FAQs for Oct.

2, 2013
Shallow tunnels How does the shallow LRT tunnel represent the least impact of all eight engineering concepts presented by project staff? The shallow LRT tunnel would give the Kenilworth Corridor an option that most resembles existing conditions because LRT tracks would be built underground except for a 20-second stretch in between the two tunnels. Freight trains would remain at ground level in the current corridors and the Kenilworth Trail would stay in the existing location. Why were shallow tunnels recommended over the least expensive concept, which was relocating the bike trail in Kenilworth? The shallow tunnels represent the best long-term investment in the region as well as a safe option. Trail users, including daily commuters, questioned the safety of rerouting more than a half million annual trail users over city streets, through intersections and across driveways. Freight rail Why will freight rail traffic remain where it is today at ground level through the Kenilworth neighborhood? With the recommendation to build LRT in tunnels, freight rail traffic does not need to move. Will freight rail be unable to relocate if a safe and efficient reroute is identified for freight railroads in the future? Rerouting freight rail some day is not precluded by building LRT underground through Kenilworth. Why is the shallow tunnel for light rail option being recommended as solution to the freight rail location issue? This option is most similar to existing conditions No acquisition of homes and businesses as compared to 30-plus acquisitions in the relocation option 220+ LRT trips per day mostly underground through Kenilworth Corridor Kenilworth Trail stays within corridor and preserved for the long-term Estimated $40 million less expensive than Brunswick Central option that would have routed freight trains on two-story berms near St. Louis Park High Schools football field and past homes

Other engineering concepts Were the environmental impacts of constructing a shallow tunnel considered?

The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District commissioned Wenck Associates of Maple Plain to review specific technical aspects related to groundwater and surface water resources in the general vicinity of the shallow tunnels. Wenck found: o The tunnels are not expected to cause flooding or impact the level of the lakes o The lakes hydrology and groundwater are not expected to be impacted o The anticipated coordinated phasing approach of the tunnel construction is viewed as a reasonable way to minimize the impact to groundwater and the lakes

Public Involvement How did public input influence the recommendations? Nearly a thousand comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement Fifteen public open houses attended by more than 2,000 people Input through the Community Advisory Committee and Business Advisory Committee on issues and concerns Input from members of the Corridor Management Committee who are elected officials (mayors, city council members, county commissioners) Examples include dropping an operation and maintenance facility location from further consideration based on community input and environmental justice concerns Eliminating freight rail relocation and co-location options from further consideration due to safety and visual impacts Emails, phone calls, presentations and one-to-one meetings with property owners, businesses and residents.