Agenda
Gateway Corridor Commission
April 14, 2016 - 3:30 PM
Woodbury City Hall, Birch Room
8301 Valley Creek Road
Woodbury, MN 55125
Notes: There will be a DEIS Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting proceeding the Gateway Corridor
Commission (GCC) Meeting this month.
Action Requested
Item
1.
Introductions
Information
2.
Consent Items
a. Summary of March 23, 2016, Meetings*
b. Checks and Claims*
Approval
3.
Communications Update*
Information
4.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement*
a. Managed Lane Alternative – Concur with FHWA Letter
b. DEIS March Activities
Approval
Update
5.
Other
a. Meeting Dates Summary*
b. Social Media and Website Update*
c. Media Articles*
Information
6.
Adjourn
Approval
*Attachments
For questions regarding this material, please contact Jan Lucke,
Washington County at (651) 430-4316 or at [email protected].
Gateway Corridor Commission
Draft March 23, 2016 Meeting Summary
Woodbury City Hall, Birch Room
Members
Rafael Ortega
Lisa Weik
Mary Giuliani Stephens
Dan Kyllo
Jane Prince
Randy Nelson
Mike Pearson
Paul Reinke
Bryan Smith
Amy Williams
Victoria Reinhardt, Alternate
Ted Bearth, Alternate
Richard Bend, Alternate
Bob Livingston, Alternate
Paul Rebholz, Alternate
Justin Bloyer, Alternate
Dave Schultz, Alternate
Ex-Officio Members
Scott Beauchamp
Ed Schukle
Randy Kopesky
Bill Burns
Tim Ramberg
Doug Stang
Jason Lott
Lisa Palermo
Matt Kramer
Others
Jan Luke
Lyssa Leitner
Laura Kearns
Andy Gitzlaff
Josh Straka
Victoria Nill
Todd Rapp
Linda Stanton
Brian McClug
Agency
Ramsey County
Washington County
Woodbury
West Lakeland Township
St Paul
Afton
Lake Elmo
Oakdale
Maplewood
Lakeland
Ramsey County
Washington County
Afton
Lakeland
Woodbury
Lake Elmo
West Lakeland Township
Agency
St Paul Chamber of Commerce
Landfall Village
Lakeland Shores
Oakdale Area Chamber of Commerce
WI Gateway Coalition
3M
Woodbury Chamber of Commerce
Woodbury Chamber of Commerce
St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce
Agency
Washington County
Washington County
Washington County
Ramsey County
US Representative McCollum
MnDOT
Himle Rapp
CAC
MZA+Co
Page 1 of 3
Present
X
X
X
X
X
X
Present
X
X
Kathleen Buraglio
Resident
The Gateway Corridor Commission convened at 3:30 p.m. by Chair Weik.
Agenda Item #1. Introductions
Introductions were made by those present. Commissioner Weik wanted to note the passing of Washington
County Commissioner Ted Bearth on March 10, 2016.
Commissioner Ortega arrived at 3:50PM
Agenda Item #2. Consent Items
Item 2a. Motion made by Commissioner Ortega to approve the January 14, 2106 meeting summary. The
motion was seconded by Mayor Williams. All were in favor. Approved. Motion carried.
Item 2b. Checks and Claims: Motion made by Commissioner Ortega to approve the checks and claims. The
motion was seconded by Council Member Reinke. All were in favor. Approved. The motion carried.
Agenda Item #3. Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Ms. Leitner said there is no additional work being done on the existing alignment east of the Landfall border.
Funds are not being spent there since it is uncertain what will happen to any of those alignments. Work is still
being done west of the border from Landfall, Maplewood and St. Paul, primarily on cultural resources. Ms.
Leitner spoke about the process for new alignments. The Technical Advisory Committee met last week and
defined a process to move forward, which will include a working group with the primary stakeholders being
Oakdale and Woodbury. More details will follow at the April Policy Advisory Commission (PAC) meeting.
Ms. Leitner said there were 10 Neighborhood Topic Discussion meetings held in the City of Oakdale in
December 2015 and January 2016. These discussion meetings resulted in three topic-specific meetings based
on the most popular questions that staff was getting from residents. One meeting was about general
environmental issues such as air, noise, and water. The other meeting was on ridership, which included details
on who would ride the service and how ridership was calculated. These first two meetings were held in the last
few weeks and provided residents with a lot of information. The first video has been posted on YouTube page
for residents who were unable to attend. The second meeting will be posted shortly. The third meeting would
be about what the engineering and route would look like. It was decided to postpone the meeting as the route
and engineering could look differently from what was previously studied.
Councilmember Reinke wanted to acknowledge and thank staff and the consultants to coming out for the
meetings and talking with residents and providing them with information.
Agenda Item #4. Communications Update
Item 4a.
Mr. McClung said the current social media portfolio includes a Facebook page. There are about five posts per
week and some good engagement is happening. There is also YouTube page and a Twitter account. The Twitter
handle that is being recommended to use is @GoldlineBRT, which is consistent with the language audit.
MZA+Co has a lot of experience doing social media, including Twitter for government entities, non-profits, tract
associations, etc. Mr. McClung said they have found best practices that have had great success. They will
create a content plan for Twitter that is similar to Facebook and work with staff on a content calendar and
Page 2 of 3
posting schedule. They will monitor the conversation and contribute to the conversation.
Councilmember Smith asked if there was a bench mark they were working towards. Mr. McClung said yes, they
will be using all of the analytical tools that Facebook, YouTube and Twitter allow as well as Google Analytics for
the web site.
Councilmember Smith asked if they have looked into using Next Door. Mr. McClung said they have looked into
briefly but will spend some more time looking into it.
Item 4b.
Ms. Leitner said the Jeff Dehler Public Relations contract ended at the end of February 2016 and MZA+Co
started at the beginning of February. There was a month overlap so there was a seamless transition between
the two contracts. Jeff Dehler Public Relations finished working on the web site, newsletters and completed
revising the Gateway videos. MZA+Co are currently reviewing those videos to make sure they are consistent
with the messaging being used going forward. Staff is planning on having the videos posted on the YouTube
page by the next meeting and they will also be sent out via email. MZA+Co are currently working on getting up
to date on everything going on with the corridor. The have also been spending a lot of time at the Capitol for
the Legislative strategy.
Agenda Item #5 2016 Results of Focus Groups Conducted by the Counties Transit Improvement Board
In 2015 the Counties Transit Improvement Board contracted with Himle Rapp & Company for a public affairs
and strategic communications counsel. They conducted the focus groups of metropolitan area residents
regarding transportation issues. Todd Rapp with Himle Rapp & Company presented the findings,
recommendations and conclusions of their work to the commission.
Agenda Item #6. 2016 Legislative Strategy
Mr. McClung said everything is progressing very fast. Three weeks have passed already with a short ten week
session. Cook Girard Associates has been very active with meetings and making sure that people are well
informed about the corridor. The Governor has proposed a $1.4 billion bonding bill. The House and Senate have
not put forward their specific bill yet. Mr. McClung expects the Senate bill to be around $1 billion and the
House’s bill to be around $600 - $700 million. The second year of a two-year biennium does not allow bills to be
passed on the last day of session. The last day of session is on Monday May 23 and that day is reserved for
retirement speeches and ceremonial activity alike.
Agenda Item #7. Other
Information was provided in the packet to read at the commission’s leisure.
The meeting adjourned at 4:45PM
Page 3 of 3
Agenda Item #2b
DATE:
April 8, 2016
TO:
Gateway Corridor Commission
FROM:
Staff
RE:
Checks and Claims
DEIS Contract (Kimley Horn)
2/1/16 – 2/29/16
$102,396.14
Contract Utilization = 80%
Communications Contract (Dehler PR)
2/1/16 – 2/29/16
$12,198.76
Contract Utilization = 72%
$41,092.68 was remaining on the contract and will be transferred into the Gateway Corridor
Commission Fund Balance.
Communications Contract (MZA+Co)
No invoice received during this reporting period.
Contract Utilization = 12%
Total
Detailed invoices can be made available upon request.
Action Requested:
Approval
$114,594.90
Agenda Item #3
DATE:
April 8, 2016
TO:
Gateway Corridor Commission
FROM:
Brian McClung, MZA+Co
RE:
Gateway Corridor Communications and Government Relations Update
Over the past month, our team has continued to build support for Gateway Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit
at the State Capitol and with key audiences throughout the East Metro. This was the second month our
team was engaged in the effort after having been brought on board on February 2, 2016.
Government Relations – Our team has been actively meeting and talking with legislators and staff
during the first few weeks of this short 10-week legislative session. We have been engaged at the
Capitol on a daily basis throughout the session.
Strategic Communications – Following up on the language audit that MZA+Co conducted during
February, in March we worked to engage more audiences and share our key messages in an effort to
educate people about Gold Line BRT and to correct any lingering misperceptions about the project.
We revised the standard Gateway Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Fact Sheet – moving information about
the route to the front and shifting the funding pie charts to the back. We included more information
about “How Does It Work?” including emphasizing that Gold Line BRT will use buses in a dedicated
busway that runs mostly adjacent to the frontage road of I-94.
Social Media – After the conversation at the last Gateway Corridor Commission meeting, we launched
the @GoldLineBRT Twitter account on Friday, March 25. There was strong demand for the information
we shared via Twitter and we rapidly found ourselves with 70 followers, a very strong initial response.
We have tweeted 14 times so far. During this period (March 5-April 8), we earned 358 impressions per
day, had 51 retweets, 21 likes, 18 link clicks and 3 replies.
Facebook continues to be a very strong outreach tool for us. In March there were 23 posts on the
Gateway Facebook page with a good level of engagement.
Community Outreach – We spoke at the East Side Area Business Association (ESABA) meeting on March
10 and had a number of positive conversations with business and non-profit leaders in attendance.
MZA+Co
1
MZA+Co Memo, April 8, 2016, p. 2
In addition Brian McClung moderated a legislative luncheon for the Saint Paul Area Chamber of
Commerce on March 29 with Sen. Susan Kent (Senate Chief Author of the Gateway funding request) and
Rep. Erin Murphy. Questions from the audience focused on transit and the business community’s
support for better transportation options in the East Metro.
Among other key meetings, we met with small business owners at the Mounds Theater on March 30
and leaders at Metropolitan State University on April 6. Metro State continues to be very engaged and
supportive of the Gold Line BRT project. Our team members also attended community meetings during
the month, including the event hosted by River Valley Action Network, the League of Women Voters and
other local organizations.
Agenda Item #4a
DATE:
April 8, 2016
TO:
Gateway Corridor Commission
FROM:
Staff
RE:
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Item 4a: Managed Lane Alternative – Concurrence with FHWA Letter
In March 2014 the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) submitted a letter to the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) requesting that the Gateway Corridor project revisit a managed lane alternative
that was previously eliminated during the Alternative Analysis phase. Since that time the project team
has formed a Managed Lane Working Group with representation from MnDOT, FHWA, Metropolitan
Council, Metro Transit, and Ramsey and Washington Counties. The Working Group provided input on
the design of a Managed Lane Bus Rapid Transit alternative and directed the project team to perform
technical analysis of the alternative.
A technical memorandum was prepared that provided information about FHWA’s three concerns
outlined in their March 2014 letter which were:
1. The elimination of feasible alternatives that may better achieve the project’s purpose
and need with fewer adverse impacts,
2. The need to fully inform decisions on the allocation of limited right of way in the
corridor; particularly the accommodation of future capacity expansion and the
preclusion of achieving full Interstate design standards, and
3. The potential degradation of Interstate ramp terminal operations due to the interaction
with the facilities under consideration.
The technical memorandum concluded that based on the information presented in this technical
memorandum relative to the Managed Lane BRT alternative’s ability to effectively meet the purpose,
goals, and objectives of the Gateway Corridor, it is recommended that this alternative be presented in
the Draft EIS in Chapter 2 Alternatives and then screened from detailed analysis in the remaining
chapters of the document. This technical memorandum will serve as additional documentation as part
of the project record, complying with FHWA’s request to fully inform decisions on the allocation of
limited right-of-way in the corridor. The project will continue to work with all partners to coordinate the
operational and expansion needs of I-94.
On January 4, 2016 FHWA sent a letter to FTA stating that the managed lane concept that they
requested has been demonstrated to not meet the project’s goals and objectives, as envisioned by the
Gateway Corridor Commission. The Policy Advisory Committee will be provided technical information
that was included in the memorandum and will be asked to concur with FHWA’s conclusions. Staff
recommends that the Gateway Corridor Commission consider this same request.
A summary of the Managed Lane Tech Memo and the correspondence between to FHWA and FTA from
January 2016 are attached to this memo.
The PAC will be asked to concur with FHWA at their April 14 meeting and the TAC concurred with FHWA
at the January 20 meeting.
Action Requested: Concur with FHWA that the managed lane concept that they requested has been
demonstrated to not meet the project’s goals and objectives, as envisioned by the
Gateway Corridor Commission.
Managed Lane BRT Alternative
This document provides a brief summary of the Managed Lane Bus Rapid Transit Alternative
Technical Memo (November 2015). The full analysis is available on the project website at
http://thegatewaycorridor.com.
Why was a managed lane alternative studied?
A managed lane alternative was first studied in the Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis (AA).
This alternative was originally not advanced for further study because it would offer less
economic development opportunity compared to other alternatives under consideration and it
would not qualify for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Starts funding.
Based on the findings of the AA, a No-Build alternative, a bus rapid transit (BRT) alternative, and
a light rail transit (LRT) alternative were carried forward for the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) process. A managed lane BRT alternative was not included.
In March 2014, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) submitted a comment letter during
the official Draft EIS Scoping process requesting further study of a managed lane alternative in
the Draft EIS. FHWA had three main concerns:



Would a managed lane alternative meet the project purpose and need with fewer
impacts?
Would there be adequate right-of-way for future capacity expansion of I-94 with a
dedicated BRT guideway?
What would the impact of a dedicated guideway be to interstate ramp terminal
operations?
FTA, serving as the lead federal agency for the EIS, concurred with FHWA’s request for
additional analysis of a managed lane alternative in the Draft EIS.
What would the managed lane alternative look like?
In coordination with FHWA, FTA, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Metropolitan Council/Metro Transit, and Ramsey and Washington Counties, a Managed Lane
BRT alternative was defined.
Managed lanes can be designed to operate in multiple ways. The above partners agreed that
for this Managed Lane BRT alternative, BRT would travel within a center managed lane where
feasible with stations located on the outside of the roadway. The managed lane would begin at
or around the left exit off westbound I-94, providing access to 6th Street in Ramsey County and
end at Manning Avenue in Washington County, for a total length of 10.4 miles.
There would be 12 BRT stations, and the platforms would be placed on the outside of the
roadway to minimize the amount of roadway reconstruction required, and therefore costs. By
contrast, the managed lane concept in the AA included eight stations that would be located in
the center of the roadway.
The Managed Lane BRT alternative would allow BRT to travel within the managed lane in
between stations, but it would traverse the general purpose lanes near stations in order to
access the station. During peak periods, or as determined necessary by Metro Transit, the bus
may maintain shoulder operations between stations to avoid interaction with congested
general purpose lanes. A map of the alternative can be seen on the next page.
Managed Lane BRT Alternative
Managed Lane BRT Alternative
Managed Lane BRT Alternative
How was the managed lane alternative evaluated?
To gain a better understanding of the potential impacts and benefits of the Managed Lane BRT
alternative, a technical analysis was completed. A summary of the findings of that analysis are
presented in the table below.
Topic
Cost Estimate
2040 Ridership Estimate
Travel Time
Congestion
Station Placement and Design
Station Spacing and Runningway
Finding
$504 million
8,250
32-34 minutes
Buses could achieve modest time savings (typical congested
speeds are 30 mph are the maximum bus shoulder speed is 35
mph)
Limits station access, development potential, and future transit
markets
Minimal use of center managed lane; weaving concerns;
shoulder running resulting in lower speeds
The Managed Lane BRT alternative was also evaluated using the project goals, which were developed
based on the purpose and need. Goals 1 and 2 (Tier 1 goals) identify minimum requirements that an
alternative would be expected to meet to advance. Goals 3-5 (Tier 2 goals) reflect broader community
goals and may be helpful in comparing alternatives that meet the Tier 1 goals.





Goal 1: Improve mobility
Goal 2: Provide a cost-effective, economically viable transit option
Goal 3: Support economic development
Goal 4: Protect the natural environmental features of the corridor
Goal 5: Preserve and protect individual and community quality of life
What conclusion was reached?
Below is a summary of the conclusions that were reached, presented according to FHWA’s three
concerns that they outlined in their March 2014 letter.
Would a managed lane alternative meet the project purpose and need with fewer
impacts?
The Managed Lane BRT alternative would not effectively meet the project’s purpose and need in the
following areas:




Station accessibility (Goal 1)
Transit mobility and operations (Goals 1 and 2)
Cost-effectiveness (Goal 2)
Support economic development (Goal 3)
Would there be adequate right-of-way for future capacity expansion of I-94 with a
dedicated BRT guideway?
One of the most constrained areas was evaluated, and it was found that both dedicated BRT and a
managed lane could be accommodated in the I-94 corridor.
Managed Lane BRT Alternative
What would the impact of a dedicated guideway be to interstate ramp terminal
operations?
The anticipated traffic queue would not impact interstate ramp terminal operations (at Kellogg
Boulevard, McKnight Road, or Keats Avenue) with a dedicated BRT guideway.
FHWA and FTA Direction
In January 2016, FHWA sent a letter to FTA stating, “FHWA’s concerns have been adequately addressed
with the understanding that expansion of I-94 is not precluded and that impacts to Interstate
operations are being avoided, minimized, and mitigated.” FTA concurred with this conclusion.
Recommendation
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) recommendation is to screen the Managed Lane BRT
alternative from detailed analysis in the Draft EIS based on the technical analysis completed and the
receipt of FHWA’s January 2016 letter on this alternative.
A timeline of all the events that led to the final recommendation is seen below.
Process Timeline
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1
Agenda Item #4b
DATE:
April 8, 2016
TO:
Gateway Corridor Commission
FROM:
Jeanne Witzig, Kimley-Horn
RE:
DEIS Update
Gateway Corridor Environmental Impact Statement
PROGRESS REPORT TO THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR COMMISSION
SUBMITTED BY JEANNE WITZIG, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Key Work Activities/Progress during from mid-March to mid-April 2016
Meetings
•
•
•
•
•
Technical and Community Advisory Committees (TAC) – The TAC met March 16, 2016.
The meeting focused on the East End Realignment process, coordination updates
(Oakdale meetings primarily), Health Impact Assessment update, and status of the
Managed Lane Alternative decision making.
Oakdale Neighborhood Topic Discussion (Ridership) – Two, two hour meetings were held
on March 9, 2016 (4-6 pm and 6:30-8:30 pm). Each session included an approximately
30-minute presentation followed by general question and answer. KHA/SRF team
prepared PowerPoint, handouts, presented and staffed the meetings and prepared
summary of discussion. Videos of the meetings are posted on the project website for
review.
East End Work Group – The working group kicked off the first meeting on March 31,
2016. The meeting focused on the overall process to define the LPA, specific to the
eastern section of the Gateway Corridor.
Meetings with MnDOT Cultural Resources Unit (CRU)–Every other week check in calls
conducted with CRU focus on status of survey work, next steps in the Section 106
process, and coordination activities with stakeholder agencies, including FTA and SHPO.
BPO/SPO/Gateway Coordination Meeting – Meeting held March 7, 2016. Key topics
included coordination of EIS schedules, FTA review/contacts, Threatened and
Endangered Species approach (specifically Northern Long-Eared Bat) and 4(f) evaluation.
Other Project Activities
• Prepared Managed Lane BRT Alternative Summary document for distribution at
upcoming PAC meeting (April 2016).
• Prepared draft East End process flow chart for review by Working Group.
• Advanced Phase I Architectural Survey work in define area of potential effect, advanced
preparation of the Phase I Architecture/History Inventory Forms (including expanded
forms), advanced Phase II evaluations, and prepared context documents. Project team
responded to comments provided by MnDOT CRU on expanded Phase I forms on several
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
•
Page 2
properties and continued coordination with MnDOT CRU on the overall Section 106
process for the Gateway Corridor.
Weekly coordination with KHA/SRF project team and Washington County. Respond to
individual requests for project information, as needed.
Upcoming Activities
Continue to work with the East End Working Group.
Continue coordination with MnDOT Cultural Resources Unit (CRU) on Section 106 process/activities.
Continue to address action items from Cost Workshop, as appropriate.
Prepare for and attend BPO/SPO/Gateway monthly coordination meeting
Prepare for and attend upcoming meetings with Washington County staff, PMT, TAC, PAC, GCC, CAC,
and FTA.
Agenda Item #5
DATE:
April 8, 2016
TO:
Gateway Corridor Commission
FROM:
Staff
RE:
Other Items
Items 5a. Engagement and Meeting Dates Summary
Included below is a summary of the upcoming Commission and DEIS Study meetings. The engagement
meetings that have taken place and are upcoming are attached to this memo.
Month
May
June
June
Meeting
Commission
Commission
Commission
Date
May 12
June 9
June 9
Planned Start Time
3:30pm
1:30pm
3:30pm
Item 5b. Social Media Updates
Facebook
The Gateway Corridor Facebook page was launched on Monday, February 20, 2012. The page currently
has 557‘Likes’. There have no instances during the reporting period where comments have been
removed in line with the Commission’s social media policy.
YouTube
The “views” of the Gateway Corridor videos ranges from 2-2,919.
Twitter
The Gateway Corridor Twitter account (@GoldLineBRT) was launched in March, 2016. The account
currently has 70 followers.
Item 5c. Media Articles
Attached are media articles about the Gateway Corridor from the last month.
Action Requested:
Information.
The Gateway project team has been arranging outreach meetings to stakeholders along the corridor.
These stakeholders range from local community city councils, council districts, business chambers,
individual businesses, community groups and others. Included below is a summary of the Commission’s
outreach activities in 2014, 2015, and 2016.
Upcoming Outreach
Stakeholder
East Metro Equity Roundtable
Previous Outreach
Stakeholder
District 1 Community Council
Oakdale Ridership Meeting
Ramsey Co/St. Paul Community Health Services Advisory
Committee
Oakdale Environmental Meeting
Oak Meadows Senior Living
Oakdale Community Meetings
Living Healthy Washington County
Lake Elmo City Council
Woodbury City Council
Oakdale Neighborhood Meetings
Senate Bonding Presentation
ESABA Lunch and Learn
Washington County Realtor Forum
Joint Woodbury/Cottage Grove City Council
Oakdale Community Meting
Woodbury City Council Workshop
Oakdale City Council
DC Trip
St. Paul Chamber of Commerce
Lake Elmo City Council
Lake Elmo Planning Commission
E Segment Public Hearing
East Side Enterprise Center
7th Street Live
Lake Elmo Open House
Oakdale HOA
Oakdale Farmers Market
St. Paul Youth Services
National Night Out – Conway Rec Center
District 1 Community Council
Landfall Open House
Status
April 13, 2016
Status
March 21, 2016
March 9, 2016
March 2, 2016
February 24, 2016
February 4, 2016
January 21 and 28, 2016
January 20, 2016
January 5, 2016
December 9, 2015
December 7, 8, 17, 2015
December 1, 2015
November 12, 2015
October 20, 2015
October 20, 2015
October 15, 2015
October 14, 2015
October 13, 2015
October 7-8, 2015
September 17, 2015
September 15, 2015
September 14, 2015
September 10, 2015
Presentation, August 25, 2015
Booth, August 21, 2015
Open House, August 19, 2015
Presentation, August 17, 2015
Booth, August 5, 2015
Presentation, August 5, 2015
Booth, August 4, 2015
Presentation, July 27, 2015
Open House, July 23, 2015
Woodbury Chamber Public Affairs Committee
CAC
District 4 Community Council
Building Owners and Managers Association
East Side Area Business Association
Saint Paul City Council Transitway Workshop
Ramsey Co/St. Paul Community Health
CAC
Living Healthy Washington County
Wilson Apartment Building
Opus (Carlson Business Park Owner)
Lake Elmo City Council
E. 7th Street Placemaking
Guardian Angels Finance Committee
Washington County Public Health staff
Lafayette Business Park Commuter Fair
Carlson/Oaks Station Property Owner
Gateway Corridor Development Forum
East Metro Strong Lake Elmo Workshop
Ramsey County Environmental Health Staff
African American Leadership Forum
HIA Workshop
Senate Transportation Committee
Oakdale Chamber
Ramsey Co/St. Paul Community Health
Legislative Breakfast
St. Paul Station Planning Task Force
St. Paul Historic Preservation committee
Stillwater Lion’s Club
Oakdale City Council
Governor Briefing
Bus Tour with Chair Duininck
St. Paul Station Planning Task Force
Community Advisory Committee
Washington County Public Health Community Leadership
St. Paul Station Planning Task Force
Maplewood Planning Commission
River Valley Action Forum
ESABA Gala
St. Paul Station Planning Task Force
Legislative Strategy Meeting
Met Council – Committee of the Whole
Maplewood Station Planning Meeting
Presentation, July 23, 2015
June 24, 2015
Presentation, July 20, 2915
Booth, June 15, 2015
Presentation, June 11, 2015
Workshop, June 10, 2015
Presentation, June 3, 2015
Meeting, June 2, 2015
Presentation, May 20, 2015
Meeting, May 18, 2015
Meeting, May 12, 2015
Workshop, May 12, 2015
Discussion, May 12, 2015
Meeting, May 6, 2015
Presentation, April 24, 2015
Booth, April 23, 2015
Meeting, April 22, 2015
Forum, April 14, 2015
Workshop, April 13-14, 2015
Presentation, March 30, 2015
Meeting, March 16, 2015
Workshop, March 13, 2015
Tour, March 5, 2015
Presentation, March 5, 2015
Presentation, March 4, 2015
February 27, 2015
Meeting, February 17, 2015
Presentation, February 12, 2015
Presentation, February 10, 2015
Workshop, February 10, 2015
Meeting, February 9, 2015
Tour, January 6, 2015
Workshop, February 5, 2015
Meeting, January 29, 2015
Presentation, January 21, 2015
Meeting, January 6, 2015
Presentation, December 16, 2014
Presentation, December 9, 2014
Table – December 4, 2014
Workshop, December 2, 2014
November 13 and 21, 2014
Presentation, November 12, 2014
November 7, 2014
Lake Elmo Station Planning Meeting
Dayton’s Bluff Community Meeting
Oakdale Station Planning Meeting
Partnership for Regional Opportunity-TOD Committee
Woodbury Station Planning Meeting
District 4 Community Council New Moon Celebration
St. Paul Station Planning Meeting
Washington County Regional Rail Authority
Globe University – Welcome Day for Students
Woodbury City Council
Oakdale City Council
Maplewood City Council
Lake Elmo City Council
Washington County Regional Rail Authority
Metro State University Fall Fest
Landfall City Council
Lake Elmo City Council
Oakdale City Council
Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority- Public Hearing
Saint Paul Planning Commission
Woodbury Rotary Club
Bruce Vento Elementary-Back to School Night
City Walk Board (Woodbury)
Metropolitan Council-Transportation Policy Plan Outreach
Oakdale City Council Workshop
Maplewood City Council Workshop
St. Paul Transportation Committee
Metro State University-Welcome Day
Lake Elmo Property Owners along I-94
Landfall City Council Workshop
LPA Public Hearing
National Night to Unite-several Woodbury neighborhoods
National Night to Unite- Dayton’s Bluff, Saint Paul
Primrose/City Walk Businesses (Woodbury)
Community Thread-Stillwater
St. Paul District 1 Community Council
Woodbury Chamber Public Affairs Committee
Wabasha Street Block Party
ESABA Bowling Tournament
Landfall Planning and Finance Committee
Community Advisory Committee
Orange Line Tour
Make it Happen on E. 7th St. Night Out Business &
November 6, 2014
November 6, 2014
November 6, 2014
Presentation, November 3, 2014
October 31, 2014
Flyers/booth – October 30, 2014
October 27 and 30, 2014
October 7th, 2014
Booth – October 1st, 2014
September 24th, 2014
September 23rd, 2014
September 22nd, 2014
September 16th, 2014
Public Hearing- September 16th, 2014
Booth-September 13th, 2014
September 10th, 2014
Workshop-September 9th, 2014
Workshop-September 9th, 2014
Presentation-September 9th, 2014
Update -September 5th, 2014
Presentation – September 4th, 2014
Booth-August 27th, 2014
Presentation-August 27th, 2014
Booth-August 26th, 2014
Workshop – August 26th, 2014
Workshop – August 25th, 2014
Presentation – August 25th, 2014
Booth-August 20th, 2014
Presentation/discussion-August 14th, 2014
Presentation-August 13th, 2014
Public Hearing – August 7th, 2014
Booth-August 5th, 2014
Booth-August 5th, 2014
Presentation-July 31st, 2014
Update-July 29th, 2014
Presentation – July 28th, 2014
Presentation – July 24th, 2014
Booth – July 24th, 2014
Booth – July 24th, 2014
Presentation – July 8th, 2014
Meeting – June 30th, 2014
Field Trip – June 25 - 27, 2014
Event Presence – June 20, 2014
Community Fair
FTA Tour and Workshop
District 4 Community Council
Green Line Opening
Community Advisory Committee
Target Station Opening
National Train Day
Future of 4th Event
St. Transportation Summit
Woodbury Expo
St. Paul Port Authority
Corridor Cities and Market Analysis Consultant
Met Council Transportation Committee
Globe University – Students
Engage East Side – Gateway Event
Globe University – Staff
Gateway Day at the Capitol
DEIS Scoping Open House, Conway Rec Center
DEIS Scoping Open House, Guardian Angels
District 1 Community Council Open House
Interagency Scoping Meeting
River Valley Action
FHWA
Landfall HRA
Environmental Quality Board
Park and Rides
Legislative Strategy
Engage East Side – Gateway Event
Washington County Board
Gateway Legislative Kick-Off Breakfast
Guardian Angels Finance Committee
Legislative Strategy
Policy Advisory Committee/Commission
Woodbury Chamber
FTA Call
Community Advisory Committee
D1/D2 Open House
St. Paul Area Chamber
Harley Davidson
Technical Advisory Committee
Legislative Strategy
Washington County Administrators
Tour and Presentation – June 20th, 2014
Presentation – June 16th, 2014
Booth at Depot/Wanderers – June 14th,
2014
Meeting – June 3rd, 2014
Booth – May 17th, 2014
Booth – May 10th, 2014
Booth – May 8, 2014
Booth – May 6, 2014
Booth – May 3, 2014
Presentation – April 17, 2014
Meetings - Week of April 14, 2014
Presentation - April 14, 2014
Presentations – April 9, 2014
Presentation/Panel – April 8, 2014
Presentation – March 28, 2014
One-on-ones - March 26, 2014
Open House – March 25, 2014
Open House – March 24, 2014
Booth – March 22, 2014
Meeting – March 20, 2014
Presentation – March 18, 2014
Meeting – March 13, 2014
Presentation – March 12, 2014
Meeting – March 12, 2014
Flyer handout – March 12, 2014
Meeting – February 28, 2014
Meeting – February 25, 2014
Workshop – February 25, 2014
Meeting – February 20, 2014
Meeting – February 19, 2014
Meeting – February 14, 2014
Meeting – February 13, 2014
Presentation – February 12, 2014
Call – February 12, 2014
Meeting – February 10, 2014
Open House – February 6, 2014
Presentation – February 6, 2014
Meeting – February 3, 2014
Meeting – January 29, 2014
Meeting – January 3, 2014
Presentation – January 22, 2014
St. Paul East Side Groups
TAC Staff from Woodbury, Oakdale, and Lake Elmo
Driving tour of Corridor w/ Senator Housley
Technical Advisory Committee
“Get to Know Woodbury” Realtors event
3M Staff
Policy Advisory Committee
Community Advisory Committee
FHWA Staff
Fostering an East Side Transit Conversation
District 2 Community Council
Technical Advisory Committee
FTA Conference Call
Fostering an East Side Transit Conversation
MnDOT, Met Council, County leadership
FTA Tour
St. Paul District 1 Community Council
Landfall
Technical Advisory Committee
Lake Elmo
MnDOT/Met Council/County Staff
East Side Area Business Association
East Side Partners
Policy Advisory Committee
Community Advisory Committee
Technical Advisory Committee
FTA
Fostering an East Side Transit Conversation – Engage ES
St. Paul Transportation Committee
Woodbury staff
Oakdale staff
Maplewood staff
Lake Elmo staff
3M
Metro State
St. Paul staff
Community Advisory Committee
Technical Advisory Committee
FTA
East Side Groups Update
Policy Advisory Committee
Hot Dogs and Transit – Engage East Side
Meeting – January 21, 2014
Meeting – January 9, 2014
Tour – December 27, 2013
Meeting – December 18, 2013
Booth – December 18, 2013
Meeting – December 16, 2013
Meeting – December 12, 2013
Meeting – December 9, 2013
Meeting – December 6, 2013
Transit Summit – December 5, 2013
Presentation – November 20, 2013
Meeting – November 20, 2013
Meeting – November 13, 2013
Town Hall – November 7, 2013
Meeting – November 1, 2013
Tour – November 1, 2013
Presentation – October 28, 2013
Meeting – October 25, 2013
Meeting – October 16, 2013
Presentation – October 15, 2013
Meeting – October 11, 2013
Presentation – October 10, 2013
Meeting – October 8, 2013
Meeting – October 10, 2013
Meeting – September 30, 2013
Meeting – September 25, 2013
Coordination Call #2 – September 25, 2013
Presentation – September 25, 2013
Meeting – September 22, 2013
Meeting – September 12, 2013
Meeting – September 12, 2013
Meeting – September 11, 2013
Meeting – September 10, 2013
Meeting – September 4, 2013
Meeting – August 29, 2013
Meeting – August 29, 2013
Meeting – August 26, 2013
Meeting – August 21, 2013
Coordination Call – August 15, 2013
Meeting – August 13, 2013
Meeting – August 8, 2013
Booth – August 3, 2013
Technical Advisory Committee
Hot Dogs and Transit – Engage East Side
Development Forum
Alliance for Metropolitan Stability
Engage East Side Resident Network staff
Start of DEIS
Meeting – July 24, 2013
Booth – July 13, 2013
June 24, 2013
Staff level meeting – June 7, 2013
Discussion on CAC – May 31, 2013