of the analysis will be summarized in the EIS. ial The EIS will examine the major social issues of "environmental justice" and "neighborhood life." Environmental Justice. Executive Order No. 12895, February 11,1994, requires that projects funded with federal funds be examined for any negative effects the project development would have on poor and minority residents. The term "Environxnental Justice" is commonly used to refer to this concern. While the Phalen Corridor Initiative is intended to assist both groups through better access to job training and new employment opportunities in their Page 41 , � ' � , L� LJ � � �I, � � � �� , ' � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document G(� -�.�� 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues neighborhoods, certain aspects of the alternative road alignments may pose problems for specific residents or businesses. This issue will require site-specific prunary research. Wherever an alternative would significantly increase or decrease local traffic, or remove businesses or housing, the impacts will be examined using census data and specially designed surveys to determine if sensitive groups (low- income, minorities, elderly, or disabled persons) are being especially affected. Neighborhood Life. Analysis of neighborhood life with and without the project wiil require use of surveys done during the Scoping Phase of the project, evaluation of the effectiveness of local programs to improve neighborhood life, close review of the land use and economic analyses above, and use of case studies to verify likely outcomes. Aesthetic change analysis will depend largely on the project design discussions done as part of the roadway design element. A"neighborhood" is the area within which an individual feels at home, the place where people live from whom an individual may expect and receive 'heighborly" favors, such as borrowing of special equipment (e.g. saw horses) or watching the house while they are away, and/or an area where they feel some responsibility to help defend against real or imagined threat, possibly by jouung an "neighborhood"block ciub. The EIS will evaluate the dicect effects of the development of the road on neighborhood identity, neighborhood safety, community facilities (schools, parks, public service facilifles), especially as they have been defined by residents in the corridor. Indirect economic effects on retail trade, employment, and housing price will also be analyzed for their effect on neighborhood life. The efforts of neighborhood organizations, the City of Saint Paul, and non-profit groups to improve local housing conditions wili be examined, to help set the baseline of the future without the project for such issues as neighborhood stability, increasing the presence of posifive role models, and improving the visual quality of the housing in local neighborhoods. Case studies of industrial redevelopment carried out in similar areas in the Twin Cities region and in , City of Saint Paul Page 42 � I ' � ' �J L� ' � � ' ' � `�i �� IJ n II L� ' � , q�-af� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Sociai, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul other metropolitan areas will be exaznined to gauge whether desired ind'uect effects occurred along with industrial redevelopment. Theoretical literature discussing the downwazd and upward spiraLs of urban core areas will be consulted as well, and applied to conditions in the Phalen Corridor, and to conditions observed in the case siudies. Other studies of successful programs to improve conditions of neighborhood life will be summazized, with special attention paid to those that are consistent with the road construction and the industrial redevelopment pianned for the Phalen Corridor. Traffi As pazt of the scoping process, a preliminary traffic unpact analysis was conducted to estimate the fuiure traffic volumes for the various project alternatives. A more detailed discussion of this analysis and methodology of the travel demand forecasting process is included in Appendix E. The average daily traffic (ADT) projections for Phalen Boulevard for the future year 2015 differ greatly throughout the western, central, and eastern segments of the project corridor. The highest traffic volumes projected for Phalen Boulevard occur in the western segment between Interstate 35E and Edgerton Street. The ADTs for this portion of the proposed corridor range from 5,400 near Edgerton Street to 28,100 near the connection to I-35E. The ADT volumes fox Phalen Boulevard in the central segment between Burr Street and Arcade Street range from 3,800 in the vicinity of Arcade Street to about 10,000 near Burr Street. The ADT volumes in the eastern segment between Arcade Street and Johnson Parkway are forecasted to range from 3,300 near Arcade to 11,700 at the Johnson Parkway terminus of the corridor. Appendix E includes graphics that indicate ADT volumes for the various project alternatives. A preliminary analysis was performed to evaluate the potential redistribution in traffic volumes for the proposed Phalen Boulevard alternatives and nearby roadways. This analysis indicates that traffic would shift to Phalen Boulevard from other major roadways resulting in moderate reductions in traffic volumes on Maryland Avenue, the proposed East CBD Bypass, East 7th Street, and Minnehaha Avenue. The development of Phalen Boulevard will aLso result in shifts on Page 43 � � L� � ' , ' ' ' C LJ lJ , � ' C � ' Q1� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of Saint Paul north-south streets within the study azea. Table 3 in Appendix E sununarizes the change in traffic volumes on north-south streets at their intersection with the proposed altematives for Phalen Boulevard. Traffic shifts on north- south streets aze fairly localized and typically do not extend more than a block or two beyond the proposed Phalen Boulevazd. Reductions in traffic volumes are eapected on Mississippi Street, Burr Street, Forest Street, Earl Street and Johnson Parkway. The EIS wIll examine in detail the traffic redistribution pattems for each alternative, and will specifically address changes eapected in truck travel pattems. The EIS will include a more detailed analysis of changes in traffic distribution patterns and local access, and the impact of interchange design options on locai street traffic volumes. The impact analyses will also evaluate the existing traffic capacity on area roadways and the future traffic demand. The traffic model will be used to examine the effect of variations and combinations of roadway design and access options. The EIS will assess the level of service (LOS) for key intersections within the study area. The LOS is a measure of the quality of traffic flow and is expressed by a letter grade of "A" through "F." LOS "A" represents ideal, free-flow conditions, while LOS "F" represents unacceptable over- capacity conditions. Visual Oualit� A visual unpact assessment will be completed for the proposed alternaiives as part of the EIS. This assessment is a six-step process which will: 1) identify affected visual resources, 2) identify the affected population, 3) define the exisring visual quality, 4) analyze impacts to visual quality, 5) summarize visual unpacts by alternative, and 6) discuss mitigation of adverse impacts and possible enhancement techniques to the existing visual quality of the study corridor. An unportant component of the visual impact analysis is the urban design plan which will be implemented as part of the redevelopment of the project corridor. This analysis will also suggest design elements that could enhance the aesthetic character of the proposed project and complement the existing natural and cultural resources of the corridor. Amenities which occurred historically would also be considered such as the former Phalen Creek and wetland areas and the culturai and industrial heritage of the study Page 44 , � 1 � � ' �I , i � � ' �J , � �� ,,,, ' � �b-� t� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues Issues OfModerate Concern, Requiring Analysis corridor. The EIS will include computer enhanced photo imagery of the various design concepts that will be proposed for the project comdor including possible landscape/streetscape and cultural/historical interpretive elements. Water Ouality Impacts to surface waters and ground water are evaluated to ensure the pzotection of these resources from pollutants associated with the proposed project. The potential for post- construction point and nonpoint source water quality impacts on surface and ground water will be evaluated. Pollutant loading from roadway runoff and reduction by proposed mitigation measures will be assessed for the project area as part of the EIS analyses. The EIS will include an analysis of the effects of starm water runoff from the roadway and mitigation measures to be included in the project. Possible groundwater impacts resulting from the disturbance of contaminated soils will be identified in the study of potentially contaminated sites. Air u i An air quality impact analysis wili be conducted for the EIS which will include a microscale analysis of carbon monoxide (CO) levels for the proposed alternatives. This analysis will be conducted using Mobile 5a and CAL3QHC modeling programs to determine the CO levels for the existing conditions and for future No Build and Build scenarios using travel forecasts for the appropriate years. It is possible that an Indirect Source Permit wiil be required for the proposed project. The permit requirements, impact analysis, and inputs to modeling programs, inciuding CO receptor locations and background levels, will be coordinated with the MPCA. Construction Activi6es Dust and noise normal to road construction will occur as a result of this project. The EIS will address dust, odors, � City of Saint Paul Page 45 ' � 1 L� � � ' , tl ' ' ' ' , J lJ F_J � q� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues ' City of Saint Paul vibration and noise caused by construction of the project and mitigation measures to be employed during construction. Construction of the pxoject may also cause temporary disruption to existing utilities and infrastructure in the project area. The ELS will discuss construction unpacts on utilities and infrastructure, and mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project. The EIS will generally describe the gotential impacts of construction of each of the proposed alternatives with regard to the following: • Erosion • Air quality and dust control • Noise and vibration • Water quality • Traffic congestion • Detours • Safety • Excess materials disposal • Utility disruption • Emergency vehicle access • Pedestrian/bicycle accommodation during construction • Other issues particular to the alternative(s) selected Mitigation measures for each potential impact will also be identified and discussed in the EIS. Endangered and Threatened S�ecies The Minnesota Natural Heritage database of federal and state-listed endangered and threatened plant and animal species has been reviewed to determine if any such species are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the project corridor. The review indicated that there are no known occurrences of rare species or significant natural features in the area. There are no endangered and threatened speaes known to inhabit the project study area. The existing development and surrounding urban area has been in place for many years, and it is unlikely that such a disturbed environment could support rare species. If the EIS analysis determines that a protected species is likely to be adversely affected by the proposed project, an assessment of the potential unpacts will be performed and mitigation measures Page 46 � 0 � � , � ' LI � � G , � LJ !J 1J , � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document a(�-�.'�� 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues coordinated with the Minnesota Department of Naiural Resources (DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Seroice . En�r� Im�acts The ELS will estimate the energy consumption differences for the various alternatives in terms of fuel usage. The analysis will use the standard methodology for calculating average fuel consumption rates for vehicles-miles-of-travel, speed, and number of starts and stops associated with each alternative. This impact analysis will not consider indirect energy uses such as fuel needed to construct or maintain a roadway. Erosion Control and Excess Material This project will result in some potenrial for erosion since ground cover will be disturbed. Erosion control measures will be identified in the EIS which wiil incorporate local, state, and federal criteria. As part of the proposed project design phase, Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be incorporated as part of construction guidelines and specifications. The disposition of solid wastes generated by clearing the construction operations is a common problem associated with road consiruction projects. The latest specifications from the City of Saint Paul as well as other applicable local and state governmental agencies shall apply and be referenced in the EIS. Both an on-site and off-site disposal program will be formulated. Any applicable measures relating to the contaminated excess materials will £urther be reviewed and analyzed. Fish and Wildlife The project corridor is located within an industrialized area of the city of Saint Paul. Field investigations of the project area indicate that there is m;n;ma] habitat that would support a large ar diverse wildlife population. The wildlife species that have been observed in or near the project corridor are those that have adapted to the urban nature of the study area such as songbirds and various mammals including squirrels, woodchucks, raccoons, deer, and rodents. The project corridor contains no water bodies or open streams that support fish or migratory bird habitat. The EIS will evaluate ' City of Saint Paul Page 47 I � � 1 � i L� ' , t , IJ ' ' ' , ' , ' a�-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmentai Issues � City of Saint Paul potential impacts to wildlife that is present in the vegetated azeas within the project corridor and, if necessary, discuss mitigation measures to address adverse impacts. Floodplains The City of Saint Paul Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel D(revised date August 3, 1989) indicates the proposed Phalen Boulevazd Project area is identified as Zone X which is defined as: "Areas of 500-year flood; areas of 100-year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage azeas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 100-year flood." It should be noted that other areas similarly identified as within Zone X(such as Battle Creek, Frost Lake, and Phalen Lake) have floodplain damage potential. Hence, although the project area is not identified in the FIRM as within the mapped "100-year floodplain;' review of the area of interest indicates there may be floodplain concerns. Analysis in the EIS may be necessary to assess the floodplain damage potential associated with the proposed project. Handicagped Accessibilitv Impacts to accessibility are evaluated to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The standard method for determination of the accessibility of a public transportation faciLity is to review the design features of a project in terms of its compliance with the ADA guidelines. The EIS will assess the urban design elements of the proposed project such as accessible routes from public transportation stops, public sidewalks, pedestrian bridges, and recreational trails in an effort to provide equal access to the proposed facility by those who are physically impaired. Transit The Phalen Boulevazd area is currently served by six regular service Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO) bus routes. These are: Page 48 � � � � , r � � � � � � r � , �� i�-��1�f Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � City of • # 9 East 7th Street • #10 East 7th Sfreet/Axcade Street • #11 Maryland Avenue • #12 East 7th Street/Stillwater • #14 Payne Avenue • #15 East 7th Street/Arcade Street All routes aze oriented towazd the Saint Paul central business district and serve a portion of the corridor. Construction of Phalen Boulevazd may present opportunities to reroute existing services or provide new services which could take advantage of a more direct east-west roadway. Lhiring the EIS analysis, these opportunities will be explored. The ELS will assess the effect of the project on existing transit services as well as the potential for enhanced services. The proposed project would be located on or adjacent to a portion of the right-of-way purchased by the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) as a potential light rail transit route. The RCRRA is considering this plus one other possible alignment for LRT in their Northeast Corridor. There is no schedule for selecting an alignment or constructing LRT. The City of Saint Paul will continue consultation with the RCRIZA during the EIS to determine whether any further decisions have been made. The Phalen Boulevard project will accommodate the fixture construction of LRT on Ramsey County right-of-way. The EIS will assess the potential impact of the project on the plans for LRT developed by the RCIZIZA. VeQetation The project comdor is located within an industrialized area of the city and is mostly unvegetated. The few areas of remaining vegetation are primarily volunteer types of trees including box elder, cottonwood, elm, ash, and a few oaks. Theze are few shrubs and the ground layer is mostly comprised of annual weeds and feral grasses. In urban areas such as the project corridor, vegetation has been purposely planted for ornament, controlling erosion, or it has volunteered in areas which are essentially abandoned. The EIS will examine changes to the existing vegetative landscape associated with development of each of the alternatives including the type, extent and quality of the impacted piant communities. The analysis will consider various design Page 49 � r � � � ,� � J � � 'i1 � � � � � � � ��-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues elements and modifications which could minimize adverse impacts to any high quality vegetative areas. Mitigation measures and opporhuuties for enhancement of vegetative resources will be discussed and coordinated with state and local agencies as appropriate. Wetlands Issues Not Requiring Detailed Mapped wetlands in the project vicinity were field verified by Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District as a part of their district-wide wetland mapping program. No wetlands are within any corridor alternatives. Three small, remnant wetlands are near the project. They are southeast of Phalen Lake near Johnson Parkway and Maryland Avenue. In addilion, wetland characteristics may be associated with the drainage through Swede Hollow. All existing or potential wetlands will be identified in the EIS. Measures to avoid indirect impacts to these weflands and view them as corridor amenities will be considered under construction impacts and landscape concepts. Federal and /or State-Designated Critical Areac Analysis Critical areas are those designated by Federal and/or State regulations as environmentally sensitive. The only designated critical area in Minnesota, the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, will not be affected by the proposed project. The proposed project is not located within or adjacent to a federal or state-designated critical area. Therefore, no impacts to critical areas are anticipated. Farmlands There are no agricultural lands within or adjacent to the study corridor and therefore, no analysis will be conducted. � City of Saint Paul Page 50 Phafen Boulevard Scoping Document q�-a.�� 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues Siream Modification There are no streams present anycvhere in the area which may be affected by the proposed Phalen Boulevard Project. Phalen Creek, which once flowed from Lake Phalen to the south and west through what is now the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way and into Swede Hollow, does not now exist, either above gcound or underground No stream modification is anticipated in the Phalen Corridor with any of the proposed alternatives. Therefore, no discussion of stream modification will appear in the EIS. Wild and Scenic Rivers There are no federal or state-designated wild and scenic rivers within or adjacent to the study corridor and therefore, no analysis will be conducted. � City of Saint Paul Page 51 � � � � � � � � � �' � ;� � � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document q� -a�y 5. Public and Agency Involvement 5. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT The City of Saint Paul is cominitted to the involvement of the community at all levels in decision-making related to Phalen Boulevard. The City has and will continue to engage community organizations, area property ovmers and residents, and county, regional and state agencies in the development of the project. Phalen Boulevard By resolution on November 18, 1994, the City of Saint Paul Plamung Commission convened the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Environmental Impact Statement Task Force. The Task Force comprises one representative from each of 15 groups. 1. District 2 Community Council 2. Dayton's Bluff Center for Civic Life 3. District 5 Planning Council 4. District 6 Planning Council 5. Thomas-Dale District 7 Planning Council 6. East Side Area Business Association 7. Payne Arcade Area Business Association 8. East Seventh Business Community 9. Phalen Village Business Association 10. East Side Neighborhood Development Company 11. North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation 12. Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association 13. Saint Paul Parks Commission 14. Saint Paul Bicycle Advisory Board 15. Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority All groups except for the Thomas-Dale District 7 Planning Council appointed representatives to the Task Force; ten of the groups also appointed alternates. Gladys Morton of the Planning Commission was named the Chair to the Task Force. Task Force members and others who participated in Task Force Meetings are listed in Appendix C. In convening the Task Force, the Planning Commission stated that "Participation in the EIS by representatives from those neighborhoods and interests thaf may be affected by decisions about Phalen Boulevard is crucial to a full public discussion of the road � City of Saint Paul Page 52 � � � � � l � � � � � � ,� i� �' � �' � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document a,�_a��} 5. Public and Agency Involvement alternatives ...". The Task Force received the following charges from the City: The task force is advisory to the Planiung Commission, Mayor and City Council. It is charged to assist in the identification of altematives and issues to address in the EIS, to understand and communicate to its constituency the findings and recommendations of the EIS, and to help build community consensus regarding the outcome of the EIS process. (PED, City of Saint Paul, November 30, 1994.) The Task Force met eleven times and participated in four tours of various parts of the study corridor between February 1995 and January 1996. A Public Information Meeting was held on October 25, 1995, prior to finalizing recommendations to be presented in the Scoping Document and Dxaft Scoping Decision Document. Task Force members serve as liaison between the Task Force and their constituent groups and were asked to repoxt the results of Task Force meetings to their groups and bring the thoughts and reactions of their groups to the attention of the Task Force. Although the Task Force is an advisory group, their input is to be an important influence on the direction of that project. The conclusions of this Scoping Document reflect the consensus of the Task Force. The City has involved citizens in the Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study in three ways: Citizen Participation Program 1• The Phalen Boulevard ELS Task Force is a key mechanism for informing and involving the public As described above, the Task Force has been continuously involved in the decision-making related to the Scoping Process. In addition, Task Force members have provided a two-way communication channel between the project and the constituent groups they represent. As active members of the community, the Task Force members also serve as focal points for discussions regarding the project throughout their daily activities. �, City of Saint Paul Page 53 � �. � � � � � � 1� ,� �� } i� � �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document "I�`o�� I 5. Public and Agency Invoivement 2. The City has conwtissioned Surve�s of Affected Groug� within the Scoping Siudy context. The consultant team conducted surveys of four groups affected by the project. T'he four groups were: • Residents • Community Leaders • Industry Managers • Commercial Business Managers The survey subjects were asked questions regarding their perception of the current condition of the study area and corridor, what they thought could and should be done to improve the corridor, and questions about the Phalen Corridor project. The survey results are considered statistically significant, which means that the sample was selected at random and was large enough to provide meaningful results. Surveys of population groups in the corridor was considered an important element of the Citizen Participation Program because the corridor contains people who historically have not participated significantly in community activities. Random samples of these populations were surveyed to ensure that the opinions and attitudes of the entire community were represented in the study. The surveys are described in more detail in Appendix B. 3. The City operates an informal Outreach Program in which staff active in the project are available to meet with individuals and groups who want to discuss elements of the projects. In the first year of the project, City staff attended over 25 meetings for this purpose. Public Agency The project has maintained contact with a number of interested public agencies throughout the scoping process. Coordination Five public agencies identified liaison staff and have maintained regular contact with the project. These agencies are: • Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Division • Saint Paul Port Authority • Ramsey County Public Works • Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority � City of Saint Paul Page 54 � i r � � � � � � � � � � � ,� � � a�-a�� Phalen Soulevard Scoping Document 5. Public and Agency Involvement • Minnesota Depaztment of Transportation Project staff have also established contact with other interested agencies during the scoping study to discuss specific project issues. These contacts have included: • Miruiesota Poilution Control Agency • Minnesota Environmental Quality Board • State Historic Pxeservation Office • Metropolitan Council • Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Chicago Northwestern Railroad (CN[N)/Union Pacific Raikoad (UP) As pazt of the review of the Draft Scoping Document, copies of this document will be distributed to the agencies listed in the Scoping Document.Distribution List (Appendix F). � City of Saint Paul Page 55 t � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� ! t 6. Governmental Permits and Approvals � � L! � � � � �" � �` ,� � :� � 6. GOVERNMENTAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS The following is a list of federal, state and local permits, and approvals which may be required for the proposed project: Government Age� T�e of A�proval or Permit Federal: U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers • Section 404 Permit - Wetland Alteration Federal Highway Administration Advisory Council on Historic Preservation State: Minnesota Department of Transportation • EIS Approval • Record of Decision • Location and Design Approvals • Section 4(fl and 106 Reviews • Project Design Approval Minnesota Department • Protected Waters Permit of Naiural I2esources • Groundwater Appropriation Permit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency • 401 WaterQuality Certification • NPDES Construction Permit • Indirect Source Permit (ISP) Miruiesota State Historic Preservation Office • Full compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act, the Miiulesota Field Archaeology Act, the Minnesota Historic Sites Act, and the Minnesota Private Cemeteries Act. '� City of Saint Paut Page 56 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� I 6. Governmental Permits and Approvals Government Agency T�e of A�proval or Permit Regional: Metropolitan Council • Controlled Access Highway Approval • Transportation Improvement Plan • Comprehensive Plan Review Local Watershed Districts • DistrictApprovals/ Permits • Grading and Drainage Plan Review Local: Ramsey County City of Saint Paul • Highway Department Approval • EIS Adequacy Determination • Plan Approval '� City of Samt Paul Page 57 � !� � � � � � � �' � � � � � � � � Draft Scoping Decision Document "� � `� 7. Draft Scoping Decision 7. DRAFT SCOPING DECISION Task Force Scoping The Scoping Document describes the process of generating and screening alternatives and of considering what social, Recommendation economic and environmental issues will affect the course of the proposed project. The screening and scoping were done during an approximately one-year period with the guidance of a community-based Task Force of the Saint Paul Plamling Commission. T'he decisions presented here reflect the consensus of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force. This Draft Scoping Decision Document reports, in draft forxn, the results of the Scoping Study. Listed below are the altematives recommended for analysis in the EIS, and those considered and rejected. Also listed are the issues which will be analyzed in detail as the alternatives are compared in the EIS. Alternatives To Be • No-Build Alternative: Within the EIS, analysis of the no- build condition provides a measure of the effect of Studied in the EIS allowing the current situation to continue. � City of Saint Paul Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative: The TSM altemafive includes relatively minor upgradings of the existing roadway system in order to determine whether the small-scale improvements are more cost-efficient than the complete project. Build Alternatives: The Build Alternatives are different ways of constructing the full-scale project, and are analyzed in comparison to one another, to the TSM alternative and to the No-Build alternarive. In the three corridor segments, there are six aligrunent options. They are: - Western Segment (from I-35E to Burr Street) W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection (Fig. 5) W-2: New Cayuga Freeway Connection (Fig. 6) - Central Segment (from Burr Street to Earl Street) Gl: Union Pacific (old CNW) Route (Fig. 7) Page 58 � 1 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � a� -� � �--( Draft Scoping Decision Document 7. Draft Scoping Decision C-4: Upper Middle Route (Fig. 8) C-5: North Bluff Route (Fig. 9) - Eastern Segment (from Earl Street to Johnson Parkway) E-1: Phalen Village Connection (Fig. 10} Alternatives During the scoping process, many alternatives were considered and rejected. Listed below are ten other Considered and alignment options which received serious consideration at Rejected some point in the analysis. • Western Segment - New Pennsylvania Freeway Connection - Westminster - Whitall to the Payne Avenue - Wesiminster - Indushial Access Road • Central Segment - Bush Avenue - Lower Middle Route Issues To Be Studied in the EIS • Eastern Segment - Ames Avenue Connection - Maryland Avenue Connection - West Side Connection - Phalen Village - Earl/E. 7th at Ross - Phalen Village - Earl/E. 7th via Duluth/Ross These aligmnents are illustrated in the Appendix. Issues of Major Concern • Bicycle and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazazdous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic • Visual quality • Water quality � City of Saint Paul Page 59 � 1 � � _� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Draft Scoping Decision Document 7. Draft Scopin Decision q� a�� Issues of Moderate Concern • Au qualit� • Construction activities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy unpacts • Erosion control and excess material • Fish and wildlite • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wetlands Issues Determined to be Not Significant in this Project City of Saint Paul • Federal and/or state-designated critical azeas • Farmlands • Stream modification • Wild and scenic rivers Page 60 i Appendix A � �� _�� l: � � � � � � � � � � � � Resource Documents � � � � � !J � � �� i..9 fJ � � � q� -� ��--� Appendix A Resource Documents City of Saint Paul Parks £� Reaeation Plan, Technical Paper 2, Recreational Traits in the St. Paut Park System, Saint Paul Planning Commission, Saint Paul Pazks & Recreation Coinmission, May 1993. Clasing the Skills Gap: Implications for Development of a Skills-Based Jobs Preparation Program for Twin City Adults, TC Rise! March 1994. District 5 Plan East Consolidated Small Area Plan, An Amendment Eo the Iand Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, June 17,1993. Greater St. Paul Tomorrow, Striving for a Stronger East Metro Area, May 1993. Meeting Minutes, Work Force Development Task Force, Phalen Initiative, Saint Paul, MN, 1995 Payne - Arcade Commercial Area Marketing and Impolementafion Strategy, Economic Reseazch Corporation, March 1990. Payne Arcade Development Plan, Task Force Report, October 4,1988. Phalen Boulevard Cultural Resources Investigation Scoping Document, The 1�6 Group, Ltd., Saint Paul, MN, November 1995. Phaten Boulevard EIS Task Force Project NoEebook, The City of Saint Paul and the SEH Consultant Team,1995. The Phalen Chain of Lakes Watershed Project, Phalen Watershed Project, Saint Paul, MN. Phalen Village Smalt Area Plan (Draft), An Amendment to the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, October 23,1995. Plans for Streets and Highways, City of Saint Paul, 1979. Polenske, Karen R., "A Property Rights Perspective on Economic Development Strategies: Venturing Beyond Hirschman and Porter;' paper presented at the "Concepts in Regional Development" session of the 4oth meeting of the North American Regional Science Association, Houston TX, November 11-14,1994. Railroad Island SmaiI Area Plan (Draft), An Amendment tv the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, July 8,1994. Ramsey County Northeast Corridor LRT Alignment Study, Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority, August 1991. Saint Paul Parks & Recreation Plan, Draft for Community Review, Saint Paul Parks & Recreation Commission, April 12, 1995. A-1 ��a�� Saint Paul Transportatinn Policy Plan, Draft for Community Review, Saint Paizl Planning Conunission, June 24,1994. Shepard/4Varner/East CBD Bypass Environmental impact Statement, The City of Saint Paul, November 1990. Weisskoff, Richazd, Factories and Foodstamps: The Puerto Rico Model of Development, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD,1985. A-2 � Appendix B i �� -a� �y Summary of Social/Economic Surve s � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � LJ �� L.: � � i� u � � � � � � � q�-�.�y Appendix B: Surveys conducted during Scoping Genereux Research condueted surveys among four groups in the East Side of the City of St. Paui. The surveys were designed to: • Gather data usefut to help determine research requirements fo� the sociaf and economic Scoping Document and data for the Environmental Impact Statement; • Assist other EIS researchers with data on aesthetic and design preferences, and on traffic patterns of local residents; • Provide other Phalen Corridor Task Forces with data useful for their efforts; and • Provide an efficient and meaningful public participation by key interest groups. The Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, City of St. Paul staff, and staff from the consultant team assisted in the design of the questionnaires. Each groups was asked to review and suggest topics for inctusion in the research, and each reviewed the draft questionnaires before they were administered. Random samples were drawn for the commercial and resident surveys. An attempt was made to include all the industrial operations in and near the construction zone of the projeCt. A reference sample procedure was used for the local leader survey, since researchers wanted to reach both formally elected and informally infiuential persons. In a reference sample, an initial group of respondents is asked to name other leaders, and they in turn name still other leaders. EIS Task Force members were asked to start the process, by naming initial respondents Surveys were compieted in early summer of 1995 with four groups: Interview Grouo A. Commerciat owners B. lndustrial managers C. Loca{leaders Number of Respondents 123 20 i 30 D. Residents Within 0,15 miles (800 feet) of Corridor Between 0.15 and 0.3 miles of Corridor Between 0.3 miles and 1 mile of Corridor 254 88 57 109 tnitial results, with special focus on transporation and design issues, were presented to the EIS Task ForCe in June, 1995. � � � � � G� -a.��{ PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS FILLED-IN RESIDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE tiOTE: The regular text was spoken by the interviewer. The text in itatics represents answers given by the respondents. As the reader �j�ll note, there were many open-ended questions in this intervieK. Except where noted, the number of respondents was at least 230. Total respondents were 2j4. � The sample was weighted to include as man�• residents as possible living Hnthin 0.1 mile of the redevelopment area. Where there are signiticant differences between overall responses and responses from those living c3osest to the active industrial redevelopment area, these are noted. � OtherK�ise, responses were similar For all respondents, no matter where they lived within the Phalen Corridor. � � lJ � � �� 1. Distance home is from edge of industrial redevelopment area: Mean =.332 miles; range = 0-1.3. 28% of sample is less than 0.1 miles. A. TO BEGIN, I'd like to ask you a few questions about the area that you live in: 1. When did you move to your present address? Mean = 18.3 years; median = 14 years. The range is 1- 76 years. The 25 % who have lived there the shortest rime have been there four years or less; the 25% who have been there the longest have lived there 32 years or more. 2. How long have you lived on the East Side: Mean = 28 years; median = 25 years. �e range is I- 84 years. 71ie 25% who have lived there the shonest rime have been there seven years or less; the 2590 who have been there the longest hm�e lived there 45 years or more. 3. Do you live in: a. l0 % An apartment. c. 72% A single family home. 4. Do you own or rent your home ? b. ]4 % A Duplex ortriplex. d. 2% Town house or condo. a. 7594 Own. b. 2i %a Rent � � � c. 490 Rent with option 5. Would you descrihe the azea you lived in when you were ib yeazs old as: a. 689� Urban. b. 13% Suburban c. 16% Rural d. 2% "Rurban" 6. If a friend in the Twin Cities introduced you to someone who asked where you lived, what wouid you say? a. 7590 Fast Side � b. 69 Sz Paul c. 8% Specific area (Lower East Side, Iake Phalen, Railroad Island, Dayton's Bluffj d. 2% Specific street (Wetls, Payne) � e. 8% Other (Lower pog Patch, Historical area, Inner city, Crime-ridden East Side, greatplace, the "hoaT ) � B-3 Filled-in Residenis Questionnaire a� �� 7. Pd like you to think ahout the area where you live. How far would you need to travel to the North, the East, the South, and the West from your home before you would leave the azea that you think of as YOUR PERSONAL NEIGHBORHOOD. (Answer is calculated in square miles, based on a measurement of The distance from each residence to the streets named. On the East Side, one mile = 6-10 blocks, depending on the length of the block. {n = 223 }) Median= 4 miz, ar about 1.0 mi[e in each direction, or about 6-]0 blocks in each direction) The 25% ofresponderas naming the sn�allestneighborhoads reponed theirpersonal neighborhoods were Q50 miz or less, which is aboul0 4 miles in each d'uection, or less. The 25`Y with the largest neighborhoads reported their personal neighborhoads were at leacf 78 miz, orabout2.1 miles in each direction, or more. 8. What are some of the things you like about your neighborhood? {n = 227 } (Respondems named up to 3 things) a. Social char¢cteristics (e.g., Neighbors, stable) b. Local facilities arrd amenuies (e.g., Schood, playground) c. Aesthetics and history (e.g., Quiet, older homes) d. Urban location (e.g., Near everything, easy access) e. Place ofpersonal history (e.g., Always lived here) f. Location offmain street, wirh yard g. Nothing h. Everything i. Other (e.g., cost, safet�) 9. What aze some of the things you disiike atwut your neighbo�ood? 39� 24� 24� 22% Il% 4% 7% 4% S% (Respondems named up to 3 things) a Crime and disorder {e.g., Unsupervised kids, gangs, crime, speeders) 459 Note: Responderns living closest to the industrial redevelopment area are more likely to name this as a problem (53% v 42 %) b. Renters 20% c. Other housing problems (e.g., Rundown neighborhood, slumiords) 405'0 Note: Respondems living closest to the industrial redevelopmern area are less likely to name �is as a problem (25% v 42 %) d Sorial characteristics (e.g., i4fPx ofpeople, lazy people) 19% e. Poor aestheties (e.g., Tra,Q'rc, irulustrial pol[ution, noise, IinerJ i6� f. Poor public worl�, city policies 4`Po g. Lackoffacilities 4� h. High casts 29� i. Otker (e.g., Too urban, screet repuir, lack ofshops; transit problems) 4� 0 Filled-in Residents Questionnaire �� f 10. I'd like you to think about improvements that could make your neighborhood better. I'm going to read a list of organizations. Tell me who you think you could RII.Y ON THE MOST to actually make these improvemerns: Fust choice Second choice (n = 51) a Yourneighbots 33% 119 Note: Respondents living closest to the industrial redevelopmenr area are more likely to mm�e this group as a first choice (459 v 28 90). b. Local District Councils 239a 39 c. Fast Side Businesses 1890 3% Note: Responderas living cdosest to the industrial redevelopment area are less likely to name this group as a first choice {ll % v 21 R'o). d. City govemment II 3'0 1`70 Note: Respondents living closest to the industrial redevelopment area are less likely to name this group as a first choice (8� v 12 %). e. Orher 5% 0 £ Don't know 10% 11. If you could live anywhere in the Twin Cities Region, including the East Side, where would you be living? a. 279� b. 19% c. 14% d. I09 e. 7% f. 4% g. 19 h. 1290 i. 6� Where I am today. Eastsuburbs Somewhere else on the Fast Side Nonh suburbs Somewhere else ia Sz Pau1. South suburbs Minneapnlis, or west suburbs Other Don't know 12. Wheze do you think you will be living five years from now, or in the yeu 2000? a. 55� b. 14% c. 7� d. 7� e. 2% f. 79 g. 14% Where I am today. Sul�urbs Somewhere else in St. Paul. Out-of-state In the country, or �sconsin Other Don't lazow m Fi1(ed-in Residents Q¢estionnaire q i� -a�( � 13. If someone you I�ow wanted to buy a moderately priced home on the Fast Side, which neighborhood or azea would you suggest she look at? (Note: This question was open-ended. These categories aze a summary of 29 azeas named.) a. 30� UpperPlanningDistrict5 d. 7R� Iower Plmtning District 5 c. 1390 PZanningDistrect2 d. 8% Planning District 4. e. 3� Planning District 1 f. 3% Other g. 20% Don't Know h. 13� I'd tell her to look oulside the East Side. B. Now, I'd like to ask you some questions about how you travel around town. I4. What is your principal means of uansportation around the Twin Cities? a. 85% Auto b. 12% Bus c. 2% Onfoot d. l% Bicycle 15. Which sireets do yon travel most frequently to get to other places on the East Sida? (Respondems named up to 3 streets) a. 43% Ma�ylland b. 38� Arcade c. 37% Payne d. 297o Minnehalra e. 21 % E. 7th f. 149 Case g. IpY White BearAvenue h. 89 Johnson Parkway i. 9% Frni j. 6k 3rd k. 309 Other (e.g., Edgenon, Forest. Burr, 6th, Lafcryene) � � � i � L , � � � � � � � � � Fi[led-in Residents Questionnaire 1i ��"� 16. Which m�ro-area highways or freeways do you travel on most in an average month? (Respondents named up to 3 roadways. {n = 215 ]} a. I-94 5390 b. I-35E 549 c. Hwy 36 I9qo d. Hwy 61 23� e. I-694/494 f. Hwy 52 g. Other 5% 28 /G 8`Ya (I-35W, Hwy 10, Hwy 32, H»ry 5) 17. I'd like you to think about East Side Sueets. If you could change something about the roads, the traffic, public transportation, access to freeways, the sidewalks, the curbs, parking, street lights, traffic signals, bicycle lanes, tuming lanes, landscaping on the berms, or any other thing, what wouid you like to see changed? (Respondenu named up to 5 things. {n = 202) ) a. 22 % Maintenance (e.g., cleaner streets, street repair, potholes, sidewalks) b. I4% Bener access (e.g., alley system, bridge on Edgerton, Zeft turns on MarylandJ c. 11 % Lighting d. 9% Better aesthetics (e.g., landscaping, trees) e. 9% Signage f. 69� Parks and trails g. 6% Reduce congesrion h. 8% W'uler sireeis i. 4� Bener law enfarcement on speeders j. 6� Other (e.g., Safety, all) k. 8% Don't know 1 709 Nothing ( For those who did this 1 or more times) 18. How many times in the past year did you: � 0 Mean # Median # � a. Ride on one of the regional bicycle trails. 48 79 2 b. Walldhike on the regional trails. 45 30 3 � fJ LJ � Note: Respondents living cZosest to the industrial redevelopment area are more likely to have gone on a trail at least once (b99 v 50�). c. Visit Phalen Pazk. 20 31 6 d. See Wildlife on a sueet or in a yazd on the East Side. 37 138 25 e. Visit an East Side playground, ball field or temiis court. 3 8 24 S Note: Respondenls living closen to the industria! redevelopmenr area me more likelp to have used these recrearional facitiries at leasr once (72% v SS�o). :1 Filled-in Residents Questionnaire �t� �a��{ 19. Where in the Twin Cities do you like to go to shop for groceries/drugs/etc.? a 55% Rainbow b. 23% Fast Side c. 3% Phalen Center d. 3% Arcade e l7k Other (Cub, Target, K-MaR, Jubilee, Oakdale, Rice Street, White Bear, Midway) 20. Where in the Twin Cities do you like to go to have a day of shopping for nothing in pazticulaz? a. 39% Maplewood b. 1390 EastSide c. 129'o Rosedale d. 2% Dbwntown d 20% Other (Target, K-Man, Mall ofAmerica, HarMar, Rice Street.) f. I4� IJonY go. 21. Where in the Twin Cities do you like to go to be "outdoors" beyond your own yazd or balcony? {n = 225} a. 27`Y lake Phalen b. ]3� OtherEastSide (Keller, Banle Cree1� around block.) c. IO% Other St. Paul (Como, Dowraown, Rice Street.) d. 119 Outside metro e. 24Y Other (Stillwater, Afton, etc) f. 169 Don't go, Don't know. 22. Where in the Twin Cities do you like to go for an evening out—a movie, dinner, etc? a. 239� Maplewood b. ]990 EastSide c. 89 Rosedale d. 3l Other Sr. Paul e 34� Other (Mall ofAmerica, HarMar, RiceStreet.) f. 139 Don'r go 23. Where in the Twin Cities do you like to go to have a day out with the family? a. 129 Como Park b. 9� Someone's house c. 7� Iake Phalen d. 59 Other East Side e. 49� Other (e.g., Maplewood, Out oftown, Zoo, Stillwater, Fair, Minneapolis, Science Museum, Dinner.} f. 169. Don't go: don't la�ow. C. The City of St. Paul is planning to re-develop the area on the East 3ide, between I35E and Johnson Pazkway, south of Lake Phalen. Tt:is area is ahout,2 mile long and 1 mile wide. You may recall that the l�ter sent to you had a drawing of this area. The city proposal is called the Phalen Cotridor Initiative. It wiil have: A new, Z-lane road; tracks for freight rail; cleaned sites for industry; a bicycle path; space for light rail; probably some new or re-developed housing; and wetland restoration nearthe Phaien.Vitiage shopping area. 24. Had you heard about the Phalen Corridor Ini6ative before we contacted you? a. 66�7o Yes b. 3790 No c. 39 Don'tremember If . � 1 � Filled-in Residents Questionnaire ��-a�� 25. LePs assume the Phalen Project is built as planned. Whicb part of the plan inieresu you the most? First Choice � (n = 210} a Wetlands, landscaping 2390 � b. A3ew or rehabhed housing 299� c. Thamad 24`P d. T}�e bicycle path 139� ' e. New industrial sites 8�0 £ Space for light rai] 490 Second (n = 157} 319� 189� 72% 799� ll5'0 10% Third {n = 98} 17�0 299� 10% 7690 16% I S% Composite Score* I48 147 106 93 62 4� *Composite score calculated as (Fi�st Choice % x 3) +(Second % x 2) +(Third % x 1) Highest score is most desired. 26. Which part of the plan do you like the least: {n = 149} a New industrial sites b. The road c. Space for light nil d. The bicycle path e. Wetlands, landscaping f. New or rehabbed housing g. Other 2l% IS�O 15% 72�0 7�e 7�O 17� (Rental housing, Business dislocarioa, Home removad, Tra,J,j'ic, Xailroad, WasteofMoney, Everything.) h. None 6�9 27. Who do you think would benefit the most if the Phalen Boulevard Plan is built? (Respondenu named up to 2) a. Lacal residents 40% b. Businesseslrestaurants 209� c. Commuters 790 d. Everyone 690 e. Government 5 �� f. Young people 39c g. Industry 39� h. Bicyclists I90 i. No-One 39a j. Don't know 139a :' Filled-in Residents Questionnaire a� -a� � 28. Who in the community might be hurt if the planned project ge�s buitt? a 23% Homeowners, taxpayers. b. 11 % Dislocared people. d. S% Low income people. e. I4% Other (Consumers by Phalen Shopping Center, Retired people, Businesses, Slumlords, Government.) f. 21 % No-one. g. 26`� Don't know. 29. If the Phalen Boulevazd Project does get built, would these things be Very Important (VI), Somewhat Important (Sn, or Not Important (NI) to you? (DK= Don t Know) VI SI NI DK Subiect �%) �%) {%) (%) a. 76 13 Il 1 Finding new homes for anyone whose home is b. c. d. e. f. S• h. i. l� torn down. 73 I S IO 2 Incernives to industry that will hire local people. 68 20 8 4 How the finished boulevazd looks. 52 32 Il 4 Including parkland in the Corridor. 36 34 24 6 Restoring the Phalen Creek now in a pipe. 27 27 43 2 Making the mad a fast route to dowmown. 24 31 38 7 Saving old buildings along the route. 21 33 38 7 Building industrial sites alc�ng the road. 16 23 55 6 Having the new road be for trucks. 12 Il 61 17 Saving Wells Street Note: Responde�ns living closest to the indusrrial redevelopment area are more likely to have wanted to save Wells Street (1990 v l0%). 30. The City of St. Paul has decided that something needs to be done on the East Side to help the economy. Would you recommend the City put money and effort into: (Response limited to one answer) {n = 226} a. 39% Job training, or b. 20% Housing, or c. 31 % New industria! employeis, or d. 10� The environmental resources on ihe East Side. 31. What woutd be the best way for the Ciry of Sc Paul to keep you informed atwut the Phalen Boulevazd Project: a 84`90 Informazion sem to you. b. 69� A number you could call for infom�ation. c. 109'� Public meetings in your neighbo�ood. � � , L� l� t1 � ' ' , �J � � �' � � � , � i �C -a`�� Filled-in Residents Quesdionnaire D. Piease think atwut the East Side neighborhood where you live. I am going to read a list of things and I'd like you to tell me if each thing is "GOOD" "FAIR" or "POOR" in your neighbocfiood. The list is pretty long. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Good �%� 24 47 50 49 21 Fair �%� 47 27 31 38 42 Poor pon't know (�o) (%) 29 0 24 2 19 0 13 36 1 The appearance of houses and yazds. The availabiliry of parking on your stre�. Lighting on your street. The condition of street paving. Safety in your neighborhood. 6. 5 36 SI 8 Safety in other parts of the East Side. 7. 3l 49 20 1 The way neighhors keep up their places. Note: Responderas living closest to the industrial redevelopment area are less likely co rate this irem as good (21 qa v 35�). 8. 64 25 6 S The way neighbors treat you. Nore.• Respondents Ziving closest to the industrial redevelopment area are a bit less likely to rate this item as good (58% v 66 �O). 9. 29 33 26 12 The way that city codes are enforced. 10. 45 39 I4 3 V ariety of items and prices in local grocery stores. 11. 51 12. 22 13. 23 14. 25 15. 17 16. 12 17. 6 18. 24 19. 11 20. 31 21. 71 22. ll 23. 27 24 27 25. 26 26. 27 27. 24 28. 31 29. l5 30. 25 40 4i 43 30 15 23 29 34 24 25 IS 34 38 38 32 36 44 36 40 35 8 30 25 30 72 36 35 27 29 22 4 35 25 25 40 I9 18 32 30 23 1 The way merchants keep up their properties. 7 The appearance of apartment buildings. 9 The balance of cacial and economic and age gtoups. l4 Recreational opportunities for young children. 56 Day caze options near home. 28 Recreational opportuniries for teens. 29 Job opportunities for teens. IS Recreational opporlunities for adults. 36 Recreational opportunities for the elderly. 22 Affordable health care neaz home. 6 Public transportation. 20 Full-time employment opportunities for adults. 12 Respect for work. 10 Respect for the duties of citizenship I Respect for personal property. 18 Respect for education. 14 Respect for diversity in lifestyles and opinions. 1 Respect for quiet and privacy. I S Optimism aUout the future. 17 Respect for history. � B-11 Filled-in Residents Questiannaire �t� -2,�y E. Finally, for statistical putposes only— I. What is your age: bfean = 50; Median = 47,• Range =19-72 2. Sex: 4690 Male 549� Female 3. What was ihe last year of school you completed: Median =12J,• 25 k of the group had 14 years or more. 4. What is your occupation: a. Professional b. Manager or administrator c. Qerical or technical d. Warehouse and trucking e. Bench trades, assembly workers 10% 7% I8� 4� 79 f. Conszruction and maintenance g. Service workers h. Housewives i. Rerired j. Other 105'0 12% 7% 22� I% 5. Are you presently employed outside of your home (Excludes those whose occupation is housewife or retired persons): (N =195) i. 129 No ii. 7I � Yes, full time iii. 17% Yes, part time. Note: Responderas living closest to the industrial redevelo�nnent area are less lilcely to be unemployed (4% v?590). 6. Are you presenUy enroAed in any {n = 18; others said no} i. 1`,b GED Class ii. 2% Vo-Tech Class iii. 5% Job uaining. &12 � 1 , '� � � i LJ , NOTE: , � i 1 1 I 1 1 i i � �� -�. r�--� PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS A. Introduction FILLED-W LEADERS QUESTIONNAIRE The follow�ing are the responses from 130 lceal leaders. The reader should assume that the number of respondents is 12g+ unless otherwise indicated. The sampie of local leaders came from two sources: b. A"second tier" (of "informal leaders") were referred b}� people in group (a). The "formal" leaders were asked to name 3 people to be added to the sample to achieve a balance in insight and opinions. These three were interviewed and asked to do the same thing, and so on, until the circle of names closed on itself. a. An initial group of respondents ("formal" leaders) lvas chosen, at random, from lists of inembers in known organizations and political agencies on the East Side. EIS Task Force members were excluded. All candidates �n�ere sent letters and the PED corridor draK�ngs before they were called. The regular text was spoken by the interviewer. The text in italics represents answers given by the respondents. As the reader will note, there were many open-ended questions in this interview. B-13 � B. Survey Results Filled-in Leaders Questioartaire q� -a�[� 1 To begin, I'd like to ask a few questions about where you live and wvrk: 1. Could you please tell me what city you live in, and what you would call the neighborhood/azea you live in: CirvJtown a. St. Paul. 80% b. South suburbs. 4 c. North suburbs. 7 d. East suburbs. 7 e. Minneapolis. 2 Nei¢htrorhood/area (N = 114) a, Da}non's Bluff. IS b. Phalen Park 13 c. I.ower Payne. 7 d. Banle Creek 5 e. Railroad Island. 4 f, Hazel Park 2 g. Other East Side .23% (No one place was named by more than 2 persons) h. Other St. Paul. I8 i. Other metro area 13 2. In what city and neighbofiood azea did you live when you were 16? Ci hown a. St. Paul. b. Other�nnesora. c Other Midwest. d. Other US. e. Outside US Nei�hbo�ood/area a East Side of St. Paul. b. Other St. Pnul. c. Other Minnesota or US. �` = 73 ) 47� 29 10 13 2 599 22 19 B-14 � � lJ � L J � � , , , � ' � , , ' ' � q� �,�� Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire 3. Wouid you describe the azea where you grew up as: 64`yc Urban 735o Subwfian 189 Rura] S�/c "Rurban 4. How long have you 3ived in the Twin Ciuzs region? Median = 35 years; ZSSo have tived here 22 years or fewer; 259 have lived here 48 years or more 5. Which azea, if any on the East Side would you say you aze the most familiaz with? Area I know best on the East Side a Payne, Arcade, Phalen area b. Lower Payne, Lower East Side, Railroad Island. c. Dayton's Bluff, Mounds Park. d. Southeast corner. e. Battle Creek f. Phaden Lake . g. Hazel Park h. Distrzct 2 areas i. All of it. j. Other 3050 10 IS 1 2 2 3 4 24 7 6. What area on the East Side would you say is typical of the way you think about the East Side? (Respondents nazned up to three.) a. Payne and Arcade. b. Phalen Iake . c. Lower East Side, Railroad Istand. d. Hazel Park e. Dayton's Bluff. f. LowerPhalenarea. g. Eastern Heights. h. Upper East Side. i. Other. j. All or no rypical area. k Don't Know. 27% 22 9 9 8 5 3 3 12 IZ � � B-15 Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire �1P � !y 7. I'd like you to imagine I am a tourist. What sort of words would you use to descrihe the East Side to me: a. 34% b. 259 c. 18% d. 139 Diverse. Blue collar or Working class. Older neigi+lwrhoods. Historic. e. 13% Normal, quiet, safe, family-oriented. f. 12% Chmeging or In transition. g. 12� Welcoming. h. 10� Strong neighborhood, community. i. 890 j. 7� k 6% 1. 5% Have 3M, Strohs. Hard working. Small town-ish. Ile.teriorated. m. 4� Low/moderate income. n. 3� Nice blend of old and new. o. 39� Crime. p. 29% Other (Growing, Collaborarive, Near Lake Phalen, Anaiques, Supponed by other businesses, Core City, Educated, Major shopping area, Qose to downtown, Urban, Loyal people, Mostly white, Lost soul, Anticipared uplift, Has schools, Easy access to stores and services, Innovative, Exciring, Self-suf�'icient, Access to freeway, Economically challenged, Has recreation and night life, Has manufacturing, service economy.) C�� , C � � � ' , ' [1 ' ' , LJ ' � � ' � qc� a�� Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire � 8. Now, imagine that I manage a pot of federal funds for neighborhood projec[s. How would you describe the East Side to me: 89 Same way as in 3G. a. b. c. d. e. f S• h. i. .1• k 3 t. m. 429 Needs Renewal. 139 Wonh helping or wonh saving. 29 Re-building housing. 89 Having housing problems, such as abseraee landlords, too crowded apartments, renters, too much low-income housing, more low-income housing needed. 7% Needing light industry. 5%a Antiquated housing. 4� Placeofopponurcity. 490 Crime, Need more police. 3% Growing urban area. 390 High unemployment. 90 Declining income. 2% Aging. 22% Other (Need more cutturally-speczfic opportunuies, More green space, Need reduced-rent housing, Welfare-ridden, Businesses need hedp, Struggling, Instabidity, Too many bars, Progressive, Diversified, Home loans, Collaboration between groups, Need federal airI.jor housing and streets, Lots of single parents, middle-working-class, Need things for kids to do, Need better roads ancl shopping.) 9. The City has decided that it needs to take initiatives to improve the economy and neighborhood life on the East Side. In which one of the three following efforts do you think the City should put its energy and money: a.. 12 % Job training, or b.. 32% Housing and public works, or c. 49% Incentives to encourage industry to bring jobs to the East Side, or d. 69 Other. 10. The Phalen Corrido� Initiative is a development plan that calls for: A limited-access mad; a bicycle/walking path; wedand restoration; clean land for indushy sites; space for a light-rail train; and possible housing and commercial developmerns. I'd like you to rank-order this list according to your preferences. "1" would be the most importani. I'11 read the ]ist again. (Note: The lower the score, the more im�ortant the ,feature) a. 1.8 Housing/business developments. b. 2.4 Industrial sites. c. 3.4 The road. d. 3.8 Bike/walking path. e. 4.1 Wetland restoration. f. 5.1 Light-rail. B-17 � Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire `�� 1 I. Are you satisfied that there is a need to change the [and use in the azea where the Phaien Cotridor is ]ikely to be drawn—that is, a 2-m7e stretch of ]and between Johnson Parkway and I35 at Pennsylvania Avenue: a. 7� Yes. b. IIY No. c. 5% Don't know. d. 109 At least some of it 12. Are you Very saUSfied, Somewhat satisfied, or Not satisfied with the plans for the Phalen Corridor Initiative that you have heard about so far: a. 43% Very satisfied. b. 43� Somewhatsatisfied. c. I4% Not satisfied. L_� ' t� , � ' 13. Which individual, organization, or government agency do you think is your BES'C SOURCE for ' compzehensive, good information about the Phalen Cotridor Project (List pmvided by respondents): � c. d. e. f 8• h, i. I• District Planning Councils. City of St, Paul. Business or developnent associations. Phalen Corridor Task Force members. East Side Neighborhood Dievelopmera Corporation. Newspapers. Others (block club, EIS groups, MNDOT.) Merrick Community Center. Don't Know. No one source. 26%a 20� 1690 7% 69� 5� 490 3� ll7 390 14. What would be the BEST WAY for you to be kept infonned atrout the Phalen Project? a. b. c. a. e. f. S• h, Newsletters sent to you. Newspaper, radio, TV. Public meetings/hearin�s. Presentations at meetings. Published reports. A aumber I can call. Irnetnet or Cable access Don't troiher me about it. 549 2� � 6� 3% 39 0& 04 I'��[.3 � 1 , , , )� �I � , � � ' , ■ J � � i � Filled-in Leaders Questiannaire � s 1 � 1l� «,�� 15. Based on what you l�ow today about the Phalen Corridor Initiative, which groups or individuals or popularions do you think would be most likely to benefit from the iniriarive (Note: List provided by respondems): a. b. c. d. e. f• 8• h. i. 289 279� 75'� 790 690 690 590 S%G 990 Neighborhoods and resideats. Business and Industry. Working class. Everyone. Low income, Hmong. Youth. Homeowners. Other (eonstruetion eontraetors, eommuters, no one , ciry overald) Don't know. 16. To be hurt by the initiative: � c. d. e. f• 8• h. i. 33% 26% 6% 890 S% 2% 2% 7% 12 �o No-one. Displaced residents_ Low irccome persons. Business owners. Residenrs, neighborhoods. Absentee owners. Wells Street residents. Other. Don `t Know. 17. Let us imagine that the Phalen Initiative is put in place as planned. In your opinion, would the finished �roiect have a direct beneficial impact on the following wish-list for the East Side: Don't Yes No Know Mavbe �%) (%) (%) �%) a. 55 18 9 b. 72 8 8 c. 33 28 18 d. 47 25 14 e. 63 22 6 f. 53 18 10 g. 65 10 9 h. 69 IS 5 i. 54 IS j. 52 18 k. 76 7 13 14 4 18 Fewer unemployed living on the East Side. 11 An active, diverse commercial sector. 21 Less crime. l4 Streets and puks that welcome pedestrians after dark. 9 Better-looking homes with higher market values. 20 Commercial and recreation attractions that bring visitors from other parts of the region. 16 Safer roadways and less traffic congestion. 10 An improvement in the attitude outsiders have about the East Side. I S Enhancement and use of natunl resources. 16 Enhancement and use of Fast Side landmarks. 13 A revitalized industrial hase in the East Side economy. ' B-19 Filled-in Leaders Quesiiortnaire q+� -�,� � 18. Which City, Coumy, or private agency o�ces do you think have the best record in helping the East Side? (Note: List provided by respondents) . c. d. e. f 8• h. i. .1• 329� 269� 179'0 IS% 6% 54'a 4% 3� IOY 6�Y City of St. Paul agencies. East Side business and development agencies. District Planning Councils. City ofSt. Paul political leaders. Merrick Community Ceruer. 3M. Fowrdations. Schools. Others (Block clufis, Clinics, State ofMinnesota, Ramsey Co Board, HUD.) Dan't Know, none. 19. What is happening now on the Fast Side that woutd help to make the Phalen Corridor Initiative a success? (Note: Snmmary of list provided by respondems) a. 33 % Pul�lic/private cdlaboration,- rnmersation benveen diverse interests, comnaunity i�rvolvement. b. 77x Housing rehabildtation, home ownership, volunreers, crime watch, block clubs. c. 15� More in,formation. d. 11 % More hope; people excited aboutproject.. e 8% Ezisting redevelopment agencies, projects. f. 7% Existing redevelopment plans, local councils. g. 4`� Corporcue support. h. 4�O Phalen Initiarive, EIS, road plans. i. 18% Others (End ofWhirlpool Building, No tolerance ofcrime, More moneyfrom legislature, Coordination by Ciry, Memo State, i�arious District Councils speakingforrhe project.) j. l6k Don'r Know. . �� ' i L 1 ' LJ ',� ' , , � u IJ , ' , ' � i Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire 9C� -� �� 20. What is happening now that would work against the proposal? (Note: Summary of list provided by respondents) a 2190 b. 149 c. IOYc d. 9� e. 79 f. 590 g. 59 h. 4% i. 3% j. 14% k. I6� Lack of money. 7QCk of information, misinformation. People speuking against it for privare reasons� ealousy. People who objecr to the plan or to moviag housing Housing rehabiliration, home ownership. Cynicism. Housing problems (Deterioration, Minorities, Mulriple family housing, Overcrowding.) Fear of big government, bureaucratic problems. State of economy. Others (Bureaucracy, Iaw income inhabitants, Too many apartment buitdings, People living on the East Side who don't care about it, Zack of information, Crime.) DonY Know. I'd no�c like to ask you a few questions about design. 21. What features or chazacteristics of the Fast Side would you like to see incotpoiated into a design of the Phalen Corridor and Phalen Boulevazd. (Note: Summary of list provided by respondents) � c. d. e. f 8• h. i. I� 35R'o Good landscaping, with trees, water, and bike path. 209� Accenr historic nature ofEast Side, railroad rheme. 249� Am Innterns or gas lights. I0� Wel1-lir. 79 Access to local businesses, good flow between industrial, commercial, residential. 4% Intimateneighborhood,feet. 4% Wetlands, with Phalen Creek 4% Wide boulevard. 32% Others. (Off-street parking, Working-ciass practical, No low income housing Mairaenance-free, Clean, Advertising.J 189 Don'r know. � B_z� Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire a�-a�� 22. Think of another neighlwrhood in the Metro that you like. What good things about that neighborhood would you like to see in the Phalen Corridor. (Note: Summary of list provided by respondems) (N =120) a. b. c. d. e. f 8• h. 1. J• k. 1. m. 7290 Iattdscaping, trees and shrubs. ll % Small rown jeel. 10% Attractive, redeveloped businesses, 7� GTean. 79 Historic nature. 65o Open space for walking. 6% Good residential feel. 4� Crime free. 3% Itevitalized wetlands. 3� Ease ofaccess. 290 Well-lit. 20% Other (More service competuion; Open space for walking; Unique; Fewer bars; Yariery,• Industrialdevelopment,• More homeowrsers; O,ff-streetparkingJ l7% Dbn't know, none. 23. Whaz is the neightarhood called or where is it located? (N =104) � c. d. e. f 8• 2490 13% 119 8� 79 6� 12`� Grand Avenue. St. Anthony Park Gocus Hill, Summit, Ramsey Hill, Cathedral Hill. Highland. Macalester-Groveland. Como Park Other St. Paul (280/Universety Avenue, W 7th, Lowertown, Dayton's Blu,�j; Pierce-Burler, Macalester-Groveland.) Location in Minneapolis (Ca�nden, Iake ofthe Isles, Lake Calhoun). Other (M¢plewood, Eagan, West St. Paul, France Avenue, Cottage Grove.) h. 6% i. 1490 24. Think about a commerciaUindushial mad with Iimited access in the Metro that comes into view when you think about how the Phalen Boulevazd might look: a 13% b. 11 � c. 9% d_ S% e. 249a f. 3290 Energy ParkDrive. Pierce-Butler. 35E South. Ayd Mill Road Other (Olson Memorial Kghway, �ssissippi River Boulevard, Ford Parkway, Kasota, 394 near St. Louis Park, Minnehaha Street, Smith Avenue, Riverview Industrial Park, Along the Mississippi in Minneapolis, Wheelock Parkway, Old Hudson Road, Lexington Parkway; McKnight Road; Hwy 280,• Lafayene Bridge area, Warner Road.) Don'r know or none. B-22 � , ' ' , ' i L � � , , , , ' � , C � ' Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire `7E^ "o�, (`( Moving away from the hypothetical for a minute, where in the Metro region, and where in St. Paul, do you like to go: 25. For a day of shopping with no particular purchase in mind: MEI'RO (N = 91) a. 229 Maplewood Mall. b. 785� Rosedale. c. 169 Mall ofAmeriar. d. 9% Woodbury Village. e. 990 Downtown Minneapolis or Uptown Minneapolis. f. 7% Stillwarer. g. II � Other. h. 99'� Don't know, doesnY apply. ST. PAUL (N = 91) a 37� Grand Avenue. b. 24% Downtown St. Paul. c. 13`� Payne and Arcade. d. 79 Sun Ray. e. S� Rosedale. f. 49 Other. g. 9� IJon't know, doesn't apply. 26. For groceries, drugs, things you buy on a regulaz basis: MEIRO a. 14% b. 1490 d. 6% e. 6� f. S% k. 169 i. 31 % ST. PAUL a. 44� b. 7�O d. 3% (N = $�) Maplewood Mald. Woodbury Village. Rosevitle. St. Paul locatiores. OCikd4le. Other (Cottage Grove, Stillwater, Galleria, Midway, Vadnats Heights, West St. Paul, Linle Canada; Eagan, Mall ofAmerica.) Don't know, none, doesn't apply. (N = 92) Payne and Arcade. Elsewhere on East Side. White Bear Avenue. e. 5% Sunray. g. 8%a Suburban Avenue. h. 179� Other (Crocus Hill, Downtown. Roseville, Grand Avenue, Fliltcrest, Midway, Woodbury, Highland.) i. 59 Don't know, doesnY apply. B-23 � 27. To be outdoors, outside of your own yazd: MEI'RO (N = 84} a. 199� b. 10% c. 89 d. 7� e. 4� f. 21 °lc g. 23� ST. PALTL a. 43% b. IS% c. 9% Regional parks. Iake Calhoun, I.ake Harriet. Other [akes and rivers. Stitlwaterarea Other pans ofSt. Paul. Other (Any golf course; Z,ake Gervais: Cenrral Park in Rosevitle; Vadnais Heights; ii'hite Bear,� Woodbury; Hudson; ForestZake; Tr�ril Lake Park, Arboretwn, Hennepin Avenue, Casinos.) DonY know. (N = 103) Lake Phalen orPhalen Park Como Park Banle Creek Park d. 99 Mound's Park e. 4% Riverfront. f. 20% Other (Golf course, Summit, Hidden F'alls, E. River Road, Walk in neighborhood, Yadnais Hts, �(lard Munger Bike Trail, Keller Lake.) 28. For an evening out to dinner or a movie: MEI'RO (N = 89) a. 2390 Downtown Minneapolis or Uptown Minneapolis. b. 19� Maplewood Mall. c. 990 Srillwater, St. Croix towns. d. 9% Roseville. e. 71 Woodbury. f. 20% Other (Shorevtew, Lake Elmo, all over, Mall ofAmerica, Whize Bear area, g. 119 ST. PAUL a. 389 b. 1990 c. 139 d. 3% f. Z29 g. 57 Har Mar, Hudson, St Croix). Don't /oiow, doesn't apply. {N = 98) Dbwntown Sr. Paul. Grand Avenue. Eart Side locations. Banle Creek Other (West St. Paui, Har Mar, Nonh Suburbs, Hillcrest, Summit, Highland, Selby Dale, Sun Ray, Erhnic restaurant, West 7th, Leazngton, Capird Hill, Macalester-Groveland.) Don't know. Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire ��a�y 1 � ' I� � L � �l � t Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire a� �� 29. I am going to name some factors that might dictate where people shop or conduct personal business. Could you please Rank-Order them from 1-7, where 1 means most i�rtant. a. .�_ b. 3.5 c. �5 d. 3.8 e. 3.8 £ 4.0 g. 5.8 � 30. Which of the factors we just spoke about aze LACKING in East Side shopping or husiness areas: (Per cent responding that the factor is missing) (N = 123) � l ' 1 � , � ' , L l' I.� 1_ a. 47% b. 47� a 45% d. 38% e. 17% £ 72% g. 7% 31. About what per cent of your retail and commercial purchases are made at locations on the East Side: Mean = 4590, Median = .509� Variety of businesses in one piace. Distance from home. Pazking- The look and feel of the azea. Cost of goods and services. Security. Places stay open late. Security. Variety of businesses in one place. The look and feel of the azea. Parking. Places stay open late. Distance from home. Cost of goods and services. 32. If you could change i route between East Side locations and any azea freeway or highway, which would it be: (N = 118) (i,ist provided by respondents.) a. b. c. d. e. f I6% I29 12�70 109 12% 3690 Phulen Boulevard roure or access. To I-94 from Lower East Side. Other. South and Nonh along 35E. Don`t know. None comes to minrl. "Other" answers included: Route to White Bear and Highway 36; Connection to 61 at 94; Make a rule that there be no teft turns on Maryland; New bus route from Mechanic Avenue to Maplewood Mall; W'ulea Maryland or Arcade, fix Edgerton Bridge, upgrade Mounds Boulevard roads. B-25 Filled-in Leaders Qr�esiionaaire gi�-a�� 33. What streets on the East Side do you try to avoid because of traffic or stop signs: a. b. c. d. e. f 8• 339 12� 8� 6� 59 6% 31% Marylund. White Bear Avenue. Payrse. Easr �th. Arcade. Other (Case, York, Residential streets.J None comes to mincl. Because you don't like the azea: a. 589� None comes to mind. b. 1890 Payne and Mcade. c. 159� Lower east side, south of Case. d. IO% Other (Barclay and Magnolia, Side meets, Maryland, Edgerton, AII over.) 34. On another subject, aze there any demands for recreation that have not been met on the East Side: a 39% Youth recreation. b. 197o Movie thearers. c. 159 Safe playgrounds and parks. d. I090 More recreation centers, 8askerball couns, Tean recreation, Tennis courts. e. 7% Bike and walking trails. f. 5� Swimming pool. g. 45� Soccerfzelds. h. 14� Other (Elderly recrealion, S�c�c sporis, Healdh club, Horseback riding, Ice skating. Everything.) 35. I'd like to ask you about the objeciives you have for the East Side that you think could be realized in the Phalen Corridor Iniriative. What per cent of the time do you think your objectives coincide with those of the Ciry? (N = 108) Mean = 5990 Med1a/1= 605'0 The bottom founh said 4790 orless; 7he top fourth said 80� or more. 0 �� r � � �� L� � Fi![ed-in Leaders Questionnaire (j � -1� `�, /� 36. It is a week-day afternoon. You aze standing somewhere along a finished Phalen Boulevard. Whaz would you like to be looking at that would make you proud you were involved in its planning? (I,ist provided by respondenu.) . .+. f,� c. d. e. 8• h. Z. 419 3290 219 119 8`/'0 59 3% 119� Natural environment: Trees, Landscaping, Lukes, Creek, Wetlands, Wildlife. Busy business, Traf,�ic, New industry, People wor/,zng, Jobs for East Siders Recreariorwl activiry: Peopte using the bi1 e trail and boul�ard Clean and neat, Benches, Well-kept yards. Housing improvements, Pleasant. Owner-occupied housing. Attractive parkway, Pedestrian friendly. We11-1'u Nothing-likes the way it is now. Other (Historic sites, Security, Parking, Small town feeling, Smoke-free buildings, Done.) � 37. In your experience, is there: A housing program, a job-training program, an economic development project, or an utfian industrial development that you think is worth repeating--in the literature or which you have seen somewhere? (Lists provided by respondents.) l� � ' , � � � � r � Let's start with a housing program (N = 118) a. b. c. d. e. f 8• 20% 74� ]3% 10% 5%a 59'0 73% Low interest loans for house remodedling and rehabilitatiorz East Side Neighborhood Dievelopment Corporation. Hafiitat for Humanity. Houses to Homes, Urban homesteading. Dayton's Blu, jf. Home ownership. Other (Grand Avenue/Summit Hill restoration, Selhy-Dale, Pinsburg, Private reinvestment, Retirees helping, Bradley Terrace, Neighborhood Housing Programs, SPEAC.) No answer. h. 339 No�+�, a job training program (1 = 112) a. 49'0 b. 39 c. 89 d. 7% e. 4% f. 70� Pon Authority. Metro State. Miscellaneous school, non profit programs. Miscellaneous public programs. �sce[laneous private programs. No answer, can'r think of one. � B_2� Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire �� -a,�[y Something worth repeating in an economic development program ('.V = 111) a. 5% East Side Neighborhood D�velopmera Corporation. b. S� North End Area Redevelopment c. 249 Miscellaneous progratts and areas (Calhoun Square, Crocus Hi[I, Woodbury Economic Dievelopment Authority, Phulen Initiazive, Grand Avenue, Highland Park, Private invesrment, West St. Paul program, Neighborhood Job BanF, Energy Park, Diayton's Bluff, Micro-Enrrepreneur Development Pragram, Banclana Square program, PABA, Stabilue schools.) d. 66% No answer, cart'r rhink of one. Finall}�, an urban industriai development: (N = 113) a. 5% b. 4% c. 3% d. 390 e. 12% f. 73� Eitergy Park Pon Authority. River front area. East Side Neighborhood Developne�u Corp�oration. Miscellaneous progrmns and areas (Phalen lnitiame, Evanston, IIZinois, Baltimore waterfront distric7, Portland iraegration of industry wul rtatural assets, Grand Avenue, URAP, Low impaa industries, Recycling business, Free trade zones.) No answer, can Y think of one. 38. Finally, for statistical purposes only: a. May I lmow your age: Median= 47 years; mean = 49. b. Sex of respondents 64% Male 36� Female. c. The last year of schooling that you completed: Mean =16. The lowest 25% af the respondents had completed 14 years of school or less. The highest 25% had completed 18 years ofschool or more. f �'. ,� � ;� � lJ � � � �c� -�. I� PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS FILLED-OUT COMMERCIAL QUESTIONNAIRE Introduction The follo�ving are the responses from 132 respondents. NOTE: The regular text was spoken b�� the intervie��er. The text in italics represents answers given by the respondents. As the reader will note, there were many open-ended quesiions in this interview. A. To begin, I'd like to ask you a few questions about your business location on the East Side: 1. In what year did your business open at your East Side location? Mean = 26 years ago; Median =18 years ago. Range =1-105 25% have been there 7 years or less. 25% have been there 39.5 years or more, 2. Would you describe your business as a II % Partnership 35% Proprietorship 52% Corpontion 49� Franchise � 3. Does your business own the building where you re located or do you rent space there from a relative or someone else? 62% Owns building 4� Rents from relative 339 Rents from another. � ■ � � � � � � � � 4. Aow many people do you employ Full-time; Pait-time, or Seasonally: a. Full-tune Employees: Means = 5.8 The bottom 25% have 1 or fewer. Median = 3 Range = 0-64 The top 25 %a have 6 or more. b. Part-time Employees: Mean = 2.8 The bonom 25% have none. c. Seasonal Employees: Mean = 0.4 Median =1 The top 25% have 3 or more. 5. About how many squaze feet of space does your East Side husiness have—the total number would be sufficient. Mean = 4933 ft' Median = 2550�t' 25`Y have 1420 ft' or less. : • Range =1-32,000 253� have 5000 ftz or more. Fitled-ia Commercia! Owners Questionrzaire �� -a�� 6. What do you think were the principal reasons that your East Side husiness location wa5 chosen? Item a Location and la�owledge ofarea: b. Convenient to owner. c. Long-rime business ofthis type established here. d. Access to highways, downtown. e. Low cost. f. Convenient to customer base. g. High trajJ'ic area. h. Availabilityoflocation. i. Enough space. j. Low competition. k Access to railroad. 7. Do these reasons hold uue today? Don't hold true because: Item - Q. IaZCILIEe O, f Q7CQ b. Business changed focus. c. Business changed owners. h o. 9 4 2 5'c 25 I8 IS 12 11 70 10 10 7 7 1 199 No 90 7 3 2 8. Do you think that your business, located where it is on the East Side, could sell for what it is really worth to you toda}�? 36% Yes 43% No 20% Don't Know 9. Looking ahead, do you expect to still be in business at your East Side location in the year 2000—or five yeazs from now? 707 Yes 9� Don'tKnow 12% No 94� Other 10. What would you say aze the best reasons atwut doing business on the East Side? Item a. Like area and fellow businesses. b. Location for doing business. c. Access to customer base. d. Access to freeways . e. Long established business. f. Close to downtown. g. Low cost. !� o. 31 22 19 IS 13 I2 12 12 8 8 1 72� Yes 9 90 Don't Know : � No. 43 26 l7 1� I3 9 3 % 35 27 l4 l4 II 7 2 � � � � � 1 � � � � � � � � � � �� Filled-in Commercial Owners Questionnaire 9(� -a,'7� 11. Is your East Side business located in a mall or complex; on a street comer, or in the middle of a btock? 79� In a mall or complex 559 On a corner 379� In the middle of a bloc�. 12. In a typicai week, about how many delivery trucks bring goods to your store? Please don't count UPS or similar package services. Mean = 5.4 trucks per week Median = 2 trucks per week. 13. How many of these aze regulaz 2-axle trucks, how many aze semi s? a Regular trucks: Mean = 2.7 Median = I b. Semi-trailer trucks: Mean =1.8 semis Median =1 14. Have you made any investments in your business in the last five years? 84% Yes 1690 No x�ge = a�o Range = 0-30 What kind? It� No. % a. Remodeled or upgraded. 46 37 6. Expanded building. 24 2D c. New store, bought property. I7 l4 d. Did landscaping, exterior face-lift. 4 3 e. Added parking lot. 2 2 f. New equipment. 22 18 g. New product . 9 7 I5. I'd like you to think about your East Side business location and to concentrate on the view from inside your building. Would you say that the view out the back, out the front, and to the sides of the building aze attractive or unamactive. Let's start with the view out the back. Don't Know Attxactive Unaaractive 490 429 539 Out the back. 7% 63% 30% Out the front. 3% 6190 35% Up the road to the left, from inside the building. 590 62% 33�Yo Up the road to the right, from inside the building. 16. Has the appearance of the area where your business is located HURT your business; HELPED your husiness, or HAD NO EFFECT on your basiness? 8% Helped 329� Hurt 54% Had no effect 59 Don't Know B-31 Filled-in Comirsercia[ Owners Questionnaire ��-a7� 17. What business street,including those on the East Side, do your personally think has an attractive and practical design for signs, lighting, pazking, sidewalks, and business fronts? Street n; p, q� East Side Streets a. Maryland 7 6 b. Payne 22 20 c. Arcade g 7 d. Easr 7rh S 4 e. White Bear ]( 14 f. Wheelock 6 5 g. Other East Side 4 3 Other St. Paul Streets a University 2 2 b. Grand 20 I8 c. Rice Street I � Non-St. Paul Sffeets a SOth and Frunce, Edina 3 2 b. Century Aveaue, Oakdate 2 2 c. Main Street, Nonh St. Paul 2 2 d. Other 2 2 18. If your business coald be located oa any sueet or in any shopping area in the Twin Cities, including your present site, where would you want to be? Item St. Paul Streets a Present location b. White Bear Ave. c. Other East Side d. Universin� e. Grand Avenue f. South Roben g. Other St. Paul No. 3�c 60 49 33 27 S 4 8 7 3 2 4 Z 5 Item Other StreeYs a. Maplewood b. 3uburbia c. Edina d. Roseville 3 e. Bloomington 2 f. Woodbury 4 g. White Bear Lake h. Otherlocations N o. 90 46 37 8 7 9 8 3 2 5 4 7 3 3 8 6 2 2 7 B-32 � � � ,� � 3 ,� � � �I :� � ;� � � � � �J � Filled-in Commercial Owners Questionnaire 9�-a`7'� 19. The City has decided that it needs to take initiatives to improve the economy and neighborhood alike in the East Side. Where do you think the City should put its efforts and money? Please pick one. 14Y 7ob Training. 169 Effotts to improve the qualiry of housing and public works. 459� Incemives to encourage industry to bring jobs to the East Side. 259 Other 20. On what days and during what houcs are your open for business? a Days open during the week: 36% 5 days; 34% 6 days 269 7 days . b. Hours: Median Opening: 8:Q'1; Mediarz Closing: 6:GYI. 25% npen by 7.•45; 259 stay open unti19:00 PM. B. I'd like to ask you a few questions now about your employees. 21. About what per cent of your employees travel to wodc by: 89� Car 4% Bus 0.2% Bike 6% Onfoot 22. What per cent of your employees would you describe as: 24% Unskilled 37% Technically irained 38% Professionally trained 23. How many openings would you have for employees in a normal year: Totals = 366 unskilled, 139 technically skilled, and 47professionally trained. Mean = 2J unskilled,l.1 technically skilled, and 0.4 professionally skflled per business. Per cent businesses with no openings: 47�0 24. What per cent of your employees live on the Fast Side? Toral for rhe enrire group: 42% C. Now I'd like to ask you a few questions about your customers. 25. About what per cent oY' your customers do business with you: 689 in your siore or o�ce 269'0 over the telephone 29 through the mail. 26. Are there any seasonal differences in the amou�t of business you do with customers? 28% No 3% Don't Know 6990 Yes 27. About what per cent of your customers are regular or repeat customecs: Mean = 74% Media�t = 8Q90 Range = I-I00 The bonom 25% say 70% oftheir curtomers are repeat customers; the top 25�7 say A�� or more are repertt customers. B-33 Filled-in Commercia[ Owners Questionrsaire q�-a�� 28. At+out what per cent of your eustomecs would you say Iive within one mile of your store or office? • Mean = 35� live within one mile; 74% of respoudents said they didnY b�now. Median = 3Q9� Range = 0- IfJO The bottom 253'� say I09 or fewer live wirhin one mile; the top 259 say 609 or more_ 29. How far from our store would you say that the limit of your mazket azea is? Mean = 33 miles; Median = I S miles. 2990 of respandents said they didn't Irnow. Range =1- 300 miles; the bonom 25� say 5 mites or less; the top 25`7o say 29 miles or more. 30. What tyQes of businesses complement yours? Item Na. � Item No. 4E Retail Shons Services a. Clothing b. Bars and restaurents c. Grocery store d. Furniture e. Gas station £ "Smail shops" g. Bridal shops h. Video store i. Other 15 12 12 10 12 10 5 4 4 6 3 3 10 a. Auto repair 12 b. Professional 5 c. Medical 4 d. Beauty shop 3 3 e. Fast food 5 £ Construetion 2 g. Banking 2 h. Funenl pazlor 8 i.Other 10 4 3 2 3 2 7 5 2 2 2 2 9 7 31. Have any of your customers ever given you any advice or make suggestions atx�ut ways to improve your business or pmduct? Item a. Add product or service b. Add security or escoa service c. Improve product or service d. Leave the East Side e. Improve store appearance £ Improve store access g. Change hours h. Chaage prices ;� o. � 8 7 6 4 3 2 2 2 � 7 6 5 3 2 2 2 2 � M � �� :� � � � � �, � � �' � �J � � � Filled-ia Commercial Ox•ners Questionnai�e � a�� 32. Based on your experiences at your East Side location, is your business very concemed (VC), concerned (C), or not concemed (NC) about the safety of your empioyees or customets: VC a. 36 b. 46 c. 35 d. 20 C 35 36 41 32 NC 29 19 24 48 When they are inside your business office or store. When they aze waiking between your site and a cu or bus. When they aze driving thmugh East Side neighborhoods nearby. When they aze traveling from your site to a freeway entrance. 33. I'm going to list some factois that might dictate where people choose to shop or conduct their business. Could you rank-order them in order of most to least important. (NOTE: Lowest number = most importarn) a. 3.1 b. 3.7 c. 3.6 d. 3.6 e. 3.7 f. 3.9 Personal relation with the owner/cierk. Cost of the product. Pazking. Security. Distance from home. Atmosphere, feeling of shopping azea. 34. Are any of these elemems lacking in East Side business areas? (Respondents could name up to three.) 4 k No 22 % Don't laeow, no answer 74 �'o Yes Item Missine a. Parking b. Securiry c. Peisonal relations with clerk or owner d. Distance from homes e. Cost competitiveness f. Atmosphere g. Other No. % 55 42 60 49 5 4 6 S 23 5 4 19 5 35. In the letter we sent to you, we described some features of the planned Phalen Boulevazd proposal. I'd like to ask you to rank-order some of these feamres from the most to the least important. (NOTE: Lowest number = most importantJ a. 2.5 b. 2.5 c. 2.9 d. 4.7 e. 4.4 f. 4.9 The new road between 3ohnson Parkway and I-35E at Pennsyivania Avenue. Land cleaned up for industrial development. Land used for new housing developments. A bicycle path to downtown and to other bike trails in rhe metro azea. A wetland where the Phalen Shopping Center is now. Space set aside for a Iight-rail train. `� B-35 Filled-ia Commercial Owners Questionnaire q(� -a i �{ 36. It wiU he a whde before this Pttalen Boulevard project g�s going. How would you like to he kept infomied about the project—would you prefer to get your information: a. 66� b. 337 c. 7% d. 2% e. 1 � f. 25'0 In newsl�tets or notices mailed to you from time to time by the City. Fmm articles in the newspaper. At mcetings of business associations. At a public meeting. In an Envimnmentai Impact Statement when it comes out. Prefer not to be bothered about this project. 37. From what you have heard so faz, do you think that the Phalen Boulevazd pmject will help or hurt your bvsiness, or not affect it? Don't Know = 9�'0 Item A. Ways it ��ill help; a. Bener aceess and jobs b. Bring more people into neighborhood c. Clean up neighborhood d. Better access to freeway e Less trurktraffic, bener flow f. No specific reason B. Ways it will hur[: a Reduce traffic for shopping b. Trme during constnrction roads will be closed c. Other C. VGays it will not make any difference: a Project too far away to have any effect b. Tjpe ofbusireess will not be affected c. Waste ofmoney/takes too long d. Other e. No specifec reason 1V o. �'c 68 55 14 13 13 5 4 19 ll 11 17 4 3 IS 10 8 4 3 2 2 4 3 33 15 7 2 2 7 27 72 6 2 2 6 � � � � '!I lJ �� Filled-in Commercial Owners Qaestionaaire �� a� 38. I'd like you to imag9ne that you aze standing somewhere along a finished PhaIen Boutevard on a week-day aftemoon. What would you like to see that would make your feei satisfied that the pmjea was well done and make you pmud to have been involved m the planning? Item a Cleaned-upplace b. Industrial activity�, prosperous businesses c. Natural environment d. 5afe, patrolled e. Recrearional activity f. Traffic, parking, access g. Well-tit h. Attractive parkway i. Fiaished in time, on budget j. Businesses and homeowners worldng together k. Housing improvemeras 1. No answer 39. For statistical purposes only, please teli me \ o . 9c 38 31 35 27 33 25 2I 16 21 l8 17 l3 16 14 14 10 6 4 4 33 5 3 3 26 a. Your age: Median = 46 years Mean = 46 years Range = 21-79 b. Your gender: 76% Men; 24%a Women c. The last year of school you attended: Mean =14; range =1420 years: 29�10 college graduutes. d. How long have you been at your present job: Mean =14 years; Median =10 years, Range = 1- 49. Bonom 25% have been there 4 years or fewer, top 25% have been there 20 years or more. B-37 � � �" �� `a�t-{ Phalen Corridor EIS Industrial Surve�� August. 1995 INTRODtiCTIOti � These responses are from 20 industrial managers. These managers were interviewed by phone after receiving letters telling them about the survey. The number of respondents for each question in this material should be presumed by to be at least 1'7 uniess otherwise stated. � �" � � ,� ,� � ,� � � � � � � The sample for this survey was taken from lists provided by the East Side Neighborhood Development Corporation, followed by a windshield survey to con�rm its completeness. "Industrial" for purposes of this research is de�ned as a business which does not market services or prodacts in the local retail market. In addition, a few waste firms, because of their truck traffic, were also included. Few demographic data were sought in interviews because many of these managers had been interviewed about their operations for a separate study conducted by Metro State University for the Employment Task Force at about the same time. 3. The Phaien Boulevard and praposed industriai sites are intended to provide economic benefit to the East Side of St. Paul by offering industrial firms b�ter mutes for supplie�s and employees and about 125 acres of clean land for industrial deveIopment. I'd like to begin by asking you some questions about truck traffic to and from your Fast Side Plant. a. What per ceut of the detiveries made m your yard arrive by 2-axie truck, semi-traiter truck, or train? Please ignore UPS or similaz package services. Totai for group = 39 qo by 2-a�cle uuck 58 % by semi-trailer � by train. b. On a tvoical weekday, how many 2-axle trucks and semi s deliver oods Lo your plant? Total for gmup = I92 2-axle trucks and 292 semi-rrailers. c. On a tvoical weekday, how many 2-axte trucks and semi s shi goods from your piant? Total for group = 245 2-axle rrucks and 247 semi-trailers d. What aze the peak trnck shipping and receiving hours at yvur plant? 8 am - 3:30 Dm e. About what per cent of your truck traffic occurs at that time? 93 � E After leaving your plant, ahout what per cent of your truck traffic goes on each of the following highways? I-94 East 52 % I-94 West 20% I-35 North 3% Hwy 36 East 1% Hwy 36 W est 1% Warner or Shepherd Road I 3'0 Hwy 52 (Lafayette) South 8% Does not go onto a highway IS� Don't Know � FiZled-in Industrial Managers' Questionnaire g. Have uuck drivets ever complained ta your dispatcher about: ��—{ Yes No D on't Know i. IS 9 70% I5� Traffic congesrion between a freeway and your gates. ii. 35� 50`� IS% Poor alignme� of surface roads maldng travel difficult az irnersections, huns, etc. (Where? Kenny at Br�nson • Mississi�i at I-35 and University�. R�crsell Street closing; 7th and Mendota.) iii. 1% 659 25� Danger to drivers or pedestrians on certain surface roads on the Fast Side. h. If you could choose to have better access to one area freeway for your trnck uaffic, which would it be? (Respondents named up to three.) No ans�ver or none: 4590 I-94 East 30%; I-94 West 30�; I-35 Nonh 25% ; Hwy 52 10%; I-694 10%; Hxry 36E 5%; Warner Road 59. Do you have any suggestions how to do ihis without major road reconstcuction? Build a ramp where Hwy 61 meets 94 .(2 respondents) 4, Now I'd like to talk to you about your employee traffic. a. Aow many shifts does your plant operate in a normal day? 61 %; One 6%; Two 339 Three b. Atx�ut what per cent of the total number of employees (3790 in all businesses surveyed) uavel to work by: 129'o Caz or van pool: 8490 PrivateCar. 2% BikeorFoot: 2% Bus: c. About what per cent of employees who drive to work (of all employees in the companies interviewed): 9b% Park on a company lot at the plant site. 2% Park on a company lot near but not at the plant site. 8% Pazk on a city sueet or a lot owned by someone else. � � � �' � � �' ,� � � �' �� ,� � ti � � � Filled-in Industrial Managers' Questionnaire � a�� d. Could you piease pmvide a count of employees who live in each of these zip codes: 135 55102 69 SSt02 30 55103 98 55104 78 55105 447 55106 44 55107 �55108 248 55109 246 55110 66 SSII2 90 SSI13 10 55114 50 55115 49 55116 128 55117 64 55118 335 55119 196 55120-55124 371 55125 145 55126-27 286 55128 169 55075-76 405 55401-40 Total �mployment of Interview Group: 3790 Fifteen per cent of atl employees live in the Phalen Corridor study area (Zip codes 55101 and 55106); ten per cent in the balance of St.Paul. 5. Let's tatk about safety for a moment. Do you think your employees or visitois aze safe: Yes No Dont Know 79% 21 % 0 When they are walking between parking lots and the plant. 63% 37% 0 When they aze driving tluough Fast Side neighborhoods near the plant. 38% 33% 28% When they stop to visit another place on the East Side. 6. Some companies sponsor social and recreational evenu for employees outside the work place, such as sports teams, dances, picnics, and charity events. Does your firm sponsor events like these? 509'o Yes 40% No ]0% Dont Know (If Yes), what per cent of them take place at locations on the East Side? 17% 7. What would be some of the limitations to your firm expanding or continuing to do business on the East Side? 25 % Can t think of any Limitations: Not enough space to expand Head office is in another ciry High taxes or too expensive Environment near the plattl has deteriorared Regularions,zoning,inspections N 6 2 2 2 6 % 30�70 IO% 10% 10% 30% � Filled-in Industrut! Managers' Questionnaire Rt�-� �� 8. If your firni were thinking aUout exganding or re-locating, would you he likely ta recommend a location on the East Side? 10 a Can't say 5 o Ikm't know 47 o Yes (Expiain: 8uilding rs big enough here to have more busir+ess; this is the idea[ property for ourbusiness; the politicol leaders are good here; space availafile here) 3� No (Explain: Moving to Crosby Inke ; this area is too cosrly (2); poor roarls; �nnesora taxstruc[ure) 9_ What recommendations, requests, or caudons would you offer to someone trying to develop industrial sites on the East Side? IS � Can't say 15% None come to mind I'd suggest {10 respondents) Security, lighring, fencing: (Z); Safery (2}; Tax inceniives(1}; Lower the road ar E. 7ih and Johnson Pkwy (1); Hardware stores (1) Reverse degeaerating neighborhoods (2} More labor needed here (1); Early AMn heavy (1); More consistent inspections (I); Freeway access not good (1); Freeway access good (Z). lU. Thinking about yourown F.ast Side location: a. Is the plant space adequate? 63� Yes; I6% No; 2l � For now. b. Is the truck docking space adequate? 59� Yes; 28%No; 17% For now. c. Is the parking adequate? 529 Yes 214o No 26%For now d. Will it be adequate for your future needs? 52% Yes 42 o No 5% For now 11. I'd like to move to another topic now and talk with you about the physical surmundings of the area where your East Side plant is located. I am going to name some local areas or featiu�es. Please tell me if each is Very Attractive, Attractive, Unattractive, or Very Unattractive. %VA %A %aN a. 16 63 5 b. II 42 ll c. 11 22 29 d. 0 26 l] e. 0 21 21 f S• h. i. J• k. I. m. %UA %V[JA II 5 37 0 33 6 52 II 53 5 50 41 35 22 28 44 l7 0 ll b 24 0 0 0 6 6 Your plant site. The strcet yow plant is located on. Other industrial plants near yours. Homes located within a block of your plant. Homes in the rest of the neighborhood of yourplant The railmad tracks near your plant Vacant lots nearyourplam. Vacant buildings near your plant. Businesses along Arcade Street Businesses along Payne Avenue. Businesses along East 7th Street. Businesses near Prosperity and Maryland The neighborhood near your own home. � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 6 35 0 50 44 33 61 44 33 I8 4l 28 28 22 I7 0 � � � �� Filled-in ]ndustriat Marsagers' Questionnaire q�-a�� 12. The City of St Paul has decided that it needs to take initiaziv� to impmve the economy and neighborhood like in the East Side. Piease tell me which of the efforts I am going to list is the best place forthe city to put its efforts and money. Please choose 1: 1690 Job training. 1690 Efforts to improve the quality of housing. 09� Improvements to public works 589 Incentives to encourage industry to bring jobs to the Fast Side 10% Other 13. Speaking of job training, please tel] me what recommendations would your firm wish to make to local schools or govemment agencies or non-profit agencies about t�aining people for jobs in a business like your own. a. Technical courses, such as electric trades, welders, science courses (7). b. Get kids to look at real life jobs, use more OJT (7). c. Challenge kids with learning rewards (2}, d. Teach basic skills/improve graduare rate (2J. e. Teach job oxmership/dependability (2). f. Teach truck driving (2). 14. The Phalen Corridor Initiative includes pmvisions for: A limited access road; a bicycle path; space for light-rail; industrial land; continued rail freight service; housing improvements; and wetland restontion at the northeastem end of the comdor. Please rank these proposals in order of their importance to your office. I'll read the list again. (" 1" = Most impottam; ' 7" = Least important) /Answers are rep�ned as the mean scores for the grouD) a. 1.7 The road. b. SJ Bicycle path. c. 5.0 Space for light rail. d. 2.6 Industrial land e. 4.0 Continaed rail freight £ 3.0 Housing improvements g. 5.6 Wetland restoration. 15. The Phalen Corridor Initiarive will be going on for some time. Which is the Best way for your office to be kept informed about ihe project: Best Second Third % % °o a. S 5 0 b. 0 IO 5 c. IO 20 0 d. 75 10 0 e. 0 10 5 £ 0 0 0 g. 0 S IS h. 0 0 0 Internet. Cable T'V channel. Newspaper articles. Newslette�s mailed to your office. A presentation to staff. A presemation to an organizazion your company belongs to. A public meeting. A published EIS on the pmject. fC ' Filled-in Industrial Managers' Questionnaire qc�-a�� 17. Would you hope your own firm would have: a I No involvement in the Phalen Project design. b. 4 Some involvement ]n the Phalen Project design. or c. 3 Significant involvement in the Phalen Project design. d. I Dontlmow. 18. When you think of the new industrial sites that may be cleared for development along the Phalen Boulevard, do you think of any of your suppiiets or customecs who might want to locate there, or who you d like to invite to locate there? (N =) 9 No, I cazi t think of any. �Don t Know. 0 Can t reveal. 3 Yes. 19. I'd like you to think about industrial parks and commercial roads in the Metro region. Are there any you think good enough for engineeis to use a model for the Phalen Boulevazd? {N=) 7 Don t Know 1 None in TC azea Yes: 3: (Ford Parkway. Energy Park Drive, Hwy 55 ar Broadway in Minneapdis> Gateway Industri¢( Park, Wheelock Parkway, Bcuularea Square.) 20. I'd like you to imagine that you aze standing somewhere along a finished Phalen Blvd on a week- day afternoon What would you like to see ti�at would make you feel that the project was well done and make you proud m have been imolved in the planning? I em % 1. Well-tit, orderfy ptace. 2. Industrial activiry, prosperous businesses. 3. Narural erevironmenr, green space. 4. Safe, patrolled. 5. Recreational activity, facilities. 6. Amactive parkway, landscttped. 7. Access to main streets. 7. Housing improvements. 21. F'mally, for staUStical purposes, please teli me: a. Your age: Mean = 50: b. ffi% Male Median = 48 IS� Female 10 45 25 10 20 35 IS 5 c. The lasi year of school you completed Median = I S Years d. How long have you worked at your present job Medimt = 22 years e. The city you live in: (N =) St. Paul (SJ; East suburbs (4); North suburbs (4); South suburbs (4); West suburbs (I) 22. Do you have any other comments you would like sent to the City or the EIS Task Force? (Dbn't mix residenti¢Z and industrial areas; Lower property tazes for industry; Hope it succeeds!) m �' Appendix C '� Q� -a��{ _ Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants �. � � � ,� ;� � � � � ,� �' � �� Appendix C Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force ParEicipants � � � � � � � � � L_.: � � � � � hair Gladys Morton Paul Haugen Re�resentatives From Saint Paul Planning Commission East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) q��a`�`� Toni Kaspazek District 2 Community CouncIl Donavan Cummings Dayton s Bluff Center for Civic Life Greg Copeland District 5 Planning Councff Martha McBride District 6 Plazuvng Council Bernie Baumann East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) John Kempe Payne Arcade Area Business Association (PABA) Susan Omoto East Seventh Business Community Arnie Eliason Phalen VIllage Business Associarion (PVBA) Karen Swenson North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation (NENDC) C1iff Carey Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association (USF3NA) Jill Danner Saint Paul Parks Commission Jim Bartol Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) John Finley Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) Gary Spray East Side Neighborhood Development Company (ESNDC) AltPrnates A1 Oertwig LaVonne Kirscher Bob Braatz Paul Gilliland Angela DuPaul Richard Newmark Liaicr�n Staff District 5 Plaruling Council District 6 Planning Council Phalen Village Business Association (PVBA) North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation (NENDC) Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association (USHNA) Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) John Wirka Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Division David Stokes Saint Paul Port Authority Kathy DeSpiegelaere Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA), Public Works Marc Goess Minnesota Department of Transportation Pro�ct Team Nancy Frick AIlen Lovejoy Michael Klassen Garneth Peterson David Warner Deborah Pofter John Genereux Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED) Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED) Saint Paul Public Works Saint Paul Public Works Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. Genereux Research (Thomas Dale/District 7 Planning Council is named as an organization to participate in the task �' force; no representative has been submitted to date.) � ,�. Appendix D � a� a �� Summary of Phase 1 Environmentai Assessment � 1 � � � 1 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �' DRAFT TECI-INICAL MEMORANDUM PROPOSED PHALEI3 BOi3LEVARD EIS SCOPING STUDY SOIL CONDITIONS JANUARY 9, 1996 � � � � � � ,� � ,� � Prepazed for: City of St. Paul Department of Plannnig and Economic Development 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Prepazed by: Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. 7710 Computer Avenue, Suite 101 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 (612)831-3341 PEER File #5023 q�-a�� i� � � � � � � � � � ��-a�� TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1 2.0 COIYTANIINATION ISSTJES ........................................................:........................................1 3.0 POTENTIALLY SIG1vIFICANI' COIVTANIINATION ISSUES .......................................1 4.0 GEOT'ECH1vICAL CONSIDERAT'IONS .............................................................................6 S.0 SUDIlYIARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................._...............................................7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Potential Contamination Sites 2 Significant Sites � � Teckmical Memorandum (�% __`� r!) 6 1 � Proposed Phalen Boulevard, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Conditions `1lU o( ��j' � � � � � � .� � � � � � � lA Il�ITRODUCTION Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. (PEER) was authorized by the City of St. Paul (City) to perform a Phase I Soils Assessment of the Phalen Corridor Redevelopment Siudy Area. PEER was also authorized to perform a Special Soils Study. PEER's scope of services was outlined in a contract with the City executed on January 27, 1995. Results of the Soils Study and Soils Assessment ate presented in reports dated March 17, 1995 and May 23, 1995, respectively. Since completion of the studies, the Phalen Boulevazd EI5 Scoping Study has identified routing aiternatives for the proposed Phalen Boulevard. The studies previously completed by PEER have been evaluated to determine potential soil contamination issues and geotechnical issues which may be encountered under various routing altematives. Results of the evaluation aze presented herein. 2.0 CONTAMINATION.ISSUES � 3.0 � � �` The appro�mate location and layout of Phalen Boulevard Routing Alternatives W-1, W- 2, C-1, C-4, GS and E-1 are shown on Figure 1(specific alternatives aze not identified on Figure 1). Sites in proacimity to the proposed Phalen Boulevazd wluch were identified by the Soils Assessment as having some potential for soil contamination aze also shown on Figure i. The site identification numbers are keyed to the table foliowing Figure 1. Although there is some potential that soil contamination may be encountered at any of the sites identified on Figure 1, the potential to encounter significant soil contamination resulting in high remediation costs appears relatively low for the majority of the sites. Those sites where the potential for significant soil contamination appeazs highest aze discussed in the foliowing section. POTENTIALLY SIGIVIFICANT CONTAMINATION ISSUES The sites with the highest potential of having significant soil contamination aze identified on Figure 2. The sites identified on Figure 2 were selected based upon their proximity to the proposed Phalen Boulevazd routing aiternatives, information presented in the Phase I Soils Assessment, and PEER's judgment and experience with regazd to evaluation of contaminated properties. The sites identified on Figure 2 are discussed as foilows: � Technical Memorandum Q� _��f � 2 Proposed Phalen Boulevard, EIS Scoping Study,Soil Condirions � Junk/Scrap Yards Along Mississippi Street (Sites 1, 4) 7unk yazds and automobile scrap yazds have been operated along the east side of Mississippi Street since the 1920's. Decommissioning of automobites at scrap yazds may result in releases of gasoline, diesel fuel, and automotive chemicals. Lead acid batteries from automobiles can impact soils if they aze damaged or stored exposed to the elements. In addition, scrap yards may accept waste metals, industrial equipment, power �ansformers, and empty chemical containers. HandIing of such materials may result in re2eases of chemicals aad petroleum products to soil. Scrap yards commonly have storage tanks for fueling of on-site equipment, representing an additional source of potential ettvironmental impacts. The scrap yard businesses along Mississippi Street are licensed hazardous waste generators. However, no documented chemical or petroleum product releases were identi&ed by review of regulatory agency records. Petroleum Sites (Stites 2, 5) RegulaYory agency records reviewed indicate that an underground storage tank (US'I) is located at the intersection of Mississippi and Cayuga Streets (Site 2). USTs are potential sources of petroleum product or hazardous substance releases. Historical sources revie•ved list Johnson aad Sons Fue2 Yazd as having been located at 859 Mississippi Street during the 1940's and 1950's. The dispensing and/or storage of gasoline, diesel fuel or other fuel products at fuel yazds may result in releases of petroleum products to soil. No documented petroleum product releases were identified by review of regulatory agency records for either of these sites. � � � Technical Memorandum Proposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Conditions Poor Richard's, Inc. (Site 7) �� -��-{ 3 � Poor Richard's, Inc. has operated businesses south of Whitali and east of Westminster since the 1960's. The company obtained a permit to operate a solid waste transfer station � on 1/2 acre in 1974, and has gradually expanded to an operation encompassing approximately 57 acres. Waste materials aze accepted from azea househoids and � businesses, sorted and shipped to recycling facilities or waste disposal sites. The company apparently accepts household hazardous waste, but is not permitted to accept commercial hazardous waste. �� l � � � � � � The Poor Richatds, Inc. facility shares the potential environmental concems identified above for scrap yards. Inspections of this facility by state and county environmental staff over the years have identified spilled petroleum and chemicals, usage of oil and other automotive fluids on ground surfaces to control dust, impropetly stored batteries, and allegations of using foundry waste as fill. Aboveground and underground petroleum storage tanks aze present on the property. Based on review of regulatory agency files, significant soil testing has not been conducted at the site. Twin City Auto and Military Parts - Scrap Yard (Site 9) A scrap yazd has been operated at this location on the west side of Edgerton Street since the 1970's. This site shazes the potential environmental concems identified above for scrap yards. Soil staining was observed during the site reconnaissance conducted as part of the Phase I Soils Assessment. Twin City Auto and Military Parts is a licensed hazardous waste generator. However, no documented chemical or petroleum product releases were identified by review of regulatory agency records. Payne Avenue Cleaners (Site 11) A dry-cleaning shop was operated at 839 Payne Avenue in the mid-1930's. Dry-cleaning -� utilizes solvents such as stoddazd solvent, hichloroethylene, and perchloroethylene. Because of the presence of chlorinated solvents, regulatory agencies typically view � releases at dry cleaning operations as high priorities for cleanup. No such releases have �_ been documented at this site. However, operations at this facility ceased prior to the era � when records of such releases were commonly kept. � Technica! Memorandum Proposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Scoping SNdy, Soil Conditions `1 lD �� I `� 4 Former Dry-Cleaning and Dyeing Plant (Site 18) A dry-cleaning and dyeing plant was operated at this location from the 1920's to the 1970's. The issues discussed above for the Payne Avenue Cleaners site also apply for this site. In addition, other types of chemicats are used in fabric dyeing. Historical maps of this site show storage tanks, which apparenfly were used to store solvents. 3MSolvent Release (Site 24) Various reteases of reguiated substances have occurred at the 3M facilities located on both sides of the CNW Railroad line between Weide and Earl Streets. Several aboveground storage tanks aze located along the south side of the CNW line, just west of Arcade Street. A release of heptane solvent from piping associated with these tanks is l�own to have impacted land occupied by the railroad line, as well as land occupied by the Whirlpool plant north of the railroad tracks. The release was reportedly cleaned up, but it is likely that some level of residual soil impacts remain. Former Whirlpool Plant (Site 25) The Seeger Refrigerator Company opened a small manufacturing operation east of Arcade S�eet in 1908. This facility gadually was transformed into a major manufacturing facility, and Seeger later merged with Whirlpool Corporation. In addition to household and commercial appliances, the plant manufactured military hardwaze beginning in the 1940's. Significant quantities of chemicals and fuels were handled on the site, and many underground and aboveground fuel and chemical tanks were present. The plant was closed in 1984, and most of the structures east.of Arcade were tom down prior to 1987 when the eacisting Seeger Square retail shopping center was constructed. A warehouse structure is still present east of Arcade, adjacent to the Clucago-Northwestem Raikoad �acks. Regulatory agency files document a number of chemical or petroleum product releases at the Whirlpool facility during the 1970's and 1980's. These include a release of heptane solvent from 3M, which apparenfly impacted the Whirlpool pazcel. � ;� � � � � ,� � �� ,� � � � � � � � � Technical Memorandum 5 Roposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Conditions �� ^a' �� Environmental assessment activities were performed at the Whiripool site in 1987. These activities included soil borings, as well as testing associated with removal of underground storage tanks. Based on the documentation contained in regulatory agency files reviewed, various regulated substances have been detected in soils at the site, although concentrations detected were relatively low. The testing activities focused on the portion of the properry which was developed as Seeger Square. There is some potential that the portion of the Whirlpool site which has not yet been developed may contain impacted soil. Former Whirlpool Building #17 (Site 26) A lazge structure associated with the former Whirlpool plant still remains west of Arcade. This structure was known as Whirlpool's "Building 17:' The issues discussed above for the main portion of the Whirlpool plant also apply to Building 17. Based on review of regulatory agency files, little soil testing has occurred at fhe Building 17 site. Atlantic Street CommerciaUlndustrial Site (Site 34) A building and associated storage yazd located west of Atlantic Sffeet between the CNW Raikoad line and the RCRRA right-of-way is currently occupied by a number of businesses including auto repair shops and a solid waste transport company. The site was used as a solid waste transfer station during the 1980's. It was formerly occupied by industrial operations, including FIavir Manufacturing (a producer of steel pulleys) and Mayflower Air Conditioning. The Aflantic Street site has an underground fuel storage tank, and is listed as a spill site by the Minnesota Poliution Control Agency. There is some potential that undocumented releases have occurred at this site based on its history of manufacturing, auto repair, and sblid waste handling. Former Griff:n Wheel Works, Former St. Paul Harvester Works (Site 35) Vacant land located west of Johnson Pazkway between the CNW Railroad line and the RCRRA right-of-way was formeriy occupied by various commercial and industriai facilities. From approximately 1900 to the 1950's the site was occupied by the Crriffm Wheel Works, a manufacturer of railcaz wheels. During the latter part of the 19th Century it was occupied by the St. Paul Hatvester Works, which manufactured agricultural implements. Technical Memocandum Proposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Scoping Study, Sofl Conditions `il1�a {� 6 Based on data contained in MPCA files, this site was investigated as part of a review of the Excello Materials Handling Company, which owned the vacant parcel during the 1980's. Several soil borings were completed, and ground water monitoring wells were instailed. Foundry slag and coal is present to a depth of 15 feet at some 2ocations. Regulated substances were identified in soil and fill at the site, but concentrations were relatively low. Ground water impacts were found to be minor. Significant soil and ground water impacts were not found to be associated with the former Excello business itself. Former Service Stations Along Prosperiry Avenue (Site 37) Five former service stations were located along Prosperity Avenue at the northeast end of the Phalen Corridor. Two of these service stations have been identified as petroleum release sites, and one of these has an active remediation system installed. It is not lmown whether testing has been performed at the remaining setvice station sites. In addition to the service stations, dry cleaning businesses and a small manufacturing business have occupied buildings along Prosperity Avenue at various times since the 1960s. These sites collectively represent a significant issue with regazd to the proposed Phalen Boulevazd, due to the presence of documented petroleum releases, and potential additional releases. 4.0 GEOTECFINICAL CONSIDERATIONS No significant geotechnical issues associated with soils have been identified based upon review of available inforcnation. Soil coaditions shouid be evaluated as specific Phalen Boulevard construction plans developed. Swamp deposits and relatively shallow ground water neaz the east end of the proposed alignment (neaz Prosperity) may warrant further geotechnical evaluation when design alternatives aze considered. � � Technical Memorandum Proposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Sca � 5.0 � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � Soil Conditions SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS i] The identified routing alternatives for the proposed Phalen Boulevazd may encounter soil contaminated resulting from a number of sites. Based upon existing information, it does not appear that there are any contamination issues which cannot be resolved or remedied to acceptable regulatory standards. The routing altematives which appear to have the highest potential to encounter significant soil contamination aze identified as follows: Altemative W-2 • Junk/Scrap Yards along Mississippi • Petroleum Release Sites • Poor Richards,Inc. Alternatives C-4 and GS • Payne Avenue Cleaners • Former Dry-Cleaning and Dyeing Plant • Former WhirIpool Building #17 It is recommended that additional reseazch and site reconnaissance be performed for the above alternatives during EIS preparation when more specific road design information is developed. If the additional reseazch and reconnaissance indicates that there is a high potential to encounter significant soil contamination during roadway construction, site specific Phase II investigation should be conducted to define soil remediation requirements and costs. It is fiuther recommended that overail soil contamination issues along the entire Phalen Boulevazd route be investigated during the design phase of the project. Invesiigation of soii contamination issues can be combined with the geotechnicat investigation to reduce overall investigation costs. � � � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � �J FIGURES q(� - a�� t � � � _ � � �0 � AV6 � C C � a� � � � AVE 1�OAK AVE GttAp C � � � v� � � �/ AYC ).{0.Y .T. � x , , �� T � � m �� e � � � � e o g � �. - rO��■ �I�T�� — r� ! ,� _ �= �'�r��r �� `'�- �� i �� ., � � :3, .� � �. _ � � � � ��_^J� _ 3 � �, � , �. i Q �� ,� ' � � I � J � - � �. ^�� _ '_ r�� \ � _I � � � •• a �� •r' � �� ♦ r � �� t aI , , �� - I� � I� I-.J �I l�J I� �l f� �1 �� 4� K C�O�C�C��C� "`� C� � �� aa� � ��..�„��ooao000� A�� o �� E MRRIiAMI � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ NAAYL�ND � � � � �� i � I i ��0��0�0�� a� � �.; aC►C"�C�C��C�C��C�C�C�C�C�(�C�CI �� 3 ; aoo o A� 00 ��; �, E MA6NW]A I ��❑��❑� �� 1 ��t��❑❑❑❑�(�� (� b � � �❑❑❑❑ � ��❑�� A � � /, g E � U,vs�' ❑��❑ � �� 61 �L�� A � � ,! � � Y oo� � o�� o� �� ,; � I f � �.,� � �� J 1 {� � SCALE IN FEET � O ST. � ` — J .. � � .�� S _ – .— 9 1 � a� � A� �a�0�� a� a� o � ' � AYE e� 8 A.� C � ' ] o �; � a e� � 0 0 �flQ A� C � � � A� � � � o � � � C�0 "`� �a�C��C�C�C��fl "� 0 � � � � � � � ; � _ �, � �OC�� "`� C�C�a�� „n„� g n. J` � a � � ° � �� C� �� Q� �� ,�— �� o� � � C L�J 0 n. r i � .,�� z �� n � '"� C� C � C_J � - C LEGEND ,EOS� �. �� '> � ,,.oaa,a � V" ao ��=_ � � � �� C Proposed Roadway ]I� ST. V' i e� ; � � At-Grade Intersecfion � C� %��° �� //�-� C� � C� G_-� �a C�� C �t�� e < g � � A9� ��_--J �� FOIJAIH � �� y � �� Bridge � n. � � � � � [� , ,� °' O � i — — RCRRA Right of Way � r" � �� } t° 1 O� � �� ^� — — Existing Raikoad �� 6 � ` � J O O� ,,� � O Pote[rhal Release Srte � �� a � �� r �/ � � \� � � � �� `7, Verified Releaze Site Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Minneapolis, Minnesota Potential Ccntamination Sites Inc. Proposed Ph.alen Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota . �� 0 AVE �� C � � Cnm � [ AtT VORA AVE �� _:--� � - �� V t LJ l�J L�J l�J L�J 6 � I�J � L_� L_1 �..J\ �� 000��oo�o � ` oaC�a � �C�00��00000 E � RriwhD a0000a �� 000DO � d 9� AP� ❑❑❑❑��❑��L�� A � �� \ DO��D�OD��OC��O� A� I�� a000000000000�❑o A� (� Former Griffin � E � � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � L�� ❑ °' � � A � Wheel Works, � � �❑❑a❑�[ A� 3rmerSt.Pau1 L_ L-1 Harvester Works [� � ❑C�❑ 0 ��0 � � � � �---� � � � � a� Aflantic Street � � L� ___J ❑� I� I Former � Commercial/Industri C'S ( � � � � , r / � , � . Service Stations 'rosperitv Ave. (: i 111�. � E � ��! Q � A� � Petroleum Sites t p,� ,.. Whirlpool Former ^� Site 34 � Street n. �-- � . � � ' �� :=:::e"' " �U` �,, �� `;- �� ..:a:� .;._ .� �\, � � , A1 p' - � \, .i� � � ♦ � • � , �� '� �� ,i�� • 1 . � ��i��i�� I � SCALE IN FEET � o i000 � 1 `��1�� , � r� �� -�-* ..�.°°°., _ � � � � �� w• �°ii•�i' :�� i�i•:'i�i r ��.w�w�w ♦ ♦�HV�v�v�JV✓f �• �- -•� �.�- . •.-.❖❖.❖.•.�❖.❖.•.. . �. ;- ... ., ..,.,.�,.,.,.,.�.,.�.,.,.,.; i �� "�ir. , �we.��. ........�....... � I i � . •e�.-..��- •R;•0,•,•�p•,•,•;4•,•, r�l�� .� � �. ..+... , ,� c� �. • ��O�pp��0�� 'i'0�0�044 �� w ��f � ! ' _ � ' . . �i��i�r4�+!Lri�� .w0./��w `. �N�� I I � �i�i�i�i�i�� i_�� _ • � > ��—�� - �p� —�` — _ -- , ��' -'-- �: � r.- �� _ �' - � _ �`�ti �� _ � _� . �' '. • • �� —�___-'�� . � � - :' . ; I�� _�_ --�'�--■ �� Jl�� I �� - �: ..: _ .��. �1 �I�. 1 � � � ��.�''��I{ � - � ... ,:, . ' .�= � �� I .� , �,. ee , I „ � ,_ _ ,� � �i l � i� � i� ` �J � �: .., � ,:. m � � .:.. - � �.�/ .. ... _ �.:::.:.:.. . , Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Significant Sites Proposed Phalen Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota Jan. 96 2 � � �Y To kzGUxE i `� ^� POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION SITES `� VJ � a� PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD Page 1 � S.ice SrteDescnphon Address ,.: # , _ .. _ _ � 1 Mississippi Metals, Action Auto Parts, Advanced Recycling Mississippi Street - Automobile scra azds Z Mississippi Street Site - UST Site Imersection of Mississippi Street and � Ca Avenue 3 Foimer Service Station (192Q's-1950's) 837 Mississi i Street 4 Junk Yazd (1926- resent) Mississi i Street � 5 Johnson & Sons Fuei Yazd (1940's-1950's) 859 Mississi i Street 6 Former Railroad Maintenance Facility South of Terrace Court - ASTs � - Maintenance activities - Machine Shop - Paint Shop � - Oil House Van Waters & Rogers Plant 845 Tenance Court - CERCLIS site � - Multiple spills reported - Significant hazardous waste - Many ASTs � - Drum sto e ', 7 Poor Richazd's, Inc. South of Whitall Street between - Area includes former Britton Motor Service (196Q's- Weshninster and Burr Street � 1980's), Coai & Oil Yazd (1930's-1940's), St. Paul Sheet Asphalt (1960's), and Scrap Metal Yazd (1950's) - Refuse transfer station � - ASTs and USTs - Oiling of ground surfaces - Drum leakage � - Alie ed fillin with foun waste 8 Metzger Building Materials 768 Bradley Sueet - Leaidn UST � 9 Twin Ciry Auto & Military Parts Southwest comer of Whitall and - Automobile scrap yard Edgerton Streets - AST 10 Former Raiiroad Roundhouse (1900's-1970's) East of Edgerton Street - Oil room - Maintenance activities i l Pa e Avenue Cleaners (1930's) 839 Payne Avenue � 12 Johnson Fumiture Refinishin (1950's) 825 Pa e Avenue ' 13 Chica o& Northwestem - UST Listin Pa e Avenue & Bush � 14 Payne Avenue Body Shop - HW REG Listing 860 Payne Avenue Auto Paintin Sho (1950's-1960's) (same) 15 "Batterv Station" (1920's) 842 Pa e Avenue 16 Wadena Dum - RCDI Listin Southeast of Pavne & Wadena 17 M.P. Mortenson & Sons Inc. 818 Payne Avenue Paint Store and Paint Contractor 818-$20 Pavne Avenue �_j KEY TO FIGURE 1 POTENTIAL CONTAIVIINA'I'ION STi'ES PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD Page 2 �� l Sife Srte $on. <; : Address ' _ ; _... - P..._.. ".._ .. _ : -:#. , _. .. . . - _ , .._ 18 Former cle " and d ein lant (1920's-1970's) 826-836 Pa e Avenue 19 Bristol Laboratories(1920's-1940's) 788 Pa e Avenue 20 Stroh Ma[t House East of Payne Avenue and south of CNW - ASTs Railroad line 21 Frank Geo e- SPILLS Listin (S ilt #15850) 736 Wells Strcet 22 Windy's Auto $ody - HW REG Listing 767 Bush Aveaue A/B Fiberglass - HW REG Listing 767 '/z Bush Avenue Beraie's Auto R air - HW REG Li ' (same) 23 Hanson Coal Com an(1930's) 825 Arcade Street 24 3M Facilities Both sides of CNW Railroad Line - ASTs and USTs between Weide and Earl Sueets - Machine shops - Chemical handling - Multi Ie releases of solverns, adhesives and oleum 25 Former Whirlpool Plant (1900's-1980's) East of Arcade Street - HW REG, VIC, UST Li�+n� - ASTs and USTs - Multiple spills reported _ - ManaEacturing of app&ances and militazy hardware - Hazardous waste eneration 26 Foimer Whirlpool Building 17 {1930's-1980's) West ofArcade Street - ASTs and TTSTs - Multiple spills reported - Manufacturing of appliances and military Uazdwaze - Hazardous waste eneiation 27 Northem Malleable Iron 867 Forest Stre,et - Significant manufacturing facility - CERCLIS site - Hazardous waste generation - UST - S ill r orted 28 Pa er-Calmenson and Com an(1920's) Fast Seventh Street 29 Earl Street Auto - HW REG Listin 803 Earl Stteet 30 Budget Towing and Former Foley Brothers Co�actors 846 Earl Street - HW REG, SPILL (#15989) and RCDI Listings - Automobile scrap yard - USTs and AST - Railroad construction and maimenance contractors � � � KEY TO FIGURE 1 � POTEN'T7AL CONTAMINATION SITES q� 'a�L.� PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD Page 3 Sife Sste Ilescnpf[on s Address ##` ° ° :: a s. - °: ,. _ _. 31 Globe Building Materials East 5eventh Street and Earl Street - Asphalt handling - Spol (#14937) � - Hazardous waste generation Fomer St. Paul Plow Works (1880's) - Manufacturing activities - Paint house - Oil house - Paint shop - Machine sho 32 W es Rubbish & Rec clin - HW REG Listin 880 Duluth Street 33 Former railroad roundhouse South of Duluth Street - Maintenance activities 34 Atlantic Street CommerciaUIndustrial Sites: West of Adazrtic Street Auto Repair and other businesses - Hazardous waste generation, HW REG Listings - Spill (#13429) - UST Former Havir Manufacturing (1960's-1970's) - Manufacturing activities - Machine shop - Paint storage Former Mayflower Air Conditioning (1950's) - Presumed manufacturing activities - Printin sho 35 Former Griffin Wheel Works West of Johnson Parkway, between - Foundry CNW Railroad Line and RCRRA Right- - Oil house of-Way - Machine shog - Transformer house Former St. Paul Harvester Works - Foundry - Paint shop - Machine sho 36 Crane Manufacturin (19�0's-1960's) 1319 Jessamine Avenue 37 Former Service Stations . Along Prosperity Avenue, between � Ma olia and M land Avenues � � � � � Ap endix E ��O'd7 Travel Demand orecasts � � � � � � ,� � � � � � � � � LJ � �� q�n'� i� Appendis E TIiE TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING PROCESS Overview Travei demand forecasting is a tool which is used by engineers, planners, and decision makers to evaluate the short and long range tra�c impacts associated with, for example, the construction of new roadways, mak'ng improvements or access changes to existing roadways, alternative land-use plans, or specifie development proposals. For this project, the travel demand forecasting process has been utilized in order to estunate future year 2015 tra�c volumes for each of the Phalen Boulevard alternatives which have been identified in the scoping process. The results of the traffic forecasts will be evaluated to determine the traftic implications of each altemative which will ultimately be one of the considerations in the decision-making process for the preferred alternative. 'i�avel demand forecasting is a term used to describe a comprehensive process used to estimate future year vehicle traffic. The process consists of a series of distinct steps which are meant to "model" observed travel behavior. The process follows the traditional four-step transportation planning process including: (1)1Yip Generation, (2)1�-ip Distribution, (3) Mode Choice, and (4) Route Assignment. Each of these steps of the travel demand process is executed using computer programs. A brief description of each step follows: • Trip Generation estimates the number of trips generated within a given area (how much traffic). • Tri�.Distribution estimates the origins and destinations of these trips (where the traffic is coming from and going to). • Mode Choice estimates the mode split for trips (how many people carpool, drive-alone, ride transit, drive a truck, etc.). • Route Ass�nment assigns the traffic to the transportation system and determines the path taken to get from origin to destination (which roads will the traf�ic follow). Twin Cities Regional �Yavel Demand Model The �vin Cities RegionallYavel Demand Model, developed in 1990 by the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of 1�ansportation (Mn/DOT), provides the basis for the travel demand forecasting conducted for the Phalen Boulevard scoping study. The �vin Cities model consists of, on a regional basis, each of the four steps outlined above. The model represents the entire seven county metropolitan area transportation system. Inputs to the model which influence future year traffic forecasts include socio-economic data such as population, number of households, auto ownership, and employment levels. This information is stored in a data base of 1165 traffic analysis zones (TAZs) each of which represents a specific geographic area in the seven-county metropolitan area. The TAZs range in size from approximately 25 square miles in outlying rural areas to only 2 or 3 city blocks in the Minneapolis Central Business District. In generating future year traffic forecasts the model also takes into account the transportation infrastructure including such elements as accessibility to bus and the roadway system. One of the Metropolitan Council's responsxbilities is to maintain the socio-economic data base and to forecast trends in socio- economic data using historical information suppiemented by current land-use planning information developed in conjunction with local communities. Mn/DOT's role is to be E-1 q�-a�� responsible for maintenance of the transportation infrastructure reflected in the model, and to make sure that it adequately reflects the current roadway infrastructure including roadway imprnvement projects yet to be implemented. METHODOLOGY The �vin Cities model was originally developed to test large scale land-use plans and major infrastructure ixnprovement projects. Therefore, the Ta*in Cities' model reflects primarily major city and County Roads, State 14vnk Highways, U.5. Iiighways, and Interstate routes. The 1165 TAZ's were defined by Metropolitan Council to support this macroscopic Ievel of detail. Analysis of traffic impacts resulting from specific smaller-scale projects such as the proposed Phalen Boulevazd project requires a model with finer detail in the local project area. For this reason a focused modeling approach is used. In order to adequately focus the model, additional local roadways were added in the project area. TAZs in the project area were redefined and an additiona170 TAZs were created to more accurately reflect local land- use and access patterns within the Phalen Boulevard project area. Tlus additional detail permits the subtle differences between alternatives to be reflected in the modeling process and in the subsequent future year traffic forecasts. 1�ig,Generation The trip generation model estimates the number of person-trips to and from each TAZ on a daily basis. Input data which influences the number of person-trips includes population, number of households, retail and non-retail employment, as well as autos ownership. In addition, accessibility to the transportation system inIIuences the trip generation. The products of the trip generation model are estimates of average weekday person-trips for seven different trip "purposes", including. Home-Based Work Home-Based Grade School Trips Home-Based Shopping 14ips Home-Based Work-Related 11�ips Home-Based Other 14ips Non-Aome Based, Work-Related 14�ips Non-Home Based, Non Work-Related'Irips Person-trips leaving the metropolitan area were also estimated. A set of special generators was included which accounted for trips from and to colleges and universities, and the Twin Cities' International Airport. Tri�Distribution The trip distribution step uses the person-trip output from the previous step along with the transportation network to determine the origin TAZ and desLination TAZ for each person- trip. The trip distribution model is executed for each of the seven trip purposes. For any Lwo TAZs, the number of person-trips between them is determined based upon the total number of person-trips coming from the origia TAZ, the total number of the person-trips going to the destination TAZ, and the travel time between them. E-2 � � if�'�� The product of the trip distribution step is a set of person-trip tables which estimate the � number of person-trips from each TAZ to all other TAZs for each trip purpose identified in the 14�ip Generation step. � � � � i � � � � � � � L � � �.��7�_� The mode choice step determines how people get from origin TAZ to destination TAZ. The mode choice model is capable of estimating the number of trips taken by various "modes", including drive-alone auto, carpool, and bus. Access to bus can be either by park-and-ride or walk-up. The first step in the mode choice model is the choice between auto and bus. Under the auto choice, the model estimates the number who drive-alone and the number who carpooi from among the trips estimated to choose auto. Similarly, within the bus choice, the model estunates the number who walk to the bus, and the number who drive. Many cost factors are used to determine the which mode is chosen, including the price of gas, bus fares, parking fees, travel time spent in autos versus buses, and tune spent waiting for the bus. In addition, different choice models exist depending on the number of autos owned, which is a m�ior influence on the decision to ride the bus. The outputs frorn the mode choice model are daily trip tables, by auto or bus. From this, the total traffic demand is estimated. Route AssiQnment The final step in the model is to determine the roadways traveled by traf�ic going from an origin TAZ to a destination TAZ. In the route assignment step, a procedure is used which determines the optixnum travel route for each trip based upon travel times. 1�ave1 times are estunated using a mathematical model which relating trafTic volume and vehicle delay. The procedure then adds the trafFc demand from the Mode Choice step to the transportation network from origin TAZ to destination TAZ following this optimum travel route. The result of the route assignment step is the final traffic forecasts used in the Phalen Boulevard alternatives analysis. For more information regarding the travel demand forecasting process, including development of the Phalen subarea network and the implementation of the four-step modeling process, the reader is referred to the "Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study 14�ave1 Demand Forecasting Technical Memorandum". E-3 � ��i� RESULTS OF TAE PFiAI�EN BOULEVAR.D ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES P M. Peak Hour Volume-to-Canaci�y (v/c) Ratios Volume-to-capacity ratios are used to provide a measure of the level of tra�c congestion experienced for a gven roadway and are typically determined for peak hour conditions when traffic is at its highest levels of the day. The v/c ratio is a comparison of projected volume to available capacity. V/C ratios above 1.0 indicate that the projected tra�c volume exceeds the available roadway and intersection capacity (over-capacity) resulting in traffic congestion. For the purposes of this analysis, v/c ratios below 1.0 will be assumed to be sufficiently under-capacity to preclude discussion. It is important to note that individual v/c ratios taken from the travel demand model are used for general planning analyses level and they should be interpreted as such A more sophisticated intersection capacity analysis is required in order to obtain an accurate measure of tra�c congestion and will be conducted during the EIS phase for the project. The v/c ratio information obtaiaed finm the model is provided here as a comparative analysis of peak hour traffic congestion between alternatives. With this in mind, the P.M. Peak Hour volume-to-capacity ratios for future year 2015 conditions were reviewed. Over-capacity (congested) conditions are forecast for a aumber of major roadways in the Phalen subarea during the peak hour as shown in Table 1. Table 1 also shows the total lane-mileage cvithin the study corridor which is forecast to be over- eapacity. All of the PhaIen Boulevard alternatives result in a net decrease in lane auleage of over-capacity conditions when compared with the future No-Build condition. Alternative combination W-1+C-5+E-1 results in the least over-capacity mileage. Alternative combination W-2+C-5+E-1 follows next. In general, Alternative W-1 in the vicestern segment and Alternative C-5 in the central segment have the greatest impacts in terms of reducing over-capacity mileage. Alternatives C-4 and W-2 result in a lesser overall reduction to over- capacity mileage. E-4 � Cl � i � � � � � � � I I t� � � � � � � o = s w �� d o . � � r + > E� w ti _ , � � a ` y E r. [�j a '= m [s7 3 �` °s �° ° °� �� ` � e W a. � � u ` G Q+ ,� z b �' � ` �m �t �s v r' e m �- °' m'� .m ,Y o - a �❑ m x O c �3 �5 ','m wr w� 3w ¢a .. z � � q � s � w � d o s m � + m s W c c „ > ..�� V � ° C" o � � '� y ra '+ y �Q �..F. 7 � �' � '� � � 3 ° m °`�'y � 3 't � 9 `'� F �O �..'-' �° N y v � .+ 'L' � .. �, m u y G y . N bJ � �� 0� O Y C �'i �' Q W " 3 �' a '? 6 � l � a W.°. 6 , � G4 N A � a W d m c�i s � y W M + W t .-�-i V a o a E a. �j '°a �� '+ � j a �d .�+ � 7 G ' � C s g' . Q p'4 � C] � 6 p 6 y LC o o L W w m � � � m �' " � � � W G " '� .� '� 'e + L + : F � y y r � u '�, '°itl .0 p � A v ^ �.R.. � �,Y c� � y> c � � N � o �a a� �� w� 3a a� � � s F w ° � y X ��., o °� o s w a � r +, �.4 -�,, 3 '� � 2 6 3 > s m z 3 ��b a� � � � �� N C ^�N y LL7 C d � a �� m " a�'i n❑ m� t " - G k W q O M-.�. � i W m 4 '� N �. r'l �G �` "a W 4c Yi G ,� 1G '� a . iG u Q y U W � v U � � y Q' ,. > ^�L W n o� � U a w �u". P' o�` k1 `kr P N E � -;, s�; e � s � � 3 °� o. � � � � F � � � ��' .n � j� �n in P t�'. -" � m ^ v m u s � d O �' "'� �� 'aw w> ''� .; � � � S O W ° 7 [� + � � °a ti m c/� V �°". °'�' o s W E�' F ,-+. E` �a s ` A e E a ' � � Q i 3 4 °, ..�'. . °' � � a � c. ° ", '� .C '" '.. 'v�. C �" T Rl y �,G o '^ G W o m�m .�> �"Q .d. �a`° m= CP" `� ';5� �7 '"aw k'� w�� Wa O F �o m � L � a W N n w rA o� °U o s �'' o E � �-' ° E s v m °� s m` 0 £ n � a C7 z��e a °'� �� c .. w �tJ �- "m C � a� y'w v C] � C o U1 O v > � i �> � Q a�. y n G� ,C � N iD ... � W . GQ � . �.°, '�, a a� �U � y s •--t � � a� � Y C :: d 'u � � F.. � w � Q V1 U q�-d �� E-5 a��a�� Avera2e Dailv 1Yaffic on Phalen Boulevard '1`raf�c forecasts for the A.M. Peak Hour, P.M. Peak Hour, and average Off-Peak Hour time periods were combined to estimate two-way average daily traffic (ADT) for future year 2015. This methodology was conducted consistent with the time-of-day distribution developed by Metropolitan Council . A summary of the ADT resvlts is contained in Table 2. As Table 2 shows, the greatest differences in traffic volumes forecasted for the project alternatives occurs in the western segment of the corridor from I-35E to Payne Avenue. The alteraatives which have a direct connection from Phalen Boulevard to the East CBD Bypass (alternative W-1) have the highest volumes on the I-35E to Westminster Street segment. It should be noted that the high end of the ADT ranges shown for this segment actually represent the Pennsylvania Avenue connection from I-35E to the East CBD Bypass. Therefore the ADT volumes shown for this segment include tra�c on the East CBD Bypass. The lower ranges of ADT on the I-35E to Westminster Street segment represent volumes on Phalen Boulevard from Pennsylvania Avenue to Westminster Street beyond the East CBD Bypass connection. Within the central segment of the corridor, Alternative C-4 results in the lowest ADT volumes (from Westminster Street to Payne Avenue) due to the lack of access at Edgerton Street and the circuitous access at Payne Avenue; because this alternative offers less convenient access, a greater proportion of traffic will utilize University Avenue and ' Lafayette Road to reach north-south streets such as Burr, Edgerton, and Payne. Alternatives C-1 and C-5 have more direct access to local north-south roadways resulting in higher volumes along the central segment. Within the eastem segment of the corridor, there is no significant difference among the trafTc volume forecasts for all alternative alignments east of Arcade Street as shown in Table 2. This is a resu2t of the eastern segment of the project corridor having as the common alignment Alternative E-1. The wide disparity in ADT volumes on the Earl Street to Johnson Parkway segment is a direct result of the Phalen $oulevard connection to Atlantic Street. This conneetion allows tra�c which formerly traveled a�ong E. 7th Street to Johnson Parkway to divert along Phalen Boulevard. The ADT forecasts for all of the Phalen Bouievard alternatives including the existing (1992) and future year 2015 No-Build conditfons are shown in �gures 1 through 8. In comparing the existing and future year 2015 No-Build conditions a couple of items should be noted. The re-coanection of Edgerton Street in the future year 2015 No-Build condition results in an overall decrease in ADT along the parallel routes of Payne Street, Burr Street, and Arcade Street. Likewise, the addition of the East CBD Bypass results in a decrease in traffic on University Avenue with it's junction with I35E. E-6 lJ � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � � I � � � � o o � w � o ° + � o o m °? ,� � � O O b M �..� � � � N ,.L`. L � l_ O O � � rn m m m m �,.� .� ° o 0 0 ° w .� o o ° O N � � N O O � �N � � N 00 W � � � � � o d� m m .-1 0 0 ° 0 �+ ° o o � � � V � � � � � � N „�y �fi 1A O � O > 3 � m C „ m ^� � R$ y d � �--I O 0 � O d� lLJ w n N CC , d' N O O �[J � ,� v o � �r o 0 0 � '+„ o in an o 0 0 u� a a � � � M M C O F � .-� o o ° 0 � �+ ° c c °°- °°- ,�-' � ~ � c � "' " � �c�, � N QO o0 O O � E� � � �? M � M M M ti � A N s�-i .--i O O O � ; W GO O O � + 1!7 O � 1f7 � �' � N � O � 09 '� O �--� N ~ � o � �: � � � � � M M M � ""� �J" d ��-' C%2 C�/1 +-` ..�.+ �i C� Q1 �+ �" � La � b y N y ��> > w Y y ai � y �1 0 � "i y � �4 � � � ,�,j y' �i W ca � ..> � � � � m a� °' °' c/] t/� ° m a � � � N � �, �, � � �. a N N W i1D r� V f' i.. � hw v� �3 3° wa: a¢� ¢�w w° E-7 a��a� �� N � y � � Z �' J Q W a� b ,�� -a o soJ d � 0 � �"_ N �-- 3 � O� � O N s� � L � � Q N � � a v � u > ¢ � c 0 �� f � a �09 � � � aS �JD3 �' �s a�a�o .� o u aS apoo�b > ¢ a o � a v c > > o, ¢ ¢ o v i F a o W U Y �g avAOd uo��abP3 �5 ]S` JJnB 1S 746ii�.��b > >�js��WaS?^ E-8 �� -a��i , .,os� a � a � t O y d � C £ W � N m � (O � � � N (`5 N — -. E (� QJ I 6� N Q m � � _„ � o j � t➢ tf� O � 0 �t M W \ N J iil 3 � v f� WI v v i p ��+' NN ��ml � I � / i i � I I � � I '� � � I I � > � � Q I � ��i I � I i � I I ` ' I I � � � � > i � � � I � `� I / I c i c c s ; � o � I 0 (n 3 Z b I \� ' Z � �� \ � _ � r ' J I iyV¢ • —�� C Z I � ��, j I S J� � G .- J I l � II � C �( 2 �� ' � � v '�F u. � LL __"_1 � � M W 005> 0001� g �� OOOC' � ✓s S � � N a S 3 � �!� .�. p W � Y > �� q Itl— 35�-l �Ol i � � � � � � � � � � � � � � r i � i ,;��i = � , �, <— I , n � .. u J � L_ I �.I _. � a� 1 b �!, \ a� S � � I 'u � � z � � � d Q lL � v � 0 Z U �( O L � J I o � O � N G N t N N > -S 7 OLI1 LL O iV 6 N } � L 3 L I �� r NFa 7$ 1� �i�' �� n�a� OSUI{O� > Q i O N S D ✓ N � C £ W ' � �� l � �S o�op�a " OQ9�L v Q �$ apoo�d Q ' a � o v m o � ' ' rn p � ¢ ' �° �m s 0 N £ 6 O tll U r as a�AOd �e � ppy� OOES a �o��a6p3 ]S r,& N � ✓ � 7$ 74 S s �a,s,.,w,sa„ �.S !dtli55rsy� {� 3 s Q � � _ � r � > - ��i0( � c c N d E-9 N M W �� ✓ s L� �� 0� �` N �v �_ � N � � �D M Ol ^J I . � _ °^�'��-�,J; s =° � o��n, � v M+ lP. ll1 I i i, � T > m U N J � (� > m m [ o - m Q U 0 W �r � L - 3 0 > U 3 J G �] m i 0 C Z U� 0 � r o a <v �� U .- 7 � a o cv ¢ � � w Z s w £ U W VJ '�� -� =�_ � v. Y 2 a' � J 4 �-\ > ��) - a� � b ��'�a W a§ O. d i U + � 3 � > � � 3 L 1 Q� 4 J o` Q y m � 3 F— O Q V � L H M T � a v._ > 2 La �� rJ� O _ Q � : i LL � O � E I L I � > I � �f1 ' � � � (Zf � � � I � N Y J � A� \ a g y� � �O y b aS 1�03 �$ �sa.o� as o�op�aW ¢� �S a,00»� p u v t > > , ¢ ¢ � m � � N p O LL U Y �� a..AO �o��a6F� J� ^8 1J �vn,��7,b �ya � s�r �+� sa� E—LO g�^�� RnSy �awyo� I > J��uO��H O fn (n S O y � S m � � c w w s � t N 0 i 3 +S '� 35E-- 's � S� �� C` �`� `C ` ' ' N > � � ti� �� L , Nr+ v � E � G7 W N � ¢�� _;; � o i � tD L^ O � � V M � W � N J �9 � V .- � W 3 v V � O � NN t(�O ¢ T£ 0] r � � � O � � � � W I � � U I / 3 I / � -o' � � N � .v N / C� 0 a / rn' � c m � nc � � o m I c� ��' �� w � �. L S 4 \\� � p .. > �\ � ' � `� O � x � _ ) � c m , � �/ / �� v, o � S O C� N r � � U N w � o ¢ a o \ N � � Q W Z £ tL £ U W ffI � � � � J �„ � � � �- L � 2 Y - J I Q � � '_ a� � 7 6 �a, �a W a soJ d I � � N i 3 � � � 0 � j L j � �� o` S y � r I � i � � � Q I v � I � I � I -^, W > ¢ I - �' v _L� I C � D � _r> � i _ Q I L I � � a� �, � j � �-- ' c � i f _I I �� I � � I } � � � � � � 7 ll � � � I � ��-a�� p, \ )e �a � �o y a 7S ll03 uosuyo� >��uo��y o m 1 O y U � C � w �S lsa� ' as ��opvaW Q �� a 7S apo�.,b > S v c � - m O d v { > > y a• Q � 0 p � a 1 t N � a 6 O W U �S avn� uo��abP3 �5 Y �S 146,��,�, _� � L I N M w �55� �T' 6) C a E-11 s� s � , �� C Q� �O u > � � N 9 O M S N() U. � - E n � CL N - Q T � 3 � � N O � aD tf� O .. .- Z v M W '� N 1 �D �� P� 3 u V 1 C C> N ul lf� O G aJ f CJ � w � i � U i N V �3 I T u ' N VI N � 0 R a I c :. Q � C l 1 v+ u � w � 1 O � ! 1 3 i C � ' Q ' � � 1 � 4' - � � o i t o I a c� U M � O a I I L O N Q ' Q I W � £ w £ U w cn I E-I2 � � � � !J � � � � � � i � � � L? , E� � � E-13 '. � 1 i i , `'�' � � �— Y 6+ �_ Z � J 4 1 (�\) - { a� � � b �J, W +a �so + J d 111 C: 3 �-- � Q � > : i I � I � I 3 L � y f 0 � o 1 m � , �� I o� ¢` I i � i i I � � ( Q. _ t r, � j J� i � � . _ � { � � T I I �' ' ` ��^ I i i u --.._""` i .- I C : � ��, I � � � `.' i -____ t I L I V � i LL . 6 � Gc��a � �{ �F��y �osuyor % �g oa �� ( � < << � � S ��uolaN o m � S O � S a � c � w y V W as ,��3 �s as�,o� .� Q N ]$ apoo�d ¢ 0 p v a C � � rn ¢ ¢ O � i £ N 0 0 w u r aS avAO ..o��aGp� � ^8 �e , �,+ b S��w)san g � � 1 c v V l 0 � S o � 3 •� 5 �� 35[- [ Y E-14 '�S \ �� L0� ��e > N > i N N 6J �`] L � N c� v� ¢�� °" `i _�� o � � v0 N O '- � V M � W'� � v � � 2` � v.t i Oc� Ll� ll1 N O Q � � m , � � ' v � � � � w � U 4 > 3 - C 3 i N i �n m s n � c . , _ � �\ o c I m G^ .. i w ne � � I j S . �� C - �� > _ I v a �, c t i � � � J c m I , v �� c � I s o � a c� � F f I � U �L W O K d O N ¢ � � 6 W Z � U W (n � � � � � ' � � , � � i r � � � � ' � , Cl� � � Y � ///�� Z � J Q � _. ! W { � U + N i 3 v > a � L v Q F-- � � V L � _� W � N ta 7� LT � (P 6 L N > 2 � O N 0 N T N J 7 LL a� � ��, �av s �� d v , ¢ a 0 A \ ) � g ; ` a Z �o y a 1S »03 >S ]sa�o,, 7S °]�P�aW v I$ apo»d ¢ 0 o � c > O ¢ £ N a (L U xs avnod �oa�a6p� j5` »�1& �g�ay6�.�,�,y sv�w�sa� �'7�o1]d 0 L 0 S a s � v � m v � � a Q y 3 � o �- > E-15 v � 0 s � N 6 O( � D � Nc� O�- - ...��111 E '�' I " n O> � N � � � m � 3 � \ � O ��DN o -. �.rt'� w � N J �D _ � ` .- � G� V � � C (`� N�n �O � �os� � L W N a W 6> 'S S �a E a > w r � N > 3 a .� m cn m c rn n C > -m 00 v m � c� v u' � ✓ 0 > - f� 3 � a c � � ' ! � c m v _ � o _ 1 0 a N u� I w � I O [[ I R G N 2 � Q W _ I i w � W w �� a�� Corridor Screenline Analy�is A screenline analysis is a simple method to determine whether traffic shifts are occurring along a given corridor. In the Phaien Boulevard screenline analysis, a screenline was drawn perpeadicular to the Phalen Boulevard in three locations which were chosen so as to be near the center of the westem, central, and eastern segments as shown in Figure 9. The screeuline was e�ctended north to Maryland Avenue and south to Interstate 94. The traffic volumes are recorded for each of the major east-west roadways (parallel to Phalen Boulevard} at the point at which they cross the screen line. By comparing the volumes at the screenlines for each project alternative and the No-Buiid condition, shifts in traffic from existing east-west roadways to Phalen Boulevard are identified. The graphs on F�gures 10, 11, and 12 show the results of the screenline analysis in terxns of future year 2015 ADT volumes for Phalen Boulevard and major roadways ia the project study area. Screenline I (East of Westminster) 5creenline 1 in the western segment of the corridor reveals that the addition of Phalen Boulevard will cause traflic to shift from the East CBD Bypass to University Avenue and Phalen Boulevard. 1`raffic along Maryland Avenue is reduced an estimated 10 to 15 percent on a daily basis depending upan the alternative being considered. Generally speaking, the various combinations of alignments that include Alternative W-2 in the western segment, will reduce traffic along Maryland Avenue to the greatest extent. Ttus is because the crossing of I-35E is located farther north with this alternative than with Alternative W-1, making it more attractive to Maryland Avenue traffic. Alternative W-2 also results in much lower volumes (on the order of 30 to 40 percent as compared to Alternative W-1) along University Avenue due primarily to the relocation of the I-35E ramps &om L3niversity to Cayuga Street. Volumes on East Seventh 5treet are relatively unaffected with any of the project alternatives. As also shown in the g�aphs, local street traffic is m.i. with Alternative W-1. Traffic volumes along Phalen Boulevard are maximized with Alternatives Gl and C-5, again, because Alternative G-4 has less convenient access to north-south rnads in the central segment. Screenlirte 2 {West ofArc¢de Street) Screenline 2 agaiu shows a reduction in Maryland Avenue volumes with the addition of Phalen Boulevard although not as significant a reduction as Screenline 1_ ADT VoIumes along roadways parallel to Phalen Boulevard such as East 7th. Street, East 3rd. Street, and Minnehaha Avenue decreases with all the project alternatives. No significant traffic shifts on roadways within the study area have been identified at Screenline 2. E-16 � � � 1 �� C� � ; � u , � � � iJ � � � � � � � �'�� i E_�� a� a s� : m « N C .� � 3 0 � � W � m C . N m U � � Q u� � O N � R v y a� � 3 � � � Q) m � y W O � W � � � ll.. W + � U + N 3 W + � U + 3 W + a � + N � W y { Y v m � a w + v + N � w + U + � d > Q � } > Y m N > � � a � � N N 'L7 W p C � ? m � Q U m J U � N � W O O ■ � Y �. � � i �' �0 h � W ■ � � E-18 O O O O O � � O t�n O � N N e- � ��}}e�l A�ep a6e�any gLQZ �eaA fV � w ¢ � t7 lL �� a�� W � � v + N � W + � U + � � � W t a U t N � W � t w 'U' m U � + r � ¢ w + U + N 3 � W + U + � � a .j m O Z �O j L — N 0] r � N � C _ C i0 �a �� H � � � i0 � V N J t y n = .-� WO ❑ � aN c m � � M f0 � W � ❑ E-20 O O O O O O O O O � a�0 C�O a N O W t�0 a N a��e�i A�iea a6e�anV 5 LOZ JeaA � [� ' � Screenline 3(Easz of Earl Street) ��a"r�{ Screenline 3 shows no significant traffic shifts with the exception of a reduction in ADT along parallel Maryland Avenue of 20 to 15 percent with the addition of Phalen Boulevard. Interestingiy, East Seventh Street shows an increase in traffic on the order of 20 percent as a resuIt of the eastem segment E-1 connection at Atlantic Street which provides a bypass of Johnson Parkway south of Prosperity Avenue. , Changes in ADT volumes on North-Sonth streets � The ad@ition of Phalen Boulevard will cause trafHc shifts on north-south streets that cross the project corridor as well. Upon review of the traffic forecasts, ADT shifts on north-south streets are local in nature and typically do not e�ctend much more than a block ar two beyond ' the proposed Phalen Boulevard corridor. A summary of the change in ADT volumes on north-south streets is contained in Tab1e 3. As the Table shows, the largest percentage reductions in ADT occur along Burr Street, Johnson Parkway, and Forest Street. ADT along ' Johnson Parkway is reduced as a direet result of the addition of Phalen Boulevard and the Atlantic Street connection. 1'his connection allows traffic which had been traveling along East ?th. Street to Johnson Parkway to bypass via Atlantic Street. Not shown in the Table, ADT along Johnson Parkway north of the Phalen Boulevard connection is expected to � increase approacimately 2500 vehicies per day as a result ofAlternative E-1. The largest increase in ADT is forecast for Areade Street as a result of the Phalen Boulevard connection. ADT along Payne Avenae and Ed$erton are foreeast to either increase or decrease depending � on the alternative combination. Altemative combinations including Alternative C-1 result in the greatest ADT increases to Edgerton Street due to the proposed at-grade access. � � � ' �� ' �_� � � � E-21 � � W + a 0 �000��000 N CO M „d ''.� M � N + + � N c�D � ti O W z ; .�-� + � � 0 4 � O c ° V 3 0 °°�,° ° °�, N c°,� �,°pn, � � � � `� w .r w N o ° o o '� ° o ° o ° o ° ,.�`. o u � ° � °o � '�' � + } � � � � F � � � G W + '� � + O O O O N O O O G' ' � .' � e�-1 + + N � � .� 0 3 s� U E , W � + � c '" o 0 d � U o o � O � o 0 0 '� °°��° 3 c ° a � � m + °Qi .."�� 0 q � y U s m W a + � " _+ O O � O � O O O � � O M � O � � � a0 y r+ N + GO ,� .-� .--i 1fJ Y N y � t � y .-+ 'O o• s, P7 � �'` °' z ° c ° m ° o � c c c"�o >" oo �n �n ao r+ tr ca ..+ i o � z N� o � � � O O a O O O O o '" � ° m � a .`"-� � � � � � � . �, CJ� +� � Q � 'a � ; .� �; a M� U2 "'' ..O 4� y L!� y f" Ci � . rs � � d RY cyn Z/2 � � N m �1 � y� U O R � E" 6 � � W G4 ¢� (:+ W y ��-a�� E-22 S � �� :� u ' ' L_7 �I ��-a�y Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) and Vehicle-Hotu's-'I�aveled (VHT) The VMT represents the total distance traveled by alt vehicies throughout the project area. VE•IT represents the total in-vehicle travel time on roadways within the project area. Both of these measures are significant in terms of evaluating the traffic impacts associated with the proposed alternatives for the follawing reasons: Both VMT and VHT can be directly related to travel costs or savings for motorists depending upon whether they increase or decrease respectively. Reductions in VMT represent motorists savings in terms of less vehicle wear and less vehicle depreciation, less fuel consumption, an8lower emissions. Reductions in VHT represent motorisfs savings in terms of less fuel consumption, lower emissions, and personal time saviugs. , With this in mind, the VMT and VFiT of each of the alternatives were compared with the future year 2015 No-Build condition (assuming no improvements are to be made beyond those currently programmed). The results of the comparisons are contained in Table 4. !J , LJ �] �� , � � As Table 4 indicates, all of the proposed alternatives will have positive resutts in terms of reducing VMT and VAT. Of all the proposed aiternatives, Alternative W-1 has the greatest impact on reducing VMT and VfiT. Alternative C-4 followed by C-5, has a greater impact on reducing VMT and VHT than does Alternative C-1. Based upon VMT/VHT analysis, therefore, the combinations of Alternatives W-1+C-4+E-1 has the greatest benefits followed by Alternatives W-1+C-5+E-1, and Atternatives W-1+C-1+E-1, respectively. A more detailed analysis wouid be required to deterxnine whether Alternatives W-2+C-4tE-I or W-2tG5+E-1 is ne�ct in rank depending upon the magnitude of the benefits given to each of the measures identified earlier. The alternative combination W-2+C-1+E-1 has the least benefit in terms of reducing VMT and VHT. � E-23 q� -a�� v y � � ^ � � � � o '`t' ° o ° � o 0 �a z z ., � � � � � Am , . . . . z � � E"' � o� d d � � o a o M ��`� 'z 'z ti � � � � � a "z � t�c'J � N � � M W � (� � d� V�' � �N � V `�d� � .-1 .-1 r-1 .-1 r1 .-t .-� .�+ � �a w m c- o co .+ ca .�+ '� .�-� � � � � c ao - n a�o x >� m m m m m m co m c� d O V � .., G7 ,�, M L� • C- ln � C� .-� M M � -�+ R � CO 'd� 1A M M �N C7 � � a: a,�. � c�o � c�o � � m d v � � ¢a � o 0 0 0 � � o � 0 x` m �r co n .-� .r m c� °; ;� w in in o �n c� in c� =' � M CD � CV cO O 00 r+ d G1 cv m m c m m m m y � �n in u� u� �n �n in ^U .-. m ¢5 � GJ ?.'' � .-� .-i N o0 it� � CV .�. t�D R � � ti p�',� ai rn a�o o a ' �o o a 0 °' >� c' � w � m c'�o � cn c�c � V Q O e�i ri eti e-/ rl �-i rl '-1 F � � � N y M u] .-� .i Q) P'� aD O J R r 1 E" '�'� c N � eM W � C�D M C� E'� �' a+ Q� � . � � H � e�-� � w d� 1t� 1C� 1D lf� 1C� iq Ip .-�i �' � uj c0 aD .-� O � h � �" m C � O O O O O O .4 � a CV M M M C+] o� C'q C7 `, O .-i .i �-i '-I ri ri W � �E: C�• � W (� ,d '�i � � a� � �, z._, v U U v r� U L a � ; N 6� N .y S'" '"� . .-� N � .++ � N *"� . *"� N E-� � Cll � W NR� NJ N� N� N� CV � N� E-24 1 C � Appendix F 1 ��-a�� Scopinq Document Dis ribution 1 1 1 0 L _� � � �j !� , , , � �,i �� , � � J � � ' � � ' ' , f__l � � � ' , ' , �� -a�� Appendix F Scoping Document Distribution List Federal: State: • Advisory Council on Historic Preservation • Environmental Quality Board Council of Environmental Quality • Department of Public Service Department of Agricult�re • Department of Naturai Resources Soil Conservation Service • Poilution Controi Agency Department of Commerce • Department ot Transportation Department of Defense • Department of Heafth Army Corps of Engineers • Department of Agriculture • Department of Energy Department of Public Safety • Department of Heaith and Human Services • Office of Waste Management Department of Housing and Urban + Board of Water and Soil Resources Development • Minnesota Historical Society • Department of interior • Legislative Reference Library Fish and Wildlife Service • Environmental Conservation Library Forest Service National Park Service + Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federai Transit Administration Federai Railroad Administration Coast Guard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Federa! Aviation Administration • Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Power Commission Local: Regional: • Ramsey • Metropolitan Council • Dakota County Metropolitan Councii Transit Operations • City of Saint Paul Metropolitan Council Waste Services Mayor Metropolitan Airports Commission City Council Pianning Commission Phaien Boulevard EIS Task Foroe Department of Public Works Department of Planning and Economic Development Division of Parks and Recreation Saint Paul Port Authority • Saint Paul Public Libraries �J i � �, Appendix G � �� -�' 1�{ � Alternatives Selected for First Screenin ' !I ' 1 , LJ � ' ' ' ' �J � ' ' ' � � ' � �J , � � , � �' ' I ' CI L ' l� Phalen Boulevard Scopin� Study Appendix G Alternafives Selected for First Screening �� (� June 28,1995 y . � �• �/ ��%O./ ' ..�% / . %//.%' i // ✓[ '.:: i ✓/ !/.. . ii W`ii ' / ..•:Gii i� .�/ l. f.l . 9 ///// . .i i ' � i i .. i ! //' ..�..i. / i .� � tiw'/..i i �� M � :l 'r ' � � , � /� %/' /,,. � l ' %/ ' //i'% >%'l'/.�! , l� ii;//// / s � -.u�..: . " l� � �✓� . � / ..� ,✓ � � !/ / �� % ,��i�j � /� // � � /iF�'t°�j%% ��'/.�� / �/' r �./, � � /N✓.�.'.� ,'��,cc% . %%� / �i.:. , .� „4�✓..I.•l%/�,/.� ; % . ,..<, - / � / /� � �� r , � ,//,,��, „ / / ✓ !%i�� .f sa. � �f. ,u,i � , . i/� , � 6 �, ✓ .�. 1 � /�%'� ,J'/// . . ,� : ••. � r i-/ �, . . i /i� . � ., ?: . - ,j � - ,; �� i/ / �// � /.' l ��iti�/✓ i�/..i f „��L�/i�/� i/�/ :i,Y/„Tj� ,G��' k..;�rz'"�"�,,,�sz...i'/�i„!!�r.r�'r'. y�i.'�s�� i�$$ .iiiq///�,- r .�..u//f �%i%s �< „ / .<!64'AUe.�i'./•�;�, // /. /�. � //ii/oiri...,.;Yii� , ..//��%O..�G�.�'�i,., .�,. � ini,o'�ii/=. i� i /,,..l�:i.. �� /.'.. ' .� _ ;.«i�,,,- c�c.,.., is;v��ih",.�y.,, i.�i,,;i.✓ir✓is;, �,.,, ,.,..,..,,, .,,� Westem 1 New Interchange New interchange at I-35E requires analysis to determine if opemtional requirements can be met. Westminster Connection Use existing streets to provide access to future industrial sites; may be paired with one of the Line 1 Earl Stceet Connection options. Westminster Connection Use a combination of euisting and new streets to provide access to future industrial sites; may Line 2 be paired with one of the Eazl Street Connection options. Pennsylvania Ave. Connection to Pennsylvania Avenue interchange at I-35E; alignment would be coordinated Connection with East CBD Bypass. Central 1 Line 1 Closely parallels UP (CNW) Railroad alignment; long bridge spanning Stroh Brewery area, extending to Payne Avenue. Line 2 Closely parallels UP (CNW) Railroad alignment; more curvalineaz alignment allows shorter bridges in Stroh Brewery azea; at-grade on Bush Avenue for about two blocks. Line 3 Avoids Stroh's Malting House; would require reconstrucrion of 5troh's grain storage facility and product storage facility. 2 Line 4 Stays completely north of Stroh's facility; would affect Wells Avenue residents. Lute 5 Avoids unpact on Stroh's grain storage facility; may requite teconsttuction of ptoduct stotage facility; would affect Whitall Street residents. � 3 Line 6 Similar to Line 4; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. � Line 7 Similar to Line 5; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. ' Eastern 1 Maryland AVe. Connecfion Pazallel to LRT corridor; extended to Maryland Avenue; no connecHon to Johnson Pazkway. Phalen Village Connection Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Parkway. Line 1 Ames Ave. Connection Connected to Johnson Pazkway at Ames Avenue. � 2 Phalen Village Connection Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Pazkway; based on alignment to Line 2 north of LRT corridor. 3 West Side Connection Located to north and west of LRT corridor; connects to Johnson Parkcvay west of LRT corridor. Earl Street 1 Line 1 Direct connection to Eazl Street and E. 7th Street. Line 2 Direct connection to Earl Street and E. 7th Street; uses local street right-of-way and avoids impacts on existing commercial property. 2 Line 3 D'uect connection to Eazl Street only. C� . . �-; �/� �i/ \ '�� y �. `, i " LAKE `/ ', PHALEN � � i �� z / 0 '�71r�9� ?, :� 0 / q� -a�� i' -0'00' PHA�L BOULEVARD SCOPING STUDY EASTERN SEGMENT SHEET 1 � JUNE 28, 1995 �� , � �� , TRAIL ^; i j r I� �� i � � � o °---_ 0 0 -�---_—�.= � � o o �� 4 c �� ,_ O � �° lt � � �� y�� oc� �'� � , D o 0 0 0 � ; 1� �, 1 � Q � , � �� /✓ o� J � -�_ , � � .�n.�� , -`�,';�''%�G'i ? j i i,, ��1�??�/ . � � `/%;;%�? '� /� ��;,�.\ Q � � �� d �„ � � /C� `�� ;� , � , � �, , . � ,�, , : , i '��' \� Phalen Bou(evazd Scoping Document and �� ` � : Draft Scoping Decision Document � % !�;�:� �,, Figure G-5 � � .� b �'r � � � _�� Appendix H i� � �� - Memorandum: Screenin of Alternatives - Round 1 � ' � � � r � � � i � � � � L � � � Memorand»m � July 19,1995 � to: from: � � � � � � � re: � �a�y Phalen Boulevazd Task Force David M. Warner, PE Project Manager Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Deborah Porter Deputy Project Manager Bazton Aschman Associates, Inc. Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Screening of Altemaiives — Round i One of the key eiements of the scoping process is to idenrify a set of reasonabie alternatives for detailed analysis in the environmentai impact statement. The guidelines specify that the alternatives include three types of alternatives: • No-Build Alternative — The No-Build altemative is defined by the situation which would exist in the study area in the forecast year if the proposed project were not built. Normai maintenance and upgrading is assumed to continue. This alternalive provides the baseline against which the positive and negative effects of the proposed project can be measured. • Transportation System Management (TSM) Altemative — The TSM altemative generally represents an effort to utilize mostly existing resources to accomplish substantially the same goals. Improvements to the existing transportation system could include key street system improvements, minor street widening, turning lanes at intersections, signal optimization, upgraded transit services, improved transit stops, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc. This altemative is generally the "low cost, minimum impacY' attempt to meet project objectives. The purpose of including the TSM alternative in the EIS is to determute to what degree project objectives can be accomplished by using the existing transportation system. � � � � � � Build Altemative(s) -- The EIS will study one or more "build" alternatives. The buiid altemative(s) represents the full-scale effort to meet project objectives. A build altemative often inciudes one or more subalt+ematives which reflect different design op6ons within the same overall design concept. While it is not required that more than one build altemative be analyzed in the EIS, it is often necessary to carry out detailed comparisons to determine which build aiternative is fhe best. The purpose of the scoping process is first to identify all potentially feasible altematives, and then to narrow the list of alternatives to a manageable number of the apparendy best altematives for detailed analysis in the EIS. The nanowing of altematives takes place in a screening process such as the Task Force is now undertaking. The July Phalen Boulevard Task Force meeting will address the first of muitipie screenings of the wide range of alternatives. The goal at the July meeting is two use two screening methods. H-i � q�-a�� In the first screen, the alternatives aze measured against the adopted goals of the project. Altematives which do not adequately address the goals can be dropped from further cansideration. A second screening method allows one-on-one comparisons of alternatives. An altemative which is outperformed by another alternative in one or more aspects, and which does not have merits of its own which suggest further consideration can also be dropped. At the August 1995 meeting, the Task Force will review remaining altematives. At that time, the consultant team will prepaze analyses of key issues to assist the Task Force in its decision- making process. The Task Force is not selecting an altemative at this time. The Task Force is actually "deselecting" alternatives which cleazly do not perform adequately, or which, in comparison to other altematives, aze cleazly inferior. The attached report summazizes the conclusions of the consultant team regarding the screening. The conclusions aze based on preliminary analyses and comparisons canducted by the team. H-2 � � �' i � ' O � q��a i�1 Phalen BouIevard Scoping Study Consultant Team Conclusions Regarding Initial Screening of Wide Range of AlEernatives July 19,1995 The Phalen Boulevazd Task Force, along with City staff and consultants, uutially identified alternatives within each ot three segments of the project study area. In most cases, an altematives within one segment can be associated with one altemative from each of the other two segments to make up a compiete, corridor-length, alternative. The exceptions to this will be described below. The consultant team compazed the performance of each of the altematives relative to the goaLs established by the Task Force over the first several months of the project. The goals were discussed at several meetings. Between meetings, Task Force members were able to review and discuss the goals with the groups which they represented. � The initiai "Wide Range of Alternatives" was also developed over a three month period with input from Task Force members (and through them their groups), City staff and the consultant team. The alternatives aze listed and briefly described in Table 1. � � � i � � �I � � The comparison of each of the altematives relative to the projecYs adopted goals is presented in Appendix A, which is attached to this report. The comparison is summarized in Table 2. The Task Force has four different types of recommendations which can be made at this time. i. Drop an altemative from further considerarion 2. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as a Build Alternative 3. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as the TSM Alternarive 4. Retain an altemarive for further screening The consultant team has carefully reviewed the comparisons completed to date. Base on that review, the consultant team recommends that the Task Force consider the following actions at the July 26 meeting. Drop From Further Consideration We�tem_�gmenr. Westminster Connection Line 1— This alignment provides very poor access to the regional roadway system. Since it dces not serve comdor-length trips, it will not divert through truck trips from the existing street system. Its use of Whitall Street will disrupt adversely effect residential development through right-of-way acquisition and environmental impacts. This alignment would be in conflict with local azea plans which call for continued residential land use along Whitall. C'entral S�gment: Line 1— Thi.s altemative seems to address many of the project goaLs as well as � other Centrai Segment alternatives such as Lines 2, 3, 4 and 5. However, the long structure it includes between Edgerton and the Stroh's site would be much more expensive and difficult to � H-3 q� "��` Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Altemative Screening -- Juty 26,1995 Meeting design and construct, with no compensating benefits. a t SPement: Am Av n� o n ction — A critical flaw inherent in this alignment is that it does not provide a ttuough truck route. The restriction by the City of St. Paul of truck traffic on the City's parkways to local trips only means that tluough trips could not use the segnent of Phalen Boulevazd between the Johnson Pazkway and the first intersection west This would cause backtracking of izaffic, possibly in residential neighborhoods. F�t S?gment West Side Connection -- A critical flaw inherent in this alignment is that it dces not provide a through truck route. The restriction by the City of St Paul of truck traffic on the City's pazkways to local trips only means that through trips could not use the segment of Phalen Boulevard betcveen the Johnson Pazkway and the first intersection west. This would cause backtracldng of traffic, possibly in residential neighborhoods. g?rl 5+,��± r.�.,A ?_ C�� of this alternative would require significant residential right- of-way acquisition along I?uluth Street and possbly along Ross Avenue. There would also be significant adverse air quality and noise impacts in these residential neighborhoods. The impacts of this alternative would be significanfly worse than those of the Earl Streer Line 1 Altemative .F rl treP :.'n 3— Construction of this alterative would require significant residential right- of-way acquisition east of Earl Street along Yotk Avenue. There would also be significant adverse air quality and noise impacts in adjacent residential neighborhoods. The curavlineaz alignment will a]so make assembly of large site for industrial redevelopment more difficult. The impacts of this alternative would be significanfly worse than those of the Eazl Street: Line 1 Altemative. Retain for Analysis in the EIS as a Build Alternative At this point, no alternatives aze recommended for inclusion in the ELS analysis. Retain for Analysis in the EIS as the TSM Alternative The consultant team recommends that the following segments be analyzed as the T5M altemative. These segments would more appropriately be analyzed as a TSM altemative because they have a lower scale of construction, generally lower cost, and, while they do address many of the key project goaLs, they don't address those goaLs as completely as some of the other alternatives. W�tern��ement• Westrninster Connection T in 2— Although this alternative dces not satisfy all the project objectives, it does provide reasonable access to the azea proposed for redevelopment west of Arcade in the former railroad right-of-way. With a connection on the west at WesUninster and Mississippi Street, and on the east at Arcade, some through travel will be accommodated. H-4 q�-d �� Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Alternative Screening — July 26,1995 Meeting F�I Street: Line 1-- AIthough this altemative does not satisfy all the project objectives, it does make a direcf connecfion befween the Phalen Village azea and East 7th Street. This altemative also makes it slightty more convenient tn access to I-94 at TH 61 (via Earl Street, 3rd Street). Construction ot this altemative would improve accessibility to industrial sites at the east end of the Phalen Comdor. The TSM altemative could be one of the two elements described above, or it could be the two elements combined into one. Each element is somewhat successful in achieving project goals, although, even together, the major goal of corridor length access via a single facility is not met. Retain for Further Screening , The consuttant team suggests that all other alternatives be refiained for further analysis. The Task Force will be considering screening of additional altematives at the August meeting. In the next screening cycle, the team expects to address the following questions: � � � � � � � ��I � � � � 1. Can an interchange be constructed between I-94 and the Cayuga $ridge which provides access to the north and south on I-35E as well as access to both the east and west on I-94? The answer will help to screen the remaining altematives in the Westem Segment. 2. Are there any geometric restrictions in the azea betcveen Forest and Edgerton which suggest a preference of some Centrai Segment altematives over others? Plan and profile studies will be prepared to assist in screening these alternatives. 3. Dces future LRT development impose any restricrions on Central Segment alignments? The ftCRRA will be consulted on issues regazding future station locafion, stafion space needs and concern regazding at-grade aossings of the LRT track. This will assist in distinguishing between Central Segment Lines 4, 5, 6 and 7, and between Eastern Segment Phalen VIllage Connection Lines 1 and 2. 4. What Eastern Segment alternarive provides the best traffic access to the comdor and to the Phalen Village azea? Traffic forecasts will suggest which of the Eastern Segment altematives best satisfies the goals of access to the corridor and diversion of traffic from Maryland and from local streets. H-5 �I� ��i�-I Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Altemative Screening -- July 2b,1995 Meeting Table 1 Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Study Wide Range of Alternatives � � , � Westem New Interchange New interchange at I-35E requires analysis to determine if opexational requir�ents can be met. Westmirtster Use e�tisling streets ro provide access ro future industrial sites; may Connection be paired with one of the Eazl Street Connection options. Line 1 Westminster Use a combination of e�dsting and new streets to provide access to Connection future industrial sites; may be paired with one of the Eazl Street Line 2 Connection options. Pennsylvania Ave. Connection to Pennsylvania Avenue interchange at I-35E; Connection alignment would be coordinated with East CBD Bypass. New Connection to realigned Pennsylvania Av�ue interchange at I35E; Pennsylvania Ave. ��t would be coordinated with East CBD Bypass. Interchange Central Line 1 Closely parallels L3P (CNW) Railroad alignment; long bridge spanning Stroh Brewery area, extending to Payne Avenue. Line 2 Closely pazallels UP (CNW) Railroad alignment; more curvalinear alignment allows shorter bridges in Stroh Brewery azea; at-grade on Bush Avenue for about two biocks. Line 3 Avoids Siroh's Malting House; would require reconstruction of Stroh's grain storage faciliry and product stoxage facility. Line 4 Stays completely north of Stroh's facility; would affect Wells Avenue residents. Line 5 Avoids impact on Stroh's grain storage facility; may require reconstruction of product storage facility; would affect Whitall Street residents. Line 6 Similar to Line 4; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. Line 7 Similaz to Line 5; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. H-6 1 � � � � � � � u � � L n �; � � � � i 1 � t � qb-a' i�( Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Altemative Screening — July 26,1995 Meeting <.��: ,�,: ., .. _�. : .... .. - .�. ... ..a. : �r i-.r: �..,,,;, �.��, ��;�� •:;.�,, �.�aiiii°s. ,. " �'.k:�z33,;r�. �s.F='" ,.,,�'i�t.''"3� w,:;"i'a,°-'tr�;cg".`w�;n:Y'->";.'=:c:><ro;�!zs`: .. ` . .. , q � . , .,,i'�✓� : . . ;;. . ��,.u :�....��., r .. / c�rF:..�.. - . � +� - � ��/ '// r �° ,,.w,..,.x.�,� /.. �{"'%� i �'SA�'�r'•.J�^" � ,n.: i... . . ._ .. . . ', :, �vy . �.[/...,,; u .'ri,^.%. Y� ;,::: �y � �'u'i::19E.�' ,:,s�:.y'Ye�.i;,:C Eastern Maryland Ave. Pazallel to LRT corridor; extended to Maryland Avenue; no Connection connection to Johnson Pazkway. Phalen Village Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Connection Line 1 Parkway. Ames Ave. Connected to Johnson Pazkway at Ames Avenue. Connecrion Phalen Village Connected to reconstzucted Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Connection Line 2 Pazkway; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. West Side Located to north and west of LRT corridor; connects to Johnson Connection Pazkway west of LRT corridor. Earl Line 1 Direct connection to Eazl Street and E. 7th Street. Street Line 2 Direct connection to Earl Street and E. 7th Street; uses local street right-of-way and avoids impacts on existing commercial property. Line 3 Direct connection to Earl Street only. H-7 � 1 Memorandum: � .� � � i [� [� � [� � 1 1 1 1 � � ��-a�� of Alternatives - Types Appendix i of Alternatives � � � � , � � � � � � � � � � � � i � � T:,i�i�� = Phalen Boulevard Scoping Siudy Summary of Goal-Based Alternatives Screening 19-)ut-9s Legend Drop from fttsther considerabon ' q� -a ��I _ R�Ma�t::for8vi2da�fanz�aEise' ;€ COR�ER�#AIA - _ ' ��r�S��lFexna�iv� "— == �iiBUS'I'R7AL - _ �EISL3RI�E�E3 �.'€ERI�tA"€E - - L',L?f3DS �t3NSTRiICT'IflAI - .. , Retainforfurthersaeenin A�C:E� - BEVEf.CJPMEN'f REINVES'i'��1'I'- 11�I�IIES�`PI2A#'EI. ENYIB(1NI�ENI` iiESTAE'€TCS iVIOV&ME�tT FEAS£BILfT'Y GY�ST SAFfii'� ' ` ; ` � € _ � ` � � ( � ] .: i � � m € -m -- i '# _. - : :. � �- � . i " tr -.�i' -a � -.+,d, s II3 "t+ - _Cy - - f. ; a: � 'is Ot _y ' � -- J �a - -' � '�° 'c " m rs ..�. m L�* _s m W m ' m - R : _' � _ O � _'pa a a�z � �. -� � a v � . .� . ��c f.- - �P2 a�s � � � �,� °� � . � `� � � � - � , .. � a "� . .m v .� �" � E o ''� � � � �+ � '� � � - m r,F �_y o-�`, � ° i x: ur1 . ., a .^'!,�', .�+ 'c a� z4� °m'+ .` <. �°, ,� � � y ii +`1 b ip � �^ m °1 � .. -,� C qQ .A. m a'�--� m. � � ra ti �� .. ia m_ 4�' m a6 �� m O v c;i� G ai - 0+ Q .cr� .� pp 4 +t� O '�..Y'B w ��_ v °� N w O'� �v^'..PJ^ _v 'S� 21.., : I+S . 73i�v �� ,�. � s'L'J' � �� S3. b'� � �_C � .. w �� 3'� Ci ��G � . O �i �� sl'� a�� . � y� ��..�. �7 � D s"� �'.Y �:!/ � O �_� m .� aa ;� -- __� �„'� •:� �. n, � s R .� w.�' .��.� . Q .... 4 .a : a,��. �' �: �;.�s_� - �' � �s.,;.� `��. .�5 :Fa°.'o n '`5 Sx ��.' y"'.;f':r. � $��^...�,- �-�.� 5:�� rr�:a a�:�� a:- m-: ..._ . �`�'°� t�s`Rt .''...�-a ��cu�� ,� Line 2 Line 4 Line 5 Line 6 Line 7 Line 1 Phalen Village Connection Line 2 affect �n affect effect � � AppendixI ' Memorandum L� August 15,1995 to: Phalen Boulevazd Task Force � from: � re: � LJ � David M. Warner, PE Project Manager Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Study Types of Altematives q� �� The c3iscussion at the July 26 Task Force meeting indicated that additional information was probably needed in order to clarify the definition of and the need for a"no-build" altemative and a transportarion system management (TSM) alternative in the EIS process. This memo also describes the "build" alternative. Build Alternative(s) � The EIS wiIl study one or more "build" alternatives. The build altemative(s) represents the full- scale effort to meet project objectives. A build alternative may include one or more subalternatives which reflect different design options within the same overall design concept. While it is not � required that more than one build altemative be analyzed in the EIS, it is often necessary to carry out detailed comparisons to deternune which build alternative best satisfies the goals of the project. � LJ J � LJ �1 � No-Build Alternative The No-Build alternative answers the question: What would happen if the project is not built? It addresses the situation which would exist in the study area in the forecast year if no major improvements are made in the transportation system. Normal maintenance and upgrading is assumed to continue. The "no-build" alternative provides the baseline against which the positive and negative effects of the "build" alternatives can be measured. Transportation System Management.(TSM) Alternative In the TSM alternative it is assumed, as with the "no-build" altemative, that no major improvements are made to the area's transportation system. Improvements are made to the existing transportation system which improve capacity and safety. These improvements could include key sfreet system upgrades, minor street widening, iuming lanes at intersections, signal optimization, upgraded transit services, improved transit stops, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc. The purpose of the T5M altemative is to allow comparison of the positive and negarive impacts of the full-scale build altematives to the unpacts of significant unprovements to the existing transportation system. �� Appendix J i a�-a�� Memorandum: Screeninq of Alternatives - Round 2 1 1 �, � !j �� CJ 1 � � , f_1 1 1 1 1 � � � ' t ' , � , , ' ' � � ' � , ' ' � � � � a�-a� ��fi memo August 16,1995 to: from: re: Phalen Boulevard Task Force David M. Warner, PE Project Manager Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Deborah Porter Deputy Project Manager Bazton Aschman Associates, Inc. Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Screening of Alternatives -- Round 2 At the July Task Force Meeting, the staff identified four different recommendations which can be made during the scoping process. These are: 1. Drop an alternative from further considerarion 2. Retain an aitemarive for analysis in the EIS as a Build Alternative 3. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as the TSM Alternative 4. Retain an altemative for further screening At that time, the Consultant team made a series of recommendation to the Task Force regarding the alternatives under consideration. These aze summarized below. , q � �� Phalen Boulevard Task Force Alternative Screening -- August 23,1995 Meeting Task Force Response to Screening Recommendations The Task Force made several changes in the Consultant recommendafions at the july 26 meeting, the changes were: • Westem Segment — Westminster Line 2: Task Force members were not convinced that this alignment was viable, even as a TSM altemarive. A representative of the St. Paul Port Authority expressed concem that the roadway alignment would affect the development potential of the azea betcveen Westminster and Payne Avenue. A motion to drop Westminster Line 2 was made but was withdrawn in favor of further study. • Central Segment — Line 1: Task Force members felt that it was premature to drop this alternative on the basis of high cost alone. • Eastem Segment — Maryland Connection Task Force members commented that there was no need to conduct further analysis of this altemative. • Earl Street Segment — Line 1: One Task Force member felt that a direct connection to East 7th Street was unacceptabie because it would increase traffic on East 7th Street. Analyses Conducted Since July Task Force MeeEing 1. The Consultant team is exploring the feasibility of an interchange betcveen I-94 and the Cayuga Bridge which provides access to the north and south on I-35E as well as access to both the east and west on I-94. The answer will help to screen the remaining altematives in the Western Segment. If the analysis is completed in rime, the results will be presented at the August Task Force meeting. . 2. The Consultant team has prepazed profile drawings, cross-sections and conceg�al. comDarative. aen�greliminary cost estimates for Central Segment altematives. The drawings and the cost estimates aze still being refined and will be presented at the Task Force meeting. 3. City and Consultant staff will meet with RCRRA staff to discuss alignment, profile and cross-section dra�vings and the interface between Phalen Boulevard and future LRT station location, station space needs and concem regarding at-grade crossings of the LRI track. The staff position on these issues is that LRT could be implemented is essenrially the same i+•ay under any of the alternatives. The results of the consultation �n�ill be reported to the Task Force. � �I � i � � I� , , � LJ I LJ ' � LJ � , �J � � � �� , ' � � � `�(� -��`� Phalen Boulevard Task Force Altemative Screening -- August 23, 1995 Meeting Consultant Recommendations Regarding Screening Round 2 Western Segment -- With the analysis of the potential Eor a new or upgraded interchange at I- 35E not yet completed, the Consultant team is not prepared to make a screening recommendation. The analysis which is under wa5� will determine whether a new interchange can be constructed which allows safe and efficient traffic flow for movements to and from the freeway and betcveen I-35E and I-94. The goal is to provide all connections between I-35E and I- 94. This may be resolved by the time the August meering is convened. , Central Segment -- The alignment and cross-section analysis of Line 2 suggest that that aitemative would be very disruptive of the residences along Bush Avenue as weli as of the operation of Stroh's Brewery. It is also cleaz that it provides little in the way of opportunities to ' access railroad corridor redevelopment sites. These findings lead us to a recommendation to drop Line 2 from fizrther consideration. ' � , C' ' ' , IJ ' � The Consultant team suggests that four altematives be cazried forward for consideration in the EIS: • Line 1: T1us alternative avoids dislocarion of any of Stroh's operations and any other businesses or housing in the azea. • Line 3: The Stroh's elevators would be relocated on site to allow room for Phalen Boulevard to pass through their property. The warehouse building would also be replaced. • Line 4/6: This altemative would require acquisition of a number of properties on Weils and Wadena, but a�•oids impacts on the Stroh's operation. • Line 5/7: This altemative avoids impacts on the properties on Wells and Wadena, and would affect Stroh's warehouse facility. East Segment -- The only altematives �vhich satisfy the basic objectives of the project aze the Phalen Village Connection alternatives. The ConsuItant team recommends dropping other altematives. Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative -- The Consultant team, along with Cit}� staff, will develop a TSM alternative which focusses on upgrades to the existing street system. The improvements will be identified by examining the capacity deficiencies which appear in the forecast of Year 2015 traffic columes on the "no-build" roadway system. The Westminster Line 2 Alternative and the Earl Street Line 1 Altemative may be reexamined as a part of the development of the TSM alternative. � _J C J � �,Appendix K q�-a �� Memorandum: Additional Scoping of Location Alternatives 1 �� i � 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 L� �� I � �� (� -� �'� � rnen:nrandunz 1 , ' ' ' ' ' � ' , � ' ' ' � � f ,�.... November 15,1995 ie: Nancy Frick, Project Manager Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study City of Saint Paul PED City Hall Annex, llth Floor 25 West 4th Street Saint Paul, MN David M. Warner, PE Senior Professional Engineer and Project Manager �� Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive st. ra,�, hu�r ssiio Phone: COplEJ: ►a: Additional Scoping of Location Alternatives FRCK1114.WPD Fax: 612/490-2166 800/325-2055 612/490-2150 Seven segment alternatives were presented at the Public Information Meeting held on October 25, 1995, including two alternatives in the West Segment, four alternatives in the Central Segment and one alternative in the East Segment. While all the segment altematives appear at this time to be buildable, it is not necessary to continue analysis of all of them in the environmental impact statement if it is concluded that one or more of them is clearly inferior to other alternatives that will be analyzed in the EIS. At this time, it appears that Alternative C-3, the Lower Middle Route in the Central Segment, is clearly inferior to other Central Segment alternatives. For that reason, the Consultant team suggests to the City and the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force that Alternative C-3 be eluninated from consideration in the EIS. The team's assessment that Altemative C-3 is inferior to other alternatives is based on four observations: Representatives of the Stroh Brewery have indicated that removal of their storage elevators, without replacement, would have a significant negative effect on their operations. 2. Consiruction of Alternative C-3 would include reconstruction of the storage elevators used by the Stroh Brewery in their malting operation. The reconstrucrion would be very costly and would also be very disruptive of a key element of the brewery operation. Construction of Alternatives C-1, C-4 and C-5 is likely be accomplished without affecting the brewery's storage elevators. 3. Many comments received from Task Force members and from people attending the K-1 LJ q�-a�� 1 Nancy Frick November 15,1995 Page 2 �', Public Information Meeting have indicated opposition to further consideration of � Altemative C-3. These comments cite the unpact on an ongoing business and the � apparent high cost of the alternative as reasons for eliminating Alternative C-3. Elimination of Alternative G3leaves three viable aiternatives in the Central Segment , from which a prefened alternative may be selected, including two (Gl and C-4) which may be accomplished with little if any effect on the adjacent residential areas. The remaining alternatives would all appeaz to allow construction of Phalen Boulevard with ' acceptable horizontal and vertical alignment, and would do so without requiring reconstruction of the Stroh facility. If you have any questions regarding this suggestion, please call. ' LJ ' � C 1 ' ' � ' LJ K-2 , � , �J � , ' L � i i 1 1 1 i� � 1 -� ,� � =� � �� i � � 1 � _� � � -� � � � �� a�� City of Saint Paul Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Phalen Boulevard I-35E to Johnson Parkway Saint Paul, Minnesota Prepared by: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. � Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. Genereux Research � 106 Group, Ltd, Malco/m Pirnie, Inc. � �� March 8, 1996 �' � � � � � � � � � � � � �! � � � � �(�-� �y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Dra Scop Decision D Table of Contents Paae Table of Contents ............................................................. i Figures .................................................................... iii Tables ............................................................. ..... iv ... Appendices ................................................................. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. INTRODUCTION .._.._..•.-• ........................................... Purpose ofthe Scoping Document .............................................. Project Description ........................................................... PublicInvolvement .......................................................... ProjectSchedule ............................................................. Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Costand Fund Source ....................................................... 6 6 6 9 9 10 11 2. PURPOSE, GOALS, AND NEED FOR PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Phalen ConidorInitiative .................................................... 12 Project ............................................................... 13 Goals DevelopmentProcess .................................................. 13 3. ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview .................................................................. Universe of "Build" Alternatives .............................................. Screening Process ............................................................ Screening Based on Project Goals ....................................... Screening Based on Logic .............................................. Screening Based on Technical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Screening Based on Public Information Meeting Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternaiives Selected for Analysis in EIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Western Segment - I-35E to Burr Stxeet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W-2: Cayuga Freeway Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Central Segment - Burr Street to Earl Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gl: Union Pacific (old CN4V) Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-4: Upper Middle Route ...................::................. C-5: North Bluff Route ......................................... Eastem Segment - Earl Street to Johnson Parkway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1: Phalen Village Connection ................................. 4. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IssuesIdentification Process .................................................. Issues Proposed To Be Studiedin EIS .......:.................................. Issues Of Major Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bicycle and Pedestrian Movement ................................ Economic ..................................................... City of Saint Paul 16 16 17 21 21 23 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 26 26 26 27 27 34 34 34 35 35 36 � � � � � �� y f �!� "� �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Dr Scop ing Decisian Do Table of Contents, cont. .. Hazazdous Materials, Contaminated Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Historicaland Archaeological Resources .......................... 38 LandUse ..................................................... 39 Noise........................................................ 40 Parks and Recreaiional Areas .................................... 40 Right-of-Way Acquisition and Relocation . . . . . . . . . . . 41 .............. Social........................................................ 41 Traftic........................................................ 43 Visual Quality ................................................. 44 Water Quality ................................................. 45 Issues Of Maderate Concern, Requiring Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 AirQuality ................................................... 45 Construction Activities ......................................... 45 Endangered and Threatened Species ............................. 46 EnergyImpacts ................................................ 47 Erosion Controland Excess Material ............................. 47 Fish and Wildlife .............................................. 47 Floodplains ................................................... 48 Handicapped Accessibility ...................................... 48 Transit....................................................... 48 Vegetation.................................................... 49 Wetlands..................................................... 50 Issues Not Requiring Detailed Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 50 Federalandlor State-Designated Critical Areas .................... 50 Fazmlands .................................................... 50 Stream Modification ........................................... 51 Wild and Scenic Rivers ......................................... 51 5. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force ............................................. 52 Citizen Participation Program ................................................ 53 Public Agency Coordinaiion .................................................. 54 6. GOVERNMENTAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 7. DRAFT SCOPING DECISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Task Force Scoping Recommendation ......................................... 58 Alternatives To Be Studiedin the EIS .......................................... 58 Alternatives Considered and Rejected ......................................... 59 Issues To Be Studiedin the EIS ............................................... 59 Issues Determined to be Not Significant in this Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 City of Saint Paul Page ii � � �' � � �' � � � ,� � �j �' � � � q��-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Oraft Scoping Decision Dncument Fi ures Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Project Area Figure 3 Corridor Segments Figure A Wide Range of Alternatives Figare 5 Altemative W-i, Pennsylvania Freeway Connection Figure 6 Alternative W-2, New Cayuga Freeway Connection Figure 7 Alternative Gl, Union 1'acific {old CNW) Route} Figure 8 Alterna6ve C-4, Upper Middle Route Figure S Alternative C-5, North Bluff Route Figure 1U Alternative E-1, Phalen Village Connection of Saint Paui Paae 2 0 18 20 � 29 30 31 32 33 Page iii � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �' � � � � � ', � !� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Tables Table 1 Build Alternative Alignment Options Table 2 Project Goal Summary of Saint Paul Paae 3 15 Page iv �' t,�, � � �I' � � � � � � � � � ��9 � .�` �!Y �� G� -a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Appendices Appendix A Resource Documents Appendix B Summary of Social/Economic Surveys Appendix C Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants Appendix D Summary of Phase I Environmental Assessment Appendix E Travel Demand Forecasts Appendix F Scoping Document Distribution Appendix G Altematives Selected for First Screening Appendix H Memorandum: Screening of Alternatives - Round 1 Appendix 1 Memorandum: Screening of Alternatives - Types of Altematives Appendix J Memorandum: Screening of Alternatives - Round 2 Appendix K Memorandum: Additional Scoping of Location Alternatives City of Saint Paul Page v � � � � � �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1� �d ��f Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Description Phalen Boulevazd is a new roadway proposed by the City of Saint Paul to be constructed on the city's East Side between I-35E on the west and Johnson Parkway on the east (Figure 1). This new roadway would support an iniriative by the City and area businesses and residents to encourage redevelopment of vacant and underutilized land in the comdor: The project will also significanfly enhance access to the near East Side by providing a better connection to the regionai roadway system at I-35E and by providing a direct route from the Phalen Village area to I-35E north of Saint Paul's downtown. The road would generally follow the Union Pacific (former CNW) and Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (former SN) railroad rights-of-way. The west end would be at an interchange with I-35E; the east end would be at an intersection with Johnson Parkway. The project will provide facili6es for bicycle and pedestrian use, and will accommodate the fixiure construction of light rail transit (LRT) on Ramsey County right-of-way. Purpose of Scoping Document and Draf[ Scoping Decision Document An environmentai impact statement (EIS) will be prepared for this project. The purpose of this Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document is to focus the EIS on a small number of potenfially feasible build alternafives and to determine which impact areas will be examined and at what level of detail they will be studied. Project Alternatives The EIS will include analysis of three types of alternatives: • No-Build Alternative: Within the EIS, analysis of the no- build condition measures the effect of allowing the current situation to continue. � City of Saint Paul Page 1 �(� a�y L -------------------3 � ; i i � Anoka � �___�• I � I �I „T� ��- � r� � I .\ � � �� I � .� I j - - •- � �� - --- !�� ' I • � �� j Hennepin — --------� � I I � 4 ---------� I � � Carver j l• � 'r'� � I � --�---- f ��;� e�;�� j ,,.,> �: �� ----� � f �S:':.�� 0 I /— Ll� r .�a J� � � _� � ------- �- l ,' Washingion j ,� 1 �-� I �,) � 691 f7 1 .... _�. �'.� ^ � ( ( �9i � ( 6 � = r 'S f I �' ( i 9yK / '6 � ��.\ 1 �� Dakota �'p I � I ]5 _"� � � � � � i __—'J I i �-�,_. �----------� t �__'� .aw '� �.—_�_�'�_�_�_ � f s Phalen Corridor Phalen Boulevud Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 1 Location Map � � N 5� Barton-Aschman Associates,lnc. Genereux Research • The 106 Group, Ltd. Malcoim Pirnie,lnc. � � � �J � � � O �` � � lJ � � V � � � ��^ "�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document Executive Summary � City of Saint Paul Transportation System Management {TSM) Altemative: The TSM altemative includes relatively minor upgradings of the existing transportation system in order to deternune whether small-scale unprovements are more cost-efficient than the complete project. • Build Altematives: The build alternatives are different ways of constructing the full-scale project, and are analyzed in comparison to one another, to the TSM alternative and to the No-Build alternative. In the Phalen Boulevard project, there are two build options in fhe Westem Segment, three build opHons in the Central Segment, and one build option in the Eastern Segment. The project would include construction of one of the options in each of the three segments. Phalen Boulevard build oprions are listed in Table 1 and described below. In the Western Segment, Option W-1 would connect to Pemisylvania Avenue at I-35E. Option W-2 would terminate at a new I-35E interchange in the vicinity of Cayuga Avenue, which is located just south of the I-35E Cayuga Bridge. In the Central Segment, all options stay fairly close to the railroad right-of-way except in the area of the Stroh Brewery. The differences between the three options are mainly in the alignment used to pass through the area where the grain brewery's elevators and malting house are located. Page 3 Table 1 Build Altemative Alignment Options � � i(��a �`-� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document � Executive Summary � � � In fihe Eastem Segment, fihere is one alignment opfion which basically pazallels, and may use a portion of, the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCl2RA) right-of-way, termutating at Johnson Parkway at the proposed Prosperity Avenue intersection. Project Analysis issues � � � � �� i � k� � � � After careful consideration of existing conditions and likely impacts, the standard list of EIS analysis issues was divided into three categories. The issues, listed alphabetically within each category, are: Issues of Major Concern. Requiring In-Depth St�y • Bicycle and pedesixian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic • Visual quality • Water quality Issues of Moderate Concern. Requirin�Analysis • Air quality • Consfrucfion acfivities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy • Erosion control and excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wetlanc3s � City of Saint Paul Page 4 � y��a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document � Executive Summary � Issues Not Requirina Analysis � i � � � � � �� • FederaI and/or state-designated critical areas • Stream modification • Farmiands • Wild and scenic rivers Public and Agency involvement A comprehensive, proactive program of community and agency involvement was uutiated by the City of Saint Paul. The focus is on the Phalen Boulevard ELS Task Force, a citizen committee created by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, which includes representatives of residential, business and insritutional interests. The Task Force has been deeply involved in generating and reviewing much of the material used in the scoping process. The Task Force will continue to be involved throughout the remainder of the EIS process. � Gity of Saint Paul Page 5 � , � � � � � ;� � � � � � t_J � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� -a�� 1. introducfion 1. INTRODUCTlON Purpose of the The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires that social, economic, and environmental Scoping Document considerations be includec4 in the planning of projects that receive federal funding. The Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document have been prepared as part of the federal NEPA process and State environmental review process to fulfill requirements of both 42 USC 4321 et. seq. and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.2000. The Mirtnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) approved the format of this Scoping Document as an alternative to the standard Scoping EAW on December 15, 1995. A 30-day comment period will begin when the avaIlability notice far the Scoping Document is published in the EQB Monitor. The Scoping Document will be circulated to the required MEQB distribution list and will be made available to the public for review and commen� A Public Scoping Meeting will be held during the comment period, which will provide an opportunity for oral and written comments to be submitted. The Scoping Document provides a discussion of: Project Description • the need for and function of the proposed project. • alternatives considered. • potential social, economic and environmental impacts. • agencies and persons consulted during project review. The Scoping Document identifies the significant issues associated with the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives for further study in the Environmental Impacf Statement (EIS). The Draft Scoping Decision Document provides a suirunary of the Scoping Document and sufficient documentation to determine the scope and focus of the EIS. These combined documents are distributed to federal, state and local agencies anc3 the public to provide an opportunity for review and comment prior to the preparation of a Final Scoping Decision Document. A final scoping decision will be made by the Saint Paul City Council after the Public Scoping Meeting and the end of the comment period. Phalen Boulevard is a proposed roadway which would be located on Saint Paul's East Side. It would connect I-35E to � City of Saint Paul Page 6 � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction � � � ' � � u � � � u � � � � � j i� , `�,� Johnson Parkway neaz Phalen Village Shopping Center (Figure 2). It would be approximately two miles long. The roadway would be located roughly pazallel and adjacent to or within the former Burlington Northern (BN) railroad right- of-way. The BN right-of-way was purchased by Ehe Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) for possible use as a light rail transit (LRT) right-of-way. Phalen Boulevard would be constructed to aIlow the future construction of LRT on Ramsey County right-of-way. The roadway may also use, for a portion of the route, vacant land formerly occupied by the Chicago Northwestern Raiiroad (now owned by the Union Pacific Railroad). The purpose of the project is to assist in the stimulation of economic redevelopment of the area by providing enhanced access for businesses and residents of the area, and to enhance access to the East Side of Saint Paul by providing a direct connecrion between I-35E and the Johnson Parkway/Maryland Avenue area which will make it possible far residents, businesses and visitors to move into, out of, and within the project area. Since the former railroad right-of-way is depressed below surrounding ground elevation, much of the road would be grade-separated from existing streets. Connections to the existing street system would be built at Westminster Street, Payne Avenue, Arcade Street and Earl Street to provide access to local residences and businesses. In 1979, the City of Saint Paul adopted Plan for Streets and Highways wtuch called for connection of I-35E and Johnson Parkway via the CNW Railroad corridor. (In that plan, it was called 'Bast Como Boulevard.") At this time, the City is close to adopting a new Transportation Policy Plan which reconfirms the need for this connection. The name for this proposed road has been changed to "Phalen Boulevard." In addifion, construction of Phalen Boulevard has been recommended in the IJistrict 5 Plan, the East Consolidated Small Area Plan, the Railroad Island Small Area Plan, and the Phalen Village 5ma11 Area P(an. These small area plans have all been adopted by the City as parts of the Comprehensive Plan. City of Saint Paul Page 7 � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1. Introduction i � fJ ' � � � � � � 1 �� , �`� The economic shifts of the eazly eighties, with manufachiring plant closings and subsequent departure of smaller businesses, has led to neighborhood decline in the corridor. In recent years, the need for economic redevelopment in the East Side has given a sense of urgency to the issues of access and land redevelopment. In the last year, there has been an effort to turn long-standing plans for Phalen Boulevard into reality, and to do so in the context of a major physical and economic redevelopment of the entire area. The Saint Paul City CouncIl passed a resolution early in 1995 in support of the development of Phalen Boulevard as a community reinvestment/economic development project for the East Side. Through the efforts of East Side legislators, businesses and labor, the 1994 I,egislature appropriated substantial funding for the first phase of development and infrastruciure analysis for Phalen Corridor. State and federal regulations require that an environmental review be done for a project of this size. The potential social, economic and environxnental issues associated with the proposed Phalen Boulevazd project are significant enough to warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Scoping Document and the Draft Scoping Decision Document are important elements of the EIS process. Public Involvement The City of Saint Paul actively involves its citizens in the planning of major projects. The community involvement program is described in Section 5 of the Scoping Document. Project Schedule 'I'he following is the anticipated schedule for mmpletion of the Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study and Environmental Impact Statement Process: March 1996 Release of Scoping Document/Draft Scoping Decision Document for public comment; begirutulg the 30-day comment period. Apri11996 � May 1996 Public Scoping Meeting. Scoping comment period ends. , City of Saint Paul Page 9 Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document May 1996 1. Introduction � May 1996 Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) q1�-a i�f City Council adopts Final Scoping Decision; Final Scoping Decision Document distributed. Publication of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation notice. December 1996 Release of Draft EIS for public comment; start of Draft EIS comment period. January 1997 January 1997 March 1997 May 1997 June 1997 July 1997 Public Hearing on Draft EIS. Draft EIS comment period ends. Selection of Preferred Alternative by Saint Paul City Council. Release of Final EIS; start of Final EIS comment period. Final EIS comment period ends. City Council deterxnines adequacy of the Final EIS. The City of Saint Paul Depariment of Plannntg and Economic Development (PED) is the designated Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the purposes of this Scoping Document and for the Environmental Impact Statement. The contact person for the RGU is: Contact Person: Nancy Frick Title: Project Manager - Phalen Boulevard Agency: Deparhnent of Planning & Economic Development City of Saint Paul Address: 1100 City Hall Annex 25 West 4th Street Saint Paul, MN 55102 Phone: (612)266-6554 Fax: (612) 2283314 , City of Saint Paul Page 10 � � � � ' , ' ' � , � , � ' � � , � ' � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �� f 1. Introduction Cost and Fund Cost estimates for the proposed project have not been prepared. The cost of the project will be estimated during the SOUTC2 preparaiion of fihe E1S. Implementation funding is expected to come from a combination of local, state and federal funds. The exact source is unknown at this time. City ot Saint Paul 11 � � � � � ' ! _� � � � � , C� �i , � ' � � ��-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project 2. PURPOSE, GOALS, AND NEED FOR PROJEGT Phalen Corridor The Phalen Boulevard project is one element of an overall effort by a cross-section of government, business, and ITtltlatlVC' neighbarhood organizations to recover and preserve the vitality of the Phalen Corridor area. The effort is known as the Phalen Corridor Initiative. As described in the Phalen Corridor Initiative Bulletin No. 1, "the Phalen Corridor Initiafive is a community paztnership to improve the economic, socia2 and physical prosperity of the Phalen Corridor, including the creation of good paying jobs, job training opportunities and support for existing businesses." Through its members, the Phalen Corridor Initiative has proposed programs which are intended to improve the area's emnomy, housing and infrastructure, and to take advantage of the existing and historical natural features of Saint PauPs East Side. The Phalen Corridor Initiative is focusing its efforts in four key areas: In the area of job training, the Phalen Corridor Initiative is identifyntg the existing and future labor force, existing and future job opportunities, training needs and opportunities, and is developing a program which would match warkers with needed training and with employers. The Phalen Corridor Initiative is working to atfract new businesses to the area by making potential sites attractive and environmentally and economically feasible for development. • The Phalen Corridor Initiative supports the provision of new infrastntcture in the form of roadways which give existing and potential development sites direct access to the regional highway system. Recognizing the value of a coordinated effort, the Phalen Corridar Initiarive is working to build parEnerships among segments of the communiry. City of Saint Paul Page 72 , J I LJ ' C ' , C' 1 LJ LJ l� � , C , ' � � �^"�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 2. Purpose, Goais, and Need for Project The Phalen Corridor Initiative successfully commenced its activities by obtaiiung a legislative grant to fund environmental studies of the proposed Phalen Boulevard roadway project and soil cleanup studies for redevelopment of the underutilized railroad corridor. Phalen Boulevard supports the objectives of the Phalen Corridor Initiative. Its primary tunction is to provide a direct connection between the areas planned for redevelopment and the regional highway system. The enhanced access will make the area more attractive to developers. In addition, Phalen Boulevard will make it easier for people living, working and shopping in the area to reach their destinations and to circulate within the neighborhood. Project Need �e Phalen Conidor is an area one mile wide and ovex two miles long stretching from northeast of downtown Saint Paul Eo the Maryland-Prosperity area. It encompasses four neighborhood retail areas, several residential neighborhoods, two in@ustrial railroad corridors and three major parks. The construction of Phalen Boulevard has been a long- standing objective of the City because of a recognized need to: • provide access to land tor redevelopment. • generally unprove access in the northeast part of the city. • better ]ink existing and future businesses to the regional highway system. • alleviate congestion on existing roads, particularly truck traffic, to improve neighborhood livability. Goals Development Goals for the Phaien Boulevard project were deveIoped in a joint effort of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force and the PTOC2SS City with the assistance of the consultant team. They were developed in a process in which project issues, project goals and project alternatives were all discussed. The process is described in detail in Section 3, Altemafives Development Process. � City of Saint Pau! Page 13 � �L -� i`� , Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document - 2. Pur ose, Goafs, and Need for Pro'ect 1 ' � ' ' L � I G I 1 1 i i I [J �_l Cl 1 The Phalen Boulevazd EIS Task Force and the project team reached agreement on a set of goaLs during the process. The goals are &sted in Table 2. The EIS will assess how each ot the alternatives pertorms relative to these project goais. � City ot Saint Pau! Page 14 � -� �L �d" �y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1 2. Purpose, Goals, and Need for Project 1 � `Prq�eet.- ` :ticress ' ' •Cor"tcr�ercxutl ` r��kz �ezre�oy:meni" v: ' `��hb��oi��a� h �e�rtve�t��s�'a; �� ' � ' E ,�� r ' �_ �', � � � �� r�e��t��,�'" «` � � � s� �YFo�es��`3� � ' � ��,�� ro � i�e � ��' �: .`�71TJd�tik�� °� e � � �� a � � ,�� g a� ' �� °' �"°e,s� ' s ��a�s °�� a � °� n � aEe��9 �'a a�s �� i� - a,.:, ° , � �'. �a aHa r �d i � ��"," i � �� ° � �� ' 1�uP#�'✓{E'�'YPu.3� E 4 e 2 A 3d . Qe � 3 � % ° 5 � ��3� e P ' y �=�f2s��ip P �'t��st&�� , s � '�� F Q �% a � �� ' �xsst� �, �,� ,� �, � � � ��. ii 4 ' a [H �ppf a f �Ey me��' � �3� �� ee'� N g � � �� 38 N � S � ;�� S 6 . e �� ' se A ��e, ' ' , City of Saint Paul Table 2 Project Goal Summary Improve regional access to and from, and local access within the project azea. Improve compatibility beriveen traffic chazacter, street classificafion and land use in the affected area. Provide adequate land and infrastructure for commercial/industrial redevelopment sites. Maintain and enhance commercial/industrial economic activity in the project area. Support preservafion and enhancement of existing neighborhoods. Maintain option of future light rail transit in the corridor. Provide for and encourage alternative modes of travel including biking, walking and transit. Minimize adverse envuonmental impact. Enhance existing environmental features. Preserve or enhance existing visual guality. Control adverse unpacts to visual quality. Provide adequate rail seroice for exisring and potenrial users in the corridor. Piovide adequate truck access for existing and potenrial usexs in the conidor. Be buildable. Optimiz,e capital costs while satisfying other project goals. Optimize operating costs while satisfying other project goals. Capitalize on opportuniries to conserve resources by coordinating construction of other infrastructure needs. Enhance emergency vehicle access. Ensure safety of Phalen Boulevard users. Page 15 � I :� ,� � �� W 1 � � �� ,� � � � � � � ai�-a,�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process 3. ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Overview The Phalen Boulevard Task Force, city staff and consultant team members worked together over several months to develop the Phalen Boulevazd alternatives. The alternatives selected for analysis in the EIS were the result of (1) a thorough discussion of issues determined to be important to the community, (2) the formulation of project goals which respond to those issues, and (3) the identification of alternatives which respond to the project goals. Input came from two principal sources: the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, and surveys of four groups within the Phalen Corridor neighborhoods. The Task Force, which was convened by the Saint Paul Plannuig Commission, provided input throughout the scoping process. The Task Force was briefed on the results of the surveys of community groups. � City of Saint Paul The four community subgroups surveyed regarding their perceptions of key concerns in the corridor were: • Managers of industrial operations in the corridor • Managers of commercial operations in the corridor • Residents of the corridor • Community leaders The samples in each survey were statistically valid and the results are, therefore, representative of each of the surveyed groups. The Task Force previewed and pretested the questionnaires; several comments and suggestions made by members were incorporated. The details of the survey procedure are summarized in Appendix B to this report. Project altematives were developed in response to the needs of the community as expressed by the project goals. Alternatives development was an iterarive process in that discussion of issues and goals generated thoughts of new alternatives, and consideration of potential alternatives generated thoughts of additional issues. Page 16 � � � � � �� 1� � � � � � �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document q��d�Lf 3. Alternatives Development Process Once the long list of alternatives was established, screening took place. The Task Force used three types of screens: • Project goals • Logic • Technical analysis Univers� of "Build" Alternatives Alternative generation and screening overlapped during later stages of alternative development because the screening of one alternative often generated ideas for a new alternative. The documentation below does not reflect all of the iterations which occurred during the study, but does reflect the spirit of the process and the key considerations and decisions. The generation of the long list of altematives took place, for the most part, during the first five meetings of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force. Meeting� 1 and 2- The Scoping Process carried out the processes of issue identification and goal development concurrenfly. The Task Force used the first two meetings primarily to discuss project issues and goals (see Section 2). Meeting� - At the third meeting, the Task Force and project staff worked together to develop a"universe of altematives." Participants were asked to draw all the alternatives they would like to have considered and describe how they thought their altemative responded to goals which had been identified to date. Participants were also asked to identify opportunities and constraints in the corridor which they thought may have an impact on, or be affected by, Phalen Boulevard. The exercise of drawing the proposed alternatives on maps also generated thought and discussion of additional issues and goals which were remrded by project staff. For the purpose of alternatives development and consideration, the Phalen Boulevard study area was divided into three segments (Figure 3): • Western Segment: I-35E to Burr Street: The key issues in this segment include making a roadway connection to I- 35E (location and access), future freeway operations, and impact on existing and planned developments. � City of Saint Paul Page 17 � � � � ;� � � � � �' � � � � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process �� `� 1 � • Central Segment: Burr Street to Eari 5treet: In this segment, key issues include impact on existing industrial operations, retafronship to the existing street system, relationship to the recreational frail and right-of-way needs. • Eastem Segment: Earl Street to Johnson Parkwag: Key issues to be assessed here include access to the local street system, impact on industrial development potential and right-of-way needs. Meetine 4- At this meeting, the Task Force was presented with a memorandum summarizing the results of the previous meeting. The alternatives generated by the participants included three signiticandy different concepts in the Westem Segment, three different concepts in the Central Segment, and four different concepts in the Eastern Segment (Figure 4). The initial project concept was a conidor-long road, and most ot the concepts generated by the Task Force were corridor- long. However, the alternatives also included a concept which called for roadway system improvements at east and west ends of the corridor which served the principle redevelopable areas of the corridor, but not in the central part (Figure 4). In this concept, at the east end of the corridor, a new connection would be made directly from Johnson Parkway at Phalen Village to East 7th Street at Eari Street; East 7th Street could then be used for the rest of any corridor-length trips. At the west end, it was reasoned that if the purpose of the PhaIen Boulevard project was to provide access to potential industrial redevelopment projects, a connection between Miss9ssippi Street and the largest of the redevelopment sites Iocated west of Payne Avenue might suffice. Connections to the possible redevelopment sites were made via Weshninster Sireet and 4Vhitall Street. 'The Task Force also received a presentation of the goals which the Task Force had been discussing during the previous meetings. The Task Force discussed the goals and made a few refinements. The resulting goa]s are listed in Table 2. � City ot Saint Paui Page '19 . �t � a . i . ... . • . - ..� y s�;: . �,w-9. °F, I ' � + . . � s y t .. I v �` - '} ,�f f+f � y € - � �'...._�'i � � � - 3 7 �' e„ " •w.s� ¢, »[ i S • } s s9C. K,,,�,�� „� . I v-m r •.' .;� i Sr�� ` .` � . 't .t'S. �.-_ » ��, �'�. � � '34 t i '3 K •� � � � �lest_$�'�.ei�t, , � "' � s .sar c � :.. 5.��.M) � ti � '..��. �#�ra :0ia i f 1L'.Ti/'i� : `°' � y � �i i ' 'P '? r :..ai t b � ±u f ,T., H , uc � Ic ♦ . .� u ��N, � i� � s •. et . . _. � . i ( ' ' - '`,� i � + `' �• . .w-.d.� � � .� .: .. � ,� :._ i ( ; a � �� J:i� N��.. rr'. ..#ii� J � f .. a �f:y3 iC "11 - .`.. �taF' � �i � S �7 ,�_ . � _ .._-..�"� I._ - • 1 dJ ��F a.� y "R+ � � ^�� . .. , ► . � f 3 �» -. " .t ( i +. .� c . t "� D .�v. a uu^ 3.�� , 4� � ~ � ' J •^� + .. �� f`� wr '+ .. f a " � ' , -s„ � nc ' { � ' '•. ,,, yF, '. -'�a •. -�.��` �. I : �-�..+..tia .�:.. n _.�.,.; ; � _.�! �.i s.' '�.c�i M � S �; it1 3 � � �7 h , '!'Y '1J '3T v ee4 Y } � '( • � � � . R1 �ta � �rv � ��'� . :I�„�`313ty�f�Y �: 3 � .a � � � .- � 1' } � ... � � : +Iry ` � Y 4 SD C' . ( .� 1 . . �' ' _ . . �. � � .,� �i � -�.^. :.1 r� �.yf' a z ? d' r>� f : Y" "' , e m � � � !i a v'� • ^a r �g i ' �. x . '� N Y ��. � : Cs' � t m -� Y<• N. ir •i` - �. .�trf �+.i,w A s� �y �s�l f � ,g_ �� ta . � � � � �� t` Y� � � : . � � � � } � � � � �. ,� ° t'+ . � �i..�-R d�e.� p� rl,� ' ��f .!_'� r'^' �'St T 's'�s �Y�, `'� � � Ss "6� ea�a 5�[3 � s f .s zs � e+ ' ° sap � o t �' t.�:f 4 t� f.' � , I,��c.. ' .�! � v 3 �y �'°�,� � ) �'^' � ':� a�w>s a�,n � rt �-% '"d�3 ' a� � � � t� I i ss� Wi !Wi#i-+'� ��, � 7 �- a�'`�€ J '�° p� ° s+ °�.. . s ...,� .i.�Y++a,u^.;,�i '��V $�.�.wr�'M+��.- +oiK ", .` �` 1} � � i :�, �,f� � �� "' ` � �",!,_`�` � f A =-;, a ��a�"�,+ i � ,x 'i � R • 4 aI J ' �M}e" ` � Y..�Y 4 � ` . '�), . S !.. ��. S.` f � aninster � . F4 ..,r t ._,r�r.� i . � ft t 'w ' t. ��.. � � �,.� j;t. li �: v�a-y�'.f,=i' .As-h: � �1C ��"'agwx �S. _¢ r . '"+� �A .Y :x :a.r' i. }�.�,, ,.. w t _ emt�n# F � �. X 'ee e� .� '� � � � t � ~ � � '4 , : f�: �� ' ; � • '� ��.E�asylti�'ia��:o�r�ifi� . ,,,,_ � ., � � � .� � '�,� i e �, � : '� � y �� ` � I � �� t.i ; � _ L � � Y 't fh Y� •.�� d a '' ` �w �'� ��, F �A � ' ' � �R`: � � .�. : �. �' �M��_— ��i ' _ , t- f � � 1 —.� � '.: „— � -�=-�4 9 f � � '� ; � � y, � �-- ��.ai-' x � nti ., x � F � `"y r,�qr ,• �� `L h� i 4'u": �� <. -. � sr ' i i/7 ' . / w � - f> K - 4 3.. . . i . �a zk '.. r `Fg 7d �� c r�" 1 � :a �t-� �7� 's � � e r � td ��x q �. �„ar. , .. a s— - °: ..� . , .. .� � � � � �� w .... f =�.� �� 4Q'' � c � � � ��'�. r�� s �•:, r" � i z. - �� < • ,.. s' r � � '3'k� +�t�;' � �� . '- � ,�. .. � .: �.�,Y 1 �_� +4 s a � r � - � ~ � � � }� � :�F � ' � a �. '.�. v�e� ';�'i0'6p "t '� �Es.7� �,l `,,`� ��`a r- : � `� 4� ° � ' y' �-�,��'�.� '- "''� �� ° a -+£ �... '� '� r x . ��` :xi�` .� ; �yol�A�"� ` f . �� % 1k� k v � � y � y �� . . : f r dt a"a ' � � S��wp r. .y ..3; .,� s� h � b -�'�:- �'.` < � . `r±� -i a . �,,....±n u3'^. .'Fah3 ..��_ .�ra ��a1. �t�,,..` � � "�� . , '� � �� . � � '*' � . i +�k ` fi Y � ', ' '� r rt C � a w+ '� g Y.a ' 4 ! '.q.� . `s f aO�'s � t `zR"t��b'@�= �� r i� � , €�0 s - @r �� \` ��-�=- .� �;. � � r � � .,: �" � � ; a � � �� , :� � . � ° a'�� i -� �\�C�� q 4^� �.T� .« ss � t { . -' v s -�{.�:. I�f�"'.^\ �.�t.+ � `�� f ,r4�"� .+`� . � .. `l.`a •-� ..i"'�,�� . ,C3. ��$" e \R s�° � i. • lu�. � r i �_% 4 if al � . . n.. i y �1: 14 ��" }�{' 4�Y _.� - �. �T � � � i�{��K. � .F .- t.�' s { ;„ '� .' t � p ; � V .� = 1 � 1.° , t-, . . ,�vi �t.-,�, � �`: . t � s. . �"�.1 '..# -! s MIJ y��.: . . . . y Y r t. � 34. l y^ �� - ._.. . . � i:. � y : �,�+r'Fr.N�� . , � �� i � �� -+ a . l ., , L'�� a.��i:a : r_.��w3Y:.�... . . �. �' � ,,.�rt ��;x g,r-.�..� �it ,yt`-t.ama �F €b+d � { >�.,� F . � { ii ti . �, . • u' " Y '�+ i * { f (. � � � �¢ w � -.Tal�+ �T� F t nd� . .�. .s�M i S p " s . � ^K e'6 ^��.: ) !re ✓ ... � � s^ . i r er�sv'a i �a. A.:. � SrY ��'r y �� _,..� � .}� 3 w y ltAYlY'1�� _ ' _ ' r r .�, �' � 5 � �'¢ g v ��J Ln, e • '"� ' ,�' .. � 7 �¢t�'� �` vc s N n � a � .+4� � � f � �� ' J � r v 1/ k)V�.1 j �t'��V.iii�JY�'�i_ `7i' . •' � � � \ Il. N �4wI �'1 f �tt '��l�" .`�✓.,� rr v 4� � �� . "" ,� `'' � Wes� 6�Qde � = � 4 � i� �. Ra � µ rA�� _.y. "� � 'p �� ,�.. ^K ' # ��.."'F� � � � 1..�, � � „� '°� :� � ; �� hale� V�1�`qe � �: e + _. � 4 ' 4 '� x � .. . .. �� ,. � ` „' ��q� Y�. . / g . . �� ^� .y.�r, ' �.,. �`° # ,� `. ��►t�12�V��&� 1 .�� ,: � �,� � xt � *� �� - .,... .,. �� , � s � �' �� FY �. t .� 'zr� A S I � .� � � ��'� � v 4 � :�1 � f' i � �,1�"+ � "� �, - /�"`°'�"' ' � s � _ t' "�f` �' ' � .-'�' j ,� �`` � ' .' x�� a .� °�S �. �,A�' ,�„'tlF<a //. �.� w ,. ``��` � ��, � �GGi 1 . " ,�. .�"� � . � .�..+�'3t � ..P� s 9 K` ' " f � � �_,� � A , � �_ ��b� y � "`N+ �'_�L5A9 d .. � �d �� r� ��.� _„ �� a.. ,� s� �� ., �-� w.- , .�«,�. ,��.,� : _,�s-�,�..'�, � � ��G�� . c.� <,�� ,+e�,� 4 � ....x�, � i � 2 .. S � _ '�° �n. � I�y1'q ,'��„sd w ,v s a' � 'sab_" �� y'' y f11�r. i e x �+aaa."'#t '�� '.�� b �� .�.'4'. rSi�-.Y"'`" y , �c.g� -.rn k . y '�� . � rt+i.::i c�3.s.r°iis�lRl6.1. ��'� �� ''��i�',+ . .sl�. ._ o. '{'a15l� �� ^F F I .. 3 � ��Mi �t,I.. Y. �, F-`,.�j� t. �---.�T� ��, } ,�� -� � � �� : .�+-'` � �i� Y' -°+!�' � 1 *Y ': � 'Y. . ty ,, `� y YYi l Y,i A� ry �3 y; p ry _ + �" < t c�t�f��'$c..'��.. t�..e..,v�x.`�`i a - .y J-. ,N : <�, a .t � r yk �l�� .;;}. � !d� '.z �.� �, — . i a : 4 �t a `� g '�. � Ri z � !�:+ e� R �� SAIN] � ! I [AVL �lv� ~� �� , l ` ±�� . Y 5""''S'� � � � � � � � :� � � ,� � � � � � � � � ,� �i� -�, �'� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process MeetinQ 5- Additional information was presented to the Task Force regazding the results of the survey of four subgroups in the corridor study area (see Appendix B). The Task Force discussed the survey results but made no changes in project goals. The consultant team presented a refined set of alternarives which included four altematives in the Western Segment (including two short west-end alternafives), seven alternatives in the Ceniral5egment, five altematives in the Eastern Segment and three alternatives in the Earl Street Segment (the Earl Street segment inciuded short, east-end altemaiives which connected Johnson Parkway at Phalen Village to East 7th Street at Earl Street). These alternatives are illustrated in Appendix G. Screening Process �e Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force conducted most of the altematives screening process during Meetings 6 through 8. As discussed above, the Task Force also added or refined aiternatives during this time. All are described below. M tin - In the sixth meeting, the Task Force began Screening Based on Project screening alternatives. The Task Force was provided with Goals inforxnation regarding the types of altematives that would be considered in the EIS: no-build alternative, transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and build alternatives (Appendix H). The Task Force was also told that while screening alternatives out of the EIS preserves project resources, it is also important that the EIS examine all reasonable alternatives in order to examine a full range of � City of Saint Paul potential project unpacts. The first screen of alternatives was based on project goals. The Consultant Team prepared an inforxnarion packet (Appendix H) which assessed the performance of each altemative relafive to the project goals. The assessment was es'sentially comparative in naiure. Where no difference could be identified, no distinction was drawn. The Consultant Team recommended that the following alternatives be dropped from further consideration because they were inconsistent with project goals: • Westem Segment -- Westminster Connection Line 1 Page 21 i � � ,� � ,� ��r ��, � ,� � �, � �� i �� a� -�� ►`� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Documenf 3. Alternatives Development Process • Central Segment — Line 1 • Eastern Segmenf — Ames Avenue Connection • Eastem Segment — West Side Connection • Eazl Street Segment — Line 2 • Bari Street Segment — Line 3 The Consultant Team recommended that the following alternatives be retained for consideration as elements of a transportaHon system managemenf (T5M) alternafive: • Western Segment — Weshninster Connection Line 2 • Earl Street Segment -- Line 1 The Consultant Team recommended that analysis be conducted of four issues to assist in turther screening of aiternatives. The four issues were: • Operational feasibility of an interchange with I-35E at Cayuga Street. • Geometric restrictions between Forest Street and Edgerton Street. • Poteniial for conflict between present alfernatives and potentiat future LRT line. • Traffic service and operations at the east end of the project. The Task Force recommended two modifications of the Consuitant Team recommendations: • Central Segment — Line 1 should be retained. In spite of its apparent high construction cost, it may offer advantages in terms of minimizing impacts on exisfing neighborhoods and businesses that outweigh its high cost. • Eastern Segmenf — Maryland Connection should be dropped at this time because it requires acquisition of active commercial property while it provides no real nnprovement in traffic seroice. At Meeting 6, the Task Force also considered an alternative connection to I-94 which called for ramp connections to Mississippi Street. The consultant team presented the finding City of Saint Paul Page 22 � � � �' �, � � � � � � ��. _� ,,� � , � t ' �� '� �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process that, given existing bridge and roadway locations and elevations, it would not be possible to construct safe and effective connections. Meetin�,*_7 - The Task Force continued screening alternatives (Appendix I�. The consultant team presented a re-evaluation of some elements of the screening (Appendix J). Based on the re-evaluation, it was recommended that Western Segment - Westminster Line 1 also be dropped as a build alternative; but, as with Westmulster Line 2, be considered as a candidate for the TSM altemarive. It was also recommended that the Central Segment - Line 2 Bush Avenue be dropped due to the significant impact on the adjacent neighborhood, and because it would be very difficult to provide access to potential redevelopment sites near Payne Avenue. As a clarificaiion, Central Segment Alternatives were reorganized and renamed. Altematives retained by fhe Task Force for possible analysis in the EIS at this point in the processincluded: • Line Gl: Union Pacific Route - bridges railroad itacks through Stroh Brewery area. • Line C-3: Lower Middie Route - through the Stroh Brewery storage elevator building. • Line C-4 (6): Upper Middle Route - around the Stroh Brewery storage elevator building. • Line C-5 (�: North Bluff Route - around the RCRItA right-of-way using Wadena right-of-way. tin �- Further consideration of alternatives in the Screening Based on Logic Eastern Segment revealed that only the Phalen Village Connection alternative (now referred to as Alternative E-1) served the needs of the community as expressed by the project goals. All other alternatives were significantly inferior to the Phalen Village Connection in terms of traffic service, impact on the community and support of economic redevelopment. It was recommended that they be dropped. City of Saint Paul Page 23 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �' � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document q� -d��{ 3. Alternatives Development Process MeetinQ 8- The Task Force considered the results of technical Screening Based on Technical analyses prepared by the Consultant Team to assess the Analysis possibility of construction of a new interchange at Cayuga Street. In order to construct the new interchange, the existing ramps at Pennsylvania Avenue would be removed, although the grade sepazation could remain. The analysis of operations using preliminary year 2015 peak hour traffic forecasts indicated that the key movements would opeiate at Level of Service "D" or "E" provided that the new interchange was configured as a folded-diamond with all ramps to the north of Cayuga Street. This is generally considered an acceptable level of service provided important traffic access or other goals are achieved. The remaining Western Segment alignments were named: • W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection • W-2: Cayuga Freeway Connection M tin - The Task Force reviewed the goals, altematives and issues which would be presented at the Public Information Meeting. A public information meeting was held on Wednesday, Screening Based on Public October 25, 1995 at Metropolitan State University on Saint Information Meeting Feedback Paul's East Side. The purpose was to inform the community-at- large of the efforts of the Task Force in examining and screening alternatives and issues during the previous nine months. In general, the meeting attendees were receptive to the work of the Task Force. There were a number of comments questioning the advisability of continued consideration of Alternative C-3, the Lower Middle Route in the Central Segment. For this reason and others described in the Appendix K memorandum, the Task Force, at its lOth meeting, recommended that Alternative C-3 not be studied in the EIS. Alternatives The alternatives development process resulted in the identification of six alignment segment options which have Selected for been recommended for detailed analysis in the EIS. Analysis in EIS . City of Saint Paul Page 24 � � � � � � � � ,� � � � � �� a�-a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 3. Alternatives Development Process Western Segment-I-35E to All segments are compatible, such that either Western Segment option can be matched with any Central Segment option, any of which can be matched with the Eastern Segment option. For the purposes of assisting in the screening of alternatives and consideration of the likely level of impact, pretiminary traffic forecasts for the Year 2015 have been prepared. The methodology and results of the travel demand forecasting process are presented in Appendix E. Each of the corridor segment options are described in the foIlowing sections. W-1: Pennsylvania Freewav Connection (Figure j Burr Street Under this option, access to I-35E would occur at the existing Pennsylvania Avenue interchange. Phalen Boulevard would be an extension of Pennsylvania Avenue. As the concept is now proposed, Mississippi Street would be grade-separated from Pennsylvania Avenue. If and when constructed, the East Central Business District (CBD) Bypass would intersect with Phalen Boulevard to allow traffic from the Bypass to reach I-35E. From Pexutsylvania Avenue, Phalen Boulevard would turn to the north, pass through the northern part of the Saint Paul Port Authority's proposed Williams Hill development, pass over to the BN and UP railroad tracks, and run parallel to and north of the LJP railroad tracks to Burr Street. W-2: Ca�uga Freewa� Connection (Figure 6� The connection to I-35E under Altemative W-2 would take place at a new interchange in the vicuuty of Cayuga Street, just south of the existing I-35E Cayuga Bridge. The intercltange would probably be a folded-diamond type, with the ramps located on the north side of Cayuga Street. The ramps at the existing Pennsylvania Avenue interchange would be removed. Vehicles accessing I-35E at the new interchange would be able to go north or south on I-35E or east or west on I-94. Phalen Boulevard would go to the east from the interchange, crossing Westminster Street at-grade, and then go slightly south to run parallel to the iJP railroad tracks to Burr Street. The East CBD Bypass would connect to � City of Saint Paul Page 25 � � � � � � � � � � � � �+ � � E_J Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document q�-a,�� 3. Alternatives Development Process Phalen Boulevazd at about Wesiminster Street, and connect to I-35E via Phalen Boulevazd. Gl: Union Pacific (old CN4V) Route (Fi re 7j to Earl Street This alignment option runs basically pazallel to the LTP railroad track from Burr Street to Earl Street. The primary feaiure is that, from west of Payne Avenue to west of Arcade Street, the roadway would be built on a structure above the UP raIlroad tracks. The purpose of the structure is to avoid all impacts on adjacent property and development. The structure would intersect Payne Avenue. The intersection would be on a bridge above the elevation of the ground. T'he roadway profile would remain elevated to the west of Payne Avenue, intersecting Edgerton Street at its existing elevation, and then drop down to pass under Burr Street. A connection between Phalen Boulevazd and Arcade Street would be made through the site of Whirlpool Building 17 (on the west side of Arcade Street, immediately north of the railroad corridor; the building was demolished in 1995). Central Segment - Burr Street City of Saint Paul � C-4: U�}�er Middle Route Fi ure 8� After passing under Arcade Street, this alignment diverts away from the UP railroad track to Yhe north to pass norfh of the Stroh Brewery storage elevators. Two subalternatives are '-'-- ^— �'--. ,,,--'— y �vpva�u a� � Qy.,< <.��.�u�. ��u« ..� .��,� �_��.. Boulevard would be grade-separated from Payne; connections to the local street system wouid be made via a second parallel access roadway rumling between at-grade intersections with Payne and Arcade. Under the second, Phalen Boulevard would inteYSect Payne Avenue at-grade; a connection between Phalen Boulevard and Arcade Street would be made through the Wiurlpool Building 17 site. G5: North Bluff Route (Figure 9� After passing under Arcade Street, this alignment diverts away from the UP railroad track to the north to pass to the north of the RCl2I2A right-of-way at about the Wadena Street right-of-way. Two subalternatives are prOposed at Payne Avenue. Under the first, Phalen Boulevard would intersect Payne Avenue at-grade; a connection between Phalen Bo.ulevard and Arcade Street would be made through the Whirlpool Building 17 site. Under the second, Phalen 26 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document Q��a��-f 3. Alternatives Devslopment Process Eastern Segment - Earl Street to Boulevard would be grade-separated from Payne; connections to fihe local street system would be made via two connectors: one to the west of Payne Avenue and one to the west of Arcade Avenue. E-1: Phalen Villa,ge Connection (F�re 10� Johnson Parkway The alignment of the Phalen Village Connection runs parallel to and mostly within the RCRRA right-of-way from Earl Street neazly to Johnson Parkway. At that point, the alignment tums to the east to intersect Johnson Parkway at the point where Prosperity Avenue (extended) is planned to intersect Johnson Parkway. This aligmnent runs at the existing ground elevation. It would pass under Earl Street, which is elevated. A connection to Earl Street would be made via Russell Street or Frank Street. � City of Saint Paul Page 27 � � � � � � � � �� °r�� I�� Vi I� �� fl [ T d� � � �� t'�l� �� f o s�� nli i �; �c, �rI— . Co�A�' p �,��;I � u ` \ �`_ L r_ � � q °� I �� 4 `o"a1�i �G��pi 3 ��.._.��o. �[7 — �� --.---.--• tGc�� Ci( p�'� � �� o' a � o ��A� C E �iJ � �� o �� .._�.�-- £� � � ��:�,�, '�,y n ,,.,, 5 � � �IS,_ �f9� I �� r Q � ! O D � � � � f0� �, � �D �'i f�1 � � �/ ( r�aa P a � � �Q � / �� D� # � �� a� �r�� --.. � � � 3�� o �� c o ¢ q � 7 ' IJ �E �.�----`. pve• �. � � � P e � �'` 6b � � � � i� �� Q €� �� `i � q `J Q � �� 1� Q �� . ��.,, i vg � •�..� )�. 1 u�? �� 4 �� ,ja o� � �� ` � � p � � a �o � � � �� O�`� �c � i �\\ i� J.��._, !; F%r � � ��' � M ,I � } � � � _ '� � ! � , . � �� ° � � ,� �I i� � � ?� )�v�� ( � � ri Q � � .N y ?� �� v %�.` l� g YO �� 1u�a c � �:� ��_------� �.� � , � — - � a� � (�� 1 R � a� ( �� j� Q� ��LL�J ' l � 4� O1_ � l � ' ��,t l ��( V�` []]( ��]' � � [� � _C � !m ` ' � f(o ➢ jy o ,- sc} ( ��j �irncac] {_ a�:. � ;LTV � 'J O `�� , �ao } !� �' co�I .., `o�,°i� °] �� 'a oli� , naJ �".��il3''C �� -��`�. ;r�` � Fit. ( � o oJf�: t) ( oag� , c • „ o ,a,; �'',�Ip�l j � f�[ � �+ r ��: p_aO �i(� a ��[z(n C� � �'��*° Q �� L' ��'".'° o� �I� �'4�e �il� i .�aa-7i � �i&a � d .� � �� ;'� o Q� �i� 6'�1� c� L�] tLt JF� p � 1 cil�i-ann, C_ � L' � 3 �1 � a; °..aR �m �p3°Q iP *i i��'U41]II�E �� %"� � r co=c: a a � t y ] n R � ��i� y❑� cc oct:n{ t77�� °)[ C11 t� x �- ( � � �3�''7�c�i� o`� c°I[L ° avj! 'a i { B�s � 6 v 7� 7 i.t, to )= C �7[L �} ¢'� i �• �` �� L �.-3fa�a £-LZ��.'p G��[G C)� vnt1G W .I ��4� �i � �� fio i�c�p�•� ��)co {j (E�u p. � � +7� t0 n�(a o}G� � Co;t� f '�u�a.,�, �!` ii� � G6 Q 6�� 'Utd t4`� `�� o G a�a�3 a3Ci�13 €�� L . t_ �J � �._,u� l� .�L�� J L � � .� r -� ^� ... .. � ._'_ � S � p , � � U �tL� c a � � Whitall St. '�� ' � � _ �� , � � , � �! UPRR� � �; o o= ¢ p c {� c � r p ?i �� D � 4� � � o�� Go,�o �o p��,.�?R G� O vF � �� g� � �� 1(C "nQ) �RF C]{E"�� 3 1 � f u _� t 4 � � � � � �]GJ ��tAp' �� i� ( � ` D , ��a �^� � �1 a � I fla�� `g °° o�� o�� 1 o Q � �'} � aca �� aa�' ^ } i { (�6�C t A £ �rsC�!'�b�.°.J��..i!°�c� n� ! � � ❑ O (� • �s fi � p r � �,;��'��f ( / a � 3r�� Ca_.� O F tp��l��l � L � � �� r;�uru,aJ�,'�J�� =,o + �" c S ° ° � � ° � � Q � �,' �Jfl °' � �� [ U�lf o ��J��;~ tl� �� ^ �;�� '� ! a � :...�� 9 f �€ � � �� —�— �;�� \�� ,�� ;, � � � l_% ,E({ z �-, ;i m ,� ,' -� � Q %!�� . o �,� a� �.� a ; c�a - �Q \ � �1 ��' J � �. A . > �+, � \ �� .� �� .. ss� � �� I al_.___; _� �� --.... '� f'� � ��naa � � �, m �. � �� 1`�� ' t � ¢, °�,� � � �� a �� =� �'�� ( � � � t�� R i c m f � �� ; �'f - . 1 � , ��i� °- i �� #i1°C 4 � n�7� j � (C7��' � 1 � �# � h �� / w� c= � {{ � # r l n � (� �� , (" i _ i�lt: °�� Y� � L:� 3 :� �� 1, _ ` `G � y,D �'� �1 �'' �a < 01 �•/%�. � � � ��'� �� °°�� , 4 o��pa�� < �� ac�-a� Key Phalen Bivd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corndor Ai-Grade Intersections Interchange Britlge ��. a�m��em��a �m�� ---'�_" O � l Q x �,. E o� •--•--� � o��',a00a � if �--�=� �— a� � �"�� ` V�� o � � � ; �/� �� /�� O °�q�.� �. .s.�� ., °o��n ��?% '�^ f � � � � �:r ! � �t �- �� ;� � � • i }9�` —'� � t+ ij �\ ❑ � � .�' �' `° �.�1 �� i '� ��^' �� G � ` ~ � �� t �--=. � � L � �, o_ j nn � � ''�Wa oe�6��3a�t2` �`. � L � �i3C��ilQi7� �Qma � r C� ^ �i i jq�o[]�,C� IJ�7i0lS� i,' Q� c� e Q000n � � f � � CP 0¢ € D10 DCP �� 7J�G�11� �P��e[ ��/ 4,�: R°R�a /) � o n7 �ke 1 Q9 ; � �i�`� �� F �Qa� >�°�� c�7 ; � � �� a p..0 la�\��/i=---__� (�_ Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document Figure 5. Alternative W-1 Pennsylvania Freeway � Connection 'mm' 0 500' 1000' � 1�� N / Barton-Aschman Associates,lnc. — � Genereux Research • The 106 Group, Lid. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. � � � � � �� fa c ��° �� o �� `ti r�=�g � �L a � p��SCQC�� fl g [,! u �� 34� �i �i r� io � r,4i ,o j � � 06� GL'�, � �`�'-G[U°�a ' f �I E � ��.. �t i ii, a o , _ —'( i �� (°°rj�i� 7Ctu] L� 3 � is � r7 �E { 3 ��❑ �({ � \ 9 oD�'i�iF't�p�.a �s L3a' �� .__._,_ � � a,� n .� °a° �� J b�G o � ��,��,� �.r.�.��, �� ;�=�a � ;� ,��'' �� , � °y�� I 'Q �CBaG Q�ati.� 1 �' � �� t Q n an & ,1 ��J}'iff�JuL J t a� �� ar- �_,--, f� ��Lv ��'� J. a ;� �, _----- --�� _ �'�� n , � � ' � 11 � �ia p� u �� Y ` n 6 } , G �� Q „ � �p �L f �1p./ � 4 � � �.�� a �� C �E � � � ��1 r � � � � �� j� �� °� �C��.�q� C? �� ano Q �J " �� rt °� � � �� PJ�� °��//// �?� W � M � � %� i 1 � � / ) \ � , L� �9�! 3��= ¢fL �. C6 c � �':�70 � � • po o9�Ir �o'I`tA a' acl t_ y � n p� �. 6> � C � .+ r, N c ''�� ` � L� 3EJ }� •� �� 3 a o .-1 �,F y �° c � j d p o � � � Qi � n a j �� o iL —�� : n �. _� i?� J �?N._s �_"-----� � � _ � - � ^ �0� 7 '��` Oi�G ��iL^ n� ��r �� I�U.41V�!11 '� 4f t � OSL O OJ� F'L{ L ylf } �ML � � 1: O Q O' � O �+_ �� cnC3 3 � p- � � f� °�� _�� o=' a�� i ` �u �� v ' -��, C}�G O p�l CF.0 � t�w��l� °O];o �03� � !--;�'� 7 �f �� a � ��iy� ��7ic aa t iac6� € .i � o Ea z" ct:ch e�a t y�� Q� a' y c: t��'6o° � l�� t_' i� � { } �� (��¢��.�`�� (�1,�'s'�] � jl�cl�mSGJ-!il` _�� iv-v' � c 00 0 a��Gs ° °�a ; €�m n � � �,��_ R �� — �� j 'g r '3 ca � ojt � J m O� ; �n ` �` °o '�� j?` �P� IL ° aflj� `a ¶ �.9�� j �S U �'Q��° , ��9} l o ° °[�Jtc �� 3L�W �I � 1 { o (c ��a Qj [a a c�to u Cd7t71 �'k � a ��o ❑ Co�� 6�]CC �( m6.o— .�i c `� ��da fl aj: ��i ` ��e� � pj fi ' Oa0.7 ��I�7 L��I � ��S �J'�° � L `� .� � , ° C�' _ � � .� _"__? ff:: ;� p p � } 6L`S�C�.Ic � Whitall St. �; �� --^ � � �� 1 UPRR� ,�I °� o) Q a�iSa ��,� o",o Q °� i o ° n b r �° �g °g . a� �$8 0� �� n � �° a a�QC o C fi�°� ( � ° ai o v� o � ��t- �� u ul aI�L�..��Ut='J � 4ao <�: �,a�co � � ° �°� 'v �� 310 �L�J{ �°� �a 4) � ,Q ° , � �� o , Qf; �F'�:�S�R oj 1�' �Q 3'0�l o l°..n° _ I .. V� n'Q. �� y N ��H G �� . � � � i � p e.� 5� � � � � a[ � k � � �E. � 3�O b�� c��i?U�o � G �IrB� �=t �—^^� a ,.�,��oo oE1 p � �� { �� e s � � � � ' � c6 �� -�=- ��° �� //� �� — �---a.. // S'J�".�O�r, � � �/ � �s� � � � �Lr�.S� � �j � 3Y a�, �� eQI� �.�� o:°;� � ee 1 ao �� { �`r�� `a �� Eq a q � � �� C' , ��— �� ❑ � s � �� p�1��L � � �� r - I�� —,�- r; + `-� �� y� � l�� i�.--�� j� � d �'� � '' " � � �� ' � �l �` r ✓ ' � i l.J �LJ o �t ��h ��!_J� a �v!L:: L�\ �.+ 6� [ �� C' �, � v^ ��> \ , \�� R Q � _ � R �\ �m i Q M 1.� � V � �---o . _I t � i o �� 3 �� o `�'ri a � �� Q� ��l£� � ��!–i �7a�Gfl, rt�(3� � � o an Go �� 1 ' �� °a �,. � / ' I L3 I o ! tJ✓ O L �� a ° � L7 0 � Key Phaien Blvd. Access Conoections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-6rade tntersections Interchange Bridge 0 0 aeaa�ma¢a� :i��a ---'�—'— O � y 0 � a •• � � ��...�� _ _...°..-. _ ("�-� c'�+Q�°C��i � 1 i {t� Q �� .ri�a � 1sm i�� ; u ;o � � � �o �� L]"D7'-sa — ��..� � � �� e � � ,➢� �.< e��(�� ' �:[�a�� o �'� pl 0 6� � o< �lillt`�nfl �� Ti � n �O\\ ?A ;\po .� �. 7 � � 1� —� � � � 3 �� i�� t l ��;� s c � �� i y,� . .... ° y a�a 6 �O�fl4� C d d 4co m�m i � a mrna• �o on� � � R ot�o�000 �� 0�56� � I i 1flfJ'�i �j]i37 ��t7Q Q �p m uvcoa ¢ � e o o ps mc oo y i�t�� p� � Q�'a70?�iJ � s � �a� r��4� o a � O? I � ata � L °(�QT1G037�`tp Q�'�'o�c h �. C a�a_ o Q� � COCm oO v � �! o l,``�j� - � � - - -- s��,.�� p' Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 1'lr /�` `, and Draft Scoping Decision Document �' � � Figure 6 � � � Alternative W-2 ��,� a � - �'°° �� New Cayuga Freeway / oo�� i � �� ° o„�� , Connection � 0 500' 1000' � N / Barton-Aschman Aasociates,�nc. —�� Genereux flesearch • The 106 Group, Ltd. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. s � � � � � � � � � _, �� S �— � ��Dj�.' j J�� .'�.' tt i3J °�r Cli °� `'^ � co ❑ A o i� �Q��: � ❑L"OS � ..,__.� � �a�t7; �1 �-a � m �a� (° ° � a 7�4Q L� �.__ � c OG � C3G�iII33C+S�y� �I � o- �£1 0� '"�� a U�r#��o �T�rt� � � � 1[(16� �� a � �� a� �� Ca ti�c+' m � IIp r �` a � � � ¢ ��g oy� ° o ^�--� � �' �/�{ � a ��'� 6 w✓�v�! � �D a 3o�r.w' � oca .�,3c�6o° �,._.. [D �°vk oPaG. 'o��ae � ��. �II ��Sn� t�� . :�,rs�"1� E� �° �� Whitall St. J i ^ • Lnv�-. � � S�a� � .� � a � i`` ,J.'` � � j( �� . � 1 �� '�. � �� ;�G��;€�� `�.i �� a� � � �L� O r� -�c�;.o_ S � �, � �i�. � t�d �� y i I a��'� �� C � u p ; � _�� m `�f6c E - .�a --� �', �r� o c3 o c� �j O ' II O ��- § r � �;��Sc53�� l'? ��' O '.��°; �,�� $ �� ° a r (�$°� � � SQ o :�� r �� Bol R� �Q1 �.�f.A D R �� i o 6 �� t�o °� 6A �� `�� ql G � G�� a �°�� f�y [jlRl��(}€A� �liiL�filU�;��,�i£1'uL<'=D^C.��J"fatWUUUViL��"'��u4culuur.�` � ,x � ; s� c+� '� a�t�+tl4� ;, �v�..� �t �� t�c�a �'c€�aGa�� €��'��s �c a Ck �� . 't n�r n� � i� 3o ancvam Ti .aocoffmmc �.=Ca au�av�a � � rrG=�+a ae a asan c Dac aa.a c 1 � � .°,� � ��Cl��iC� ��+fli',fl� �etTi�`[IY�G � �3�7�C�7 �sna�C�ccs,,,;�� {{� +� �I�LC��7 °� ( � , .� Qc1IGm� y � ¢ � ( 9 o - � �nm '' � � � 5 L�o��tp� ( � a � � �f T � / � , � a�a. t�Jfi�y�' L—l ` y � � �j ""V i^�TS-_Q--3F� {r�ii �� m�6a r ¢oca�n� ma y � � � ,� � T.E."'(�'S�'.T 91TQ W�306m0 46�II6f2 OID �{ Q GOQf �LOGC �° o� a, �� °amr�� `�'t�e�n �€�a�rr�[� it�° Z io[�sa�u��; �!a['r, o �L°t�fl4�mm�: C i �.� _ � �i�j�i6� C�IItk'3L£ffi ��?'t13£1 �` �� "i�€�{F3C�[t F3{�ID� ��QCSQZCiLL ; �I113� Dfl �,�^f�'��Y � �¢ T��'l �. s E t r�a= t a n.n2.s_ �e saca�a a a D aa�asnoaaa� :?at'bc c ma: �� C � �� C � � s "` -'^-�a r"i �°¢ �aa e m �a =w axc�n o ; • c� n L_._ o � � i.._... 'a �� t�6 c e' j � ac� �� C � G �citt�mQ�E� �., �u��DU�cu�c�3 ri��e�n� ? c��or�ac�� e 6 W 3�C+6 � . � } ��.'QU€1c � � �GLHl��CiS9�at�� :Lh'B[sQ1U�}G�a�¢ l"_" � � Qp II �Aap' aa s 6tII�m ° anaoa a� Cca� �t � I .� i?. _ s❑�3 f�tl}{}�� .�� i�@att��iS:DII �3C��7�1G�� 4[��Q�BLec �jo� �a 6L� �m� � [�� Q �� ( �0� �o��e�n�acs �n�9sY.toC� nG� � � i+. »..�+" r�� ].� L'X�s oII mG❑ na �. cmc i� .aG � ae°' = n ag�'o$�fe'i?>o t.}�� nssac;�a 4acoa eo�a- �s< � �� Case Ave. ��J � �«� � a��r�s[�a� �1 �II�9�a o�� ase�� _ � �� — — � �"�-'_}'__?`_.. � g � �l L�+E1G'�� '�tf-s��-" } C�}a[FII�I6(}a 4JL�il�tlk�[4.71�1 ° °om°� �TT4ss � `�! ' �.� �� Q�� Q ��fl E3Q`r � � . � a c a ., cr � � o L5j cs�a .. �° �.cs � £� �aStt� , , a�II€� �C�]`�t�' nGOcElatllD � a��l� 2Ilp� t3r�'€o t7��3 4 '.��s ¢t4n�7 0� 4 ! ° ��,"j �� ° r��[ �� Fv�E��( � ��I �C�#�G�6 �7��O�d� (?c�lII 43� ��D� $a� ��°�° �c,�le� �� II �� i�J`f�t�LT� �S il¢tl �7 �itt�7�t"$.5 Q€I{i e�CtkC� M Y � ��[1�3 �� Ctt�,t(7QL[F�t$3iit �� a � ic� nE C�� a c�, a � go � q��iB4Rt� ��At€t�t#t?�CA ,�tP�_ t=�r � � � m �`� ° o �� rBn �` ° °� ` 9 Welis Ave. �£ �� , � � �, �_ � ° ° T C 9� ��i C1 �._�.� _. _..Y 't �—� � � � �oeat�q�G � m t�� f�' � � �;: � .�.—�—�_ � � � �t �; �� J ~� 1 S � � / ��331�51[Qu�� ,�� [l� s�9 -' 1=.7�' 3 ao ° »� 4 �� ; �'� ; ��L/'� :. ,�`�� ;�i° o�[� ...--t� [ { z o�a� � Key Phalen Blvd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdwys Trail LRT Corridor At-Grade lntersections Q��a � ■��aava�at �e�Om� ----�—_— O � Interchange Bridge = 3� o JID a•+"We::cO� e u3� I �=axnnc�ao r q a c J��'� � y�;j� :a�4ssp a� � �°' S R�� [O�ti� 9� �I � W $ r�� 4t� CS � � ' � i e 9 � � �f�� _ � �'�'° _�i' / / / / 43 4 � r. �� ° � �� -� � ( Q 4 yy,❑ 4 fl ''.....:"�.��'� �I)i�Ct4`tE1t� tf �t�IB13ccICiQ�� t�tL'u�'uC� .� tk � �� a '� s ��a�� Qz��t a��ss�[��r�46 Ca��aa�� ti� � f�n m °�', a�sa� o� � 0 7g Q� Aa1 �+ � V i L /",� R7� n 1)v�4 SSflii� �S�j�s'kCi4 �� C� �� eLC9 {�,kGT.Tt4CR �� "e�� i� � ( { ( 4 �� 9�1 GT�ZS�qi3C43(3�p IIc�{}4C�pflaa�� flDaa�33 C30�aaUEiDZ R� � �� `� .�-^--F`� o o❑ fl aaa �¢ Ro l¢fl a a m ocnna43w� °�c��^°*T` a a t� � ,�'� COt�a a mrc "�' • '� � D€�flf}�� 7�1tIElQ�`iSI?G�1� ��.7�'+'�l�¢�flCl�i§t}�Qt�il�j(R7Da�[�G�t4 � � �`� 4__ n�;{i?"°"S] } �� )' �1(1 isCS2lia�� I# CS � � EQ[7�D{7 Il i`tL7C�i{s ` {�+[�� {360}71G�{�ta+• � a _� Q ��-- ✓ ona �,>caaa a a a o ��Anunem } �,____� � l�?��,� �.�.___�� (�7nCiC1CT7� �5�1[1��C3�,'C�fSQ�t{ �EY�t2[��QQC3 ��JcCiE3��t}ii� � i , �a{�OC�74 �' � �� ° �� a g�s�� E. M�nnehaha Ave. �' �� aB � ; .�i `"� o C�`Tma a n a a n at.as o � � C]a o� y � i �"'t-� � �-�} f � ( � 4° QO�Q O@C 490II04SO 6+OQ p4a�II [�R�' Corridor ; � ��° ��-=�-' °�� '�� ! Ph�� Boulevazd Scoping Document n� r �° �� a�a��f�a�� y��c�s�i ttms� r.ea� ' and Draft Scoping Decision Document E� .�—,(� �� . ( fl � p g am �m ak�. am e a� o a . � o c u° cro � �� , �2RS}3{�Uf$f� � �3L�lEx3).3'�Q3� L��'J1Ja Q' �UU£it��'33'�y ��i� �' 1'�� .��_� Figure 7 �t � � �� °�� ,� �a�� Alternative C-1 ��„ �` ^ a¢¢e 6�Sa af aoQCID¢ a �c�vo sa a3i o'« �� 9 � J'f' �. �\�°. � 3� 4�P +,2t� LDL 944 C�'Si O�6 6 qD m Cb $� � t� 9 C � ' Uninn Pacific ;, �- �.� �g�� c�� Q�� tc��e Q� � f ��`�� .__ �,�(�°��,.: �o�� a�� ,�, (old CNW) Route �� 0� � a n C3} ��ma �oa�A'i s aczov na nm cr c� c 3 � � � �OOIILry� QtG j� 9Y{�� ifi � � � J � �� L:..3 �LV W ❑ tt . . _ f �QE.}.B� �F�t �3E�C�E� , v � (� � ['} #'�A �y.��q{y��'{�'y�g��(�}�{} r� c`��3 ('g'� �^,. ��{\\y8 SyQEl££'Ui.�-+�y ll"`itUL+iT`u: Q6 �q>Y� �U �'�SJJ v '�'�iV �� aeaan�IDQ �Ci o� aoiF }� acon � m a 9 5 ��4no � C',p -�+` n aa> 0o��3so7� �a c�a��m � vg�" �� S O�% 4sS�J .�S `t� c� s5;4'9t`3 .--< <. @tktl7stail�rt° ra Ea 9 QY��JtJ€'Sr-d �`� � � 0 500' 100�' � N / Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. � —�� Genereux Research • The 106 Group, Ltd. r Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. cx=� p c�c� � � t ��i,� �Q 6 L^�C3 � " ��`'S °�� i� �° � o ¢aF�l tl� ��a� �� Sson� ai o�5°°a� o`� �Sp�o , � '°° �3 � a � o�'' ..-7. �z na o o a°c � i ��<`,�JQ �r � � �� ¢ 6II1il'�'rPt�g,°� c. E� �� CJ 1 � � � � � � t 1 u �� I � � � � � �c�-a�� n. �'� -° ° J` 3 ° i rJ'] I -'€ 9 (p �r``�'Cz7G�f;.2=�J S�l�'JCF 'U!.iN�iJu-SS?' 73L'��G�f's Jw:3'u:W�-�c:, a� u-1 ❑ u� i UUt'4: � � 0 f7J � p n 0� j fl I� G.: �...J i� c� L 1� �Iliwl �� l� ��. � �...��.� ��.. uU C..t:1 U.ft ` n "l � �� `'� c �� F�1 � �' ��1� � ��'i¢u4• IJ�k]�7e�o� ; �q7s � �c0�u�? � �?;Q�s��t�nmc ��t�o � � n 1 �� I� { Q�1 C{ E � 1 n33 �a nn=n°Q� ° Siasos�mma �.o� vaaL�no �ul � O^ i i� L� �i.fo D �� _'� �t', �i�vT.a � ec � amo a':oee ac�e u � n�a�c� �'�-��!` • C �� - �i�a o ° ji` �;�' °�; ,"��"F7L�s(1'�7j ��o ,0`6t� £+x�GL��,'g L'vt'•Cs7 ��slGl�'a�7caGL�gt3�oo:iIlO¢.�� = ,�� l= �... ��, �� t/� ��-- t � ._ � . � l ° u 0� Tira OGOmC:'a IYJCti7t7�tit 6�0 .� L' ��r � 1 � _� y r fl � B ' o� _� @ ... p ,r��-�.."QL1�7 ! d] �`�ss�� ( i't'" � � !�- �O3 2 t�"�iG `� � I �O o � �i ..mso+lrc..1 ae ��c- i �o.,: �I O a�� i O i E o� � 4 °� y=� a.° 3x.A: T� �m a� 000me% mc t/! I { � a ��.� �c �-� � �DOWO �otLO�'- �] OQ d � e s � � r �} a � 6 d ` `� , o =, 9 � �1 � [I ! C�� @ �.`�i� '' �.= 0�'L p � l��J{�1F�1�OGi ,a� � '` o J � m ��„ o j,��<` o e�ti`ii.3 -�J C� �_ �"tt�0[P9 � iC� Co f�Ca =c3'i. a[I�' oJ �G `r1L:r7 ~•�� ;c3 ,'�e �: i, � i �Q7Ga0.7 �.i�� 9 � �� = T £ iPll[TiQ� O�S�'�`j'�71` 'T..7'�JB �[I} �� fi9�S�G0��'�3".[ � -� � G i�'�o �` 41 �-. ❑°s__ R 3 =� - am e, �a o r„�c_ � x�o �nn_a c o a ccaamaaao< I.a3,�� mac c � o° G e � "'cC'a'LS c "� �� nd t w G� �o � � �bo � Q�G ��"�� 4 .3�1` OA� °�"4 �1'°�a6Ar� 4}mo m+mo ;�3 p� L� C`�� od�'o � o $� l� C41i7 9 s L c,t�� .,� f�, E��.`' ,['�oQL v"��'Cv�u ��; f�Cr��7��JS]�'�F7E� e."13de�3o� ,��07��0��;na � r F 6G° ��l u�:. ---� o o� W ?, � p y =�. - �C4�GC�o� + � I „� OaL�a6C Ck"GOa�$ � o r ��' o � �q �`ZI�`3 i. _ �W1�D �G��G j �� : '-= �`J : �l'o�� I€o f o y� Q -c - f�� eo c j ��oa ae cCSC n:c cII�vna. L �-CS�n "n'+ C d f J { '----�— �. � L� �� o �_.-_.� nl�-� � av a�e c � o c a� f n � � ° ° i ��:° � � SDP�a�€'!Pp€7 �{�1c�LE1E�I3� �Ofie.fll�QOc(�t7L' � cd�G�1 �� rl o��o 3�� 3a� Ji�as I ��:E �oGe; t�tGGt7�U R � (— �� `__,.� � � s 4 � {143 i `- � 8 �G �� 3�'i' �`�i3 r� � � D" Q a��l G'�DaotS� � � Ot]�C Oo � e,al�O�uoist:G❑n �[��]oav7� �� Key Phalen Bivd. Access Connections Other Prop.Rdxys Trail LRT Corridor At-6rade Intersections Interchange Bridge 0 t�rafi-r.a � - • -- O � i0�7� j 1[�� 0 3�"�� `�„� ;� �'B��__��_ �___�IG�! L` -R ` "- "-" ' -"� Q. c��aa.aoGl'.aa wao o sv,: ( p onoc c� .Qao� a�a�c �E��um c ��.sc:t�um n:u�++c oz.i aa' l_ � [fl��° ��L�� ^ � c� c"�aii�43 ao=oao, �.v=moanarr �ifl:��nc'oc �E c o� �: �L Q �� I€t3� � �� ^ Q]GG�C�'S� � � �L��J.�'t� ,��G _Case Ave �:� €Il'..k� � flop6�[LIO6] ;[ 6L dGGoc�l19[ �,�c�ti0�t16�t7C7�;'�; o��c� "15�� l� � �� .__� t —J� � � --y �- — a I J(�Oa){ �u � CoJ��'°O°� �s bp .C't 6,; E ��GfY� �'if1?TJ��1 �Cltl�.�� '�'t1� � 7j o046�G2`��'C�i �i�p��`cz'�O�Jt p �t q�I7�G.10��4a 1 � ��Q �� b7LL`' a : Co c �"�'°J � L �3 � � � �� eD ^,. r^ 9'� oab�' u�w�,TS �° ° �'�' a�d��G Y ^`„'�°- � _ �toac5 ��n� '� � �� °,m '�� aO �� o��° a�� p� r7cfl7�.��(ta�JCt74�c7i�([3@Ot�aCil�sE380cflL�[�a CG�i7��ti OL9Ga�a�4� tl�s��tt7�7;��(�aa��c5 �a?O[3oeoGGn �i B�I�oc��9 �? i �L� 9�(��° ° cCy 0 c�.� f� �c' � �— � o o e o= [ o � o �c � � J��Iflf41� f;O o ��6�JB.7��P�� (��`��d 9 ��(J ��Gr3Q7 Q� o�O�.Gw �`7 ��iJ3 g� � a ° o 6 1 a� `v:pI10 0� �� W ��Rl ti^ Gy'�� I� �� f�c ��p i�o g] «� �a�'< ��i � t � `"` �-- ° �a �r , � � u �"� � J3 � o-r 3 � � ° e ] s [ �P � � ' , --.^�, n, e 4 w o �i as �� o`a°; 4�44a�: ��'� o n� 1�..�. �� '��' �� o � �. n.�, � � � .�i�: . �] Ct5 . i ...If �OQ€� `i3 �pQO�JffQLid`WCa7 00�. i Q. .Q.. �( ca° n° m a� G n n Q' �❑ ',"n na�Cft�t� t€�3�i1! � 1�`�"tC� pG t7Ca 4 � CA`�'�`� � CS� �� i o a .� ,�.��a o � �� s �6�c� �� n' L �� q� � � T�_ � a] v m � lo�p '��flg �o�co; cJ(�'� ° ° ° � �a WeIlsAve �°'— ; F� 9 ! �iJ co o t°rPo� ��t� oc�� `�OG � � '�L' cao`� _�� -t ❑ �ca a n� n°I i❑ anl� � 0 �7 �J� fl�� - - � �, p � �1 e � '��❑ ��o�t��'c Qa7�� Gt7P Q"gJ� i"� °� 4 0 �� E�f7'`� -� i §3 f � � C[E .,;r.� :.� .. _. � _ k� ia � a�- i oQ . 4 ��, m c Whitall St. °� `�� ( � �c � � � � �fl �� + °�. , �� o�; , �., � J .� � o � / / i t� o Q a?;Q � _� �,..,,�._..�... .{��' (� {� �, �o m �_ �� F�S '`� .;�s �'�7�'�} C�''� °' . . j f ° I � o r " i €S�li3 t� t€�� ,��,,,� �`. �✓ ¢�� [} p i or+ a� �� V t E � = H '�e m � � � c� 4"tG� � L 1 a�° � �n=� °j o� c v c o-°�. l�� 4 Ia� 6 fr�� Rr�foa["f� - o lL_1 T�3 t L7 i 'tt5 } a �s - 'J � �. �,o a `p af�� £� �oj ��V� OD�� O� g ��' � °� t� �i n I ° �a U��+�i 0 f� �❑�C7�, L otlac� oao QiLLY�aO 7 � a a o � ;�Rn(1rt11�n�3f�1 In�stir.a; �i � �a�tln� �fC� ' Jar q - ' -- -r - �� l '(�'� ia v I Z �J � � �� __ Wells Ave. .` � Sub-alternate ::8 � =J f l� , � �°" �.�.,� •� oe p�� ao °C� f � aac4 nUO4UG I � Qt�Sao :� a � ` � p � :� 9 C�L.._ � j �� - - � o o `-__ � ��aa� os ^ �o�'-�� ¢r-onr�� - > � t �_ ,—� / �� , , � � � �� y l � i ^ � �'�nf m � voeod �z aaa'J tl k ��,,,8 � � v._'��-��__' ° � , � „S�l �.°' '�7�oC1o3o 3av�G"ufi �1LOD{�i`[� �p[QiG0i3tft � � � � , t,r �� C '_-�� i �^- � ('--'"":�� )'� r �p�;�3 �Cla�'3P}[10£70{�i� �G �C100UG�I,1[ R� 's ��a.�;c r� ; J ' 000 t1 am � c no �., o m [oe000ce :a❑ o _ � � � i �.��`—�--e , ` �: ; ��oo�oo �.. i�� l� c� � ��l �� ea��oa°a a��a�3 �n�3�; aoe� ��c �tt a9c��vCo�Qr�a �a�Gat�o�Q a � �j ` 0 C � � }� ��"�°d � � '�'�7� �p €I�G�G�` �J�[�C?n�CV�7sG [e�9CGpr lY�� 6� ��IE 4� ° n .."]ov ��m ma4 cwa aoe[tio C� y� � 09�� Ik .� t�'II" 3 , �,f7 a � ---� ; �- �� Q_ � «�.—.. �"� �i b c�Q�omo 4��0�� ° �oaoaao�ca ��onoa=�c�Q� -��coac��fl � '— ,J � g! a�,�o �� °^�� `��: a�a � � �a;p�t m na ��p�� ;�c� �a� E. Minnehaha QVe � ��3 p ob `„ t n,'T2i mo a a o a a cx o0 9�Y?a 6 � r� a° Qa�a' � o� aw c no �av ( c oa=Qy � � 4��' Corridor ,�� .o;€ �� '��a dm�O�C�I7C�7o t t�r��0�e�,� Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Document , o � r 1 o[�tk3� ��tt��o��ott, ��o�ac��i c�� and Draft Scoping Decision Documeni tQ . Q �� a �r! �' r� a �y p� f� v9 L'm C27 amj �P `-x 0 aa ❑ C' ov Figure 8 � � � a oowa6DC G Opp n31 QikSO aoo6cpnK' CO oa 'J6 LCpaG � � �'�� 1�r �"� ��3�G�c�ra�5'[��a ocro��a�tr�e ;�af��r��oc � � � -� �•� ,-- ----, ��,�o�� n�a�� a� ��; ��a / } ¢�� oQ�, � Afternative C-4 f`+J l; ✓ ��E aaooSl6�=�a aaaoua �L)€ °cn a q°��''a6"ava � V� 4 { COC 0 G' �O�cE `JOL C �p� �� 9a;�0 Om r °�-�� ti�"��, ° a co��°�0 00000d�o��ac� �c�a�3oec dl� cr�� ma � Upper Middle Route � � � � o `� � ° __�=.._ll.�_..� �_.-----�` � °`ti'' S� _ �1 �� °t)�I�a"u�ii C� p°J�1nG(I�J a�p `� �3ev o �c�a � �fi�. �j °� \� v �l ��esa �an9m y a oca on o�o a.- �oa °v � � � �` ! �'°�, t � � ."ii73�"0)�nCL,J t . � L,—� Ll��(q ❑'v'��Goact's � �'�Ja 1�i � c'�AG .��i�'CC �� '� �...._�..� � ��v � �� I //��\,�3 Q��./�� Q�p�l�0� o9Q L��t �� r�[ � pa 3� �f�fQ� 4uzi�'�1�1 �V�f _ � 0 ��/� ��+ \�Ot Or-,p _•,�y�B� a p Q3 0 ❑ a m o t 4 octtn�os �'�.11 a as m'� ) i�oeo- ap m,� � 50�� . ..CL3 0 �� 0� � � dn0 �°OP°oan'tk7Y��r-.'?��o-s aa m°��I�° °c �, °[�� t 0 � � Q'In7:ain{Dr: ;��fl f£3fS �o�3D6r� 1 R N a n �;v� -� �o� G n � ' /�� Barlon-Aschman Associates, Inc. — Genereux Research • The 706 �roup, Ltd. — Malcolm Pimie, Inc. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� —ss. —_—,.��. � _ "- "' � S4 F a ':,ax1 C�t�1'CnC :1a J��ooj � � �7.; £ � �� co�rnt:°�o r-�-,� ;[7� � `-op`=� �oRi71�J o � �'� (�= r ��i.� o� =O"o �� ti-"" i y r ��`. P a_i ��.-. �'o^-,r L•2� r�'S' e y fl�tg ;� I s .- r•-• a L: c dt g l D ��'i ! $�d_� y ❑�I'o ��a� 7] Jp CI � Q o � �i m�c� 6o I`° i,J qIS �= 4G[ '+ typ i r � 3 t� c o a � � v � pf �� o cr ;Ti�l fl❑ a C[�� o� ° o�� 0� �� o ? .J t__ _ � —J -^'0 w t w ��lc�) � �c �� a� - j° �°� °�� J a�d3, � ��c�l 8� Bo � � � : 2�G'o z �a°� `��'�� S30(pB a �( � - —� �n� I �� Il, � ; t o°t l t` �] yaG �°0 9� o p� �� o �[a e`o��^ �1 Fto "�-'(r� �oisi ^ '�c1 �a� c c o ��'�'oo: i � ° t �oa � }�.� v� �°S a ��p °o �� ' ��pj��o Cp� � C]� O�LO�'�' �c.�_'I.� Lfl� mITSJfi3 I G ybe o' �� U 1[—' o C] �oa.m � o o�i�Tl�t�6z �''° � ° i i �x , tl7CPno� a m � f �, on � �,, �. °, f —. � .—...�J a � a ��J�� QO�, p_..[3 �,-� Lp p0 �50� �I� y�� [� CO) 'J�b L t�(Ip [oo�c3� rclkC.l a °�J�oa� E�� go� �g a o� ��f° � [Q `��E �Cl3iQOBlJ °� 7 '7}�Q �P] Whitall St. � � �ao� �� _ a -., 4.,..,.._..� � o �� °' ^ t7p o�3[Q a 3 ew a � " � �� 4 �dl<op .� � m _ �f (3�t f: n �� °�EQ� —'�. �� [� o"� ''a �o�� , � o � �' i � ' I P� d9 �oGCI 1 S n Ti n °n:`lniE�!3fR(il�� ..ai�cO C GG�1 �i� '� l�L`�"� ��OSj{a,�.� LiI�:OG��J 7(;UWGC( �JU:� :RflLUUUU> w u vU uv c:2;+i�+tnt� �.�. ��3 �� [ a �..._._.�J '�'� � � �.�=, ; � i�t�a�? � �� o��sr�;;Q�� oq�� ' �a�oc� � � F�e��oc�� 4. � Key � p s �� ,� n .+ m: � n ao� iama c�m me :=:.a c� ncxc Ph210f1 BIVd. -�-�- --v�,—a �a y � ea � eoaa a��ooa oc=o e F � � ,�,;rn , z ��"¢�7ii�,,sp;y�, �p�ptft�te � �eciy � `��i ;�tcairJ67cmOtl� ��G[3o� � � ; � ls Access Connections �� r-- r— V� I Other Pro Rd s � y � �Oa�7 � l � �3�0 ��7�F � eac��t:�o�lrr•[l'� GR�a ,r �ooec�6��aw+ ; �- �. � l `--� P WY m amm�.�-�e dl '�.:gy_ a c vcma,: � Trail U3un 1 � oa �[�'^_'rIS �a' �oawc escocn•E a2 � =ocb'm�ae c � c:7Lt, � 1 E �t�30t�� '��1Gt'St "i �`'rp�[II [L`• � � c [r.'".}C�. 0(J�p � �` �J'�'i o L-artll�,T��t LRT Corridor O '— � � gmt�� . ; a pTi��L� [xi}eaqu(A o�n}� @y; �i,�tn� � ?�7cTiD� �Ji�G� �'t,L�GT?-`' v��aLL ��9 ��0 CSiHG[ At-Grade Intersections y ❑ C6 i" " v ��`� x000c ac C��ama�oacsi I:m''.ya ❑ mac C lap--�-'..G--�' . a�� c�oQ� W{F••�wu3��oo 1'r°=�omc� �' W � Gp0 "� �� 'OC�� fl � D C� Q�� b'�nLQ[�LGU� � y ��Qr��@��EQG akk3r�aC�3oe f�tta�cG��aa'lecef�?a na Interchange � ��;t��' � � C��r�o�o 4��17�q� �� ; � � x.Q��,e� �,�a��'oaCG ,�mcer�6o�cGasa �mc ��pn tl0 �'So O. jC�-.c o 0 9 �� II . C9qc� Ao c � v a � � � t °a ¢ vu�^woo•• c o eo alm^= a==� m=¢ e-� Bn ge �,�`� oo�(�ii 47�4`i[f�� L� R , ��-.�a�p�=G�{ G�C�1�tfs,7+sQa QttGf1��30a JQ❑ Ct� � i .��...t ,�? _ _ - �----� € v ��`--� � � � n � r' n I i.-� � ..� �� ^� c�(�53 � [':800�C� � a� ps � �{� .743QSS7 �Ct��[3�,]'JOQII ��Y-'`u'L`Lmo �7[lu I�J C LJ['4�� '�� E� ^ m�' 3� m0000.0 0 p�..et maG o r� untY^^ � a�nvactb: !I��Ute a'+�U.:;.uam niWa � hS�� 1 s r� c a�ctca�'a�j(p�°��SGanoQ�p aRxa�oo°DO �o�9m€Jika ;�cemoac�o: '❑❑ Q�� S Case Ave. �� 4 a o � ��c �oa�m n��,�� a� ��arc�,. � a[ c��7z� ; o a oa�oQaoa:�i ��"� °�� , � @fl7Ll"a3G�S 5� � GC�� _ ., � ( ` `� �°.�_..._. c � C.�- �_...^ � l.�� t�1A�_ � c CP�d r DL�id7C (3(A6�G�� C�J�(gEt?]�3 oc� 000�,"".d7s"T.,�'°tpi.Y��o 1 ��Q� [ .B�� [ �6i�pa4e� 0 y y � , �ic�a00i1 � � r --- r ; - � {f � f �Y"._sm..Il 'li___s_<,i � G� � �n„n� o � nm' `b-� . � � 1 �. ` f � C P t °�q °sSta�nn�.` � � � ° e + ,.i r ��Q � f'�^t � a ac ' ��` �,�� D' . y o �� --'' �� oL��3�b Q�U�ai�O �7�C�aa��Ei�iJO `—'� iliDa pi9=Es C€�t�L"� ¢a�m a c�nooa[�a � oa�� o�� ti / ��1 � ��f C 17�`�{��€I}t� i fk7�k�C� a 0t] � 10�4�°d - 0� c47�[�C�ca� o0a�`-'�[# 6t� ��a�, °�oI`{o�k7C,�y30C0a �tN SE#J�] QO O. ' ! [ Rto.,, .,,- �i a... n� � n n �¢� i� �: 1 y t n o l 1 1�� " nn - ��Sl�� G{? i36, � L��CCI� � �p�a��i�i�aQi[Cl �L�, �� BOiz�i�3 � iY �e� 9QG0 �� E "�; a DfA4�� ^� �s r; i O�S� O�pp � Ct pDtS�D�C� �� „ N� ; r ��L.. t-eo � ^� - � j � j �� ot 't_]n �� r� �� 1 1��A,AtN II n n nrEdfr�?. WPi�� VP•• lIIIII 9 � �E �7 G� d10 °�7 i� �� : n� ��\, _\k�"�`" f//_ � t� _ _ _ "' _ _ „�._ � �Qd��Q : �� t`J C� �J LO � Ck �� DL4IDt�..., � nD� ��❑�� -- 1 � L!� � (n Gor� �a Wells Ave. � te. i�' I R�t�� n�,.n %;a � :rnate _.�� c 8 � � � �J �% ta a � _'_ �_`- O � �� / / C,j O V ��g� o, l 0 P ,�Ia � �� _ ! . _� ___ i l � � ; p� ° __ a .. V.'2 UQ��'uttuVyl i� � �l � Q 6�(t ..�� , {. a � c � ;.� �,. 4� � � r�ai > � °i` � � � �� --� � �� p p � 1 � �� d � J � � �� 1 ��1� �o�p � � ly 9 �v v� �" W w ac ^- .�.a,.��° �� _j cot�oe��, � a,}' aeo�iat�aaaL [�Cn��a [t �� r o l�ya,D[]Da �c�Of1 C�c�a��o ,� E p• �GL� � ' ..��, � . �'� , � � �o� , � i � ✓, �� C�1 ocanc¢ m oveo c�o� eD w � yr � �-�- � ' �° ' i �11_ ! _s..._/l.�` �Dao��a ac�QC��cyuo� tm��e�� n� � J� t �__..°�_ , ... 3 ��'"�O�Q€��i� Rr �' � �� ° t� C3'�t�.1 L��C�� 6o0��i o`J�c� ` � �� — � S r. oPm 6 a4] � V Cv '�g fl��D tm�ooaa� p� � f$ICi]�_ � i - s � � S1 L3zx'�n�taa R `� � z,�* i q�� DCYt�ClOO°c� flFI7L'J6t�.7��G� CTOd� e4"1�00�� CI�Q7o0L�C�=C3o (t37GQfl17oG9� ��I C r` � o aol , � j o��n� �00��3�an �gn�aeQC� ac�4ar�I�Q�3�a � 0� 1( (�'� ' f. � �� ae�oa � � �[ e O�� Q�� ` 8Gb4[i��CGmc(10N6 SO�yyja O G G609cQ�_ '•OO�m-{ i R' > t--�". [ � E t �] �P`.�-- a a'�1"� N w '�� ;� ��xi1 f� ��._.. �� ___�__�°G4�1� fl��CCeC�1P0�701 ° ilOg0��1�� G'�o00Co�D� � �Co=�OGUDOU � � � aaflo �`' �'�Y��' � �� a[�❑m�, �°9 6�m�° o�s� �onc;ti E. MIIl0�h8h8�Ve. — r�a ❑ a � �il . n£`�imo c no G a a� a �U3a c� o= f;l �.��n= uoea= a on c� ¢� 5 � v� ao=�o '' t' g Corrii�or � ��r€�ar�n aRS�a�7�}�lt�cl ��O�n�G PhalenBoulevardSco in Docuxnent �,� ;�` �— ,`. �� nr�� a�c�.-t3C��, �j�o�tn�ra� � �m�� and Draft Scoping Deasion Document r � �,,--�,, ��1 1'.I a� Q SL �3 G 09� (14? � 6 e P C P 4 �` C¢ P C ��b tS �i�ff� a— � ^'�C11tlJ��u�CJ��L ��[}31�1�41��] €Ti7czt74fltA�a� +� i'�� oC3C�.�'if Figure 9 � �� 11 � i:�_� � ' 1 � l �u ��, � �•� � � ,�� ;Q� �� Alternative C-5 `� ��I�aaa000a��e ioaaoae o s��oo0a o�Q � � �o a.o m¢aaa ooa9 �nrs m a p om � `�-�'' d.��-�� a�cnac�l�c�co��io��? c��b�c4�J�xa��wa co North Bluff Route � � �.� ,�� ----- ��°�� r--'�� [s � c��oma � fl�;��a��a 30� e�aa��o� � �. ( O� \ �"z—o c C}��ca Pocm� � aeo�� n� �ac `a ,// t � �� vm ,�n (�--� o � m \v"� �p�� a� "t L--�� Li�j� o Bft�ll��n � � � (� �f� �Q� 1 a°� G �{1t�G�43�U ^ �L� 4.'`�t�`�1: k��G� �D`�u � / � �/ � �\-p o 1 C a aa¢� on SDQ �G nm �IP ]� ocao 6� m 0 500� ��p� ,� ° a��0 ° ' /�� G \ O� n ax n°��5'�'�a aaoo s=a8��m "c � av^�#��yj° „ O /. �c� ,a�'i O`� c, rt�tti�! .--, ,• r, �(6flmr.tt}r� rn �a m�'t(#i"t�7�--s4 €� o r� � N oc ao / Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. � — � Genereux Research • The 106 6roup,Ltd. — Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 1 � � i � � � � � � � � � 1 � � � � � ;� a fl� � °av° m�� <�¢�� ; °� nd��" � Lake Phalen � ! 3oo eon ,�aczi`t3oaflvCk��k oC�mL�sq� �a[J� � ` �� a � I�!_____�,��. i� �_>�✓ amoo (AGcn!�o�¢�a�= ��omox�Cia� B�� eo�[16 �p47G0� �C j i� c � 6 v(k E a�[ a m e v D� r....,. ..m cRi.,.... 1. _� � Q�� Qa�1ee cx�aoaG�'&' am�,�c�� caoa�iT�cr� =�� a000� ce�DO �e�=DO�7 p1°W17��'30�30�4 �� en n m w ,meo e eo . moo} � o � � f Maryland Ave. � � � � � ❑ ��tppws �fl a(5^�3o c ID[� O � ��o� 0 �0a�J � 6Dt7W�J�tc�o��fl90 �G�lOt1� F9�J� � ado�jrob0 c ma om e�flo a e a m ��9 m o �eava ao }om ocoa ovoa 0. 9aa, e q y s lr —^� ? a�w n am� a6sm mana pa eq�naawac o momo pao�j;� e p � $ ; 7 ' c e�fDD09o�9Laa7��'.1�L40o�poQG,7��6��o G�Hd.t3�AmGR7n o � �� ,� ] f3o �S$nQ � Q -0� fl[��+'+ �'i 4 'i7 a D 6 � $�fl ��QD a a t7[,�((IaOj�Q�fl 0➢�e�90�i � Qn o� � 6 � � il ID��e� Om ^ c�a� a m Oemmaomo.:a o-a]�c�mpoo 2 cp Gnoaa 'a aoaaam�7 8a=aooacem ;mv�ov=�o �❑� � 7, '4 y ] �a 00 ot3ay' 9�+37 E7�7ocat170 � �]o '� i[floa`tfi[3]ct�JOJC� �{�e o (� �a�g IIa � � � y � �L �(]ofl¢t7�.' . � o j�}� 6oC�25�.,'�i�00u�7 �a�� € a0�° • � �. O 6 o p(C m ae• �o c� aaI � �° U omu m"b mo2'�oo¢O m om p Q 4�� s D1 O OQ �❑ ° OQ � �� ] 09 °a6p p{Q p(�` � 6W960O4'6.vQe (y09� , fJ OD V '4 y. onoa o�°� � p��j a�C�i1Q� R7047Q`s7a �� ❑o a o00 �n�n i LL � oaa�D�a[Oa �t3arcPO(}9 � 1 o a�o�4o7��cdaoo geo�JOOena0000c ° gg � �� z .=ao=aovveo =.auoea000 R� aa m oco �{�y¢a con Ga� 1� 7 aa omc W �QaG?tEO3O]YO�'�OtviDOOla no 0 odQQ c�a � u ,} �� t1�a0�� '�� a��omarsQ oEA7Ernc�3oo�cr�o agoc c��aoDA��J `..�� oQ1�� 7 m�DD flCt ;� co Q C7 (}W Rct ��000 �❑q�o�o �c0�oaoo�ao acaa� p C,] '$ vo o U3 � o rF ow.r.?! Eo ae aoa � macmmailam <oa�moo em � vo s � b^G �a� 546� ve O o oaam m G o9 0o mC11W Q(b df a o Op9w' QO� mm pw p�o q�p �8} b a a� o�af147��casm �ooamw�aooc �s �¢�at�ao oaflo�o� oocamo �oJ�6 ��oo c�m ad�o� `° tlQa°� �41 SS(36� �fi100ffi �+ €�off9�tr°� 8QG s'�0351°fl �t'A ao Oa�10 (��'��4�fl Rl oo� �p �,�� fa.n o maon oacea¢ooa�°1 �&�J3 �� Q p F oe000 =owow � av mno •no amc oacooQO pp � ^ LRT Corridor v� ( 000� omrpoco��0000 n6 Cfl�I370Qt o o OQID {J 0� � f 3�Qil0 9�o0U36DE; (QTpm�tl€7oo6�e c3 OCa7ol�Aao EOOO�oa piPb �� ,/� � ]¢�ouo +*oaom ooamp.Lpooamo�a O � �� ma'JTd �domom000_ `j 7WOOt7� 0+7Li OCIFI[3i�t0�r5��Q ` ��OOCi}DOqL3�tt000�DC!]70 I � � � � � �.___� �' � � p �--- �--��---.-� Trail t o¢aAa oxsa a oo ��3a�C��°� e oe� o OWUO a�ao �oopDT � I° a oo- odS a�C .ctkoa ncb� mod Ga] a D�tloo, �6pm u 4� �o � de av 009 CO [ b D 6G� d a aocc a a=n oc caaa $n<m accraa so t� a a } p > C�o �o(4a�e6�aGZi� oDoca�o�oo,��❑affi7oa�+aooe[A�) aooao��c�o oC:ii � 7QJ�°�� B o'� ��TSff��a06 a o ° SIL��ODQ flo �s�9 � �' � o °°O l �� c ° ° � ° � � �G�� D � . oa ° }s ° � et7I70QQQQa6 °'� �mo�Q �' �3 �J� 40� ° �e ° � o� 1�6�Q0 0¢ QLfI g� 8 � tl`� �[� ❑ �� i es 46{LtW �7�o p8oi �]��,Q..CmO p�� p�GQ€C7 � o {�°°=a {� ° � �� ('� � ° ° 3 ° s F ��+ '9� xtt � � f o a � � �a.�• oa ° �; °' ( � o �� a �o v � �,..�+• �°� � �� a � � Qea 1� [ �, _ � � �y �c �� n o�Fi : ��ral � �, ° t v � 0 4�� f i 7.,_jL o 0 � oo� o � o � � e ' r � �pCF7 � C � � �c� a o�l�� o ��6 �_� �,_,j �3��3 ��C�i� ��$]Q�70�0(#Of� Q7 fl€]Q� ��rmapvaF �$�, ��pom 1�c � 600� �oo[J sa� m�c�� y� a i � 01 ocao m m oDac n o ��HQ �. � ,� � .. v � � �Qa0�6o a4ToL�Q��aooff fff,�@t7c�0,Q a�a��¢'fOC�AO[ � � [��9`�'oe ai ^ �`�Q�L�.I�1 s�`�aQ00C�77i}OG Oo��PQ�oo�l GWOa�00 R'� o��3ui3o�E O� o a�� y G am °� b o0 40 p o� (ooaxocp mF 1 ��° .� �� t— aoroa a 5• i v'T�pm°GU° { m c��oo��a aavL'��ooGG aaG6a�po�c40 c��aeII��ia �mo�o�ooc �'o�moa❑r€� � � � �a�f14CJ0eQ[T�1� � �-tt�( rn nnnn�471 nnnn�nrarn) {3U0�'JQQ� � fl4to€1(pOpp �0 a n o G¢o6 _ _ .. .�-.r-.�� qc�-a�� fl�l`�o ogp'c�{°oI. o �`' ` Ke a o�i� �'I� � a��°� ��l� 3,( ��f� PhalynBlvd. � oc a o s a ��❑ a,t �a�' �i= �C � i � � j ; � �, j Q ° j �o �; � Access Connections � C� � �e� L Co °��fg��I ��7� [ OtherProp.Rdwys as��Qa�n�: OC � oj� �'� [ao a oI`� l � �� Trail �� ,�0�� T'� r � � i � LRTCorridor —_______� oO �C7i f 5 "oo 1 C -- s�� C i� _.,..� ��t,. At-Gradelntersections • ❑�(j �� a� QOaa �cQC:ca� � O �� a � � Interchange _ °�€ J �� I7 �� Bridge � V ^v fl�� l7�r�n ; ��Reali ned �° �� `J�� ae Qa �4 � � �� 0 0 � a� � ❑ O OcnB u�� Prosperity Ave. o o ° o �� a � Q o��°g 1 �� O �� a ��4 tl O � c n° o � � (� c � " O '�'�� E n p� o p 6 e O D° c9 9 oaa �o � aQ � ° � o �oo � � v t:� o o= � o o� a R '6 0 0 �- 0 Q an oo �a C� a°o r' 0 o Q o p� � n R /, �d� ° o o°a a i� � 6 � (l n ❑nfl9. �7° � o fl � o � � 6 o p o0 � Q 0 a o � m � o °aoo°� �� Q� Uo °� Q � = 6 u H �(�o . Q q � � .� Sa a$ Q��d��%;� °°� UPRR � L Q �� o a Cs� � ^"� a ---' f __ ^__" p� O � ° i C°a 4 pPp ��, D ° GS 3 ci O� � � a � a fl� � a4 n a � ;),O �jrIt�qQ�..l��(4po ° C1€5 � q ? � a� 4 �I ' LO 6�o-�� ][ n0� o a � oi / j�� c�� p � ° �CIC7CIGG4 a❑ a Ll � o��p oor� oGfJ3G0 Q i./ " o � � o _- ��°� z.�.�..��J � � �° � . � ��i a �� O��aoQ ❑o � b[�qaao�a��tt3❑ ❑ €o,, m`�'P� ��=C� 0 o a fl a Q�c , °, Q m E� � � 9� C �fl p [£� � 4 �' q �' ° fd a�C7oo, 400� �° 0� fl O U 0 ❑ j�Q �i �._�.—..�.Q ��1�........�� a �C� O �fS � ° a� �r" Q m �l u CI['a�Y,-C7 ° � " o � s c��^'�Za� , 17 �� 0 0 0� EI 6 � t ° Oioaa P0 � 4 oi � �°� �❑. � � co o�� a a c[u�i � r.f'ela ( orooa a�i,'�a`�. o noo �,��p oo a I�6eoor3� �n oC3 oflao op � �' ° ao q� �� n �� (�� r� OD�t3 a c cfl�o Q�7Doo c�� j` D(34o�N' Op DOtf �° 4P�; ° Cf�ttiS Co ffi O a i"` L c o Q o p fl q o 3 � L a o � co � no� o a o :�° o,? �nc�% �° i I {.� � �°8a D Ofl �oe�oo a� � 6 D��3L� 0 e�n¢0 6p � QO � 1 �cii oaoao�� [ � S t � � ! � O O �° �� 4� ��il �� °❑ 0�[�D�� —.= Q ° g p ��,��,� ��— E. �th $t. ;� o � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document — an d Dra ft Scoping Decision Document R�� ❑ a �'-"�0 OQ � � I,� Q d C� [7�� [ ' Figure 10 �°�� °°� a - � ¢ °� � ° � Alternative E-1 � 8 °°° � �� a��°` � Phalen VillageConnection acrn�p, — _ ^ � � da cs��c�a( 0000a�co a� c�s l o o¢m� a � o � C1�tlC3��00m Q�OCdC�i3Gi a �—� � � � ' 06FJtlo'iL / �� , E. Minnehaha Ave. , �� ' o soo� ,000� T 00 ��no�� ,� ��_ ao� N ^� c �a� c � U n ' / Barton-Aschman Associales,lnc. �, — Genereux Research • The 106 Gmup, Ltd. — Malcolm Pimie, Inc. u t t l t � � � ! �, � � t �� -a�t-4 � y < A 0 Q 7 � 3� m o � � Q o y3 c � N Q . � � � ` � � , �_i � � � � f �� I� R Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document �L - a ! �-{ 4. Social, Economie, and Environmentai issues 4. SOCIA�, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Issues Identification A comprehensive review of a wide range of social, economic, and environmental (SEE) issues is required by federal and PTQC2SS state legislation as pazt of the environmental review process. Although a detailed study of SEE impacts is not tequired during the scoping phase, a prel'uninary assessment can be made of the potentially significant issues associated with Yhe proposed project. A final determination of issues to be studied in the EIS will be made after the Public Scoping Meeting and the official comment period. Issues Proposed To Regulations regarding the preparation of an EIS list specific Be Studied in EIS social, economic and environmental (SEE) issues which should be considered. One of the primary purposes of a Scoping Report is to deteruinte which of the issues are likely to be of significant concern in a parricular project. This section of the documenc identifies the types of SEE impacts that will be discussed in the EIS. Methodologies which will be used to analyze these impacts are described. Each of the SEE issues has been identified as being of major, moderate, or minor concem based on the potential for significant impact due to the proposed project. The issues in each of the three categories are listed below in alphaberical order. Issues of Major Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study The following social, economic, and environmental issues were determined to be potentially significant and require detailed analysis in the EIS. • Bicycle and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use � Noise � Parks and recreational areas • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social • Traffic City of Saint Paul Page 34 L a�-a�c� � Phalen Bou(evard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental lssues � � � , � � � � � � � � � � �� Issues Of Major Concern, Requiring In-Depth Study • Visual quality • Water quality Issues of Moderate Concern, Requiring Analysis Assessments conducted as a part of the scoping phase indicated that there is a potential for moderate impact with respect to the issues listed below. These issues will be analyzed at a moderate levei in the EIS. • Air guality • Construction acrivities • Endangered and thYeatened species • Energy • Erosion control and excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains • Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wedands Issues Not Requiring Analysis Based on information developed during scoping, it appears that the project will not result in any impacts in the areas listed below. These issues will not require analysis in the EIS. • Federal and/or state-designated critical areas • Stream modification • Farmlands • Wild and scenic rivers The methodology planned to be used for each issue analyzed in the EIS is described in the following paragraphs. Bicycle and Pedestrian Movement The provision of a separate bicycle and pedestrian trail as part of the proposed project is considered a priority by the community. The EIS will evaluate the opportunities and constraints associated with providing for non-motorized travel within the project corridor. The EIS will also discuss the design guidelines and standards that apply to the bikeways and pedestrian crossings and how these City of Saint Paul Page 35 � � � � � �� , � ' , � � � � � � �� : Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues movements will be affected by each of the proposed alternafives_ Potential vehicle/bicyclelpedestrian conflicts will be identified and design options analyzed to minimize these types of impacts. The EIS will discuss the relarionship of the proposed project and assoaated bicycle and pedestrian trail to the existing BN Regional Trail Corridor and possible linkages within the study azea. mi The EIS will include an examination of the following major economic issues: • Industriai development • Commercial development • Employment growth • Housing price changes • Property tax base changes It is assumed that any indirect changes in socio-economic indicators which occur as a result of construction of the Phalen Boulevazd will depend on investments made there by businesses and individuals, assisted and stimulated by public planning and investments. Four sets of data will be used to define the economic setting ot the Phalen Corridor: • Data from surveys conducted among local residents, industriai managers, and retail trade owners. • Census data, house sales data, and other secondary economic data. • Business activity data, based on censuses, sales tax and unempioyment tax data. • Income data, based on state and federal income tax information. The fizture without the project and with the project will be described separately for the Phalen Boulevard alternatives and for the probable indusirial development facilitated by the road. Since the project is designed to attract industrial users to the area, direct development of commercial property is unlikely. However, such commercial development is likely City of Saint Page 36 � ��-a �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economie, and Environmental Issues � l , � LJ , � , � � to be encouraged neaz the eastern terminus of the road, and is part of the land use plans for that azea. The effect of any changes in traffic volumes on retail trade levels will be estimated for construction and operatian. T'his is likely to be especiaily unpartant for Payne and Arcade during construction, due to the potential disruption of bridges in the construction zone, and for East Seventh during operation, since a completed Phalen Boulevard may be a competing traffic route. Effects of these traffic changes for each altemative will be estimated, based on the existing sales of each important retail sector as provided in census data, reliance on local neighborhood business as identified in the surveys and in standard market area analysis, and dependence on traffic-related business, as identified in standard market area analysis. The effects of the alternate industrial developments will be studied using an IMPLAN model which uses existing economic trends in the Phalen Corridor area to estimate the impact of the industrial development on such key economic indicators as local employment, retail trade changes, and demand for housing. Since the model can be run only at the level of the city of Saint Paul, not for the Phalen Corridor, outputs from the model will be scaled down based on appropriate ratios, such as the existing ratio of industrial employees to those who are also residents, and the ratio of local incomes to local retail sales. In addition, case studies of similar urban industrial redevelopments will be used to determine whether the outputs from the IMPLAN model are truly applicable to the setting of the Phalen Corridor. Areas for study will be chosen in the Twin Cities Metropolitan region, or similar regions if necessary. Hazazdous Material Contamin�tPd Pro rtie The potential to encounter soil contaminarion for various routing alternatives has been evaluated. Results of the evaluation are presented in a Technical Memorandum included as Appendix D. Sites which have the highest potential for soil contamination will be further evaluated during preparation of the EIS. City of Saint Paul Page 37 � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Sociai, Economic, and Environmental Issues , � � i � �J , � � � J � L� � � ��'� i� The evaluation process will involve additional reseazch and site reconnaissance once more specific road design information is developed. If the additional research and reconnaissance indicate that there is a high potential to encounter significant soil contamination during roadway construction, Phase II investigation will be conducted to further define soil remediation requirements. Phase II investigation activities may include one or more of the following: soil borings, soil gas surveys, surficial sampling, ground water sampling, geophysical surveying or analytical testing. A specific Phase II investigation plan wiil be designed based upon available information concerning the potential contamination site and the road design alternarive. Historical and Archaeolo�ical Resources During the Scoping Study, a preliminazy invesrigation was conducted to identify all areas exhibiting potential for archaeological sites and standing structures of potential historic significance within and adjacent to the proposed project. The study included documentary research, prepazation of a preliminary predictive model oufline for potential archaeological site locarions, and recommendations for further �ultural resources investigations. Research indicates that 13 structures in the project area are considered "Historic Preservation Commission (HPC)-eligible" or as being of "major significance." Four properties within one-quarter mile of the project area are known to be eligible National Register of Historic Places properties. In addition, there are 20 recorded sites which have potential value as archaeology sites. Also of potential interest are the historical aspects of the transportation corridors present in the study azea. The EIS will continue culturai resources investigarions to determine the possibie effect of the project on the area's cultural resources. The first step in the EIS will complete the Phase I cultural resources investigation and will inciude: • Preliminary determination of the "area of potential effect" (APE). • Literature search. City of Saint Paul Page 38 , � � � , , �J LI � � , � � �1 � i I_ . , � � � , �� -�, ��l Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues • Photographic record and preliminary assessment of buildings of potential historic significance. • Geomorphological investigation to determine the potential for deeply buried sites. The second step in the EIS will be a Phase II cultural resources investigation conducted for a refined area of potential effect and will include: • Evaluation of historic structures, corridors, and historic landscapes within the APE which have been determined in Phase I to have potential historic significance. Archaeological field investigation and evaluation of potential historic, Contact and Pze-Contact period sites. Documentation of this work will conform to the Secretary of the interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation Activities (Federal Register, September 29, 1993, Voi. 48, No. 90, Part IV, (48FR44716- 44740). The geomorphological report will comply with Iowa guidelines for geomorphological investigations. Lan�dlTg The project shxdy area encompasses various types of urbanized land uses including residential, commercial, and industrial development. The dominant land uses within the corridor are the active and abandoned rail lines and adjacent industrial facIliries such as 3M, Stroh Brewery, and various manufacturing and salvage operations. Portions of the study corridor are vacant or underutilized industrial properties. There are also some commercial and multi-family residential azeas in decline and in need of rehabilitation. As part of the alternatives screening analysis, a review was made of the small area plans and future land use goals for the affected districts throughout the corridor, as well as the specific objectives of the Phalen Conidor Initiarive. These plans recognize the need for redevelopment and renewal of various properties within the districts and support efforts such as the proposed project which seeks to improve the basic infrastructure of the community. The EIS will examine in greater detaIl the consistency and compatibility of the project alternatives with the future land use plans for all City of Saint Paul Page 39 ❑ ' L� , i , , � 'J Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document a �r� t � 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues affected properties. Potential land use changes that occur as a result of right-of-way acquisition, and changes in access and traffic volumes, will be identified in the EIS. The unpacts analyses will also include a review of related redevelopment plans and proposed environmental and natural resource reclamation projects that have been prepared by the local community groups, the Saint Paul Port Authority, and renewal efforts of the Phalen Corridor Initiative. The EIS will examine the impacts to land uses in the area resulting from right-of-way acquisition and changes in access to commercial and industrial sites within the project corridor. The EIS will aLso evaluate the potential indirect land use unpacts that may occur as a result of changes in traffic volumes and traffic patterns on local roadways following construction of the proposed boulevard. Induced or secondary land use impacts will be considered in terms of potential expansion of existing commercial and/or industrial operations, and other land use changes adjacent to the project study area. ��L.�,' J f �i �J , � C � � i Changes in existing noise levels within the project corridor for each of the alternatives will be evaluated in the EIS using the Federal Highway Administration (FF-IWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model. Changes in ambient noise levels are associated, in part, with increases and decreases in traffic volumes on area roadways. Noise sensitive areas (residences, schoois, parks, etc.) will be identified in the EIS and analyzed to determine the noise unpacts of the project alternatives. Based on input from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), selected areas throughout the conidor will be monitored to determine existing ambient noise leveLs. Future daytime and nighttime maximum noise levels will be calculated and compared with existing noise levels and federal and state noise standards. Mitigation measures tor traffic-related noise will be identified for all areas which exceed the federal or state noise standards. Areas that may be impacted during construction phases will also be identified and temporary noise mitigation measures evaluated. Parks and Recreational Area Impacts to public park and recreational property will be evaluated to ensure compliance with federal and state regulations which limit the conversion of these types of ' City of Saint Paul Page 40 � � � l� u , � , C� ' LJ IJ ' , � ' � , �� f Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmentai (ssues � City of Saint Paul properties to transportation use. Legislaflon commonly referred to as Section 4( fl and Section 6(� prohibits the use of such lands for roadway development unless there is no prudent and feasible alternative, and the project nuniuiizes harm to the resource. The Case/Duluth Recreation Area located within the eastern segment of the project comdor is the only public recreational land that is adjacent to the proposed altematives. Both Section 4(fl and Section 6(fl requirements apply to this property. There is no intent to compromise the Case/Duluth Recreation Area in any way; however, if it is determined during the EIS design phase that this property will be impacted by the proposed project, the required Section 4(� and 6(� evaluations wiII be prepared. The Section 4(� and 6(� requirements do not apply to the BN Regional Trail Corridor because it is designated as a transportation corridor in the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority. Ri$ht-of-Wav Acquisition and Relocation The EIS will include detailed analysis of right-of-way acquisition and relocation impacts to identify properties potentially affected by right-of-way acquisition. A property inventory will be conducted, and the availability of compazable housing and sites for business relocation will be determuled. The analysis will address the appropriate means of mitigating adverse impacts in accordance with state and federal reguirements governing right-of-way acquisition and relocation. Available relocation assistance programs will be identified. Results of the analysis will be summarized in the EIS. ial The EIS wiil examine the major social issues of "environmental juskce" and "neighborhood life." Environmental Justice. Executive Order No. 12895, February 11,1994, requires that projects funded with federal funds be examined for any negative effects the project development would have on poor and minority residents. The term "Environmental Justice" is commonly used to refer to this concern. While the Phalen Corridor Inifiafive is intended to assist both groups through better access to job training and new employment opportunities in their Page 4'I � L. � 1 i � , , � �_' � I' � i ' � � qL - a`l � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental issues neighborhoods, certain aspects of the alternative road alignments may pose problems for specific residents or businesses. This issue will require site-specific primary research. Wherever an altemative would significantly increase or decrease local traffic, or remove businesses or housing, the impacts will be examined using census data and specially designed surveys to determine if sensiHve groups (low- income, minorifies, elderly, or disabled persons) are being especially affected. Neighborhood Life. Analysis of neighborhood life with and without the project will require use of surveys done during the Scoping Phase of the project, evaluation of the effectiveness of local programs to improve neighborhood life, close review of the land use and economic analyses above, and use of case studies to verify likely outcomes. Aesthetic change analysis will depend largely on the project design discussions done as part of the roadway design element. A"neighborhood" is the area within which an individual feels at home, the place where people live trom whom an individual may expect and receive "neighborly" favors, such as borrowing of special equipment (e.g. saw horses) or watching the house while they are away, and/or an area where they feel some responsibility to help defend against real or imagined threat, possibly by joining an "neighborhood" block club. The EIS will evaluate the direct effects of the development of the road on neighborhood identity, neighborhood safety, community facilities (schools, parks, public service facilities), especially as they have been detined by residents in the corridor. Indirect economic effects on retail trade, employment, and housing price wiil also be analyzed for tHeir effect on neighborhood life. The efforts of neighborhood organizaflons, the City of Saint Paul, and non-profit groups to unprove locai housing conditions will be examined, to help set the baseline of the future without the project for such issues as neighborhood stability, increasing the presence of positive role models, and improving the visual quality of the housing in 1oca1 neighborhoods. Case studies of industrial redevelopment carried out in similar areas in the Twin Cities region and in of Saint Paul Page 42 � ' � L..J ' � ' ' � � � � � � LJ ' C� � �l��a' i� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economie, and Environmental issues � City of Saint Paul other metropolitan azeas will be examined to gauge whether desired indirect effects occurred along with industrial redevelopment. Theoretical literaiure discussing the downward and upward spirals of urban core areas will be consulted as well, and applied to condirions in the Phalen Comdox, and to conditions observed in the case studies. Other studies of successfiil programs to improve conditions of neighborhood life will be summazized, with special attention paid to those that are consistent with the road construction and the industrial redevelopment planned for the Phalen Corridor. Traffic As part of the scoping process, a preliminary traffic impact analysis was conducted to estimate the fuiure traffic volumes for the various project alternatives. A more detailed discussion of this analysis and methodology of the travel demand forecasting process is included in Appendix E. The average daily traffic (ADT) projections for Phalen Boulevard for the future year 2015 differ greatly throughout the western, central, and eastern segments of the project corridox. The highest traffic volumes projected for Phalen Boulevard occur in the western segment betcveen Interstate 35E and Edgerton Street. The ADTs for this portion of the proposed corridor range from 5,400 near Edgerton Street to 28,100 near the connecrion to I-35E. The ADT volumes for Phalen Boulevazd in the central segment between Burr Street and Arcade Street range from 3,800 in the vicinity of P,rcade Street to about 70,000 near Burr Street. The ADT volumes in the eastern segment between Arcade Street and Johnson Parkway are forecasted to range from 3,300 near Arcade to 11,700 at the Johnson Parkway terminus of the corridar. Appendix E includes graphics that indicate ADT volumes for the vaxious project alternatives. A preliminary analysis was perforxned to evaluate the potential redistribution in traffic volumes for the proposed Phalen Boulevard alternatives and nearby roadways. This analysis indicates that traffic would shift to Phalen Boulevard from other major roadways resulting in moderate reductions in traffic volumes on Maryland Avenue, the proposed East C&D Bypass, East 7th Street, and Minnehaha Avenue. The development of Phalen Boulevard will also result in shifts on Page 43 , -, �� , Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmentat Issues 1 I � t , ' � �� ' �� ' , � ' ' � , City of Saint Paul north-south streets within the study area. Table 3 in Appendix E summarizes the change in traffic volumes on north-south streets at their intersection with the proposed altematives for Phalen Boulevard. Traffic shitts on north- south streets aze fairly localized and typically do not extend more than a block or two beyond the proposed Phalen Boulevard. Reductions in traffic volumes are expected on Mississippi Street, Burr Street, Forest Street, Earl Street and Johnson Parkway. The EIS will examine in detaIl the traffic redistribution patterns for each alternative, and will specifically address changes expected in truck travel patterns. The EIS will include a more detailed analysis of changes in traffic distribution patterns and local access, and the impact of interchange design options on local street traffic volumes. The impact analyses will also evaluate the existing traffic capacity on area roadways and the future traffic demand. The traffic model wiIl be used to examine the effect of variations and combinations of roadway design and access options. The EIS will assess the level of service (LOS) for key intersections within the sfudy area. The L05 is a measure of the quality of traffic flow and is expressed by a letter grade of "A° through "F.° LOS "A" represenYS ideal, fre�flow conditions, while LOS "F" represents unacceptable over- capacity condirions. Visual ualitv A visual impact assessment will be compieted for the proposed alternatives as part of the EIS. This assessment is a six-step process which will: 1) identify affected visuaY resources, 2) identify the affected population, 3) define the existing visual quality, 4) analyze impacts to visuai quality, 5) summarize visual impacts by alternative, and 6) discuss mitigation of adverse impacts and possible enhancement techniques to the existing visual quality of the study corridor. An unportant component of the visual impact analysis is the urban design plan which will be implemented as part of the redevelopment of the project corridor. This analysis will also suggest design elemenes that could enhance the aestheric character of the proposed project and complement the existing natural and culhxral resources of the corridor. Amenities which occurred historically would also be considered such as the former Phalen Creek and wefland areas and the culiural and industrial heritage of the study Page 44 � gL F� ' Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental lssues ' ' [I ' �I � � � � LJ ' ' , t ' Issues Of Moderate Concern, wrridor. The EIS will include computer enhanced photo unagery of the various design concepts that will be proposed for the project corridor including possible landscape/streetscape and cultural/historical interpretive elements. Water Oualit� Impacts to surface waters and ground water are evaluated to ensure the protection of these resources from pollutants associated with the proposed project. The potential for post- construction point and nonpoint source water quality impacts on surface and ground water will be evaluated. Pollutant loading from roadway runoff and reduction by proposed mitigation measures will be assessed for the project area as part of the EIS analyses. The EIS will include an analysis of the effects of storm water runoff from the roadway and mitigation measures to be included in the project. Possible groundwater unpacts resulting from the disturbance of contaminated soils will be identified in the study of potentially contaminated sites. Air Oualitv Requiring Analysis An air qualiry impact analysis will be conducted for the EIS which will include a microscale analysis of carbon monoxide (CO) levels far the praposed altematives. This analysis will be conducted using Mobile 5a and CAL3QHC modeling programs to determine the CO levels for the existing conditions and for future No Build and Build scenarios using travel forecasts for the appropriate years. It is possible that an Indirect Source Permit will be required for the proposed project. The permit requirements, impact analysis, and inputs to modeling programs, including CO recepcor locations and background levels, will be coordinated with the MPCA. Construction Activities City of Saint Paul Dust and noise normal to road construction will occur as a result of this project. The EIS will address dust, odors, Page 45 � , 1 � � , � , , � , , I_I II ' Pha{en Boufevard Scoping Document �� -�� 4. Social, Economie, and Environmental Issues vibration and noise caused by construction of the project and uritigation measures to be employed during construction. Construction of the project may also cause temporary disruption to existing utilities and infrastructure in the project azea. T'he EIS will discuss construction impacts on utilities and infrastructure, and mitigation measures to be incorporated into ihe project. The EIS will generally describe the potential impacts of construction of each of the proposed altematives with regard to the following: • Erosion • Air quality and dust control • Noise and vibration • Water quality • Traffic congestion • Detours • Safety • Excess materials disposal • Utility disrupflon • Emergency vehicie access • Pedestrian(bicycle accommodarion during construction • Other issues pazticular to the alternative(s) selected Mitigation measures for each potential impact will also be idenrified and discussed in the EIS. Endangered and Threat ned �ecies The Minnesota Natural Heritage database of federal and state-listed endangered and threatened plant and animal species has been reviewed to deternune if any such species are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the project corridor. The review indicated that there are no known occurrences of rare species or significant natural features in the area. There are no endangered and threatened species known to inhabit khe project study area. The existing development and surrounding urban area has been in place for many yeazs, and it is unlikely that such a disturbed environment could support rare species. If the EIS analysis determines that a protected species is likely to be adversely affected by the proposed project, an assessment of the potential unpacts will be performed and mitigation measures of Saint Paui Page 46 � � LJ � � � � � � � � 1� � � � i � a�-a �y Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Enviranmental Issues coordinated with the Minnesota Depaztment of Natural Resources (DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . Energy Im�ac�.�t The EIS will estimate the energy consumption dif£erences for the various alternatives in terms of fuel usage. The analysis will use the standard methodology for calculating average fuel consumption rates for vehicles-mSles-of-travel, speed, and number of starts and stops associated with each altemative. This impact analysas will not consider indirect energy uses such as fuel needed to construct or maintain a roadway. E�osion Control and Excess Material This project will result in some potenrial for erosion since ground cover will be disiurbed. Erosion controi measures will be identified in the EIS which wil] incorporate local, state, and federal criteria. As part of the proposed project design phase, Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be incorporated as part of consfruction guidelines and specifications. The disposition of solid wastes generated by clearing the consiruction operarions is a common problem associated with road construction projects. The latest specifications from the Ciry of Saint Paul as well as other applicable local and state governmental agencies shall apply and be referenced in the EIS. Both an on-site and off-site disposal program wIll be formulated. Any applicable measures relating to the contaminated excess materials will further be reviewed and analyzed. Fish and Wildlife The project corridor is located within an industrialized area of the city of Saint Paul. Field invesrigations of the project azea indicate that there is minimal habitat that would support a large or diverse wildlife populaflon. The wildlife species that have been observed in or near the project corridor are those that have adapted to the urban nature of the study area such as songbirds and various mammals including squirrels, woodchucks, raccoons, deer, and rodents. The project corridor contains no water bodies or open streams that support fish or migratory bird habitat. The EIS will evaluate City of Saint Paul Page 47 � � Phalen Bou�evard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economic, and Environmental Issues � LJ � � �9 � � �� , � � � � `J � � � ^�� '��'a potential impacts to wffdlife that is present in the vegetated azeas within the project corridor and, if necessary, discuss mitigation measures to address adverse impacts. Flood�lains, The City of Saint Paul Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIIZM) Panel D(revised date August 3,1989) indicates the proposed Phalen Boulevazd Project area is identified as Zone X which is defined as: "Areas of 500-year flood; azeas of 100-year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 100-year flood." It should be noted that other areas similarly identified as within Zone X(such as Battle Creek, Frost Lake, and Phalen Lake) have floodplain damage potential. Hence, although the project area is not identified in the FIRM as within the mapped "100-yeaz floodplain; ' review of the area of interest indicates there may be floodplain concerns. Analysis in the EIS may be necessary to assess the floodplain damage potential associated with the proposed project. Handica�ed Accessabilitv Impacts to accessibility are evaluated to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The standard method for determination of the accessibility of a public transportation facility is to review the design features of a project in terms of its compliance with the ADA guidelines. The EIS will assess the urban design elements of the proposed project such as accessible routes from public transportation stops, public sidewallcs, pedestrian bridges, and recreational trails in an effort to provide equal access to the proposed facility by those who aze physically impaired. Transit The Phalen Boulevard area is currenfly served by six regular service Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO) bus routes. These are: � City of Saint Paul Page 48 q�-� E� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economie, and Environmentai Issues • # 9 East 7th Street • #10 East 7th Street/Arcade Street • #11 Maryland Avenue • #12 East 7th Street/Stillwater • #14 Payne Avenue • #15 East 7th Street/Arcade Street All routes are oriented towazd the Saint Paul central business district and serve a portion of the corridor. Construction of Phalen Boulevard may present opporhinities to reroute existing services or provide new services which could take advantage of a more direct east-west roadway. During the EIS analysis, these opportunities will be explored. The EIS will assess the effect of the project on existing transit services as well as the potential for enhanced services. The proposed project would be located on ar adjacent to a portion of the right-of-way purchased by the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) as a potential light raff transit route. The RCRRA is considering this plus one other possible aligimient for LRT in their Northeast Corridor. There is no schedule for selecting an alignment or constructing LRT. The City of Saint Paul will continue consultation with the RCRRA during the EIS to determine whether any fiirther decisions have been made. The Phalen Boulevard project will accommodate the future construction of LRT on Ramsey County right-of-way. The EIS will assess the potential unpact of the project on the plans for LRT developed by the RCRRA. Vegetation The project corridor is located within an industrialized area of the city and is mostly unvegetated. The few areas of remaining vegetation are primarily volunteer types of trees including box elder, cottonwood, elm, ash, and a few oaks. There are few shrubs and the ground layer is mosfly comprised of annual weeds and feral grasses. In urban azeas such as the project corridor, vegetation has been purposely planted for ornament, conirolling erosion, or it has volunteered in areas which are essentially abandoned. The EIS will examine changes to the existing vegetative landscape associated with development of each of the alternatives including the type, extent and quality of the impacted plant communities. The analysis will consider various design City of Saint Paul Page 49 � � � � �' � �i � ,� �� ; � �� -d �� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 4. Social, Economie, and Environmental Issues elements and modifications which could minimize adverse impacts to any high quality vegetative areas. Mitigation measures and opportunities for enhancement of vegetative resources will be discussed and coordinated with state and local agencies as appropriate. Wetlands Mapped wedands in the project vicinity were field verified by Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District as a part of their disfrict-wide wetland mapping program. No wetlands are within any corridor altemarives. Three small, reirulant wetlands are near the project. They are southeast of Phalen Lake near Johnson Parkway and Maryland Avenue. In addition, wetland characteristics may be associated with the drainage through Swede Hollow. All existing or potential wetlands will be identified in the EIS. Measures to avoid indirect impacts to these wetlands and view them as corridor amenities will be considered under construction impacts and landscape concepts. Federal and /or State-Designated Critical Areas Analysis Critical areas are those designated by Federal and/or State regulations as environmentally sensitive. The only designated critical area in Minnesota, the Mississippi River Coxxidor Critical Area, will not be affected by the pxoposed project. The proposed project is not located within or adjacent to a federal or state-designated critical area. Therefore, no impacts to critical areas are anticipated. Issues Not Requiring Detailed Farmlands There are no agricultural lands within or adjacent to the study corridor and therefore, no analysis will be conducted. City of Saint Paul Page 50 � � � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 5. Public and A enc Involvement a�-a � ly alterrtntives ...°. The Task Force received the following charges from the Ciry: The task force is advisory to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council. It is charged to assist in the identification of alternatives and issues to address in the EIS, to understand and communicate to its constituency the findings and recommendations of the EIS, and to help build community consensus regarding the outcome of the EIS process. (PED, City of Saint Paul, November 30, 1994.) Citizen Participation Program The Task Force met eleven times and participated in four tours of various parts of the study corridor between February 1995 and January 1996. A Public Information Meefing was held on October 25, 1995, prior to finalizing recommendations to be presented in the Scoping Document and Draft Scoping Decision Document. Task Force members serve as liaison between the Task Force and their constituent groups and were asked to report the results of Task Force meetings to their groups and bring the thoughts and reac6ons of their groups to the attention of the Task Force. Although the Task Force is an advisory group, their input is to be an important influence on the direction of that project. The conclusions of this Scoping Document reflect the consensus of the Task Force. The City has involved citizens in the Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study in three ways: 1. The�alen Bo �la��ard EI Task ForrP is a key mechanism for informing and involving the public. As described above, the Task Force has been continuously involved in the decision-maldng related to the Scoping Process. In addition, Task Force members have provided a two-way communication channel between the project and the constihxent groups they represent. As active members of the community, the Task Force members also serve as focal points for discussions regarding the project throughout their daily activities. City of Saint Paul Page 53 t � �� -a. , � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 5. Public and Aqency Involvement � �` � � �' � � � � � � � ;� � � �' 5. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT The City of Saint Paul is coulmitted to the involvement of the community at aIl Ievels in decision-making related to Phalen Boulevard. The City has and will continue to engage community organizations, area property owners and residents, and county, regiona] and state agencies in the development of the project. Phalen Boulevard By resolufion on November 18, 1994, the City of Saint Paul Plaiuting Commission convened the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Environmental Impact Statement Task Force. The Task Force comprises one representative from each of 15 groups. � City of Saint Paul 1. District 2 Community Council 2. Dayton's Bluff Center for Civic Life 3. Disfrict 5 Planning Council 4, District 6 Planning Council 5. Thomas-Dale District 7 Planning Council 6. East Side Area Business Association 7. Payne Arcade Area Business AssociaHon 8. East Seventh Business Community 9. Phalen Village Business Association 10. East Side Neighborhood Development Company 11. North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation 12. Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association 13. Saint Paul Parks Commission 14. Saint Paul Bicycle Advisory Board 15. Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority All groups except far the Thomas-Dale District 7 Plamiing Council appointed representatives to the Task Force; ten of the groups aLso appointed alternates. Gladys Morton of the Planning Commission was named the Chair to the Task Force. Task Force members and others who participated in Task Force Meetings are listed in Appendix C. In convening the Task Force, the P1amling Commission stated that "Participation in the EIS by representatives from those neighborhoods and interests that may be affected by decisions about Phalen Boulevard is crucial to a full public discussion of the road Page 52 qc� -a�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 5. Public and Agency Involvement 2. The City has commissioned Survevs of Affected Grou.�s withixl the Scoping Study context. The consultant team conducted surveys of four groups affected by the project. T'he four groups were: • Residents • Community Leaders • Industry Managers • Commercial Business Managers The survey subjects weie asked questions regazding their perceprion of the current condition of the study area and corridor, what they thought could and should be done to improve the corridor, and questions about the Phalen Corridor project. The survey results are considered statistically significant, which means that the sample was selected at random and was large enough to provide meaningful results. Surveys of population groups in the corridar was considered an impartant element of the Citizen Participation Program because the corridor contains people who historically have not participated significanfly in community activities. Random samples of these populations were surveyed to ensure that the opinions and attitudes of the entire community were represented in the study. The surveys are described in more detail in Appendix B. 3. The City operates an informal Outreach Pro�ram in which staff active in the project are available to meet with individuals and groups who want to discuss elements of the projects. In the first year of the project, City staff attended over 25 meetings for this purpose. Public Agency The project has maintained contact with a number of interested public agencies throughout the scoping process. Coordination Five public agencies identified liaison staff and have maintained regulaz contact with the pro}ect. These agencies are: • Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Division • Saint Paul Port Authority • . Ramsey County Public Works • Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority � City of Saint Paul Page 54 � � � � � � � ,� � � � � � � ,� ,� � ��-�� Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document 5. Public and Agency Involvement • Minnesota Deparhnent of Transportation Project staff have also established contact with other interested agencies during the scoping study to discuss specific project issues. These contacts have included: • Minnesota Po$ution Controt Agency • Minnesota Environmental Quality Board • State Historic Preservation Qffice • Metropolitan Council • Ramsey Washington Meiro Watershed District • Minnesota Department of Naturai Resources • Chicago Northwestern Railroad (CN4V)/Union Pacific ftailroad (IJP) As part of the review of the Draft Scoping Document, copies of this document wili be distributed to the agencies listed in the Scoping Document.Distribution List (Appendix F). � City of Saint Paul Page 55 Phalen Boulevard Scoping Document ��-a�`�y 6. Governmental Permits and Approvals 6. GOVERNMENTAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS The following is a list of federal, state and local permits, and approvals which may be required for the proposed project: Government Agency T�e of Ap�roval or Permit Federal: U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Federal Highway Administration Advisory Council on Historic PreservaHon State: Minnesota Department of Transportation • Section 404 Permit - Wetland Alteration • EIS Approval • Record of Decision • Location and Design Approvals • Section 4(� and 106 Reviews • Project Design Approval Minnesota Department • Protected W aters Permit of Natural Resources • Groundwater Appropriation Permit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office � City of Paul • 401 Water Quality Certification • NPDES Construction Permit • Indirect Source Permit (ISP) • Full compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act, the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act, the Minnesota Historic Sites Act, and the Minnesota Private Cemeteries Act. Page 56 , � � � Draft Scoping Decision Document 7. Draft Scaping Decision L' � , � u � � � , � � � � � � a��-a �� 7. DRAFT SCOPfNG DECISION Task Force Scoping The Scoping Document describes the process of generaring and screening alternatives and of considering what social, Recommendation economic and environmental issues will affect the course of the proposed project. The screening and scoping were done during an approximately one-year period with the guidance of a community-based Task Force of the Saint Paul Planning Comxnission. The decisions presented here reflect the consensus of the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force. This Draft Scoping Decision Document reports, in draft form, the results of the Scoping Study. Listed below are the alternatives recommended for analysis ln the EIS, and those considered and rejected. Also listed are the issues which will be analyzed in detail as the aiternatives are compared in the EIS. Alternatives To Be ' No-Build Alternative: Within the EIS, analysis of the no- build condition provides a measure of the effect of Studied in the EIS ailowing the current situation to continue. • Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative: The TSM alternarive includes relatively minor upgradings of the existing roadway system in order to determine whether the small-scale improvements are more cost-efficient than the complete project. Build Alternatives: The Build Alternatives are different ways of constructing the full-scale project, and are analyzed in comparison to one another, to the TSM alternative and to the No-Build alternative. In the three corridot segments, there are six alignment options. They are: - Western Segment (from I-35E to Burr Street) W-1: Pennsylvania Freeway Connection (Fig. 5) W-2: New Cayuga Freeway Connection (Fig. b) - Cenfral Segment (from Burr Sfreet to Eari Street) C-1: Union Pacific (old CNW) RouYe (Fig. � of Saint Paui Page 58 � q��d {� � Draft Scoping Decision Document 7. Draft Scoping Decision i � � � � � � � � � C-4: Upper Middle Route (Fig. 8) G5: North Bluff Route (Fig. 9) - Eastern Segment (from Earl Street to Johnson Parkway) E-1: Phalen Village Connection (Fig. 10) Alternatives p�'�S �e scoping process, many alternatives were considered and rejected. Listed below are ten other Considered and alignment options which received serious consideration at Rejected some point in the analysis. Issues To Be � Studied in the EIS � �� il � • Western Segment - New Pennsylvania Freeway Connection - Wesrininster - Whitall to the Payne Avenue - Westminster - Industrial Access Road • Central Segment - Bush Avenue - Lower Middle Route • Eastern Segment - Ames Avenue Connection - Maryland Avenue Connection - West Side Connection - Phalen Village - Earl/E. 7th at Ross - Phalen Village - Earl/E. 7th via Duluth/Ross These alignments are illustrated in the Appendix. Issues of Ma�r Concern • Bicycie and pedestrian movement • Economic • Hazardous materials, contaminated properties • Historical and archaeological resources • Land use • Noise • Pazks and recreational areas . • Right-of-way acquisition and relocation • Social � • Traffic • Visual quality • Water quality � City of Saint Paul Page 59 � '�� "a' i� � Draft Scoping Decision Document 7. Draft Scoping Decision � � � � � CJ � � � � 1 0 Issu�s Determined t� be Not Significant in this Project of Saint Paul Issues of Moderate Concern • Air quality • Construction activities • Endangered and threatened species • Energy impacts • Erosion control and excess material • Fish and wildlife • Floodplains � Handicapped accessibility • Transit • Vegetation • Wetlands • Federal andjor state-designated critical areas • Farmlands • Stream modification • WIld and scenic rivers Page 60 , ! � �i � � � � � � � � � � �� lJ Ap endix A �� a�� Resource Documents � � f � � L � � � � � � � LJ � �J � � � � qL��y Appendix A Resource Documents City of Saint Paul Parks F� Recreation Plan, Technical Paper 2, IZecreational Traiis in the St. Paul Park System, Saint Paul Planning Comnussion, Saint Paul Pazks & Recreation Commission, May 1493. Closing the Skills Gap: Implications for Development of a Skills-Based Jobs Preparation Program for Twin City Adults, TC Kise! March 1994. District S Plan East Consolidated Small Area Plan, An Amendment to the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, June 17,1993. Greater St. Paul Tomorrow, Striving for a Stronger Easf Metro Area, May 1993. Meeting Minutes, Work Force Development Task Force, Phalen Initiative, Saint Paul, MN, 1995 Payne - Arcade Commercial Area Marketing and Impolementation Strategy, Economic Reseazch Corporation. March 1990. Payne Arcade Development Plan, Task Force ReporE, October 4,1988. Phalen Boulevard Culturat Resources Investigation Scoping Document, The 106 Group, Ltd., Saint Paul, MN, November 1995. - Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Project Notebook, The City of Saint Paul and the SEH Consultant Team,1495. The Phalen Chain of Lakes Watershed Project, Phalen Watershed Project, Saint Paul, MN. Phalen Village Small Area Plan (Draft), An Amendment to the Land Use Chapter of the Comqrehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, October 23,1995. Plans for Streets and Highways, City of Saint Paul, 1979. Polenske, Karen R., "A Property Rights Perspective on Economic Development Strategies: Venturing Beyond Hirschman and Porter;' paper presented at the "Concepts in Regional DevelopmenY' session of the 4oth meeting of the North American Regional Science Association, Houston TX, November 11-14,1994. Railroad Island Small Area Plan (Draft), An Amendment to the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Saint Paul, July 8,1994. Ramsey County Northeast Corridor LRT Alignment Study, Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority, August 1991. Saint Paul Parks F� Recreation Plan, Draff for Community Review, Saint Paul Parks & Recreation Commission, Apri112,1995. A-1 f � Appendix B � Summarv of Social/Economic Surve s � 1 i 1 C !� � 1 � � u 1 [� � � 1 i 1 � LJ � �� L �� , � , � LJ 1 � � � r-, � � LJ � � � G� -�. z �-( Appendix B: Surveys conducted during Scoping �enereux Research conducted surveys among four groups in the East Side of the City of St. Paul. The surveys were designed to: • Gather data useful to help determine research requirements for the soc+ai and economic Scoping Document a�d data for the Environmental Impact Statement; • Assist other EIS researchers with data on aesthetic and design preferences, and on traffic patterns of local residents; • Provide other Phalen Corridor Task Forces with data useful for their efforts; and • Provide an efficient and meaningful public participation by key interest groups. The Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force, City of St. Paul staff, and staff from the consultant team assisted in the design of the questionnaires. Each groups was asked to review and suggest topics for inciusion in the research, and each reviewed the draft questionnaires before they were administered. Random samples were drawn for the commercial and resident surveys. An attempt was made to ir.clude all the industrial operations in and near the construction zone of the project. A reference sample procedure was used for the local leader survey, since researchers wanted to reach both formally elected and informaily influentiai persons. In a reference sample, an initial group of. respondents is asked to name other leaders, and they in turn name stitl other feaders. EIS Task Force members were asked to start the process, by naming initial respondents Surveys were completed in early summer of 1995 with four groups: Interview Grouo A. Commercial owners B. Industrial managers C. Local leaders Number of Respondents 123 20 130 D. Residents Within 0,15 miles (800 feet) of Corridor Between 0.15 and 0.3 miles of Corridor Between 0.3 miles and 1 mile of Corridor 254 88 57 109 Initiai results, with special focus on transporation and design issues, were presented to the EI5 Task Force in June, 1995. I� � � PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS � � � CJ ' � , � , LJ ' , � � , � ��-a �� FILLED-IN RESIDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE 10TE: The regular text �+�as spoken b}• the interviewer. The text in italics represents answers given b� the respondents. As the reader �i311 note, there were many open-ended questions in this intervie�n�. Except where noted, the number of respondents was at least 230. Total respondents were 254. The sample was weighted to include as many residents as possible living within 0.1 mile of the redevelopment area. Where there are signi�cant differences between overall responses and responses from tHose living closest to the active industrial redevelopment area, these are noted. Otherw�se, responses were similar for all respondents, no matter ��here they lived within the Phalen Corridor. i. Distance home is from edge of industria] redevelopment azea: Mean =.332 miles; range = 0-1.3. 2890 of sample is less than 0.1 miles. A. TO BEGIN, I'd like to ask you a few questions ahout the area that you live in: 1. When did you move to your present address? Mean =18.3 years; median =14 years. The range is I- 76 years. The 25% who have lived there the shortest time have been there four years or less; the 25% who have been there the longest have lived there 32 years or more. 2. How long have you lived on the East Side: Mean = 28 years; median = 25 years. 7he range is 1- 84 years. 3he 25% who have fived there the shortest time have been there seven years or less; the 25% who have been there the longest hm�e lived there 45 years or more. 3. Do you live in: a. 10 9'o An apartment. c. 72% A single family home. 4. Do you own or rent your home ? a. 759 Own. b. 279 Rent b. 14 % A Duplex ortriplex. d. 2� Town house or condo. c. 4% Rent with option 5. Would you describe the area you lived in when you were 16 yeazs old as: a. 68% Urban. b. 139 Suburban c. 167 Rural d. 2� "Rurban" 6. If a friend in the Twin Cities introduced you to someone who asked where you lived, what would you say? a. 7590 F.ast Side n. � e. 69 St. Paul 8% Specifie area (Lower Easr Side, Lake Phalen, Railroad Island, Dayton's Blu, f�jj 2% Specific street (Wells, Payne) 8% Other (Lower pog Patch, Historical area, Inner ciry, Crime-rulden East Side, great place, the "hood ") � B-3 , � i � � , � ' [� � ' , !I u � I� J ' � � Filled-in Residents Questionrsaire� I �� 10. I'd like you to think alwut improvements that couid make your neighborhood better. I'm going to read a list of organizarions. Teil me who you think you could REI.Y ON THE MOST u� aetua]ly make these impmvements: Fust choice Second choice (n=51) a Your neighbois 339� 119� Note.• Respondents living closest to the industrial redevelopmera area are more likely to name this group as a first choice (459 v 28 9). b. Local District Councils 2390 39� c. East Side Businesses 789 3% Note: Respondenls living closest to the industrial redevelopment area are less likely to name this group as a fzrst choice (]I 9 v 2I �). d. Ciry govemment 11 %a ] �a Note: Respondents living closest to the industrial redevelopment area are less likely to name this group as a first choice (89 v 129�). , e. Other 5% D f. Don't know 10% 11. If you could live anywhere in the Twin Cities Region, including the Fast Side, where would you be living? a. 279� b. 19% c. 14% d. 10% e. 7� f. 49� g. I � h. 12% i. 6% Where I am today. Eastsuburbs Somewhere else on the East Side North suburbs Somewhere else in Sz Paul. South suburbs MinneupoJis, or wesr suburbs Olher Don't know 12. Where do you think you will be living five years from now, or in the year 2000? a. 559� b. 14% c. 790 d. 790 e. 2% f. 79 g. I4% Where I am today. SuBurbs Somewhere else in St. Paul. Out-of-state In rhe country, or �sconsia Other Don't know � B-5 � Filled-in Residents Questionnaire , ��^ - a i'� 16. Which m�ro-azea higfiways or freeways do you travel on most in an average month? , , , , (Respondenu named up to 3 roadways. {n = 215 }) a. I-94 539� b. I-35E 549 c. Htivy 36 199 d. Hxry 61 239 e. I-694/494 f. Hwy 52 g. Other S% 28T 8% {I-35W, Hxry ]0, Hwy 32, Hwy 5) ' 17. I'd like you to think about East Side Sueets. If you could change something about the roads, the traffic, public transportation, access to freeways, the sidewalks, the curbs, pazking, street lights, traffic signals, bicycle lanes, turning lanes, landscaping on the berms, or any other � thing, what would you like to see changed? (Respondenu named up to 5 things. {n = 202) ) a. 22% Maintenance (e.g., cleaner streets, streer repair, potholes, sidew¢IIs) b. 74% Bener access (e.g., alley system, bridge on Edgenon, left turns on Maryland) ' c. Il % Lighting d. 990 Better aesthetics (e.g., Zandscaping, trees) , i I �� e. 97 Signage f. 6% Parks and trails g. 6% Reduce congestion h. 8l W'rderstreets i. 4 k Bener law enforcement on speeders j. 67 Other (e.g., Safety, all} k. 8% Don't know I 107 Nothing , ( For those who did this 1 or moTe rimes) 18. How many times in the past year did you: �0 0 Mean # Median # ' a. Ride on one of the regional bicycle trails. 48 79 2 b. Walk/hike on the regional trails. 45 30 3 1� � � ' Note: Responderas living closest to the indusrrial redevelopment area are more Zikely to have gone on a trail at least once (69% v 50%). c. Visit Phalen Pazk. 20 31 6 d. See W ildlife on a street or in a yazd on the East Side. 3 7 138 25 e. Visit an Fast Side playground, ball field or tennis court. 38 24 5 Note: Responderas living closest to the industrial redevelopmera area are more Zikely to have used rhese recreational faciliries at least once (729� v 58�). L:3'] r i � Filled-in Residents Questionnaire a� -a�y 25. L.et's assume the Phalen Project is built as planned. Which part of the plan interesu you the most? Fust Choice � (n = 210} a Wetlands, landscaping 239c b. New or rehabhed housing 299 � c. The road 24�C d. The bicycle path 7390 , e. New industriai sites 89'0 f. Space for light rail 49 Second {n = 157} 317 189� 129� 799 ]19 107 Third {n = 98} I790 29� l09 76% 16% 157 Composite Score* I48 I47 106 93 62 47 *Composite score calculated as (First Choice % x 3) +(Second % x 2) +(Third % x 1) Highest score is most desired. 26. Which part of the plan do you like the least: (n = 149} a. New industrial sites b. The road c. Space for light nil d. The bicycle path e. Wetiands,landscaping f. New or rehabbed housing g. Other 21� 1590 I59 1290 7% 7% 779 (Renral housing, Business dislocation, Home removad, Tra,�c, Railroad, Waste ofMoney, Everything.) h. None 6% 27. Who do you think would benefit the most if the Phalen Boulevazd Plan is built? (Respondents named up to 2) a Local residents 40% b. Businesses/restaurants 2040 c. Commuters 790 d. Everyone 6% e. Government 5% f. Young people 3�O g. Industry 390 h. Bicyclists 1 % i. No-One 3% j. DonY know 13% :• ' 1 � , u l� , , , , C J ' L ' � ' ' , Filled-in Residents Questionnaire �� -a�� D. Please think about the East Side neighborhood where you live. I am going to read a list of things and I'd like you to tell me if each thing is "GOOD" "FAIR" or "POOR" in your neighhorhood. The list is preriy long. 1 2 3 4 5 Good �%) 24 47 50 49 21 Fair �%) 47 27 31 38 42 Poor pontknow �%) �%) 29 0 24 2 I9 0 13 36 1 The agpeazance of houses and yazds. The availability of pazking on your strea. Lighting on your street. The condition of street paving. Safety in your neighborhood. 6. 5 36 51 8 Safety in other parts of the East Side. 7. 31 49 ZO l The way neighbois keep up their places. Note: Respondents living closesi to rhe industrial redevelopmenr area are less lihely to rate this item as good (21 % v 35 %a). 8. 64 25 6 5 The way neighbors treat you. Note: Responclents living closest to the industrial redevelopmera area are a bit less likely to rate this item as good (589 v 669b). 9. 29 33 26 12 The way that city codes are enforced. 10. 45 39 14 3 Variety of items and prices in local grocery stores. 11. 51 12. 22 13.� 23 14. 25 15. 17 16. 12 17. 6 18. 24 19. I1 20. 3I 21. 71 22. 11 23. 27 24 27 25. 26 26. 27 27. 24 28. 37 29. IS 30. 25 40 41 43 30 14 23 29 34 24 25 IS 34 38 38 32 36 44 36 40 35 8 30 25 30 I2 36 35 27 29 22 4 35 25 25 40 19 18 32 30 23 I The way merchants keep up their properties. 7 The appearance of apartment buildings. 9 The balance of racial and economic and age groups. I4 Recreational opportuniries for young children. 56 Day care options near home. 28 Recreational oppormnitiesforteens. 29 Job opportunities for teens. IS Recreational opportunities for adults. 36 Recreational opportunities for the elderly. 22 Affordable health care near home. 6 Public transportation. 20 Full-time employment opportunities for adults. 12 Respectfor work. 10 Respect for the duties of citizenship 1 Respect for pe�sonal property. 18 Respect for educatioa 14 Respect for diversity in lifestyles and opinions. I Respect for quiet and privacy. 15 Optimism about the furure. 17 Respect for history. ' B-11 [-J 1 i� � �' , ' , NOTE: ' , , , ' , ' � ' ,, � PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS A. Introduction FILLED-IN LEADERS QUESTIONNAIRE The follo�ing are the responses from 130 locai leaders. The reader should assume that the number of respondents is 125+ unless othenvise indieated. The sample of local leaders came from two sources: a�-a�� a. An initial group of respondents ("formal" leaders) was chosen, at random, from lists of inembers in l:notim organizations and political agencies on the East Side. EIS Task Force members were excluded. b. A"second tier" (of "informal leaders") ��ere referred bc people in group (a). The "formal" leaders were asked to name 3 people to be added to the sample to achieve a balance in insight and opinions. These three were interviewed and asked to do the same thing, and so on, until the circle of names closed on itself. All candidates were sent letters and the PED corridor drar��ngs before they were called. The regular text was spoken by the interviewer. The text in italics represents answers given by the respondents. As the reader will note, there were many open-ended questions in this interview. B-13 � 1 , �� , , Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire 3. Would you describe tHe area where you grew up as: 649 Urban 139 Suburban 789 Rurai 59 "Rurban" 4. How long have you lived in the Twin Cities region? Median = 35 years; 259 have lived here 22 years or fewer; 259 have lived here 48 years or more 5. Which azea, if any on the East Side would you say you aze the most familiaz with? Area I know best on the East Side a. Payne, Arcade, Phalen area. ' b. Lower Payne, Lower East Side, Railroad Island. c. Dayton's Bluff, Mounds Park , d. Southeast corner. e. Battte Creek f. Phalen Gake . � g. Hazel Park. h District 2 areas � i. All of it. j. Other � ' , ' ' , �l �J 3090 10 18 I 2 2 3 4 24 7 6. Whaz area on the East Side would you say is typical of the way you think about the Fast Side? (I2espondents named up to three.) a. Payne and Arcade. b. Phalen Inke . c. Lower East Side, Railroad Island. d. Hazel Park e. Dayton's BZuff. f. Lower Phalen area. g. Eastern Heighrs. h. Upper East Side. i. Other. j. All orno typical area. �:. Don't Know. 27% 22 9 9 8 5 3 3 12 12 7 � 6-15 � C�� ' LJ � il u �J I� 'J ' ' � ' L� u , ' ;� ' Filled-in Leaders Questionna re ��-�� 8. Now, imagine that I manage a pot of federat funds for neighhorhood projects. How would you describe the Fast Side to me: 89 Same way as in 3G. a. 429 Needs Renewal. b. 135'o Wonh helping or worrh saving. c. 2S'� Re-building housing. d. 8� Having housing probtems, such as absentee landlords, roo crowded aparnneras, renters, too much low-income housing, more low-income housing needed. e. 7k Needing Zight industry. f. 5% Anriquated housing. g. 47 Ptaceofopportuaity. h. 49� i. 3 % j. 3 % k 3 9 1. m. Crime, Need more police. Growing urban area. High unemployment. Deelining income. 2% Aging. 22�C Other (Need more culturally-specific opporturtuies, More green space, Need reduced-rent housing, Welfare-ridden, Businesses need help, Struggling, Instability, Too many bars, Progressive, Diversified, Home loans, Coltaboration between groups, Need federat aid for housing and streets. Lots of single parents, middle-working-class, Need things for kids to do, Need bener roads and shopping.) 9. The City has decided that it needs to take initiatives to improve the economy and neighbothood life on the East Side. In which one of the three following efforts do you think the City should put its energy and money: a.. 12 % Job training, or b.. 32% Housing and public works, or c. 49�0 Incentives to encourage indushy to bring jobs to the East Side, or d. 69 Other. 10. The Phalen Corridor Initiative is a development plan that cails for: A limited-access �ad; a bicycielwalking path; wefland restoration; clean tand fnr indushy sites; space for a light-rait Uain; and possibie housing and commercial developments. I'd Iike you to rank-0rder this list according to your preferences. " i" wouid be the most impor[ant. I`ll read the list again. (Note: The lower the score, the more im�ortant the feature) a. 1.8 Housing/business developments. b. 2.4 Industrial sites. c. 3.4 The road. d. 3.8 Bike/walking path. e. 41 Wetland restoration. f. 5.1 Light-rail. B-17 � 1 � � ' � � r � C� IJ � � u r � IJ I� Filled-in Leaders Questiorenaire q� -�� 15. Based on what you knoiv today about the Phalen Corridor Initiative, which groups or in rvid als or popularions do you think would be most likely to benefit from the iniriative (Note: List provided by responderns): � . c. d. e. f 8• h. i. 289 279 790 7% 6% 690 590 5% 99 Neighborhoods and residents. Business and Industry. Working class. Everyone. Low income, Ffmong. Youth. Homeowners. Other (construction conrractors, commuters, no one , city overall) Don't know. l6. To be hurt by the initiative: a. b. c. d. e. 8• h. i. 33 % 26% 690 8�0 57 2% 290 7% 12% No-one. Displaced residerus. I.ow rncome persons. Business owners. Resideras, neighborhoods. Absentee owners. Wells Street residents. Other. Don't Know. 17. L,et us imagine that the Phalen Initiative is put in place as planned. In yow opinion, would the finished �roiect have a direct. beneficial impact on the foilowing wish-list for the East Side: Don't Yes No Know �%) �%) �%) a. 55 18 b. 72 8 c. 33 28 d. 47 25 e. 63 22 f. 53 18 g. 65 IO h. 69 IS 9 8 I8 14 6 10 Mavbe (%) IS II 2l ]4 9 20 Fewer unempioyed living on the East Side. An active, diverse commercial sector. Less crime. Streets and parks that welwme pedestrians after dark. Better-looking homes with higher market values. Commerciai and recreation attractions thaz bring visitors from other parts of the region. Safer roadways and less tra�c congestion. An improvement in the attitude outside�s have about the East Side. Enhancement and use of natural resources. Enhancement and use of East Side landmazks. A revitalized industrial base in the East Side economy. 9 16 5 10 i. 54 15 73 18 j. 52 18 14 ]6 k. 76 7 4 13 � B-19 � � r � � � � � �l M �� r C�I � � Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire �c�.a I� 20. What is happening now that wwld work against the proposal? (Note: Summary of list provided by respondents} � z19 b. 149� c. 109� d. 99 e. 790 f. 59a g. 590 h. i. .1• 49 3% l4`� k. 16� Lack of money. Iack of information, misinformation. People speaking against it for privare reasons� ealousy. People who object to the plan or to moving housiag Housing rehabilitation, home ownership. Cynicism. Housing problems (Deterioration, Minorities, Multiple family housing, Overcrowding.) Fear of big governmera, bureaucratic problems. Srate of economy. Others (Bureaucracy, Low income inhabitants, Too many apartment buildings, Peopie living on the East Side who don't care about it, lack of infornaation, Crime.) Don't Know. I'd no�:- like to ask you a few questions about design. 21. What features or characteristics of the Fast Side would you like to see incorporated into a design of the Phalen Corridor and Phalen Boulevard. (Note: Summary of list provided by respondents) . c. d. r:� f• 8- h. 1. J• 35 � Good [andscaping, wirh trees, warer, and bike path. 209 Accent historic nature ofEast Side, railroad rheme. 24% Amactive lanterns or gas lights. 10% Well-lit. 7% Access to local businesses, good fiow benveen industrial, commercial, residenrial. 4 % Intimate neighborhood, feel. 4%a Wetlands, with Phalen Creek 4% Wide boulevard. 32% Others. (Ofj-street parAzng, Working-class practical, No low income housing, Maintenance free, Clean, Advertising.) 18% Don't know. � B-21 � �� J � � � � :� Filled-in Leaders Questionnaire �� -a�y Moving away from the hypotherical for a minute, where in the Metro region, and where in St. Paui, do you like to go: 25. For a day of shopping with no particulaz purchase in mind: METRO (N = 91) a. 22 � Maplewood Mall. b. 189 Rosedale. c. 169 Mall ofAmerica d. 99 Woodbury Village. e. 99� Downroti�n Minneapolis or Uptown Minneapolis. f. 79� Saltwater. g. 119 Other. h. 9%a Don't know, doesn't apply. ST. PAUL (N = 91) a 379 Grand Avenue. b. 24% Downtown St. Paul. c. 13% Payne and Arcade. d. 79 Sun Ray. e. S% Rosedale. f. 4�C Other. g. 9% Don't know, doesn't apply. 26. For groceries, drugs, things you buy on a regulaz basis: MEIRO a. 74� b. 14% d. 6% e. 67 f. S% h. 1690 [. 3l % ST. PAUL a. 44% b. 7� d. 390 M = g�) Maplewood Mall. Woodbury Village. Roseville. St. Paul locations. Oakdale. Orher (Cottage Grove, Stillwater, Galleria, Midway, Vcidnais Heights, West St Paul, Little Canada; Eagan, Mall ofAmerica.) Don't know, none, doesn't apply. (N = 92) Payne and Areade. Elsewhere on East Side. White Bear Avenue. e. 590 Sunray. g. 8% Suburban Avenue. h. 179� Other (Crocus Hill, Downtown, Roseville, Grand Avenue, Hillcrest, Midway, Woodbury, Highland.) i. 59 Don't know, doesn't apply. B-23 � � � � � � Fiiled-in Leaders Quesiionn¢ire d( -a�� 29. I am going to name some factors that might dictate where people shop or conduct personal business. Could you please Rank-Order them from 1-7, where 1 means most im�ortant. a. 3.3 b. 3.5 c. 3.5 d. 3.8 e. 3.8 f. 4.0 g. 5.8 30. Which of the factors we just spoke about are LACKING in East Side shopping or business areas: � (Percentresponding thatthefactoris missing) (N = 123) � � � � � � �� a. 47% b. 47% c. 459 d. 387 e. 179 f. 1290 g. 79� 31. About what per cent of your retail and commercial purchases are made at locations on the East Side: Mean = 45%, = 509� V ariay of businesses in one piace. Distance from home. Pazking. The look and feel of the area. Cost of goods and services. Security. Places stay open late. Securiry. Vatiety of businesses in one place. The look and feel of the azea. Parking. Places stay open late. Distance from home. Cost of goods and services. 32. If you could change 1 route between Fast Side ]ocations and any azea freeway or highway, which would it be: (N = 118) (List provided by respondenu.) a. b. c. d. e. f 161c 12% 12� 109 1290 36% Phalen Boulevard route or access. To I-94 from Lower East Side. Other. South and North along 35E. Don't know. None comes to mintl. � "Other' answers included: Route to White Bear and Highway 36; Connection to 6l at 94; Make a rule thcu there be no left turns on Maryland; New bus route from Mechanic Avenue ro Maplewood Mall; �den Maryland or Arcade, fix Edgerton Bridge, upgrade Mounds Boulevard roads. �� B-25 � 1 � � � � � Filled-in Leaders Q¢estionnaire ��-a� 36. It is a week-day a$erno6n. You are standing somewhere along a finished Phalen Boulevard. Whaz would you like to be looking at that would make you proud you were involved in its pl annina ? {I,ist provided by respondents.) a 649 � c. d. e. 8• h. i. 41'/a 329a 219 119 89 59 39� 115� Natural environmera: Trees, Landscaping, Lakes, Creek, Wetlands, Wildlife. Busy business, Traffic, New industry, People worLzng, Jobs for East Siders Recrearionai activiry: People using rhe bike rrail and bouZee¢rd Clean and neat, Benches, We11-kept yards. Housing improvements, Pleasara, Owner-occupied housing. Attractive parkway, Pedestrian friendly. Well-la Norhing-likes the way ir is reow. Other (Historic sites, Security, Parking, Small town feeling, Smoke free bui(dings, Done.) � 37. In your experience, is there: A housing program, a job-training pmgram, an economic development project, or an u�an industrial development that you think is worth repeating—in the literature or which you have seen somewhere? (Lists provided by respondents.) � �' � � � � � � � � Let's start with n housing program (N = 118) a. b. c. d. e. f 8� 20% 14% 13% 1090 5% S% 13% Low interest loans for house remodelling and rehabiditation. Easr Side NeEghborhood Devedopment Corporation. Habitat for Humanity. Houses to Homes, Urban homesteading. Dayton's Bluff. Home ownership. Other (Grand AvenuefSummit Hidl restoration, Selby-Dale, Pittsburg, Privaie reinvesmtent, Rerirees helping, Bradley Terrace, Neighborhood Housing Programs, SPEAC.) No answer. h. 33% !�o��, a job training program (n = ll2) a 4% b. 39 c. 89� d. 7�� e. 490 f. 705'a Pon Authority. Metro State. Miscellaneous school, non profit programs. Miscellaneous public programs. �scellaneous private progrmns. No answer, can't think of one. . � B-27 ��. � �' � � ��-a�� PHALEN CORRIDOR EIS FILLED-OUT COMMERCIAL QUESTIONNAIRE Introduction The follo�ving are the responses from 132 respondents. tiOTE: The regular text was spoken by the interviecver. The text in italics represents answers given by the respondents. As the reader x�ill note, fhere were many open-ended questiorzs in fhis ittterview. A. To begin, I'd like to ask you a few questions about your business location on the East Side: 1. In what year did your business open at your East Side location? Mean = 26 years ago: Median =18 years ago. Range =1-105 2590 have been there 7 years or less. 25% have been there 39 5 years or more. 2. Would you describe your business as a � 119 Partnership 35% Proprietorship � i� � � 52% Corporation 4% Franchise 3. Does youc business own the building where you re located or do you rent space there from a relative or someone else? 62% Owns building 4% Rents from relative 33% Rents from another. 4. How many people do you employ Full-time; Pazt-time, or Seasonally: a. Full-time Employees: Means = 5.8 The bottom 2590 have I or fewer. Median = 3 Range = 0-64 The top 25% have 6 or more. b. Part-time Empioyees: Mean = 2.8 The bonom 25% have none. c. Seasonal Bmployees: Mean = 0.4 Median =1 71ie top 25% have 3 or more. � 5. About how many squaze feet of space does your East Side husiness have—the total number would be sufficient. � �� Mean = 4933 ft' Median = 2550 ft' 25`Y have 1420 ft or less. R¢nge =1-32,000 25�7 have 5000 fr or more. � B-29 � Fi11ed-in Commercial Owners Questionnaire � a� �� 1 i. Is your East Side business located in a mail or complex; on a street comer; or in the middle of a block? � � � � � � � � � � � � � 79� In a mall or complex 55 q� On a corner 37�� In the middle of a bloc�. 12. In a typicai week, atwut how many delivery trucks bring goods to your store? Please don't count UPS or similar package services. Mean = 5.4 trucks per week Median = 2 trucks per week 13. How many of these aze regulaz 2-axle trucks, how many aze semi s? a. Regular trucks: Mean = 2.7 Median =1 Range = 0-70 b. Semi-rrailer trucks: Mean =1.8 semis Median = I Range = 0-30 14. Have you made any investments in your business in the last five years? 84% Yes 169 No What kind? I e�m No• % a. Remodeled or upgraded. 46 37 b. Ezpanded building. 24 20 c. New store, bought properry. 77 74 d. Did landscaping, exterior face-lift. 4 3 e. Added parking lot. 2 2 f. New equipment. 22 18 g, New product . 9 7 15. I'd like you to think about your East Side business location and to concentrate on the view from inside your building. Would you say that the view out ffie back, out the front, and to the sides of the building are amactive or unattractive. Let's start with the view out the back. Don't Know Attractive Unathactive 4% 42% 53� Outtheback. 7% 63% 30% Outthefinnt. 3% 61 % 3.59 Up the road to the left, from inside ttie building. 5% 6290 339� Up the road to the right, from inside the building. 16. Has the appearance of the uea where your business is located HURT your business; HELPED your business, or HAD NO EFFECT on your business? 89� Helped 32% Hurt 54� Had no effect S% Don't Know B-31 !'J � � � � � � � ,�� . � � � � � �' Pilled-in Commercia! Ok•Rers Questionnaire Q� - d�� 19. The City has decided that it needs to take initiatives to improve the economy and neighborhood alike in the East Side. Where do you think the City should put its efforts and money? Please pick one. 14� Job Training. 769 Effortts to improve the quality of housing and puhlic works. 4590 Incentives to eacourage industry to bring jobs to the East Side. 259� Otha 20. On what days and during what hours are yow open for husiness? a. Days open during the week: 36% 5 days; 349 6 days 26� 7 days . b. Hours: Median Opening: 8:Q?,� Median Closing: 6:Q�. 25 � npen by 7:45; 259 stay open unril 9: Q0 PM. B. I'd like to ask you a few questions now about your employees. 21. About what per cent of your employees travel to woiic by: 89� Car 4% Bus 0.2% Bike 6% Onfoot 22. Wr,at per cent of your employees would you describe as: 24% Unskilled 37% Technically uained 38% Professionally trained 23. How many openings would you have for employees in a normal year: Totals = 366 unskilled, 139technically skil[ed, and 47professionally trained. Mean = 2.7 unskilled, l.l technically skilled, and 0.4 professionally skilled per business. Per cent businesses with no openings: 47� 24. What per c;ent af your employees live on the East Side? Total for the enrire group: 42� C. Now I'd like to ask you a few qaestions about your customers. 25. About what per cent of your customers do business with you: 689 in your store or office 2690 ovet the telephone 29 through the mail. 26. Are there any seasonal differences in the amount of business you do with customers? 28% No 3� Don't Know 6990 Yes 27. About what per cent of your customeFS are regular or repeat customers: Mean = �4� Median = 809 Range = I-100 The bottom 25% say 70� oftheir customers are repeat customers; the top 25`Y say 5b9 or more are repeat customers_ B-33 � t � � � � � � Filled-in Commercial Ox•ners Questionnaire �� d �`� 32_ Based on your experiences at your Fast Side location, is your business very concemed (VC), concemed (C), or not concerned (NC) about the safety of your employees or custome�: VC a. 36 b. 46 c. 35 d. 20 C 35 36 41 32 NC 29 19 24 48 When they are inside your business o�ce or store. When they are walking between your site and a car or bus. When they are driving thmugh East Side neighhorhoods nearhy. When they aze traveling from your site to a freeway entrance. 33. I'm going to list some factors that might dictate where people choose to shop or conduct their business. Could you sank-order them in order of most to least important. (N07'E: Lowest number = most important} a. 3.1 Pe�onal relation with the owner/clerk. b. 3,1 Cost of the product. c. 3.6 Parking. d. 3.6 Security. e. 3.7 Distance from home. £ 3.9 Atmosphere, feeling of shopping area. � 34. Are any of these elements lacking in East Side business areas? (Itespondents could name up to three.) 49 No 2290 Don't Irnow, no answer 747� Yes � Item Missina � a. Parking b. Security c. Personal relations with cierk or owner � � � � �� d. Distance frum homes e. Cost competitiveness £ Atmosphere g. Other No. % 55 42 60 49 5 4 6 5 23 S 4 l9 S 35. In the letter we sent to you, we described some features of the planned Phalen Boulevazd proposal. I'd like to ask you to rank-order some of these features from the most to the least important. (NOTE: Lowest number = most important.) a. 2.5 b. 2.5 c. 2.9 d. 4.7 e. 4.4 f. 4.9 The new road between Johnson Parkway and 135E at Pennsylvania Avenue. Land cleaned up for industrial development. Iand used for new housing developments. A bicycle path to downtown and to other bike trails in the metro azea. A wetland where the Phalen Shopping Center is now. Space set aside for a light-rail train. B-35 Filled-ia Commercial Owaers Questionnaire qc� � � �y 38. I'd like you to imagine that you aze standing somewhere along a finished Phalen Boulevard on a week-day aftemoon. What would you like to see that would make your feel sarisfied that the project was well done and make you proud to have been involved in the planning? Item ¢ Cleaned-upplace b. Irulustrial activity, prosperous businesses c. Natural environment d. Safe, parrolled e. Recreotional activity f. Traffic, parking, access g. Well-lit h. Amactive parkway i. Finished [n time, on budget j. Businesses and homeowners worldng together k Housing improvements l. No answer 39. For statistical purposes only, please tell me 1 0 . 9c 38 31 35 27 33 25 21 16 21 IS 17 13 I6 I4 14 10 6 4 4 33 5 3 3 26 a. Your age: Median = 46 years Mean = 46 years Range = 21-79 b. Your gender: 767 Men; 24% Women c. The last year of school you attended: Mean =14; range =10-20 years, 29� college graduates. d. How long have you been at your present job: Mean =14 years; Median =10 years, Range = I- 49. Bottom 25% have been there 4 years or fewer, top 25 % have been there 20 years or more. B-37 � � � � � ,� � � � � � � � � � � qt�-a`�`� Phalen Corridor EIS Industrial Survev August, 1995 INTRODliCTION These responses are From 20 industrial managers. These managers were interviewed hy� phone after receiving letters telling them about the survey. The number of respondents for each questioa in this material should be presumed bc to be at least 17 unless otherwise stated. The sample for this survey was taken from lists provided by the East Side Neighborhood Development Corporation, foltowed by a windshield survey to con�rm its completeness. "Industrial" for purposes of this research is defined as a business which does not market services or products in the local retail market. In addition, a few waste firms, because of their truck traffic, were also included. Few demographic data were sought in interviews because many of these managers had been interviewed about their operations for a separate study conducted by Metro State University for the Employment Task Force at about the same time. 3. 'I`he PhaSen Boulevard and proposed industrial sites are intended to provide economic benefit to the Fast Side of St Paul by offering industrial firms b�ter mutes for suppliers and employees and about 125 aeres of clean land for industrial development. I'd like to begin by asking you some questions about uuck traffic to and from your Fast Side Plant. a. What per cent of the deliveries made to your yard arrive by 2-axle truek, semi-traiSer truck, or train? Please ignore UPS or similaz package services. Total for group = 39 % by 2-axle truck SS % by semi-uailer 3% by train. b. On a ty�ical weekdaX, how many 2-axle uucks and semi`s deliver oods t�our plant? Total for groug =192 2-axle tnscks anci 292 semi-mailers. c. On a typical weekday, how many 2-asle trucks and sem� s shi� goods fmm your plant? Totat for group = 245 2-a.zte truckr and 247 semi-traiters d. What aze the peak truck shipping and receiving hours at your plant? 8 am - 3:30 pm e. About whaz per cent of your truck traffic occurs at that time? 93 % £ Afrer leaving your plant, about what per cent of your uuck traffic goes on each of the following highways? I-94 East 52 9 I-94 West 20% I-35 North 3% Hwy 36 East I 9 Hwy 36 West 1% Warner or Shepherd Road I% Hwy 52 (Lafayette} South 8% Does not go onto a highway 159� Don't Know � � � � ,� � Ci � � � � �' � �' �� q(� -d�►�f Fil[ed-in Industrial Managers' Questiannaire d. Could you please pmvide a count of employees who live in each of these zip codes: 135 55101 69 55102 30 55103 98 55104 78 55105 447 55106 44 55107 31 55108 248 55109 24�55110 66 55112 90 55113 10 55114 50 55115 49 55116 128 55117 64 55118 335 55119 196 55120-55124 371 55125 145 55126-27 286 55128 l69 55075-76 405 55401-40 Tota1 �mployment of Interview Group: 3790 Fifteen per cent of all empioyees live in the Phalen Corridor study area (Zip codes 55101 and _55106); ten per cent in the balance of St.Paul. 5. Le:'s talk about safety for a moment. Do you think your employees or visitors aze safe: Yes No Dont Know 79% 21 % 0 When they are walking between pazking lots and the plant. 63% 37% 0 When they are driving through Fast Side neighborhoods near the plant. 38% 33% 28% When they stop to visit another place on the East Side. 6. Some companies sponsor social and recreational events for employees outside the work place, such as sports teams, dances, picnics, and charity events. Does your firm sponsor events like these? 50% Yes 40% No 70% Don't Know (If Yes), what per cent of them take place at locations on the East Side? 17% 7. What would be some of the limitations to your fum expanding or continuing to do business on the East Side? � 25 % Can't think of any Limitltions: � Not enough space to expand Head of�'ice is in another ciry High taces or tno expensive '� Environmentneartlzeplanthasdeteriorated Regulations,zoning,inspecrions � N 6 2 Z 2 6 � 3090 IO% 10% 10� 30% � B-41 � � � � � � � � � � � � ��- Z� Pilled-in Industriat Managers' Questionnaire 12. The Ciry of St Paul has decided that it needs to take initiatives to improve the economy and neighbochood like in the Fast Side. Piease teli me which of the efforts I am going to list is the hest place for the city to put its efforts and money. Please choose 1: 7690 Job ccaining. 1690 Efforts to improve the quaiity of housing. 09 Impmvements to public works 589 Incentives to encoutage indusay to bring jobs to the Fast Side 10� Other I3. Speaking of job training, please tell me what recommendations would your fum wish to make to Iocal schools or government agencies or noa-profit agencies about trainmg people for jobs in a business like your own. a. Technical courses, such as elecrric trades, welders, science courses (7). b. Get kids to look at real life jobs, use more OJT (7). c. Challenge kids with learning rewards (2). d. Teach basic skzlls/ improve gruduare rcue (2). e. Teach job awnership/dependabiliry (2). f. Teach truck driving (2). 14. The Phalen Comdor Initiative includes provisions foc A limited access road; a bicycle path; space far light-rail; industdal iand; continued rail freight service; hoasing improvements; and wetland restoration at the northeastem end of the corridor. Please rank these pmposals in order of their unportance to your office. I'Tl tead the list again. (" 1" = Most imponant; ' 7" = Least important} LAnswers are re�rted as the mean scores for the group) a 7.7 The mad. b. 5.7 Bicycie path. c. 5.0 Space for light rail. d. 2.6 IndustriaI land e. 4.0 Continued rail freight f 3.0 Housing improvements g. 5.6 Wetland restoration. � 15. The Phalen Comdor Initiative will be going on for some time. Which is the Best way for your office to be kept informed atwui the pm�ect: !1 � � � � a. b. c. d. Best S 0 10 75 e. 0 f � g. 0 h. 0 3econd %a $ 10 20 10 l0 0 � Third � 5 0 0 5 Q IS 0 Internet Cat�le T'V channel. Newspaper articles. Newslette�s mailed to your office. A presentation to staff. A presemation to an organization your company beiongs to. A public meeting. A pubiished EIS on the pmject. � B-43 � � Appendix C � a� -Z�y Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants � � � � � � � ,� � � � � � � � � � � Appendix C Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Participants � � � � � � � � � � � �� hair Gladys Morton Paul Haugen R�r ntativ From Saint Paul Planning Commission East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) i�-�-�y Toni Kaspazek I?istrict 2 Community Council Donavan G�mmings Dayton's Bluff Center for Civic Life Greg Copeland District 5 Planning Council Martha McBride District 6 Planning Council Bemie Baumann East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) John Kempe Payne Arcade Area Business Association (PABA) Susan Omoto East Seventh Business Community Arnie Eliason Phalen Village Business Association (PVBA) Karen Swenson North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation (NENDC) Cliff Carey Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association (USHNA) JIlI Danner Saint Paul Parks Commission Jim Bartol Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) John Firley Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA) Gary Spray East Side Neighborhood Development Company (ESNDC) A1t�Tnat� A1 Oertwig District 5 Planning Council LaVonne Kirscher District 6 Planning CouncIl Bob Braatz Phalen Village Business Association (PVBA) Paul Gilliland North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation (NENDC) Angela DuPaul Upper Swede Hollow Neighborhood Association (USHNA) Richard Newmark Bicycle Advisory Board (BAB) Liaison Staff John Wirka Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Division David Stokes Saint Paul Port Authority Kathy DeSpiegelaere Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRIZA), Public Works Marc Goess Minnesota Department of Transportation Projg�t Team Nancy Frick Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED) Allen Lovejoy Saint Paul Plannin.g and Economic Development (PED) Michaei Klassen Saint Paul Public Works Garneth Peterson Saint Paul Public Works David Wamer Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Deborah Porter Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. John Genereux Generewc Research (Thomas Dale/District 7 Planning Council is named as an organization to participate in the task force; no representative has been submitted to date.) � � „ Appendix D � ��-a fy Summary of Phase I Environmentai Assessment � � � � � � lJ C � � � � � � � � � � N � 1 � � � � � � � � � � L J ' � �RAFT TECHIVICAL MEMORANDUM PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD EIS SCOPING STUDY SOIL CONDITIONS Il_��1i1'�Ca` • ••. Prepazed for: City of St. Paul Department of Planning and Economic Development 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Prepared by: Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. 7710 Computer Avenue, Suite 101 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 (612)831-3341 PEER File #5023 ��-a�1`� � 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS a�-a�� ' 1 .0 INTRODUCTTON ....................................................................................................................1 � 2.0 CONTAD'IINATION ISSUES ........................................................:........................................1 3.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANI' CONTAMINATION ISSLTES .......................................1 � 4.0 GEOT'ECHI�IICAL CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................6 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................7 ;� � � � l_ : � � � � � � � � � LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Potential Contamination Sites 2 Signincant Sites � � � �� ' �� Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. (PEER) was authorized by the City of St. Paui (City) to perform a Phase I Soils Assessment of the Phalen Comdor Redevelopment Study Area. PEER was also authorized to perform a Special Soils Study. PEER's scope of services was outlined in a conhact with the City executed on January 27, 1995. � Results of the Soils Study and Soiis Assessment aze presented in reports dated Mazch 17, 1995 and May 23, 1995, respectively. Since completion of the studies, the Phalen � Boulevard EIS Scoping Study has identified routing alternatives for the proposed Phalen Boulevazd. The studies previously completed by PEER have been evaluated to determine � potential soil contamination issues and geotechnical issues which may be encountered under various routing altematives. Results of the evaluation aze presented herein. � 2.0 CONTAD'IINATION.ISSUES � The approximate location and layout of Phalen Boulevazd Routing Altematives W-1, VJ- 2, C-1, C-4, GS and E-1 aze shown on Figure 1(specific aitematives aze not identified on � Figure 1). Sites in proximity to the proposed Phalen Boulevazd which were identified by the Soils Assessment as having some potential for soil contamination aze also shown on Figure i. The site identification numbers aze keyed to the table following Figure i. � � � � 3.0 Although there is some potential that soil contamination may be encountered at any of the sites identified on Figure 1, the potential to encounter significant soil contamination resulting in high remediation costs appeazs relatively low for the majority of the sites. Those sites where the potential for significant soil contamination appeazs highest aze discussed in the following section. � POTENTIALLY SIGNIF'ICANT CONTANIINATION ISSUES � The sites with the highest potential of having significant soil contamination are identified on Figure 2. The sites identified on Figure 2 were selected based upon their proxunity to � the proposed Phalen Boulevard routing altematives, information presented in the Phase I Soils Assessment, and PEER's judgment and experience with regard to evaluation of contaminated properties. The sites identified on Figure 2 aze discussed as follows: � Technical Memorandum Proposed Phalen Boulevard, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Condirions 1.0 INTRODUCTION � i � i Technical Memorandum Ptoposed Phalen Boulevud, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Conditions Poor Richard's, Inc. (Site 7) n � �.�� 3 t �'� " � Poor Richard's, Inc. has operated businesses south of Whitall aud east of Westrninster since the 1960's. The company obtained a pemtit to operate a solid waste transfer station � on 1/2 acre in 1974, and kas graduaily expanded to an operation encompassing approximately S7 acres. �Jaste materials are accepted from azea households and businesses, sorted and shipped to recycling facilities or waste disposal sites. The � company apparenfly accepts household hazardous waste, but is not pemutted to accept commercial hazardous waste. � � LJ I � � � � �� The Poor Richarc3s, Inc. facility shares the potential environmental concerns identified above for scrap yards. Inspections of this facility by state and counry environmental staff over the years have iden�ed spilled petroleum and cfiemicals, usage of oil and other automotive fluids on ground surfaces to control dust, improperly stored batteries, and alIegations of using foundry waste as fill. Aboveground and underground petroleum storage tanks aze present on the property. Based on review of reguIatory agency files, significant soil testing has not been conducted at the site. Twin City Auto and Military Parts - Scrap Yard (Site 9) A scrap yazd has been operated at this iocation on tiie west side of Edgerton Street since the 1970's. This site shazes the potential enviranmentai concems identified above for scrap yazds. Soil staicung was observed during the site reconnaissance conducted as part of the Phase I Soils Assessment. Twin City Auto and Military Parts is a licensed hazardous waste generator. However, no documented chemical or petroleum product releases were identif ed by review of regutatory agency records. Payne Avenue Cleaners (Site 11) A dry-cteaning shop was operated at 839 Payne Avenue in the mid-1930's. Dry-cleaning utilizes solvents such as stoddard solvent, trichloroethylene, and perchloroethylene. Because of the presence of chlorinaYed solvenYs, regulatory agencies typicalIy view releases at dry cleaning operations as high priorities for cleanup. No such releases have been documented at this site. However, operations at this faciIity ceased prior to the era when records of such releases were commonly kept. � � � Tec[mical Memorandum Proposed Phalen Boulevard, EIS Scoping Study, Soil Conditions ��- 5 � Environmental assessment activities were performed at the Whirlpool site in 1987. These activities inciuded soil borings, as well as testing associated with removal of under�ound , storage tanks. Based on the documentation contained in regutatory agency files reviewed, various regulated substances have been detected in soils at the site, although concentrations detected were relatively low. The testing activities focused on tfie portion , of the property which was developed as Seeger Sqvare. There is some potential that the portion of the Whirlpool site which has noi yet been developed may contain �mpacted i � � � � so�i. Former Whirlpool Building #17 (Site 26) A large structure associated with the former Wlurlpool plant still remains west of Arcade. This structure was Irnown as Whirlpool's "$uitding 27." The issues discussed above for ihe main portion of the Whirlpool plant also apply to Building 17. Based on review of regulatory agency files, little soii testing has occurred at the Building 17 site. Atlantic Street CommerciaUlndustrial Site (Site 34) A building and associated storage yazd located west of Atlantic Street between the CNW � Railroad line and the RCRRA right-of-way is currenfly occupied by a number of businesses including auto repair shops and a solid waste transport company. The site was � used as a solid waste transfer station during the 1980's. It was formerly occupied by industrial operations, including Havir Manufacriuing (a producer of steel pulleys) and , Mayflower Air Conditioning. The Adantic Street site has an underground fuel storage tank, and is listed as a spiil site by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. There is � some potential thai undocumented reteases have occurred at this site based on its history of manufacturing, auYo repair, and solid waste handling. � � � � Former Griffin YVheel Works, Former St. Paul Harvester YVorks (Site 35) Vacant land located west of Johnson Pazkway between the CNW Raikoad line and the RCRRA right-of-way was formerly occupied by various commercial and industriai facilities. From approximately 1900 to the 195Q's the site was occupied by the Griffin Wheel Works, a manufacturer of raiicaz wheels. During the latter part of the 19th Century it was occupied by the St. Paul Harvester Works, which manufactured agricultural implements. � � � Technical Memocaccdum Proposed Phalen Boulevazd, EIS Sco � S.0 Soil Conditions ��C -d: l � 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS � The identified routing alternatives for the proposed Phalen Boulevazd may encounter soil contaminated resu[ting from a number of sites. Based upon e�sting information, it does not appear that there aze any contamination issues which cannot be resolved or remedied � to acceptable regulatary standards. The routing aiternatives which appeaz to have the highest potential to encounter significant soil contamination aze identified as folIows: � � � � � � � � � � [_ J � Alternative W-2 • 7unk/Scrap Yar3s along Mississippi • Petroleum Release Sites • Poor Richards, Inc. filternatives C-4 and C-5 • Payne Avenue Cleaners • Former Dry-Cleaning and Dyeing Plant • Former Whirlpool Berilding #17 It is recommended that additional reseazch and site reconnaissance be performed for the above aiternatives during EIS preparation when more specific road design information is developed. If the additional research and reconnaissance indicates that there is a high potential to encounter significant soil contamination during roadway construction, site specific Phase II investigation shouid be condueted to define soii remediation requirements and costs. It is fiuther recommended that overall soil contamination issues along the entire Phalen Boulevazd route be investigated during the design phase of the project. Investigation of soiI contautination issues can be combined with tlte geotechnical investigation to reduce overali investigation costs. � � � � � 1 � L [� � � � LJ � , � � �� FIGURES �(�-� �`� , a �0 AVE AVE �� NVE r•cF � � � AVP YORR AV8 U� C ��- � � � � � z � � UUI�Ui�l��l� �J��\� � � � � = DOOa❑ 6� ��000 � �� aaa � ��0�000 a�� 0� E � AriAND ❑ ❑ ❑�❑� MARYGbD � ��❑ � L� � �� 9� �❑❑❑❑❑❑�L�.��❑�� A�E � _ � � ��0��0��0�� A�8 �� . I a��❑❑❑❑�� A � � � � � ❑ 61 � ❑ � A � Wheel Works �00��000 � � �❑�❑❑��j('�� A� FormerSt.Paul � l,�-1 L_! Harvester Works �� DG�O�� 3 � [�C� �� 35 � � � �--� � � � � a� Atlantic Street � � �� Former � CommerciaUIndustri � � A r 'r ' \"' � J ' , � 1 ' � , � , , , .� Service Stations 'rosperity Ave. ( � 1 \ �� / � ,� � ,.� ��! g� �� AVE 3 � • - . - „� � � � . � � � ' � 1 � � �� , , � _ � � � - ....eee.. ..� � – F��el � Street � � SCALE IN FEET � � Poor � d Y � � � J �� . �.� ,,._ I�� .��j �� • �� f� . . �' : - � ♦ ♦��1 �P ��♦ • / • � � � 1�� . ..... �� o. •o.00•. ..-�r r:�. o eoo�.o�--------- ' , —�_ . o... .. . ............... � � . ��■ r� ■ �►� �� .� ..............................: � � •�,�. �->�.��O.iln•. .•.•..,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,� .i iJ�P ��I � N . w�� i Ji:��i�i!�.:��ec��.� (�� ' _ � � t� A'i�• �� I��i�i� ��1�� /� �/ � i�� O•'•�i4�i�i�•! � �;��i I��!�' � � � = - �.t.� — �-.., � I � _ - _� . �' . � �'�� i��ir�� I''' � -, _' . ' I�� - '_�__--) �- � / � • • � � - � � � � . � � " I��_ �� .:� ' �., ��i��►_.`��II • � - ►� �� c�,� .,..:. . �� , ��"1_ �II � �, ;. , ,. � e.. �, � � �I i '� _ - �� O '�11 .,. � ,,. � ... �.•:•:. � _ I � i'•S'•'• � •• ' r�... Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Minneapolis, Minnesota I Significant Sites Ine. Proposed Phaten Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota Jan. 96 2 � � � , I , ! � �0 AVE AV$ �C � AVE '�� AVE Y� AVE G]20A C � �/ �1� a. �� Y � � uuuUUUU u�� Da'aa c 00❑0❑ 61 �0� a�� xawnrowue 0 � x,awnaat¢ � ❑ � ❑ � � � � w�g � E MAAYiAND �❑ ❑�❑❑ )fA0.YG}�D � ��❑�� i � C��D��DOC�0�0��00 A� � � �, �0��0�0 �� ' � � ' Z C t tl � � � �� P *$ 1 °� � G I � D � � � , , �, � �0��0�00�� D��C�u; � � E ��❑❑❑ ❑ � ��❑ �� a E ��❑�000�0��0 �� / , � E � ❑��0� 0 " ��0 �� / �±--� . I � � I . _ � � � � � � � � �2 ._.._ L�_J � �sL_J A� � $ ''�I �� x�� ) >< � ,.� AVE g � � _��-��_ 1�1� cj',cj � // �. '�_��_ �� ;� �� I , � � � ' : .� �. � _ � � ,` �1�� . 3 - � �.. = �; . 0�� "' ¢ : ��-�o '� . /.; � =�:�� ...= � �, �' _ . : .� � - � � � � � O � � 3 �a � SCALE IN FEET � o i000 �,� � n '� , _ -- -_--- - _ � 9 1 � � a � � �� &OSS A� 0 � AVE AVE 9„9, O AVE � � i� � Q B � ; , � � B � � � � �oU A � � rr. 0 � � � � � � �3 � , � � � "�! I�a0�0�00�0 "� � AVE �� ❑ � � aD� � � � x � � �� r� �oo� a �� n�� ;� � � a�� 00� �oo�i� , � §, o� � �� °�.�0�0 �� .Dao � �, � I�'� � � v �`' � � � � I • �� C LEGEND �� < � �� "' Proposed Roadway oO • At-Grade Intersecfion i �� D� � � � �� C � Interchange i A � ¢ ,�m` oy� O o� �� ro„a� � ,�� x��C O RC Right of Way � � � � � � � � �"ON `� �� ^� — — Existing Railroad i 6� J O O� „� � ^ O Potenhal Releaze Srte �� \� � � � �� `y, Verified Release Site Peer Environmental & Engineering Resources, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Potential Ccntamination Sites Proposed Phalen Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota Jan. 96 � 1 IS��7l_�L•�eliLi�l POTENTIAL CONTA1�fINATION SITES PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD Page 1 ��-�� , Sife SrtaDescnphqa Adilress #: ; ; € _ - 1 Mississippi Metals, Action Auto Parts, Advanced Recycling Mississippi Street � - Automobile scra vazds 2 Mississippi Street Site - UST Site Intersecrion of Mississippi Street and Ca a Avenue , 3 Former Service Station (1920's-1950's) 837 Mississi i Street 4 Junk Yazd (1926- resent) Mississi i Street 5 Johnson & Sons Fuel Yazd (1940's-1950's) 859 Mississi i Street � 6 Former Railroad Maintenance Facility South of Tesace Court - ASTs - Maintenance activities � - Machine Shop - Paint Shop - Oil House , Van Waters & Rogers Plant 845 Terrance Court - CERCLIS site - Multiple spills reported � - Significant hazardous waste - Many ASTs - Drum sto e � 7 Poor Richard's, Inc. South of Whitall Street between - Area includes former Britton Motor Service (1960's- Westminster and Burr Street 1980's), Coal & Oil Yazd (1930's-1940's), St. Paul Sheet � Asphalt (1960's), and Scrap Metal Yazd (1950's) - Refuse transfer station - ASTs and USTs ' - Oiling of ground suifaces - Drum leakage - Alle ed fillin with foun waste 8 Metzger Buiiding Materials 768 Bradley Street - Leakin UST 9 Twin Ciry Auto & Military Parts South�vest comer of Whitall and � - Automobile scrap yazd Edgerton Streets - AST 10 Former Railroad Roundhouse (1900's-19'70's) East of Edgerton Street - Oil room - Maintenance activities 11 Pa e Avenue Cleaners 1930's) 839 Payne Avenue 12 Johnson Fumiture Refinishin (1950's) 825 Pa e Avenue 13 Chica o& Northwestem - UST Listin Pa e Avenue & Bush 14 Payne Avenue Body Shop - HW REG Listing 860 Payne Avenue Auto Paintin Sho (1950's-196Q's) (same) 15 "Batterv Station" (1920's) 842 Pa e Avenue 16 Wadena Dum - RCDI Lisun Southeast of Pa e& Wadena 17 M.P. Mortenson & Sons Inc. 818 Payne Avenue Paint Store and Paint Contractor 818-820 Pavne Avenue �' � � i , , , � KEY TO FIGURE 1 POTENTIAL CONTAD'IINATION SITES PROPOSED PHALEN BOULEVARD /�� _� � f ' Page 3 `�� j 3ife Srte t7escnpfron #° ,:" ' 31 Globe Building Materials - Asphalt handling - Spill (#14937) - Hazardous waste generation Fomer St. Paul Plow Works {1880's) - Manufacturing activities - Paint house - Oil house - Paint shop - Machine shou 32 33 ' 34 - HW REG Formerrailroad roundhouse - Maintenance activities Adantic Street Commercial/Industrial Sites: Auto Repair and other businesses - Hazardous waste generation, HW REG Listings - Spill (#13429) - UST Former Havir Manufacturing (1960's-1970's) - Manufacturing activiries - Machine shop - Paint storage Former Mayflower Air Conditioning (1950's) - Presumed manufacturing activities -riuiuu auv 35 Former Griffin Wheel Works - Foundry - Oil house - Machine shop - Transformer house Former St. Paul Harvester Works - Foundry - Paint shop - M�rhinr chnn 36 Crane Manufacturin (1 37 Former Service Stations !J f � Address ;€^ ° East Seventh Street and Earl Street 880 Duluth Street South of Duluth Street West of Adantic Street West of Johnson Pazkway, between CNW Railroad Line and RCRRA Right- of-Way 1319 Jessanune Avenue Along Prosperity Avenue,between Magnolia and Maryland Avenues [� f Ap�endix E � ��-��y Travel Demand Forecasts 1 L� � 1 1 1 �_� 1 ' 0 ' 0 �� - �J I� C� � � , ' , , t� i , � u LJ ' ,' � � � � Q�-d�� Appendig E THE TRAVEL DEMEIND FORECASTING PROCE5S Overview 1�ave1 demand forecasting is a tool which is used by engineers, planners, and decision makers to evaluate the short and long range traffic impacts associated with, for example, the construction of new roadways, mal�ng improvements or access changes to existing roadways, alternative land-use plans, or specific development proposals. For this project, the travel demand forecasting process has been utilized in order to estimate future year 2015 tra�c volumes for each of the Phalen Boulevard alternatives which have been identified in the scoping process. The results of the traffic forecasts will be evaluated to determine the traffic implications of each alternative which will ultunately be one of the considerations in the decision-making process for the preferred alternative. 14�avei demand forecasting is a term used to describe a comprehensive process used to estimate future year vehicle traffic. The process consists of a series of distinct steps which are meant to "model" observed travel behavior. The process follows the traditional four-step transportation planning process including: (1)'htip Generation, (2)1�ip Distribution, (3) Mode Choice, and (4) Route Assignment. Each of these steps of the travel demand process is executed using computer programs. A brief description of each step follows: • Trip Generation estimates the number of trips generated within a given area (how much traffic). • TrFp Distribution estimates the origins and destinations of these trips (where the traffic is coming from and going to). • Mode Choice estimates the mode split for trips (how many people carpool, drive-alone, ride transit, drive a truck, etc.). • Route Assi nment assigns the traffic to the transportation system and determines the path taken to get from origin to destination (which roads will the traffic follow). 'I�vin Cities Reeionall�avel Demand Model The �vin Cities Regional �avel Demand Model, developed in 1990 by the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of 1Yansportation (Mn/DOT), provides the basis for the travel demand forecasting conducted for the Phalen Boulevard scoping study. The �vin Cities model consists of, on a regional basis, each of the four steps outlined above. The model represents the entire seven county metropolitan area transportation system. Inputs to the model which influence future year traf�ic forecasts include socio-economic data such as population, number of households, auto ownership, and employment levels. This information is stored in a data base of 1165 traflic analysis zones (TAZs) each of which represents a specific geographic area in the seven-county metropolitan area. The TAZs range in size from approximately 25 square miles in outlying rural areas to only 2 or 3 city blocks in the Minneapolis Central Business District. In generating future year traffic forecasts the model also takes into account the transportation infrastructure including such elements as accessibility to bus and the roadway system. One of the Metropolitan Council's responsibilities is to maintain the socio-economic data base and to forecast trends in socio- economic data using historical information supplemented by current land-use planning information developed in conjunction with locai communities. Mn/DOT's role is to be E-1 � � �� , ll ' , ' , I� ' ' ' ' ' I _J �I I! 'I� a�-��1� The product of the trip distribution step is a set of person-trip tables which estimate the number of person-trips &om each TAZ to all other TAZs for each trip pvrpose identified in the Trip Generation step. Mode Choice The mode choice step determines how people get from origin TAZ to destination TAZ. The mode choice model is capable of estimating the number of trips taken by various "modes", including drive-alone auto, carpool, and bus. Access to bus can be either by park-and-ride or walk-up. The first step in the mode choice model is the choice between auto and bus. Under the auto choice, the model estunates the number who drive-alone and the number who carpool from among the trips estimated to choose auto. Similarly, within the bus choice, the model estimates the number who walk to the bus, and the number who drive. Many cost factors are used to determine the which mode is chosen, including the price of gas, bus fares, parking fees, travel time spent in autos versus buses, and time spent waiting for the bus. In addition, different choice models exist depending on the number of autos owned, which is a major influence on the decision to ride the bus. The outputs from the mode choice model are daily trip tables, by auto or bus. From this, the total traffic demand is estimated. Route Assignment The finai step in the model is to determine the roadways traveled by traffic going from an origin TAZ to a destination TAZ. In the route assignment step, a procedure is used which determines the optimum travel route for each trip based upon travel times. 74�ave1 times are estimated using a mathematical model which relating traffic volume and vehicle delay. The procedure then adds the traffic demand from the Mode Choice step to the transportation network from origin TAZ to destination TAZ following this optimum travel route. The result of the route assignment step is the final traffic forecasts used in the Phalen Boulevard alternatives analysis. For more information regarding the travei demand forecasting process, including development of the Phalen subarea network and the implementation of the four-step modeling process, the reader is referred to the "Phalen Boulevard 5coping Study 1�ave1 Demand Foreeasting Technical Memorandum". E-3 El 1 i , , t i ' ' � � ' C � ' ' � , � � � Q s ; s .. „ w � m o � � e � � � " m W r � ` n p C `� cu a. �j G '"' v � � N ^� � ' cy, T � � p o � C � ` ti �= : s � �� b � y�` T� y � S � s V � � b W �� m a�. X [� C y� L X � O c� �s ��.�` a m w a ° � �'� 3 w a a .� G� „ U �+ m ° w s = '� �n � E W �- c_ o f� V 7 � a o.. w � �' m �J •-+� •y 3 �.�. `� S & o s � O M 3 °@ a � � s � �� `� W � ,/ 1�0 � T 'N d R� F � L 6� �y � W � > �!C O V W N ': °�� aW G ;>" W3 a� a � y A � � a w �d d o s c e�^ i . U a o a E.. kj '$ 't � N + � ,� o o F c. m CO\] 3 Q m a � �9' w � �, ��, � W .�, � . s � � � `� :� �,� ;� �s �� bx �} O b A y > � W L L` d N N lO d x �2 m% F� � N m� �a ",'w ",a W� 3a ¢� W � � s E-� �+ E ° ¢7 � o p ES w r �J U E as � 0 �w �m • 3 0 �. � � �' �, F ' `t t'id z � ` a�. m ." • i. a, � 7'n t' s N v.c � O c�bi ? c �' . �' � m GC e � � G G �i C Q N ~• r'l � �' r` � a W r• 'i+ W �'� a '� y � � Fr ti •• C C1 •-• � W � � W J £ u �C � R � � W U � ° C�L �� W 3 d + � �= E � 3 m U N on a� �� °�, cy � 3 � s y � O � � w ,> � m y�. ,y y > m O `V � � �a a m� w° y� ° . 3 5 W Ca � W � W Fq e,�- R ^ oa, g$ W SZ, C�] U o". o» � o V .- o" �s 3 � a o o w �� a Q 3 � w c " v w � r p � S W O m�� .m v m G w t= G� e �� ^ m� o � C Y �C m O I_ N �. � �G � .'�. �. W �. 'Y�� W � '�a w G Y�1 W L � � [� v a' m w � n z �, ' sR €� � w T �� . � £ s 'O t y T p W p, � � ttl '� � F v t � G � ':. •y!-` � �+ � `'� C ��i. N Ca N S. F'Yi � N m�� W a u' > R m p y � C C 'C � � .ia �L � S �r'� a W wU W 1L`o y. •--1 � a �q � a u F� d W EO� � Fa'F�� a�-a�� `� � L� , L� u t , ' �� ' C ' � L1 �J �J � �� o o � 0 �+ ° o o �'? °: "° u� ° o o �n m r "'., U � �n in o 0 0 + oo- c: o 0 3 oi o� m m o� �,j (�] � O O O O O N � � N O O CD d' � � N o0 OD � � 0 � o � m � � m � j ° o ° o � 0 + ° o o � .� � ° o o �n �w '" � `r o o ~ � � �n an o 0 ° > � cr" co � ,� m � ^o � � y � � r'I � G � � � 11� W N N p� d�' N O O �n d' ,'� d � � � � � � � � �✓ co �' m ci R� � O � � o o ° W o o N t � � � O O � � 4". U � c�0 C�D 0 ' � ' y N N oO o0 O O � E� � � °? m M M M Q N � ~ 00 O O O ' O W � O 0 1IJ � � �' •�-� N � O If� M .�,~.� � V p o � o 0 0 o � o ,� in o 0 0 N � �r rn w �, �, .�+ r� m M � � �+ � � � � y o Y � d d� y y w f � b y t � ��; ; ' y / � ' y / � y 0 ,� I+� 'N y M �� O VI � Vj v, yj yj ~ a� � W� �,C � a� al .a .� U� C/� m � m v, � � � �'� �" F+ W u] ,. � �° W P+ a+ ¢� ¢� W W y E-7 o� �� ! , , ' , � ' i� ' � ' � � ' ' ' � � � ,,,, ; ,-. , ; I L� ��- ; .� � i � ' C ! � _. v ! a� b � �'a s d � ( � I � � 1 r O z i � 3 � Q �t L1 lL � v 0 6 0 V �1 � L � � I � I d G � t N N > _ J � LiLfl �� iV � � � � L i �L � �� r WV� �S ��3 N 2 1 D �" q�-a� � � �, � � _ , =. � ; �� 3 I '' Z I � Ci S � L^ y i � �j � : nm�y osvyor y � o �� S O ✓ N � C £ W . �j �S2�p� � � �S o�op�aW " 00911 v Q ]$ apoo�d ' o ¢ _ � o v v o � � � o+ � ¢ � o T � m s 0 N 0 O W Cl � �S` 3VApd � � pp� OOES a uo��a6p3 7g ��n8 N �r 6 � �7$ 746i�n��d S 3 �a�s�iw�san �S �dd�ss�ss 3 S£-j �� E-9 � M W �� J S� r � c 00 � `9 > � � a > ro�� ID n ? N � N J 0 � ? m � C O Q U O W UJ S � L � 3 a > n a � > > I c m m i O I C Z L tn o .- t o 2 N H � U � 0 ¢ a o N 2 � Q W Z � w E U W (n � ' � `�' f� , N � y_- > � _ Z �i-- � ¢ L- �'V) - � a� i 6 �a, � w .atlso+ d I � U � + N i 3 I � � � d C a L � � � Q � T � t_ � 2 � 3 1 � � � � � I V I � � , - I ! ` T� v � I - > ¢ � �' a �LJ C _ � a Q ` � 6� a � � � � I � � � — Lr �—� G � � , I � � �� I r 4% 7 7 � � � I I � A \ �g �a � �o y a aS 1'°3 ��uo�ad 1$ �sa�o� ' I$ o�opuaW � M a 1c apo»y > ¢ v c � _ � O d v � � � � b o . Q ¢ � £ N 1 0 S 0 o d w c� r �S a�nc �oa�abp� � �' �+� a$ ]46 _,�a�sv�,��sa � c t / E-11 � �.�d�'� N�,o� r: ca t^, I v. - E � � 1 CL N G � � { � I 3 � � �n Oi � iG U� O .- Z ' (7 1 W �I N� �C 3 �. � ��! t C �' N�. �,O�I m f mi y �osuyo� � u > o u' u' 2 O v � 2 � Y � � � C C� £ W W iP \ \ y t. �y � L � N i N u > C � ssi — � QI m d w i U � N ! >3 T .� N N N 0 t* C � c > � � �" � i fn U w � a � 1 3 � � � a I _ � 0 a c I U f`� I w 7 p K I d O ' N Q I � Q . W Z � w £ U , W (A ' �� _� � � � ��-a,`�y � E-13 � � � , ' � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � � �\//' '��\ \) N Y Z �+ J Q �L/ __ � a I b �7, �� W o- � d, i U t N i 3 � > 0 � 3 i � v 4 y � Q q 2 0 � �� H O Q v D � H � ? v v -' > L ¢ a a'� D LL � i � 0 a £ L N > Q Lf� 0 N 0 N Y � � t 3 � LL p � � )g �a � . y � ,JO3 � �� (�-a�� N fC O C7 S N�h O � - E h � � N ¢mm �� in o � � D N O � .i t'i � W � (V J �9 � IX � V � � O M v� u� v� o � m E 2 �M� �os� � w � ��o�� p � � S S ✓ � G � M � C £ W W 7S dse..o� 1 'ag oaop�a� � v 1S aPoo� ¢ � 0 � � m o v v t 0, Q Q d f m S � 6 0 �-N w c> >- a� avROd t i � uo��sbp3 aS '�^E aS �Y6�.n.�� sviw�saM u: x F 0 1 ' , w � ¢) l ti E-15 �S S� � c Q,C C � N i � w a � N > 3 V y N UJ N e rn n C � - m o� v m CD U a � . s a .- ' .' e� � � a m J [ m m - tn o � r o G N un w 7 C a o N � �. S W i c W LLJ J � � � � � I 1 �� l 0 � � i 1 � 1 aC�'a�� E-17 � C� Screenline 3(East of Earl Street} a�-a-�y. � Screenline 3 shows no significant tra8'ic shifts with the exception of a reduction in ADT along parallei Maryland Avenue of 10 to 15 percent with the addition of Phalen Boulevard, � Interestingiy, East Seventh Street shows an increase in traffic on the order of 20 percent as a result of the eastern segment E-1 connection at Atlantic Street which provides a bypass of Johnson Parkway south of Prosperity Avenue. � Chanses in ADT volumes on North-South streets The addition of Phalen Boulevard will cause traf�ic shifts on north-south streets that cross � the project corridor as well. Upon review of the txaffic forecasts, ADT shifts on north-south streets are local in nature and typically do not extend much more than a block or two beyond the proposed Phalen Boulevard corridor. A summary of the change in ADT volumes on � north-south streets is contained in Table 3. As the Ta61e shows, the largest percentage reductions in ADT occur along Burr Street, Johnson Parkway, and Forest Street. ADT along Johnson Parkway is reduced as a direct result of the addition of Phalen Boulevard and the � Atlantic Street connection. This connection aliows traffic which had been traveling along East 7th. Street to Johnson Parkway to bypass via Atlantic Street. Not shown in the Table, ADT along Johnson Parkway north of the Phalen Boulevard connection is expected to � increase approximately 2500 vehicies per day as a result of Alternative E-1. The largest increase in ADT is forecast for Arcade Street as a result of the Phalen Boulevard connection. AI7T along Payne Avenue and Edgerton are forecast to either increase or decrease depending � on the alternative cambination. Alternative cambinations including Alternative C-1 result in the greatest ADT increases to Edgerton 5treet due to the proposed at-grade access. � � � � � � E-21 � 1 � � �' � � � �b-a��l Vehicte-Miles-ZY-aveled (VMT) and Vehicle-Hours-TYaveled (VHTI The VMT represents the total distance traveled by all vehicles throughout the project area. VHT represents the total in-veIiicle travei time on roadways within the project area. Both of these measures are significant in terms of evaluating the traffic impacts associated with the proposed alternatives for the following reasons: Both VMT and VHT can be directly related to travel costs or savings for motorists depending upon whether they increase or decrease respectiveiy. Reductions in VMT represent motorists savings in terms of less vehicle wear and less vehicle depreciation, less fuel consumption, and lower emissions. Reductions in VHT represent motorists savings in terms of less fuel consumption, lower emissions, and personal time savings. With this in mind, the VMT and VHT of each of the alternatives were compared with the � future year 201b No-Build condition (assuming no improvements are to be made beyond those currently programmed). The results of the comparisons are contained in Table 4. � � � � � � � � � � As Table 4 indicates, all of the proposed alternatives will have positive results in terms of reducing VMT and VHT. Of all the proposed alternatives, Alternative W-1 has the greatest impact on reducing VMT and VHT. Aiternative C-4 followed by C-5, has a greater impact on reducing VMT and VHT than does Alternative C-1. Based upon VMT/VHT analysis, therefore, the combinations of Alternatives W-1+C-4+E-1 has the greatest benefits fol2owed by Alternatives W-1+C-5+E-1, and Alternatives W-1+C-1+E-1, respectively. A more detailed analysis would be required to deterznine whether?.lternatives W-2+C-4+E-1 or W-2+C-5+E-1 is next in rank depending upon the magnitude of the benefits given to each of the measures identified eariier. The alternative combination W-2+C-1+E-1 has the least benefit in terms of reducing VMT and VHT. E-23 � � Appendix F � �� `� Scopinq Document Distribution � i i i 0 ! t � � � � � 1 � 1 � � � 1 � � , , � � � LJ [_.l � � � lJ �_� � t_i �l �a�� Appendix F Scoping Document Distribution List Federai: State: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation • Environmentat Quality Board • Council of Environmental Qua(ity Department of Public Service Departmeni of Agriculture • Department of Natural Resources Soil Conservation Service Pollution Control Agency Department of Commerce Department of Transportation Department of Defense Department of Health Army Corps of Engineers • DepaRment of Agricutture Department of Energy • Department of Public Safety Department of Heaith and Human Services Office of Waste Management • Department of Housing and Urban Board of Water and Soil Resources Devefopment • Minnesota Historical Society • Departmeni of interior • Legislaiive Reference Library Fish and Wildiife Service • Environmental Conservation Library Forest Service Nationai Park Service Department o1 Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration Federal Railroad Administration Coast Guard • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • Federai Aviation Administration • Federal Emergency Management Agency Federel Power Commission Locai: Regional: • Ramsey • Metropolitan Council • Dakota County Metropolitan Council Transit Operations • City of Sa+nt Paul Metropolitan Council Waste Services Mayor Metropolitan Airports Commission City Council Planning Commission Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force Department of Public Works Department of Planning and Economic Development Division of Parks and Recreation • Saint Paul Port Authority • Saint Paul Public Libraries � � � Appendix G qC�- ;7y Alternatives Selected for First Screening � — � i ! � � 1 1 1 � 1 1 � 1 1 1 � L� � � � � � I� i � �� J � �� Phalen Boulevard Scopin� Study Appendix G Alternatives Selected for First Screening �(�-a' 1� une 28,1995 :,•>,..0 , •:•:, ,- , , ., , , , :::. :: ..;,, . ,;,. , ., ii. •.i r . r i ,/. - ,. i r�;• . . /n' / , �: / i �. 3' �. � � i /i� / , // . / �. .. � i . i i i, - ,/ ' /•" - / ,i , i i• i i� / =, ,i � „�r„- , • i�i ' /.d// .i . _:G -. �n r�./ , .ii.� ; i , :%„✓'� .r�//;.. .,. -, - ��✓/1�? /%/.v"%��i �i�/yr' „�l , „ ,./ �-- ; �j� "''�� „ � � •, n� ,/.�� l� �/� . �%.� ///, ,.%,�, •,%'� , � �� ' y i�%//�i., z '. ^'% �,j f� �i � �� %� �i � Y /9� �'u%: ' i� �%�i�� %. �iTi„ ;� �. !4 i��f%i� �� r/' �y' , ih./ �..i , �:::a !, �'/ , .� j� •, . � , i . . � �: � �� s>' �.;,,, /� � � /.., y � // ��, y � � _ /��i ,� , , . . �'(�,�,i��r. • �� , , :ii�� , � i•, NJ �i /��'�.__ �ii!/i^a ., f _ %:�iai .!��,/ �/ . ,ss? � ��;,, �%ii'��/ i^'_6/,.i_�/ ��:.��/'✓9 „r'e%/�.i�i�„yi ;.,✓/, �ri�ii ,C�. . _ ,/ ,. . /� ,/ :i✓/i%/:•r'Oi;Y/. �� o %' /.� / /� „�n.•• i/.% i i rs„v:,s. 4. x Westem 1 New Interchange New interchange at I-35E requires analysis to deternune if opernflonal requirements canbe met. Westminstez Conneciion Use existing streets to provide access to future industrial sites; may be paired with one of the Line 1 Eazl Street Connection options. Westaiinster Connection Use a combination of existing and new streets to provide access to future industrial sites; may Line 2 be paired with one of the Eazl Street Connection options. Pennsylvania Ave. Connection to Pennsyivania Avenue interchange at I-35E; alignment would be coordinated Connection with East CBD Bypass. Central 1 L'ute 1 Closely pazallels UP (CN4V) Railroad alignment; long bridge spanning Stroh Brewery area, extending to Payne Avenue. Line 2 Closely parallels UP (CNVJ) Railroad alignment; moxe curvalineaz alignment allows shorter bridges in Stroh Brewery azea; at-grade on Bush Avenue for about tcvo blocks. Line 3 Avoids Stroh's Malting House; would require reconstruction of Stroh's grain storage facility and product storage facility. ;' 2 Line 4 Stays completely north of Stroh's faciliry; would affect Wells Avenue residents. Line 5 Avoids impact on Stroh's grain storage facility; may require reconstruction of produM stozage facility; would affect Whitall Street residents. , 3 Line 6 Similaz to Line 4; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. � Line 7 Similar to Line 5; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. Eastern 1 Maryland Ave. Connection Pazallel to LRT corridor; extended to Maryland Avenue; no connection to Johnson Pazkway. Phalen Village Connection Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Parkway. � Line 1 Ames Ave. Connection Connected to Johnson Paxkway at Ames Avenue. 2 Phalen Village Connection Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Parkway; based on alignment to Line 2 north of LRT corridor. 3 West Side Connection Located to north and west of LRT corridor; connects to Johnson Pazkway west of LRT corridor. ' Earl Street 1 Line 1 Direct connection to Eazl Street and E. 7th Street. Line 2 Direct connection to Eazl Street and E. 7th Street; uses local street tight-of-way and avoids impacts on existing commercial property. 2 Line 3 Direct connecfion to Earl Street only. i� � Appendix H � �C� a�y Memorandum: Screeninq of Alternatives - Round 1 ' � � � �' � � �LJ � � � � � I 1 I � 1 � � , � r � �' � � � � � � � � qi� -a�y Memorandum July 19,1995 to: from: re: Phalen Boulevazd Task Force David M. Wamer, PE Project Manager Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Deborah Porter Deputy Project Manager Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Screening of Aitematives — Round 1 One of the key elements of the scoping process is to identify a set of reasonable alternatives for detailed analysis in the environmental impact statement. The guidelines specify that the alternatives include three types of alternatives: • No-Build Altemative — The No-Build alternative is defined by the situation which would exist in the study azea in the forecast year if the proposed project were not built. Normal maintenance and upgrading is assumed to continue. This altemative provides the baseline against which the positive and negarive effects of the proposed project can be measured. • Transportation System Management (TSM) Altemarive — The TSM alternative generally represents an effort to utilize mostly existing resources to accomplish substanflally the same goals. Improvements to the existing transportation system could include key street system improvements, minor street widening, turning lanes at intersecrions, sig�al optimization, upgraded transit services, improved transit stops, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc. This alternarive is generally the "low cost, minimum impacY' attempt to meet project objectives. The purpose of including the TSM altemative in the EIS is to determine to what degree project objecfives can be accomplished by using the existing transportation system. Build Alternarive(s) -- The EIS will study one or more 'build" alternatives. The build altemative(s) represents the full-scale effort to meet project objecrives. A build alternative often inciudes one or more subaltematives which reflect different design options within the same overall design concept. While it is not required that more than one build altemarive be analyzed in the ELS, it is often necessary to carry out detailed comparisons to determine which build alternative is the best. The purpose of the scoping process is first to identify all potentially feasible alternatives, and then to narrow the list of alternatives to a manageable number of the appazently best altematives for detailed analysis in the EIS. T'he nazrowing of alternatives takes place in a screening process such as the Task Force is now undertaking. The July Phalen Boulevazd Task Force meeting will address the first of multiple screenings of the wide range of alternatives. The goai at the July meeting is two use two screening methods. H-1 � � � �I � � �_ ��. Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Consultant Team Conclusions Regarding Initial Screening of Wide Range of Alternatives July 19,1995 , The Phalen Boulevazd Task Force, along with Ciry staff and consultants, initially idenrified alternatives within each of three segments of the project study area. In most cases, an � altematives within one segment can be associated with one alternative from each of the other two segments to make up a compiete, corridor-length, alternative. T'he exceptions to this will be described below. � � The consultant team compazed the performance of each of the alternatives relative to the goaLs established by the Task Force over the first several months of the project. The goaLs were discussed at several meetings. Between meetings, Task Force members weie able to review and discuss the goaLs with the groups which they represented. The iniiial "Wide Itange of Alternatives" was also developed over a three month period with � input from Task Force members (and through them their groups), City staff and the consultant team. The alternatives are listed and briefly described in Table 1. � � The compazison of each of the altematives relative to the projecYs adopted goals is presented in Appendix A, which is attached to this report. The compazison is summarized in Table 2. The Task Force has four different types of recommenda6ons which can be made at this time. 1. Drop an altemative from further consideration � 2. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as a Build Alternarive 3. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as the TSM Alternative 4. Retain an altemative for furthez screening � � f .� � The consultant team has carefully reviewed the comparisons completed to date. Base on that review, the consultant team recommends that the Task Force consider the following actions at the July 26 meeting. Drop From Further Consideration Was�;�gment• We tm'n er n ction Ln 1— This alignment provides very poor access to the regional roadway system. Since it dces not serve corridor-length trips, it will not divert through truck trips from the existing street system. Its use of TNhitall Street will disrupt adversely effect residential development through right-of-way acquisition and environmental impacts. This alignment would be in conflict with local azea plans wMch call for continued residential land use along Whitall. ntral �ement: Line 1— This altemarive seems to address many of the project goals as well as � other Central Segment alternatives such as Lines 2, 3, 4 and 5. However, the long structure it includes between Edgerton and the Stroh's site would be much more expensive and difficult to � H-3 !.J � � � ' � � q�-a��f Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Alternative Screening — July 26, 1995 Meeting 1 treP : Lin 1-- Although this alternative does not satisfy all the project objectives, it dces make a direct connection between the Phalen Village azea and East 7th Street. This altemative aLso makes it slighfly more convenient to access to I-94 at TH 61 (via Eazl Street, 3rd Street). Construction of this altemative would improve accessibility to industrial sites at the east end of the Phalen Conidor. The TSM altemative could be one of the two elements described above, or it could be the two elements combined into one. Each element is somewhat successful in achieving project goaLs, although, even together, the major goal of corridor length access via a single facility is not met. Retain for Further Scrnening The consultant team suggests that all other altematives be retained for further analysis. The I Task Force will be considering sczeening of additional alternatives at the August meeting. In , the next screening cycle, the team expects to address the following questions: � , � � � 1. Can an interchange be constructed between I-94 and the Cayuga Bridge which provides access to the north and south on I-35E as well as access to both the east and west on I-94? The answer will help to screen the remainnlg altematives in the Westem Segment. 2. Are there any geometric restrictions in the azea betcveen Forest and Edgerton which suggest a preference of some Central Segment aitematives over others? Plan and profile studies will be prepared to assist in screenntg these alternatives. 3. Dces future LRT development impose any restricfions on Central Segment alignments? The RCRRA will be consulted on issues regazding future station locarion, station space � needs and concem regarding at-grade crossings of the LRT track. This will assist in distinguishing between Central Segment Lines 4, 5, 6 and 7, and between Eastern Segment Phalen Village Connection Lines 1 and 2. � I', ,� r � � 4. What Eastem Segment alternative provides the best traffic access to the comdor and to the Phalen Village area? Traffic forecasts will suggest which of the Eastern Segment alternatives best satisfies the goals of access to the corridor and diversion of tr,affic from Mazyland and from local streets. H-5 , _� � � � ' � � � � � � � � LJ � � �l � � ��-� I� Phalen Boulevazd Task Force Alternative Screening -- July 26,1995 Meeting 'y'"s�"Hi.^�h' � ' . . � �� w �y�i�✓;""'' ��"� i � � m ' _;� �� . .. u a./u �,<" -• rl /�� .,.... . : _ . . �' . ,i�.i-, z r fµ �r� - ,y� >' .. , , � ' ��' : % . . „� l,• �%^ u .��iY !��.�./3'F ,. ,._ ��n^�""� _, �. F.: �/,'� i�✓�, Eastern Maryland Ave. Pazallel to LRT corridor; er,tended to Maryland Avenue; no Connection connection to Johnson Pazkway. Phalen Village Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Connection Line 1 Pazkway. Ames Ave. Connected to Johnson Pazkway at Ames Avenue. Connection Phalen Village Connected to reconstructed Prosperity Avenue at Johnson Connection Line 2 Pazkway; based on alignment to north of LRT corridor. West Side Located to north and west of LRT corridor, connects to Johnson Connection Pazkway west of LRT corridor. Earl Line 1 Direct connection to Earl Street and E. 7th Street. Street Line 2 Direct connection to Earl Street and E. 7th Street; uses local street rightof-way and avoids impacts on existing commercial property. Line 3 Direct connection to Earl Street only. H-7 � �� .� � � 1 � 1 1 I 1 1 � 1 1 1 [ � 1 Appendix I a� -a�y Memorandum: Screeninq of Alternatives - Types of Aiternatives f ! , AppendixI Memorandum � , � August 15 to: Phalen Boulevazd Task Force from: David M. Warner, PE Pioject Managei Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. �-lt��-��-{ � re: Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Study Types of Alternatives � � � � tJ � � � � The discussion at the July 26 Task Force meeting indicated that additional information was probably needed in order to clarify the definition of and the need for a"no-build" alternative and a �ansportation system management (TSM) alternative in the EIS process. This memo also describes the "build" altemative. Build Alternative(s) The EIS will study one or more "build" alternarives. The build alternative(s) represents the full- scale effort to meet project objectives. A build alternative may include one or more subalternarives which reflect different design options within the same overall design concept. While it is not required that more than one build alternative be analyzed in the EIS, it is often necessary to carry out detaffed comparisons to determine which build altemative best sarisfies the goals of the project. No-Build Alternative The No-Build alternative answers the question: What would happen if the project is not built? It addresses the situation which would exist in the study area in the farecast year if no major improvements are made in the transportation system. Normal maintenance and upgrading is assumed to continue. The "no-build" alternative provides the baseline against which the positive and negative effects of the "bufld" altematives can be measured. Transportation System Management (TSM) Aiternative � In the TSM alternative it is assumed, as with the "no-build" alternative, that no major improvements are made to the area's transportation system. Improvements are made to the existing transportation system which improve capacity and safety. These improvements could ' include key street system upgrades, minor street widening, turning lanes at intersections, signal optimizarion, upgraded transit services, improved transit stops, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc The purpose of the TSM alternative is to allow comparison of the positive and negarive impacts of the � full-scale build altematives to the impacts of significant improvements to the existing transportation system. i � t ' �� a ��Appendix J ' — Memorandum: Screenin of Alternatives - Round 2 LJ r � � � � � � � �� r � � � � � � � memo J II � ' ��-a�� August 16,1995 to: Phalen Boulevard Task Force from: David M. Wamer, PE Project Nlanager Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Deborah Porter Deputy Project Manager Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. ' re: Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Screening of Altematives -- Round 2 � , , � � � � � � � � J � i 0 At the July Task Force Meeting, the staff identified four different recommendations which can be made during the scoping process. T'hese are: 1. Drop an altemative from further consideraHon 2. Retain an altemative for analysis in the EIS as a Build Alternative 3. Retain an altemarive for analysis in the EIS as the TSM Altemarive 4. Retain an alternative for further screening At that time, the ConsuItant team made a series of recommendation to the Task Force regarding the altematives under consideration. These aze summarized below. 1 Ii � � �) I' r� I I �) �� ' ��-�-�� Phalen Boulevard Task Force Altemative Screening -- August 23, 199� Meeting Consultant Recommendations Regarding Screening Round 2 Western Segment -- With the analysis of the potential for a new or upgraded interchange at I- 35E not yet completed, the Consultant team is not prepared to make a screening recommendation. The analysis which is under wa}' will determine whether a new interchange can be constructed which allows safe and efficient traffic flow for movements to and from the freeway and between I-35E and I-94. The goal is to provide all connections between I-35E and I- 94. This may be resolved by the time the August meeting is convened. Central Segment -- The alignment and cross-section analysis of Line 2 suggest that that alternative would be very disruprive of the residences along Bush Avenue as weil as of the operation of Stroh's Brewery. It is also cleaz that it provides little in the way of opportunities to access raIlroad corridor redevelopment sites. These findings lead us to a recommendation to drop Line 2 from fizrther consideration. T'he Consultant team suggests that four altematives be carried forward for consideration in the EIS: • Line 1: This alternative avoids dislocation of any of Stroh's operations and any other businesses or housing in the azea. I� • Line 3: The Stroh's elevators would be relocated on site to allow room for Phalen Boulevard to pass through their property. The warehouse building would also be replaced. • Line 4/6: This altemative would require acquisition of a number of properties on Wells and Wadena, but avoids impacts on the Stroh's operation. �� I� t_ �,� �! • Line 5/7: This altemative avoids impacts on the properties on Wells and Wadena, and would affect Stroh's warehouse facility. East Segment -- The only altematives which satisfy the basic objecrives of the project are the Phalen Village Connection altematives. The Consultant team recommends dropping other altematives. Transportafion System Management (TSM) Alternative -- The Consultant team, along with City staff, will develop a TSM alternative which focusses on upgrades to the existing street system. The improvements will be identified by examining the capacity deficiencies which appear in the forecast of Year 2015 traffic volumes on the "no-build" roadway system. The Westminster Line 2 Alternative and the Earl Street Line 1 Alternative may be reexamined as a part of the development of the TSM alternati��e. 1� �� 1 1 �� na e rn n� a n d u in November 15,1995 ' {o: Nancy Frick, Project Manager Phalen Boulevazd Scoping Study City of Saint Paul PED � City Hall tlnnex, llth Floor 25 West 4th Street ' eopiaa: ! fE: L. J ' i� ' ' Saint Paul, MN ��-��L-j fronr.... David M. Warner, PE Senior Pcofessional Engineer and Project Manager 3� Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paul, MN 55110 Phone: Fax: Additional Scoping of Location Alternatives FRCK1114.WPD 612/490-2166 800/325-ZO55 612/490-2150 Seven segment alternatives were presented at the Public Information Meeting held on October 25,1995, including two alternatives in the W est Segment, four alternatives in the Central Segment and one alternative in the East Segment. WYule all the segment alternatives appear at this time to be buildable, it is not necessary to continue analysis of all of them in the environmental impact statement if it is concluded that one or more of them is clearly inferior to other alternatives that will be analyzed in the EIS. At this time, it appears that Alternative G3, the Lower Middle Route in the Central Segment, is clearly inferior to other Central Segment alternatives. For that reason, the Consultant team suggests to the City and the Phalen Boulevard EIS Task Force that Alternative C-3 be elnninated from consideration in the EIS. The team's assessment that Alternative G3 is inferior to other alternatives is based on four observations: ' 1. Representatives of the Stroh Brewery have indicated that removal of their storage elevators, without replacement, would have a significant negative effect on their operations. ' ' ' I� 2. Construction of Alternative G3 would include reconstruction of the storage elevators used by the Stroh Brewery in their malting operation. T'he reconstruction would be very costly and would also be very disruptive of a key element of the brewery operation. Construction of Alternatives C-1, G4 and G5 is likely be accomplished without affecting the brewery's storage elevators. 3. Many comments received from Task Force members and from people attending the K-1 Il , ' , � ' � , � , ' 1 ' � ' ' � � ' t � � � �� ct- "� �` � � \ 't{ —� � � � � � �� Tablo: � Phalen Boulevard Scoping Study Summary of Goal-Based Alternatives Screening 19-Ju1-95 , Legend F?rop�#com furtller consideration G� -a��-{ . .._.. ...... . �: : - :, - - - . -- - - - g.2f3731fflI:BV2�-fi�tETEY9fE1'i.i.i::i - ��yj��IAI� - - . - � - - - � - - - - - - $�ai�.��'S,��Ii`e�ffY€ =_ :; -- - - _iL1V[JSTR721�. .- . GTi�£TKHOO t11..TER�TA�E�E _ _ - . -- _ --L'+fl�DS �03!ISPRi7�T'I�L�I- - . �� Retainforfurtherscreenin ACC£SS IYEVELOPMEI�P#' RESIV�TES'fIY2E3dT TuIDDE3QF`tRAKTE€. ENVIItQNh�hi'T AESTHETFCS MOYEME3�IT FEASIBILI'tY C48T _--- � ' � m � � f � E � i r�a � .£ � ' --� . - � � _� � "' ? � m - wf � E� . r � - . ' � `J�, � � 'a m - 'Q � -� ?, �' - m m ,..�.,. r�,� � y � ° m �s , _ I . . � �ti 4 I -� � 2f W � -._� � � '�C- Q . � R ' $ 'FS � � k � R � � 6� � � m # � 3 _ � �� 3:� � �.�� K �u v s '� o oa�� m � o� � �_u a .i?° � � � � y Ct - N y pp �� # • x'� y� W C! � m:u � .�� at . R.� 2- m ai �0 � O OD D��.. '�II�.� Sv`3C� -.4��.4 ��.-� �3�c�S ��"+ �Lia�. �� i't" v_C' ��n�� R � '�" ' ��P�i L i +- �Y m -� Q c� ie m �., rt: m . ��m q '�.,,yG � 4 . � � a � i m o �n � � � �, oo � . $ � g �' � � ¢, � � ..� � g� � .c � a -. g v .� � � u� � � a y � ; � m �:G � � fl. �C .�'.. M i Q� e c - �' S w :a � c�", ��i` tV a� v $ �-. +C� �-. i �¢ i. _ �N _ im o '.'3 m { i � ... > w a a .. a. � �5'' �z' �esEer�: �' ::. ._....::. ..... ,:..... <....» ,�.�„ � New Intercliange Good Some Fair Good divenion � �� l�� // . �� l � ..,�' i /' / � j .�, jt -�� a�� _ - _ i i$rssron , _....__ .. _...__:. _ Pennsylvania Ave. Connection Adequate Some Poor Fair � diversion New Pennsylvania Ave. Inter. Goai Some Fau Pooc diversion :.�r- .,:[: . . ...�.. . .... 3 . .. �`� ... F ...:� . 5 .': t• � . ....... .... � ... .. .... ....�.b � .. . ..... .. .: � / / j/�.�. � / . �/ / . . y . e i � , % . ,/� : ; % i - ,�``e/�/ �:; Line 2 Good Some Good Fair � diveraion Line 3 Good Some Fa'u Poor diversion ; Line 4 Good Some Good Fair � diversion Line 5 Goocl Some Fair Poor Idiversion 1 Line 6 C'�ooci Some Good Fair diversion Line 7 Good Some Fair Poor diversion � .. � GF3t,i: � ........... .... ...��' .:....� � .::';i: , �:;�: .:: ::;: Maryland Ave Connection Good Some Good Fair diversion ' Phalen VIllage Connection Line 1 Good Some Good Gooc � diverson r � � � ��i��'r� ; % �,�'` ,, , i %� a� ; / `,�,' ' � ` ' / . i�% � Phalen Village Connection Line 2 Good Some Fair Fair diversion � `. � „- �� , y ,�� ' � �j� . ' . f c� p � ��/ / �� l �/ �� ,� ,G%' i �/f„��%r .��.,f �/��/ i/ �� I �� .. � , � �� ---- --=- - � - - �- _- - - _ - ° �� F '% %,�� `�y i �,� � ��' ,� r/ �' ; , „�.�:, ��`� �/� 9�i� �ri�%�j�/ .... ,�/ < ._�f a F� �i��lnli / �` � � � ¢ ', s / �. e�� `! �>'�le„'7s� � � ��'��i ��` z i� � r�� y � � � i � # i f �� fii ��!i� // � ��%i c% l` ��? � :i�.sF,s r ; i�1.-, '� � �` � .�� a G;� � affect �n affect effect Not � . �; ; � � � �