City of St. Paul DEED Application Final

2012 Minnesota Business Development
Capital Projects Grant Program Application

Submitted by:

CITY OF ST. PAUL
Department of Parks and Recreation

For

The REGIONAL BALLPARK in
LOWERTOWN SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA

Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development
City of St. Paul
Department of Parks and Recreation

Application to the
Department of Employment and Economic Development
Minnesota Business Development Capital Projects Grant Program

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover Letter from Mayor Christopher Coleman

DEED Capital Grant Program Application

Supporting Documentation

TAB 1 Section III Project Description, Question 1
a. Project Description
b. Legal Descriptions of Current Condition and Proposed Development
c. Port Authority Board Report

TAB 2 Section IV Project Timeline and Readiness, Question 1
Section V Financial Information, Question 5
Section VII Other Public Benefits, Question 8
a. 2010 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report
b. 2011 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report Update
c. 2012 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report Update
d. 2012 Proposed Project Budget
e. Preliminary Concept Design Plans and Renderings
f. Lowertown Master Plan
g. Downtown St. Paul Station Area Plan
h. 2011 St. Paul Port Authority Former Diamond Products Due Diligence Report
i. St. Paul Summary of Recommendation and Land Acquisition Documentation
j. Ballpark Consultant Project Team
i. Nelson, Tietz and Hoye
ii. Ryan Companies US, Inc.
iii. Julie Snow Architects
iv. AECOM

TAB 3 Section V Financial Information, Question 4
a. Economic Impact Study
b. St. Paul Port Authority Midway Site Redevelopment Plan
c. Relevant News Articles

TAB 4 Section V Financial Information, Question 5
a. Funding Commitment Letters
v. St. Paul City Council Resolution
vi. St. Paul Saints Letter
b. Ten Year Pro-Forma

TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued

TAB 5 Section VII Other Public Benefits, Question 1
a. Assessors Valuation Lowertown

a. Assessors Valuation Midway

a. Ticket Sales by Geographic Location USA
b. Ticket Sales by Geographic Location Twin Cities Region
c. Regional Users by Geographic Location
d. American Legion and NCAA Division III World Series Impact

a. Project Letters of Support

a. St. Paul Port Authority Letter of Support

Minnesota Business Development
Capital Projects Grant Program
Request for Proposal

Application Packet
Funding provided by 2012 Bonding Bill Appropriation

4

Minnesota Business Development
Capital Project Grant Program
I. Applicant Information
Applicant (Public Entity): ______________________
Address: _____________________________________ City: ____________________________________
Project Contact: _______________________________ Phone: __________________________________
Email: _______________________________________ Address: ________________________________
MN Tax ID: ___________________________________ Federal Tax ID: __________________________
II. Project Information
Project Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
Name of site: ________________________________ Site Address: ____________________________
City or Township: ____________________________ Zip Code: _______________________________
Minnesota House District: _____________________ Minnesota Senate District ___________________
Current property owner(s): Land ______________ Building: ________________________________
When was/will property be purchased? _____________ For what amount? ________________________
Who will develop the site? ________________________________________________________________
Who will own the site after development? ___________________________________________________
III. Project Description
1. Provide a brief project description and attach a more detailed description including background of the site,
nature of acquisition and/or improvement, future use information, etc. (500 character limit
):

*Attach a legal description and maps showing the current condition and proposed development of the site

City of Saint Paul
400 CHA; 25 West Fourth Street Saint Paul
Michael Hahm, Parks Director 651-266-6409
michael.hahm@ci.stpaul.mn.us 400 CHA; 25 West Fourth Street
8025095 41-6005521
City of Saint Paul Regional Ballpark ("Project")
Diamond Products Site 310 East Fifth Street
Saint Paul 55101
65B 65
Various Diamond Products Co.
July 31, 2012 $5,125,000
The City of Saint Paul
The City of Saint Paul
$54M project will replace a vacant and polluted industrial site in St. Pauls Lowertown with a new
7,000 seat ballpark serving state and regional needs for youth, amateur, and St. Paul Saints
baseball. This publicly owned and privately supported ballpark will host over 180 events, entertain
400,000 visitors, and produce $10M of direct economic activity each year. The existing Midway
Stadium site will become a Port Authority business park, producing jobs and increasing local tax
base. See TAB 1
5

IV. Project Timeline and Readiness
1. Provide a summary of the current status of the planned development. Attach information such as bid
information, permits received to date, zoning approvals, governing body approval, building permits, etc. (500
character limit, attach additional pages if necessary):

2. Complete the project schedule outlining individual tasks of the overall project. Include major milestones for
the eligible project, including anticipated completion dates:

V. Financial Information
1. What are total project costs? __________________

2. What is applicants funding request from DEED for this project? ____________________________

3. How much of the total project costs are for construction activities? ______________________

Task Start mm/yy Finish mm/yy

The City is ready to quickly move forward, having completed many necessary pre-development
tasks: identified all private and local funding; secured property; obtained a comprehensive feasibility
report and site condition due diligence report; adopted and amended necessary City planning
documents to support this reuse of the Diamond Products site; hired an experienced owners rep;
identified other development team members; and completed a preliminary concept design. See TAB
2
Phase II Design and EAW
06/12 12/12
Site Prep and Surcharge 01/13 06/13
Civil Sitework Design Package 01/13 02/13
Grading Permit
02/13 04/13
Ballpark Construction Documents 01/13 03/13
Graphics and Wayfinding Package
01/13 03/13
Building Permit
04/13 06/13
Site Work, Utility Relocate, Road Work 04/13 07/13
Ballpark Construction, Playing Field
06/13 12/13
Ballpark Interiors / Opening Day!
01/14 05/14
$54,000,000
$27,000,000
$38,600,000
6

4. Explain how the project will attract private investment that is directly related to the project (500 character
limit, attach additional pages if necessary):

*If an economic impact, cost/benefit or return on investment analysis has been conducted, please attach.

5. Complete the following table indicating sources, uses and amounts of all funds. If there are multiple funding
sources for an activity, please identify all sources for that activity:

Sources and Uses of Funds

Source of
Funds (federal,
state, local,
private, etc.)

Amount Use of Funds
( Project
Activity)
Date funds
committed
Public or
Private Land?
Have costs been
incurred?
If yes, indicate
date incurred

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

*Attach a commitment letter for each of the above funding sources and detailed cost estimates or other
supporting documentation for each activity.
*Attach a pro forma of estimated operating costs for the project ten years following completion
6. Will the project reduce operating expenses of or increase revenue from existing capital assets, offsetting at
least a portion of project costs? Yes No
If yes, please explain (500 character limit, attach additional pages if necessary):

An initial feasibility report and pursuit study activities were funded with $450,000 from private
sources. The Saints also will contribute $10M toward the Project. The redevelopment of the Midway
Stadium site will attract $15M of private investment. In addition to the $10M of yearly economic
activity related to the ballpark, the Project reinforces the renaissance happening in downtown
creating interest and demand which attracts investment which leads to jobs. See TAB 3
Local (City) $8,750,000 Acq./Demo Est. July 2012 Private
s
City / Private $6,775,000 Soft Costs Est. July 2012
s
Local (City) $2,000,000 Finance Cost Est. July 2012
s
Private $1,500,000 Finance Cost Est. July 2012
s
Local (City) $3,100,000 Construction Est. July 2012
s
Private $4,875,000 Construction Est. July 2012
s
State $27,000,000 Construction
s
The new ballpark will incorporate sustainable technologies that decrease operating expenses on a
per-seat basis from the dilapidated Midway Stadium per City Sustainable Building Policy. Though
average ticket prices will remain affordable, there will be opportunities for increased revenue from
naming rights, suite rentals, and an enhanced fan experience. The increased net revenue will allow
for significant private investment into the project, limiting the necessary State contribution to $27M.
REFER TO TAB 2 & 4
7

7. Does the project provide necessary repair or replacement of existing capital assets? Yes No

VI. Job Creation and Retention
For purposes of this section, one full-time equivalent job equals 2080 hours per year.

1. How many FTE construction jobs will result from this project? __________________

2. Project the number of new permanent full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs created and wages after development
of the site.
Total New FTE Jobs: _________________ Projected average wages _________________

3. Project the number of retained jobs and wages after development of the site (jobs that existed on-site or
elsewhere in Minnesota prior to development).
Total Retained Jobs: _________________ Projected average wages _________________

4. What is the classification/industry for the new FTE jobs (i.e., industry name and 4-digit NAICS code)?:

5. Explain any improvements to the quality of existing jobs as measured by wages, skills or education
associated with those jobs (500 character limit, attach additional pages if necessary):

VII. Other Public Benefits

1. What is the current appraised value of the site? _______________
*Attach appraisal or assessors valuation

2. What is the projected value of the site after the project is complete? _____________________
*Attach assessors projected valuation

The new ballpark will replace the existing Midway Stadium, which is beyond refurbishment and must
be replaced in order to retain a viable regional asset for amateur, high school, and Saints sporting
events. The new ballpark also will solve the blighting influence of the Diamond Products site, which
is polluted and contains an enormous and economically obsolete building in the otherwise resurgent
Lowertown neighborhood. See TAB 2
225 + 23 for design
23 $33,800 annually
$33,800 annually 36
71-Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation/Sports Teams and Clubs 1211
The ballpark goals include the incorporation of high performance sustainable technologies that
improve efficiencies associated with ongoing operations and maintenance. This equipment requires
knowledgeable staff to monitor and operate it, including more advanced computer interfaces. This is
a significant step forward from the mechanical systems currently being operated at Midway Stadium
and will require additional staff skills.
$3,218,100
$30,400,000
REFER TO TAB 5
REFER TO TAB 5
8

3. How will the overall local tax base be affected by the project? Explain (500 character limit, attach
additional pages if necessary):

4. How many residents will be served by or benefit from the project? _____________
Explain (500 character limit, attach additional pages if necessary):

5. Describe the level of local support for the project (500 character limit, attach additional pages if necessary).
*Attach letters of support, if applicable.

6. Will the project attract revenue from outside of Minnesota? Yes No
If yes, please explain indicating numbers of visitors to the state, total visitor spending, types of visitor spending,
etc. (500 character limit, attach additional pages if necessary): *Attach supporting documentation, if applicable.

The current site, dominated by an outmoded vacant industrial facility with no viable reuse, is paying
only $39,150 in taxes. Although the new ballpark will be tax exempt, the currently exempt Midway
Stadium will become a new business park estimated by the County to generate $607,641/year in
new taxes. Additional entertainment venues, business investments and increased housing property
values will increase the tax base in Lowertown. See TAB 3, 5 & 6
400,000 / yr.
The ballpark plaza will provide the 7,057 downtown residents with a new outdoor gathering space.
Projected annual attendance at the new facility is 400,000, including 50-55 St. Paul Saints games
and 100-125 other events, comprised of amateur sports games and tournaments, concerts and
community events. The new facility will provide users and customers from across the region and
state an improved experience over that found at the current regional facility. See TAB 7
Extensive outreach efforts over the last three years in St. Pauls Lowertown neighborhood, the local
business community, and amongst fans of the Saints and regional amateur baseball, have produced
a very high level of local and regional support for this project. In addition to the attached letters,
financial and logistical support has been provided in order to complete the extensive
pre-development work necessary to make this project ready to start once State funding is approved.
See TAB 8
The ballpark will host sports tournaments that bring out-of-state money to Minnesota, including an
American Legion and NCAA Division II or III World Series drawing teams and fans from around the
country. The current facility lacks amenities essential to attracting these events. American
Association teams from 7-8 states and 1-2 Canadian provinces will play there each season. The
facility will also host outdoor concerts or other non-sports events that will attract from the region. See
TAB 3&7
9

7. Will the site be used for innovative business activities? Yes No

8. Does the project provide health or safety benefits (e.g., clean drinking water, contamination cleanup,
building rehabilitation, traffic safety, etc.)? Yes No

9. Other than the benefits derived from the project itself, does the applicant anticipate other community or
regional impacts (i.e., new community investment, new businesses, new jobs, additional private investment or
other factors to be considered in review of this application)? Describe (500 character limit, attach additional
pages if necessary):

The facility will contain an industry first: a classroom where students will have the opportunity to learn
aspects of the sports business in a hands-on environment. The outdoor area will be used
year-round; a winter skating rink for community recreational or youth athletics uses is planned. The
concourse will serve as an extension of the regions successful outdoor Farmers Market and will
provide the neighborhoods sizeable arts community with spaces to market and sell artwork. See
TAB 3
The Diamond Products building, which is functionally obsolete and has known environmental
hazards, will be demolished. The project site has significant contamination that also will be
remediated. The sustainable goals for the project, including innovative storm water solutions, will
make this ballpark one of the greenest in the country, and its location at the intersection of Light
Rail Transit, bike paths, walking trails, and vehicular access make it a multi-modal destination. See
TAB 2
Lowertown will be undergoing significant change with LRT, new businesses, housing, a new
Lafayette Bridge, and renovation of Union Depot as a transit hub. In conjunction with LRT, the
ballpark will be the greatest activity and investiment generator in downtown, spurring new
development and expediting the redevelopment of under utilized parcels. The remediation and
redevelopment of the Midway site will create up to 520 future jobs and $607,600/year in increased
taxes. See TAB 3, 6 & 9
10

SAMPLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS GRANT PROGRAM
Applicants must adopt and submit the following resolution. This resolution must be adopted prior to submission of the forms package.
BE IT RESOLVED that _______________________________ (Applicant) act as the legal sponsor for project(s) contained in the Business
Development Capital Projects Grant Program Application to be submitted on __________________ and that
____________________________ (Title of First Authorized Official) and ____________________________ (Title of Second Authorized
Official) are hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development for funding of this project on
behalf of ____________________________________ (Applicant).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ______________________________ (Applicant) has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance,
and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of
the proposed project for its useful life.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ______________________________(Applicant) has not violated any federal, state, or local laws
pertaining to fraud, bribery, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state, ______________________, (Applicant) may enter into an
agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project(s), and _____________________________ (Applicant)
certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in all contract agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all nonstate funding is committed and available and meets or exceeds the requirement that the non-
state match equal or exceed the state funding.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ____________________ (Applicant) certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and
rules of General Obligation bond funds.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that ____________________________ (Title of First Authorized Official) and
____________________________ (Second Authorized Official), or their successors in office, are hereby authorized to execute such
agreements, and amendments thereto, as are necessary to implement the project(s) on behalf of the applicant.

I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the __________________________________ (City Council or County Board) of
____________________________ (Applicant) on _______________ (Date).
SIGNED: WITNESSED:
(First Authorized Official) (Signature)
_______________________________ ________________________________
(Title) (Date) (Title) (Date)

SIGNED: WITNESSED:

(Second Authorized Official) (Signature)

_____________________________________ _______________________________________
(Title) (Date) (Title) (Date)

TAB ONE

Section III Project Description, Question 1
a. Project Description
b. Legal Descriptions of Current Condition and Proposed Development
c. Port Authority Board Report
The City of Saint Paul Regional Ballpark

The Saint Paul Regional Ballpark project (Project) will replace the existing 30 year old
Midway Stadium with a new 7,000 seat ballpark to be built on a vacant and polluted
industrial site in the Lowertown neighborhood in downtown Saint Paul. The new
ballpark will take advantage of transit and other downtown infrastructure while still
serving state and regional needs for youth, amateur and the Saint Paul Saints baseball.
The existing Midway site will be redeveloped by the Port Authority into a new industrial
park creating opportunities for new jobs and increased tax base.

History of Regional Ballpark in Saint Paul

St. Paul has been home to a regional ballpark since 1930, beginning with Lexington Park
(Lexington Avenue and University Avenue), the original Midway Stadium in the 1950s,
and finally the current Midway Stadium, built in 1982. In addition to being the home of
the Saint Paul Saints, the current ballpark serves people and organizations throughout the
region and state with more than 100 other events per year, including:

Class A Minnesota Amateur Tournament
MSHSL Baseball Tournaments
o Section 4AAA
o Section 5AAA
o Section 4AA
o Section 4A
AAA State Baseball Tournament
Hamline University Baseball
American Legion District 4 Playoffs
Walk to Prevent Child Abuse
National Kidney Foundation Twin Cities Kidney Walk

In addition, the new ballparks size and amenities will be able to attract national events
such as an American Legion tournament, and NCAA Division II or III World Series, and
regional concerts and other non-sports events.

The St. Paul Saints are a major tenant of Midway Stadium and will continue that role in
the new ballpark. Their annual rent provides $10 million of private funding toward the
financing of the Project. The Saints have been in business since 1993, and have 15 full
time and 135 seasonal employees with a $1.3 million annual payroll (including
ballplayers). The Saints are regarded as a best in class organization and their unique
partnership with the City of Saint Paul at Midway Stadium has created a home for
amateur baseball teams from around the region.

2
Existing Condition of Midway Stadium

The current Midway Stadium was constructed in 1982. It was initially intended to serve
municipal athletics only not a minor league baseball team and the facility and the
infrastructure are insufficient for all of its current users. Minimal upgrades made over the
years by the St. Paul Saints have extended the facilitys useful life, but the facility does
not meet current and future needs of players or families:

Locker rooms, bathrooms, and other areas are
not ADA compliant, and there are only a
handful of handicapped accessible seats for
patrons.
The insufficient number of bathrooms means
that the average customer will miss 1-2 innings
for each trip to the restroom.
Fields have sinkholes and grading issues and
require major soil corrections to repair.
Concrete plaza areas have major cracks and
need to be replaced.

Due to the age and quality of the facility, the City of
Saint Paul has determined that the stadium is beyond
the point of being able to renovate cost effectively. In
addition, the existing Midway Stadium location in an
industrial area far from the downtown or
neighborhoods does not provide the revenue potential
or economic benefit that the Lowertown site will.

Existing Condition of Diamond Products Site

The proposed site is currently occupied by a multi-story industrial building with limited
parking, formerly occupied by the Gillette Company and more recently Diamond
Products. The building has been vacant for many years, and the buildings condition,
multi-level configuration, age, parking, and downtown location have rendered it obsolete
and not viable for renovation and reuse.

The Diamond Products site has known environmental impacts to soil and ground water
and is listed as a hazardous waste generator. Based on findings from preliminary
environmental investigations, there will likely be restrictive covenants on the site that
will limit future uses outside of those proposed in the Project. In addition, the limits
imposed to the site by the adjacent uses of the Lafayette Bridge, the Central Corridor
OMF, and Holman Field, along with the site topography and poor soil conditions, would
significantly limit other commercial redevelopment opportunities. A regional ballpark
appears to be an ideal use for a site that is very difficult to redevelop, as it would increase
transit usage, utilize existing parking lots, and generate economic activity that could
support local businesses.
3

Conceptual Program of New Ballpark

The City and Saints worked with Julie Snow Architects, AECOM, and Ryan Companies
to develop a conceptual program that would serve the Saints and the myriad of amateur
and high school athletic programs that currently utilize the Midway Stadium. The
general parameters include:

7,000 Fixed seats with total capacity of 9,000 (2,000 General Admission)
6-8 Suites with flexible corporate areas that deliver suite-like amenities
Modern amenities, concessions & rest rooms
Administrative offices
Classroom
Public plaza
Restaurant
Permanent art exhibits
Opportunities for year-round use
Future trail connection between downtown and Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary

In addition, the Saints have indicated that their goals for the project are to create:

Best fan experience in the Twin Cities
Greenest ballpark in America
Community gathering place that celebrates Lowertown with a design that reflects
the communitys artistic character

Schedule

The timing of the Project is ideal. Assuming an allocation of state bonding in 2012,
design could begin immediately and the ballpark could be open for the 2014 baseball
season. This syncs up well with the start of light rail operations and completion of the
new Lafayette Bridge, and builds on the current public support for the new ballpark. Any
delays in State funding would lead to increased project costs due to inflation, causing
either a reduced scope or a need for additional State assistance.

Redevelopment of the Midway Stadium Site

The Saint Paul Port Authority will acquire the existing Midway Stadium site once the
new regional ballpark opens. The 13 acre Midway site is in an existing industrial area
where the Port has completed other projects (Energy Park). The Port estimates that their
typical business park model for site development will lead to at least $15 million in
private investment and the creation of over 290 living wage jobs in year one and up 520
total future jobs by year ten. The new business park is expected to increase property
taxes by $607,600 per year.

4

Overall Economic Impact

The Project will produce:
225 construction jobs related to the construction of the new regional ballpark;
23 new FTE jobs associated with the operation of the new facility;
$10 million in annual related spending outside the ballpark by its 400,000 users;
Up to 75,000 new transit trips each year due to its proximity to the new Central
Corridor Light Rail.

In addition to these quantifiable economic benefits, the redevelopment of the blighted
Diamond Products site into this exciting new sports venue will add in immeasurable ways
to the current resurgence of the east side of downtown Saint Paul. Although Lowertown
has recently seen new housing and business development Farmers Market Lofts;
Heartland, Barrio, Bulldog, and other restaurants; Cray and Biomedix corporate offices,
for example and new public investment soon to be completed Central Corridor Light
Rail, Union Depot, Lafayette Bridge there are still vacant storefronts and office space,
and underutilized historic structures which will undoubtedly benefit from this Project.

Moving the regional ballpark from Midway will also allow that site to be more
appropriately utilized as industrial land well-suited to the types of business parks the Port
Authority has successfully developed throughout Saint Paul. The conservative estimate
of 290 new living wage jobs in year one is an added benefit of the Project that the State
funds will help leverage.

Summary

The Regional Ballpark Initiative provides the opportunity to develop a regional ball park
that serves more than a dozen amateur baseball organizations from throughout the region
and state in a location that takes advantage of other State, City, and private sector
investments. The relationship envisioned is a model public-private partnership between
the City of Saint Paul and the Saint Paul Saints Professional Baseball Club. This use is
an excellent one for a site that has significant environmental and market constraints.

The Regional Ballpark Initiative presents the opportunity to support the long term success
of a regional asset and the surrounding businesses and neighborhoods in Lowertown
Saint Paul.

C U R R E N T C O N D I T I O N - P R O P E R T Y O W N E R S H I P A N D P A R C E L I D E X H I B I T
P R O P O S E D D E V E L O P M E N T - P R O P E R T Y O W N E R S H I P A N D P A R C E L I D E X H I B I T

TAB TWO

Section IV Project Timeline and Readiness, Question 1
a. 2010 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report
b. 2011 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report Update
c. 2012 Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report Update
d. 2012 Proposed Project Budget
e. Preliminary Concept Design Plans and Renderings
f. Lowertown Master Plan
g. Downtown St. Paul Station Area Plan
h. 2011 St. Paul Port Authority Former Diamond Products Due Diligence Report
i. St. Paul Summary of Recommendation and Land Acquisition Documentation
j. Ballpark Consultant Project Team
i. Nelson, Tietz and Hoye
ii. Ryan Companies US, Inc.
iii. Julie Snow Architects
iv. AECOM

rbi
regional ballpark initiative
REGIONAL BALLPARK INITIATIVE
FEASIBILITY REPORT
Lowertown Saint Paul, MN
July 2010
RESEARCH TEAM
Ryan Companies US, Inc.
Julie Snow Architects
Ellerbe Becket
Braun Intertec Corporation
St. Paul Saints
City of Saint Paul

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1) Executive Summary
A. Narrative

2) Site Conditions
A. Narrative
B. Figure 1: Property Acquisition Exhibit
C. Figure 2: Existing Conditions Exhibit
D. FAA Constraints
E. Figure 3: Proposed Zone B Map
F. Figure 4: Height Restriction Map

3) Conceptual Program
A. Narrative - General Parameters
B. Figure 5: General Layout and Concept of the Ballpark

4) Conceptual Site Plan
A. Narrative
B. Figure 6: Conceptual Site Plan
C. Figure 7: Birds Eye View of Regional Ballpark
D. Figure 8: Entrance Perspective from 5
th
Street

5) Traffic and Transportation
A. Narrative
B. Figure 9: Parking and Tailgating Map
C. Figure 10: Connectivity Map

6) Geotechnical and Grading Concerns
A. Narrative
B. Figure 11: Existing Topography Plan
C. Figure 12: Conceptual Grading Plan
D. Figure 13: Braun Geotechnical Memo

7) Environmental Contamination
A. Narrative
B. Figure 14: History of Property Owners
C. Figure 15: Existing information from surrounding properties
D. Figure 16: Braun Environmental Memo

8) Utilities
A. Narrative
B. Figure 17: Conceptual Utility Plan

1
9) Sustainability
A. Narrative

10) Cost Estimates
A. Narrative
B. Figure 18: Project Cost Estimate
C. Figure 19: Ballpark Cost Comparisons

11) Schedule
A. Narrative
B. Figure 20: Project Schedule

12) Appendix
A. Project Directory
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
FAA Draft Ordinance and Letters
Site Orientation and Sun Studies
Full Geotechnical Report

2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Purpose of Study
Ryan Companies US, Inc. was commissioned by the St. Paul Saints, the City of Saint
Paul, the City of Saint Paul Parks & Recreation Department, and the Capital City
Partnership to analyze the feasibility of developing a new regional ballpark in downtown
Saint Paul on the former Gillette site in Lowertown. The goal is to replace the
functionally obsolete, 30 year old Midway Stadium with a state of the art venue that
could take advantage of transit and other downtown infrastructure while still serving state
and regional needs for youth, amateur and the St. Paul Saints baseball.

The study team evaluated site constraints including environmental contamination,
geotechnical suitability, utilities, traffic, and zoning; produced a conceptual program, site
plan, and schedule; and completed a conceptual level project estimate. Study team
members included:

St. Paul Saints
Julie Snow Architects
Ellerbe Becket
Braun Intertec Corporation

The feasibility study was completed during the period from August 2009 to March 2010
with significant assistance from City of Saint Paul Planning and Economic Development,
Public Works, and the City of Saint Paul Parks & Recreation Department.

Vision
The vision for the new regional ball park in downtown
Saint Paul is for a 7,250-seat publicly-owned ballpark
that will host 160-180 events per year (50 St. Paul
Saints games, 100+ amateur baseball games, and
dozens of community events). The proposed site is
located in Lowertown adjacent to Farmers Market and
the Central Corridor LRT operations & maintenance
facility. A regional ballpark on the site has the
potential to provide linkage to three trail systems as
well as a destination and transit-oriented development anchor for east end of downtown.
A new regional ballpark located downtown is anticipated to draw upwards of 400,000
people per year.

Existing Facility
The current Midway Stadium was constructed in 1982.
It was initially intended to serve municipal athletics
only not a minor league baseball team and the
facility and the infrastructure are insufficient for all of
the users. Minimal upgrades made over the years by the
3
St. Paul Saints have extended the facilitys useful life, but the facility does not meet
current and future needs of players or families:

Locker rooms, bathrooms, and other areas are
not ADA compliant, and there are only a
handful of handicapped accessible seats for
patrons.
The insufficient number of bathrooms means
that the average customer will miss 1-2 innings
for each trip to the restroom.
Fields have sinkholes and grading issues and
require major soil corrections to repair.
Concrete plaza areas have major cracks and
need to be replaced.

Due to the age and quality of the facility, the City of
Saint Paul has determined that the stadium is beyond
the point of being able to renovate cost effectively. The
total cost of replacement of the ballpark on the existing
site is likely to be $25 - $30 million, based on prior
construction estimates commissioned by the City of
Saint Paul and updated conceptual estimates by Ryan
Companies.

St. Paul Saints
The St. Paul Saints are a major tenant of Midway Stadium; their annual rent supports
90% of ballpark operations. The Saints have been in business since 1993, and have 16
full time and 135 seasonal employees with a $1.3 million annual payroll (including
ballplayers). The Saints are regarded as best in class organization and their unique
partnership with the City of Saint Paul at Midway Stadium has created a home for
amateur baseball teams from around the region.

Proposed State Involvement
The City of Saint Paul requested $25 million in state bonding funds to support the
development of the Regional Ballpark Initiative at this Lowertown site. This request is
consistent with state investment in other amateur athletic venues throughout the state that
serve regional purposes.

St. Paul has been home to a regional ballpark since 1930, beginning with Lexington Park
(Lexington Avenue and University Avenue), the original Midway Stadium in the 1950s,
and finally the current Midway Stadium, built in 1987. The current ballpark serves
people and organizations throughout the region and state with more than 100 other events
per year, including:

4
Class A Minnesota Amateur Tournament
MSHSL Baseball Tournaments
o Section 4AAA
o Section 5AAA
o Section 4AA
o Section 4A
AAA State Baseball Tournament
Hamline University Baseball
American Legion District 4 Playoffs
Walk to Prevent Child Abuse
National Kidney Foundation Twin Cities Kidney Walk

In addition, the proposed ballpark leverages other state investments such as Lafayette
Bridge, Central Corridor LRT, public trails, and high speed rail. The City of Saint Paul
and the Saints are proposing a unique public/private partnership that cannot be realized
without state investment.

Conceptual Program
The Saints worked with Julie Snow Architects, Ellerbe Becket, and Ryan Companies to
develop a conceptual program that would serve the Saints and the myriad of amateur and
high school athletic programs that currently utilize the Midway Stadium. The general
parameters include:

7,250 Fixed seats with total capacity of 9,250 (2,000 General Admission)
6-8 Suites with flexible corporate areas that deliver suite-like amenities
Modern amenities, concessions & rest rooms
Classroom
Public plaza
Restaurant
Baseball Academy
Opportunities for year round use
Future trail connection between downtown and Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary

In addition, the Saints have indicated that their goals for the project are to create:

Best fan experience in the Twin Cities
Greenest ballpark in America
Community gathering place that celebrates Lowertown with a design that is
reflects the communitys artistic character

5
Lowertown Site
The proposed site is currently occupied by a multi-story industrial building with limited
parking, formerly occupied by The Gillette Company and more recently Diamond
Products. The building has been vacant for several years, and attempts to lease it have
been unsuccessful due to the buildings multi-level configuration, age, parking, and
downtown location.

Acquisition
The site is comprised of multiple property owners and parcels, some of which are
involved in the ongoing acquisition process between MnDOT, Met Council and
the property owners related to the Lafayette Bridge renovations and the Central
Corridor Operations and Maintenance Facility (OMF). The City of Saint Paul
will continue to monitor land acquisition process as it continues through the
summer of 2010, and will determine the further feasibility of acquiring the land
for the purpose of a Regional Ballpark. Once land is under control, the City of
Saint Paul and Ryan Companies will coordinate soil borings to confirm
constructability assumptions.

Environmental Contamination
The site has known environmental impacts to soil and ground water and is listed
as a hazardous waste generator. The MPCA is currently investigating a portion of
the Lowertown site for petroleum impacts. Based on findings on adjacent parcels
and information from Braun and the Met Council, we anticipate that there will
likely be a restrictive covenant on the site, which would prohibit the residential
uses originally called for in the Lowertown Comprehensive Plan.

Soil Conditions
Based on existing geotechnical information for adjacent properties, the bedrock is
over 100 deep on the site. There is a mixture of soil types in the top 20, much of
which is of insufficient quality for foundations. Reports show us there is decent
amounts of sand at the 20 mark and deeper. Due to the contamination, soft soils,
and other debris in the area it is anticipated that the project will require a piling
foundation roughly 40 to 50 feet deep.

The limits imposed to the site by the adjacent uses of the Lafayette Bridge, the Central
Corridor OMF, and Holman Field, along with the site topography and poor soil
conditions would significantly limit other commercial redevelopment opportunities. A
regional ballpark appears to be an ideal use for a site that is very difficult to redevelop, as
it would increase transit usage, utilize existing parking lots, and generate economic
activity that could support local businesses.

6
Benefits of Lowertown Site
The Lowertown site provides synergy with other state investments, providing the
opportunity to synchronize the schedule of the Regional Ballpark with other
infrastructure projects within 1-3 blocks of the site, including the Central Corridor OMF
(Operations and Maintenance Facility), the Lafayette Bridge, and the Union Depot
transportation hub.

Schedule
The timing of the proposed Regional Ballpark is ideal. If design funds are procured in
2011, programming and schematic drawings could be completed as design work for the
Lafayette Bridge and Central Corridor OMF projects are being finalized, allowing for the
projects to coordinate infrastructure requirements. Assuming an allocation of state
bonding in 2011, design could begin in the summer of 2011 and the ballpark could be
open for the 2013 baseball season. Coordinated timing of the ballpark project with the
construction of the LRT, Central Corridor OMF, Union Depot, and Lafayette Bridge
projects could minimize disruption and potentially reduce construction costs for all
projects. Much of the schedule depends on land acquisition of the site and if the City of
Saint Paul or other entities could fund the demolition, environmental cleanup, and soil
correction prior to receiving the construction funding from the State.

Economic Impact:
225 construction related jobs
[1]

240 Full time and seasonal jobs
[2]

$10 million per year of direct economic activity
[2]

400,000 visitors annually
[2]

75,000 new transit trips per year
[2]

Proposed Public/Private Partnership
The City of Saint Paul and the St. Paul Saints have already agreed to the general
parameters of an agreement and agreed upon preliminary economic terms.

Summary
The Regional Ballpark Initiative provides the opportunity to develop a regional ball park
that serves more than a dozen amateur baseball organizations from throughout the region
and state in a location that takes advantage of other State, City, and private sector
investments. The relationship envisioned is a model public-private partnership between
the City of St Paul & the St. Paul Saints Professional Baseball Club.

The feasibility study completed by Ryan Companies US, Inc. and its consultants validates
the functionality of the proposed site, identified unique extraordinary costs related to the
site, and proposed a conceptual total cost model that works within the framework
established by the City of Saint Paul and the Saints.
[1] Construction Job Estimate Per Ryan Companies
[2] Data from the City of Saint Paul
7
This use is an excellent one for a site that has significant environmental and market
constraints; should acquisition be pursued, this study lists out the next steps for the future
design work, environmental impact analysis, and environmental investigation that are
necessary to further refine the construction numbers.

The Regional Ballpark Initiative presents the opportunity to support the long term success
of a regional asset and the surrounding businesses and neighborhoods in Lowertown
Saint Paul.

8
SITE CONDITIONS

The Lowertown site being proposed for the Regional Ballpark has multiple constraints
that could impact the proposed program and the overall use of the site. We are listing
several of the current elements that will influence the conditions related to proposed land
use. There are existing conditions on the site as well as adjacent uses that will have an
impact on the design, the construction, and the operations of the ballpark:

Site boundaries and built structures, both municipal and private ownership
Metropolitan Council projects related to Central Corridor Light Rail (CCLRT)
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) projects related to the
reconstruction and expansion of the Lafayette Bridge Hwy 52 Mississippi
Crossing
Saint Paul downtown Airport Holman Field zoning changes, operated by the
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary, a City of Saint Paul owned and operated park
facility

The proposed site is bordered by state, regional, city and privately owned developments.
Borders to all sides of the proposed site have specific elements that do not allow for
significant movement of the proposed ballpark program in any direction and some
demolition of structures will be required to make room for this new facility within the
site. (See Figure 1)

Site Boundaries and Built Structures
The boundaries for the proposed site are I-94 to the north, Lafayette Bridge to the east,
the Diamond Product southern building to the south and Broadway Street to the west.
The proposed ballpark would include the demolition of the northern Diamond Product
building and the vacation of 5
th
Street and North John Street within the property. This
study anticipates that both parking lots north of 5
th
Street would also be removed and
incorporated into the site. The boundaries of the proposed ballpark site are shown on
Figure 2.

Metropolitan Council, CCLRT and OMF
The Central Corridor Light Rail Transit (CCLRT) will connect downtown Minneapolis to
downtown Saint Paul. The last stop in downtown Saint Paul will be at Union Depot,
which is located at 4
th
and Wacouta Street, 2 blocks west of the proposed ballpark. Met
Council is currently working on the design of the Central Corridor Operations and
Maintenance Facility (OMF) which will occupy the south building of the Diamond
Product site. Met Council plans to remodel and retrofit the building, this includes
reconstructing the roof, upgrading the structural system, and add some architectural
enhancements along Broadway and Prince Street. The Light Rail tracks will extend
roughly 400 feet east of the building. This facility will be used to store and maintain the
Light Rail cars. (See Figure 2)

9
The Met Council is in the process of acquiring the property for this facility and the
property directly to the east of the building to extend the railroad right of way. The
anticipated completion date of the acquisition process is currently anticipated to be
completed by Summer 2010.

Ryan Companies and Met Council have discussed the potential ballpark project and have
attended the Lowertown Task Force meetings in the summer of 2009 to understand
potential design issues for this area. The Central Corridor staff stated a potential ballpark
would be a welcomed neighbor and discussed the possibilities of sharing resources to
make both projects more efficient. This would include stormwater management areas,
parking, and the use part of the OMF roof as a potential green roof/patio area that would
overlook the ballpark and city. Due to the timing of construction and the timing of
potential funding for the ballpark some of these options may not be possible.

The land immediately to the east of the OMF will be occupied with rail lines for train
movements in and out of the OMF building, as shown on Figure 2. As of October 2009,
Met Council did not have plans for the eastern portion of this land and they were open to
discussion about a possible lease for parking or stormwater use.

Construction for the OMF building will start in the summer of 2010 and is scheduled to
be completed early in 2013. The CCLRT is scheduled to open for public ridership
starting in 2014.

Operations and Maintenance Building Schedule:
[1]
Bid Plans to be completed Spring/Summer 2010
Land Acquisitions Spring / Summer 2010
Start Construction Site Work Early fall 2010
Start Construction Building Remodel Late Fall /Early Winter 2010
OMF Building/ Facility to be completed Spring 2013
Full Light Rail operation Spring 2014

MNDOT, Lafayette Bridge
MNDOT is currently progressing on plans for the new Lafayette Bridge. The new
western bridge deck will have roughly the same alignment and height as the existing
bridge. MNDOT is planning on another bridge deck that will extend roughly 80 feet to
the east of the existing bridge deck. The on-ramp from eastbound I-94 to southbound
Highway 52 will have a larger radius and will extend into the potential ballpark site.
MNDOT is in the process of acquiring additional land for this on-ramp and for additional
ramps and stormwater ponding on the east side of the bridge. See Figure 2 for the new
bridge plans and the approximate area of right of way shown in red.

MNDOT is also planning on closing 5
th
Street from John Street which is on the eastside
of the Diamond Products building to Kittson Street. This area will be used for the new
bridge abutment, ramps, and side slopes. This work will include the relocation of most of
the utilities that are under 5
th
Street. MNDOT will be using the area just north of 4
th

Street for their stormwater management area. Due to the existing topography, soil
[1] Schedule Per Nick Landwer Met Council 7/13/10
10
conditions, and proposed slope they will not have enough capacity for a shared or
regional pond in this area.

MNDOT stated in a September 2009 meeting, they will require a 50 foot temporary
construction easement that will extend past the drip line of each bridge structure. Most of
the staging areas will occur on the east of the bridge and they do not see a need for any
additional need on the west side of the bridge. The permanent right of way will extend
approximately 25 feet beyond the drip line which is shown in red on Figure 2. MNDOT
may allow parking underneath bridges, but no structures. They do have some concerns
with parking and other uses inside the right of way during the winter with the snow
plowing.

Construction will start in 2011 and be completed in 2014.

Construction Schedule :
[1]
Start on the east bridge Winter /Spring 2011
East Bridge Completion Fall 2012
Demolition of Old Bridge and Start of West Bridge Fall 2012
Finish West Bridge Summer 2014

Saint Paul Downtown Airport Holman Field
Holman Field is roughly one (1) mile southeast of the site. The airport will have limited
restrictions on the site due close proximity of the site. See the FAA / MAC summary for
more details.

Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary
This City of Saint Paul park facility lies within the National Park Service's Mississippi
River and Recreation Area. The Sanctuary is roughly a one-half mile to the east of the
site. It is The Saint Paul Planning Staff and the Lowertown groups desire to incorporate a
bike and pedestrian access through the site to create a connection from downtown to the
sanctuary.

[1] MNDOT Schedule per 7/13/10 email per Project Engineer, Jennifer Read
11
FAA /MAC

The Saint Paul Downtown Airport Holman Field is roughly one (1) mile south, southeast
of the potential ballpark site. Due to its close proximity to the airport and the flight path
there will be additional zoning restrictions that will impact the potential ballpark.

The Saint Paul Downtown Airport Joint Airport Zoning Board completed a draft zoning
ordinance on June 5
th
, 2009, creating restrictions which may affect the ballpark design
and operations.

There are two different types of zoning on the site:
1) The eastern three acres of the site are located in Zone B, which prohibits stadiums,
ponding or other uses that may attract birds.
2) The remaining six acres of the site are located in Zone C which does not prohibit any
type of uses, but still restricts heights, lighting, and electronic interference. (See Figure 3)

The height limitations on the site vary from elevation 800 in the southeast corner of the
site to 845 in the northwest corner of the site. (See Figure 4) Given the current
topography of the site it will allow for structures from 60 to 100 high. The team will
have to monitor the height restrictions closely during the design, as similar ballparks can
have structures 50 to 100 feet in elevation. Consequently, a permit will be required for
crane operations during construction.

Ballpark lighting must not impair the visibility for pilots or the airport and must not make
it difficult for pilots to distinguish the airport lights. Advances in lighting technology in
the last 30 years have made lighting more efficient and directional. This results in less
light pollution and glare. Due to the height restrictions, the lighting maybe lower than
typical for a minor league ballpark which may make it more difficult to see the high fly
balls at night.

The Saints put on 3 to 5 fireworks shows per season and they are extremely hopeful they
can do the same at this location. The team has discussed this topic during our meeting
with MAC. Although they would not commit to allowing the fire works at this time, they
did seem that it would be a possibility a few times a year; it would require some
coordination with the airport during these events.

Per FAA standard, stormwater management system in Zone B must not attract birds or
other waterfowl. We will work with the City, the Watershed Distrist, MnDOT, Met
Council, and MAC to make sure we meet the needs and requirements for all parties.

The City of Saint Paul, the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, and the St. Paul
Saints provided testimony and written responses (see appendix) to the Joint Airport
Zoning Board in support of elimination of Zone B on the west side of the Lafayette
Bridge. If Zone B is not eliminated from the east side of the site, it will make this site
less flexible and more expensive to build. At the time of this report, it was the boards
12
opinion to keep the same zoning areas as the June 5
th
draft ordinance, but they are
looking at different language that would allow a ballpark of this size and capacity in Zone
B. In November Allen Lovejoy, Principal Planner for the City of Saint Paul proposed a
language to the board that would allow for a ballpark larger than 8,000 seats as long as
only 8,000 of them are in Zone B.

Next Steps
The team needs to review the revised draft ordinance and provide additional comments
that may affect the potential for a ballpark on this Lowertown site.

Below is the approximate timeline for the zoning process.

Timeline of Saint Paul Downtown Airport Zoning Ordinance:
[1]

JAZB to complete possible amendments/make recommendation to MnDOT
Commissioner
3
rd
Quarter 2010

MnDOT Commissioner provide comments back to JAZB
4
th
Quarter 2010

2
nd
Public Hearing
4
th
Quarter 2010

MnDOT Commissioner Signs off on final Ordinance
1
st
Quarter 2011

City of Saint Paul holds public hearing before Planning Commission and City
Council before final adoption
4
th
Quarter 2011

[1] Schedule per Allen Lovejoy City of Saint Paul 7-19-10
13
14
15
16
17
CONCEPTUAL PROGRAMMING

The conceptual program was prepared by Ellerbe Becket, serving as the baseball
consultant on this project. The general parameters established in the project proforma
were adhered to during the conceptual design process, which included the following
metrics:

7,050 Fixed seats
200 Suite seats
2,000 General admission seats ledge seating and outfield areas
9,250 Total capacity
No additional public parking

Ellerbe Becket with input from the Saints & JSA created a conceptual program
document. In addition, the St. Paul Saints and Ellerbe Becket worked to devise a
preliminary concept that enabled the team to derive the necessary revenue from the suite
level without spending as much capital dollars on the twenty-two individual suites
originally envisioned. Included as Figure 5, the floor plans are highly conceptual, but
generally adhere to the site plan prepared by JSA and Ryan Companies, as well as the
geotechnical considerations uncovered during the feasibility study.

The program envisions:

Suite Level
6-8 Private suites
4 - All inclusive club seating areas
Suite lounge
Press area
Restrooms
Storage
Flexible areas for meeting and classroom

Main / Field Level
Concessions
Restrooms
Public plaza
Restaurant
Baseball academy
Kids zone
Ticketing
Storage
Catering
10,000 SF Corporate tent area
18
Home/Visitor clubhouses
Pedestrian path to Bruce Vento Nature Trail
Group party deck
Terraced seats
Maintenance and service access points

Opportunities for Year Round Use:

Plans for indoor sports academy
In-park classroom
Banquet and catering facilities on premium/club level
Integration with Saint Paul Winter Carnival activities

Next Steps
During the schematic design phase, the design team will refine this concept further and
develop more detailed drawings and square footages per space type so that cost estimates
can be prepared. Our current cost precedents provide higher figures than the proposed
budget of the Regional Ballpark Initiative. The financial goal for achieving the proposed
cost model is a construction cost between $4,000- $4,500/ per fixed seat. The most
recent comparable minor league ballparks are summarized on Figure 19 which shows a
substantial range of cost per seat. A more accurate determination of cost will be the final
square footage of the ballpark, and how the space is utilized. This information will not be
developed in detail until the completion of schematic design.

As part of the schematic design process, the design build team would create a prioritized
list of options for achieving the target cost model. The team will work from the
assumption in the final proforma developed with the City of Saint Paul, which assumed
19
7,250 fixed seat and a range of $28 Million for the construction cost, excluding special
site/subsurface conditions.

Potential Value Engineering Options:

Seat product - utilize more bench with back seating and focus stadium style
seating to only special seating types/products
Develop level of finish expectations consistent with budget
Eliminate below grade construction - simple, single story, masonry construction
(can be considered as part of overall evaluation of structural options)
Construct seating bowl as all cast-in-place concrete / slab on grade and utilize
load bearing masonry concourse structures to support suite & press box level
Locate all team support and spectator buildings outboard from concourse; share
perimeter securing function; single story, simple masonry construction and/or
consolidate into as few stand alone structures as possible efficient skin, utility,
roofing, etc
Re-use scoreboard from Midway Stadium
Downgrade second Home Clubhouse to level of finish comparable to visitor
locker - make more basic
Locate bullpens in foul territory of main field versus constructing dedicated areas
Field construction - explore specific section conditions of the ball field that may
present cost savings
Bid Concession contract - bring in outside operator for concessions - entity will
contribute capital and/or fund fit out of kitchen equipment in exchange for rights
to building
Engage entity like CBS Sports, IMG, etc to provide media partnership financing -
guaranteed annual term equity in exchange to media rights in facility
Review specific Suite fit out budget assumptions - develop cost/sf for premium to
align with overall funding target
Relocate the proposed pedestrian and bike path thru the site to Prince Street.
Concentrate major support amenities from 1st base to 3rd base outfield
concourse becomes more temporary/mobile type amenities
Reevaluate the potential LEED and GREEN concepts and eliminate the lower
value / higher costing options
Eliminate some of the non-necessity items in the programming
20
21
22
23
SITE PLAN & ACCESS

Testing the capacity of the Lowertown site adjacent to the Central Corridor's Operating
and Maintenance Facility for a regional ballpark began with in-depth study in the urban
context of Saint Paul and the Lowertown neighborhood. Placing a 7,250 seat mixed use
ballpark on the site required understanding of a myriad of concerns from a wide range of
stakeholders. Addressing environmental and regulatory criteria has driven the ballpark
orientation to a southeast facing facility. Continued development of plan and program
components will be completed as funding approvals are released.

Transportation
The mixed-use facility is based on both professional and amateur programs with a
regional and statewide reach. Users and fans will arrive at the ballpark via multiple
modes of transportation options, including local public transportation with CCLRT and
Metro bus line service south and west of the site and public and private parking flanking
both east and west boundaries of the facility. For additional information related to
transportation and traffic management please refer to Section 5 of this document.

Orientation
The playing field orientation responds directly to the environmental conditions of
prevailing winds, solar sightline studies and existing contours for the site. Air traffic from
Holman Field crosses the site and FAA regulatory issues are addressed in the southeast
alignment with careful attention to park lighting systems. Additionally, service and
emergency access opportunities, as well as capitalizing on the unique views offered by
the Lowertown location have played a significant role in the current thinking for the
ballpark orientation and layout of associated program amenities. Figure 6 shows the
conceptual site plan for the ballpark.

In the course of the feasibility study, the team studied an option of a southwest facing
ballpark with home plate in the northeast corner of the site. This orientation allowed for
views of downtown for the majority of the spectators. However, solar sightline studies of
this orientation completed by Julie Snow Architects determined that the parks best
orientation would be a rotation to the southeast to eliminate potential sun blinding issues
during afternoon games. (The alternative layout and sample solar sightline study are in
Appendix)

Access
The primary entrance is proposed as an open plaza space along the western edge of the
ballpark. According to the current demographic studies the major source of pedestrian
traffic would originate in the downtown business district, public and private parking
facilities, the multimodal hub of Union Depot and from multifamily units throughout
Lowertown and other areas. Figure 7 shows a birds eye view of the Regional Ballpark.
Locating the main entry adjacent to the Saint Paul Farmers Market, along Broadway
Street, reinforces the connection of both programs and provides synergies as a common,
public space. Further development of an open plaza will provide extended views to
downtown Saint Paul off 5
th
Street and support a display area for public art. Figure 8
shows the existing 5
th
Street view of the Diamond Product building and a conceptual
plaza/entry view into the new ballpark.
24

To the north of the entry plaza is a larger paved area to be used as a pre-function plaza
and concourse viewing area, also serving as the required utility and emergency access
corridor. Emergency and fire truck access to the site along the north side double as an
access area for periodic maintenance of city run utilities.

A secondary entrance is planned along the eastside of the ballpark for the pedestrians that
choose to park to the east and south of the ballpark, taking advantage of tailgating
opportunities. In the current configuration, it is anticipated that a corporate picnic / plaza
area will be provided just beyond left field. The east entrance also accommodates bus
drop-off area for fans. Adjacent to this entrance is a separate and sheltered service entry
to provide access to back of house deliveries and for ballpark field maintenance.

A pedestrian and bike trail along the south end of the ballpark will connect 4th Street to
the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary trail system. An outdoor public passage will run along
the north site of the CCLRT Operation and Maintenance Facility, remaining open before
and after paid events. This will allow the public bike and pedestrian access from
Lowertown to the Bruce Vento Sanctuary and regional bike trail systems and destinations
west of the ballpark. While the connection from Broadway to the eastside of the ballpark
is included in this project, the cost and design of the remaining trail connection has yet to
be determined, and would likely require separate public funding.

Additional viewing areas south of the Ballpark as well as green roof options were
reviewed with the Met Council for the roof of the OMF. Structural feasibility studies of
the structural implications of these imposed loads to the existing facility are necessary.
Completion of structural modifications and required vertical transportation to maintain
public access are complicated by the CCLRT scheduled construction and start of
operations in 2012. A decision to accommodate this option will require design solutions,
pricing and potential funding scenarios to implement required structural modification to
the OMF facility. At this point, the base program for the Regional Ballpark does not
include a green roof on the OMF building.

Conclusion
The proposed ballpark and program will fit on the site as shown in the conceptual site
plan provided that all of the properties shown can be acquired for use by the ballpark, and
there are no major changes from the various adjacent users (OMF, Lafayette Bridge,
Holman Field) that would further infringe upon the ballpark site.

Next Steps
Once the project moves forward, soil borings should be completed as discussed in
Section 6 of this study. The exact nature of the soil conditions on the site will influence
the final site plan as it relates to designing a cost effective solution that minimizes
extraordinary site costs due to piling or soil corrections. Specifically, the soil conditions
at the 5
th
Street Plaza and the northern boundary of the site will influence the final design
of the ballpark, which will incorporate the a more detailed program to be completed in
the next design phase.

25
26
27
28
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION

As part of this study, The City of Saint Paul transportation division reviewed the parking
and the road system around the potential ballpark to understand the parking needs, the
potential traffic impacts, and road improvements that would be required for the Regional
Ballpark. If the project proceeds, there will be a more comprehensive study completed
during the design phase of the project as part of the approval process. The intial findings
are listed below.

Traffic
The City of Saint Paul Public Works division completed a preliminary traffic and parking
analyses based on a 7,500 seat ballpark. Below is the summary of their traffic findings
from October 29
th
, 2009.
Using Met Transit estimates, the 7,500 seat ballpark may have roughly 10% of the people
arriving at the ballpark by transit. This would leave 6,750 people that would be
commuting to the ballpark by car. There is an average of 3 people per vehicles for this
type of event, which would result in 2,250 vehicles added to the area during major events.
Most of the events would occur around 7:00 PM which is the off-peak traffic hours.
Running thru the traffic models there were no issues on the out lying street network and
no further road improvements would be necessary to maintain acceptable traffic flows
and levels.

Additional discussions with city staff suggested that due to the popularity and the traffic
for the Farmers Market, it is anticipated the major traffic generating events should not be
scheduled during the same time as the Farmers Market (Saturday and Sunday mornings
from 6 am 12 pm). As part of the larger traffic study that will be part of the EAW
process, we would recommend the planners analyze transit use for other similar ballparks
across the country to identify whether a 10% transit usage rate is reasonable for this use.

Parking
The City of Saint Paul Public Works also stated in the October 29, 2009 summary that
there is More than adequate parking existing in the adjacent Lowertown area See
Figure 9 for parking space counts and locations.

The downtown Saint Paul Station Area plan adopted by City Council in February 2010
also states that there is an oversupply of structure parking in downtown. The plan calls
for restricting the amount of new parking downtown.
[1]
This will help promote the Light
Rail Transit and new development in the downtown area. Given both these factors and
discussions with the Citys engineering and planning staff, it is anticipated that no new
parking would be required for the ballpark.

At the time of the completion of this report there have been no identified parking areas
that would be under contract for the specific use of the ballpark. The Saints would like to
provide tailgating spots for their fans and also recoup some revenue from event parking
fees. Negotiations with The City of Saint Paul, Ramsey County, and the Met Council
should continue during the site acquisition process to enable this program to be fulfilled. [1] Downtown Saint Paul Station Area Plan by Urban Strategies Inc
Topic #6 in Section 2.2 - Land Use
29

Transit
The Central Corridor Light Rail Transit is in the final design phases and should be
starting construction in 2010. The last stop in downtown Saint Paul will be at Union
Depot, which is 2 blocks west of the ballpark site. (See Figure 10) The ballpark will
provide a good partnership with the LRT. It is anticipated that the Central Corridor will
be in operation in 2014. At 10% usage, this should generate 1,500 transit trips (750 each
way) per game x 50 Saints games for a minimum of 75,000 new transit trips per year.

Union Depot will be a major transportation hub with Light Rail Transit, High Speed Rail,
and buses all congregating at this location. It is anticipated that Union Depot will open in
late 2012, with the LRT fully operational in 2014.

Lafayette Bridge
MNDOT will be starting construction on the new Lafayette Bridge in winter of 2011.
The new bridge is scheduled to be completed in the summer 2014. There will not be a
direct access to 7
th
Street for people going northbound on Highway 52. These people will
exit off a ramp to Kitson which runs north and south about mile to the east of the new
bridge. Kitson will connect to 7
th
Street.

Potential Future Roads
At the time of this report, it is unclear if there will be any road improvements east of the
Lafayette Bridge as part of the area transportation plan. The timing of the potential future
roads and the funding source has not yet identified. The only item that would be a
requirement for the ballpark is a small road connection from Prince to 4
th
Street to make
sure there is access to the east side of the site. Other potential road improvements east of
the bridge would help the ballpark traffic flow, but it would not be a requirement for the
project.

Bike and Pedestrian Access
The City Planning Staff and the Lowertown communities have expressed the need to
have an access to the Bruce Vento Sanctuary thru the site. There will be two main access
points from the downtown area. The primary route for pedestrian and bicyclist will be
thru the south side of the site. There should be enough room to provide a wide sidewalk
between the outfield fence and the OMF building. This sidewalk will be used during
event to get people to around the ballpark and will be closed during paid admission
events. During these events, people will need to use Prince Street as the primary route to
the sanctuary. Vehicle access with be from Prince or Kellogg to 4
th
Street. This corridor
is not currently in the ballpark budget and would need to be funded separately.

Schedule
Both the LRT and the new Lafayette Bridge scheduled for completion in 2014. The
ballpark could open as early as the summer of 2013 or tie its opening to the completion of
the major infrastructure projects.

30
The ballpark is not dependant on these projects to be completed prior to opening. Once
these projects are completed it will help to improve the traffic flow in the area, but the
traffic levels would not dictate these improvements must be completed prior to
operations. Construction of these projects should have little impact to the ballpark site
and should not affect construction or operation of the ballpark. There will be some
coordination during construction but no major conflicts are anticipated.

Next Steps
During the next phase of design and after confirmation the program and the site plan,
additional transportation analysis will be required for the project approvals. A major
portion of the approval process will be the MPCAs (Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency) EAW (Environmental Assessment Worksheet). A meeting with the MPCA
will be required to understand the full scope of work and study area that will be required
for the transportation section of the EAW.

31
32
33
GEOTECHNICAL AND GRADING

Ryan Companies hired Braun Intertec in the fall of 2009 to reviewed existing data on
soils in the subject area, and in immediate proximity of the site. No new soil borings
were authorized as part of this feasibility study. The purpose of the review was to
identify areas of concern for further investigation, and to provide guidance for
construction personnel as they completed their conceptual cost estimate.

Datum
Elevation information at the onset of the project was received in two datums, North
American Vertical Datum (NAVD) and the City of Saint Paul datum. The City of Saint
Paul informed Ryan Companies that their datum is 694.1 feet below NAVD. All
elevations were converted to NAVD, the standard for vertical survey control in the
United States.

Existing Site Grades
The existing site slopes from north to south. The highest elevation of 755 is in the
northwest corner and the lowest elevation of 712 is in the southeast corner. The entire
first level of the existing warehouse building on-site has a floor elevation of 716.0. (See
Figure 11)

Proposed Site Grades
Property boundary elevations, groundwater elevations, soft soils, and potential
contaminated soils are the primary influential factors shaping the grades on-site.

Groundwater elevations in an exhibit created by ERM in 2000 indicate a potential
groundwater elevation of 722 in the northwest corner of the site, sloping down to 701 in
the southeast corner of the site. Groundwater near the infield playing surface is shown at
720. The proposed infield was set at an elevation of 722 to keep it above the potential
groundwater elevations. A gradual slope toward the outfield fence will be needed to
provide drainage off of the field. With the infield surface at elevation 722, the outfield
fence could be as low as 720, however, the anticipated ground water near the fence is
much lower. Once site investigation and the design phase have started, further
examinations will be completed to determine solutions to the potential ground water
issues.

The concourse level elevation of 736.4 has been established to allow for adequate vertical
rise from the playing field for seating site-lines and to allow access off of Broadway
Street at an elevation near that of 5th Street.

The Service Level, including back of house amenities such as locker rooms and storage,
will be at an elevation close to that of the field. To avoid excavation and disturbing soils
for these amenities, their proposed location will be assigned to areas that have already
been excavated for the existing building pad. Further excavation will be required for
utility routing, a portions of the playing surface, seating areas and portions of the
concourse on the north side of the site. If further environmental testing indicates that
34
existing soils are suitable to be used as fill, a more efficient and cost effective approach
will be explored.

Previous investigations related to other uses for this site indicated that the soils on site are
most likely contaminated. These assumptions are detailed in Section 7, of this document.
To avoid excessive excavation and removal of these soils, the site will be designed to
maximize the amount of soils left in-place. The playing field will need to be placed, at a
minimum, four (4) feet above soils designated as contaminated. With the existing
building pad floor elevation of 716 and the lowest playing field surface elevation at 720,
the minimum separation is being provided at this time.

The preliminary design assumes that no grading operations will occur outside of the
property boundary. (See Figure 12) A large amount of retaining wall could be eliminated
along the north property line if grading is allowed within the I-94 right of way.
Continued discussion with MnDOT will be required to determine if this will be allowed
and if it can be a consideration for potential project cost savings. There may also be
opportunities to work with MnDOT to provide more efficient grading along the east side
of the property as it relates the modification of the Lafayette Bridge on ramp. Further
conversations with MnDOT will need to take place during the next phase of design to
determine if this is a feasible option for both projects.

The bearing capacity of the existing soils will also have an impact on the grading plan.
Data from several soil borings near the site along with the presence of piled structure
under the existing buildings suggests that the soils on site may have poor capacity. It is
anticipated that structures will need to be supported by driven piles and that the field will
need to be surcharged to minimize settlement. (See Figure 13)

Next Steps
Further geotechnical and environmental investigation will be completed when the project
proceeds so that a comprehensive understanding of site soil conditions can be identified.
This in-depth examination will allow the project team to determine the full range of
options available to mitigate and minimize site costs. This may include revising the site
layout and grading plan. It may be more cost effective to move some of the
programming around or revise the grading than to increase structure or import fill.

35
36
37
FIGURE 13
38
39
40
41
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION

The Regional Ballpark Initiative feasibility study utilized existing environmental
investigation reports, correspondence and other data from Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) files. As part of this study, Braun Intertec was engaged to complete a
summary of the existing environmental documents and known history of the site based on
work that they have completed for the Met Council on the Operations & Maintenance
Facility (OMF). A 2000 Environmental Phase I and a 2001 Phase II report included the
ballpark site, and both were reviewed by Braun for this study.

The site has a long industrial history dating back to the early 1900s, including coal gas
manufacturing, a shoe factory, cold storage, meat packing, plumbing wholesales,
transformer storage, and most recently the production of personal care products and paper
correction fluid. See Figure 14, the Historical Environmental date map. Brauns review
of the documents suggests that there is high potential for contaminated soil and
groundwater to be present throughout the site (Figure 15), and to be encountered during
construction of the ballpark. It is also anticipated that the construction process will
expose buried items given the history of the site. See Figure 16 for Brauns summary
report dated October 26, 2009. Below is a summary of their report:

The ballpark site is in the MPCA VIC (Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup) and
Petroleum Programs; future uses will need to be approved by both programs.
The ballpark site has known environmental impacts to soil and ground water.
The MPCA is currently investigating a portion of the ballpark site for petroleum
impacts.
The Diamond Product site will be required to file an Environmental Covenant and
Easement prior to sale; it is anticipated that this covenant will prohibit residential,
hospital, and school uses on the site.
The ballpark site was listed as a RCRA hazardous waste generator, and is also on
several state lists documenting leaking underground storage tanks and various
chemical releases.
Additional Phase II investigations need to be conducted with the approval of the
MPCA, but these cannot be completed without the approval of the current owners.
Ryan understands that the additional environmental investigation will not occur
until the acquisition of the site is completed by the Port Authority.
It is anticipated that the ballpark will need at least 4-feet of separation from
contamination to the field or bottom floor, the nature of the separation would be
determined by the MPCA after further investigation.

Next Steps
Braun recommends that a Phase I, Phase II work plan, Phase II Investigation,
Phase II ESA report, and a Response Action Plan be completed as part of the
next design phase. Braun estimates the total cost of this work to be $125,000.
At the end of this work, the team will be better able to estimate the total cost of
environmental remediation.
42
Ryan Companies & City staff will meet to discuss strategy for environmental
investigation process prior to the commencement of the design phase.
City will pursue funding for environmental remediation as part of Preliminary
Terms between City and Saints. Deadlines for the DEED and Ramsey County
ERF programs should be coordinated with Ryan. Please note that TBRA funds
would not be available should the site be acquired though eminent domain.
43
44
45
FIGURE 16
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
UTILITIES

Introduction
As a part of the ballpark feasibility study, a site investigation was completed to identify
existing utilities in the area of the ballpark site. These utilities needed to be identified to
understand if there is adequate service capacity for the proposed ballpark and if there are
any services that need to be relocated due to the location of structures on site. This helps
in identifying potential costs to relocate or upgrade the utilities to accommodate the
ballpark. Most utility providers in the area of the proposed site have been contacted and
the approximate location of their utilities has been identified. In the next phase of site
investigation, a site survey will need to be completed to identify all utilities in the area
and verify their exact locations.

Broadway Street and 5
th
Street are main corridors for utilities in Lowertown. The
ballpark will be located over 5
th
Street, requiring the utilities in this area to be relocated
to a separate area of the site. Fifth Street holds two fiber optic lines, a 30 inch sanitary
sewer line, a 36 inch sanitary sewer line, watermain, storm sewer, gas, electric and phone.
The two sanitary sewer lines currently combine into one 36 inch line east of the Lafayette
Bridge. The City of Saint Paul engineering staff has confirmed that these two lines could
be rerouted around the site as one 36 inch line. The current plan for routing these utilities
is to provide a corridor on the north side of the site that will also allow for fire and
maintenance vehicle access around the site. (See Figure 17)

A 12 inch sanitary line and a 54 inch MNDOT stormsewer enter the proposed site from
Interstate 94. The sanitary line routes through the site and connects to the 30 inch
sanitary along 5th Street. This line will be connected to the 36 inch sewer being routed
around the site. The stormsewer leaves the site further east on Interstate 94. A portion of
the storm sewer will need to be relocated to provide room for a retaining wall and for
routing other utilities. Both of these items will require MNDOT approval.

District Energy has hot water pipes approximately 45 feet south of the site along
Broadway. The nearest cold water pipes are located 230 feet west of the site at the
intersection of 5th Street & Wall Street.

Preliminary plans of the proposed Lafayette Bridge Expansion show off-ramps being
constructed over 5
th
Street, east of the bridge. MNDOT was unable to give us
information on their plans for relocating existing utilities within 5
th
Street. Further
coordination will need to be completed in the next phase of the feasibility study to make
sure that the ballpark utility relocations coincide with the MNDOT plans. There may be
opportunities to work with MNDOT to find a more cost effective approach for rerouting
the utilities if the timing of the ballpark design and the construction of the bridge allows.

Based on the utility demands and requirements provided by Ellerbe Becket and the
information provided by the City of Saint Paul and other private utility companies, there
is adequate utility supply in the area to support the ballpark.

55
Stormwater Management
Capital Region Watershed District (CRWD) requires that one (1) inch of stormwater
from all impervious areas be infiltrated on site. If stormwater can not be infiltrated on-
site due to contamination, high water table or other reasons, 1.3 inches of rain from all
impervious areas needs to be filtrated prior to discharging to the regional storm sewers.
A series of stormwater pipes area being proposed to capture this stormwater. We are
anticipating that turf grass will be used on the field and that the stormwater in these pipes
will be used for irrigation. If an artificial turf is proposed, all of the stormwater will need
to be filtrated by a mechanical device.

CRWD also requires that the post construction stormwater runoff rates, not exceed the
existing runoff rates for the 2, 10 and 100 year rain events. The existing site is mostly
impervious surface which creates high runoff rates. The proposed site will contain large
green areas that will decrease the rate that stormwater leaves the site.

Soils Considerations
Borings taken near the proposed site indicate that there may be layers of peat soil,
contaminated soils and a high groundwater level on the site. Peat typically causes
settlement which would cause the utilities to settle and hinder the flow of all gravity
services. Contaminated soils combined with high ground water can cause contamination
to leak into sanitary and storm sewers near this location. High groundwater can also
cause buoyancy in utilities that arent heavy enough or have enough fill to keep them
planted. There are methods for preventing each of these scenarios. Borings will need to
be taken on-site in the next phase of site investigation to determine if peat, contamination
and high groundwater are a constraint for the ballpark and how it will affect the cost and
construction of the utilities

Summary
The ballpark will require some major relocation of utility mains in 5th Street to be
rerouted around the site. The City of Saint Paul Public Works Department verified that
the proposed rerouting shown on the concept utility plan is acceptable.
Based on the information from the utility providers and the concept demands provided by
Ellerbe Beckett, the utilities in the area are adequate to support the ballpark.

Next Steps
There should be a review of the MnDOT plans once completed to understand the
relocation of utilities on the 5
th
Street on the east side of the bridge. This may have an
impact on the ballparks plans for relocating the utilities on the west side of the bridge.

Once the next phase of design begins there will need to be a verification of utility
demands and stormwater requirements. There also should be a meeting with the utility
providers to discuss service rates, incentives, and scope of work to provide service.
56
57
SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

The proposed regional ballpark aspires to implement sustainable strategies, which will
follow multiple national and state guidelines and criteria:

United States Green Building Council (USGBC), Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED)
B3 State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines (B3-MSBG)

LEED and B3-MSBG guidelines are designed to complement each other to reinforce
sustainable solutions in the design and operations of the facility. Projects funded through
state bonding require by law to meet the B3-MSBG criteria. There are both
environmental and financial benefits to earning LEED certification and following MSBF-
B3 guidelines; identifying and following sustainable strategies typically lead to
significant long-term benefits:

Lower operating costs and increase asset value.
Reduce waste sent to landfills.
Conserve energy and water.
Be healthier and safer for occupants.
Reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions.
Qualify for tax rebates, zoning allowances and other incentives
Demonstrate a commitment to environmental stewardship and social
responsibility.

USGBC, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LEED is a third-party certification program and the nationally accepted benchmark for
the design, construction and operation of high performance green buildings. LEED gives
building owners and operators the tools they need to have an immediate and measurable
impact on their buildings performance. LEED promotes a whole-building approach to
sustainability by recognizing performance in five key areas of human and environmental
health: sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection
and indoor environmental quality.
[1]

Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines
All new buildings funded in whole or part by Minnesota bond monies after January 1,
2004 must meet the Minnesota Sustainable Building Design Guidelines. The initial
review of the project has revealed potential guideline compliance issues. Below are the
sustainable building guidelines that may require a request for variances:

S.2 - Stormwater Management - (Runoff Rate)
The requirement states that there shall be no discharge from the site for a 1.25 inch
rainfall based on the Rational Method.

[1] Excerpt taken from USGBC Website at http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=222

58
The most commonly used technique to control runoff is infiltration. Due to the
contaminated soils currently on site it may be difficult if not damaging to the
environment to infiltrate this amount of water. The way we might be able to
fulfill this requirement is to capture the runoff in a storage tank and use the water
for irrigation. It will take further design analysis to see if this is possible.

S.3 - Soil Management
The requirements states that site disturbance (defined as piling, tilling, scraping, storing,
and removal of any and all soil) must be limited to 40 feet beyond the building perimeter,
5 feet beyond primary roadway curbs, walkways, and main utility branch trenches, 5 feet
beyond tree driplines and the edges of site areas identified for protection and 25 feet
beyond pervious paving areas and stormwater management features that require
additional staging areas in order to limit compaction in the constructed areas.
Removal of existing buildings, pavement and contaminated soils will prevent the
team from meeting this requirement.

S.4 - Sustainable Vegetation Design
On previously developed sites, the new construction will maintain or improve natural site
functions and biodiversity for 50% of site area (excluding building footprint) in
accordance with existing conditions and surrounding site context.
The site layout for the proposed program will not provide the 50% open or natural
requirement for functions and biodiversity. The project will request a variance on
this requirement.

S.5 - Light Pollution Reduction
The guideline limits the maximum vertical illuminance levels at property line to .6 foot-
candles. This requirement is for urban areas having both residential and commercial use
and experiencing high levels of night time activity.
The pre-game plaza will require lighting that is well above the allowed
illuminance along the property line of the proposed site.

Below are recommended sustainable guidelines that the proposed ballpark will meet:
S.10 Brownfield Redevelopment
S.12 Transportation Impacts Reduction

Next Steps
At the start of the next design phase the project team will need to meet and discuss sustainable
goals for the project. This will include reviewing of the LEED checklist and discussing systems,
options, and the economics. This will help set the groundwork for an efficient and collaborative
design.
We will also have to meet with the States B3 reviewing agency to go over the project and the
possible waivers/variances that will be needed.
59
COST ESTIMATING

Ryan Companies worked with the City of Saint Paul and the St. Paul Saints to refine the
assumptions used in the conceptual budget presented here.
The items that were included in the pursuit budget are excluded from this conceptual total
budget as they were funded separately through the City of Saint Paul, the St. Paul Saints,
and the Capital City Partnership. The pursuit budget was intended to cover
predevelopment activities that occurred between July 2009 and April 2010, prior to
approval of the capital budget request for the project in the 2009/2010 session. Should
the funds for the project not be obtained in the 2009/2010 session, either the total
conceptual budget or the pursuit budget will need to be adjusted to reflect the additional
costs for pursuing a bonding request in the 2010/2011 session.

Special Site Constraints
The existing building is a concrete structure supported on steel piling. Due to subsurface
conditions the lowest floor of the existing building is on a structural slab. Based on soil
borings from MNDOT, it appears that the site has a layer of organic deposits (peat)
approximately 20 feet below the surface. The load from any fill material placed on top of
the existing ground surface will result in settlement as the organic layer consolidates.
Therefore, the geotechnical engineer has expressed their concern regarding the potential
for differential settlement in areas of fill. Additionally, the existing building piling will
resist the settlement in localized areas thus contributing to the differential settlement. To
alleviate that issue we will either extract the piling or cut off the upper portion of the
piling. The playing surface will be surcharged to accelerate the organic layer settlement.

Due to the soil conditions noted above all structures will have to be supported on deep
foundations (steel piling assumed to be 70 feet long). Soil supported construction such as
a concrete slab on grade and concrete stadia seating will not be permitted. Therefore,
items that would normally be constructed on and supported by the soil are now required
to be structural elements. At this point in time our approach to the foundations and
excavation work is based on Brauns Geotechnical Summary. Unfortunately, their
summary is based on soil borings that are located hundreds of feet from the infield.

Going forward, one of the first priorities will be confirmation of subsurface soil
conditions by conducting soils test of the site. In order to minimize cost the site layout
and design should recognize the findings of the soils investigation.

Cost Modeling
For the conceptual cost estimating we took comparable per seat costs for recently built
comparable ballparks and added the extraordinary site costs and soft costs to come up
with a total estimated amount. We verified this number by taking the total programming
square foot cost and multiply it to a comparable cost per square foot cost. Architectural
plans were not developed beyond sketches as part of the feasibility study. Because we
are still very early on in the concept stages of the project, we felt it more accurate to use
per seat and per square foot cost comparison than to spend additional dollars developing
plans for cost estimating purposes. Given all of the financial consideration and limits of
60
the ballpark, the project team will need to choose very carefully where to spend the
money.

Soft Costs + Per Seat Cost & Hard + Extraordinary Costs
The project team looked at several comparable and recent built ballparks around the
county. Figure 19 shows 8 ballparks with seating capacity, construction costs, and cost
per seat. We did complete a concept grading and utility plan to understand some of the
site constraints with topography, the high-water table, stormwater management, soils
concerns, contamination, and the utilities that will have to be relocated. Many of these
items are addressed in the extraordinary costs listed below. The cost estimate does not
include offsite road or other infrastructure improvements beside the relocation of the
utilities located in 5
th
Street.

Soft Costs
1. Land Acquisition. For the purposes of this study, land acquisition costs are to be
determined. The exact price of the property will be determined through the
process initiated by the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Department of
Transportation, with the acquisition of the project parcel managed by the Saint
Paul Port Authority on behalf of the City of Saint Paul (per Memorandum of
Understanding between City and St. Paul Saints).
2. Design costs were estimated at 6.5% of construction seat costs ($28 Million)
excluding extraordinary site costs. This is intended to include architectural,
engineering (structural, civil, mechanical, electrical), landscaping, and specialized
consultants for items such as lighting, sprinkler, etc.
3. Project Management was estimated at 1.5% of total costs. This item would cover
the costs of a Development Project Manager to oversee all aspects of the project.
4. Financing Costs were estimated $1,925,000, which may include several different
financing options available.
5. Owners Contingency is estimated at 3% of Total Project costs (construction seat
costs of $28 M and soft costs), excluding extraordinary site costs.
Hard Costs
The total construction seat costs were estimated at $28 Million based on a per seat
estimate of $4,000 with 7,000 fixed seats. This cost is on the low end of the range of
per seat costs provided by the baseball consultant, and would require that the design
be coordinated to achieve that budget.
1. Stadium Piling and structure is estimated at $2,637,000. Estimate provided by
Ryan Companies US, Inc. This item includes the deep foundation system (piling
and pile caps) as well as a structural slab in lieu of slab on grade at the lowest
level of the stadium. Due to soil conditions all stadia will be structured, not grade
supported.
61
2. Plaza Structure is estimated at $1,323,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. This item includes a deep foundation system and structural
slab for 31,000 SF of plaza slab.
3. Soil Surcharge is estimated at $92,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies
US, Inc. as noted in the geotechnical section, the playing field will be surcharged
with soil to induce consolation of the peat layer. The intent is to mitigate the
magnitude of differential settlement in the playing field.
4. Block Retaining Wall is estimated at $400,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. Due to the layer of organic material, site retaining walls will
have to be supported on deep foundations or geopiers. The estimate includes a
Recon wall supported by geopiers. The Soils Investigation will have to verify the
suitability of geopiers for this application
5. Retention System is estimated at $751,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. The entire site will be excavated to approximately the same
elevation as the playing field; thus requiring a temporary retention system on the
west and north sides of the site.
6. Stormwater Storage Treatment System is estimated at $350,000. Estimate
provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. A compensatory underground storage
system in the form of a pipe gallery will be required to comply with the Capitol
Region Watershed requirements.
7. We provided a budget for miscellaneous items. These may in include
sustainability / LEED enhancements, architectural enhancements, and other
potential ballpark upgrades.

Extraordinary Site Costs
1. Building demolition is estimated at $2,636,000 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This
cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their
agreement with the St. Paul Saints. Building demolition includes removal of the
structured floor slab at grade level, pile caps and the upper 20 feet of the steel
piles. This building is a very heavily reinforced concrete structure designed for
warehouse loading. The upper portions of steel piles are being removed to avoid
the differential settlement issue noted above.
2. Removal of 5th Street is estimated at $16,500 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This
agreement with the St. Paul Saints.
3. Offsite road improvements were included as an allowance of $500,000 to cover
John and 4th Street (one portion of the total estimate provided by the Public
Works department, which covered additional future road improvements not
required by the project). The total cost is yet to be determined and the work
62
would be estimated and completed by the City of Saint Paul Public Works
department. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of
the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints.
4. Environmental Investigation is estimated at $125,000 for Phase II investigation
work. This estimate was provided by Braun Intertech. This cost would be
handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with
the St. Paul Saints. It is assumed that public funds would be requested to offset
remediation costs.
5. Environmental disposal of excess soil in landfill is estimated at $1,000,000 based
on the assumption that excess soil would need to be transported to a hazardous
waste landfill. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part
of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. It is assumed that public
funds would be requested to offset remediation costs.
6. The cost of a raised bike path for the Bruce Vento connection was estimated at
$500,000. This is an allowance based on the assumption that the path would
require piling. This number will be further refined as design progresses. This
agreement with the St. Paul Saints.
7. Utility Relocation costs were estimated for the water and sewer lines in 5th Street
at $495,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would
be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement
with the St. Paul Saints. Per the City of Saint Paul, the cost of relocating private
utility lines would be borne by the private utilities per an existing agreement with
the City.
8. OMF Green Roof is not currently in the project scope and was not included in the
cost estimate at this time.

Programming Square Footage Cost Comparisons
Ellerbe Becket completed a concept program on January 13, 2010. The total
programming square footage was 196,000 SF. Given the anticipated soft costs,
extraordinary site work costs, and financial capacity for the project, the hard cost of the
project cannot exceed $35 million or $178 per square foot. Once again this is a very
economical price per square foot.

Summary
To solidify the cost model, many of the site assumptions will need to be verified and
schematic plans need to be developed to fully understand the real costs of the project. To
get the project down to the targeted hard cost budget of $35 million, an economical
$4,000 per seat cost and a $178 per SF costs would be required.

63

Next Steps
The project team will need to evaluate the potential value engineering options (listed in
the Section 3 Programming) along with almost real time cost modeling early on in future
design phases to be able to get the hard construction costs down to the budgeted $35
million.

64
REGIONAL BALLPARK INITIATIVE:
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
FIGURE 18 - PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
TOTAL COST
Land Acquisition
TBD
Soft Costs
Design (6.5% of Construction) 1,820,000
Project Management (1.5% of Total Project Costs) 518,295
Financing Cost 1,925,000
Owner's Contingency (3%) 910,149
Subtotal Soft Costs 5,173,444
Hard Costs
Construction (7000 seats @ $4000/seat) 28,000,000
Stadium Piling and Structure 2,637,000
Plaza Structure 1,323,000
Place Surcharge 92,000
Block Retaining Wall at North side of site 400,000
Retention System 751,000
Stormwater Storage & Treatment 350,000
Miscellanous Items 1,000,000
Subtotal Hard Costs 34,553,000
Building Demolition 2,636,000
Removal of 5th Street 16,500
Offsite Roads (John & 4th only) 500,000
Environmental Investigation 125,000
Environmental Disposal of Excess Soil in Landfill 1,000,000
Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento Trail 500,000
Utility Relocation from 5th & Broadway (Water and Sewer) 495,000
Subtotal Extraordinary Site Costs 5,272,500
TOTAL COSTS
44,998,944
65
66
PROJECT SCHEDULE

In reviewing all of the major scheduling components and critical path factors of the
project, the best case scenario for the ballpark to open would be in the spring of 2013 if
all of the funding, land acquisitions and review approvals meet the schedule.

At the time of this report there are still questions on the actual timing of the land
acquisition and if / when public funding would become available.

Major Milestones of the Schedule

The Land Acquisition
Land control of the site will dictated when it will be possible to complete the
necessary on-site testing to verify the environmental and geotechnical
assumptions listed in the other sections of this report. These two items could have
major impact on the layout, design, and cost impacts of the project. Because of
these critical factors, there should be minimal design work done prior to the
investigation.

Funding
In order to start the design work there will need to be additional funds to start the
on-site testing and the design of the ballpark. This will be dependent on the state
support for the $25 million or at least some support for the design aspects of the
project. If there are no design funds available by the mid summer of 2011, the
schedule may pushed out.

EAW / Approval Process
We are anticipating the EAW permitting approval process will take roughly 1-
year to 18-months to complete. This will depend on several factors and
requirements that will need to be discussed with the MPCA, the City of Saint
Paul, and other reviewing agencies. The MPCA was not comfortable with stating
approximate schedules until the project was further along in the design process
and we could provide more information to them. If the EAW takes longer than 1-
year from the start of design to approval, it will push out the opening date of the
ballpark. The City of Saint Paul felt that all other rezoning, permitting, and
approvals may run concurrent with the EAW process and should fall within the
approval of the EAW. Once the design funding is approved we will have a scope
and schedule meeting with the MPCA and the City of Saint Paul to verify the
approximate timing.

Demolition and Surcharging
The environmental testing of the building and site need to take place prior to
demolition of the building. We anticipate that this would take roughly 3 months to
complete and acquire the approvals to start demolition of the building. There
maybe delays in getting the approvals and abatement completed if there are
unforeseeable issues or major abatement is needed. It would also be a good idea
67
to close down and vacate the on-site portion 5
th
Street prior to the start of
demolition for both cost savings and safety precautions. We anticipate a fall 2011
demolition schedule. The site would require roughly 210 days from the start of
demolition to the removal of the surcharge material. This assumes that the City of
Saint Paul or other entities could fund this work while the ballpark is going thru
the EAW process and other approvals.

Ballpark Construction
The ballpark construction should take roughly 10 months after the surcharge is
complete. If the start of the construction slips past July 1, 2012, there will be
some risk of not getting the project completed prior to the start of the Saints 2013
season. One of the major items with the winter construction is making sure that
the grass is established before the season begins.

Summary
A summer 2013 opening of the ballpark could be possible if the land acquisition,
the funding, and all of the approvals meet their earliest targeted dates. Given the
complexity of the project and that the project team would have to commit some
money for demolition prior to full approval and funding of the project, a May
2013 opening is unlikely.

68
2009
QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 2 QTR 2 QTR 2 QTR 2 QTR 1 QTR 1 QTR 1 QTR 1
2010
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN (09/01/09 - 02/01/10)

FUNDRAISING (09/01/09 - 02/02/12)
2011 LEGISLATIVE SESSION (11/02/10 - 05/14/11)
ACQUISITION (06/01/11 - 09/01/11)
DESIGN (06/01/11 - 06/01/12)
EAW PROCESS (06/01/11 - 06/01/12)
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES (05/01/12 - 05/27/12)
DEMOLITION AND SURCHARGING (10/01/11 - 07/01/12)
BALLPARK CONSTRUCTION (07/01/12 - 04/15/13)
Ballpark Opens (05/01/13)
OMF CONSTRUCTION (06/01/10 - 01/07/13)
LRT CONSTRUCTION (06/01/10 - 12/10/12)
LRT TESTING (12/11/12 - 12/09/13)
LRT Operational (01/01/14)
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION - EAST SIDE (09/01/10 - 07/03/12)
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION - WEST SIDE (07/04/12 - 05/06/14)
*
2011 2012 2013 2014
FIGURE 20 - REGIONAL BALLPARK INITIATIVE SCHEDULE
*
69

APPENDIX

A. Project Directory

AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
FAA Draft Ordinance and Letters
Site Orientation and Sun Studies
Full Geotechnical Report

70
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Revised: July 19, 2010
Saint Paul, MN

Below is the list of people that contributed to the Feasibility Report

Description/CSI Title/Scope Company Name/Address/E-mail Contacts/Phone/Fax #/Cell

Tenant

Exe Vice President
ST.PAUL SAINTS

St. Paul Saints
Midway Stadium
1771 Energy Park Drive
St. Paul, MN 55108
twhaley@saintsbaseball.com

Tom Whaley
P: (651) 644-3517
M:(651) 233-0174
F: (651) 644-1627

Tenant Vice President St. Paul Saints
Midway Stadium
St. Paul, MN 55108
annieh@saintsbaseball.com

Annie Huidekoper
P: (651) 644-3517
F: (651) 644-1627

Tenant Vice President St. Paul Saints
Midway Stadium
St. Paul, MN 55108
dsharrer@saintsbaseball.com

Derek Sharrer
P: (651) 644-3517
F: (651) 644-1627

Economic
Development
VP Economic
Development
Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce
401 North Robert Street, Suite 150
Saint Paul, MN 55101
susan@saintpaulchamber.com
Retired Summer 2010

Susan Kimberly
P: (651) 265-2796
F: (651-223-5119

Development Dir of Development RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.

50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55403

Currently Employed by
Ackerberg
3033 Excelsior Boulevard, Suite 10

Joanna Hicks

P: 612-924-6417
F: 612-924-6499
Construction Team Leader Ryan Companies US, Inc.
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Dave.gotham@ryancompanies.com

Dave Gotham
P: (612) 492-4265
F: (612) 492-3265
Environmental Sr. Environmental Ryan Companies US, Inc.
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Marie.mccallum@ryancompanies.com

Marie McCallum
P: (612) 492-4331
F: (612) 492-3331
71
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Saint Paul, MN



Architecture Dir of Architecture Ryan Companies US, Inc.
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Randy.gould@ryancompanies.com

Randy Gould
P: (612) 492-4479
M: (612) 867-2793
F: (612) 492-3479

Civil Site Team Leader Ryan Companies US, Inc.
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Jared.olson@ryancompanies.com
Jared Olson
P: (612) 492-4447
M: (612) 360-3203
F: (612) 492-3447

Civil Civil Engineer Ryan Companies US, Inc.
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Chris.brink@ryancompanies.com
Chris Brink
P: (612) 492-4244
M: (612-718-4714
F: (612) 492-3244

Landscape Landscape
Architect
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
Kevin.pfeiffer@ryancompanies.com

Casey.harris@ryancompanies.com

Kevin Pfeiffer
P: (612) 492-4366
F: (612) 492-3366

Casey Harris
P: (612) 492-4654
F: (612) 492-3654

Arch & Eng Sr. Design
Assistant
50 South 10
th
Street, Suite 300
jenelle.daley@ryancompanies.com
Jenelle Daley
P: (612) 492-4241
F: (612) 492-3241

Consultant Government &
Community
Consultant
JEL CONSULTING

JEL Consulting
1141 Portland Avenue
ballparktours@qwest.net

Julian Empson Loscalzo
P: (651) 227-3437
M: (612) 328-1145
F: (651) 227-3473

Architecture

Architect
JULIE SNOW ARCHITECTS, INC.

Julie Snow Architects, Inc.
2400 Rand Tower
527 Marquette Avenue
Julie@juliesnowarchitects.com

Julie Vanden Berg Snow
P: (612) 359-9430
M: (612) 803-8335
F: (612) 359-9530

Architecture Architect Julie Snow Architects Inc.
2400 Rand Tower
matt@juliesnowarchitects.com

Matt Kreilich
P: (612) 359-9430
F: (612) 359-9530

72
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Saint Paul, MN



Ballpark
Consultant

Principal
ELLERBE BECKET

Ellerbe Becket
2380 McGee, Suite 200
Kansas City, MO 64108
Jon_niemuth@ellerbecket.com

Jon Niemuth
P: (816) 561-4443
M: (816) 674-6784
F: (816) 561-2863
Ballpark
Consultant
Director Ellerbe Becket
800 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55402-2014
Maryclaire_olson@ellerbebecket.com
Mary Claire Olson
P: (612) 376-2221
F: (612) 376-2271

Ballpark
Consultant
Principal Engineer Ellerbe Becket
800 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55402-2014
Dan_dickenson@ellerbebecket.com

Daniel R. Dickenson
P: (612) 376-2327
M: (612) 239-9037
F: (612) 376-2554

Geotechnical

Principal Engineer
President
BRAUN INTERTEC

Braun Intertec
1826 Buerkle Road
St. Paul, MN 55110
bjanssen@braunintertec.com

Robert Janssen
P: (651) 487-7017
M: (612) 865-8786
Geotechnical Senior Engineer Braun Intertec
1826 Buerkle Road
smartin@braunintertec.com

Steven B. Martin
P: (651) 487-7026
M: (612) 221-2504
F: (651) 487-1812
Environmental Associate Principal Braun Intertec
11001 Hampshire Avenue South
jforce@braunintertec.com

Jennifer A. Force
P: (952) 995-2454
M: (612) 360-0723
F: (952) 995-2020

City of Saint
Paul

Special Projects
Coordinator
CITY OF SAINT PAUL

Office of Mayor Coleman
25 West Fourth Street
joe.spencer@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Joe Spencer
P: (651) 266-8524
Planning &
Economic
Development
Director City of Saint Paul, Department of
Planning & Economic Development
Cecile.bedor@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Cecile Bedor
P: (651) 266-6628
F: (651) 228-3261

73
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Saint Paul, MN



Public Works City Engineer City of St Paul, Department of Public
Works
1500 City Hall Annex
John.maczko@ci.stpaul.mn.us

John P. Maczko
P: (651) 266-6137
F: (651) 266-6222

Planning &
Economic
Development
Senior Planner City of St. Paul, Department of Planning
& Economic Development
25W Fourth Street
Lucy.thompson@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Lucy Thompson
P: (651) 266-6578
F: (651) 228-3261
Planning &
Economic
Development
Planner City of St. Paul, Department of Public
Works
25W Fourth Street
Allen.lovejoy@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Allen Lovejoy
P: (651) 266-6226
Public Works Project Manager City of St Paul, Department of Public
Works
mike.klassen@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Mike Klassen
P: (651) 266-6209
F: (651) 266-6222

Public Works

Sewer Utility City of St Paul, Department of Public
Works
700City Hall Annex
anca.sima@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Anca Sima
P: (651) 266-6237
F: (651) 298-5621

Public Works

Civil Engineer City of St Paul, Department of Public
Works
700 City Hall Annex
mike.kassan@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Michael Kassan, Jr.
P: (651) 266-6249
F: (651) 298-5621

Safety &
Inspections
Project Facilitator City of Saint Paul, Department of Safety
& Inspections
375 Jackson Street, Suite 220
Larry.zangs@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Lawrence R. Zangs
P: (651) 266-9109
F: (651) 266-9040

74
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Saint Paul, MN



Fire Inspections Fire Protection
Engineer
City of Saint Paul, Department of Safety
& Inspections
375 Jackson Street, Suite 220
angie.wiese@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Angie Wiese
P: (651) 266-8953
F: (651) 266-8951

Watershed Permit
Coordinator
CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED
DISTRICT

Capitol Region Watershed District
1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4
forrest@capitolregionwd.org

Forrest Kelley
P: (651) 644-8888
F: (651) 644-8894

Airport
Commission
Manager METROPOLITAN AIRPORT
COMMISSION

Metropolitan Airport Commission
Aviation Noise & Satellite Program
6040 28
th
Avenue South
cleqve@macnoise.com

Chad Leqve
P: (612) 725-6326
F: (612) 725-6310

Metropolitan
Council

Asst. Project
Director
CENTRAL CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL
TRANSIT

Central Corridor Light Rail Transit
540 Fairview Avenue North, Suite 200
Griggs Midway Building
Gary.erickson@metc.state.mn.us
Retired Summer 2010

Gary J. Erickson
P: (651) 602-1936
M: (715) 699-3584
F: (651) 602-1920
Metropolitan
Council
Architect Central Corridor Light Rail Transit
Kyle.williams@metc.state.mn.us

Kyle Williams
P: (651) 602-1913
M: (651) 592-4700
F: (651) 602-1920

Metropolitan
Council
Outreach
Coordinator
Central Corridor Light Rail Transit
dana.happel@metc.state.mn.us

Dana Happel
P: (651) 602-1954
M: (612) 968-8382
F: (651) 602-1920

75
PROJECT DIRECTORY
Saint Paul, MN



MNDOT/Lafayet
te Bridge
Professional
Engineer
MINNESOTA DEPT. OF
TRANSPORTATION

Minnesota Department of Transportation
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113-3174
Jennifer.read@dot.state.mn.us

Jennie Read
P: (651) 234-7713
F: (651) 234-7709
Community

Director SAINT PAUL RIVERFRONT
CORPORATION

Saint Paul Riverfront Corporation
25 Sixth Street West
griffin@riverfrontcorporation.com

Timothy J. Griffin
P: (651) 293-6864
F: (651) 293-6868

76

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

PLANNING BUDGET

Funded Thru Ryan Co's Interim Agreement w/ SPSBC Phase II Total
Budget Project
Description (Thru DD) Budget
Soft Costs - Basic Services
Predesign & Schematic Design Total (3% of total project cost) 1,030,607 $ 1,030,607 $
Design Development Total (3.5% of total project cost) 1,202,375 $ 1,202,375 $
Architect-of-Record (included above) - $ - $
Ballpark Consultant (included above) - $ - $
Design Architect (included above) - $ - $
Structural Engineering (included above) - $ - $
MEP Engineering (included above) - $ - $
Civil Engineering (included above) - $ - $
BIM (Building Information Modeling) (included above) - $ - $
Landscape Architecture (included above) - $ - $
LEED Administration (included above) - $ - $
Interior Design (included above) - $ - $
Reimbursables & Travel, etc. 145,144 $ 145,144 $
Soft Costs - Preconstruction and Coordination Services
Ryan Preconstruction 150,000 $ 150,000 $
Cost Estimates at PD, SD, DD, & GMP - $ - $
Construction PM time - $ - $
Ryan Development Coordination Services 150,000 $ 515,877 $
Reimbursables & Travel, etc. 19,500 $ 43,282 $
Meeting Expense - $ - $
Hard Costs Construction
Total Ballpark Cost (Includes construction documents & admin) - $ 33,515,687 $
Construction Escalation - $ 837,892 $
Sub-Total 2,697,627 $ 36,602,973 $

Contracted for and funded directly by SPSBC Phase II Total
Budget Project
Description Thru DD Budget
Soft Costs - Additional Services
Design Consultants Not Funded Thru Ryan's Interim Agreement
Code Consultant (estimate) 5,000 $ 10,000 $
Elevator/Escalator Consultant (estimate) 5,000 $ 10,000 $
Fire Protection Consultant (estimate) 5,000 $ 10,000 $
Food & Beverage Consultant (estimate) 25,000 $ 50,000 $
Kitchens Equipment Designer (estimate) 20,000 $ 40,000 $
Acoustical Consultant (estimate) 10,000 $ 20,000 $
Renderings& Models (estimate) 20,000 $ 40,000 $
Specialty Systems (estimate) 15,000 $ 30,000 $
Additional BIM integration (estimate) - $ - $
Lighting Consultant (estimate) 25,000 $ 50,000 $
Audio-Visual Consultants (estimate) 10,000 $ 20,000 $
Playing Field Design Consultant (estimate) - $ - $
Misc. Other Consultants (estimate) 35,000 $ 70,000 $
Consultant Reimbursables (estimate) 11,375 $ 22,750 $
Additional SPSBC Funded Planning Costs
Market Research-Operations Proforma Consultant (estimate) - $ - $
Cost Segmentation Study - CPA firm (estimate) - $ - $
Insurance (estimate) - $ - $
Project Accounting - Cost Mgmt, Draw Submittals (estimate) - $ - $
Financing Expenses, Bond Issuance Costs (estimate) - $ - $
Marketing/Graphics (estimate) - $ - $
Advertising (estimate) - $ - $
Public Relations (estimate) - $ - $
Lobbying Expenses (estimate) - $ - $
Legal (entity docs, bond offering, loan closings, land PA, ,etc) - $ 25,000 $
Financing Costs (2% of Bonds) - $8M - $ 160,000 $
Capitalized Interest (2 years) - 6.38% - $ 1,021,280 $
Debt Service Reserve Fund - $ 719,998 $
SPSBC Contingency 3% 86,520 $ 1,184,609 $
Sub-Total 272,895 $ 3,483,637 $
Regional Ballpark in Saint Paul
for
3/1/2011 - 5/1/2012
Phase II: Design - Planning Budget
R:\0905\905_500\905_541 Saints Ballpark\ADMIN\Planning Costs and Scope Definition Summary\Regional Ballpark Cost Tracking - 03-01-11 3/1/2011

Contracted for and funded directly by Owner (The City) Phase II Total
Budget Project
Description Thru DD Budget
Soft Costs - Additional Services
Site Survey 20,000 $ 20,000 $
Soil Borings & Geotech Analysis 90,000 $ 90,000 $
EAW Process & Traffic Study 150,000 $ 150,000 $
Environmental Investigation (Phase I, Phase II) 150,000 $ 150,000 $
Environmental Remediation - $ - $
Environmental Disposal of Excess Soil in a Landfill - $ 1,000,000 $
Building Demolition - $ 2,636,000 $
Removal of 5th Street - $ 16,500 $
Offsite Roads (John & 4th only, out of a $4.2M total) - $ 500,000 $
OMF Green Roof - $ - $
Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento - $ 500,000 $
Utility Relocation from 5th and Broadway - $ 495,000 $
Construction Escalation - $ 141,556 $
Design Costs Associated with Extraordinary Site Costs 334,588 $ 514,750 $
Contingency 74,459 $ 621,381 $
Land Acquisition
Plat/C.C.&R.s - $ - $
Land Purchase Extension - $ - $
Closing Costs - $ - $
Title Work, Title Ins. - $ - $
Municipal Dev. & Permit Fees - $ - $
Land Appraisal, Project Appraisal - $ - $
Additional Owner Funded Planning Costs
Project Coordinator
Aerial Photography - $ - $
Market Research-Operations Proforma Consultant - $ - $
Cost Segmentation Study - CPA firm - $ - $
Insurance - $ - $
Property Taxes - $ - $
Project Accounting - Cost Mgmt, Draw Submittals - $ - $
Financing Expenses, Bond Issuance Costs - $ - $
Additional Project infrastructure - $ - $
Advertising - $ - $
Public Relations - $ - $
Lobbying Expenses - $ - $
Legal (entity docs, bond offering, loan closings, land PA, ,etc) - $ - $
Sub-Total 819,046 $ 6,835,187 $
Cumulative Total 3,789,568 $ 46,921,797 $
R:\0905\905_500\905_541 Saints Ballpark\ADMIN\Planning Costs and Scope Definition Summary\Regional Ballpark Cost Tracking - 03-01-11 3/1/2011

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

PLANNING BUDGET LINES ITEM NARRATIVE

PHASE 2 - DESIGN - PLANNING BUDGET LINES ITEM NARRATIVE

In Phase 2, Ryan will manage the completion of the project design through Design Development, while
performing preconstruction services that include updated and thorough project scheduling and estimating.
Ryan will provide timely value selection opportunities and project pricing updates at periodic milestones
throughout the design process, so a guaranteed maximum (GMAX) price may be established and a
Design-Build Construction Contract may be executed at the onset of Phase 3. The scope of Ryan's work
will be limited to the 9 acre site as defined by the attaached figure 1 - responsibility of design.

The following list represents an explanation of each line item listed in the planning costs summary sheet:

SOFT COSTS - BASIC SERVICES
Predesign, Schematic Design, and Design Development Basic Services - This is a lump sum fee based
on 6.5% of the total Project Cost of Work. Services include and are limited to: Facilitating project team
formation, where Ryan will serve as the Architect-of-Record, Design-Build Contractor, and Development
Coordinator for the SPSBC, and work together with the SPSBC to assign key player roles and
responsibilities to create an integrated design-build project team structure, reporting relationships,
communication channels, and information workflows; All Architectural Design, Civil, Structural,
Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Engineering, Landscape Architecture, Building Information
Modeling (BIM) services for design, Interior Design, and LEED-B3 Administration required, as
applicable, to execute Phase 2; Compiling baseline project information to facilitate Project planning and
design; Facilitating interviews and the selection of additional team members and consultants; Finalizing
the Design Program and establishing the Project Scope of Work; Developing Schematic Design
documents and a corresponding Estimate of Probable Project Costs; Developing Design Development
documents and an updated Estimate of Probable Project Costs; Securing SPSBC & Owner Approval of
the Project Schematic Design & Design Development.
The scope of all Design, Civil Engineering & Landscape Architecture work is limited to the 9 acre site.
It does not include work for offsite improvements, road vacation, or main utility relocations (off and on-
site), as these items are assumed to be the Citys responsibility.
See Exhibit A for a further breakdown of the specific Scope included in Basic Services.

SOFT COSTS - PRECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION SERVICES
Ryan Preconstruction - This is a not-to-exceed cap which will be invoiced against on an hourly basis.
Services include but are not limited to: Developing a Construction Scope document or narrative of Project
requirements and inclusions that generally define the scope of the Project; Developing a Project schedule
that includes key milestone dates throughout the Design, Approval, Preconstruction, and Construction
phases.
Ryan Development Coordination - This is a not-to-exceed cap which will be invoiced against on an
hourly basis (for the entire project it is estimated at 1.5% of total costs). This item would cover the costs
of a Development Coordinator to oversee all aspects of the project. Services include but are not limited
to: Developing a Project schedule that includes key milestone dates throughout the Design, Approval,
Preconstruction, and Construction phases; owners representation through attendance at relevant planning,
design, and city meetings, as well as advocating the SPSBCs best interest in coordination with affected
regional development projects including the light rail, OMF, and Lafayette Bridge; working with the
SPSBC and the Owner to distinguish the scope of the Project vs. the scope of the City's work required to
execute the Project; Assisting the SPSBC in preparing required documentation and procuring
governmental agency permits and approvals; Tracking and managing Project 'pursuit costs' incurred
before the start of construction on behalf of the SPSBC including distinguishing SPSBC vs. Owner costs
& tasks.

HARD COSTS - CONSTRUCTION
Total Ballpark Cost - This number was estimated as a part of the Regional Ballpark Feasibility Report
(from July 2010), and has been escalated by 2.5% for the one year delay in project opening. This number
includes all construction costs with the exception of extraordinary site costs that will be the responsibility
of the City. This cost also includes design fees for the Construction Documents and Construction
Administration phases. In addition, this number includes all of the following items:
1. Construction cost for the ballpark proper.
2. Stadium Piling and structure is estimated at $2,637,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies
US, Inc. This item includes the deep foundation system (piling and pile caps) as well as a
structural slab in lieu of slab on grade at the lowest level of the stadium. Due to soil conditions
all stadia will be structured, not grade supported.
3. Plaza Structure is estimated at $1,323,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This
item includes a deep foundation system and structural slab for 31,000 SF of plaza slab.
4. Soil Surcharge is estimated at $92,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. as noted
in the geotechnical section, the playing field will be surcharged with soil to induce consolation of
the peat layer. The intent is to mitigate the magnitude of differential settlement in the playing
field.
5. Block Retaining Wall is estimated at $400,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc.
Due to the layer of organic material, site retaining walls will have to be supported on deep
foundations or geopiers. The estimate includes a Recon wall supported by geopiers. The Soils
Investigation will have to verify the suitability of geopiers for this application
6. Retention System is estimated at $751,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. The
entire site will be excavated to approximately the same elevation as the playing field; thus
requiring a temporary retention system on the west and north sides of the site.
7. Stormwater Storage Treatment System is estimated at $350,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. A compensatory underground storage system in the form of a pipe gallery
will be required to comply with the Capitol Region Watershed requirements.
8. We provided a budget for miscellaneous items. These may in include sustainability / LEED
enhancements, architectural enhancements, and other potential ballpark upgrades.

SOFT COSTS - ADDITIONAL SERVICES - FUNDED DIRECTLY BY SPSBC
Design Consultants Not Funded Thru Ryan's Interim Agreement - Beyond the Basic Services defined
above, Ryan acknowledges that additional services will be required to execute the project. Additional
services may include but are not limited to items such as: code/fire protection, elevator, food and
beverage, lighting, audio-visual, kitchen equipment, and acoustical consulting, models, renderings, BIM
integration (beyond what is required by Ryan to complete the Project), specialty systems engineering,
traffic studies, and playing field design.
Financing Costs - were estimated at 2% of the cost of the Revenue Bonds, estimated at $8 Million.
Estimate per City of Saint Paul finance staff.
Capitalized Interest - estimated at 6.38% of the Revenue Bonds for two years, estimated at $1,021,280.
Estimate per City of Saint Paul finance staff.
Debt Service Reserve Fund - is estimated at $719,990 based on one year of debt service. Estimate per
City of Saint Paul finance staff.
SPSBC Contingency - is estimated at 3% of all phase II costs (excluding extraordinary site costs).

SOFT COSTS - ADDITIONAL SERVICES - FUNDED DIRECTLY BY OWNER (The City)
Site Survey The price for the survey include items on a typical ALTA survey. It includes boundary,
topography, utilities, structures, and the existing recorded easements that are on the site. The survey will
mainly be used for design and estimating purposes. We will rely on city information on as-built, record
drawings, and topo that is more than 200 away from the site. This does not include platting, lot
consolidation, easements, vacations of roads or easements, recording fees, lawyer fees, title work,
relocation fees, etc. We assume that these items will be handled with the property assembly and
acquisition. These costs could be significant.
Soil Borings & Geotechnical Analysis The geotechnical fee is for the soil borings and engineering
during the design phase. This does include a geotechnical report. We anticipate preliminary round of
borings and then a final round of borings once the preliminary design is complete and the structure
locations are fixed. This does not cover geotechnical engineering, inspection, or testing during
construction.
Extraordinary Site Costs - The following items were carried as extraordinary site costs:
1. EAW Process - This rough estimate is for a consultant to compile the information and write the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet. It is still undetermined who will manage the EAW
process, which can be a large undertaking depending on all of the issues (this is not included in
the fee). Information will utilized from the other disciplines (Civil, Arch, Traffic, Geotech,
Environmental, etc.) to write the EAW. This does not include any fees from the MPCA (which
could be just as much, if not more). Note that the price on the EAW consultant is an estimate, as
the full scope and requirements from the city, MPCA, other agencies, and the potential comments
from the public are unknown at this time. As such, there should be a high contingency for this
number due to the uncertainties of public input and comment that may need to be addressed. This
may require additional studies and consultants, like noise, lighting, site lines, additional traffic
studies, stormwater management, etc.
2. Traffic Study - This is a rough estimate for a private consultant to complete a minor traffic study
for the immediate areas around the ballpark. We are assuming that we can utilize resources from
the city and that the city will dictate the scope of work needed for the study. This could be a cost
saving measure if the city can complete the traffic study, but there may be political reasons to
have a private traffic engineer complete the study. If there are issues or comments from the
public during the rezoning or the EAW process, this traffic scope could get expanded.
3. Environmental Investigation- This fee covers a Phase I ESA Report, an asbestos / demolition
survey, Phase II ESA & testing, and preparing Response Action plans to the MPCA. This will
allow us to better understand the existing site conditions and how we may need to remediate and
handle certain environmental issues. This does not include any fees from the MPCA, costs for
cleanup, or testing and inspection during construction. This cost would be handled through the
City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. It is assumed
that public funds would be requested to offset remediation costs.
4. Environmental disposal - Disposal of excess soil in landfill is estimated at $1,000,000 based on
the assumption that excess soil would need to be transported to a hazardous waste landfill. This
cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with
the St. Paul Saints. It is assumed that public funds would be requested to offset remediation
costs.
5. Building demolition - Estimated at $2,636,000 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would be
handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul
Saints. Building demolition includes removal of the structured floor slab at grade level, pile caps
and the upper 20 feet of the steel piles. This building is a very heavily reinforced concrete
structure designed for warehouse loading. The upper portions of steel piles are being removed to
avoid the differential settlement issue noted above.
6. Removal of 5th Street - Estimated at $16,500 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would be
Saints.
7. Offsite Roads - improvements were included as an allowance of $500,000 to cover John and 4th
Street (one portion of the total estimate provided by the Public Works department, which covered
additional future road improvements not required by the project). The total cost is yet to be
determined and the work would be estimated and completed by the City of Saint Paul Public
Works department. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the
terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints.
8. OMF Green Roof - not currently in the project scope and was not included in the cost estimate at
this time.
9. Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento - Estimated at $500,000. This is an allowance
based on the assumption that the path would require piling. This number will be further refined
as design progresses. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the
10. Utility Relocation - Costs were estimated for the water and sewer lines in 5th Street at $495,000.
Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would be handled through the City of
Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. Per the City of Saint
Paul, the cost of relocating private utility lines would be borne by the private utilities per an
existing agreement with the City.
11. Construction Escalation - This aforementioned numbers were estimated as a part of the
Regional Ballpark Feasibility Report (from July 2010), and have been escalated by 2.5% for the
one year delay in project opening.
12. Design Costs Associated with Extraordinary Site Costs - These design fees associated with the
extraordinary site costs are exclusive of the fees for the ballpark design. As such a 6.5% design
fee has been assumed for these cost for Phase II, and a 10% design fee has been assumed for their
total cost.
13. Contingency The biggest risk will be the EAW. Until we meet with the MPCA to understand
the scope, it is hard to determine what will be required. The public comment period may also
bring additional studies or testing to help address some public comment issues. Other unknown
factors include the roles and responsibilities of the City, County, and Port Authority. We may be
involved with additional items that would be outside the scope of work for the Saints. Offsite
improvements, major utilities relocations, grant applications, exhibits for land acquisitions, etc.
To account for this risk a 10% contingency has been placed on the extraordinary site costs.
Land Acquisition - Land acquisition costs are yet to be determined. The exact price of the property will
be determined through the process initiated by the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Department of
Transportation, with the acquisition of the project parcel managed by the Saint Paul Port Authority on
behalf of the City of Saint Paul (per Memorandum of Understanding between City and St. Paul Saints).

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

L
O
W
E
R
T
O
W
N

B
A
L
L
P
A
R
K

-

O
R
G
A
N
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
A
L

C
H
A
R
T
O
N
S
I
T
E

D
E
S
I
G
N

-

+
/
-

9

A
C
R
E
S
R
Y
A
N

C
O
M
P
A
N
I
E
S

U
S
,

I
N
C
.
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T

C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
C
I
T
Y

O
F

S
T
.

P
A
U
L
S
T
.

P
A
U
L

S
A
I
N
T
S
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T

O
F

R
E
C
O
R
D
P
R
E
-
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
J
u
lie

S
n
o
w
A
r
c
h
it
e
c
t
L
a
n
D
s
c
a
p
e

a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t

-

D
e
s
i
g
n
R
y
a
n

C
o
m
p
a
n
ie
s
B
a
L
L
p
a
r
k

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
A
E
C
O
M
L
e
e
D
/

B
3
R
y
a
n

C
o
m
p
a
n
ie
s
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
C
it
y
/
T
B
D
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
T
B
D
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
L
B
r
a
u
n
g
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
L
B
r
a
u
n
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
L
T
B
D
s
u
r
v
e
y
T
B
D
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
L
T
B
D
e
L
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
L
T
B
D
c
i
v
i
L
R
y
a
n
p
L
u
m
B
i
n
g
T
B
D
e
a
W
C
it
y
/
T
B
D
c
o
s
t

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
i
n
g
R
y
a
n

C
o
m
p
a
n
ie
s
D
E
S
I
G
N

C
O
N
S
U
L
T
A
N
T
S

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

FIGURE 1 - SITE DESIGN RESPONSIBILITY

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

EXHIBIT A : SCOPE DOCUMENT

EXHIBIT A: PHASE 2 - DESIGN : RYAN SCOPE OF SERVICE INCLUDED IN BASIC SERVICES
Project Name: Regional Ballpark in Saint Paul
Project Number:
Project Location: St Paul, MN
Date: 2001-03-01
Ryan Dev. Coordinator: Mike Ryan

INCLUDED NOT
INCLUDED
NOTES / DELIVERABLES
1 PREDESIGN
Project Administration X -
Design Consultant Coordination X -
Agency Consulting
Review/Appr.
X -
Coordinate Owner-supplied Data X -
Programming X -
Site Analysis and Selection X -
Master Planning X -
Space Schematics/Flow
Diagrams
X -
Renderings X -
Graphic Design X -
Civil Design/Documentation X -
Landscape
Design/Documentation
X -
Architectural
X -
Interior Design/Documentation X -
Structural
X -
Mechanical
X -
Electrical Design/Documentation X -
Site Surveys X - Assumed to be provided by City
Site Platting/Recording X - Assumed to be provided by City
Existing Facilities Surveys X - Assumed to be provided by City
Marketing Studies X -
Economic Feasibility Studies X -
Project Financing X -
Constraints Analysis X - Completed with the Feasibility Report
On-Site Utility Studies X -
Off-Site Utility Studies X -
Environmental Studies and
Reports
X - Assumed to be provided by City
Zoning Processing Assistance X - Assumed to be provided by City
Project Development Scheduling X - Included with Development Coordination Services (hourly
basis)
Project Budgeting X - Included with Development Coordination Services (hourly
basis)
Presentations X - Included with Development Coordination Services (hourly
basis)
LEED Analysis X -

INCLUDE
D
NOT
INCLUDE
D
2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN
Client Meetings X -
Presentations X -
Programming X -
LEED (Implementation) X -
LEED (Administration) X -
Code review X -
WUFI analysis X -
ECOTECT analysis X -
BOMA Calculations X -
Renderings X -
Graphic Design X -
Fly-By/Walkthrough Computer
Animations (avi)
X -
NavisWorks (Schedule
Integration)
X -
NavisWorks (Clash Detection) X -
Smart Drawings (2D) X -
Horizontal Glue Coordination X -
Quantity Takeoffs (Innovaya) X -
Quantity Takeoffs (Horizontal
Glue)
X -
AHJ Review/Approval X -
Agency Consulting
Review/Approval
X -
Coordinate Owner-supplied Data
w/ Documents
X -
Landscape
X -
Architectural
X -
Structural
X -
Mechanical
X -
Site lighting X -
Materials Research X -
Project Manual X -
Project Manual (eSpecs) X -
Project Development Scheduling X - Included with Development Coordination Services (hourly basis)
Statement of Probable Const.
Cost
X - Included as a part of Preconstruction Services (Hourly Rate)

INCLUDE
D
NOT
INCLUDE
D
3 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Client Meetings X -
Presentations X -
LEED (Implementation) X -
LEED (Administration) X -
WUFI analysis X -
ECOTECT analysis X -
BOMA Calculations X -
Renderings X -
Graphic Design X -
Fly-By/Walkthrough Computer
Animations (avi)
X -
NavisWorks (Schedule
Integration)
X -
NavisWorks (Clash Detection) X -
Horizontal Glue Coordination X -
Quantity Takeoffs (Innovaya) X -
Quantity Takeoffs (Horizontal
Glue)
X -
Direct-to-Manufacturer X -
AHJ Review/Approval X -
Agency Review/Approval X -
Coordinate Owner-supplied Data
w/ Documents
X -
Landscape
X -
Architectural
X -
Structural
X -
Mechanical
X -
Site lighting X -
Materials Research X -
Project Manual X -
Project Manual (eSpecs) X -
Project Development Scheduling X -
Statement of Probable
Construction Cost
X - Included as a part of Preconstruction Services (Hourly Rate)

8 CONSULTANTS
3D Laser Scanning X
Acoustics/Vibration Analysis X
ADA X - Ryan will address basic ADA requirements
Architect X - Julie Snow - Design Architect, Ellerbe Beckett/ AECOM
Architectural Computer
Animations
X
Architectural Models X
Architectural Renderings X
Architectural Still Photography X
Architectural Video Photography X
Artwork X
A/V X
Building Code X - Ryan will address Code requirements
Building Energy / Envelope X
Building Science X
Civil X
Commissioning - Fundamental X
Commissioning - Enhanced X
Cost Estimating X Included as a part of Preconstruction Services (Hourly Rate)
Curtain Wall X
Electrical X
Elevator X
Environmental Testing X - Assumed to be provided by City
FF&E X
Fire Protection X
Geotech X - Assumed to be provided by City
Graphic Design X
Hardware X
Helipad Design X
Historic X
Interior Design X
Kitchen Equipment X
Landscape X
LEED X
Legal Counsel X
Life Cycle Cost Estimating X
Lighting X
Lobbyist X
Low Voltage X
Materials Testing X
Mechanical X
Parking Structures X
Plumbing X
Process Engineering X
Public Relations X
Railroad X
Real Estate Broker X
Revit Modeling for
subcontractors
X
Roofing X
Security X
Signage X
Solar X
Structural X
Surveying (ALTA, Boundary,
Property)
X - Assumed to be provided by City
Traffic X - Assumed to be provided by City
Urban Design X
Website Development X

Wetland X
Wind X
Wind Load Testing X
Urban Design X

REGIONAL BALLPARK INITIATIVE - JANUARY 2012 UPDATE

Executive Summary:
The intended purpose of this document is to supplement the Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility
Report from July 2010. An update was produced in 2011 to capture the effects of a one year delay. This
document builds on the 2011 update, and captures the effects of a two year delay. Two primary elements
are incorporated into this year's update: 1.) We have escalated construction costs by 6.5% to reflect
changes in the building industry over the two year time frame, and 2.) The estimate has been updated to
incorporate new information made available through the Port Authority's Diamond Due Diligence (from
November 2011).
In all, the net result of the information provided through the Port Authority study resulted in a modest
increase in cost. The total project budget sits at roughly $50,306,000, which excludes land acquisition.
This number will increase slightly when revised financing numbers are provided. Assuming a design
start date in the Summer of 2012, the project could be completed in time for the 2014 season.

The Update is Organized as Follows:
1.) Executive Summary
2.) Budget - 2 line-item estimates have been provided, one is a single sheet executive summary
followed by a more thorough breakdown of the costs. For a full understanding of costs refer to
the second estimate. Several line items have been left without allocated budgets.
3.) Budget Line Items Narrative - The text in this document explains the assumptions that went
into each line item of the budget. Updates are identified on this sheet that changed specifically as
a result of the Port Authority's study.
4.) Figure 1 - Site Design Responsibility - This image displays the extents of area that this estimate
represents. Work in the area shown in blue is incorporated into this estimate, while all work in
the yellow zone was not.
5.) Schedule - An updated project schedule has been provided. This schedule assumes a start of
design in the summer of 2012.

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

BUDGET

Soft Costs
Predesign & Schematic Design Total (3% of total project cost) 1,072,306 $
Design Development Total (3.5% of total project cost) 1,251,024 $
Preconstruction 150,000 $
Development Coordination Services 515,877 $
Specialty Design Consultants (Ex. Lighting Consultant, Code Consultant, 372,750 $
Food & Beverage Consultant, Kitchen Equipment Consultant)
Reimbursables 194,298 $
Legal 25,000 $
Financing Costs (Needs Updating - These are the 2010 numbers) 1,901,278 $
Owner's Contingency 3% 1,236,782 $
Sub-Total Soft Costs 6,719,315 $
Hard Costs
Ballpark Construction (Includes CDs & CA) 28,000,000 $
Stadium Piling and Structure 2,467,000 $
Soil Corrections 150,000 $
Plaza Structure 1,323,000 $
Place Surcharge 92,000 $
Block retaining wall at North side of site 400,000 $
Retention System 780,000 $
Stormwater Storage & Treatment 350,000 $
Batting Academy
Construction Escalation 2,181,530 $
Sub-Total Hard Costs 35,743,530 $

Survey, Soil Borings & Geotech Analysis 110,000 $
EAW, Traffic Study, Environmental Investigation (Phase I, Phase II) 300,000 $
Environmental Disposal of Excess Soil in a Landfill 1,100,000 $
Building Demolition 2,995,000 $
Offsite Roads (John and 4th Street only, out of $4.2M total) 500,000 $
Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento 500,000 $
Removal of 5th Street & Utility Relocation from 5th and Broadway 541,500 $
Relocation of Fiber Optic 300,000 $
Venting System for Environmental 220,000 $
Design Costs Associated with Extraordinary Site Costs 563,650 $
Owner's Contingency for Extraordinary Site Costs 713,015 $
Sub-Total Extraordinary Site Costs 7,843,165 $
Unknown Costs
Land Acquisition TBD
Total Project Cost (Excl. Land Acquisition) 50,306,010 $
Phase II & III Budget
2/3/12

Total
Project
Description Budget
Soft Costs - Basic Services
Architect-of-Record (included above) - $
Ballpark Consultant (included above) - $
Design Architect (included above) - $
Structural Engineering (included above) - $
MEP Engineering (included above) - $
Civil Engineering (included above) - $
BIM (Building Information Modeling) (included above) - $
Landscape Architecture (included above) - $
LEED Administration (included above) - $
Interior Design (included above) - $
Reimbursables & Travel, etc. 151,016 $
Soft Costs - Preconstruction and Coordination Services
Ryan Preconstruction 150,000 $
Cost Estimates at PD, SD, DD, & GMP - $
Construction PM time - $
Ryan Development Coordination Services 515,877 $
Reimbursables & Travel, etc. 43,282 $
Meeting Expense - $
Soft Costs - Contracted for and funded directly by SPSBC
Design Consultants Not Funded Thru Ryan's Interim Agreement
Code Consultant (estimate) 10,000 $
Elevator/Escalator Consultant (estimate) 10,000 $
Fire Protection Consultant (estimate) 10,000 $
Food & Beverage Consultant (estimate) 50,000 $
Kitchens Equipment Designer (estimate) 40,000 $
Acoustical Consultant (estimate) 20,000 $
Renderings& Models (estimate) 40,000 $
Specialty Systems (estimate) 30,000 $
Additional BIM integration (estimate) - $
Lighting Consultant (estimate) 50,000 $
Audio-Visual Consultants (estimate) 20,000 $
Playing Field Design Consultant (estimate) - $
Misc. Other Consultants (estimate) 70,000 $
Consultant Reimbursables (estimate) 22,750 $
Additional SPSBC Funded Planning Costs
Market Research-Operations Proforma Consultant (estimate) - $
Cost Segmentation Study - CPA firm (estimate) - $
Insurance (estimate) - $
Project Accounting - Cost Mgmt, Draw Submittals (estimate) - $
Financing Expenses, Bond Issuance Costs (estimate) - $
Marketing/Graphics (estimate) - $
Advertising (estimate) - $
Public Relations (estimate) - $
Lobbying Expenses (estimate) - $
Legal (entity docs, bond offering, loan closings, land PA, ,etc) 25,000 $
Financing Costs (2% of Bonds) - $8M 160,000 $
Capitalized Interest (2 years) - 6.38% 1,021,280 $
Debt Service Reserve Fund 719,998 $
SPSBC Contingency 3% 1,236,782 $
Sub-Total 6,719,315 $
Hard Costs Construction
Ballpark Construction (Includes CDs & CA) 28,000,000 $
Batting Academy - $
Sub-Total 35,743,530 $
Regional Ballpark in Saint Paul
for
2/3/12
Phase II & III: Budget

Total
Project
Description Budget
Site Survey 20,000 $
Soil Borings & Geotech Analysis 90,000 $
EAW Process & Traffic Study 150,000 $
Environmental Investigation (Phase I, Phase II) 150,000 $
Environmental Remediation - $
Building Demolition 2,995,000 $
Removal of 5th Street 16,500 $
Offsite Roads (John & 4th only, out of a $4.2M total) 500,000 $
OMF Green Roof - $
Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento 500,000 $
Utility Relocation from 5th and Broadway 525,000 $
Relocation of Fiber Optic 300,000 $
Venting System For Environmental 220,000 $
Construction Escalation
Design Costs Associated with Extraordinary Site Costs 563,650 $
Contingency 713,015 $
Land Acquisition
Plat/C.C.&R.s - $
Land Purchase Extension - $
Closing Costs - $
Title Work, Title Ins. - $
Municipal Dev. & Permit Fees - $
Land Appraisal, Project Appraisal - $
Additional Owner Funded Planning Costs
Project Coordinator
Aerial Photography - $
Market Research-Operations Proforma Consultant - $
Cost Segmentation Study - CPA firm - $
Insurance - $
Property Taxes - $
Project Accounting - Cost Mgmt, Draw Submittals - $
Financing Expenses, Bond Issuance Costs - $
Additional Project infrastructure - $
Advertising - $
Public Relations - $
Lobbying Expenses - $
Legal (entity docs, bond offering, loan closings, land PA, ,etc) - $
Sub-Total 7,843,165 $
Cumulative Total 50,306,010 $

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

BUDGET LINES ITEM NARRATIVE

PHASE II & III - BUDGET LINE ITEMS NARRATIVE

In Phase II, Ryan will manage the completion of the project design through Design Development, while
performing preconstruction services that include updated and thorough project scheduling and estimating.
Ryan will provide timely value selection opportunities and project pricing updates at periodic milestones
throughout the design process, so a guaranteed maximum (GMAX) price may be established and a
Design-Build Construction Contract may be executed at the onset of Phase 3. The scope of Ryan's work
will be limited to the 9 acre site as defined by the attached figure 1 - responsibility of design.

The following list represents an explanation of each line item listed in the planning costs summary sheet:

SOFT COSTS - FUNDED BY SPSBC
1. Predesign, Schematic Design, and Design Development - This is a lump sum fee based on
6.5% of the total Project Cost of Work. Services include and are limited to: Facilitating project
team formation, where Ryan will serve as the Architect-of-Record, Design-Build Contractor, and
Development Coordinator for the SPSBC, and work together with the SPSBC to assign key
player roles and responsibilities to create an integrated design-build project team structure,
reporting relationships, communication channels, and information workflows; All Architectural
Design, Civil, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Engineering, Landscape
Architecture, Building Information Modeling (BIM) services for design, Interior Design, and
LEED-B3 Administration required, as applicable, to execute Phase 2; Compiling baseline project
information to facilitate Project planning and design; Facilitating interviews and the selection of
additional team members and consultants; Finalizing the Design Program and establishing the
Project Scope of Work; Developing Schematic Design documents and a corresponding Estimate
of Probable Project Costs; Developing Design Development documents and an updated Estimate
of Probable Project Costs; Securing SPSBC & Owner Approval of the Project Schematic Design
& Design Development. The scope of all Design, Civil Engineering & Landscape Architecture
work is limited to the 9 acre site. It does not include work for offsite improvements, road
vacation, or main utility relocations (off and on-site), as these items are assumed to be the Citys
responsibility. See Exhibit A for a further breakdown of the specific Scope included in Basic
Services.
2. Ryan Preconstruction - This is a not-to-exceed cap which will be invoiced against on an hourly
basis. Services include but are not limited to: Developing a Construction Scope document or
narrative of Project requirements and inclusions that generally define the scope of the Project;
Developing a Project schedule that includes key milestone dates throughout the Design,
Approval, Preconstruction, and Construction phases
3. Ryan Development Coordination - This is a not-to-exceed cap which will be invoiced against
on an hourly basis (for the entire project it is estimated at 1.5% of total costs). This item would
cover the costs of a Development Coordinator to oversee all aspects of the project. Services
include but are not limited to: Developing a Project schedule that includes key milestone dates
throughout the Design, Approval, Preconstruction, and Construction phases; owners
representation through attendance at relevant planning, design, and city meetings, as well as
advocating the SPSBCs best interest in coordination with affected regional development projects
including the light rail, OMF, and Lafayette Bridge; working with the SPSBC and the Owner to
distinguish the scope of the Project vs. the scope of the City's work required to execute the
Project; Assisting the SPSBC in preparing required documentation and procuring governmental
agency permits and approvals; Tracking and managing Project 'pursuit costs' incurred before the
start of construction on behalf of the SPSBC including distinguishing SPSBC vs. Owner costs &
tasks.
4. Specialty Design Consultants - As with any large project a series of specialty consultants will
be required to execute the project appropriately. This line item is based assumption of what the
SPSBC will require, and includes lighting, code, food and beverage, kitchen equipment, and
acoustical consultants, models, renderings, BIM integration (beyond what is required by Ryan to
complete the Project), specialty systems engineering, traffic studies, and playing field design..
These would be brought onto the project on an as needed basis.
5. Reimbursable Expenses - Are estimated at 6.5% of design related soft costs.
6. Financing Costs - were estimated at $3,500,000 based on the SPSBC discussion with City of
Saint Paul finance staff.
7. SPSBC Contingency - is estimated at 3% of all hard costs and soft costs, but excluding
extraordinary site costs.

HARD COSTS - CONSTRUCTION - FUNDED BY SPSBC
Total Ballpark Cost - This number was estimated as a part of the Regional Ballpark Feasibility Report
(from July 2010), and has been escalated by 6.5% for the two year delay in project opening. Additionally
this estimate has been updated to incorporate new information made available through the Port
Authority's Diamond Due Diligence (from November 2011). This estimate includes all construction costs
with the exception of extraordinary site costs that will be the responsibility of the City. As is typical in a
design-build contract, this estimate also includes design fees for the Construction Documents and
Construction Administration phases of the project. Specifically, this estimate accounts all of the
following items:
1. Ballpark Construction cost for the ballpark proper. This number is based on a 7,000 seat
ballpark at an estimated cost of $4,000/seat. The $4,000/seat based on both market comparables,
and the experience of AECOM, as indicated in the feasibility report from 2010.
2. Stadium Piling and structure is estimated at $2,337,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. This item includes the deep foundation system (piling and pile caps) as well
as a structural slab in lieu of slab on grade at the lowest level of the stadium. Due to soil
conditions all stadia will be structured, not grade supported. UPDATE: This number has been
reduced by $300,000 based on new information provided via the Port Authority's Diamond Due
Diligence Report (dated November 2011).
3. UPDATE: Soil Corrections - Based on the information from the Port Authoritys Report
(November 2011) the northern portion of the site will not require a deep foundation system. A
conventional spread footings foundation system should be possible with some soil corrections.
These corrections are estimated at $150,000.
4. Plaza Structure is estimated at $1,323,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc.
This item includes a deep foundation system and structural slab for 31,000 SF of plaza slab.
5. Soil Surcharge is estimated at $92,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. as
noted in the geotechnical section, the playing field will be surcharged with soil to induce
consolation of the peat layer. The intent is to mitigate the magnitude of differential settlement in
the playing field.
6. Block Retaining Wall is estimated at $400,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc.
Due to the layer of organic material, site retaining walls will have to be supported on deep
foundations or geopiers. The estimate includes a Recon wall supported by geopiers. The Soils
Investigation will have to verify the suitability of geopiers for this application
7. Retention System is estimated at $751,000. Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. The
entire site will be excavated to approximately the same elevation as the playing field; thus
requiring a temporary retention system on the west and north sides of the site.
8. Stormwater Storage Treatment System is estimated at $350,000. Estimate provided by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. A compensatory underground storage system in the form of a pipe gallery
will be required to comply with the Capitol Region Watershed requirements.
9. UPDATE: Construction Escalation - As this estimate was prepared as a part of the Regional
Ballpark Feasibility Report (from July 2010), an escalation factor of 6.5% is intended to account
for the two year delay in project opening.

EXTRAORDINARY SITE COSTS - FUNDED DIRECTLY BY OWNER (The City)

Extraordinary Site Costs - The following items were carried as extraordinary site costs:
1. Site Survey The price for the survey include items on a typical ALTA survey. It includes
boundary, topography, utilities, structures, and the existing recorded easements that are on the
site. The survey will mainly be used for design and estimating purposes. We will rely on city
information on as-built, record drawings, and topo that is more than 200 away from the site.
This does not include platting, lot consolidation, easements, vacations of roads or easements,
recording fees, lawyer fees, title work, relocation fees, etc. We assume that these items will be
handled with the property assembly and acquisition. These costs could be significant.
2. Soil Borings & Geotechnical Analysis The geotechnical fee is for the soil borings and
engineering during the design phase. This does include a geotechnical report. We anticipate
preliminary round of borings and then a final round of borings once the preliminary design is
complete and the structure locations are fixed. This does not cover geotechnical engineering,
inspection, or testing during construction.
3. EAW Process - This rough estimate is for a consultant to compile the information and write the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet. It is still undetermined who will manage the EAW
process, which can be a large undertaking depending on all of the issues (this is not included in
the fee). Information will utilized from the other disciplines (Civil, Arch, Traffic, Geotech,
Environmental, etc.) to write the EAW. This does not include any fees from the MPCA (which
could be just as much, if not more). Note that the price on the EAW consultant is an estimate, as
the full scope and requirements from the city, MPCA, other agencies, and the potential comments
from the public are unknown at this time. As such, there should be a high contingency for this
number due to the uncertainties of public input and comment that may need to be addressed. This
may require additional studies and consultants, like noise, lighting, site lines, additional traffic
studies, stormwater management, etc.
4. Traffic Study - This is a rough estimate for a private consultant to complete a minor traffic study
for the immediate areas around the ballpark. We are assuming that we can utilize resources from
the city and that the city will dictate the scope of work needed for the study. This could be a cost
saving measure if the city can complete the traffic study, but there may be political reasons to
have a private traffic engineer complete the study. If there are issues or comments from the
public during the rezoning or the EAW process, this traffic scope could get expanded.
5. Environmental Investigation- This fee covers a Phase I ESA Report, an asbestos / demolition
survey, Phase II ESA & testing, and preparing Response Action plans to the MPCA. This will
allow us to better understand the existing site conditions and how we may need to remediate and
handle certain environmental issues. This does not include any fees from the MPCA, costs for
cleanup, or testing and inspection during construction. This cost would be handled through the
City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. It is assumed
that public funds would be requested to offset remediation costs.
6. UPDATED Environmental disposal - Disposal of excess contaminated soil is estimated at
$1,100,000 based on the assumption that excess soil would need to be transported to a landfill.
Based on the Port Authoritys report (November 2011), we have added an additional allowance of
$100,000 for the disposal 600 tons to a hazardous waste landfill. This cost would be handled
through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. It
is assumed that public funds would be requested to offset remediation costs.
7. UPDATE Building demolition - Estimated at $2,995,000 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This
cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with
the St. Paul Saints. Building demolition includes removal of the structured floor slab at grade
level, pile caps and the upper 20 feet of the wood piles. This building is a very heavily reinforced
concrete structure designed for warehouse loading. The upper portions of wood piles are being
removed to avoid the differential settlement issue noted above. We have updated this estimate
based on the information in the environmental and demolition sections of the Port Authortitys
report (Novermber 2011).
8. Removal of 5th Street - Estimated at $16,500 by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would be
Saints.
9. Offsite Roads - improvements were included as an allowance of $500,000 to cover John and 4th
Street (one portion of the total estimate provided by the Public Works department, which covered
additional future road improvements not required by the project). The total cost is yet to be
determined and the work would be estimated and completed by the City of Saint Paul Public
Works department. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the
10. OMF Green Roof - not currently in the project scope and was not included in the cost estimate at
this time.
11. UPDATE Relocation of Fiber Optic Estimated at $300,000. Our previous estimate assumed
that the small utilities (gas, power, telephone, cable, and fiber optic) would be relocated on 5
th

Street west of the bridge at the time MnDOT vacated and relocated the utilities on 5
th
Street on
the east side of the bridge. Due to the delay of the ballpark project this coordination and sharing
of costs could not be realized.
12. UPDATE Venting System for Environmental Estimated at $220,000. The Port Authoritys
report (November 2011) confirmed that a venting system for enclosed structures will likely be
required.
13. Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento - Estimated at $500,000. This is an allowance
based on the assumption that the path would require piling. This number will be further refined
as design progresses. This cost would be handled through the City of Saint Paul as part of the
14. Utility Relocation - Costs were estimated for the water and sewer lines in 5th Street at $495,000.
Estimate provided by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This cost would be handled through the City of
Saint Paul as part of the terms of their agreement with the St. Paul Saints. Per the City of Saint
Paul, the cost of relocating private utility lines would be borne by the private utilities per an
existing agreement with the City.
15.
16. Construction Escalation - This aforementioned numbers were estimated as a part of the
Regional Ballpark Feasibility Report (from July 2010), and have been escalated by 2.5% for the
one year delay in project opening.
17. Design Costs Associated with Extraordinary Site Costs - These design fees associated with the
extraordinary site costs are exclusive of the fees for the ballpark design. As such a 6.5% design
fee has been assumed for these cost for Phase II, and a 10% design fee has been assumed for their
total cost.
18. Contingency The biggest risk will be the EAW Process. Until we meet with the MPCA to
understand the scope, it is hard to determine what will be required. The public comment period
may also bring additional studies or testing to help address some public comment issues. Other
unknown factors include the roles and responsibilities of the City, County, and Port Authority.
We may be involved with additional items that would be outside the scope of work for the Saints.
Offsite improvements, major utilities relocations, grant applications, exhibits for land
acquisitions, etc. To account for this risk a 10% contingency has been placed on the
extraordinary site costs.

UNKNOWN COSTS - FUNDED DIRECTLY BY OWNER (The City)
Land Acquisition - Land acquisition costs are yet to be determined. The exact price of the property will
be determined through the process initiated by the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Department of
Transportation, with the acquisition of the project parcel managed by the Saint Paul Port Authority on
behalf of the City of Saint Paul (per Memorandum of Understanding between City and St. Paul Saints).
These costs are not included in this cost estimate.

PHASE 2 - DESIGN:

FIGURE 1 - SITE DESIGN RESPONSIBILITY

PHASE 2 &3 :

SCHEDULE

2
0
0
9
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
3
Q
T
R
4
Q
T
R
1
Q
T
R
2
Q
T
R
2
Q
T
R
2
Q
T
R
2
Q
T
R
2
Q
T
R
1
Q
T
R
1
Q
T
R
1
Q
T
R
1
2
0
1
0
F
E
A
S
I
B
I
L
I
T
Y

S
T
U
D
Y

(
0
9
/
0
1
/
1
0

-

0
6
/
0
1
/
1
1
)

2
0
1
2

L
E
G
I
S
L
A
T
I
V
E

S
E
S
S
I
O
N

(
1
1
/
0
2
/
1
1

-

0
5
/
1
4
/
1
2
)
P
H
A
S
E

I
I

-

D
E
S
I
G
N

(
0
6
/
0
1
/
1
2

-

0
6
/
0
1
/
1
3
)
E
A
W

P
R
O
C
E
S
S

(
0
6
/
0
1
/
1
2

-

0
6
/
0
1
/
1
3
)
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N

E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
S

(
0
5
/
0
1
/
1
3

-

0
5
/
2
7
/
1
3
)
D
E
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N

A
N
D

S
U
R
C
H
A
R
G
I
N
G

(
1
0
/
0
1
/
1
2

-

0
7
/
0
1
/
1
3
)

P
H
A
S
E

I
I
I

-

E
X
E
C
U
T
I
O
N
(
0
7
/
0
1
/
1
3

-

0
4
/
1
5
/
1
4
)

B
a
l
l
p
a
r
k

O
p
e
n
s

(
0
5
/
0
1
/
1
4
)
O
M
F

C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N

(
0
6
/
0
1
/
1
0

-

0
1
/
0
7
/
1
3
)
L
R
T

C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N

(
0
6
/
0
1
/
1
0

-

1
2
/
1
0
/
1
2
)
L
R
T

T
E
S
T
I
N
G

(
1
2
/
1
1
/
1
2

-

1
2
/
0
9
/
1
3
)
)
4
1
/
1
0
/
1
0
(

l
a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

T
R
L

B
R
I
D
G
E

C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N

-

E
A
S
T

S
I
D
E

(
0
9
/
0
1
/
1
0

-

0
7
/
0
3
/
1
2
)
B
R
I
D
G
E

C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N

-

W
E
S
T

S
I
D
E

(
0
7
/
0
4
/
1
2

-

0
5
/
0
6
/
1
4
)
*
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L

B
A
L
L
P
A
R
K

I
N
I
T
I
A
T
I
V
E

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
*
P
H
A
S
E

I
I
P
H
A
S
E

I
I
I

2
0
1
2

L
E
G
I
S
L
A
T
I
V
E

S
E
S
S
I
O
N

(
1
1
/
0
2
/
1
2

-

0
5
/
1
4
/
1
3
)
Phase II & III Budget
06/12 Updated
Budget
Land Acquisition
Diamond Products Property 2,500,000 $
Rasoir Property 1,500,000 $
Market House Parking (assume purchase and swap of alternative lot) 1,000,000 $
BNSF Railway 125,000 $
Site Clean-up 3,623,950 $
Sub-Total Land Acquisition 8,748,950 $
Soft Costs
Design Fees
Ryan Preconstruction Services 150,000 $
Specialty Design Consultants (Ex. Lighting, F&B, Kitchen, etc.) 372,750 $
Subtotal Design Fees (CD's are in Ballpark Construction Figure) 2,846,079 $
Other Professional Services
Legal 100,000 $
Survey, Soil Borings & Geotech Analysis 110,000 $
EAW, Traffic Study, Environmental Investigation (Phase I, Phase II) 500,000 $
Ryan Development Coordination Services 515,877 $
Owner's Rep During Construction 550,000 $
Internal City Project Management - $
Subtotal Other Professional Services 1,775,877 $
Building Permit 600,000 $
Reimbursables 194,298 $
Owner's Contingency 3% 1,304,055 $
Sub-Total Soft Costs 6,720,310 $
Site Prep / Environmental
Venting System for Environmental 220,000 $
Raised Bike Path Connection to Bruce Vento - $
Removal of 5th Street & Utility Relocation from 5th and Broadway 541,500 $
Relocation of Fiber Optic (Lump Sum, No design fees added) 300,000 $
Design Costs Associated with Site Prep / Environmental 186,150 $
Owner's Contingency for Site Prep / Environmental 295,765 $
Sub-Total Site Prep / Environmental 2,643,415 $
Site Related Circulation and Parking
Offsite Roads (John and 4th Street only) - $
Prince & Willius 2,600,000 $
Lafayette Street (Prince / Kellogg connection) - $
East Side & Lafayette Bridge connection - $
Parking - $
Sub-Total Site Related Circulation and Parking 2,600,000 $
Hard Costs
Ballpark Construction (Includes CDs & CA & FFE) 22,436,695 $
Sub-Total Hard Costs 29,818,610 $
Total Project Costs before Financing
Financing Costs 3,468,715 $
Total Project Cost 54,000,000 $
Greater Lowertown Master Plan Summary
Adopted by Saint Paul City Council
as an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan April 18, 2012
2
April 2012
Contents and Acknowledgements
Task Force Advisors
Dave Tune
Saint Paul City Councilmember, Ward 2
Lucy Tompson
Saint Paul Department of Planning and Economic Development
Weiming Lu
Former Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation, Lower Phalen Creek Project
Steering Committee President, International Urban Planner and Artist
Consultant Team
Cuningham Group, Project Management, Urban Design & Planning
JJR, Landscape Architecture & Transportation Planning
106 Group, Cultural & Historical Resources
AECOM Economics, Real Estate Market & Economics
Tom Borrup, Creative Community Builders
*CRC: CapitolRiver Council, BOD: Board of Directors
Acknowledgements
Greater Lowertown Master Plan Task Force
Ellen McPartlan
Task Force Chair, Lowertown resident, CRC BOD*
Katherine Stillings Barta & Kevin Barta
Lowertown Landing, Union Depot Residents
Justin Busch
Composer, Author; President, Northern Artist Cooperative and Warehouse
President
Sarah Clark
Lower Phalen Creek Project Staf, Project Manager
Jacob Dorer
District 4 Representative
Robert Ferguson
Heritage Preservation Commission
Tim Grifn
Saint Paul on the Mississippi Design Center, CRC BOD*
Michael Heelan
Lowertown resident, CRC BOD
Katy Lindblad
Lowertown resident, GNLHA President
Chip Lindeke
AIA, RRTL Architects Principal, Lower Phalen Creek Project Steering Ctee
Pat Lindgren
Legislative Aide for Saint Paul City Councilmember Dave Tune, Ward 2
John Mannillo
Mannillo and Associates Real Estate Agency Principal, CRC BOD*
Andy Remke
Black Dog Cofee and Wine Cafe Owner
Andrew Schlack
CRC Chair (District 17)
Marcus Young
City Artist-in-Residence, Lowertown resident
3
April 2012
Contents and Acknowledgements
1. Introduction
2. Vision and Initiatives
3. Land Use and Urban Design
4. Arts, Culture and the Creative Economy
5. Transportation
6. Parks and Open Space
7. Housing
8. Water, Energy and the Environment
9. Historic Preservation
10. Implementation
Table of Contents
The Purpose of This Plan
Te purpose of this Plan is to lay out the communitys vision for its future.
Te Plan provides predictability to the greater Lowertown area, which extends
from Jackson Street to the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary and from the
Mississippi River to the East 7th Street. Successful implementation of this
plan will result in two legacies - the physical legacy of an urban village where
people can choose to live, work, and create in a unique urban setting; and the
social legacy of cooperation and partnerships that enable Lowertown to defne
its own destiny.
April 2012
1. Introduction
5
April 2012
1. Introduction
Introduction
Lowertown is a treasure. It is an authentic urban neighborhood with a unique
history. It is changing quickly.
Te layers of history of Lowertown, evident in the streets and buildings
throughout, and the river and blufs surrounding, have provided a backdrop for
a steady succession of people with the desire to call Lowertown their home.
Over the past 100 years, immigrants, capitalists, merchants and artists have
come to Lowertown to make their mark.
Capitalists such as James J. Hill made their fortunes in Lowertown during
the turn of the 19th to 20th century as the area became a major center of
manufacturing, wholesaling and distributing for the entire Upper Midwest.
Lured by the promise of good jobs, thousands of immigrants passed through
Lowertown. Te Lower Landing (Lamberts Landing) and Union Depot
welcomed thousands of immigrants to the Upper Midwest as they made their
way up the Mississippi by boat and across Minnesota and Wisconsin by train.
Fortunes were made and lost in Lowertown. After the Depression, Lowertown
was virtually neglected and left to its own. Buildings were abandoned, streets
were empty. But in the 1970s, the City of Saint Paul and the McKnight
Foundation decided to reinvest in Lowertown. Tey took a $10 million risk in
creating the Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation (LRC).
Over the next 30 years, Lowertown grew slowly, deliberately and incrementally.
Over 3.5 million square feet of warehouse space was renovated; the Farmers
Market moved into Lowertown; the neighborhood was listed on the National
Register of Historic Places and designated by the City as a Saint Paul Heritage
Preservation Site; and Mears Park was rebuilt. By focusing on existing assets,
Lowertown managed to avoid the ills that plagued so many urban areas during
this time period: large scale demolition and urban renewal, undiferentiated
architecture, chain stores and gentrifcation. Even during the most recent real
estate boom, Lowertown remained under the radar when compared to other
warehouse districts across the country. Lowertown protected and invested in its
assets.
Today, Lowertown is a mixed-use, mixed-income community. Notably,
Lowertown has a large population of artists who live and work in the
community. A major reason for the stability of the artist community has been
the creation of the Lowertown Lofts Artist Co-op, and the renovations of
the Tilsner and Northern Warehouse. Together, these buildings established
a stable presence of artists in Lowertown signaling to the development
community that artists will always be a part of the evolution of Lowertown.
After the 30 years of hard work by the LRC and City of Saint Paul, slow and
deliberate growth, and steady commitment from a pioneering set of residents,
Lowertown has fnally been discovered. Lowertown is no longer a secret.
Lowertown is on the brink of yet greater signifcant change. In recent years,
new condominiums and restaurants have opened, attracting new residents
and visitors. Within the next fve years, Union Depot will be reborn as a 21st
century multi-modal station. It will become a hub for Amtrak, Greyhound,
Jeferson, commuter rail lines and the Central Corridor LRT. When the real
estate market returns, Lowertown will emerge as a very desirable place to
invest.
The Past and the Future
Quietly, Lowertown has emerged as a stellar example of how a community
can grow slowly and organically - from the bottom up. In the early years of
the LRC, Lowertown was a community of artists. Tey were the pioneers. By
most accounts, the artists and their spirit of creativity and community still lie
at the heart of what makes Lowertown unique today. But today, Lowertown
is more than a community of artists. It is a diverse, vibrant community of
residents who enjoy and appreciate the arts, creativity, sustainability, and their
unique, historic built environment.
Lowertown residents have always been progressive and forward looking. Te
community carefully balances the stories and values of the past with innovative
ideas for the future. Te strength of Lowertown is partially rooted in the idea
that you come to Lowertown to build upon what exists. You respect your
surroundings and your context. You take raw space (and buildings and land)
that has been neglected, you live in it, you work in it, and you turn it into
something useful. You create another layer of history. In the same way the
industrialists took raw materials and turned them into marketable products,
6
April 2012
1. Introduction
Lowertown residents took raw buildings and streets and turned them into a
neighborhood.
Because artists are such a strong part of the community, it is a place where
privacy, solitude and contemplation blend with collaboration and civic
involvement. In Lowertown, you create both on your own and with others.
Tere is a healthy respect for the individual creative process, but also an
appreciation for the importance of collective action. In recent years, this spirit
has helped cultivate the evolution of Lowertown from an artist community
to a creative community. In doing so, Lowertown has become a signifcant
economic engine of ideas and products for Saint Paul and the region.
Lowertown residents embody a spirit of respect and cooperation with each
other and the built environment. Tis spirit was born by the early residents;
it was critical as they supported each other in their individual and collective
endeavors. Te cooperative spirit was exemplifed by the City of Saint Paul
and LRC, which made its mission the nurturing of partnerships to create a
healthy Lowertown. Notably, the LRC extended the vision of Lowertown
to create partnerships with surrounding neighborhoods. In 1997, the LRC
joined East Side community members to advocate for the Lower Phalen Creek
project. Tis partnership was instrumental in creating the Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary.

Strength and Fragility
After 150 years of changes, Lowertown is both strong and fragile. Decades
of hard work and community building have resulted in a truly unique
neighborhood. With over 3000 residents, approximately 600 artists and a
variety of businesses, Lowertown is a national-model grassroots community, an
example of what can happen when individuals come together to employ their
creative and productive skills to build a neighborhood.
But Lowertown is as fragile as it is strong; and it is changing quickly. New
public investments (LRT, Union Depot) have and will continue to bring
changes to Lowertown at a pace never experienced. Suddenly, Lowertown
is not just a small corner of downtown inhabited by artists. It is a mixed
community of many cultures, lifestyles and points of view. For Lowertown to
weather the changes, existing and new residents must carry forth the values of
neighborliness and tolerance while embracing change.
The Challenges Ahead
While there is some nervousness and concern in the community about
Lowertowns recent emergence and the changes ahead, most in Lowertown
look to the future with promise.
However, the challenges ahead are signifcant.
How can the community of artists solidify their identity and ensure their
presence amid rising property values?
How can the community welcome light rail transit, hundreds of new
residents and new public venues without becoming simply a destination or
entertainment district for others in the region?
How can the community redefne its relationship to the river when the
barriers that cut it of are seemingly impenetrable?
How can the community maintain itself as it changes from a sleepy corner of
downtown to the nexus of natural and transportation corridors?
How can the community help ensure the longevity of the loved and
cherished Farmers Market in the heart of Lowertown?
How can the community continue to preserve and maintain the integrity of
the historic district given pending and future development activities?
How can the built environment of the neighborhood be more expressive
and representative of the creativity, innovation, and diversity of people who
inhabit it?
And perhaps most importantly, how can a community take control of its
future be the primary stakeholder at the table and complete its vision of a
self-reliant urban village?
7
To many in the Twin Cities, Lowertown is thought of as the few blocks
around the Farmers Market. Te identity of Lowertown is closely linked to the
Farmers Market because it is a major regional attraction.
To others, Lowertown extends to Jackson Street, and includes Mears Park
and the Union Depot. And to others, Lowertown extends across 7th Street
into Wacouta Commons. Rarely has the identity or defnition of Lowertown
extended past the Lafayette Bridge.
For the purposes of this study, Lowertown extends from Jackson Street to
the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary and from the river to East 7th Street.
Te expanded defnition of Lowertown is signifcant because it recognizes
Lowertowns emerging role to the region, city, and downtown. It is a centrally-
located neighborhood in the river valley.
With the recent completion of Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary and the regional
eforts to connect trails, the east side of Lowertown becomes a critical focus.
It is no longer the back of Lowertown. It ofers promise for connection and
amenities.
Similarly, Lowertown extends to the river. Te elevated rail structure separates
Lowertown from the river. However, with the recent initiatives to engage the
river on a regional scale, there is new promise for connection and amenities.
Te study area extends north to include 7th Street. Previous plans for
Lowertown have extended beyond 7th Street to include Wacouta Commons.
Tis Plan extends to East 7th Street and works to connect Lowertown to
Wacouta Commons simiar to how the Plan connects Lowertown to the Bruce
Vento Nature Santuary. East 7th Street has changed dramatically over the past
few decades, transforming from a Main Street in the middle of downtown to a
main thoroughfare that divides two downtown neighborhoods.
April 2012
1. Introduction
The Study Area
Mears Park Converted Warehouse Buildings
Farmers Market Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary
Behind the Diamond Products Building Beneath the Lafayette Bridge
8
1. Introduction
Greater Lowertown Master Plan Study Area and Connecting Neighborhoods (Shaded)
April 2012
M
ississip
p
i R
iver
Union
Depot
Mears
Park
Downtown
Core
Bruce Vento
Nature Sanctuary
I-94
Wacouta
Commons
Daytons
Bluf
West Side
Flats
Farmers Market
J
a
c
k
s
o
n
S
t
.
S
i
b
l
e
y
S
t
.
W
a
c
o
u
t
a
S
t
.
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
L
a
f
a
y
e
t
t
e

B
r
i
d
g
e
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
.
9
April 2012
1. Introduction
Local and Regional Context
Trails: Several existing (black) and planned (red) recreational
trails converge at Lowertown.
I
-
3
5
E
I-94
M
N

5
2
Lowertown is located on the east edge of
downtown Saint Paul, on the Mississippi Rivers
north bank. Here, at the bend of the river, a reach
extends north into Saint Pauls neighborhoods.
Phalen Creek from the northwest and Trout Brook
from the northeast join at this reach before fowing
into the river.
Lowertown is relatively well-connected to the
region. Te river, freeways, arterials, transit routes
and recreational trails give access to and from
Lowertown, enabling area residents to move
about the region with relative ease. Planned
improvements in transit, in particular Central
Corridor LRT and the re-opening of Union
Depot, will further improve transit service to and
from Lowertown.
Although Lowertown and downtown are diferent
in character, the areas are seamlessly connected by
the downtown street grid. Te Mississippi River
defnes Lowertowns south edge, but is nearly
inaccessible due to the presence of an elevated rail
deck and the lack of street connections.
Parking lots, large industrial buildings and rail
lands (Hofman Junction) occupy the area east of
Broadway, and provide no neighborhood amenity.
Te Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary, an important
amenity to both Lowertown and Daytons Bluf
residents, lies just beyond these parking lots.
Streets: Te downtown street grid extends to Broadway and
Kellogg, and freeways and arterials are located nearby.
Buildings: Lowertowns buildings create well-defned streets,
parks and blocks.
Parks: Lowertown is bounded on two sides by large regional
open space assets.
Bruce Vento
Nature Sanctuary
M
ississip
p
i R
iver
10
April 2012
1. Introduction
History of Lowertown
Lowertown derives its name from the Lower Landing site along the
Mississippi River. Used by Native Americans and industrialists, immigrants
and tourists, the Lower Landing provided a soft landing at the bend of the
river, with gentle access to the uplands where there is a natural break in the
rivers 80-foot high blufs. With Saint Anthony Falls and rapids upriver, the
Lower Landing was the end of the line for most river transportation.
Until the beginning of the railroad era in the 1880s, Lower Landing was the
main source of supply and communication for Saint Paul. It also served as
the arrival point for tens of thousands of immigrants entering Minnesota. On
average, each steamboat carried several hundred passengers, and the number of
steamboat arrivals grew from 256 in 1854 to 1068 in 1858.
Soon after the rail network was built, Lowertown grew into a major
warehousing and distribution center serving the entire Midwest. Lowertowns
railroad, manufacturing and wholesale companies expressed their sense of pride
and permanence in the structures they erected nearly a century ago, many of
them designed by some of the nations most renowned architects.
After the Depression, Lowertown declined. Te frst project to focus attention
on the revitalization potential of Lowertown was the renovation of the
Merchants National Bank Building (now McColl Building) in the late
1960s. Tis was soon followed by the conversion of the Noyes Brothers and
Cutler Building in to a complex of ofces, shops, and restaurants now known
as Park Square Court. Te Citys Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(HRA) became involved in 1973 when Mears Park was redesigned by William
Sanders and renamed after Norman B. Mears, a Saint Paul businessman who
spurred Lowertown redevelopment. Te HRA and City of Saint Paul have
since encouraged renovation and development in Lowertown.
In April, 1978 the Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation was organized
with the goal of creating a place for people, a highly livable urban village
in the midst of the city, which will bring new jobs, housing, commercial
development, and year round activities to Lowertown and infuse the city
with renewed vitality. Enabled by an unprecedented $10 million grant by the
McKnight Foundation, the LRC assumed the role and responsibility of driving
the revitalization of Lowertown.
Lowertown in 1959
Troughout the 1970s and 1980s, artists moved to Lowertown. Attracted
by low rents, raw space and relative quiet, artists from around the region saw
opportunity in Lowertown. Slowly and quietly, a new, risk-tolerant population
began to bring life to the buildings and the streets of Lowertown.
Initiated by the Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation and supported fully
by the City of Saint Paul, Lowertown was listed on the National Register of
Historic Places in 1983. Tis gave the area protection under the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Te next year, the City of Saint Paul
designated the Lowertown Historic District as a Heritage Preservation Site.
11
Unlike many similar warehouse-artist neighborhoods across the country that
transitioned quickly from an artist neighborhood to a gentrifed neighborhood,
Lowertown has held onto its working/living artists. Together, they have created
a strong sense of community, independence, a spirit of cooperation and a
mutual respect for each other and the arts. Tey are qualities that remain today
and are adopted by newcomers whether they are artists or not.
Today, Lowertown has approximately 600 working artists. Due in part to the
small studios and compact urban environment, most of the artists practice
in the traditional media arts (painting, drawing, etc). However, the arts
community has grown in recent years to include composers, the culinary arts,
performers and other media.
Te sheer number of artists has attracted related businesses and organizations
to Lowertown. Today, Lowertown is home to several arts organizations and
foundations. Te Jerome Foundation, Springboard for the Arts, Zeitgeist,
Public Art Saint Paul and State of Minnesota Arts Board add richness to the
arts community.
In recent years, the identity of the Lowertown community has evolved
to become less an artist community and more a creative community.
Designers, architects, musicians and programmers have come to Lowertown
to work and live within the creative environment originally established by the
pioneering artists. Many are attracted by inexpensive raw space, but they also
are attracted by the potential to collaborate, exchange and integrate ideas across
professions and disciplines. Collectively, this creative sector has begun to build
a network of collaborations and self-employed entrepreneurs.
April 2012
1. Introduction
Arts and the Creative Community
Aided by these designations and the associated tax credits, Artspace, the LRC,
the City and others partnered to renovate three buildings dedicated to the
arts. Te Lowertown Artists Lofts Cooperative, the Tilsner and the Northern
Warehouse were renovated and became the anchors for the arts community.
Troughout the years, there has been a steady commitment to incrementally
reinvest in the assets of Lowertown. Instead of demolishing and building new,
Lowertown remained committed to a slow, deliberate and steady approach to
redevelopment.
Tis approach allowed Lowertown to remain a relatively quiet neighborhood
on the edge of downtown. Such an approach was particularly supportive of
the artist community, as it respected the fnancial and environmental needs of
working artists.
In 1982, the Saint Paul Farmers Market moved to Lowertown. An
institution since the late 1800s, the Farmers Market was an anomaly of
sorts for Lowertown - it was a destination in the middle of a relatively quiet
neighborhood. Te market now draws 20,000 people each weekend in the
summer.
Recently, a few new buildings have been added to the mix, attracting new
residents paying market rate for condominiums. In addition, restaurants and
other regional attractions have opened in Lowertown, continuing Lowertowns
evolution.
Today, over 3.5 million square feet of warehouse space have been renovated.
Mears Park has been redesigned and improved, and Union Depot is
undergoing a major renovation to be restored as a train depot and transit
hub. Lowertown is a model example of how the deliberate act of historic
preservation can be a successful economic development tool. Without the
economic assistance enabled by designating the area an historic district,
buildings most likely would have been demolished and the unique sense
of place that exists today would be lost. Preserving the unique qualities of
Lowertown over the past 30 years enables Lowertown today to thrive as a
desirable authentic urban neighborhood.
12
Lowertown An Artist Neighborhood in the Creative Economy
Lowertown has the potential to be Saint Pauls engine of innovation producing
the ideas, products, and culture of the new century. It is the kind of district
prized by cities around the world trying to compete in the global creative
economy the citys most signifcant and dense cluster of artists, and creative
individuals and enterprises.
An analysis of just over 300 business establishments within the 55101
ZIP code area (based on 2007 data) revealed that 15.11 percent of all
establishments were considered creative businesses. Tis compares with a
county and metro area average of half that percentage. Tis represents 47
frms, but does not include the self-employed or sole proprietor businesses. Te
number of artists in the neighborhood, most of whom are self-employed, is
estimated to be approximately 600.
Creative Places Nurture Entrepreneurs
Since the 1990s, urban neighborhoods that are diverse and welcoming to
newcomers, and that ofer a lively mix of social and cultural activities, became
important engines for economic development, community pride and livability.
Scholars, planners and researchers alike cite the presence of cultural and social
activities, receptivity and local aesthetics as key indicators of and contributors
to economic vitality and residents sense of connection to place.
April 2012
1. Introduction
The Artistic Dividend
Ann Markusen, an internationally-known Minnesota-based economist, has
written extensively on the positive efects of creativity, which she calls the
artistic dividend. Her work focuses on the impact of a creative community
on larger, established enterprises, as well as on start-ups. In addition to these
impacts, she asserts that, as a growing part of the overall economy, the arts and
cultural sector is the nations most under-rated economic engine, producing
millions of well-paying jobs. In 2010, Markusen concluded that creative
places nurture entrepreneurs.
Lowertown has established itself as a welcoming and supportive place for
working artists and for visitors. It has grown into a center of small creative
cultural organizations as well as home to the Saint Paul Art Crawl and the
Saint Paul Farmers Market, marketplaces in which local producers have the
opportunity to meet face-to-face with buyers. Tis welcoming character,
with its rich fabric of cultural life, is critical to a citys capacity to be globally
competitive and to attract and nurture creative talent.
Adjacent to Lowertown are many other cultural and natural assets. Tey
include the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary to the east, and institutions such
as the Ordway Center for the Performing Arts, Saint Paul Public Library,
Minnesota Public Radio, Fitzgerald Teater and other resources to the west.
To the south lies the lower landing of the Mississippi River, and to the north
lie major medical complexes and State government.
Cities in every corner of the world are bending over backwards to attract and
retain the kind of creative cluster and core of creative talent that Saint Paul
has built in Lowertown over the past 30 years. Lowertown, as a hub of creative
people and small arts organizations, is pivotal to the regions cultural vitality
and economic success.
13
April 2012
1. Introduction
Lowertown Values
Lowertown residents and stakeholders value their community. Lowertown residents share three
commonly held values: Arts, Sustainability and Historic Preservation.
The Arts and Creativity
For the past 30 years, Lowertown has cultivated a community through the businesses of artists, creators
and innovators. Even before Lowertowns recent emergence, Lowertown was home to James J. Hill
and other entrepreneurs whose innovations changed the country. Today, there are approximately 600
practicing artists in Lowertown. In addition, Lowertown is home to several arts organizations and
foundations serving the arts community. Recently, Lowertown has attracted and produced several
companies (technology, graphics, design, etc.) that rely on innovation and creativity as their stock and
trade. Creativity and innovation are a part of Lowertowns past, and should be a part of its future.
Sustainability
Lowertown residents pride themselves on creating a community and encouraging lifestyles that have low
impacts on the environment. Te community desires to create a complete urban village - a place where
one can live and have most daily activities of life within walking or biking distance.
Historic Preservation
Many choose to live in Lowertown for its unique historic character. Te older buildings and narrow
streets allow residents to live within and side-by-side with the layers of history that create the on-going
and constantly evolving story of Lowertown. Lowertowns historic resources defne the physical character
of the neighborhood, create a strong sense of place, enhance the quality of life of residents, and connect
residents to each other and the city. Saint Paul has embraced preservation as an important tool for
maintaining economic and social vitality. During the past 25 years, historic preservation has been used to
transform Lowertown. Te commitment to Lowertown by residents, the City and other organizations has
led to increased investment and higher property values, and has made the neighborhood a better place to
live, work and recreate. Trough historic preservation, Lowertown and Saint Paul have remained attractive
and vital to those who seek an urban lifestyle.
Lowertown residents recognize that historic preservation is a deliberate act - it does not happen by
chance or default. Historic resources are an asset that need to be nurtured and protected. If not, they
will be lost and never recovered. Historic resources are also an asset that can fuel economic development.
Redeveloping buildings with sympathetic developers and tenants will further diferentiate Lowertown
from other communities.
April 2012
15
April 2012
Vision Statement
Lowertown is urban and lush.

Historic brick buildings are softened
by shade trees, fowers, and parks. Te
neighborhood is alive with residents
and visitors. Independent businesses,
restaurants and galleries thrive.
Te Farmers Market, Union Depot,
and artists residences and studios
enhance the vitality of Lowertown.
Striking Mississippi River vistas, access
to safe trails, and convenient public
transit make Lowertown an inviting
community, allowing residents and
visitors alike to enjoy the neighborhood
without the hassles and costs of a car.
Te Plan is organized around six primary initiatives. Each is accompanied with
a narrative followed by illustrations and photographs that further describe the
specifc physical recommendations associated with the Goals.
Seven Initiatives of the Master Plan
1. Complete the Village
Initiatives
3. Advance the Arts
2. Grow the Market
5. Stitch the Seam
6. Preserve the District
4. Connect to the River
7. Evolve the Task Force
16
April 2012
Initiative #1: Complete the Village
Maintain the eclectic residential character of Lowertown.
Carefully and incrementally add new community supporting facilities,
programs and activities to Lowertown.
Aggressively pursue sustainability initiatives to develop Lowertowns
self-reliance.
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
2
3
4
5
6
Infll Development (in pink)
Transit Connections
Trail Connections
Sustainability Initiatives
New Gathering Places
Renovated Buildings (in orange)
17
April 2012
Initiative #2. Grow the Market
Ensure the longevity of the Farmers Market in the heart of Lowertown.
Make the Farmers Market site an amenity to the neighborhood
throughout the week.
1
2
3
4
5
Indoor Market in the OMF
Plaza Street
Indoor/Outdoor Market
Passive Plaza and Gathering
(see following page)
Additional Overfow Market Vendors
1
3
2
2
4
5
5th Street
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
Saint Paul Farmers Market:
Long-term vision of a shared use block,
with a dedicated Market site and park
18
April 2012
Potential Options for Long-Term Improvements
Minor improvements to the site will enhance the Market and provide an amenity to the
neighborhood throughout the week and the year. Most of the site can remain intact while a
few vendors would move to adjacent streets or into the front of the OMF building.
Initiative #3: Advance the Arts
Make the arts integral, accessible and visible.
Maintain the community as a place for artists to live and work.
Encourage the creative skills of artists to be used to address a wide
range of neighborhood issues.
Public art events
Functional art
Art on unused objects
19
April 2012
Initiative #4: Connect to the River
Increase access to and views of the river.
Maximize the river for its recreational, restorative and habitat value.
1
2
3
4
5
6
River Balcony
Development with views of the river
Improved riverfront park
Broadway connection
Bridge or Overlook
Vertical connections to river
1
4
2
3
5
6
20
April 2012
Initiative #5: Stitch the Seam
Create a front door to Lowertown, the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary
and the East Side.
Connect recreational trails to Lowertown and to the River.
Aggressively pursue sustainability initiatives that increase Lowertowns
self-reliance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
4th Street Trail connection
Stormwater Harvesting
Community / Urban Agriculture
Trout Brook Trail Connection
Lower Phalen Trail Connection
Marsupial bridge beneath
Lafayette Bridge
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
.
M
is
s
is
s
ip
p
i R
iv
e
r
4
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
I-9
4
L
a
fa
y
e
tte
B
rid
g
e
1
2
6
3
4
5
5
7
Depot / River Balcony Trail
Connection
7
21
April 2012
Continue to recognize, preserve and celebrate the industrial warehouse
character of Lowertown Historic District.
Ensure that every new increment of development enhances the
character and value of Lowertown as an historic district.
Preservation is a widely-held community value. Te narrow streets and
warehouse buildings are part of what makes Lowertown unique and
loved. Lowertown residents recognize preservation does not occur by
accident. It requires diligence and constant attention. Without it, one of the
neighborhoods greatest assets will be lost. By protecting the historic character
and fabric of a community, residents and visitors of Lowertown can connect
with the people and events that underlie their past. Tis Plan also recognizes
the need for on-going support and education about the District, particularly
through stewardship of historic resources.
Initiative #6: Preserve the District
22
Tis Master Plan was made possible through the
volunteer eforts of the Master Plan Task Force
and the generosity of the Lowertown Future
Fund, the Saint Paul Foundation and the Central
Corridor Funders Collaborative. Te Task Force
and funders recognize that implementation of this
Plan will require a more organized and coordinated
efort than volunteers can ofer. Terefore, the
Plan recommends organizational options charged
with representing the neighborhood, nurturing
partnerships and leading implementation in the
Plan.
December 2011
1. Introduction
Initiative #7: Evolve the Task Force
GREATER LOWERTOWN
RESIDENTS + BUSINESSES
GREATER LOWERTOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD
ORGANIZATION
GROW THE
MARKET
COMPLETE THE
VILLAGE
ADVANCE THE ARTS
CONNECT TO THE
RIVER
STITCH THE SEAM
STAFF
SUBCOMMITTEES
COMMUNICATION/
INFORMATION
WEBSITE
FACEBOOK
ALLIED & PARTNER
ORGANIZATIONS BOARD ADVISOR
Possible Organizational Structure
PRESERVE THE
DISTRICT
April 2012
24
April 2012
Summary
Primary Observations
Lowertown is a downtown
neighborhood with a mix of
uses, although the retail sector is
underdeveloped.
Lowertowns eastern edge is in
transition.
Lowertown is becoming a
regional draw.
Lowertown is a transit-oriented
village.
The street grid in Lowertown has
remained largely intact and is a
character-defning feature of the
Historic District.
The land use pattern in
Lowertown is major public
spaces/parks (Mears Park,
Farmers Market) surrounded by
buildings that enclose them.
Part of Lowertown is located
within the 100-year Mississippi
River foodplain, and has
experienced frequent fooding in
the past.
Goals
3.1 Remain a sustainable urban
neighborhood.
3.2 Be a dense, transit-oriented
urban village.
3.3 Become fully connected to the
East Side and the riverfront.
3.4 Welcome new investments that
enhance and augment the unique
qualities of Lowertown.
3.5 Maintain the historic character
of the district and neighborhood.
3.6 Maintain and enhance
Lowertown as a place for the
creative community to live, work,
produce, collaborate and share
with each other and the region.
Objectives
3.1 Organize retail around clusters
and anchors.
3.2 Manage parking to minimize
its impacts and accommodate
demand.
3.3 Utilize the land east of the
Lafayette Bridge for uses benefcial
to Lowertown and the East Side.
25
April 2012
Summary
3.8 Improve Kellogg Boulevard by
developing a liner building on the
north edge of the Union Depot rail
deck.
3.9 Develop more gathering
spaces for the neighborhood.
3.10 Maintain and create
afordable housing and studio
space in Lowertown.
3.11 Attract additional arts
investments such as galleries,
museums, performance venues,
schools, and academies.
3.12 Determine the appropriate
food prevention system for
Lowertown so that existing and
future development are protected
from fooding.
Strategies
3.1 Prioritize building
rehabilitation and redevelopment
of surface parking lots over
building demolition.
3.2 Build three retail clusters:
neighborhood services and retail
on 7th Street, food and arts around
the Farmers Market, restaurants
and entertainment around Mears
Park and Union Depot.
3.3 Encourage redevelopment
of vacant and underutilized
properties surrounding Union
Depot.
3.4 Designate a permanent home
for the Farmers Market and a year-
round community amenity.
3.5 Extend Lowertown east of the
Lafayette Bridge to connect with
the East Side of Saint Paul and the
Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary.
3.6 Introduce urban agriculture,
recreational uses and
sustainability initiatives east of the
Lafayette Bridge in The Seam.
3.7 Create a parking plan for
downtown and Lowertown
that prioritizes full occupancy
of existing parking spaces over
construction of new parking.
26
April 2012
Illustrative Master Plan for Greater Lowertown
4
t
h
S
t
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
W
a
r
n
e
r
/
S
h
e
p
a
r
d
R
o
a
d
5
t
h
S
t
6
t
h
S
t
S
i
b
l
e
y
S
t
J
a
c
k
s
o
n
S
t
W
a
c
o
u
t
a
S
t
W
a
l
l
S
t
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
W
i
l
l
i
u
s
S
t
.
Bruce Vento
Nature
Sanctuary
Union Depot
Mears Park
Lower
Landing
Park
Mississippi
River
7
t
h
S
t
Note: This Illustration describes one alternative
for the Diamond Product Sites. Later in this
chapter, and elsewhere in the report, alternatives,
including a Ballpark are described and discussed.
27
3.2 Create three distinct retail clusters: food and arts,
neighborhood service and retail, and restaurants and
entertainment.
Neighborhood
Retail and
Services
Restaurant and
Entertainment
Food
and Arts
Retail Cluster Strategy: Retailcanbefocusedaroundexistingandproposed
urbanrooms:Mearspark,UnionDepotandFarmersMarket.Te
NeighborhoodRetailandServicesclusterislocatedon7thstreet-thezipper
betweentwoneighborhoods.
April 2012
3.1 Prioritize building rehabilitation and redevelopment of
surface parking lots over building demolition.
Potential Infll Buildings and Building Renovations
Strategies
existing buildings
proposed new
buildings
proposed building
renovations
Wacouta Commons
Fitzgerald Park
Downtown
Core
Lowertown
28
April 2012
3.3 Encourage redevelopment of vacant and underutilized
properties surrounding Union Depot.
Redevelopment Opportunities: Redevelopmentofvacantparcels(yellow)surroundingthe
LRTStationwillhelpenclosethespace,createactiveedgesandtakefulladvantageofthe
transitinvestments.
Union Depot
TPT
Lowertown
Lofts
CoCo
Sibley
Square
Jax
Northwestern
Strauss
Apts
262 Studios
4
t
h
S
t
.
5
t
h
S
t
.
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
.
Kellys
3.4 Designate a permanent home for the Farmers Market and a
year-round community amenity.
Illustrative Master Plan
New buildings
Existing buildings
Note: This Illustration describes one alternative
for the Diamond Product Sites. Later in this
chapter, and elsewhere in the report, alternatives,
including a Ballpark are described and discussed.
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
.
4
t
h
S
t
.
5
t
h
S
t
.
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
29
Redevelopment Around Union Depot
Existing Potential
A 2 story parking Mixed-use
40 Units
B Vacant lot/
surface parking
Mixed-use
16 Units
C Vacant Lot/
surface parking
Mixed-use
40 Units
D Pkg Lot/ bar Mixed-use 24 Units
E Drop Of Lane
and Lawn
Setting for art installations, performances
and food carts
BA
BC
BD
BE
BF
B B
BA
BC
BD
BE
B B
Activate the Room
with temporary
art, performances,
food carts,
installations and
events.
April 2012
30
Step 1. Preserve the Farmers Market in the heart of Lowertown
InordertopreservetheMarketonitscurrentsite,thePlanrecommends:
Improvementstooperationsandtothesite.
TeMarketneedsaplanforfuturecustomerandvendorparking,
establishmentofapick-up/drop-ofzone,andapositiveworking
relationshipwiththeCitysotrafcfowissmoothandparkingissecure.
LegalandpolicyprotectionsthatpreservethesiteasifitwereaCitypark.
TeneighborhoodandtheMarketshouldworkwiththeCitytolegally
protectthesitefromredevelopmentthatwoulddisplacetheMarketfrom
theheartofLowertown.Withminimalcapitalinvestmentsonthesiteanda
ten-yearlease,displacementduetoredevelopmentisalwaysapossibility.
Step 1: Accommodate Near-Term Market
Growth and Expansion
Of-Site Expansion: Street Market
around the sheds and along 4th
Street
Options for Indoor Market
Three-Season Sheds
Step 2: Accommodate near-term growth in the Market
Severaloptionsexistfornear-ormedium-termgrowth,expansionand
diversifcationoftheSaintPaulFarmersMarket.IftheGrowersAssociation
aspirestoincludenewvendors,additionalvendorssurroundingstreetsand
buildingswillcomeintoplay.Optionsinclude:
Locateayear-roundindoormarketorrelatedvendorsintheretailspaceof
theOMF.
GrowtheMarketalong4thStreet,inalleysandalongsurroundingstreets
towardUnionDepot.
Addgaragedoorstoselectedshedssothesellingseasoncanbeextended.
April 2012
maintain vehicular
access to freeway
31
Potential Improvements to the Farmers Market Site:
Step 3: Reinvest in the site to improve the Market
and to create a year round neighborhood amenity.
Minorimprovementstothesitewillenhance
theMarketandprovideanamenitytothe
neighborhoodthroughouttheweekandtheyear.
Mostofthesitecanremainintactwhileafew
vendorswouldmovetoadjacentstreetsortowithin
thefrontoftheOMFbuilding.
April 2012
32
Diamond Products Site: Existing Conditions
Diamond Products Site: Building Reuse
Diamond Products Site: Regional Ballpark
Diamond Products Site
TeDiamondProductssiteisthelargestprivately-
ownedpropertyinLowertown.Currently,the
CityofSaintPaulisworkingwiththeSaintPaul
Saintstolocatearegionalballparkfacilityonthe
northerlyDiamondProductssite.
TePlanofersthreealternativesforredeveloping
theDiamondBuilding/Site.
Reusetheexistingbuilding(artsrelatedand/
orindoorrecreation),subjecttomoredetailed
analysisofinteriorarchitecturalandstructural
buildingfeatures.
Redevelopthesiteforaregionalballpark(with
surface/tailgatingparkingmostlikelybetween
theLafayetteBridgeandBruceVentoNature
Sanctuary).
Redevelopmentwithmixed-usebuildings(arts-
related).
Existing Conditions
April 2012
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
.
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
.
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
Diamond Products Site: Private Redevelopment
W
a
l
l
S
t
.
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
33
Prince Street Extension and Redevelopment Between
the Lafayette Bridge and Broadway
Proposed Lowertown street extensions east of Broadway
Proposed new development east of Broadway
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
4
t
h
S
t
W
i
l
l
i
u
s
S
t
L
a
f
a
y
e
t
t
e
S
t
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
Prince
St. Park
(proposed)
reorganized
resident parking
(30 spaces)
Potential low-
rise housing
Potential mid-
rise housing
Tilsner
OMF
Northern
April 2012
34
Greenhouses Community
gardens
Rowcrops Orchards
East of the Lafayette Bridge:Dueinpartto
developmentrestrictions,theeastedgeof
Lowertowncanbecomeavaluableresource
forurbanandcommunityagriculture,
stormwatermanagementandrecreational
connections.Detailedsoilcontamination
studieswillberequiredtodeterminethe
exactlocationanddesignofagricultural
felds/gardens.
Community gardens closer to the neighborhood
Greenhouses for year round production and
educational programming
Row crops on larger contiguous parcels
3.6 Introduce urban agriculture, recreational uses and
sustainability initiatives east of the Lafayette Bridge in The
Seam.
April 2012
35
Proposed Cultural Center at Bruce Vento Sanctuary
Existing Potential
A Unused Stormwater and grey water harvesting
B Beneath
Lafayette Bridge
Tailgating and public art
C Vacant Lot/
surface parking
Urban agriculture and recreation
D Unused Trail connections
BA
BC
BD
BB
BA
BC
BD
BB
BC
Potential reuse of the building could feature a green roof and outdoor decks that
allow visitors to stroll out onto the sanctuary.
Designs by Rafferty Rafferty Tollefson Lindeke Architects
Unique Location, Exciting Potential:

Imniza-Ska Cultural Center at the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary

Saint Paul, Minnesotas Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary is a nationally acclaimed natural area
with abundant ecological and cultural resources. A
city park, the sanctuary offers 27-acres of prairie,
wetland and forest habitat as well as remnants of
Saint Pauls early brewing and rail history. Wakan
Tipi/Carvers Cave at the southeastern tip of the
sanctuary is a Dakota sacred site.

In 2008 Saint Paul Parks and Recreation
purchased a vacant 36,000 square foot former
warehouse next to the sanctuary. The nonprofit
community group Lower Phalen Creek Project is
working with the city to redevelop the building as a
multi-use cultural center that revitalizes and
interprets this stretch of the Mississippi River
corridor. Honoring the significance of the area to
Native people, the working title for the project is the
Imniza-Ska Cultural Center, reflecting the Dakota
name for the while cliffs of the area.

Redevelopment steps conducted to date include
engineering evaluations of the building, several
architectural renderings and soil cleanup supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

A place where urban and natural meet
The building is just a short walk from the Lowertown area of Downtown Saint Paul a historic district known for its lively
arts community, farmers market and Union Depot transportation hub. Plans for redeveloping the land between the sanctuary
and Lowertown include urban agriculture and a regional ballpark. An 80-mile pedestrian/bicycle trail network connects the
area to destinations across the city and beyond.

Opportunities for a wide range of uses
Community members have long envisioned using a portion of the building for interpreting the lands ecological and cultural
significance from its geology to its value for Native people, industrial use and recent reclamation. Initial plans call for a
multi-cultural place-based approach featuring strong engagement and leadership from the surrounding community and
Dakota partners. The cultural center would also provide facilities for school groups visiting the sanctuary for fieldtrips.

Interpretive exhibits would take up approximately one fourth of the building. Engineering evaluations indicate that the
building could be rehabilitated for a range of uses. Early plans have considered the following:
A caf with an outdoor deck offering stunning views of the sanctuary and Mississippi River.
Office space for environmental groups and others.
A teaching kitchen and facilities that support adjacent planned urban agriculture.
A preschool or daycare.
Educational facilities for local colleges or other learning institutions.
Exhibit space for arts and culture organizations.

For more information and updates as the process moves forward, visit www.phalencreek.org.
BC
L
a
fa
y
e
tte
B
rid
g
e
I-94
Mississippi River
K
e
llo
g
g
B
lv
d
April 2012
The Seam
36
3.7 Create a parking plan for downtown and Lowertown that
prioritizes full occupancy of existing parking spaces over
construction of new parking.
Newbuildingsshouldcontinuetoprovideparkingfortenantsandresidents
eitherbeloworbehindthebuildings.Generally,theparkingshouldbe
concealedwithinthebuilding.Inordertosupportactivesidewalksandtransit
use,newdevelopmentshouldcreatenomorethanoneparkingspaceper
residentialunit.Teparkingspacesshouldbemanagedasapooledresource
andleasedtoresidents.Byleasing-notselling-parking,residentscanchoose
tohavetwocarsornocars.Furthermore,byleasingparking,theoverall
poolofparkingcanbesharedacrossbuildingsandforgeneraluseinthe
neighborhood.
April 2012
Potential new parking structures
Event Parking Strategy: Eventparkingshouldbedirectedtotheedgesofthe
neighborhood,notthecenter.Shuttlesandapedestrianfriendlyenvironmentwill
improvethevisitorexperiencenote:DiamondProductsBuildingshouldbeconsideredfor
neartermparking
Ballpark
(potential)
Farmers
Market
Art Crawl
650 650
1150
113
829
650
172
404
725
J
a
c
k
s
o
n
S
t
P
P
primarily
residential
residential and
visitor
residential
and visitor
37
3.8 Improve Kellogg Boulevard by developing a liner building
on the north edge of the Union Depot rail deck.
Potential redevelopment south of Kellogg Blvd.
3.9 Develop more gathering spaces for the neighborhood.
April 2012
Gathering Places
Farmers
Market
Improved
atrium at
Cray Plaza
Mears
Park
Black
Dog
Cafe
Small parks,
and cafe or
cofee shop on
East 7th
Depot Head
House and /
or Plaza
Lower
Landing
Park
Prince St.
Park
Existing
Potential
April 2012
39
April 2012
Summary
Lowertown has a large contingent
of self-employed individuals, artists,
small frms and non-profts engaged
in the creative economy.
The creative community is primarily
engaged in art production and
creative services, as opposed to
presentation and marketing.
Over 30 years of investment have
been made in creating afordable
live and work space for artists and
creative enterprises.
Lowertowns identity as an artist
and creative community is not
immediately evident in the physical
environment and has not been
asserted clearly.
The vulnerability of the creative
community to market forces in
real estate on the one hand, and
the communitys need to attract a
market for its products on the other,
are in some ways in confict.
The artist community is well-
networked but, at-large, not strongly
organized or fully engaged in
neighborhood activities, governance
and other creative sector businesses.
Goals
4.1 Position and expand the
Lowertown creative cluster as a
signifcant contributor to the regional
economy.
4.2 Maintain and expand live and work
spaces, as well as gathering places,
that are afordable for artists and
attractive to the creative community.
4.3 Defne and grow the identity of
Lowertown as a vital community of
creative and cultural production.
4.4 Foster a more diverse and
complete mixed-income residential
community that provides walkable
access to daily needs and services.
4.5 Strengthen the network and
quality of creative output of artists,
arts producers, creative entrepreneurs
and creative sector workers.
Objectives
4.1 Protect the afordability of
residential artist buildings from
escalation in the real estate market,
and increase the number of afordable
work spaces and gathering places
suited to artists and creative
entrepreneurs.
4.2 Advance an identity that serves
to maintain the neighborhood as a
creative sector cluster producing high-
quality work.
4.3 Integrate public art, creative design
and streetscaping, and other cultural
activity in the public realm and built
environment.
4.4 Build markets for artists and
creative entrepreneurs, their skills and
work product.
4.5 Create a neighborhood that
is inclusive, culturally diverse and
connected to other communities.
4.6 Develop artists and creative
community members as leaders in
Lowertown, the city and the region.
4.7 Identify opportunities for using
Union Depot as a site for arts activities,
arts marketplace or work spaces for
artists.
4.8 Establish a strong and integral
role for creative producers in district
management and implementation of
the Master Plan.
40
April 2012
Summary
4.6 Explore opportunities to grow
educational spaces and opportunities
for creative skills transfer.
4.7 Maintain state-of-the-art
technology infrastructure needed for a
competitive creative sector.
4.8 Explore the value of an Arts
or Creative Overlay District
in collaboration with historic
preservation representatives.
4.9 Work with Union Depot managers
to incorporate public art, public
programs, retail marketing and other
opportunities.
4.10 Seek out and develop appropriate
venues and partnerships to enhance
markets for locally-produced creative
products.
4.11 Leverage the diverse range of
people who come to Lowertown for
the Farmers Market, Art Crawl and
other events as well as those who
travel through the Union Depot to
create a welcoming multi-cultural
environment.
4.12 Identify appropriate spaces,
partners and activities to expand
networking and career development
among artists and creative workers.
Strategies
4.1 Identify the most immediate
opportunities for stabilizing artist live/
work spaces and gathering places.
4.2 Prepare a comprehensive database
to map the creative community
(individuals, venues, activities) and
develop economic data to measure
the impact of the Lowertown creative
cluster.
4.3 Inventory underutilized and
vacant spaces and work with property
owners, the artist community, the
City and potential occupants to create
appropriate arts-related uses.
4.4 Work with existing networks
and organizations to strengthen the
creative community, the creative
cluster infrastructure, district identity,
and participation of artists and
creative entrepreneurs in leadership
development activities.
4.5 Encourage policy makers to protect
the creative sector workforce and
work spaces, and steer developers to
create appropriate spaces and support
services using Community Benefts
Agreements to protect and enhance
creative sector jobs, spaces and
programs.
April 2012
5. Transportation
42
5. Transportation
April 2012
Summary
Lowertown has an efcient
urban grid that extends to the
north (to Wacouta Commons)
and west (to downtown), but not
the south (riverfront) and east
(toward Vento Sanctuary).
Lowertown is well-served by
two freeways: I-94 and 35W. The
pedestrian environment is worse
where the local streets interface
with the highways.
Lowertown is at a nexus of
recreational trail connections.
85 miles of regional trails are
connected through Lowertown.
Transit in Lowertown is
improving rapidly. With LRT and
the renovation of Union Depot,
Lowertown will soon be as well
connected by transit as any place
in the region.
Surface parking has become the
default use for several parcels.
Goals
5.1 Provide safe access and
mobility for vehicles.
5.2 Prioritize safe, convenient, and
inviting pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit accessibility.
5.3 Be a multi-modal
transportation hub centered on
Union Depot.
5. 4 Create a multi-modal
transportation network that is
well-connected to the regions
transportation network.
5.5 Create a multi-modal
transportation network that is
internally integrated, providing
the facilities needed for easy
switching from mode to mode.
Objectives
5.1 Connect Lowertown to the
Mississippi River and regional
trails.
5.2 Shift mode split away from
single-occupant vehicles.
5.3 Incrementally and selectively
modify streets to be more
pedestrian-friendly.
5.4 Expand Lowertowns open
spaces with shared streets and
plaza streets.
5.5 Prioritize full occupancy of
existing parking garages before
building new.
Strategies
5.1 Construct a complete and
connected on-street bike network
and preserve sufcient right-of-
way for transit on 4th, 5th and 6th
streets.
5.2 Connect Kellogg Mall to Bruce
Vento Regional Trail (via the River
Balcony and Union Depot).
5.3 Improve connections between
Lowertown and the Bruce Vento
Trail System.
5.4 Connect Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary to the Sam Morgan Trail.
5.5 Provide bicycle storage
facilities at all major attractions.
5.6 Connect Lowertown streets to
the Lafayette Bridge vertically.
5.7 Design the streets surrounding
parks and plazas as part of the
adjacent open spaces.
5.8 Extend Broadway to Warner
Road.
5.9 Create a street network east of
the Lafayette Bridge that connects
Lowertown to the East Side
5.10 Reconsider Downtowns /
Lowertowns one-way circulation
system.
5.11 Selectively reconstruct
intersections on 7th Street to
encourage pedestrian crossings.
5.12 Reconstruct select
intersections of Warner Road to
enable safe bicycle and pedestrian
crossings.
43
5. Transportation
Lowertown Movement and Access Plan
April 2012
BA
BE
BE
BF
BA
BA
BB
BC
BC
BD
BD
BC
BC
Tailgate / Market parking BA
Lower Landing parking BB
Improved Intersections BD
New Streets BE
New Trailhead BF
Structured parking BC
E
E
44
April 2012
5. Transportation
Strategies
Proposed bicycle and trail network
To downtown via
River Balcony
Sam Morgan
Regional Trail
To West Side
Flats via
Lafayette
Bridge
m
arsupial bridge connection across rail deck
Bruce Vento to
Lower Landing
Connection
To McCarrens Lake
and Trillium via
Trout Brook Trail
Bruce Vento
Regional Trail
To Bruce
Vento Nature
Sanctuary
Mounds Park,
and Battle
Creek
To downtown via
5th and 6th St.
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
r
u
c
e
V
e
n
t
o
R
e
g
io
n
a
l T
r
a
il
To Swede Hollow
Existing
Proposed
5.1 Construct a complete and connected
on-street bicycle network and preserve
sufcient right-of-way for transit on 4th,
5th and 6th Sstreets.
5.3 Improve the connection between
Lowertown and the Bruce Vento Regional
Trail system.
5.4 Connect Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary to the Sam Morgan Trail.
5.5 Provide bicycle storage and bicycle
sharing facilities at all major attractions.
5.6 Connect Lowertown streets to the
Lafayette Bridge vertically.
Marsupial Bridge
Warner
Shepard
Road
Lafayette Bridge
Marsupial Bridge
Lower
Landing
Park
Kellogg Blvd. Prince St.
45
5.8 Extend Broadway to Warner Road
5.9 Create a street network east of the Lafayette Bridge that
connects Lowertown to the East Side.
5.11 Selectively reconstruct Intersections on 7th Street to
encourage pedestrian crossings.
April 2012
5. Transportation
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
P
r
in
c
e
W
i
l
l
i
u
s
L
a
f
a
y
e
t
t
e
Proposed New Street Network East of Broadway
Recommended Changes at East 7th Street
Improved
intersections
Small parks, and/
or opportunities
for greenspace and
gathering spaces
W
a
ll S
t
.
W
a
c
o
u
t
a
S
t
.
S
ib
le
y
S
t
.
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
n
c
e
S
t
7
th
S
tre
e
t
Infll development
Infll development
46
Recommended changes to Warner / Shepard Road
Intersection improvements
Extend Broadway
to Warner /
Shepard
5.12 Reconstruct select intersections of Warner Road to enable
safe bicycle and pedestrian crossings
April 2012
5. Transportation
April 2012
48
April 2012
Summary
Mears Park is a jewel, but it
needs relief.
The riverfront is an asset, but
inaccessible.
Growth in the neighborhood will
require better connections to
existing parks and open spaces.
Recreational connections
are incomplete; they can be
completed east of the Lafayette
Bridge.
The Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary ofers unique access
to nearby wilderness just a short
walk from Lowertown, but it
is difcult to fnd the trail that
connects the two areas.
The Lowertown population will
grow in numbers and diversity;
the neighborhoods open spaces
should adapt to these changes.
There is a lack of recreational
opportunities for children and
seniors.
Goals
6.1 Be lush and connected.
6.2 Be a neighborhood in a river
valley.
6.3 Have a variety of ample
outdoor spaces for residents and
visitors to enjoy throughout the
year.
6.4 Meet the diversity of needs for
a growing Lowertown.
6.5 Maximize proximity to existing
parks and open spaces.
6.6 Create indoor recreational
opportunities.
Objectives
6.1 Increase access to existing
parks.
6.2 Leverage new investments
to create semi-public parks and
gathering spaces.
6.3 Create opportunities for active
recreation - both indoor and
outdoor.
6.4 Consider streets and alleys as
part of the open space system.
6.5 Leverage atriums and
skyways and other semi-public
spaces for indoor recreation and
programming.
6.6 Complete the recreational
network through Lowertown.
Strategies
6.1 Activate the lawn and
former drop-of area in front
of the Union Depot with
temporary installations, art and
programming.
6.2 Enhance the Farmers
Market site to become a greater
neighborhood amenity.
6.3 Create the River Balcony
connecting the Science Museum,
Kellogg Mall and Union Depot to
the Trout Brook Regional Trail.
6.4 Create Prince Street Park.
6.5 Locate additional recreation
space east of the Lafayette Bridge.
6.6 Activate the Riverfront with a
promenade, Lower Landing Park
and programming per the Great
River Passage Plan
6.7 Incrementally improve
sidewalks to become part of the
neighborhoods valued open space
system.
6.8 Expand the use of temporary /
seasonal cafes and plazas.
6.9 Create roof top gardens as part
of the open space system.
6.10 Raise visibility and improve
awareness that the Bruce Vento
Regional Trail connects Lowertown
to the Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary, Swede Hollow Park,
and other East Side recreational
destinations.
6.11 Explore use of the Diamond
Products building for indoor
recreation.
49
April 2012
Lowertown Open Space Plan
BA
BB
BD
BE
BC
BF
Trail connections B
A
Lower Landing Park BB
Farmers Market Plaza BD
Prince Street Park BE
River Balcony BF
Signature pedestrian/bicycle bridge BC
Bruce Vento
Nature Sanctuary
Mears Park
Wacouta
Commons
50
6.1 Activate the lawn and former drop-of area in front
of the Union Depot with temporary installations, art and
programming.
6.2 Enhance the Farmers Market Site to become a greater
neighborhood amenity.
Activate the edges of the room.
Redesign streets to become convertible streets.
Create a year-round amenity / gathering place that enhances the
Market.
Utilize the Market sheds year-round.
6.3 Create the River Balcony connecting the Science Museum,
Kellogg Mall and Union Depot to the Trout Brook Regional Trail.
Proposed River Balcony
Post Ofce
Kellogg Mall
Union Depot
April 2012
Strategies
TespaceinfrontoftheUnionDepotcanbeactivatedwithdisplaysandeventssuchasthe
temporarydeckingshownintheimageabove,thatcanprovideafexiblefestivespace.Art,
foodserviceandliveperformanceswillalladdlifetothespaceandallowthespacetobe
preserved,celebratedandanamenitytotheneighborhood.Tisrenderingalsoillustrates
thepotentialfornewinflldevelopmenttofrontonanddefnethestreetenvelopewitha
varietyofarchitecturallanguagesthatsharethefundamentalformandpatternfoundinthe
LowertownHistoricDistrict
51
6.5 Locate additional recreation space east of the Lafayette
Bridge.
6.4 Create Prince Street Park.
TePrinceStreetParkwillbeapproximately1/3acre-aneighborhood-scaled
openspace.Tespaceshouldbeprogrammedforchildrensplayandsocial
interactionamongneighbors.Teparkshouldbedesignedandoperatedin
partnershipwiththeTilsnerandNorthernWarehouse.
Prince Street Park
4
t
h
S
t
.
W
i
l
l
i
u
s
S
t
.
P
r
in
c
e
S
t
.
April 2012
52
6.6 Activate the Riverfront with a
promenade, Lower Landing Park and
programming per the Great River
Passage Plan
native gardens and water quality wetlands
signature pedestrian bridge / gateway
potential skate park
potential dog park
Lamberts Landing
on-site full access parking
landforms and overlooks
Broadway / Lowertown access
April 2012
B
A
BB
BD
BE
BF
BG
BH
BC
B
A
BB
BC BD
BE
BF
BG
BH
April 2012
7. Housing
54
7. Housing
April 2012
Summary
There are approximately 2000
units in Lowertown, most in
renovated buildings.
The neighborhood is mixed
with both rental and ownership,
afordable and market-rate
housing.
The three arts-oriented buildings
are national models.
Afordability in Lowertown
exists, but it is not guaranteed.
Goals
7.1 Maintain housing afordabiilty
for artists and members of the
creative community.
7.2 Continue renovating buildings
for housing.
7.3 Ofer opportunities for new
construction that is compatible
with the historic character of the
neighborhood.
7.4 Provide a range of housing
types and prices.
7.5 Create housing choices that
take advantage of the transit
investments.
7.6 Create added and sustained
value for resident owners in
Lowertown.
7.7 Promote transit use and Transit
Oriented Development as an
afordable housing strategy.
7.8 Create housing opportunities
that appeal to all segments of the
creative community.
7.9 Recognize housing
opportunities in relation to and on
the Riverfront.
Objectives
7.1 Develop additional artist-
oriented housing.
7.2 Diversify housing to
attract new residents to the
neighborhood.
7.3 Continue investing in
the amenities (public space,
community retail, etc) that sustain
values for all residents.
Strategies
7.1 Provide a broad range of
housing types. prices, choices and
sizes to accommodate diverse
residential needs.
7.2 Work to convert the vacant
and under-utilized buildings into
artist-owned live / work buildings.
7.3 Convert the bottom two
foors of the Lowertown Lofts
Cooperative to artist use.
7.4 Develop in-line and townhouse
units along the south side of the
new Prince Street extension.
7.5 Develop market-rate housing
south of Kellogg.
55
7. Housing
April 2012
Lowertownisahousingsuccesswithover2000unitslocatedwithinthe
generalstudyareaandmorebeingaddedin2011(theLoftsatFarmersMarket
58units).Since2000,about25percentoftheunitsdeliveredindowntown
SaintPaularelocatedintheLowertownarea.Mostoftheseunitsarerental;
oftheapproximately1,530rentalunits,1,142areamarket-rate.Approximately
240unitsareestimatedtobeafordableorhaveincome-restrictions.Ofthe
roughly2000unitsabout470oftheseareowner-occupied.Overallvacancy
rate(asofthe3rdQtrof2010)wasabout8percent.Anestimated147units
areconsideredartist-relatedorsupportivehousing.
Totalunits: 2010
Rental 1540(77%)
Owner-occupied 470(23%)
Market-raterental 1142(57%oftotal)
Afordable 240(12%oftotal)
Artistunits 147(7%oftotal)
Demographically,LowertownresidentsdiferfromSaintPaulinseveral
categories:
Higherpercentofnewresidents
Higherpercentofeducatedpopulation(bachelordegreeorhigher)
Higherincomeresidents
Higherpercentofresidentsnotmarried
Higherpercentofresidentswithoutschoolagechildren
Higherproportionoffemalesvs.males
Higherpercentusingalternativeformoftransportation
Signifcantpercentofpopulationthatdonotownacar
Reviewingthehousingdevelopmentpatternrevealsanumberofconditions
andcharacteristicsthatmayinfuencefutureinvestmentandrenovation/
redevelopment.Tegraphicbelowillustratesexistingresidentialbuildings
(darkgray);proposednew/infllbuildings(lightblue)andpotential
renovations(darkblue).Ingeneralhousingunitsarelocatedinproximityto
twomajorareasofLowertown,MearsParkandtheFarmersMarket.
Over1000unitsarelocatedonorverynearMearsPark;andalmost500units
arelocatedaroundorneartheFarmersMarket.AportionoftheWacouta
Commonsareaisshownascontext;thiswell-formedgreenspaceprovidesa
centertoover600units.
TeDowntownSaintPaulStationAreaPlanidentifesanumberofpotential
inflldevelopmentsitesandexistingbuildings.Tusathirdcenterfor
residentialdevelopmentisclearlyemerginginthestationareaanchoredbythe
UnionDepot.
Analysis
There are approximately 2000 units in Lowertown, most in
renovated buildings.
The neighborhood is mixed with both rental and ownership,
afordable and market-rate housing.
The three arts-oriented buildings are national models.
Afordability in Lowertown exists, but it is not guaranteed.
56
7. Housing
April 2012
Tilsner Artists Coop
Market House
Crane
Cosmopolitan
Strauss Apts
Union Depot
Parkside Apts
River Park
Lofts
Lowertown
Lofts
Cooperative
Lot 270
Airye
Mears Park Place
On the Park
Condominiums
Northern
Warehouse
Heritage House
Essex on the park
W
a
l
l
S
t
W
a
c
o
u
t
a
S
t
N
S
i
b
l
e
y
S
t
J
a
c
k
s
o
n
S
t
E
4
th
S
t
Great Northern
Lofts
American House
Airye 101 For Sale
River Park Lofts 120 For Sale
Market House 58 For Sale
Union Depot Lofts 33 For Sale
Essex on the Park 38 For Sale
Great Northern Lofts 53 For Sale
Lot 270 45 For Sale
On the Park Condominiums 16 For Sale
Chicago Great Western 8 For Sale
sub total 470
Galtier Towers 366 Market Rate For Rent
The Parkside 53 Market Rate For Rent
Lowertown Lofts 107 Market Rate For Rent
Cosmopolitan 255 Market Rate For Rent
Lowertown Commons 111 Market Rate For Rent
Mears Park Place 250 Market Rate For Rent
sub total 1142
Heritage House 58 Afordable Rental
American House 13 Afordable Rental
Strauss Apartments 49 Afordable Rental
Crane 70 Afordable Rental
Mears Park Place 50 Afordable Rental
sub total 240
Lowertown Lofts Cooperative 29 Artists Residential
Ownership
Northern Warehouse Artists
Cooperative
52 Artists Residential
Rental
Tilsner Artists Cooperative 66 Artists Residential
Rental
sub total 147
TOTAL 1999
Housing Inventory (partial)
Galtier Tower
Lowertown
Commons Lowertown
Lofts
Chicago
Great
Western
57
50
78
24
32
40
24
180
30
16
12
21
40
45
45
20
48
42
April 2012
7. Housing
Potential New Construction
Potential Renovations
Existing
Proposed New Housing
April 2012
59
April 2012
Summary
Lowertown is a part of the
Capitol Region Watershed
District.
Phalen Creek and Trout Brook
Creek converge at the east end
of Lowertown prior to entering
the Mississippi River.
The soils east of the Lafayette
Bridge are contaminated;
water that infltrates these soils
becomes contaminated.
District Energy does not extend
to all buildings in Lowertown
and Wacouta Commons.
Based on past uses, the soils
between Broadway Street and
the Lafayette Bridge are likely
contaminated; the extent and
cost of remediation may impact
future use.
Goals
8.1 Reduce use of potable water.
8.2 Use grey water and stormwater
as a resource for irrigation and
within buildings, and as an
amenity in open spaces.
8.3 Increase the use of clean and
renewable energy sources.
8.4 Encourage all transportation
options that reduce the use of
fossil fuels.
8.5 Highlight and make visible the
process of resource use, and waste
production and management.
Objectives
8.1 Implement a grey water system
for Lowertown.
8.2 Integrate stormwater
management into the public realm
and streetscape.
8.3 Integrate public art
into stormwater solutions,
energy generation and waste
management.
8.4 Use open spaces, large fat
roofs and other unused spaces for
solar arrays and micro wind farms.
Strategies
8.1 Support the Bring Water Back
to Saint Paul campaign by the
Capital Region Watershed District
to restore surface water features
and build better stewardship for
area water ways (e.g., Trout Brook,
Phalen Creek, etc.).
8.2 Harness water from the
Lafayette Bridge and use as a
resource for the neighborhood;
coordinate eforts with Prince
Street reconstruction.
8.3 Work with the Metropoitain
Council to use grey water for
washing LRT vehicles.
8.4 Engage the artist-in-residence
at the Capitol Region Watershed
District to create an amenity out of
the Lafayette Bridge stormwater
facility.
8.5 Extend the LRT infltration
trench in front of Union Depot to
adjacent blocks.
8.6 Encourage new and existing
developments to mitigate
stormwater by utilizing green roofs
and providing cisterns.
8.7 Extend District Energy
throughout Lowertown and into
Wacouta Commons.
8.8 Consider the use and
application of alternative energy
sources including low elevation
domestic wind turbines.
60
April 2012
TehistoryofLowertownisverymuchahistoryofwateritsuse,itscourse
andcontrol.FromtheMississippiRiverthatwashomeandhabitatfornative
peoplesandlateractedasthetransportationandeconomiccorridor,water
hasalwaysandwillalwaysbeadefningcharacteristicoftheneighborhood.
Historicwatercoursesmaynotentirelyexisttodaybutthegeographicaland
geophysicalsettingremainsariversideconfuencethatexhibitsthebluf
andvalleyformbuthasbeenalteredovertimewithmoremodernversionsof
infrastructureandprogress.Lowertownsitsontheriverbutinmanywaysdoes
notalwaysconnectvisuallyorphysically.
Likewater,energyisalsocloselytiedtotheriverasasourceofpower
generationatmultiplepointsontheriver.Today,Lowertownremainsamodel
foramoresustainable,connecteddevelopmentpatternthatreliesonDistrict
Energy,reuseandrenovationofexistinghistoricbuildingstock,andsoon
lightrailtransitthatwillconnectresidentstotheStateCapitol,Universityof
MinnesotaanddowntownMinneapolis.
Environmentally,Lowertownhaschangedradicallysincetheearlydays
ofNativeAmericanhabitation,paddleboatlandingsandwarehouse
development.Creeksandwetlandshavebeenmoved,channeledorburied;
heavyindustryhashadenvironmentalimpactsandsomestillremain;andrail
hasbeeninuseforoveracenturyandwillcontinueintheforeseeablefuture.
UsingbestpracticesandincrementalreinvestmenttheGreaterLowertown
areacanbeamodelofsustainablelivingfordecadestocome.
Sustainabilitybeginsbyaskingthequestionwhere?Wheredowelive,work,
shop,andplayinrelationtohownearorfarwearelocatedtothesebasic
dailyfunctionsoflife?Lowertownresidentshaveahigherpercentageusing
alternativemeansofcommutingincludingworkingathome(orstudioorlive/
workunit),walkingandutilizingpublictransportation.Asignifcantpercent
(comparedtothecityasawhole)oftheLowertownpopulationdoesnotown
anautomobile.Tecombinationofhistoricbuildingsbeingreusedforhousing
andwork,numbersofresidentsalsoworkingathomeorinthedistrict,
efcientDistrictEnergyresourcesandthesoon-to-beoperationalCentral
CorridorLRTmakeLowertownoneofthemostsustainableneighborhoodsin
thecityandmetropolitanarea.Ofcourse,morecanbedonesuchasenhancing
buildingperformancestandards,accommodatingadditionalresidentialand
live/workspace,treatingstormwaterrunofandmanagingtheup-stream
implicationsofwateruse,andsupportinglocalurbanagriculturethatresultsin
localjobsandlocalfood.
AnotherimportantinitiativeidentifedinthePartnershipinLowertown
report(August1981,LowertownRedevelopmentCorporation)isthepotential
ofsolarenergy.AtthatpointintimetheLRChadreceivedagrantfromthe
NationalEndowmentfortheArtsandworkedwiththeSolarEnergyResearch
Institutetoconductsolarenergyassessmentsandanalysis.
Analysis
Lowertown is a part of the Capitol Region Watershed District.
Phalen Creek and Trout Brook Creek converge at the east end of
Lowertown prior to entering the Mississippi River.
The soils east of the Lafayette Bridge are contaminated; water that
infltrates these soils becomes contaminated.
District Energy does not extend to all buildings in Lowertown and
Wacouta Commons
61
April 2012
Support the Bring Water Back to Saint Paul campaign by the
Capital Region Watershed District (CRWD) to restore surface
water features and build better stewardship for area water
ways (e.g., Trout Brook, Phalen Creek, Mears Creek, etc.) and the
Lower Phalen Creek Project mission.
CRWDhopestoBringWaterBacktoSaintPaulbycraftingavisionfor
thewatershedthatincludesthebestofinnovationandcollaborationtotreat
stormwaterasaresourceinsteadofawasteproduct.
CRWDsfrstwatershedplanwasadoptedin2000toidentifygoals,policies,
andactionplansforfulfllingCRWDsmission,toprotect,manage,and
improvethewaterresourcesoftheCapitolRegionWatershedDistrict.Te
Districtisembarkingonitsseconddecadeofworkunderanewplanthatwill
continuethelong-termworkofprotectingandimprovingtheDistrictswaters.
Te2010-20WatershedPlan:
Recognizesthechallengesofwaterqualityimprovementinahighly
urbanizedwatershedandrecommendsandprioritizesuniqueandcreative
approachestowatershedmanagement;
Recommendsandprioritizeswaterqualityandquantityimprovement
projects,basedonCRWDmodelingandmonitoringresults;
RecommendsandprioritizesDistrictprogramsforimprovedwatershed
awareness;
Moreefectivelydefnestherespectiverolesandresponsibilitiesbetween
CRWDandthelocalunitsofgovernment,otheragencies,andother
organizations;and
AddressesemergingchallengesposedbyfederalCleanWaterAct
requirementsforimpairedwaters(thosewithqualitytoopoorfortheir
designateduses)
Goals
Objectives
Strategies
Reduce use of potable water.
Use grey water and stormwater as a resource for irrigation and
within buildings, and as an amenity in open spaces.
Increase the use of clean and renewable energy sources.
Encourage all transportation options that reduce the use of fossil
fuels.
Highlight and make visible the process of resource use, and waste
production and management.
Implement a grey water system for Lowertown.
Integrate stormwater management into the public realm and
streetscape.
Integrate public art into stormwater solutions, energy generation
and waste management.
Use open spaces, large fat roofs and other unused spaces for
solar arrays and micro wind farms.
62
April 2012
Harness water from the Lafayette Bridge and use as a resource
for the neighborhood; coordinate eforts with Prince Street
reconstruction.
DiscussionswiththeMinnesotaDepartmentofTransportation,US
RepresentativeMcCollumandlocalstakeholdersprovidedinterestand
supportforthepotentialtoaddressstormwaterrunofinamoresustainable
andproductiveway.Teideaistocapturetherunoffromthenorthendof
theLafayetteBridge(andsupportinginfrastructureandotherareas),treatthe
watertoalevelthatisacceptableforirrigationandnon-potableapplications
andthenfromacentralsetofreservoirsorconnectedcisternsusethegrey
waterasanirrigationsourceforurbanagricultureusesand/orforpractical
applications(likeLRTcarwashing.)
Work with the Metropolitain Council to use grey water for
washing LRT vehicles.
MetroTransitcontrolskeybuildingsandparcelsintheGreaterLowertown
area.TeMasterPlanlookstopartnerwithstakeholdersliketheMetropolitan
CouncilandMetroTransitinordertomoveimportantstrategiesand
initiativesforward.Oneinitiative,explainedabove,suggestshowlocally
harvestedwaterresourcescanbeappliedintheOperationsandMaintenance
Facility,suchascarwashingandotheroperations
Te Lower Phalen Creek Project is a nonproft organization
working to strengthen Saint Paul s East Side and Lowertown
communities by developing and maximizing the value of local
parks and trails, ecological and cultural resources and connections
to the Mississippi River. Founded by Friends of Swede Hollow
and catalyzed in 1997 by the engagement of the Lowertown
Redevelopment Corporation, the Lower Phalen Creek Project
is led by a community based Steering Committee and actively
partners with the City of Saint Paul and others to:
Complete the redevelopment of the Bruce Vento Nature
Sanctuary as an ecological, cultural and educational resource
and key community asset;
Establish and promote trail connections between the
Sanctuary, the Lowertown/Downtown neighborhood and the
Mississippi River; and
Capture and flter stormwater through multiple strategies.
April 2012
64
April 2012
Summary
Much of Lowertown is within
the National Register and local
Lowertown Historic Districts,
in which preservation, new
construction and demolition
are guided by the Secretary
of the Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation and the adopted
Lowertown Design Review
Guidelines.
Lowertowns historic character is
established by the architectural
signifcance of the individual
buildings, the collection of those
buildings, and the established
street grid and streetscape;
they are fundamental to the
neighborhoods physical identity.
The history of Lowertown is
on-going, containing multiple
layers across multiple eras. The
National Register Nomination
establishes the Period of
Signifcance for the Lowertown
Historic District as 1867-1929.
The historic resources of
Lowertown are assets that
have and can continue to fuel
economic development.
Preservation, alteration, new
construction and demolition
are guided by the Secretary
of Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation and the
Lowertown Design Review
Guidelines.
Goals
9.1 Continue to value and support
the National Register and local
designation of the Lowertown
Historic District.
9.2 Continue to preserve the
historic character of the Historic
District.
9.3 Continue telling the story of
Lowertowns culture and history
through investments in the built
environment (streetscape and
buildings).
9.4 Integrate expressions of
Lowertowns contemporary
cultures into the Historic District
while maintaining its architectural
and historical integrity.
9.5 Welcome and celebrate
changes and investments in
Lowertown by managing them
within the strong historic fabric.
Objectives
9.1 Focus redevelopment on the
stewardship of historic resources
by seeking building uses that
are compatible with the historic
character of the buildings.
9.2 Promote the reuse of existing
building stock as a green and
sustainable practice.
9.3 Encourage the arts community
and the historic preservation
community to work together to
develop an understanding of
appropriate place-based, context-
sensitive public art within the
historic district.
9.4 Prioritize new construction
on vacant or underutilized lots
over additions on top of historic
buildings.
Given recent Central Corridor
and Union Depot projects, the
Post Ofce and Union Depot
train deck have been determined
eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic
Places.
65
April 2012
Summary
Strategies
9.1 Apply the Secretary of Interiors
Standards for Treatment of Historic
Properties and the local Design
Review Guidelines to all repair,
alteration, new construction and
demolition in the Historic District.
9.2 Work with the Citys PED
and HPC to revise and expand
the Lowertown Historic District
Design Review Guidelines. The
Guidelines should better address
new construction, signage, public
art, streetscape and sustainability
within the Lowertown Historic
District.
9.3 Educate and engage the
community, new residents
and business owners of the
signifcance of the Historic District
and the applicable design review
guidelines.
9.4 Explore listing the Post Ofce
to the National Register and
designating it a local Saint Paul
Heritage Preservation Site.
9.5 Explore expanding the Union
Depot National Register site to
include the adjacent train deck,
and designate it a local Saint Paul
Heritage Preservation Site.
9.6 Prepare a Historic Structures
Report for the Post Ofce building
to explore adaptive reuse.
9.7 Conduct a study on historic
streetscape and infrastructure
to inform future open space and
streetscape proposals.
9.8 Encourage the use of
temporary and experimental pop
up installations within the District
as a way to activate buildings and
spaces without disrupting the
well-preserved assets.
9.9 Complete the Lowertown
Historic District signage program.
9.10 Discourage the extension of
the skyway system into and within
the Lowertown Historic District.
66
Lowertownresidentsrecognizetheeconomicvalueofbeingdesignated
anHistoricDistrictaspreservationisawidely-heldcommunityvalue.In
1983,theNationalRegisterLowertownHistoricDistrictwascreatedto
helpprotectthehistoricresourcesbyincentivizinginvestmentinthem.Te
processrequiredtheestablishmentofaPeriodofSignifcanceandextensive
documentationofbuildings,spaces,andanalysisofsignifcance.Teoutcomes
ofboththeNationalRegisterandlocaldesignationshavebeenseveraladaptive
reuseprojects,risingpropertyvalues,andthepreservation/creationofa
cherishedplace.
Much of Lowertown is within the National Register and local
Lowertown Historic Districts, in which preservation, new
construction and demolition are guided by the Secretary of
the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation and the adopted
Lowertown Design Review Guidelines.
Lowertowns historic character is established by the
architectural signifcance of the individual buildings, the
collection of those buildings, and the established street grid
and streetscape; they are fundamental to the neighborhoods
physical identity.
The history of Lowertown is on-going, containing multiple
layers across multiple eras. The National Register Nomination
establishes the Period of Signifcance for the Lowertown Historic
District as 1867-1929.
The historic resources of Lowertown are assets that have and
can continue to fuel economic development.
Preservation, alteration, new construction and demolition
are guided by the Secretary of Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation and the Lowertown Design Review Guidelines.
Given recent Central Corridor and Union Depot projects, the
Post Ofce and Union Depot train deck have been determined
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
Lowertownisarchitecturallysignifcantforitsremarkablyintactconcentration
ofcommercialbuildingsdesignedbythecitysmostprominentarchitectsin
stylesrangingfromtheItalianatestyleoftheearly1880stotheBeauxArts
oftheearlytwentiethcentury.Lowertownissignifcantinthehistoryof
landscapearchitectureandcityplanningduetothedramaticstreetpattern
andgradechangeswhichweremadeinthe1870s.Lowertownssignifcanceis
alsoduetothefactthatapark(MearsPark)encompassinganentirecityblock
hasbeenpreservedsincethe1880sinthemidstofalargewarehouseand
industrialareawithtightlyclusteredbuildings.
Today,Lowertownsdenseconcentrationofcommercialbuildingslocated
onstreetswhichformagrid-ironpatternthatgraduallyslopedownto
theMississippiRiverarepartofwhatdefnesitscharacter.Mostofthe
buildingsarefourtosixstoriestallandfacedinredorbufbrickwithstone
accents.Ingeneral,pre-1900buildingsareundersevenstoriestallandhad
storefrontswithstorageormanufacturingspaceabove.Manyalsohavecast-
ironstorefrontswhichweremanufacturedlocally.Post-1900buildingswere
generallybuiltforasinglepurposesuchasfreightstorageorofcesandwere
immenseutilitarianstructureswithClassicalRevivaldetailing.Teywere
alsotallerthantheVictorianstructuresandwerebuiltemployingreinforced
concreteandstructuralsteel.
WhilemuchofLowertownssuccessisrootedinitshistoriccharacter,residents
recognizethathistoryisnotafxedobject,orasingularlydefnederaintime.
Teyrecognizethathistoryisongoing;todaysactionsbecometomorrows
history.Teyarecommittedequallytopreservinghistoricresourcesandto
exploringnewinnovations-andtheywantthatevolutiontobeexpressedin
thephysicalenvironment.
Sincethedesignationin1983,Lowertownhascontinuedtowriteitshistory.
OverthepastseveraldecadesLowertownhasestablisheditselfasamodel
urbanvillagewithastrongartsproducingcommunity.Teartist-owned
andoperatedbuildings(createdinlargepartwithassistancegrantedtoitby
theHistoricTaxCreditlegislationandGapFinancingthroughtheLRC)
havebecomenationalmodelsforcreatingandprotectinganartsproducing
community.Itisthedesireofthecommunitytocontinuepreservingtheassets
thatmakeLowertownuniquewhileatthesametime,tocreateaphysical
environmentthatisrepresentativeofwhotheyare.
April 2012
Analysis
67
Historic Districts, Existing and Eligible
From Saint Pauls Comprehensive Plan:
Preservation is a core community value.
Historic preservation is a priority for the
City of Saint Paul.
Preservation is a critical component of
neighborhood vitality, quality of life and
sense of place.
Preservation is key to making Saint
Paul an economically, socially and
physically sustainable city, through
the rehabilitation and adaptive
reuse of buildings as well as the
broader protection and celebration of
neighborhood character.
Preservation is an essential tool to
accomplish economic development.
Historic resources are unique and
irreplaceable, and should be treated
accordingly.
Preservation should be integrated with
the broader city and neighborhood
planning process and with other
chapters of the Comprehensive Plan.
Industrialists
capitalists and
merchants build
Lowertown leaving
a legacy of rail
lines, buildings and
streets
Lowertown
declines
LRC is formed.
Buildings are
preserved and
repurposed; urban
pioneers move to
Lowertown. The
area is stabilized
and slowly brought
back to life by
artists and other
urban pioneers.
National register
and Local District
established
Newresidents,
newinvestments
in transit, the
arts, livability and
sustainability
leaving a legacy
of a productive
living / working/
collaborating arts
district within a
thriving urban
neighborhood.
1st generation
investments
1880 1930 1970 2000
2nd generation
investments
3rd generation
investments
NRHP Historic District
Eligible NRHP Historic District
Local Historic District
April 2012
68
April 2012
9.1 Continue to value and support the National Register and local
designation of the Lowertown Historic District.
9.2 Continue to preserve the historic character of the Historic
District.
9.3 Continue telling the story of Lowertowns culture and history
through investments in the built environment (streetscape and
buildings).
9.4 Integrate expressions of Lowertowns current and
contemporary cultures into Lowertowns built environment.
9.5 Welcome and celebrate changes and investments in
Lowertown by managing them within the strong historic fabric.
Goals Objectives
TeMasterPlanincludesanumberofimportantgoalsthatarefocusedon
Lowertownshistoricstory,characterandenvironment.Paramountamong
theseistheHistoricDistrictitselfandhowthatuniquecharacterandsetting
aremaintainedandenhanced.Andthisshouldnotbedonenotjustbyasingle
partybutfromthemanyvoicesandstakeholdersthatvalueLowertown.Tis
shouldincludeaccommodatingnewinvestments,newpublicartwork,and
newpoliciesthatpreservethehistorywhilecelebratingthefuture.
9.1 Focus redevelopment on the stewardship of historic resources
by seeking building uses that are compatible with the historic
character of the buildings.
9.2 Promote the reuse of existing building stock as a green and
sustainable practice.
9.3 Encourage the arts community and the historic preservation
community to work together to develop an understanding of
appropriate place-based, context-sensitive public art within the
historic district.
9.4 Prioritize new construction on vacant or underutilized lots over
additions on top of historic buildings.
AnumberofobjectivesrespondtothebroadernatureofLowertownasa
rolemodelforillustratingthepowerofgeographyandlocationasitrelates
tosustainability.Lowertownisalreadyanestablishedurbanvillageexhibiting
compactform,wellconnectedpublicrealmandmixofuses.Withtheaddition
oflightrail,Lowetownwillrepresentthemostsustainable,transit-oriented
villageintheTwinCities.Tomaintainthesustainable,cyber-villageobjectives
willfocusoncompatibleuses,reuseofexistingbuildingstockandcelebrating
thehistoryandcreativityoftheplace.
69
April 2012
Strategies
9.1 Apply the Secretary of Interiors Standards for Treatment of
Historic Properties and the local Design Review Guidelines to
all repair, alteration, new construction and demolition in the
Historic District.
TeguidelinesreferencetheSecretaryofInteriorsStandards;theseshould
applywhenrehabilitatingbuildingsintheHistoricDistrict.Futureprojects
mayalsoincorporateadditionalinvolvementandreviewprocessesifhistoric
taxcreditsarebeingsoughtorifthereisfederalfunding.TesameStandards
willapplyaswell.
9.2 Work with the Citys PED and HPC to revise and expand
the Lowertown Historic District Design Review Guidelines. The
Guidelines should better address new construction, signage,
public art, streetscape and sustainability within the Lowertown
Historic District.
MostdevelopmentisgovernedbytheLowertownHeritagePreservation
DistrictGuidelinesforDesignReview.Asapartofamitigationplanfor
theCentralCorridorLightRailProject,theCityofSaintPaulandthe
MetropolitanCouncilarecommittedtoupdatingtheseGuidelines.Tis
Planrecommendsthependingguidelinesaddressamorecomprehensive
approachtobuildingrehabilitations,signage,streetscape,infllconstruction
andpublicartthatwouldoferclarityandpredictabilityforresidents,property
owners,developersandinvestors.Guidelinesshouldbeinformedbythebroad
constituentsthroughoutLowertown.
9.3 Educate and engage the community, new residents and
business owners of the signifcance of the Historic District and
the applicable design review guidelines.
Buildingownersandresidentschangeovertime,whiletheDistrictdesignation
stayswiththestructuresandspaces.Tisrequireson-goingandconstant
communicationamongorganizationsandindividuals.
9.4 Explore listing the Post Ofce to the National Register and
designating it a local Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Site.
9.5 Prepare a Historic Structures Report for the Post Ofce
building to explore adaptive reuse.
TePostOfcehasbeendeterminedeligibleforlistingontheNational
Register,andseveralcovenantsforthebuildingspreservationarepartofthe
saleofthesite.TePostOfceisamostlyvacant750,000SFbuildingthatwill
beagreatchallengetoredevelop.However,itisavaluableassetthatplaysan
importantroleinSaintPaulshistory;preparingaHistoricStructuresReport
willguideappropriatenewuses.ListingthebuildingontheNationalRegister
wouldrenderthebuildingeligibleforHistoricTaxCreditsandothergrants
andfundingpossibilities,suchastheLegacyAmendment.Localdesignation
wouldensurepreservationofthesiteforthelongterm.
9.6 Explore expanding the Union Depot National Register site
to include the adjacent train deck, and designate it a local Saint
Paul Heritage Preservation Site.
TeUnionDepottraindeckwasdeterminedeligibleforlistingon
theNationalRegisterduringtheCentralCorridorCulturalResources
investigation.TecurrentworkbytheRamseyCountyRegionalRail
Authoritymeetsapplicablepreservationstandards,andaNationalRegister
nominationwillbecompleted.ListingthesiteasaSaintPaulHeritage
PreservationSitewouldensurepreservationofthissiteforthelongterm.
9.7 Conduct a study on historic streetscape and infrastructure
to inform future open space and streetscape proposals.
Acontextstudytoidentifyandinventoryremaininghistoricfeatureswithin
Lowertownsstreetscape,alongwithahistoryofhowLowertownsstreetscape
hasprogressed,shouldbecompleted.Tisstudywillinformfutureproposals
andexplorewherehistoricfeaturesshouldberestoredtoprovidegreater
interpretationandreinforcetheDistrictscharacter.Forexample,thehistoric
streetlightswerereconstructedduringthe1980srevitalization.
70
April 2012
TemporaryPark
TemporaryShops
9.8 Encourage the use of temporary
and experimental pop up installations
within the District as a way to activate
buildings and spaces without disrupting
the well-preserved assets.
TeHistoricDistrictisawell-preserved
environmentofbuildingsandstreets.Tecurrent
andfutureguidelineswillreinforcethedefning
characteroftheDistrictastheyrelatetothe
defnedPeriodofSignifcance(turnofthe20th
century).Temporaryandpopupinstallationsare
awaytoactivatetheDistrict(publicspacesand
unusedspaces)byinfusingitwithexperimental
andcontemporaryinterventions.Temporary
installationsdonotcompromisethehistoric
characterofaDistrict.Somerecentexamplesof
popupurbanisminclude:publicreadingrooms,
foodcarts,publicpianoandpingpong,temporary
pools,andtemporarysidewalks.
9.9 Complete the Lowertown Historic
District signage program.
In2003,theHPCandPublicWorksdesigneda
uniquelogo,andfabricatedandinstalledsignage
forallSaintPaulhistoricdistrictsforhalfofthe
intersections.Tesignsincreasedawarenessofall
ofSaintPaulsHistoricDistrictswhilehighlighting
theiruniqueness.Teremainingintersections
withintheDistrictshouldbeidentifedwiththese
signstocompletetheprogramanddefnethe
boundaries.
BrickAlley
PostOfceBuilding
9.10 Discourage the extension of the
skyway system into and within the
Lowertown Historic District.
Teconstructionofnewskywayscanoftenhave
negativeimpactsonhistoricbuildingfacadesand
reducethevibrancyofpedestrianactivityatthe
streetlevel.ExistingCitypolicyistolimitthe
expansionofskywaystothehigh-densitycoreof
downtown,andprohibitexpansionofskywaysin
thehistoricareasofLowertownandRicePark.
December 2011
10. Implementation
72
April 2012
10. Implementation
Implementation
Te Master Plan represents a wide variety of ideas, visions, and
recommendations. Some can be (and should be) acted on immediately; others
will take years to realize. Implementation, in a general sense, is an on-going
activity various plans, policies and projects are always in some stage of
completion. Tis chapter is focused on two key points:
1)Providing a level of priority and timing for the various strategies;
2) identifying responsible parties for each strategy.
Overall, the Master Plan represents a locally-driven, neighborhood-based
efort. For the frst time in Lowertown, a community-based process is
listening to and acting on the preferences and expectations of the resident and
business stakeholders. As such, it is critical that a well - organized body emerge
from this efort to guide and shepard the goals, objectives and strategies of the
Plan. Te most immediate priority for implementation is to Evolve the Task
Force into a fully-functioning, non-proft neighborhood organization. Tis is
a strategy that the Master Plan will depend on as the implementation process
begins. It is a very exciting prospect and much work is to be done.
Te over-arching priority is to ensure that an organizational model is
considered and adopted that will seamlessly accommodate the transition
from the Greater Lowertown Master Plan Task Force. A number of ideas for
this organization may be appropriate. Whatever form it takes it should be
community-based and representative of the Greater Lowertown stakeholders.
And it should be closely aligned with the CapitolRiver Council (District
17). Te new organization ideally would encompass the broader meaning of
Greater Lowertown and include the residents and businesses north of 7th St
(the Wacouta Commons area). A neighborhood association with non-proft
status may be the best structure to address the next steps and provide the
capacity needed to move the Master Plan forward.
At this time, the GLMP Task Force is exploring options for how to evolve as
an organization. Te Task Force is actively discussing and looking into options
and models for the organization. It will defnitely remain involved in the
implementation of the Greater Lowertown Master Plan and will most likely
evolve over multiple phases or steps.
Initially, the Task Force will operate in its present form - an independent
community-based task force working with CapitolRiver Council and City
representatives. Te immediate focus will be to oversee a few top priority
projects as defned in the Master Plan. In this form and capacity, the Task
Force will be able to:
prove its efectiveness and success to the Lowertown Community,
CapitolRiver Council, City of Saint Paul and funders;
support real, implementable projects that will help to evolve its
organizational direction; and
take the necessary time needed to explore organization models and review/
consider options to create an organizational structure that optimally serves
the Greater Lowertown Community.
Goal
Te goal of evolving the Task Force, in the immediate term, is to fnd shovel-
ready or otherwise ready projects quickly to demonstrate Task Force successes.
Tis will help the Task Force determine their strengths, gain funding and help
to defne their role all while benefting the Lowertown Community.
Next Steps for the Task Force are to be determined. All possibilities are now
being considered, but currently include:
a non-proft 501 ( c ) (3), potentially as outlined in detail in the following
pages
a Main Street Organization to manage a Main Street Program. Te Main
Street Program is sponsored program of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation. Te program is a well tested strategy for revitalization, a
powerful network of linked communities, and a national support program.
(http://www.preservationnation.org/main-street/about-main-street/)
a neighborhood organization that would be a project-oriented and not
a policy-oriented initiative. Unlike the CRC which is the neighborhood
association focusing on civic and community engagement, crime prevention,
etc., a Greater Lowertown Neighborhood Association would.....
73
April 2012
10. Implementation
an independent Task Force enlisting resources such as Neighborhood
Development Corporations, etc.
operate with the Capitol River Council as a special Task Force or work
initiative
orotherunexploredorganizationalpossibilities
In any case, an organization could identify a number of sub-committees
that would specifcally address the fve goals of the Master Plan. Each sub-
committee would be led by a committee chair. In addition, a sub-committee
would need to be formed to address communication and information, and to
continue and/or expand the website.
Once the task force is more formally organized and recognized, it can begin
to consider personnel and funding needs, grant opportunities and partnerships
with the many allied groups and organization of Greater Lowertown. A
number of options and directions are available for managing and coordinating
eforts including programs like the Minnesota Main Street, a business
improvement district (BID), or partnering with allied organizations on specifc
initiatives or strategies.
Te Implementation chapter is organized according to the topical chapters;
the strategies are then categorized as policy, program or capital. Each strategy
includes a listing of the responsible party or parties, and then coded by a
general timeframe: on-going; immediate (0-1 year); short-term (1-3 years),
mid-term (4-9 years) and long-term (10+ years).

GREATER LOWERTOWN
RESIDENTS + BUSINESSES
GREATER LOWERTOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD
ORGANIZATION
GROW THE
MARKET
COMPLETE THE
VILLAGE
ADVANCE THE
ARTS
CONNECT TO
THE RIVER
STITCH THE
SEAM
STAFF
SUBCOMMITTEES
COMMUNICATION/
INFORMATION
WEBSITE
FACEBOOK
ALLIED & PARTNER
ORGANIZATIONS
BOARD ADVISOR
Possible Organizational Structure
PRESERVE THE
DISTRICT
74
Policy 3.1 Prioritize building renovations and redevelopment
of surface parking lots over building demolition.
PED, Private Owners On-going
Policy 3.2 Build three retail clusters: Neighborhood services
and retail on 7th Street, Food and Arts around the
Farmers Market, restaurants and entertainment around
Mears Park and the Depot.
PED, Private Owners,
GLNO, RC
Short-Mid term
Policy 3.3 Encourage redevelopment of vacant and
underutilized properties surrounding Union Depot
PED, HPC On-going
Policy 3.4 Designate a permanent home for the Farmers
Market and a year-round community amenity.
PED, PR,
SPGA, GLNO
Short-term
Policy 3.5 Extend Lowertown east of the Lafayette Bridge to
connect with the East Side of Saint Paul and the Bruce
Vento Nature Sanctuary.
PED, PR, CRWD, RC, MET,
LPCP,
MnDOT, Private Owners, D4
Short-term
Policy 3.6 Introduce urban agriculture, recreational uses and
sustainability initiatives east of the Lafayette Bridge in
The Seam.
PED, LPCP, DC, SPGA Medium-term
Program 3.7 Create a parking plan for downtown and Lowertown
that prioritizes full occupancy of existing parking
spaces over construction of new parking.
PED, CRC Short-term
Program 3.8 Improve Kellogg Boulevard by developing a liner
building on the north edge of the Union Depot rail
deck.
Capital 3.9 Develop more gathering spaces for the
neighborhood.
PR, PW,
GLNO, PED, DC
Short-term
Land Use
Strategies Responsibility Timeframe
10. Implementation
April 2012
75
Land Use (contd)
Program 3.10 Maintain and create afordable housing and studio
space in Lowertown.
HRA,
PED, Developers
On-going
Policy 3.11 Attract additional arts investments such as
galleries, museums, performance venues, schools, and
academies.
SA, PASP,
GLNO
On-going
Capital 3.12 Determine the appropriate food prevention
system for Lowertown so that existing and future
development are protected from fooding.
PW Short-term
April 2012
10. Implementation
76
Policy 4.1 Identify the most immediate opportunities for stabilizing
artist live/work spaces and gathering places.
GLNO, Private Owners, PED Immediate
Program 4.2 Prepare a comprehensive database and map the
creative community (individuals, venues, activities).
GLNO, SA,
PASP, CRC
Immediate
Program 4.3 Inventory underutilized spaces and work with
property owners, artist community, the City, and
potential occupants to create appropriate arts-related
uses.
GLNO, Private Owners,
SA, PASP, Mayors Ofce
Immediate
Program 4.4 Work with existing networks and organizations to
strengthen the creative community, the creative cluster
infrastructure, and district identity.
GLNO, PASP, SA,
Mayors Ofce
Immediate
Program 4.5 Encourage policy makers to protect the creative sector
workforce and work spaces, and steer developers to create
appropriate spaces and support services using Community
Benefts Agreements to protect and enhance creative sector
jobs, spaces and programs.
PED, CRC,
GLNO, Mayors Ofce
On-going
Program 4.6 Explore opportunities to grow educational spaces /
opportunities for creative skills transfer.
PASP, SA,
GLNO
Short-term
Capital 4.7 Maintain state-of-the-art technology infrastructure
needed for a competitive creative sector.
GLNO, PED, PW Short and medium term
Policy 4.8 Explore the value of an Arts or Creative Overlay
District.
PED, HPC,
GLNO, PASP, CRC
Short-term
Policy 4.9 Work with Union Depot managers to incorporate
public art, public programs, retail marketing and other
opportunities.
GLNO, HPC, RC Short term
10. Implementation
April 2012
Arts, Culture, and the Creative Economy
77
Program 4.10 Seek out and develop appropriate venues and
partnerships to enhance markets for locally-produced creative
products.
GLNO, PASP, SA, Mayors Ofce Immediate
Policy 4.11 Leverage the diverse range of people who come to
Lowertown for the Farmers Market, Art Crawl and other
events as well as those who travel through the Union Depot
to create a welcoming multi-cultural environment.
GLNO, D17, SA Short term
Program 4.12 Identify appropriate spaces and partners to
expand networking among artists and creative workers
and opportunities for collaborations.
PASP, TC, SA,
GLNO
Short-term
10. Implementation
April 2012
78
Capital 5.1 Construct a complete and connected on-street bike
network ; retain right-of-way for transit on 4th 5th and
6th St.
PW Mid-term
Capital 5.2 Connect Kellogg Mall to Bruce Vento Regional Trail. PR, LPCP
MC, PW, LPCP, CRC
Mid-Long term
Capital 5.3 Improve connections between Lowertown and the
Bruce Vento Trail System.
PW Short-term,
Capital 5.4 Connect Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary to the Sam
Morgan Trail
PW, PED, RCRRA, LPCP, PR Mid-term
Capital 5.5 Provide bicycle storage facilities at all major
attractions.
PW,
PR
Short-Mid term
Capital 5.6 Connect Lowertown Streets to the Lafayette Bridge
vertically.
PW, MnDOT Mid-term
Capital 5.7 Design the streets surrounding parks and plazas as
part of the adjacent open spaces.
PW,
PR
Mid-Long term
Capital 5.8 Extend Broadway to Warner Rd. PW,
RC
Mid-term
Capital 5.9 Create a street network east of the Lafayette Bridge
that connects Lowertown to the East Side.
PW, LPCP
MnDOT, D4, DC, PED
Short-Mid term
10. Implementation
April 2012
Transportation
79
Policy 5.10 Reconsider the Downtown / Lowertowns one-way
circulation system.
PW,
PED
Mid-term
Capital 5.11 Selectively reconstruct Intersections on 7th Street
to encourage pedestrian crossings.
PW,
RC
Mid-term
Capital 5.12 Reconstruct select intersections on Warner Road to
enable safe bicycle and pedestrian crossings.
PW,
RC
Mid-term
April 2012
10. Implementation
Transportation (contd)
80
Program 6.1 Activate the lawn and former drop-of area in front
of the Union Depot with temporary installations, art
and programming.
PR,
MC
Short-Mid term
Capital 6.2 Enhance the Farmers Market site to become a
greater neighborhood amenity.
GLNO, GASP, PED, PR Mid-term
Capital 6.3 Create the River Balcony connecting the Science
Museum, Kellogg Mall and Union Depot to the Trout
Brook Regional Trail.
PW,
RC, Private Owners
Mid-term
Capital 6.4 Create Prince Street Park. PR,
PW, Private Owners
Mid-term
Policy 6.5 Locate additional recreation space east of the
Lafayette Bridge.
PR, LPCP Short-Mid term
Capital 6.6 Activate the Riverfront with a promenade, Lower
Landing Park and programming per the Great River
Passage Plan
PR, DC Short-term
Capital 6.7 Incrementally improve sidewalks to become part of
the neighborhoods valued open space system.
PW,
PR
Short-term
Program 6.8 Expand the use of temporary / seasonal cafes and
plazas.
PW,
PED, Building Owners
Immediate
Policy 6.9 Create roof top gardens as part of the open space
system.
Building Owners On going
Program 6.10 Raise visibility and improve awareness of the
Bruce Vento Regional Trailhead in Lowertown and
its connection to Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary and,
Swede Hollow Park, and other east side recreational
destinations.
GLNO, D4 , LPCP, PR Immediate
Policy 6.11 Explore use of the Diamond Products Building for
indoor recreation.
GLNO, PED Short term
10. Implementation
April 2012
Parks, Recreation and Open Space
81
Policy 7.1 Provide a broad range of housing types. prices,
choices and sizes to accommodate diverse residential
needs.
Private Market, Developers, PED On-going
Policy 7.2 Work to convert the vacant and under utilized
buildings into artist-owned live / work buildings.
Private Market Mid-term
Capital 7.3 Convert the bottom two foors of the Lowertown
Lofts Cooperative to artist use.
Private Market Short-term
Capital 7.4 Develop in-line and townhouse units along the
south side of the new Prince Street extension.
Private Market Mid-term
Capital 7.5 Develop market-rate housing south of Kellogg. Private Market, Developers
RC,
Long-term
10. Implementation
April 2012
Housing
82
Policy 8.1 Support the Bring Water Back to Saint Paul
campaign to restore surface water features and build
better stewardship for area water ways (e.g., Trout
Brook, Phalen Creek, Mears Creek, etc.).
CRWD, LPCP,
CRC, D4, DC, PED, DSI
Immediate
Capital 8.2 Harness water from the Lafayette Bridge and use
as a resource for the neighborhood. Coordinate eforts
with Prince Street reconstruction.
MnDOT, LPCP,
MC, PW, DSI
On-going
Policy 8.3 Work with Met Council to use greywater for washing
LRT vehicles.
MC, MET, LPCP,
MnDOT, PW
Mid-term
Capital 8.4 Engage the artist in residence at the Capitol Region
Watershed District to create an amenity out of the
Lafayette Bridge stormwater facility.
CRWD, PASP, LPCP Short-term
Capital 8.5 Extend the LRT infltration trench in front of Union
Depot to adjacent blocks.
MET, PED Short term
Policy 8.6 Encourage new developments to mitigate
stormwater by utilizing green roofs and providing
cisterns.
PED, GLNO Mid-term
Capital 8.7 Extend District Energy throughout Lowertown and
into Wacouta Commons.
PED, GLNO Mid-term
Policy 8.8 Consider the use and application of alternative
energy sources including low elevation domestic wind
turbines.
PED Short term
10. Implementation
April 2012
Water Resources
83
Policy 9.1 Apply the Secretary of Interiors Standards for
Treatment of Historic Properties, and the Design Review
Guidelines to all repair, alteration, new construction
and demolition in the Historic District.
HPC, Private Owners,
PED
On-going
Policy 9.2 Work with the Citys PED and HPC to prepare an
update to the Lowertown Historic District Design
Guidelines. The Guidelines should be informed by an
HPC/Arts working committee and should address new
construction, signage, and public art and streetscape,
for the Lowertown Historic District.
HPC, PED,
Private Owners, GLNO
On-going
Program 9.3 Educate and engage the community, new residents
and business owners of of the signifcance of the
Historic District and the applicable design review
guidelines.
GLNO, PED, HPC, PASP, SA Short-term
Policy 9.4 Explore listing the Post Ofce to the National
Register and designating it a local St. Paul Heritage
Preservation Site.
HPC, SHPO, CRC On-going
Policy 9.5 Explore expanding the Union Depot National
Register site to include the adjacent train deck and
designate it a local St. Paul Heritage Preservation Site.
HPC, SHPO, RC, CRC Short-term
Program 9.6 Prepare a Historic Structures Report for the Post
Ofce building to explore adaptive reuse.
HPC, Building Owner Short-term
Program 9.7 Conduct a study on historic streetscape and
infrastructure to inform future open space and
streetscape proposals.
HPC, PED, PW, PR Mid-term
Policy 9.8 Encourage the use of temporary and experimental
pop up installations within the District as a way to
activate buildings and spaces without disrupting the
well-preserved assets
GLNO, PED, Private Owners On-going
Program 9.9 Complete the Lowertown Historic District signage
program.
GLNO, CRC, PW Short-term
Policy 9.10 Discourage the extension of the skyway system
into and within the Lowertown Historic District.
HPC, PED, CRC On-going
10. Implementation
April 2012
Historic Preservation
84
10. Implementation
April 2012
List of Organizations
Greater Lowertown Neighborhood Organization (GLNO)
City of Saint Paul
Mayors Ofce
Public Works (PW)
Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
Parks & Recreation (PR)
Planning & Economic Development (PED)
Technology & Communications (TC)
Port Authority (PA)
Planning Commission (PC)
Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC)
Safety and Inspections (DSI)
Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD)
Lower Phalen Creek Project (LPCP)
Public Art Saint Paul (PASP)
Saint Paul on the Mississippi Design Center (DC)
Springboard for the Arts (SA)
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
Metropolitan Council (MC)
MetroTransit (MET)
Ramsey County (RC)
Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (RCRRA)
District Energy Saint Paul (DESP)
CapitolRiver Council - District 17 (CRC)
Daytons Bluf - District 4 (D4)
Saint Paul Growers Association (SPGA)
bowntown 5alnt Paul 5tatlon Area Plan
Adopted by the
3aint Paul City Counoil
on lebruary 10, 2010
City of 3aint Paul
Christopher Coleman, Mayor
We thank all those who contrlbuted to create the bowntown 5tatlon Area Plan, and ln artlcular:
5tatlon Area Plannlng 5teerlng
Commlttee
Matt Anfang 3aint Paul Building 0wners and
Managers Assooiation
Larry nglund CapitolRiver Counoil
Mlchael Reelan Lowertown resident
Paul Mandell Capitol Area Arohiteotural and
Planning Board
John Mannlllo Lowntown Business 0wners
Assooiation
Paul Mohrbacher 3oienoe Museum of
Minnesota
Karrl Plowman 3aint Paul Area Chamber of
Commeroe
Jesslca 1reat 3mart 1rips
Marcus oung Publio Art 3aint Paul
Clty of 5alnt Paul 5taff
Lucy 1homson (1eam Leader) Lepartment of
Planning & Loonomio Levelopment
Marle Franchett Lepartment of Planning &
Loonomio Levelopment
Nancy Romans Mayor's 0ftoe
Mlke Klassen Lepartment of Publio works
Allen Lovejoy Lepartment of Publio works
Jody Martlnez Lepartment of Parks and
Reoreation
Jesslca Rosenfeld Lepartment of Planning &
Amy 5ong Lepartment of Planning &
Consultlng 1eam
Melanle Rare urban 3trategies
George bark urban 3trategies
Bryan Bowen urban 3trategies
Cralg Lamettl urban 3trategies
Jeff Patterson Colliers 1urley Martin 1uoker
Adjunct 5taff
1lm Grlfn 3aint Paul on the Mississippi Lesign
Center
1he Clty of 5alnt Paul gratefully acknowledges
nanclal suort from the Central Corrldor
Funders Collaboratlve, whlch heled fund thls
communlty lannlng rocess.
1able of Contents
1.0 lntroductlon
1.1 1he 0pportunity
1.2 1he 3tation Area Plan
1.3 1he Alignment
1.4 1he Planning Context
1.5 Real Lstate Market Considerations

2.0 LR1 bowntown
2.1 Mobility
2.2 Land use
2.3 Built lorm
2.4 Publio Realm
3.0 Place-5eclc 0ortunltles
3.1 Creating Positive 1ransit Lnvironments
3.2 Reinforoing Lowertown
3.3 Re-lmaging 4th 3treet
3.4 0etting People to the Riverfront
4.0 Gettlng 1here
4.1 Preparing the Lowertown Master Plan
4.2 line-1uning the 3aint Paul Loning 0rdinanoe
4.2 Advanoing Key Redevelopment 3ites
4.4 Lesignating the 3aint Paul urban Renewal Pistorio Listriot
4.5 Leveraging 3trategio Partnerships

1
2
4
6
8
10

13
14
18
22
28
33
34
38
46
48
51
52
53
54
55
56
6
b0WN10WN 5AlN1 PAUL 51A1l0N ARA PLAN | lLBRuAR 2010 | 1
lntroductlon
1.0
1he 0ortunlty
1he City of 3aint Paul is planning for light rail transit along the Central Corridor, a spine that will oonneot the
downtowns of 3aint Paul and Minneapolis, the university of Minnesota, and the diverse neighborhoods along
university Avenue. 1he 'RZQWRZQ6DLQW3DXO6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ applies the broader vision, Prinoiples, and Lesign
Lireotions of the &HQWUDO &RUULGRU 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\ (CCL3). Building on this oommunity-based and City
Counoil-adopted foundation, the 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ oreates a more detailed framework for integrating
deoisions affeoting future built form, land use, the publio realm, and movement (inoluding LR1, buses, oars,
pedestrians, and bioyoles) within downtown.
As an introduotion to this 3tation Area Plan, Chapter 1 begins by desoribing 1he 0ortunlty that LR1 oreates
for enhanoing 3aint Paul as a vibrant and interesting plaoe to live, work, and visit. lt goes on to desoribe Why
a 5tatlon Area Plan is an important part of planning for LR1 and related investments in downtown 3aint Paul,
and desoribes the study prooess that led to this dooument.
1he Allgnment of the planned LR1 is then desoribed in detail, followed by a summary of the Plannlng Context
that has shaped suooessful growth and investment in downtown 3aint Paul in reoent years.
1his introduotory ohapter oonoludes with Real state Market Conslderatlons, inoluding a series of
reoommendations for oapturing the potential of LR1 to enhanoe the vitality and eoonomio health of downtown
3aint Paul.
2
1.1
1he insertion of LR1 in downtown 3aint Paul oreates
a signature opportunity to reinforoe and enhanoe
downtown 3aint Paul as a oontemporary, vibrant
heart of the oity for living, working, and oulture. lt is an
opportunity to put downtown 3aint Paul on the map"
through a series of targeted oity-building initiatives:
strengthening and distinguishing downtown's
development market, promoting large and small plaoe-
making efforts, and improving mobility options and
aooess to jobs, housing, and oommunity servioes.
0ver the past deoade, there have been a number
of positive investments that have helped revitalize
downtown. 1he introduotion of new open spaoes and
streetsoaping has transformed the Rioe Park area into
a regional gem and destination for arts and oultural
attraotions. 1he transformation of former warehousing
into residential and artists' lofts as well as spaoes for
oreative industry has breathed new life into Lowertown.
1he addition of waoouta Commons, a new residential
neighborhood in the northeast quadrant of downtown,
has brought hundreds of new residents to enliven
downtown day and night. Laoh of these important
developments has helped strengthen the attraotion,
vitality, and eoonomio position of downtown.
1here are a number of ways in whioh LR1 has the
potential to build upon and strengthen these initiatives.
1hese inolude:
1. rebalanoing movement opportunities in favor of
pedestrians and oyolists,
2. strengthening links between the ourrent aotivity
olusters to oreate a stronger Lowntown" brand
oomprised of a oolleotion of enjoyable, distinot
plaoes and attraotions,
3. aoting as a oatalyst for the re-faoing of streets in
Flgure 1.1 when oompleted, the Central Corridor LR1 will be a oentral organizing element for new developments along its length and help to
strengthen downtown 3aint Paul's position as both a destination and gateway within the 1win Cities.
1he 0ortunlty
1he 0ortunlty
downtown with new or renovated buildings that
open up and embraoe aotivity at the street, and
4. supporting new uses and aotivities that will seek
to looate in vibrant downtown settings with strong
transit linkages to the wider 1win Cities region.
Warehouse
blstrlct
West
Bank
East
Bank
5tadlum
vlllage
29th
Avenue
Westgate
Raymond
Falrvlew
5nelllng
Lexlngton
bale Rlce Caltol
ast
10th
5treet
4th &
Cedar
Unlon
beot
bowntown
5alnt Paul
Nlcollet Mall
Government
Center
bowntown ast ,
Metrodome
Flgure 1.2 Lowntown oontains the highest building density within the oity. 1he string of blooks on either side of the LR1 line (highlighted above in green), and areas within a 5-minute walk of LR1 (highlighted in
white), illustrate the potential of LR1 to serve the highest oonoentration of uses and people within downtown.
4
Why a 5tatlon Area Plan?
Many oommunity and City staff disoussions have
taken plaoe around the issues and opportunities
assooiated with the addition of LR1 to downtown. 1he
'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ oaptures these many
ideas, artioulates how LR1 should tt within the fabrio of
downtown, and summarizes a range of opportunities
that result from this investment in order to maximize
the benetts to downtown.
1he planned 11-mile Central Corridor LR1 will extend
from downtown Minneapolis, aoross the Mississippi
River, and through the heart of many of 3aint Paul's
diverse residential and business oommunities. lrom
its trst 3aint Paul stop at westgate 3tation, it will follow
university Avenue to the 3tate Capitol oampus, oross
l-94 and thread its way into 3aint Paul's oompaot and
urban downtown oore, where it will oonneot to other
transit modes at the historio union Lepot.
1he &HQWUDO &RUULGRU 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\ a vision
and set of strategies for how the Central Corridor
should grow and ohange in response to the investment
in LR1, was adopted in 0otober 2007 as a ohapter of
the 3aint Paul Comprehensive Plan. Building on the
foundation provided by the 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\,
the 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ addresses two of
the three proposed downtown station areas - Central
3tation (on the blook bounded by 4th 3treet, Cedar,
Minnesota, and 5th 3treet), and union Lepot. 1his
amalgamated study area is generally detned by 7th
3treet to the north, the western edge of the Bruoe
vento Nature 3anotuary to the east, the Mississippi
River to the south, and wabasha 3treet to the west.
1he 6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ also updates and replaoes the
1994 /RZHUWRZQ6PDOO$UHD3ODQ.
1he 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ foouses on oity-
building opportunities related to the integration of
LR1 within downtown. lt represents the City's ongoing
oommitment to transit-supportive development by
exploring opportunities in downtown to:
1) enhanoe the publio realm,
2) improve options for mobility, with a strong
emphasis on pedestrian movement,
3) identify appropriate future land development
opportunities and built form, and,
4) analyze market potential for long-term
development.
Created with the input and endorsement of oommunity
members and stakeholders, and adopted as part of
the 3aint Paul Comprehensive Plan, the 'RZQWRZQ
6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ is a useful tool to guide the following
deoision-making prooesses:
polioy and development review in response to
infrastruoture design and investment in LR1 and
transit-supportive development,
on-going disoussions with the Metropolitan
Counoil related to tnal LR1 design through
downtown 3aint Paul, partioularly related to long-
term aooess to buildings and desired streetsoape
oonditions,
oontinued outreaoh and eduoation amongst
downtown residents, businesses and employees
with respeot to the LR1 design and oonstruotion
prooess, operation, and future potential benetts
and impaots,
priority-setting for publio investment in oity
building and infrastruoture, and
the review and update of the Lowertown 3mall
Area Plan in light of the renewed opportunity LR1
oreates for this downtown neighborhood.
1he 5tudy Process
1he Central Corridor LR1 design and development
prooess is being undertaken in a partnership between
the Metropolitan Counoil, the oities of 3aint Paul
and Minneapolis, Pennepin and Ramsey oounties,
and the university of Minnesota. 1he Metropolitan
Counoil's longer-term prooess for planning the design,
1.2
1he 5tatlon Area Plan
1he 5tudy
Area
Flgure 1.3 1he 3tation Area Plan study area.
oonstruotion and operation of LR1 is illustrated in the
upper portion of ligure 1.4.
1he Metropolitan Counoil is responsible for making
deoisions regarding the LR1 route alignment, the
number, looation, and design of station platforms,
future road oontgurations, property aoquisition, and
other design and oonstruotion issues that are beyond
the soope of the station area planning prooess.
1he 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQbuilds on the overall
direotion of the &HQWUDO&RUULGRU'HYHORSPHQW6WUDWHJ\.
lt has been undertaken in oonsultation with key
stakeholders, agenoies, land owners, businesses, and
oommunity members in downtown. 1he preparation
of the Plan was guided by the Lowntown 3teering
Committee and City staff.
1he lower portion of ligure 1.4 illustrates how the
City of 3aint Paul's downtown station area planning
prooess tts into the bigger pioture of planning for
LR1. 1his dooument is the result of this prooess, and
is designed to foous on the assooiated benetts and
impaots that LR1 will bring to downtown 3aint Paul, as
opposed to the design of the LR1 alignment itself.
Flgure 1.4 1wo oonourrent and mutually-supportive prooesses for planning LR1 in downtown 3aint Paul are featured above.
P|ojecl
lu|l|al|ou
Neel|ug
C
|
|
e
u
l

N
e
e
l
|
u
g
s
C
o
u
s
u
|
l
a
l
|
o
u
T
a
s
|
s
P|epa|al|ou ol Nale||a|s P|epa|al|ou ol Nale||a|s
lulo|mal|ou
Co||ecl|ou
& Rev|ew
luveulo|y
Aua|ys|s &
Assessmeul
ol l|ud|ugs
1 OnoerstanoinQ
6
D
L
Q
W
3
D
X
O
'
R
Z
Q
W
R
Z
Q
6
W
D
W
L
R
Q
$
U
H
D
3
O
D
Q
3
U
R
F
H
V
V
0
H
W
U
R
S
R
O
L
W
D
Q
&
R
X
Q
F
L
O
&
H
Q
W
U
D
O
&
R
U
U
L
G
R
U
/
5
7
3
U
R
F
H
V
V
2 Exp|crinQ S CreatinQ
lu|l|a| owulowu Slee||ug
Comm|llee Neel|ug
Slee||ug Comm|llee &
Sla|eho|de| wo||shop
Sla|eho|de| lule|v|ews
Neel|ugs
w|lh C|ly
Slall
leedbac|
l|om
C|ly Slall
Pub||c Rouud
Tab|es
0peu house 1
Eme|g|ug ||ecl|ous
0peu house 2
|all owulowu Slal|ou A|ea P|au
Rev|se aud P|epa|e lhe |all
Slal|ou A|ea P|au
Neel|ugs w|lh
C|ly Slall
|all owulowu
lssues &
0ppo|luu|l|es Nemo
0|gau|/al|ou ol lulo|mal|ou
& P|epa|al|ou ol wo||shop
Nale||a|s
P|epa|al|ou
ol lhe lu|l|a|
|all
Slal|ou A|ea
P|au
Subm|ss|ou
ol lu|l|a| |all
Slal|ou A|ea
P|au lo| Rev|ew
Rev|se & P|epa|e
l|ua| owulowu
Slal|ou A|ea P|au
3eptember 0otober November Leoember 1anuary Maroh May leb April
Fina| EesiQn
T
|
a
u
s
|
l
R
e
|
a
l
e
d

N
|
|
e
s
l
o
u
e
s
C
e
u
l
|
a
|
C
o
|
|
|
d
o
|

L
R
T
Euv||oumeula| lmpacl Slalemeul
Eraft Envircnnenta|
npact Statenent
Pre|ininary
EnQineerinQ
Phaseo Ccnstructicn
h|awalha
L|ue beg|us
lu|| Se|v|ce
P|e||m|ua|y Eug|uee||ug
'HYHORSPHQW
6WUDWHJ\
&RPSOHWHG
&RUULGRU6WDWLRQ
$UHD3ODQV
&RPSOHWHG
'RZQWRZQ
6WDWLRQ$UHD
3ODQQLQJ
l|ua| es|gu Slage Cousl|ucl|ou
2004 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 2006 2013
0pe|al|ou ol
lhe LRT ||ue
beg|us
Cousl|ucl|ou beg|us LRT Se|ecled
as P|ele||ed
A|le|ual|ve
Slee||ug Comm|llee
Neel|ug
1une 1uly 3ept August
200S 2009
6
1.3
1he Allgnment
01: lrom the Capitol, the alignment will run down the oenter of
Cedar 3treet until the 10th 3treet 3tation, where it will shift to
the eastern side of the street.
03: At 5th 3treet the alignment will run diagonally through the
blook bound by 5th, Cedar, 4th and Minnesota. 1his will be the
site of the Central 3tation.
Flgure 1.5 1he LR1 alignment will have a variety of oontgurations as it travels through downtown.
02: 1he alignment will oontinue along the eastern side of Cedar
until 5th 3treet, preserving a single lane along the west side of
the street for southbound trafto and buses.
04: 1he alignment will run along the south side of 4th 3treet,
preserving one westbound trafto lane along the north side of
the street.
05: 1he alignment will oontinue along the south side of 4th
3treet in front of union Lepot. 1he union Lepot 3tation will
abut the existing front lawn of the station.
06: Last of union Lepot, the alignment will shift to the oenter
of the street, preserving one trafto lane in eaoh direotion up to
the 0perations and Maintenanoe laoility at Broadway.
1he Allgnment
LR1 inserts itself into downtown along existing streets.
lt will inolude three stations beginning at union Lepot,
whioh will in the future also oonneot to a larger inter-
modal transit network. 1he LR1 alignment desoribed
in ligure 1.5 and illustrated in ligure 1.6 transforms
the oharaoter of Cedar and 4th streets into balanoed
streets with a strong emphasis on transit and
pedestrian movement.
LR1 will have a muoh different impaot and relationship
to downtown 3aint Paul than the remainder of the
Central Corridor line. lunotionally, the downtown
portion of this alignment will have more similarities
with the Piawatha LR1 alignment in downtown
Minneapolis than with neighboring stops on university
Avenue. while university Avenue is generally wide
enough for LR1 to be added within the existing right-of-
way, the insertion of LR1 into downtown 3aint Paul's
narrow rights-of-way will require a more sympathetio
response to a denser, more oomplex existing urban
fabrio.
1hese oonstraints will require ooordination with and
oonsideration of neighboring businesses, residenoes,
institutions, pedestrians, and motorists who rely
on the same tight spaoes for aooess, address, and
oiroulation. Laoh user will need olear indioations,
through some oombination of trafto signals, signage,
paving materials, bollards or other sensitively-
designed features to identify permitted routes, trafto
direotion, approaohing trains, and safe orossing points.
Additionally, stations and related LR1 infrastruoture
will need to be streamlined to preserve limited spaoe.
UBS Plaza
St. Louis King
of France Church
0
p
e
ra
tio
n
s
&
M
a
in
te
n
a
n
o
e
l
a
o
ility
Central
Presbyterian
Church
St. Agatha's
Conservatory
of Music
McNally
Smith
St. Paul
Athletic
Club
Minnesota
Building
Pioneer
Building
Endicott
Building
Alliance
Bank
Science
EcoLab
Center
Lawson
Commons
City Hall
Annex
St Paul
Hotel
Ordway
Music
Theater
RiverCentre
Qwest
Travelers
Companies
Travelers
Companies
City Hall
& Courthouse
Capital
City Plaza
Kellogg
Square
First National
Bank
US Bank
Center
Securian
Center
Securian
Center
Minnesota
Public
Radio
Farmers
Market
Cray
Plaza
Federal
Building
St. Paul
Radiology
US Postal
Union
Depot
Wells Fargo
Place
7
th
P
L
.
M
A
L
L
L
A

F
A
Y

E
T
T

E

R

O
A

D
6th ST.
B L V D.
W E S T 5th S T.
W
A

S

H

N

G
T

O

N

S
T
.
M
A

R

K

E
T

S
T
.

S H E P A R D
R O
A D
P
R
N
C
E
S
T
.
K E L L O G G
2
n
d
S
T
.
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
.
5
th
S
T
.
5
th
S
T
.
5
th
S
T
.
4
th
S
T
.
4
th
S
T
.
6
th
S
T
.
6
th
S
T
.
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
S
T
.
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
1
4
th
S
T
.
C
O
L
U
M
B
U
S
A
R

E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
R
T
N
L
U
T
H
E
R
K
N
G
D
R
.
A
V
E
.
E
X
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
T
.
R
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
S
T
.
W
A
L
L
S
T
.
P
N
E
O
N
A
V
E
.
7
th
S
T
7
th
S
T
- 9
4
- 9
4
8
th
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
th
P
L
.
C

E

D
A

R

9
th
S
T
.
1
2
th
S
T
.
S
T
.
S
T
.
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
P
N
E
S
T
.
1
0
th
S
T
.
1
0
th
S
T
.
1
0
th
S
T
.
1
1
th
S
T
.
S
T
.
B
A
L
S
A
M
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
B
L
V
D
.
C
E
D
A
R
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
C
E
R
O
B
E
R
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
R
O
B
E
R
T
S
T
.
R
O
B
E
R
T
S
T
.
Proposed
litzgerald Park
3itH
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
R
T
R
O
U
T

T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
O
K
B
L
V

B
R
O
R
T
R
O
U
T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
Flgure 1.l1he LR1 alignment through downtown serves the oftoe oore, residential, and live/work neighborhoods (suoh as Lowertown), and oonneots to the union Lepot multi-modal hub.
5tudy Area
8
Numerous plans, studies, and initiatives have shaped
the positive transformation of downtown 3aint Paul
over the last 20 years. 1he 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD
3ODQ does not exist in isolation from these doouments,
but rather provides a lens through whioh to re-
examine past ideas and reoommendations in light of
the planned insertion of LR1, and identify the many
new opportunities this investment affords to aohieve
the long-term vision for downtown 3aint Paul as a
revitalized, vibrant and oomplete oommunity.
1his dooument oarries many of the ideas from
existing plans forward, with a revised emphasis on
the plaoe-making and reinvestment potential of LR1.
1he following summarizes where the 'RZQWRZQ
6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ is aligned with, and informed by, its
predeoessor doouments inoluding:
the Central Corridor Levelopment 3trategy,
the 3aint Paul on the Mississippi Levelopment
lramework,
the Lowntown Levelopment 3trategy,
the Pistorio Lowertown 3mall Area Plan,
the Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation's
urban village vision, and
the Report of the Liamond Produots 1ask loroe.
Central Corrldor beveloment
5trategy (2001)
1he &HQWUDO&RUULGRU'HYHORSPHQW6WUDWHJ\ (CCL3), a
vision and set of strategies for how the Central Corridor
should grow and evolve in response to the investment
in LR1, was adopted in 0otober 2007 as a ohapter of
the Comprehensive Plan for the City of 3aint Paul. 1he
'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ is designed to be fully
oonsistent with and oomplementary to the higher-level
objeotives of the CCL3, partioularly the downtown-
speoito opportunities desoribed in 3eotion 3.4 of the
CCL3. where relevant, the'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ
revises and expands upon these reoommendations
in light of new information and/or reoent planning
or development aotivity, inoluding the tnal looation
of LR1 stations and nature of platform amenities, a
oontrmed LR1 alignment and relationship to existing
transportation patterns, the looation of the 0perations
and Maintenanoe laoility (0Ml), and additional detail
on an expanded pedestrian and bioyole network.
5alnt Paul on the Mlsslssll
beveloment Framework (1991)
1he 'HYHORSPHQW )UDPHZRUN outlines ten prinoiples
for guiding future development in downtown 3aint
Paul. 1he 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ inoorporates
the general intent and meaning of these prinoiples
into Lireotions and Plaoe-3peoito 0pportunities
outlined in 3eotion #3. ln partioular, prinoiples related
to ,PSURYLQJ &RQQHFWLYLW\ by improving linkages and
mobility routes through downtown, and 3URYLGLQJ D
EDODQFHGQHWZRUNIRUPRYHPHQWwhioh refers to the
design of streets that are shared equally amongst
vehioles, pedestrians, buses, bioyoles, and trains, are
explored in more detail in the 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD
3ODQ
5alnt Paul bowntown beveloment
5trategy (2005)
1he 'RZQWRZQ 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\ builds on the
'HYHORSPHQW)UDPHZRUN oore prinoiples of improving
oonneotivity between neighborhoods, downtown and
the river, and designing a more balanoed network
of streets. Key direotions desoribed in the 6WUDWHJ\
with partioular relevanoe to the station area planning
prooess inolude:
enhanoing Cedar and 4th 3treets as balanoed
streets that aooommodate LR1, pedestrians, and
other forms of mobility,
improving the experienoe of moving through
downtown at street level,
oreating unique transit stops, and improving the
oontguration and safety of transit stops at Cedar
and Minnesota, and
1.4
1he Plannlng Context
1he 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ oarries forward the
oore oommunity-building aspeots of the existing plan,
while updating them to desoribe the positive role LR1
oan play in advanoing the oommunity's vision of a
oulturally vibrant and oomplete downtown oommunity.
lt oalls for the subsequent preparation of a /RZHUWRZQ
0DVWHU3ODQ in order to address in more detail the new
private development and publio realm opportunities
triggered by LR1 in Lowertown. 0noe the /RZHUWRZQ
0DVWHU 3ODQ is adopted, the /RZHUWRZQ 6PDOO $UHD
3ODQ will be deoertited.
Urban vlllage vlslon (2005)
ln Maroh 2005, the Lowertown Redevelopment
Corporation oreated the 8UEDQ9LOODJH9LVLRQ. 1hough
never formally adopted as City polioy, the vision
dooument oontains many worthwhile direotions
relevant to the station area planning prooess,
inoluding:
improved oonneotions from union Lepot to the
Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary, and between
Lowertown and the river valley,
enlivened frontages on wall and Broadway streets
through new aotive gallery uses, and
exploring the long-term reuse of the Liamond
Produots site for residential or employment uses.
1he 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ oarries many of
these oore reoommendations forward, inoluding
the proposed extension of Lowertown's texible grid
pattern east of Broadway, and the potential re-use of
the northern portion of the former Liamond Produots
Building.
Reort of the blamond Products 1ask
Force (2005)
1he former Liamond Produots site, looated between
the Lowertown neighborhood and the Bruoe vento
Nature 3anotuary, is of strategio importanoe given its
soale as an anohor on the eastern edge of downtown.
1he 5HSRUW RI WKH 'LDPRQG 3URGXFWV 7DVN )RUFH
desoribes the area's long-term potential for transit-
supportive development, and the desire to reduoe
the barrier oreated by the existing site oontguration
through the introduotion of a tner-grained network of
blooks and streets enlivened with aotive uses on the
ground toor. 1he 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQoarries
this ambition forward, and outlines parameters
for redevelopment of the site so that it oontributes
positively to the historio fabrio of Lowertown while
aohieving the objeotives above.
designing transit so that it makes a positive
oontribution to the downtown area.
1he 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ draws guidanoe from the key
moves desoribed in the 'RZQWRZQ 'HYHORSPHQW
6WUDWHJ\, and elaborates on these to illustrate how
LR1 will oontribute to plaoe-making and oommunity-
building downtown.
Lowertown 5mall Area Plan (1994)
1he /RZHUWRZQ 6PDOO $UHD 3ODQ was adopted in
response to the signitoant revitalization of the area
from a manufaoturing/warehouse area to a mixed-
use/residential neighborhood. 1he main purpose of
the Plan was to desoribe a vision for this 3aint Paul
oommunity and to foous on seouring the neoessary
ingredients to support its evolution, inoluding new
residential amenities, an improved pedestrian
environment, and balanoed approaohes to dealing with
issues of trafto and parking. Powever, the /RZHUWRZQ
6PDOO$UHD3ODQ was written in advanoe of planning for
LR1 and does not therefore antioipate the opportunity
this investment brings to attraot new investment in
buildings or redevelopment sites, nor the need to
reoonsider movement patterns downtown.
10
1.5
Real state Market Conslderatlons
while the introduotion of LR1 in downtown will not
oreate new markets where they do not already exist,
this signitoant investment has the potential to amplify
and reposition real estate and market demand. ln
downtown, over a dozen key strategio redevelopment
sites have been identited (ligure 1.7) for their potential
to redevelop. 1he introduotion of LR1 will positively
intuenoe the form and potential of this reinvestment.
Building on the real estate and development analysis
previously oompleted for the &HQWUDO &RUULGRU
'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\, the station area planning
prooess revisited and retned 20-30 year market
foreoast overviews for downtown 3aint Paul (ligure
1.8) and found that:
1here ls otentlal for slgnlcant new houslng,
artlcularly new rental lnl unlts.
More modest amounts of oftoe, retail and hotel
uses are antioipated. lor eaoh use, LR1 will help
faoilitate high-density development that does not
require valuable, oentrally-looated land for the
parking of automobiles.
lt ls antlclated that downtown 5alnt Paul could
accommodate u to 2.3 mllllon square feet of
new ofce sace.
Powever, with or without LR1, downtown 3aint
Paul is not likely to see any new oftoe building
development over the next 20 years unless it oan
attraot and seoure a signitoant anohor tenant
or oorporate user to trigger the oonstruotion of
suoh a projeot. 3peoulative oftoe development,
as historioally praotioed, where tnanoing was
awarded and oonstruotion oommenoed onoe 50
- 75 of the proposed toor area was pre-leased
or trmly oommitted, is not likely to re-ooour in
downtown 3aint Paul in the foreseeable future.
1he 4th and Cedar block holds good otentlal
for a slgnature ofce develoment.
0oing forward, the underwriting of Central
Business Listriot oftoe towers is likely to be muoh
more oonstrained. Notwithstanding these market
oonstraints, the introduotion of LR1 through the 4th
and Cedar blook oreates a oompetitive advantage
for this future redevelopment site. A targeted
eoonomio development oampaign to promote the
site as a high-protle national headquarters may
assist in expediting investment here.
Rouslng and nelghborhood develoment offers
the greatest oortunlty for new lnvestment.
0ver the next 30 years, as many as 6,000 new
rental and 1,200 new ownership units are
foreoast for downtown. ln addition, there oould
be a market for up to 300 new hotel units. 1he
expansion of housing options and oontinued
strengthening of downtown neighborhoods, with
the resultant inorease in demand for looal retail,
servioes, and amenities, is downtown 3aint Paul's
greatest opportunity to expand investment in the
oity's oore. Residential development in downtown
3aint Paul should be suooessful at sites where
there is an interesting view" of some landmark
like the riverfront and river valley, 3tate Capitol,
3aint Paul Cathedral, Mears Park, and Rioe Park.
oung eole and emty nesters are the rlme
markets for urban llvlng.
luture demographio trends indioate that, with
aooess to oonvenient transit, young single
professionals, ohildless oouples, and empty nester
baby boomers will be attraoted to vibrant, aotive
downtown urban oores to live. Lowntown 3aint
Paul, with its speotaoular riverfront and soaring
river bluffs, oan oapture this emerging residential
market segment.
New resldentlal uses wlll drlve future retall
otentlal.
Approximately 100-150,000 square feet of new
retail uses are projeoted over the next 30 years.
As retailers have borne the brunt of the dramatio
eoonomio slowdown in the u.3., retail development
in downtown is likely to be stagnant for the next
tve years. Powever, an inorease in the number of
people living downtown will oontinue to generate
demand for neighborhood-based retail and
servioes - a vital oomponent to re-aotivating the
street throughout evening hours and weekends.
Flgure 1.1 A number of vaoant or underutilized sites within a 1/4 mile of the stations have the potential for new real estate development in olose proximity to LR1.
Flgure 1.8 Lstimated Long-1erm Levelopment Potential of the Lowntown 3tation Areas.
Resldentlal
Potentlal Number of Unlts
Rental
5,000-6,000
0wnership
750-1,200
1,880,000 sq ft 100,000-150,000 sq ft 300
0fce
Potentlal New 0fce 5ace (GFA)
Retall
Potentlal New Retall 5ace (GFA)
Rotel
Potentlal Number of New Rooms
1/4 Mile
1/4 Mile
1/4 Mile
UBS Plaza
St. Louis King
of France Church
0
p
e
ra
tio
n
s &
M
a
in
te
n
a
n
o
e
l
a
o
ility
Central
Presbyterian
Church
St. Agatha's
Conservatory
of Music
McNally
Smith
St. Paul
Athletic
Club
Minnesota
Building
Pioneer
Building
Endicott
Building
Alliance
Bank
Science
Museum of
Minnesota
EcoLab
Center
Lawson
Commons
City Hall
Annex
St Paul
Hotel
Ordway
Music
Theater
RiverCentre
Qwest
Xcel
Energy
Center
Travelers
Companies
Travelers
Companies
City Hall
& Courthouse
Capital
City Plaza
Kellogg
Square
First National
Bank
US Bank
Center
Securian
Center
Securian
Center
Minnesota
Public
Radio
Farmers
Market
Cray
Plaza
Federal
Building
St. Paul
Radiology
US Postal
Union
Depot
Wells Fargo
Place
7th P
L.
M
A
L L
J
O
S
E
P
H
' S
L
A
N
E
M
A
N
L
A
F
A
Y
E
T
T
E
R
O
A
D
6th ST.
B L V D.
K
E
L L O
G
G
O L D
6th S T.
W E S T 5th S T.
W
A
S
H
N
G
T
O
N
S
T
.
M
A
R
K
E
T
S
T
.
S H E P A R D
R O A D
P
R
N
C
E
S
T.
K E L L O G G
2
n
d
S
T
.
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
.
5th S
T.
5th S
T.
5th S
T.
4th S
T.
4th S
T.
6th S
T.
6th S
T.
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
S
T
.
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
14th S
T.
C
O
L U
M
B
U
S
C
E
D
A
R

E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
R
E
V. D
R
. M
A
R
TN
LU
TH
E
R
K
N
G
D
R
.
C
E
D
A
R

A
V
E
.
E L F T H
S T.
E
X
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
T.
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
M
A
N
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
W E S T N N T H
S
T
.
K
E
L L O
G
G
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
S
T
.
W
A
L
L
S
T
.
P
N
E
A
V
E
.
7th S
T
7th S
T
- 94
- 94
8th S
T
7th S
T
7th P
L.
C
E
D
A
R

9th S
T.
12th S
T.
S
T
.
S
T
.
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
P
N
E
S
T
.
10th S
T.
10th S
T.
10th S
T.
11th S
T.
S
T
.
B
A
L S
A
M
K
E
L L O
G
G
B
LV
D
.
C
E
D
A
R
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
C
E
R
O
B
E
R
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
R
O
B
E
R
T
S
T
.
R
O
B
E
R
T
S
T
. Proposed
litzgerald Park
3itH
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
R
T
R
O
U
T

T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
O
K
B
L
V

B
R
O
R
T
R
O
U
T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
Key 5trateglc
Redeveloment 5ltes
5tudy Area
5-mlnute Walklng blstance
from 5tatlons
12
1he insertion of LR1 into downtown 3aint Paul is a remarkable opportunity to not only refresh the physioal and
eoonomio foundations of downtown, but also to breathe new health and vitality into the heart of the oity. lf
leveraged properly, it has the potential to re-position 3aint Paul from a relatively quiet oenter to a lively, vibrant
destination and desirable plaoe to live, work, and visit
LR1 represents an opportunity to effeot a paradigm shift in the way people move, see, experienoe, build, relax,
and live in the oore: a shift that makes downtown a neighborhood, a plaoe to do business, and a destination of
ohoioe for a distinotly urbane and vibrant experienoe.
1he following seotion builds on the &HQWUDO &RUULGRU 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\ to desoribe this paradigm shift
(brought about, in part, by the introduotion of LR1) and identites a series of direotions that will guide downtown
polioy deoisions. 1he disoussion is framed around four oore themes:
Moblllty: the ability to move to, from, and within downtown 3aint Paul by a variety of modes (as pedestrians,
on bioyoles, by transit, or by oar),
Land Use: the range and integration of uses, servioes, aotivities, and destinations throughout downtown that
help oreate vitality,
Bullt Form: the design and oontguration of buildings within downtown's environment of narrow streets,
blooks and open spaoes in order to oreate a human-soaled and attraotive built environment, and
Publlc Realm: the interoonneoted network of streets and open spaoes that tie downtown's neighborhoods
together, and oreate the oivio glue that oonneots people, plaoes, and aotivities to one another.
LR1 bowntown
2.0
LR1: lnvestlng ln the Future of the bowntown
14

xand Nelghborhood
Park 5treets
Aimed at enhanoing street-level pedestrian movement,
Neighborhood Park 3treets will oonneot the key
publio spaoes anohoring the major neighborhoods in
downtown. Building on the direotions in the &HQWUDO
&RUULGRU'HYHORSPHQW6WUDWHJ\ and 6DLQW3DXORQWKH
0LVVLVVLSSL'HYHORSPHQW)UDPHZRUN, the system has
been extended to oapture Rioe Park to the west.
1he three downtown LR1 station areas are integrated
as key new plaoes within this ring of park streets.
Comprised primarily of looal streets, these streets
should demonstrate a oonsistent streetsoape palette
of plantings, pedestrian amenities, and signage to
rebalanoe streets in favor of pedestrians and oyolists.
Lxpanding the park-like quality of these streets will
offer people attraotive routes to walk and enoourage
non-automobile movement throughout downtown.

S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V E N E N E N E N E N
E N TT H T H T H T H T H
NN
HHH T H HHHHH
S E V E V E V E V
S E V E V EMA L A L A L LLL L L L
M A M A M A M
J O S E P H' S
J O S E P H'
J O S E P H'
L A N E
A N E
A N E
L A F A Y E T T E R O A D
T. S T.
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
O L D O L O L L D L DDDDD L D S X T H
W E E S T T H F F T H S T S T. S T S
S H E P A R D
E P A
O U
T. ST T. ST
PRNCE ST
L L O G G
K E L L O G G L L O G G
2n 2nd 2nd
S ST
2nd 2nd 2nd nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd ST.
2nd ST
2
H ST.
T H
F F T
X T H ST.
S X X T H
XX
ST.
S
W
ST
W A B A S H A S
W
A
W A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
F O U R T E E N T H
F O F O U R T E E N T H
E E N T
T W E L F T H
T W E L F T
C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
EE A S T C E N T R A L P A R K
E A S T
C E N T R A L
P A R K
E A S T C E N T R A L P A R K
AA V E.
N
R
R E L A N D
B L V D.
E S E
C H A
S T. P P E T E T E R
M
A
N
M A N
W E S T N N T H S T.
TT J
S E V E N T H
F F T H
K
B R O A D W A Y ST.
A D W A Y S
E
P N E
P N E
E N T
E
S
E N
S E V E
.
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T
D
C
E
C
D AA R
C E D
C
E
C
D
A R
A R
EEE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
RRR
D
A
D
A
D AA
R
A
R
A
R
T H
T W W E L F T H
T.
ST T ST TTT ST ST ST
B R O A D W A Y
R O A D W A
ST.
ST.
ST.
SSS
S T. S T
N T N T H ST.
T E N N
T E
ST
T E N T H H ST.
T E
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
KKKK E L L O G G
BLVD.
G BL
CC E D A R R
L P L P L P L. P L PP
E Y S S
E Y
SS
EEE
SS B L L E Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
EE
T E E M
P E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W A C O
W A
W A
WWW
O U T A
A
ST
CC O
ST.
ST ST
B BB
S B L E Y ST.
S
J A C K S O N ST.
A C K
N
ST.
K S O N
T A
N N E N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
J A C K S O N ST ST ST ST
B E
ST.
C O U T A S
C O
ST.
ST ST S B
S S B
T.
W A C CCC
H ST. ST
H
N T
N N T H T H
T. T.
T E
R O O B BB E R T ST
B E
ST
O T A
N E S O TT A
N E
A ST.
A
N N
MM N N N NN
ST. S
E X C H
E
C H
EE
H A N G E
N G E EE
H A
U R T H ST
FF O U
J O S E P H' S
J O S E P H'
J O S E P H'
T. S T.
S X T H
O L D O L O L L D L DDDDD L D
S H E P A R D
E P A
U R
T. TT.
H ST.
T H
F F T
M
O T A ST.
N N E N E S O
ST.
S
W
ST
W A B A S H A S
W
A
W A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
F O U R T E E N T H
F O F O U R T E E N T H
E E N T
S T. C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
E A S T
C E N T R A L
P A R K
AA V E.
N
R
R E L A N D
B L V D.
M
A
N
M A N
W E S T N N T H S T.
TT J
F F T H
K
E N T
E
S
E N
S E V E
.
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T
D
C
E
C
D A A R
C E D
C
E
C
D
A R
A R
EEE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
RRR
D
A
D
A
D A A
R
A
R
A
R
N T
N N T H ST. ST
T W W E L F T H
T.
B R O A D W A Y
R O A D W A
N T N T H ST.
T E N N
T E
ST
T E N T H H ST.
T E
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
A M
BB A L S A
CC E D A R R
ST.
S
E Y S S
E Y
SS
EEE
SS B L L E Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
EE
T E E M
P E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W A C O
W A
W A
WWW
O U T A
O T A ST.
N N E S O T
MM N N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
J A C K S O N ST ST ST ST R O O B E R T
B L V D. B L V D B L V D
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
W
A S H N G T O N ST
W
A S H N
G
T O
N
W
A S H N
G
T O
N
A
S
H
N
G
A
S
A
S
T.
L L O G G
S T. P E T E R ST.
S T. P E T E R ST
2nd 2nd ST
22nd 2nd 2nd 2nd nd 2nd 2nd ST.
2nd ST
2
B R O A D W A Y ST.
A D W A Y S
E
P N E
P N E
W A C O U T A ST.
C O U T A ST
ST.
ST ST
S B L E Y S
S B L E Y
S B L E Y
S B L E Y ST
S
Lowntown 3aint Paul is a series of distinot and
attraotive plaoes - neighborhoods, parks, oultural
institutions, and employment oenters - struotured
and oonneoted by a strong pedestrian-soaled grid of
streets and blooks.
while this grid has historioally provided an exoellent
foundation for movement throughout downtown,
deoades of over-relianoe on the automobile as
the prinoipal mode of transport have eroded the
oharaoter and plaoe-making quality of the street
system. while areas of downtown have emerged
as striking and distinot plaoes for people, auto-
dependenoe, ooupled with the skyway system, has
resulted in the emergenoe of a street network that
puts too muoh emphasis on vehioular movement,
and in many plaoes negleots the basio needs of
pedestrians and oyolists.
Lnhanoed mobility is partioularly important in light
of the introduotion of LR1, whioh in and of itself will
be a signitoant generator of additional foot, bioyole,
and bus trips.
1he following Lireotions desoribe the potential
for LR1 to positively impaot and transform ourrent
movement patterns throughout downtown.
Advance the 4th 5treet Artway
lourth 3treet is evolving as an inoreasingly important
downtown street. Already a spine linking two of
downtown's most important assets, the oultural
distriot and the Lowertown oommunity, 4th 3treet
also links two planned LR1 stations, many heritage
buildings and publio institutions. As suoh, it should
oontinue to be promoted as a signitoant walk of arts,
oulture, and entertainment.
while the reoonstruotion of 4th 3treet will provide
an important starting plaoe for the re-imaging of the
street, this initiative should be extended east and
west of the LR1 oorridor to oreate a olear oonneotion
between Rioe Park and the larmers' Market. 1hough
narrow in plaoes and oonstrained by existing areaways
below grade, opportunities should be pursued where
feasible to oreate a truly green" street through planting
and landsoaping investments, inoluding green walls,
hanging baskets, and street trees.
Flgure 2.1 A ring of Neighborhood Park 3treets will help to oonneot
existing and emerging neighborhoods with LR1.
Flgure 2.2 1he 4th 3treet Artway will be an important pedestrian
oonneotion linking the Lowertown and Rioe Park Lntertainment
Listriots.
1 2
Moblllty
2.1
Moblllty nhancement Areas
while oonstruotion of LR1 will bring streetsoape
enhanoements along the length of the transit oorridor,
strong emphasis should be fooused around the three
station areas in downtown. 1hese areas present
speoito opportunities to oreate positive environments
and enhanoe mobility where a signitoant inorease in
pedestrian and oyoling aotivity will ooour.
1he intent of the Mobility Lnhanoement Areas is to
prioritize the movement of pedestrians and oyolists
to and from LR1, inorease a sense of personal safety,
and faoilitate transfers between the different modes of
transport. As distinot plaoes along the Corridor, these
areas should be distinguished through an enhanoed
streetsoape, waytnding, arts and oultural expression,
and a landsoape strategy that integrates pedestrians,
oyolists, buses, and LR1, and generally improves the
experienoe of using transit.
7th P
7th P
7th P
7th P
7th P
7th PLLLLLL h PL
7th PLLLLL. L
7 MA L A L A L LLL L L L
M A M A M A M
J O S E P H' S
J O S E P H'
J O S E P H'
L A N E
A N E
A N E
6th ST.
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
O L D O L O L O DDDDDDDD
W E E S T 5th S T. S T
S H E P A R D
E P A
ST.
L L O G G
2n 2nd 2nd
S ST
2nd 2nd 2nd nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd ST.
2nd ST
2
55th S h ST.
5th ST.
4th ST.
6th ST. ST ST
ST.
S
W
ST
W A B A S H A S
W
A
W A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
14th SST.
C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
E A S T
C E N T R A L
P A R K
AA V E.
R R E L A N D
B L V D.
E ST.
E
E X C H A N
E
E
N G E
M
A N
M A N
W E S T N N T H S T. TT J
K E L L O G G
B R O A D W A Y ST.
A D W A Y S
E
P N E
P N E
T T ST
7th ST
th ST
8th
7t 7th PL.
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
A A R
A
R
A
R
S
9thh ST.
T. TT ST ST ST
B R O A D W A Y
R O A D W A
ST.
ST.
ST.
SSS
hh ST.
10thh 10
10th ST ST.
1
11th ST.
1th
B A L S A M
B A L S A
KKKK E L L O G G
BLVD.
G BL
E Y S S
E Y
SS
EEE
SS B L L E Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
EE
T E E M
P E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W A C O
W A
W A
WWW
O U T A
W A C O U T A ST.
C O U T A ST
ST.
ST ST
S B L E Y S
S B L E Y
S B L E Y
S B L E Y ST.
S
J A C K S O N ST.
A C K
N
ST.
K S O N
O T A ST.
N N E S O T
M M N N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
O B E R T
R O O
ST.
- 94
- 94
N
R O O B
E
D
EE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
D
A
DD
CC E D A R R
E
D
EE
CC E
C
D
A
DD
5
th
and 6
th

Cross-1own
Connectlons
ln the evolution of the post-LR1 downtown, 5
th
and 6
th
streets should emerge as important urban greenways
linking the Central 3tation to key destinations on either
side of downtown. As the prinoipal bus and oyoling
routes through the oity, emphasis should be plaoed on
striking a balanoe between pedestrians, oyolists, oars
and buses. ln support of this, a more balanoed street
with a reduoed number of lanes, or narrower lanes
and shared bike routes, should be implemented.
Flgure 2.3 5
th
and 6
th
streets will emerge as important oross-town oyoling oonneotions linking the west 7th and Cathedral Pill neighborhoods
east to the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary. 1he image above from the 5th and 6th 3treet Capitol lmprovement lnitiative highlights the three
plazas along the oorridor. 1hese have the potential to support a range of events and aotivities, inoluding festivals, food vendors, plaoes of
respite or performanoe, and publio art.
Flgure 2.4 1he areas around the downtown stations represent
important plaoes to foous strategies for mobility enhanoement,
suoh as olearer waytnding, enhanoed streetsoaping, and improved
intermodal oonneotivity.

0ver the long term, as a oomponent of a broader
1ransportation Master Plan for the downtown, the
oonversion of these streets to two-way streets should
be explored. 1he introduotion of opposing trafto lanes,
oombined with related improvements to the publio
realm, will assist in slowing vehioular trafto through
these thoroughfares, oreate a more balanoed and
safer environment for pedestrians and oyolists, and
promote a stronger retail environment that oan better
support street-related oommeroial aotivity.
Securian
Plaza
Robert Street Plaza
Ecolab
Plaza
16
Advance 0ortunltles for
Cycllng
Cyoling is an inoreasingly important mobility option
in urban oenters. lmproving the environment and
infrastruoture for oyolists to ride to and within the
downtown and oonneot to transit will foster this aotive
form of transportation. with respeot to oyoling, key
mobility strategies and investments emerging from
the %LNH:DON&HQWUDO&RUULGRU$FWLRQ3ODQ inolude the
following:
the transformation of both 3ibley and 1aokson
streets into balanoed roadways with more
equitable provisions for pedestrians, oyolists and
automobiles,
utilization of 5th and 6th streets as important east-
west greenways" with enhanoed landsoaping
features, trafto oalming measures, and dedioated
bioyole infrastruoture and amenities,
Flgure 2.6 0pportunities to integrate oyoling oonneotions and infrastruoture with LR1 faoilities will inorease opportunities to link to a greater
range of downtown attraotions by multiple modes of movement.
provision of oyoling infrastruoture, where feasible,
at or near LR1 stations. 1his may inolude
bioyole looks, bioyole lookers, bioyole repair and
maintenanoe servioes, and/or other amenities
that will promote oyoling as an eftoient mode for
reaohing LR1, and
improved oonneotions at downtown edges to
faoilitate bioyole travel into and out of downtown
and to aohieve better oonneotions with regional
bioyole faoilities.
nhance the Grld
1he enhanoement of the streets that form the historio
grid will be a key strategy to improve the pedestrian
environment in downtown. 1his oan be aooomplished
on an inoremental basis through a series of small
moves on a blook-by-blook basis as redevelopment
and/or re-investment ooours. As existing buildings are
renovated or retrottted for new uses, opportunities
should be sought to enhanoe pedestrian amenities
at street level. 1his may inolude some oombination of
improvements to building faoades, promoting ground-
toor aotivity, and improved streetsoaping. 1his effort
should be supported through a City-led program of
streetsoape enhanoements radiating out from existing
pedestrian-fooused areas (suoh as Rioe Park and
Mears Park) to oreate a pedestrian-friendly, walkable
environment aoross downtown.
Flgure 2.5 1he historio walkable downtown street grid establishes
a strong foundation for improving the pedestrian environment in
downtown over time through blook-by-blook inoremental streetsoape
enhanoements.

L
A
F
A
Y
E
T
T
E
R
O
A
D
6th ST.
S H E P A R D
E
P A
55
th
S
h
S
T.
5
th
S
T.
4
th
S
6
th
S
TTT
6
th
S
T.
6
S
T
.
S
W
S
T
W
A
B
A
S
H
A

S
W
A
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
H
A
S
T
.
1
4
th
SS
T.
S S
C
U
S
C
O
L U
M
B
U
R
C
E
D
A
R
C
EE
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
AA
V
E
.
R

R
E
L
A
N
D
B
L
V
D
.
M
A
N
M
A
N
W E S T N N T H
K
E
L L O
G
G
TT
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
t
7
th
P
L
.
hhh
PP
L
P
L L
P
L
RRR
D
AAAA
R
A
R
A
R
T.
1
2
th
S
T.
T
.
TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
R
O
A
D
W
A
h h
S
T.
1
0
thh
1
0
1
0
th
S
T
S
T.
1
11
th
S
T.
1
th
B
A
L S
A
M
B
A
L S
A
S
B
L
E
Y
S S
S
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B
L
E
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
T
.
S
T
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
C
E
E
M
E
P
E
R
A
N
E
M
P
N
C
E
W
A
C
O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O
U
T
A
T
A

N
N
E
N
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
B
E
- 9
4
- 9
4
A
S
T
.
O
T
A
N
E
S
O
T
MM
N
N
N
N
S
9th h
S
T
B
E
R
T
R
O

O
B
T
.
T
A
N
NN
S
T
B
T
E
A
N
E
B
E
T
.
th
S
T.
th
S
C
E
D
C
E
C
E
C
E

C
E
C
E
C
DDDDD
A
DD
M
N N
N
E
S
E
S
B L V D.
B L V D
B L V D
K
E
L L O
G
G
K
E
L L O
G
G
K
E
L L O
G
G
W E E S T
WWWWWWWWWE WWEEEEEE SSS T S TTTT 5th 55555tth h 5th 5 hhhh S T. S T SSS TT S T TTTTTTTT
H

NN
L L O G G
K E L L O G G
L L O G G
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
.
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
A
S
H
AAA
S
H
A
S
A
S
HH
N
G
T
O

T
O
N
G
2
n
d
2
n
d
S
T
22
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
S
T
.
2
n
d
S
T
2
S
T.
6
th
S
T.
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
S
T
.
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
P
N
E
P
N
E S
T
CC
O
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
B BB
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
S
S
T
SS
B
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
B
L
E
Y
T
.
S
T S

B
S
C
O
U
T
A

S
W
A
C C
T
.
S
T
SSS
S
T
B
C
O
S
CC
B
L
BB
4
th
S
T
S
T T.
T
B
T
B
R
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
T
R
O
U
T
R
T
T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
O
K
B
L
V
D
B
R R
O
R
T
R
O
U
T
R
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
Rlce Park
Lowertown
Bruce vento
Nature
5anctuary
West 1th
10th 3treet
3tation
4th and Cedar
3tation
union Lepot
3tation
Nelghborhood Park 5treets
Moblllty nhancement Areas
5th and 6th Cross 1own
Connectlons
Advanclng the 4th 5treet
Walk
Flgure 2.1 lramework of Mobility Lireotions.
18
Land Use
2.2
Focus More Actlve Uses
Around 5tatlons
luture LR1 stations oreate a natural oatohment
area for neighborhood-oriented retail and servioes,
inoluding ooffee shops, dry oleaners, and other goods
and servioes geared primarily to area residents and
employees. 1hough aotive at-grade uses should be
enoouraged throughout the study area, a foous on
aotivating ground toor retail at the stations has the
greatest potential to oapitalize on the trafto generated
by LR1, and to support a more aotive streetsoape.
At the 4th/Cedar 3tation (herein after referred to as
Central 3tation), in partioular, street-level aotivity oan
be supported through an enhanoed skyway oonneotion
to the ground.
Promote lnnovatlve Re-Use of
Rlstorlc Bulldlngs
3aint Paul's wealth of high-quality historio buildings
represents a strategio oompetitive advantage within
an employment and housing market that inoreasingly
favors a return to urban environments. Prospeotive
tenants are attraoted to the amenities afforded by
a downtown looation, inoluding distinot work spaoes,
aooess to publio transit, and proximity to restaurants,
nightlife, and oulture.
1he oonversion of existing buildings to a full range of
residential, oultural, employment, and eduoational
uses will oontinue to advanoe the revitalization of
downtown 3aint Paul. 1his transformation should
be promoted through strategies aimed at attraoting
innovative and teohnology-oriented employers,
and enabling the oontinued oonversion of existing
struotures. ln partioular, the underutilized Lndioott and
Pioneer buildings provide an opportunity to expand
Lowertown's residential, oultural, and innovative
uses to bring a new mix of uses and aotivity into the
traditional oftoe oore.
Flgure 2.8 1he pedestrian aotivity that will be generated at
stations oreates an opportunity for more street-related retail and
neighborhood servioes in these areas.
Flgure 2.9 1he large inventory of remarkable historio warehouse
buildings oreates reuse opportunities for oompanies looking to
benett from proximity to LR1.
S E V E N T H
M A L L
J O S E P H' S
L A N E
S T.
S X T H
B L V D.
O G G
O L D
T H S T.
W E S T F F T H S T.
W
A S H N G T O N ST.
M A R K E T ST.
S H E P A R D
R O A D
F O U R T H ST.
PRNCE ST
K E L L O G G
2nd ST.
S T. P E T E R ST.
F F T H ST.
S X T H ST.
S X T H ST.
M N N E S O T A ST.
W A B A S H A ST.
W A B A S H A ST.
S T.
T W E L F T H
C O L U M B U S C E D A R
A R K
A V E.
S T.
E X C H A N G E ST.
S T. P E T E R
S T. P E T E R
S T N N T H
S T.
B R O A D W A Y ST.
W A L L ST.
P N E
A V E.
S E V E N T H ST.
S E V E N T H PL.
E G H T H ST.
C E D A R
N N T H ST.
T W E L F T H
ST.
S T.
S T.
T E N T H ST.
T E N T H ST.
E L E V E N T H ST.
ST.
K E L L O G G BLVD.
C E D A R ST.
P L.
S B L E Y ST.
T E M P E R A N C E
W A C O U T A
W A C O U T A ST.
S B L E Y ST.
S B L E Y ST.
J A C K S O N ST.
M N N E S O T A ST.
J A C K S O N ST.
R O B E R T ST.
R O B E R T ST.
lor a oity of 270,000 people, downtown 3aint Paul
offers a substantial oonoentration of oommeroial,
employment, residential and leisure uses. At the
heart of the oity is a hub of oultural aotivity with a
number of regional attraotions that bring thousands
of people into the oore eaoh year. 1his has been
oomplemented reoently by signitoant new residential
developments and intensitoation that have brought
new population and aotivity to the oore. 1hough
diverse, the existing pattern of uses is highly olustered.
1here is a distinot laok of residential density in the
heart of the downtown, while retail for the most part
is looated along a few shopping streets or above the
street within the skyway system. 1his oreates pookets
of inaotivity throughout the day and espeoially in
the evenings, when the laok of a oentrally-looated
residential population is most evident.
1he introduotion of LR1 and the oonvenienoe, protle
and enhanoed pedestrian aotivity it will bring has
the potential to boost the liveliness and eoonomio
health of downtown, while broadening the range and
inoreasing the integration of aotivities.
1he following Lireotions provide guidanoe for
oapitalizing on LR1 as a way to improve real estate
potential, oonneot sub-olusters of aotivity and oreate
a tner integration of uses in the downtown.

lmrove Connectlvlty Between
LR1 and xlstlng Retall on Wabasha
By drawing pedestrian aotivity east to Cedar, the
introduotion of LR1 has the potential to support the
vitality of existing and oontinued expansion of ground-
related aotivity now ooourring on wabasha and 3t.
Peter 3treets. Lnoouraging aotive ground toor or street-
related uses on east-west streets between wabasha
and Cedar will enhanoe the walk from the LR1 station
to wabasha and the Rioe Park Lntertainment Listriot,
and inorease the potential for pedestrian aotivity along
wabasha. ln the long term, this oreates an opportunity
for an expanded oore of aotive streets between the
LR1 station and the Rioe Park Lntertainment Listriot.
lnoorporating a range of aotive uses to meet the
needs of both downtown and regional residents would
oomplement the more passive opportunities available
in the Nature 3anotuary. 1hese oould be supplemented
with faoilities and programming that draw users from
the broader 1win Cities region, suoh as soooer telds or
a skate park.
Key to the suooess of the regional reoreational faoility
will be improved oonneotions east of Broadway
3treet over time. 1hese should oome through the
re-dedioation and extension of Prinoe 3treet to the
east, redevelopment of the northern portion of the
Liamond Produots site, enhanoements to the Prinoe
3treet frontage and streetsoape with the development
of the 0Ml, and enhanoed north-south oonneotions
through the oreation of 1rout Brook Boulevard.
Large areas of underutilized surfaoe parking east
of the Lafayette Bridge oreate a oonsiderable gap
on the edge of downtown, and deter pedestrians
and oyolists from reaohing the Bruoe vento Nature
3anotuary. 1his underutilized area of land has the
potential to form an integrating seam between
downtown and the tremendous natural asset of the
Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary.
1he implementation of a long-term plan for regional
reoreational grounds on this site, ooupled with the
redevelopment and reintegration of the Liamond
Produot site into the Lowertown neighborhood,
represents a tremendous opportunity to bridge the
gap between oity and nature.
Flgure 2.10 A new aotive reoreational area east of Lafayette Bridge would help to link the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary with downtown.
1his will be supported through improvements to Prinoe 3treet brought about by the development of the 0Ml, the redevelopment of the north
Liamond Produots site over time, and oonstruotion of a new 1rout Brook Boulevard (shown in orange).
Flgure 2.11 New aotive ground toor uses on 4th 3treet between
Cedar and wabasha will help attraot pedestrian aotivity between
LR1 and the Rioe Park Lntertainment Listriot.
Create a Green 5eam Between
bowntown and the Bruce vento
Nature 5anctuary
20
Promote Relnvestment ln
5trateglc Redeveloment 5ltes
Lowntown's strategio redevelopment sites (as
identited in ligure 1.7) will play a signitoant role in
the future vitality, oompetitiveness, and livability of
downtown. 1he potential of these sites should be
maximized by the City.
LR1 will enhanoe the long-term development potential
of more than a dozen downtown redevelopment
sites. Reinvestment in eaoh of these sites should
enoourage the integration of a number of different
uses, an enhanoed pedestrian environment at the
sidewalk level, and where provided on site, a sensitive
integration of parking that neither detraots from nor
oontiots with the adjaoent publio realm.
1wo suoh sites are the former Liamond Produots site
and the Central 3tation blook. 1hough the southern
building on the Liamond Produots site will oontain the
LR1 0perations and Maintenanoe laoility, the northern
Prohlblt New 5lngle-Use
Parklng 5tructures
1he oversupply of struotured parking in the downtown
oore has the potential to negatively impaot all four of
Flgure 2.13 Restrioting the amount of new parking downtown will
help to maximize the use of existing struotures, enoourage use of
transit, and oreate more opportunity for new aotivity-generating
developments.
Flgure 2.12 1he 4
th
and Cedar blook (above left) and Liamond Produots site (above right) are the two sites most likely to undergo signitoant
redevelopment with the oonstruotion of LR1.
half of the site has the potential to aooommodate a
range of new uses over time. 1hese inolude a new
ballpark for the 3aint Paul 3aints, or an expanded
medium- to high-density mixed-use development, both
of whioh have the potential to reintegrate the site baok
into its Lowertown setting.
1he oonstruotion of LR1 through the Central 3tation
blook oreates the oity's greatest opportunity to establish
a new anohor oftoe building and revitalize the protle of
the oftoe oore. 0iven the size and soale of this potential
development, the opportunity to use the redevelopment
of this blook to kiok-start the introduotion of a diverse
mix of new uses, inoluding residential and grade-related
retail, is unparalleled in the oore.
the themes disoussed in this seotion. 1his abundant

supply promotes the use of private automobiles,
interrupts and detraots from the pedestrian
environment, oreates blank and inaotive street walls,
and absorbs development sites that oould make better
use of existing infrastruoture and the aooessibility
afforded by LR1.
Restrioting the amount of new parking downtown
will help to maximize the use of existing struotures,
enoourage use of transit, and oreate more opportunity
for new aotivity-generating developments. New
freestanding, single-use parking struotures should be
prohibited within the downtown oore. A freestanding,
single-use parking struoture is one that is not physioally
attaohed to a prinoipal use and is used for the exolusive
purpose of parking oars. where parking struotures
exist, the City should work with property owners to
aotivate the ground toors with street-related uses.
L
A
F
A
Y
E
T
T
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
H
A
S
T
.
1
4
th
SS
T.
C
U
S
C
O
L U
M
B
U
R
C
E
D
A
R
C
EE
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
AA
V
E
.
L
A
N
D
B
L
V
D
.
M
A
N
M
A
N
W E S T N N T H
7
th
S
T
S
9
th h
S
T.
1
2
th
S
T.
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
R
O
A
D
W
A
hh
S
T.
1
0
thh
1
0
1
0
th
S
T
S
T.
1
11
th
S
T.
1
th
B
A
L S
A
M
B
A
L S
A
S
B
L
E
Y
S S
S
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B
L
E
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
T
.
S
T
.
T
E E
W
A
C
O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O
U
T
A
M M
N
N
E
S
N
N
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
R
O

O
B
E
R
T
- 9
4
- 9
4
5
th
S
5
th
S
5
th
S SSS
T. T. TTT
K
22
n
d
2
n
d
S S
T
22
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
222
n
d
2
n
d
S
T
.
2
n
2
n
d
S
T
2
4
th
S
T
4
th
S
T.
E
P
N
E
P
N
E
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
E
E
M
E
P
E
R
A
N
E
M
P
N
C
E
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
.
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
L
E
Y
S
L
E
Y
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
T
B
T
R
T
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
O
U
T
RRR
TTT
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
O
K
B
L
V
D
B
RR
O
RRR
O
U
O
U
T
B
R
O
O
K
B
L
V
D
K
E
L L O
G
G
T
R
O
U
T
T
R
O
U
T
R
O
U
T
R
O
U
6th ST.
B L V D.
B L V D
B L V D
W E E S T
WWWWWWWWWWE WWEEEEEE SSS T S TTTT 5th 5555tth h 5th 5 hhh S T. S T SSS T T S T TTTTTTTT
WWWW
6
th
S
T.
6
M
N
O
T
A
S
T
.
N
N
E
S
E
S
O
T
TT
S
T
7
th
S
T
D
C
E

C
D
AA
R
C
E
D
C
E
C
D
A
R
A
R
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
A A
R
A
R
A
R
T
.
S
T T
S
T TTT
S
T
S
T
S
T
O
T
A
S
T
.
S
O
T
7
t
7
th
P
L
.
hhh
PP
L
P
LL
P
L
S
B
L
E
S
B
L
S
B
L
W
A
S
H
N
G
T
O
N
S
T
T
O
N
W
A
W
A
T
O
N
A
S
H
N
G
N
A
S
A
S
T
.
S H E
S
H E
S
H E
S
H E
S
H E
S
H E
S
H E
S
H E
P A
P A
P A P A
P A AA P A RRRR
D
R
D
R D
RR
EEEE
PPPP A PPPP
GG
L L O L O L O L O OOOO G G G G GG G G G G G G G G G
K E L
K E L
K E L E L E L E L
K E L
K E L LL L L L O
L O
L O
L
GGGGGG G GG
L LLL O L O OOO GGGGGGG G G
55
th
S
h
S
T. T
4
th
S
T.
S
T
.
S S
T
A
S
H
A

S
CC
E
D
A
R

R
S
T
.
S
WW
A
B
A

W
A
Actlve ground oor
or street-related
uses between
Wabasha and Cedar
Rlce Park
ntertalnment
blstrlct
Rlverfront
Uses
Lowertown
Actlve
Recreatlon
mloyment
Cluster
Bruce vento
Nature
5anctuary
West 1th
10th 3treet
3tation
union Lepot
3tation
xanded Ground-Level Retall
and Nelghborhood 5ervlces
Bruce vento Nature
5anctuary
Rlverfront Uses
mloyment Cluster
Rlce Park ntertalnment
blstrlct
Lowertown
New Actlve Recreatlon
blamond Products
Redeveloment
5lte
Flgure 2.14 lramework of Land use Lireotions.
Central
3tation
4th and Cedar
Redeveloment
5lte
22
Bullt Form
2.3
5trengthen the Character of
the Urban Renewal Rlstorlc blstrlct
ln the urban Renewal Pistorio Listriot, smaller toorplate
buildings sit atop two- and three-story oommeroial
podiums oonneoted by skyways. 1hough laoking some
of the more traditional oharm of Lowertown, the urban
Renewal Pistorio Listriot is nonetheless unique in the
oontext of the downtown. New development here
should strive to represent the oreativity and brave
arohiteoture embodied in the spirit of the buildings at
a soale and intensity of use appropriate for the oore
of the oity.
LR1 here will plaoe a new emphasis on street-
related aotivity. 1his should be supported by new
developments and the appropriate renovation of
existing buildings with usable street-level spaoes
and strengthened oonneotions between skyway and
street. 1his is partioularly important in and around
the Central 3tation Mobility Lnhanoement Area,
where oonneotions to LR1 and bus transfer points are
desired.
Preserve the Unlque Character
of Lowertown
1he Lowertown Peritage Preservation Listriot is
a traditional 1800's briok warehouse distriot with
generous toor heights, large toorplates, and building
footprints that oover the entire blook. 1he on-going
stewardship and revitalization of Lowertown is one of
downtown 3aint Paul's greatest suooess stories. 1he
large toorplate industrial buildings have demonstrated
surprising resilienoe to ohange, and oontinue to be
adapted for a variety of new uses.
As the neighborhood oontinues to evolve, and
reinvestment potential is enhanoed by LR1, there should
be great emphasis on preserving the unique oharaoter
and quality of development that has promoted the
area's oontinued suooess. 1his inoludes a texible range
of spaoes, oapable of aooommodating a healthy mix
of residential, oultural, and oommeroial aotivities. 1he
direotions within this Plan, together with the existing
texible zoning parameters, should enable the sensitive
evolution of this area as LR1 improves aooessibility of
Lowertown for residents, workers and visitors.
Flgure 2.15 New buildings should reinforoe the existing warehouse
oharaoter of Lowertown, partioularly on lower levels. upper levels
may introduoe more oontemporary features and materials.
Flgure 2.16 1he urban Renewal Pistorio Listriot will oontinue to
offer the highest density of uses within a distinot, multi-storied
environment.
Lowntown 3aint Paul is a highly attraotive plaoe.
with a few notable exoeptions, the oore of 3aint
Paul avoided the grand redevelopment patterns
that dramatioally altered the historio fabrio and
tne-grained struoture of many Amerioan oity oores
in the 1950's and 60's. 1he result is a relatively
intaot oolleotion of outstanding historio buildings
throughout the downtown. ln partioular, the historio
fabrio in Lowertown oreates a distinot urban form
in terms of street width, blook length, and historio
warehouse arohiteoture. Colleotively, these buildings
provide a human soale and detnition to downtown's
strong network of streets and open spaoes.
while 3aint Paul has a strong inventory of historio
buildings, trends in building design and ohanges in
grade have resulted in inaotive uses on the ground
toors of otherwise attraotive buildings. ln a number
of plaoes, underutilized or vaoant properties oreate
the potential for new development that oan both
support and benett from investment in transit.
1he introduotion of LR1 and inoreased emphasis
on street-level aotivity that oome with it oreate an
opportunity to rethink how buildings meet the street
and oapitalize on new development opportunities
along the Corridor.
1he following Lireotions desoribe the potential of
LR1 investment to reaotivate the street, strengthen
the oharaoter of downtown, and oapitalize on the
real-estate potential of downtown's distinot living
and working environments.

Llnk the Central 5tatlon Block
to lts 5urroundlngs
1he Central 3tation blook represents an unparalleled
opportunity for new development in the heart of
downtown. 3ituated atop the new Central 3tation, at the
interseotion of over 15 bus routes, the redevelopment
of this blook represents a strategio opportunity to
integrate new development with the historio Athletio
Club building, and oonneot with both bus and LR1.
As demonstrated in the &HQWUDO&RUULGRU'HYHORSPHQW
6WUDWHJ\, development of the Athletio Club blook oould
take on a variety of oontgurations - on either side of
the station or as part of an integrated station struoture
bridging the LR1. 1o suooeed, however, the development
of the site will require the aooommodation of a oarefully
balanoed program of aotivities. 1he integration of
an LR1 station and new skyway oonneotions, both
horizontally through the building and between the
skyway and ground, will require oareful ooordination
between City staff and prospeotive developers.
As a strategio opportunity with signitoant implioations,
Flgure 2.18 Central 3tation (above left) represents an unparalleled opportunity for new development atop LR1, inoluding integrating bus and
LR1 operations, and oompleting a series of key skyway linkages (above right).

suooessful redevelopment of the blook will require a
proaotive publio seotor role, inoluding site assembly
and the preparation of a detailed Request for Proposals
from potential development partners.
As part of the 3eotion 106 prooess for the Central
Corridor projeot, a Programmatio Agreement (PA)
among the lederal 1ransit Administration, Metropolitan
Counoil, Minnesota 3tate Pistorio Preservation 0ftoe
and Advisory Counoil on Pistorio Preservation was
signed. As mitigation for the demolition of the Midwest
lederal Building, required to make way for the LR1
station, the PA requires the Metropolitan Counoil to
develop design guidelines for future development
of the blook, oonsistent with the 6HFUHWDU\ RI WKH
,QWHULRUV 6WDQGDUGV IRU $UFKDHRORJ\ DQG +LVWRULF
3UHVHUYDWLRQ 1he Metropolitan Counoil will work with
the City of 3aint Paul, 3aint Paul Peritage Preservation
Commission, and 3tate Pistorio Preservation 0ftoe to
prepare the guidelines. 0noe these guidelines are
approved, they will be adopted as an amendment to
the 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ
5trengthen the xlstlng Block
and Bulldlng Pattern
1he existing tne-grain pattern of streets and blooks
is one of the detning oharaoteristios of downtown. As
opportunities for intll development emerge and larger
redevelopment sites oome forward, new development
should reinforoe and re-establish this existing pattern
through extensions of the street grid and plaoement of
new buildings that detne the streets. 1his inoreased
sensitivity to the way buildings relate to the street will
enhanoe the pedestrian environment, thus oreating
more walkable streets and improving the walk to and
from LR1 stations.
0ne of the best opportunities for the re-establishment
of the blook and building pattern remains with the
potential redevelopment of the Liamond Produots
property. New development here should extend 5th
3treet east to Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary and
replioate the pattern of north-south streets to promote
a pedestrian soale and walkability.
Flgure 2.11 New intll development should reinforoe the existing
blook and building pattern.
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
S
T
.
W
A

S
T
.
S
T
S
T
E
S
T
.
SS
B
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
B
L
E
Y
A
D
Y
S
T
A
D
W
A
Y
S
A
C
T
.
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
P
N
E
P
N
E
P
N
E
24
Flgure 2.19 1he oontrast between the existing oondition (top) and illustration (bottom) on Minnesota 3treet between 4th and 5th streets
demonstrates the dramatio improvement numerous small initiatives oan make over a longer period of building reinvestment and
streetsoaping.
26
lmrove Bulldlng Frontages
Between LR1 and Kellogg Mall Park
with LR1 bringing new aotivity into the heart of the oity,
the role of Kellogg Mall Park as one of the largest open
spaoes in downtown beoomes inoreasingly important.
3ituated within a minute's walk of the Central 3tation,
Kellogg Mall Park and the route down 2nd 3treet
represents one of the easiest ways for residents and
visitors to view or gain aooess to the river.
ln order to enhanoe the walk from LR1 and enoourage
greater levels of pedestrian aotivity, new buildings
should aotively front the north side of Kellogg Boulevard
and the prinoipal routes of Cedar and Minnesota
streets that lead to the park. Renovations to existing
buildings should seek to enhanoe the street oondition
with new windows and openings faoing the street.
Flgure 2.20 Kellogg Mall Park, within a minute walk from LR1,
oreates a remarkable open spaoe vista looking out to the Mississippi
River.
5tatlon
Area

Actlvate the Ground Floor of
Bulldlngs
Flgure 2.21 1he areas in red show where effort should be made to
aotivate the ground toors of buildings.
S E V E N T H
M A L L
T.
L
F T H S T.
W
A S H N G
T O
N ST.
M
A R K E T ST.
F O U R T H ST.
PRNCE ST
K E L L O G G
2nd ST.
S T. P E T E R ST.
F F T H ST.
S X T H ST.
S X T H ST.
M N N E S O T A ST.
W
A B A S H A ST.
S T.
T W E L F T H
B U S
A
X C H A N G E ST.
S
T. P E T E R
B R O A D W
A Y ST.
W
A L L ST.
P N E
S E V E N T H ST.
S E V E N T H PL.
E G H T H ST.
C E D A R
N N T H ST.
T W E L F T
ST.
S T.
T E N T H ST.
E L E V E N T H ST.
ST.
K E L L O G G BLVD.
C E D A R ST.
P L.
S B L E Y ST.
T E M P E R A N C E
W A C O U T A
W
A C O U T A ST.
S B L E Y ST.
S B L E Y ST.
J A C K S O N ST.
M N N E S O T A ST.
J A C K S O N ST.
R O B E R T ST.
R O B E R T ST.
existing and planned transit stations so that they may
doubly funotion as plaoes to wait for a train or bus.
Along the Corridor, efforts should be made to engage
building owners to establish oommeroial and retail
spaoe at sidewalk level and to inoorporate appropriate
exterior building materials to distinguish a strong base
level or podium at the base of buildings. 1his oould
be oomplemented where feasible by designating
adjaoent sidewalk spaoe for the display and sale of
goods, exhibition of art, or as outdoor seating areas
for oafes and restaurants.
0ther opportunities for aotivating the ground toor of
buildings inolude 5th and 6th 3treets between Rioe Park
and Mears Park, and the plazas of mid-oentury buildings.
lifth and 6th streets will form important pedestrian
oonneotions west from the Central 3tation area to the
existing oluster of oultural and entertainment uses. 1he
plazas of suoh mid-oentury buildings as Kellogg 3quare,
lederal Building, and Allianoe Bank Center represent
exoellent opportunities for aotive publio spaoe.
1he dominant role of the skyway in aooommodating
downtown retail and servioes has led to a reduoed market
for these uses at grade. 1he introduotion of LR1 and
oorresponding emphasis on street-related aotivity oreates
an important opportunity to reoontgure and reaotivate
the ground toors of buildings in downtown. 3inoe the
majority of riders will be walking or oyoling to LR1, oreating
aotive streets is not only about oreating new businesses,
but enhanoing the experienoe of pedestrians and transit
users. As suoh, the need for supporting street-level aotivity
is most aoute at stations in and around the Mobility
Lnhanoement Areas.
A key strategy to aotivate the ground will be to strengthen
the relationship between the skyway and street. 1his oan
be aohieved by enhanoing the visibility of existing skyway
oonneotions with improved glazing and signage. More
oritioal, however, will be to orient skyway oonneotions to
Flgure 2.23 lramework of Built lorm Lireotions
A

D
R

O
A A
A
Y

Y
E
T
T

E

R
Y
R
L
A

F
A AA
h ST.
B L V D.
B L V D
B L V D
S T SSS T S TTTT 5th 5555tth h 5th 5 hhh S T. S T SSS T T S T TTTTTTTT
W
A

S

H

N

G

T

O

N

S
T
W
A

S

H

N
G
T
O
N
W
A

S

H

N
G
T
O
N
A
S
H
N
G
A
S
A
S
T
.
A
R
D
L L O G G
K E L L O G G
L L O G G
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
S S
T
22
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
S
T
.
2
n
d
S
T
2
S
T
.
T
.
S
T
. P

P
E
T
E
R
S
T
55
th
S
h
S
T
.
T
5
th
S
T
.
T
.
4
th
S
T
4
th
S
T
.
6
th
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
6
th
S
T
.
6
MMMMMMMM
N
MMMMMMMM
O
T
A
S
T
.
N
N
E
S
E
S
O
T
S
T
S
T
S
TT
S
TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
TT
S
T
S
T
S
TT
S
T
.
SS
WWWW
SSSSSSS
W
S
T
AAAAAA
B
AA
SSSSSSSS
H
A

H
A

AAAAA
W
A
B
W
A
B
A
W
A
B
W
A
B
A
W
A
B
W
A
B
W
A
B
W
A
B
W
A
B
W
A
B
W
A
B
A
W
A
B
W
A
W
A A
A
S
A
S
A
S
A
SS
A
S
AA
S
A
S

A
S

A
S
A
S
A
S

AA
S
AA
S
H
A

H
A

H
A

H
A
H
A

H
A
H
A
H
A
H
A

H
A
H
A
H
A
H
A
H
A AA
SS
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
WWW
A
W
A
WW
A
WWWWW
A
WWW
A
W
A
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
H
A
S
T
.
1
4
th
SS
T
.
U
S
C
O
L
U
M
B
U
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
E
A
S
T
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
P
A
R
K
AA
V
E
.
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
AAAAA
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
B
R
O
A
D
Y
S
T
.
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
D DD
A
D
WWWWWW
A
Y
WWWWWWW
S
D
W
E
P
N
E
P
N
E
TT
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
t
7
th
P
L
.
hhh
PP
L
P
L
P
L
C

E

D
C
E
C
E
C

E
C
E
C
E
C
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
A A

R
A
R
A
R
S
9
th h
S
T
.
1
2
th
S
T
.
T
.
TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
R
O
A
D
W
A
h h
S
T
.
1
0
thh
1
0
S
T
S
T
.
1
1
th
S
T
.
1
th
B
A
L
S
A
M
B
A
L
S
A
CC
E
D
A
R

R
S
T
.
S
S
B
L
E
Y
S S
S
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B
L
E
L
E
Y
S
T
S
T
S
T T
.
T
.
T
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
E
E
M
E
P
E
R
A
N
E
M
P
N
C
E
W
A
C
O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O
U
T
A
W
A
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
.
C
O
U
T
A
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
TT
.
TT
S
B
L
E
Y
S
S
B
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
S
T
.
S
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
S
T
.
M
N
N
E
S
O
T
N
N
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
R
O

O
B
E
R
T
T

B
T

R

O
U
T

R
O

O

K

B

L

V
T

B
T
R

O

U
T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L

V

D
O

K

B

L

V

D

BB
R
O
T
R

O

U
T
R

O

U
T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L

V

D
- 9
4
- 9
4
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
4th and Cedar
Redeveloment 5lte
Wacouta 5treet
Parklng Lots
Jackson
Parklng
Ram
blamond
Products 5lte
4th 5treet
Parklng Ram
1P1 Parklng
Ram
Lowertown
Urban Renewal
Rlstorlc blstrlct
10th 3treet
3tation
4th & Cedar
3tation
union Lepot
3tation
Actlvatlng the Ground Floor of
Bulldlngs
Llsted or llglble for Natlonal
Reglster of Rlstorlc Places
lmrovlng the Walk to
Kellogg Park
Redeveloment 5ltes
Urban Renewal Rlstorlc
blstrlct
Lowertown Rerltage
Preservatlon blstrlct
Flgure 2.22 lramework of Built lorm Lireotions.
28
Publlc Realm
2.4
Create Urban Rooms at
5tatlon Areas and 5eclal Places
1he LR1 stations and speoial plaoes should evolve as the
oolleotive hearts of an enhanoed downtown. By building
on the suooessful experienoes of plaoes suoh as Rioe
Park and the larmers' Market, targeted publio realm
improvements at station areas and speoial plaoes have
the potential to rapidly ohange the image of downtown for
the thousands of people who oome via LR1 eaoh day. lor
example, the Children's Play 3paoe at 4th/3ibley, aoross
from union Lepot, is a valued amenity that helps make
downtown a diverse, family-friendly neighborhood.
lmprovements in these areas should foous on the oreation
of high-quality publio spaoes oapable of integrating the
needs of a wide range of users and aooommodating
pedestrians, oyolists, transit, and vehioular movement.
As in Rioe Park, the suooess of these improvements will
be dependent on their ability to oreate an urban room
that is texible and oapable of aooommodating a range of
oivio aotivities, yet is distinot in feel and oharaoter.
nrlch 5treets 1hrough
lnvestment ln LR1
1he insertion of LR1 through the heart of downtown
represents an immediate opportunity to enhanoe the
streets and spaoes along its route. working olosely
with the Central Corridor Projeot 0ftoe, an opportunity
exists to establish a oonsistent streetsoaping palette for
the LR1 zone to distinguish this Corridor in downtown.
Lmphasis should be on the oareful integration of LR1 in
a way that oelebrates the distinot oulture and oharaoter
areas and seamlessly weaves transit through the oore.
0iven the restrioted right-of-way, it will be important
to minimize streetsoape olutter on the sidewalk by
oonsolidating infrastruoture where possible and
enforoing restriotions on the use and plaoement of
signage. where street planting is not possible, oreating
an inviting, green, and people-friendly oorridor will
depend on urban greening teohniques, suoh as hanging
baskets or green living" walls.
Flgure 2.23 1he station areas provide an opportunity to build on
3aint Paul's legaoy of oreating great urban rooms.
Flgure 2.24 1he insertion of LR1 oreates an opportunity to enhanoe
the streetsoape along 4th and Cedar streets.
O
S E P H' S
O
S E P H'
O
S E P H'
T. S T.
S X T H
W E E S T T H F F T H S T S T. S TT S
W
A S H
N
G
T O
N
ST
W
A S H
N
G
T
O
N
W
A S H
N
G
T
O
N
A
S
H
N
G
A
S
A
S
T.
S H E P A R D
E P A
FF O U R T H
T. ST T.
ST
L L O G G
2n 2nd
2nd
S ST
2nd
2nd
2nd nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
ST.
2nd
ST
2
S T. P E T E R ST.
S
T. P E T E R ST
H
ST.
T H
F F T
M
O
T A ST.
N N E
N
E S O
ST.
S
W
ST
W
A B A S H A S
W
A
W
A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
S T. C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
P A R K
P A R K
P A R K
AA V E.
F F
B R O A D W
A Y Y
ST.
Y
A D W
A Y
S
Y
E
P N E
P N E
E N T
E
S
E N
S E V E
.
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T E
D
EE
CCC
D
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
DDD
A
DD
A R
A
R
A
R
N T
N N T H ST. ST
T W W E L F T H
T. TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
N T N T H ST.
T E N N
T E
ST
T E N T H H ST.
T E
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
CC E D A R R
ST.
S
E
Y S S
SS
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B L E L E
Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
T E M
P E R A N C E
E M
E
P
E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W
A C O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O U T A
W
A C O U T A ST.
C
O U T A ST
ST.
ST ST
S B L E Y S
S
B
L E
Y
S
B L E Y
S B L E Y ST.
S
J A C K S O N ST.
A
C K
N
ST.
K S O N
M
N N E S O T A ST.
M
N
N E S O T
N N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
O
B
E R T
R
O O
N
R O O
B
O
S E P H' S
O
S E P H'
O
S E P H'
T. S T.
S X T H
W EE S T T H F F T H S T S T. S T S
W
A S H
N
G
T O
N
ST
W
A S H
N
G
T
O
N
W
A S H
N
G
T
O
N
A
S
H
N
G
A
S
A
S
T.
S H E P A R D
E P A
FF O U R T H ST T. ST T. ST
L L O G G
2n 2nd
2nd
S ST
2nd
2nd
2nd nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
ST.
2nd
ST
2
S T. P E T E R ST.
S
T. P E T E R ST
H
ST.
T H
F F T
M
O
T A
N N E
N
E S O
A ST.
ST.
S
W
ST
W
A B A S H A S
W
A
W
A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
S T. C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
P A R K
P A R K
P A R K
AA V E.
F F
B R O A D W
A Y ST.
A D W
A Y S
E
P N E
P N E
E N T
E
S
E N
S E V E
.
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T E
D
EE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
C
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
AA R
A
R
A
R
N T
N N T H ST. ST
T WW E L F T H
T. TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
N T N T H ST.
T E NN
T E
ST
T E N T H H ST.
T E
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
CC E D A R R
ST.
S
E
Y S S
E
Y
SS
EEE
SS
B LL E
Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
EE
T E E M
P
E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W
A C O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O U T A
W
A C O U T A ST.
C
O U T A ST
ST.
ST ST
S B L E Y S
S
B
L E
Y
S
B L E Y
S B L E Y ST.
S
J A C K S O N ST.
A
C K
N
ST.
K S O N
O
T
A ST.
N
N E S O T
M M
N N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
J A C K S O N ST ST ST ST R O O
B E R T
lnvestment in the oreation of a oonsistent and high-
quality publio realm will help to attraot new private
investment and establish exoellenoe in arohiteotural,
site, and open-spaoe design for new uses drawn to
the downtown oore over time. lt will also oontribute
to a positive experienoe for transit users.
while plaoes suoh as Rioe Park and Mears
Park demonstrate 3aint Paul's ability to oraft
beautiful streets and open spaoes, other parts of
downtown leave muoh to be desired. ln many areas,
overemphasis on aooommodating the automobile
has resulted in wide streets, broken sidewalks, and
overall poor pedestrian oonditions.
As LR1 delivers more people into downtown's
streets and open spaoes, a high-quality publio realm
oapable of attraoting and supporting new levels of
aotivity will be inoreasingly important. At station
areas and along the Corridor, the publio realm will
aot not only as a gathering plaoe and staging ground
for new aotivities but will provide an important link
between the surrounding oity and LR1.
1he following Publio Realm Lireotions provide
guidanoe for priority investments, the expansion of
the oity's urban rooms and speoial plaoes, and the
gradual enhanoement of downtown streets.

Flgure 2.26 An inoremental program of streetsoape improvements
that link 4th, 5th, and 6th in oonjunotion with LR1 enhanoements
will help expand existing speoial plaoes to oreate a pedestrian-
friendly downtown over time.
An inoremental program of streetsoape improvements
should be integrated into infrastruoture planning and
oapital programs to ensure that routine items suoh as
road or utility repairs result in the gradual upgrading
of street materials in these key looations over time.
1hese improvements should be ooordinated to ensure
that they support new opportunities for the oreation
of aotive uses on the ground level of buildings, and
oould be oomplemented with a program of mandatory
streetsoaping for all new or redeveloped sites in the
downtown.
where publio funds are available, a high priority should
be plaoed on those streets (suoh as 5th, 6th, or 3ibley)
that lead from station areas to key destinations within
downtown and along the riverfront.
Llnk Urban Rooms and Places
0ne Rung at a 1lme
Lowntown 3aint Paul possesses a largely intaot grid
of streets and pedestrian-soaled blooks that make the
oity easy to navigate on foot. while the struoture of
this grid provides good oonneotivity and multiple route
options for pedestrians, the experienoe of moving
through or oooupying these routes is less satisfying.
wide streets oapable of aooommodating (in some
oases) up to tve lanes of trafto oreate large orossing
distanoes, and leave sidewalks feeling dwarfed by
oomparison.
1o oomplement the reoonstruotion of the Corridor
and priority publio realm improvements at station
areas, a strategy should be put in plaoe to support the
greening and beautitoation of downtown streets over
time. Lmanating east from Rioe Park and west from
the larmers' Market, a systematio program of gradual
street improvements has the ability to radioally ohange
the oharaoter of downtown to oreate an enjoyable
network of green pedestrian streets.
Flgure 2.25 0pportunities to improve the publio realm along 4th and Cedar streets in oonjunotion with LR1 are limited due to the narrow right-
of-way within whioh the train and assooiated hardware must tt. ln partioular, the frequenoy of vaults and areaways under sidewalks, and the
proximity of LR1 to the ourb signitoantly limit possible looations for street trees. ln response, publio realm plantings will follow a pattern of
urban gardens and urban forests along 4th and Cedar. urban gardens (inoluding large potted plants, hanging baskets and window boxes) will
be planted along the street faoes between stations. urban forests (i.e. trees) will be oonoentrated at stations.
5te 1: Prearlng for LR1 (lmrovlng 5th and 6th)
5te 2: Llnklng 5eclal Places 1hrough lncremental
5treetscae lmrovements
5te 3: Comletlng an nhanced 5treet Network
0ver 1lme
30
Green the Rlng of Park 5treets
ln addition to oreating a pedestrian-friendly oirouit,
oonneoting downtown's major neighborhood parks
and the riverfront by a ring of Park 3treets will
extend the oharaoter and quality of the unique open
spaoes they oonneot. As green oorridors ringing the
downtown, the intent with these streets over time is to
develop a lush network of boulevard streets oapable of
providing a delightful, shaded walk on a hot summer's
day. 1o this end, an ambitious program of streetsoape
enhanoements, sustainable infrastruoture projeots,
publio art expressions and street tree planting should
be undertaken to oreate oomplete streets.
Connect to the Rlverfront
1hough geographioally looated adjaoent to the
Mississippi River, physioal barriers oreated by ohanges
in elevation, rail and road infrastruoture make it diftoult
for pedestrians and oyolists to aooess the riverfront.
where routes do exist, they are typioally through long
tunnels or down large tights of stairs that oan be
intimidating and unoomfortable for pedestrians.
A series of riverfront oonneotions leading from urban
rooms and station areas should be identited for
targeted publio realm enhanoements. ln partioular,
3ibley, 1aokson and 2nd streets provide direot
riverfront oonneotions today that oould be greatly
enhanoed as pathways to the riverfront. lmprovements
to the oharaoter and quality of viaduots oould inolude
streetsoape enhanoements, publio art, inoreased
lighting, and waytnding. ln addition, a vertioal
oonneotion between the Lafayette Bridge and 3am
Morgan Regional 1rail should be oonstruoted to bring
bioyolists down to the riverfront.
Flgure 2.21 Lnhanoing key riverfront oonneotions will enoourage
pedestrian movement between LR1 stations, downtown, and the
riverfront.
O
A D DD
L A
F A Y E T T E
L A F
L A
F
A Y E T T E R O
A Y E T T E R O
A
T. S T.
T H F F T H SSSS TT. TT
N G
T O
N ST
T
O
N
H
N
G
NN
T.
W
A S H
W
A
W
AA
S
H
A
S
A
S
HH
S H E P A R D
E P A
FF O U R T H ST. TT. ST ST ST SST ST
L L O G G
2n 2nd
2nd
S ST
2nd
2nd
2nd nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
ST.
2nd
ST
2
S T. P E T E R ST.
S
T. P E T E R ST
H
ST.
T H
F F T
M
O
T A
N N E
N
E S O T A ST.
T A
ST.
S
W
ST
W
A B A S H A S
W
A
ST
A
ST.
S T.
U S
U M B U
F F T H
K E L L O G G
B R O A D W
A Y
A D W
A Y Y
ST.
S
YY
U T B R O
O
K
E
P N E
P N E
E N T H ST.
E
S
E N
S E V E
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T E
D
EE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
C
RRR
D
A
D
A
D
A A R
A
R
A
R
N T
N N T H ST. ST
T W W E
T. TT
S
T
S
T
S
T
N T N T H ST.
T E N N
T E
ST ST.
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
CC E D A R RRRRR
ST.
S
E
Y S S
SS
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B L E L E
Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
T E M P E R A N C E
E M
E
P
E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W
A C O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O U T A
W
A C O U T A ST.
C
O U T A ST
ST.
ST ST
S B L E Y S
S
B
L E
Y
S
B L E Y
B L E
T.
S B
S
B
J A C K S O N ST.
A
C K
N
ST.
K S O N
M N N E S O T A ST.
M N
N E S O T
N N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
O
B
E R T
R
O O
N
R O O
B
Flgure 2.28 A ring of Park 3treets will help oreate green street
oonneotions that link destinations and neighborhoods.
Flgure 2.29 Publio art, suoh as this pieoe embedded into the side
of a parking ramp, will oontinue to make an important oontribution
to the livability of downtown.
S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V
S E V E N E N E N E N E N
E N TT H T H T H T H T H
NN
HHH T H HHHHH
S E V E V E V E V
S E V E V EMA L A L A L LLL L L L
M A M A M A M
J O S E P H' S
J O S E P H'
J O S E P H'
L A N E
A N E
A N E
L A F
T. S T.
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
K E L L O G G
O L D O L O L L D L D DDDDD L D S X T H
S H E P A R D
E P A
O U
T. ST T. ST
PRNCE ST
L L O G G
2n 2nd
2nd
S ST
2nd
2nd
2nd nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
ST.
2nd
ST
2
H ST.
T H
F F T
X T H ST.
S X X T H
XX
ST.
S
W
ST
W A B A S H A S
W
A
W A B A S H A ST.
H A ST.
T W E L F T H
T W E L F T
C
U S
C O L U M B U
R
C E D A R
C
E A S T
C E N T R A L
P A R K
AA V E.
E
S
E
C H A
M
A
N
M
A N
W E S T N N T H
S T.
TT J
S E V E N T H
F F T H
B R O A D W A Y ST.
A D W A Y S
E
P N E
P N E
E N T
E
S
E N
S E V E
.
T H ST.
.
N T H PL. LL
S E V E N T
D
C
E
C
D A A R
C E D
C
E
C
D
A R
A R
EEE
CCCC
E
C
E
C
E
RRR
D
A
D
A
D A A
R
A
R
A
R
T H
T W W E L F T H
T.
ST.
ST.
ST.
SSS
S T.
S T
N T N T H ST.
T E N N
T E
ST
T E N T H H ST.
T E
E L E V E N T H ST.
V
KKKK E L L O G G
BLVD.
G BL
CC E D A R R
L P L P L P L.
P L PP
E Y S S
E Y
SS
EEE
SS B L L E Y
ST.
ST.
ST.
EE
T EE M
P E R A N
E
M
P
N C E
W A C O
W A
W A
WWW
O U T A
A
ST
CC
O
ST.
ST ST
BBB
S B L E Y ST.
S
J A C K S O N ST.
A C K
N
ST.
K S O N
T A
N
N E
N
J A C K S O N ST.
J A C K S O N ST
B E
ST.
C
O U T A S
C
O
ST.
ST ST S B
S S B
T.
W A C C CC
H ST. ST
H
N T
N N T H T H
T. T.
T E
R O O
BBB E R T ST
B E
ST
O
T A
N
E S O T T A
N
E
A ST.
A
N
N
MM N N
N
NN
ST. S
E X C H
E
C H
EE
H A N G E
N G E EE
H A
U R T H ST
FF O U
nrlch bowntown wlth Publlc
Art
with the reoent adoption of a new publio art ordinanoe,
the City of 3aint Paul has made olear its belief that
publio art strengthens publio plaoes, and enhanoes and
promotes 3aint Paul's identity as a livable and oreative
oity. 1he ordinanoe enoourages the engagement of
artists in shaping the form and experienoe of the oity
through partioipation in planning and in the design of
publio buildings, open spaoes and infrastruoture.
1he establishment of 4th 3treet as the 3aint Paul Artway
will play an important role in promoting Lowertown as both
a vibrant artistio and oultural distriot and a linear, ourated
spaoe. By making storefront windows and the sides of
buildings available for art installations, projeotions, and
murals, business and property owners will be essential
partners in the produotion of ourated art exhibitions that
will attraot residents and visitors alike. 1he path outlined
by these rotating exhibits," whioh would extend from
Rioe Park to Broadway 3treet, will invite visitors to the
Rioe Park Lntertainment Listriot to explore on foot the
Lowertown neighborhood, and disoover and support the
looal artist oommunity.

L
A
F
A
Y

E
T
T

E

R

O
A

D
6th ST.
B L V D.
B L V D
B L V D
5th 5th 5th 5555tth h 5th 5 hhh S T. S T SSS T T S T TTTTTTTT
H

NN
S H E P A R D
E
P
A
L L O G G
K E L L O G G
L L O G G
2
n
2
n
d
2
n
d
S S
T
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
S
T
.
2
n
d
S
T
2
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
.
S
T
. P
E
T
E
R
S
T
55
th
S
5
th
5
thh
S
T
.
h
S
T
h
S
T
5
th
S
T
.
4
th
S
T
44
th
S
T
6
th
S
T
.
6
t
S
T
6
th
S
T
6
th
S
T
6
M
N
O
T
A
S
T
.
N
N
E
S
E
S
O
T
S
T
.
T
.
S
WW
S
T
S
T
W
A
B
A
S
H
A

S
A
B
A
S
H
A

W
A
B
W
A
W
W
A
B
A
S
H
A
S
T
.
H
A
S
T
.
C
U
S
C
O
L
U
M
B
U
R
C
E
D
A
R
C
A
R
K
A
R
K
A
R
K
AA
V
E
.
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
B
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y Y
S
T
.
Y
A
D
W
A
Y
S
Y
E
P
N
E
P
N
E
T T
S
T
7
th
S
T
7
t
7
th
P
L
.
P
L
hhh
PP
L
P
LL
P
L
E
D
EE
C
D
E
C
E
D
C

E
CCCC
E
C
D
A
D
A
DDD
A
DD
T
.
1
2
th
S
T
.
h h
S
T
.
S
T
1
0
thh
1
0
1
0
th
S
T
S
T
.
1
1
1
th
S
T
.
1
th
CC
E
D
A
R

R
S
T
.
S
S
B
L
E
Y
S SS
S
E
Y
E
S
E
S
B
L
E
L
E
Y
S
T
.
T
.
T
.
S
T
S
T
S
T
...
T
.
T
.
T
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
N
C
E E
T
E E
M
E
M
E
M
EE
P
E
R
A
N
E
R
A

EE
P
E
R
A
N
M
PP
N
C
E
N
C
E
N
C

W
A
C
O
WW
A
C
O
W
A
W
A
WWWW
O
U
T
A
O
U
T
A
S
T
SS
CC
O
C
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
B BB
B
L
E

T
.
T
A

A
N
N
E
NN
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
.
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
B
E
T

B
T

B

R
T

B
R
O

O

K

B

L

V
T

R

O

U
T
R
T
T
R

O

U
T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L

V

D
O

K

B

L

V

D
B
R R
O
R
T
R

O

U
T
R

O

U
T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L

V

D
- 9
4
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
S
T T
.
RRRR
D
AAAAA
D
A

R
A

R
A
R
AAA
R
T
.
TTT
S
T TTT
SSSS
T
S
T
SS
B
L
E
Y
S
B
L
E
Y
B
L
E
Y
T
.
T
S
TT
S
T S

B
S
C
O
U
T
A

S
A
O
U
T
A
A
S
T
.
W
A
C
W
A
CC
O
T
A
T
N
E
S
O
T
E
S
O
M M
N
N
N
N
S
9
th h
S
T
B
E
R
T
R
O

O
B
T
.
T
.
S
T
SS
B
L
E

S
BB
S
T
S
B
A
S
C
O O
A
CC
T
A
N
E
N
NN
S
T
B
E
B
T
.
T
E
W
A

S

H
W
A
W
A A
S
H
A
S
A
S
H H
4
th
S
T
.
4
th
S
T
N

G

T

O

T
O
N
G
4
th
S
T
4
th
4
th
S
4
th
S
4
th
SS
T
SS
T T
.
T
.
S
B
S
B
DD
A
Y

E
T
T

E

R

O
A
Connectlng to the
Rlverfront
10th 3treet
3tation
4th & Cedar
3tation
union Lepot
3tation
5alnt Paul Artway
Along 4th 5treet
Flgure 2.30 lramework of Publio Realm Lireotions
Nelghborhood Park 5treets
Rlverfront Connectlons
1he Corrldor
Urban Rooms
Llnklng Urban Rooms
32
Place-5eclc 0ortunltles
3.0
Bulldlng on 5uccess
1his ohapter demonstrates the applioation of the 3eotion 1wo Lireotions to speoito plaoes in downtown 3aint
Paul. 1he four Plaoe-3peoito 0pportunities represent strategio priorities with the greatest potential to oapture
the momentum and plaoe-making potential oreated by LR1.
1hough not all of these 0pportunities are neoessarily oreated by or solely dependent upon the oonstruotion of
LR1, eaoh is enhanoed by this signitoant investment, and is desoribed and illustrated here in the oontext of its
relationship to the future LR1 alignment, design, and oonstruotion.
34
3.1
Creatlng Posltlve 1ranslt nvlronments
1he potential for LR1 to affeot positive ohange is most
apparent at the Central and union Lepot stations. As
identited in the Lireotions outlined in 3eotion 2, these
plaoes have the potential to develop into outdoor
rooms" over time with a high-quality publio realm,
high levels of street-related aotivity, and the ability to
aooommodate a wide range of movement patterns.
Central 5tatlon
1he Central 3tation blook will arguably oonstitute the
most dramatio transformation of any planned LR1
station within 3aint Paul. 1he existing blook, a oentrally-
looated and underutilized redevelopment paroel, will
be biseoted by the LR1 traok running diagonally aoross
the site. 1his unique blook oontguration affords an
opportunity to develop a landmark development atop
or on either side of the LR1 station, oreating unrivaled
aooess between a oommeroial and/or residential
development and this signitoant publio asset.
Key 5trategles
1) Redevelo the block on whlch the statlon
slts to be a landmark hlgh-denslty, mlxed use
develoment that will support the investment in
LR1.
2) 5trengthen connectlons between the bus and
LR1 statlon through the creatlon of a generous
east-west romenade along the south slde of
5th 5treet. A pedestrian link stretohing between
Cedar and Minnesota will oreate a direot and
generously proportioned oonneotion between the
two prinoipal bus stations in downtown and LR1.
1his will help to enhanoe waytnding and oreate
a foous for pedestrian amenities and faoilities
oatering to transit users.
3) lncororate lnternal translt-related waltlng
areas lnto the redeveloment of the Central
5tatlon block. 1he oreation of internal waiting
areas or shared oiroulation areas along 5th
3treet would help to enhanoe the experienoe for
transit users during oolder winter months, and
oreate an interfaoe between transit users and
new development on the Central 3tation blook.
ln partioular, an enolosed atrium running the
length of the blook along 5th 3treet would have
the ability to link the LR1 and bus stations to
LR1 5tatlons As 0utdoor Rooms
oreate an integrated station environment oapable
of supporting a range of retail uses and internal
pedestrian amenities.
4) Create a strong connectlon to the skyway
system. 1he redevelopment of the Central 3tation
blook represents an important opportunity to
strengthen oonneotions between the skyway
system and ground. A skyway oonneotion here,
linked to internal oiroulation and waiting areas
assooiated with the LR1 and bus stations, would
help support greater levels of street-related
aotivity and strengthen the relationship between
these two levels of oiroulation and transit servioe.
5) Create a new ubllc laza to act as a focus for
statlon-related actlvltles. 1he new plaza should
be oonoeived as the oommon ground between
the bus and LR1, and adjaoent businesses and
development. 1he design and oreation of this
new publioly-aooessible spaoe should oreate a
safe, green, vibrant, and inspiring plaoe. lt should
aooommodate a range of oomplementary aotivities
that will make the spaoe a ohoioe destination for
transit users, workers, visitors, and residents.
Flgure 3.1 1he existing oondition of the northern edge of the Central
3tation blook.
1he redeveloment of the Central 5tatlon block reresents a tremendous oortunlty to create a osltlve translt envlronment
that better connects bus and LR1 oeratlons. ln thls lllustratlon, a generous atrlum llnks the LR1 statlon wlth bus stos on
Cedar and Mlnnesota. lntegratlng modes of translt through the redeveloment of a block such as thls wlll hel break down
ercelved dlfferences between modes, encourage greater levels of street actlvlty, and create an actlve, safe envlronment for
translt users.
Flgure 3.2 A transformed 5th 3treet
edge with the new station integrated
into the redevelopment.
36
Unlon beot 5tatlon
LR1, in oonjunotion with planned oommuter and high-
speed train servioe based out of the historio union
Lepot, provides an opportunity to return the union
Lepot plaza to its former status as an important oivio
spaoe and gateway into 3aint Paul and the larger
1win Cities metropolitan area. LR1 will stop direotly
in front of the plaza on the south side of the street.
1his orientation provides direot pedestrian aooess
from the LR1 platform to the union Lepot plaza and
building. Lxtending the design language of the plaza
direotly to the platform has the potential to oreate a
distinotive urban room that integrates and oelebrates
oontemporary and historio elements of 3aint Paul.
Key 5trategles
1) Actlvely romote adjacent redeveloment sltes.
1here are four key sites adjaoent to union Lepot
with the potential to redevelop over time: the 4th
3treet parking ramp north of union Lepot, the two
waoouta 3treet parking lots on either side of 4th
3treet, and the Post 0ftoe.
1hese sites represent high-protle opportunities
for the oreation of new mixed-use developments
inoorporating residential, oultural, employment
and institutional uses that will aotivate the station
area and strengthen the physioal setting of union
Lepot.
2) Create a conslstent streetscalng language
for the statlon laza and adjacent streets that
can hel create a coherent urban room. 0ver
time, the plaza and the three streets that bound it
should read as a oonsistent singular urban spaoe,
the foreoourt to union Lepot.
3) 0tlmlze Unlon beot's role as an lmortant
translt hub through the lanned lntegratlon of
a wlde range of transort alternatlves. 1he
oonoourse and aftliated train deok of union
Lepot represent an unparalleled opportunity for
the aooommodation of a range of transportation
modes, inoluding looal and regional bus and train
servioe. Long-term planning for the station should
allow for this broad range of aotivities over time.
4) nsure that surroundlng bulldlngs lncororate
actlve uses at-grade and suort the hlgh level
of edestrlan actlvlty ln the area through the
rovlslon of nelghborhood retall and servlces.
1his initiative should be targeted to both existing
buildings and the design of future developments
on paroels adjaoent to union Lepot.
5) xand the role of the hlstorlc traln deck wlth
a green roof, green wall, raln garden or other
natural amenlty. while plantings should preserve
ample room for antioipated regional rail servioe,
they oan help improve the setting of the sites lining
the north side of Kellogg and the deok struoture by
providing an improved river valley vista. Also, the
potential exists here to demonstrate sustainable
praotioes suoh as stormwater re-use, biodiversity,
and inoreased tree oanopy. A greened train deok
would also enhanoe the experienoe of arriving in
3aint Paul by train.
Flgure 3.3 Creating an urban room" at union
Lepot.
1he redeveloment of sltes adjacent to Unlon beot ln thls lmage wlll create a conslstent wall of bulldlngs that
frames a new urban room ln front of Unlon beot. 1o the rear of the bulldlng, beneath the concourse, the traln
deck has been adated to accommodate new bus and reglonal rall servlce.
38
3.2
Relnforclng Lowertown
Lowertown is a speoial neighborhood in downtown -
one where new and revitalized historio buildings house
a growing arts- and oulture-based oommunity with a
strong residential and looal business base. Popular
destinations like the 3aint Paul larmers' Market and
events like the 3aint Paul Art Crawl bring visitors and
aotivity into the oore on weekends. 1he result is a
remarkably urban plaoe with an energy and unique
oreative vibe in the oity.
Lowertown is an important part of downtown 3aint
Paul's future and has been the foous of oritioal thought
and planning sinoe the late 1970's. Most reoently,
the Lowertown Redevelopment Corporation's 8UEDQ
9LOODJH 9LVLRQ, the 5HSRUW RI WKH 'LDPRQG 3URGXFWV
7DVN )RUFH, the +LVWRULF /RZHUWRZQ 6PDOO $UHD 3ODQ
and the 6DLQW 3DXO 'RZQWRZQ 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\
all herald the potential of this preoinot to evolve as a
vibrant and attraotive historio distriot that embodies
the spirit of downtown 3aint Paul's renaissanoe.
while the area has evolved signitoantly over the
past deoade, there is muoh potential for oontinued
investment. Last of Broadway, many underutilized sites
have left this edge of downtown poorly detned and
unresolved. 1o the south, the presenoe of signitoant
rail and roadway infrastruoture has resulted in poor
oonneotions to the riverfront.
ln addition to LR1, the eventual introduotion of higher-
order transit and inter-regional transit at Lowertown's
doorstep oreate oritioal opportunities to advanoe the
area as an arts, oultural, residential and employment
oluster. Lnhanoed mobility options, oombined with an
improved publio realm and streetsoape oonneotions,
will inorease reinvestment potential and pedestrian
aotivity into and throughout Lowertown.
ln thinking about the future of Lowertown, it is useful
to group strategies into three sub-areas:
Rlstorlc Lowertown (1aokson to Broadway),
Lowertown xtenslon (Broadway to the Lafayette
Bridge), and
Lowertown 1ransltlon (Lafayette Bridge to Bruoe
vento Nature 3anotuary).
ln the Rlstorlc Lowertown sub-area, strategies foous
on strengthening Lowertown's oharaoter as expressed
in its historio buildings, oonneoted street grid, urban
A Renewed vlslon and Urban 5tructure for a 1ranslt-5uortlve vlllage
1he 0ortunlty
soale and blook pattern, building soale and materials,
and the relationship of buildings to the street.
Redevelopment must be more delioate" in this area,
as development sites are small and a strong fabrio
already exists.
ln the Lowertown xtenslon sub-area, strategies
foous on guidanoe for redevelopment of the Liamond
Produots site, inoluding the 0Ml and a regional/
3aints ballpark. 1he redevelopment moves" in this
area oan be a bit bolder sinoe the sites are larger, the
task is to oomplete the urban edge of downtown in a
way that adapts new development to tt the historio
Lowertown pattern. Redevelopment must take best
advantage of this inoredible opportunity, yet respeot
the historio fabrio, street grid, and movement patterns
of Lowertown proper.
ln the Lowertown 1ransltlon sub-area, strategies
should foous on the transition from the highly urban
oharaoter of Lowertown to the very natural oharaoter
D
Y
E
T

T

E

R

O

A

D
A

D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
L

A

F

A

Y

E

T
A

D
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d

S
T
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
dd
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d
2
n
d

S
T
.
2
n
d

S
T
2
5
th
S
T
.
5
th
5
th
S
T
.
h
S
T
.
4
th
S
h
S
TT
4
th
4
th
S
T
.
S
4
th
S
T
.
4
th
S
T
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
YYYY
SS
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
SS
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
.......
R
B
R

O
B

R

O
B

R

O
B

R

O
B

R

O
B

R

O
B

R

O

A
D
A
D
AA
D

A
D
A
D
A
D

A
D
A
D

A

D
A
D
A
D

DD
A
D

D
W

A

Y
W

A

Y
WW

A

Y
W

A

Y
W

A

Y
W

A

Y
W

A

Y

SSS
W
A

Y
W
A

YY
W
A
Y
S
T
S
TT
S
T
B

R

O

A

D

W

A

Y

S
T
.
E
P

N

E
P

N

E
7
th
7
th
7
th
7
th
7
th
7
th
7
th
7
th
P
L
.
P
L
.
P
L
P
L
P
L
P
L
P
L
P
L
th th th th th th th th
777
th
P
L
E
Y

S S
SS
E
Y
E
S
E
S

B

L

E
L

E
Y
S
T
.
S
T
.
S
T
.
T
.
T
E

M

P

E

R

A

N

C

E
T

E E

M
E
E
P
E

R

A

N
E
M
P
N

C

E
W
A

C

O
W
A
W
A
WWW
O

U

T
A
W

A

C

O

U

T

A

S
T
.
C
O

U

T

A

S
T
S
T
.
S
T
S
T
S

B

L

E

Y

S
S

B
L
E
Y
S

B

L

E

Y
S

B

L

E

Y

S
T
.
S
B
T

B

R
B
R R
O

O

K

B

L

V
T

R

O
U

T
R
T
T
R

O

U

T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L

V

D
O

K

B

L

V

D
B

B

R
B
R R
O
R
T
R

O

U
T
R

O

U

T

B

R

O

O

K

B

L
V

D
Flgure 3.4 A Lowertown lramework.
Major Connectlons
Urban Rooms
5treetscae nhancements
Contlnuous Bulldlng Face
Actlve Frontages
Redeveloment 5ltes
Connectlon from Lafayette
Brldge to 5am Morgan 1rall
0
e
r
a
t
l
o
n
s

&

M
a
l
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

F
a
c
l
l
l
t
y
U
n
l
o
n

b
e
o
t
Rlstorlc
Lowertown
Lowertown
xtenslon
Lowertown
1ransltlon
Mlnor Connectlons
40
of the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary. Redevelopment
in this area is likely to be muoh less intense, espeoially
due to oonstraints imposed by proximity to Polman
lield, but must also transition to the Nature 3anotuary
in an environmentally-sensitive way.
Key 5trategles: Rlstorlc Lowertown
1) 5trengthen Lowertown as a unlque arts and
cultural dlstrlct.
a) Lxplore the idea and viability of a multi-disoiplinary,
oontemporary visual and performing arts oenter.
1he oenter would engage oommunities at all
soales - neighborhood, oity, region, state, and
beyond - in the aotive experienoe of diverse
oontemporary art forms.
b) Maintain and expand the diversity of art and
oultural offerings.
o) Continue to invest in the larmers' Market as
the fooal point of Lowertown.
Flgure 3.6 1he union Lepot LR1 3tation.
2) Malntaln and strengthen Lowertown as a dlverse
resldentlal communlty.
a) work with land owners and developers to
inoorporate uses that improve residential
amenities for residents. 1hese may inolude
looally-oriented retail and servioes, suoh as
oorner stores and dry oleaners.
b) Promote a family-friendly environment with
play areas and day oare faoilities for ohildren.
1he presenoe of families in the area will help
generate pedestrian trafto on sidewalks and in
publio parks during evenings and on weekends.
ln partioular, the Children's Play 3paoe on the
southwest oorner of 4th/3ibley, now 17 years
old, requires signitoant investment to relaoe
the rubber surfaoing, repair or replaoe the play
equipment, repaint the publio art on the wall,
and replaoe landsoaping.
o) Avoid displaoement of artists, and maintain
housing and oommeroial affordability, as
development and redevelopment ooour.
Flgure 3.5 1he existing oondition of union Lepot.
1he Unlon beot LR1 statlon and adjolnlng laza wlll rovlde a landmark gateway for vlsltors arrlvlng ln 5alnt Paul by LR1 or another mode of transortatlon.
42
Flgure 3.1 1he existing oondition of 4th 3treet east of union
Lepot.
of the value LR1 brings to this oentrally-
looated and aooessible site, and strengthen
the enolosure of this important historio plaza.
0ver time, this oivio spaoe will beoome onoe
again an important gateway into 3aint Paul.
1hese sites should inoorporate aotive uses at
grade.
5) lmrove the exerlence of movlng along the short
block between Unlon beot and the Farmers'
Market. 1he route along 4th 3treet will beoome
an inoreasingly important pedestrian street as
LR1 operations oommenoe, and as the Lowertown
oommunity oontinues to expand with new oultural,
residential, employment, and oommeroial uses.
1his stretoh of 4th 3treet should beoome a priority
projeot for a targeted streetsoaping program
aimed at promoting the suooessful integration of
pedestrians and transit. ln addition, enoouraging
the expansion of grade-related retail west towards
union Lepot will extend the draw and energy of the
Market so that one's market experienoe essentially
begins at the station. Luring speoial events, the
City should explore the potential for street vending
and additional artisan booths along 4th 3treet.
Flgure 3.8 4th 3treet to the larmers' Market.
3) Requlre new develoment ln Lowertown to be
symathetlc to the scale, materlals, masslng,
and helght of adjacent bulldlngs, artlcularly
hlstorlc warehouse bulldlngs that contrlbute
to the nelghborhood's attractlve qualltles.
while buildings should embraoe oontemporary
arohiteoture and be representative of their time,
they should be designed to be sensitive to their
oontext, inoluding the built form, soale, massing,
and faoade artioulation that oontribute to
Lowertown's distinot identity.
4) bevelo the Unlon beot 5tatlon to reect lts
role as a gateway to 5alnt Paul.
a) Lesign the union Lepot building, station and
lawn to oreate a front door not only for LR1 but
also for Lowertown. 1he front lawn should be
designed to oelebrate the signitoant heritage
of the site and also offer opportunities for
revolving art displays and installations that
signify the presenoe of the vibrant arts and
oultural oommunity living and working nearby.
b) Redevelop underutilized paroels adjaoent to
the union Lepot plaza to take better advantage
4th 5treet ln the future may evolve to lnclude an extended Farmers' and Artlsans Market where dlslay booths slll off sldewalks and out lnto streets durlng seclal
events.
44
6) Prohlblt skyway exanslon ln Lowertown.
Conoentrating pedestrian movement at ground
level will keep aotivity on the street and provide
needed foot trafto for Lowertown businesses.
Prohibiting visually disruptive skyway oonneotions
between buildings will also proteot the arohiteotural
integrity of historio buildings.
1) Malntaln and enhance the street grld.
1he street and blook pattern in Lowertown is a
detning feature of the neighborhood. Keeping
existing streets open is important not only to
maintain Lowertown's sense of plaoe and soale, but
also to aooommodate some inorease in vehioular
trafto that will oome with a major entertainment
faoility, and new neighborhood oommeroial and
residential aotivity. ln addition, enhanoing the
grid - by oonverting Prinoe 3treet to a oomplete
street," for example - will provide vehioular, bike,
and pedestrian oonneotions to the Bruoe vento
Nature 3anotuary.
Key 5trategles: Lowertown
xtenslon
8) beslgn the blamond Products slte to be a
comlementary nelghbor. Proposed alterations
to the former Liamond Produots warehouse and
property should be oonsidered in the oontext
of Lowertown's unique setting. 1he following
oonsiderations should be brought to bear in the
design of the 0Ml and the potential development
of a ballpark on the adjaoent northern half of the
site:
a) Lxplore opportunities to provide aotive street
frontage along Broadway between Prinoe and
6th 3treets and along Prinoe 3treet east of
Broadway. Approximately 8,000 square feet
have been reserved in the 0Ml along Broadway
for this purpose. 0n the northern half of the
site the City of 3aint Paul has determined
that a future ballpark - programmed for a
range of minor league baseball and publio
reoreational uses and events - represents
the best reuse of the non-0Ml portion of
the former Liamond Produots site. An aotive
street-level frontage should be explored for
the faoade of this proposed ballpark use. 1his
important interfaoe with Broadway 3treet and
the surrounding Lowertown oommunity oould
potentially inoorporate street-related retail,
oonoession and tioket stands, and/or other
uses oompatible with and oomplementary to
the ballpark, the adjaoent larmers' Market,
and the general vitality of surrounding street
life and aotivity.
b) Celebrate the terminus of 4th 3treet with an
arohiteoturally distinot portal or other feature
on the 0Ml that draws the eye to Lowertown
and enoourages the viewer to oontinue down
4th 3treet into Lowertown.
o) Lxplore opportunities for the oreation of a
green roof atop the 0Ml and a green living"
wall along Prinoe 3treet to help trap runoff
during storm events, oreate a green amenity,
and enhanoe views from adjaoent uses.
Flgure 3.9 1he oreation of a green living" wall on the 0Ml along
Prinoe 3treet would help to soften the edge of the faoility.
d) Redevelop underutilized paroels on the south
side of Prinoe 3treet to frame and strengthen
the street. 1hese building paroels lend
themselves well to intll mixed-use or residential
development that would support enhanoed
aotivity along Prinoe 3treet and provide a strong
east-west oonneotion between downtown and
the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary.
e) Allow for pedestrian oiroulation east through
the ballpark north of the 0Ml. 3ubjeot to
additional investigation, this oonneotion
may be provided through either a pedestrian
pathway as an extension of 5th 3treet east of
Broadway (i.e. between the proposed ballpark
site and the 0Ml site), or along the northern
edge of the proposed ballpark where it would
interseot with 1ohn 3treet and 4th 3treet
before oonneoting direotly to the Bruoe vento
Nature 3anotuary.
9) 5hould a reglonal,5alnts ballark faclllty rove
lnfeaslble for the northern half of the blamond
Products slte, deslgn new develoment to extend
the urban fabrlc, bullt form, and street grld of the
Lowertown urban vlllage.
Key 5trategles: Lowertown
1ransltlon
10) nhance connectlons east to the Bruce vento
Nature 5anctuary.
a) lmprove oonneotivity between downtown and
the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary with a
restored and extended street grid and enhanoed
pedestrian oonneotions. 1he oonversion of
Prinoe 3treet to a full publio street - designed
to aooommodate vehioles, pedestrians, and
bioyoles equally - will provide direot aooess
Flgure 3.10 A sensitive briok faade wrapping Coors lield in Lenver
helps to integrate the ball park into the surrounding warehouse
distriot.
Flgure 3.11 1he integration of an extensive green roof atop the
0Ml would help trap runoff during storm events.
Flgure 3.12 A pedestrian pathway adjaoent to Camden ards in
Baltimore helps to extend the oity's fabrio past the stadium and to
oreate an interesting environment for smaller vendors.
to the Nature 3anotuary and potential aotive
reoreation uses between Lowertown and the
3anotuary.
New oonneotions should inoorporate
pedestrian and oyoling infrastruoture with
signitoant landsoaping and tree planting.
3treetsoape strategies along these routes
should provide taotile and visual oonneotions
to the tremendous natural resouroes sitting
immediately east of Lowertown.
b) Lesign new uses east of the Lafayette Bridge
to be sustainable and green." lf a large part
of the area is needed for servioes anoillary
to the ballpark, ensure that these servioes
are provided in the most environmentally
sensitive manner. lurther, enoourage shared
use of faoilities, suoh as parking, and aotive or
passive reoreational uses.
46
3.3
Re-lmaglng 4th 5treet
1he introduotion of LR1 on 4th 3treet is an important
stage in this downtown street's evolution. Already an
important link between the Rioe Park Lntertainment
Listriot on the west end and the arts oommunity and
larmers' Market of Lowertown, the re-design of this
street through the introduotion of LR1 will help elevate
the protle of the street and the many businesses,
institutions and signitoant buildings along its length.
ln time, a walk on 4th" will beoome synonymous with
visiting and experienoing all that downtown 3aint Paul
has to offer.
1he reoonstruotion of the 4th 3treet right-of-way as
a oomponent of the LR1 oonstruotion represents an
opportunity to signitoantly enhanoe the oharaoter of
the street through new streetsoaping, the insertion of
vertioal greening and planters, and new opportunities
for publio art. 0ver time, the street will beoome a
pedestrian-friendly route with greater street-level
aotivity, permanent and rotating exhibitions of publio
art, oafes, and galleries.
0f the many aotivities and destinations that line the
street, LR1 stations at union Lepot and the Central
3tation blook will stand out as speoial plaoes of
enhanoed mobility and aotivity. 1hese areas will aot as
launohing points from whioh to set out for an evening
of dining and entertainment, attend a sporting event,
or meet friends for ooffee before partioipating in a
gallery tour. Pistorio buildings, brimming with aotivity
from new media, graphios, and oommunioations
trms, beoome the baokdrop for photographs taken
by tourists en route to tour the Bruoe vento Nature
3anotuary by bioyole.
Key 5trategles
1) Focus resources on the rovlslon of a hlgh-quallty
ubllc realm to comlement the hlstorlc settlng
and create a street that balances edestrlans,
vehlcles, and translt. 1he installation of attraotive
paving to olearly delineate pedestrian, vehiole,
and LR1 zones, and the provision of additional
pedestrian amenities suoh as waytnding signage
and street furniture, will help to enhanoe 4th
3treet as a pedestrian route and oreate a striking
impression for visitors arriving in 3aint Paul by
either LR1 or regional train.
2) xlore oortunltles to create a green and
anlmated streetscae through a varlety of
lantlng and landscalng medlums inoluding
sidewalk planters, hanging baskets, and street
trees wherever feasible. 0reen walls and other
vertioal landsoape elements will help to soften
blank walls and oreate a welooming pedestrian
environment.
1he 0ortunlty
3) Relghten the role of the arts communlty
by employing blank walls, skyways, and street
furnishings as oanvases for murals and other
forms of publio art expression.
4) Promote lnll and redeveloment sltes as
remler downtown mlxed-use redeveloment
oortunltles in keeping with the exoeptional
aooess and amenity of their looations. luture
buildings should exhibit a high degree of
transparenoy at the ground level with aotive retail,
oultural or servioe uses that have direot aooess
to and integration with the sidewalk. upper toors
should inoorporate generous toor-to-oeiling
heights, aooommodating a truly urban mix of
uses from residential to live-work to oftoe and/or
gallery spaoes.
5) Work wlth key stakeholders such as 4th
5treet buslnesses, bulldlng owners, the 5alnt
Paul Rerltage Preservatlon Commlsslon, and
Lowertown arts communlty to create and
romote 4th 5treet as an Artway - an ongoing
opportunity to explore and oelebrate the many
arts, oulture, and looal heritage stories of the
street.
1he 5alnt Paul Artway
Flgure 3.13 1he existing oondition along 4th 3treet.
A revltallzed 4th 5treet lncludes facade lmrovements, lmroved skyway connectlons, and a range of ubllc art exresslons
to create a more edestrlan-frlendly envlronment .
Land Use
Flgure 3.14 A revitalized 4th 3treet.
48
3.4
Gettlng Peole to the Rlverfront
Flgure 3.15 1he existing oondition of the 3ibley viaduot.
Lowntown's green edge," an open spaoe and river
park system oonsisting of the National 0reat River
Park, Parriet lsland Regional Park, and Bruoe vento
Nature 3anotuary, represents one of 3aint Paul's most
signitoant assets. Powever, poor existing oonneotions
resulting from rail infrastruoture, in oombination with
the bluffs south of Kellogg Mall Park, oreate natural
impediments to the frequenoy and ease of pedestrian
aooess between downtown and these areas. where
pedestrian viaduots are provided, they are poorly
lit and poorly maintained. 1heir infrequenoy of use
speaks to their peroeption as unsafe and unattraotive
environments.
1hough oonstruotion of the LR1 will not in and of
itself enhanoe oonneotions, the introduotion of LR1
servioe into downtown oreates an ideal opportunity
to re-examine and improve options for people moving
between LR1, downtown, and these valuable natural
resouroes. Lnhanoed oonneotivity is primarily a matter
of improving the experienoe for users along existing
oonneoting routes, in partioular 3ibley, 1aokson and
2nd streets. with improved oonneotions, downtown's
green edge" has the potential to leverage this
proximity to nature as an amenity that will attraot
employers, residents, and investors.
Key 5trategles
1) xlore otlons for lmrovlng exlstlng
edestrlan and blcycle vladuct connectlons
along 5lbley and Jackson. 1hese routes should be
more than oovered sidewalks, but instead evolve
as oelebrated and attraotive passages linking the
bustle of downtown with the beauty of the river.
Laoh should exhibit signitoantly improved lighting
treatments, deoorative paving materials, way-
tnding devioes, and artwork oapable of enlivening
the oonneotion.
2) lnltlate a rogram of regular malntenance to
enhanoe the upkeep of the passages and foster
an image of oleanliness and safety.
3) Promote Kellogg Mall Park as a ostcard
destlnatlon that offers key vistas to the adjaoent
river valley and a memorable view of the downtown
skyline.
1he 0ortunlty
4) lmrove 2nd 5treet as a rlverfront connectlon.
A targeted program of sidewalk enhanoement
and widening, improved lighting features, and
dedioated maintenanoe would strengthen this
direot link between Kellogg Mall Park and the
riverfront trail system.
5) xlore constructlon of a new north-south local
green street , 1rout Brook Boulevard, to connect
Unlverslty Avenue and the rlverfront. 1his would
improve aooess between downtown destinations,
neighborhoods, and the water, oreate an
aooessible new entryway to the river valley and
3am Morgan Regional 1rail, and expand the
riverfront pedestrian and oyoling system linking
riverfront destinations like the Bruoe vento Nature
3anotuary and the upper Landing urban village.
Land Use
A renewed rlverfront connectlon along 5lbley enllvens the vladuct through entertalnlng and whlmslcal art
lnstallatlons, whlle celebratlng the connectlon to the downtown's surroundlng natural features.
Flgure 3.16 A refreshed riverfront oonneotion
along 3ibley.
50
while the preoeding ohapters reoommend strategies speoito to a partioular issue or plaoe, the following ohapter
looks at the study area through a wider lens. 1he reoommendations and strategies that follow explore the
broader prooesses and partnerships by whioh downtown stakeholders will move the 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD
3ODQ forward, and begin to implement the Lireotions and 3trategies for Plaoe-3peoito 0pportunities desoribed
in earlier ohapters. 1hese inolude:
desoribing the issues to be addressed in a future Lowertown Master Plan,
understanding how the Clty of 5alnt Paul Zonlng 0rdlnance oan be tne-tuned to support the
reoommendations of the 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ,
outlining parameters and best possible outoomes in the planning and development of oomplex and strategio
redeveloment sltes,
pursuing designation of the 5alnt Paul Urban Renewal Rlstorlc blstrlct as both a looal and National Register
distriot, and
identifying key strateglc artnershls in order to maintain support for the plan, keep the LR1 and downtown
planning prooess inolusive and transparent, and realize tangible results.
Gettlng 1here
4.0
lmlementatlon and Partnershls
52
4.1
ln the oourse of developing the 'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ
$UHD 3ODQ, several Lowertown issues were identited
for subsequent, more detailed, exploration. using the
'RZQWRZQ 6WDWLRQ $UHD 3ODQ's broader vision as the
framework, these issues should be addressed in a
/RZHUWRZQ0DVWHU3ODQ. 1hey inolude:
more speoito site planning to ooordinate and
integrate the new development aotivity envisioned
for the Lowertown 1ransition area (between
Broadway and the Bruoe vento Nature 3anotuary),
inoluding a munioipal/3aints ballpark, a new
Lafayette Bridge, and the Central Corridor LR1
0Ml,
speoito housing needs and opportunities,
speoito aotivities and oomponents in the area
identited as aotive reoreation" between the
Lafayette Bridge and Bruoe vento Nature
3anotuary,
a Lowertown parking management plan,
Prearlng the Lowertown Master Plan
impaot of skyways on street aotivity and integrity
of historio buildings,
sustainability/"green" design,
strengthening the larmers' Market as a fooal
point for Lowertown,
further exploration, inoluding market feasibility
study, of a Lowertown Performing Arts Center,
further exploration of Broadway and Pine street
extensions to warner Road and the riverfront,
speoito aotions to strengthen the presenoe of
artists in Lowertown and their involvement in
publio art, neighborhood redevelopment, and
plaoe-making,
riverfront development opportunities adjaoent to
union Lepot, and
full utilization of union Lepot as a multi-modal
transportation hub and oommunity asset
lurther, the /RZHUWRZQ 0DVWHU 3ODQ should lay out
a detailed implementation strategy, inoluding key
partners and speoito aotivities. lt should be guided
by a oommunity-based task foroe representing
Lowertown's residential, oommeroial, entertainment,
arts and oultural oommunities.
4.2
As stated in the &HQWUDO&RUULGRU'HYHORSPHQW6WUDWHJ\
downtown 3aint Paul already has muoh of the physioal
and regulatory struoture in plaoe to support a high level
of publio transit and transit-oriented development.
1he following tne-tuning" amendments to the B4 and
B5 zones are reoommended to disoourage any further
proliferation of surfaoe and struotured parking uses,
and to assist in the oreation of animated ground-level
building frontages:
Prohlblt constructlon of new freestandlng, slngle-
use arklng structures and make surface arklng
lots a condltlonal use. lreestanding, single-use
parking struotures detraot from our experienoe of the
built environment and publio realm in downtown. New
surfaoe parking lots should require a oonditional use
permit so that they may be reviewed on a oase-by-oase
basis and oonsidered in the oontext of site, adjaoent
land use, oonsistenoy with the Comprehensive Plan,
eto.
Flne-1unlng the 5alnt Paul Zonlng 0rdlnance
Zone for anlmated ground-level bulldlng frontages.
Consistent with reoommendations of the &HQWUDO
&RUULGRU 'HYHORSPHQW 6WUDWHJ\, future design
standards for the underlying B4 and B5 zones should
help reinforoe the vitality and animation of streets,
blooks and open spaoes. 1his inoludes speoito
ordinanoe requirements for minimum retail frontages
at street levels of oommeroial, residential, and mixed-
use buildings, as well as all parking struotures where
feasible, minimum glazing as a peroentage of the trst-
story elevation of any new or renovated building, and
mandatory pedestrian entranoes olearly detned and
oriented to a publio street, partioularly where fronting
a transit station or park spaoe.
54
1he key redevelopment sites identited in this plan
will play important roles in the long-term revitalization
of downtown 3aint Paul. 1hese large and oomplex
sites, whioh inolude the former Liamond Produots/
0Ml site and the future LR1 station at 4th and Cedar
streets (also known as the Central 3tation blook),
afford the ability to drastioally enhanoe the oharaoter
and quality of plaoes surrounding them through the
oreation of medium- to high-density, transit-supportive
development.
0iven the strategio importanoe of these sites, it
is reoommended that the redevelopment of eaoh
prooeeds through a City-initiated master plan prooess.
1he intent of eaoh master plan would be to: olearly
desoribe the opportunities of eaoh site (as identited
in the 6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ), identify a range of suitable
development responses and guidelines for eaoh in
pursuit of oapitalizing upon these opportunities, and
present a detailed partnership and implementation
strategy for ensuring the neoessary tnanoing,
approvals, and partnerships for development to
prooeed. lssues to be addressed in eaoh master plan
should inolude:
1he relatlonshl between the slte and LR1: what is
the proximity of the site to LR1 and how oan aooess
to and from LR1 servioe be enhanoed through the
redevelopment of this site? lurther, what implioations
(if any) will LR1 oonstruotion have on redevelopment
of the site?
where relevant, a detailed strategy would desoribe a
joint development prooess, inoluding issues of transit
infrastruoture or faoility oonstruotion, development
phasing, and publio easements.
0tlons for accommodatlng ubllc realm
lmrovements: 1he redevelopment sites identited
in this dooument will shape and enhanoe important
publio spaoes downtown. Building on the plaoe-
speoito opportunities desoribed herein, eaoh master
plan should explore the potential to oontribute to or
oreate new publio plaoes, parks, and streets. 1his
will be oritioally important to realizing the future LR1
publio plaza desired for the Central 3tation and the
suooessful redevelopment of the northern half of the
former Liamond Produots site, where publio streets
will shape urban-soaled development blooks.
betalled edestrlan lan: 1he intent of this study is to
identify ways to minimize oontiot between automobiles
and pedestrians/oyolists. 1his oomponent is
partioularly important where redevelopment sites are
looated olose to LR1 stations, and where underground
parking aooess has the potential to interfere with
sidewalk aotivity.
where relevant, the provision of transit amenities for
both LR1 and bus passengers, inoluding sheltered
waiting areas, street-related retail, and transit
signage, should also be explored as a oomponent of
the pedestrian plan.
As part of the 3eotion 106 prooess for the Central
Corridor projeot, a Programmatio Agreement (PA)
among the lederal 1ransit Administration, Metropolitan
Counoil, Minnesota 3tate Pistorio Preservation 0ftoe
and Advisory Counoil on Pistorio Preservation was
signed. As mitigation for the demolition of the Midwest
lederal Building, required to make way for the LR1
station, the PA requires the Metropolitan Counoil to
develop design guidelines for future development
of the blook, oonsistent with the 6HFUHWDU\ RI WKH
,QWHULRUV 6WDQGDUGV IRU $UFKDHRORJ\ DQG +LVWRULF
3UHVHUYDWLRQ 1he Metropolitan Counoil will work with
the City of 3aint Paul, 3aint Paul Peritage Preservation
Commission, and 3tate Pistorio Preservation 0ftoe to
prepare the guidelines. 0noe these guidelines are
approved, they will be adopted as an amendment to
the 'RZQWRZQ6WDWLRQ$UHD3ODQ
4.3
Advanclng Key Redeveloment 5ltes
4.4
beslgnatlng the 5alnt Paul Urban Renewal Rlstorlc blstrlct
ln the oourse of preparation of the Lnvironmental
lmpaot 3tatement (Ll3) for the Central Corridor
projeot, the 3aint Paul urban Renewal Pistorio Listriot
was determined eligible for the National Register of
Pistorio Plaoes. 1he distriot is generally bounded by
Kellogg Boulevard on the south, wabasha 3treet on
the west, 3eventh Plaoe and 6th 3treet on the north,
and 1aokson, 5th, Robert and 4th streets on the east.
1he 3aint Paul urban Renewal Listriot reoognizes
the signitoanoe of downtown redevelopment efforts
between 1955 and 1974. Luring this period,
the physioal fabrio of downtown 3aint Paul was
dramatioally remade as blighted blooks were replaoed
with modernist oftoe towers and plazas. 1he 3aint
Paul Peritage Preservation Commission should
initiate the prooess for listing the distriot on the
National Register, as well as pursue designation of
the distriot as a looal heritage preservation distriot.
ln addition, there are several individual buildings within
the two station areas that were determined eligible for
the National Register in the Ll3, inoluding the Athletio
Club, lirst National Bank, Merohants Bank and
Minnesota Building. National Register listing and looal
designation should be pursued for these sites as well.
56
work with the City to plan and develop the Artway
and to engage artists in shaping the form and
experienoe of downtown's open spaoes and
infrastruoture
Metropolltan Translt
in addition to operation of transit servioe, long-
term responsibility to manage 0Ml in a neighborly
fashion
5alnt Paul Area 0hamber oI 0ommerce
key partner in promoting strategio redevelopment
sites suoh as 4th and Cedar and adjaoent to
union Lepot
5alnt Paul RlverIront 0orporatlon {0eslgn 0enter)
valuable input into design and review of proposed
building, open spaoe and oomplete streetsoape
designs
assist in shaping infrastruoture projeots to
improve oonneotivity and walkability downtown
1he key agenoies and stakeholder groups that will
provide both partnership opportunities and investment
potential for implementing downtown initiatives
inolude:
0lty oI 5alnt Paul 0epartment oI Plannlng and
conomlc 0evelopment
prinoipal ohampions of station area plan
gauge future development proposals against built
form and publio realm oomponents of plan
identify opportunities to implement publio realm
and mobility improvements through private
investment and infrastruoture projeots
0lty oI 5alnt Paul 0epartment oI Publlc Works
primary responsibility for design and oonstruotion
of street and sidewalk improvements
implementation of progressive design standards
for pedestrian-oriented streetsoapes, roadways
and mobility improvements through private
investment and infrastruoture projeots
0lty oI 5alnt Paul 0lvlslon oI Parks and Recreatlon
primary responsibility for design, oonstruotion
and maintenanoe of parks and landsoaping
improvements in publio realm
improvements through private investment and
infrastruoture projeots
0entral 0orrldor Project 0Ice
primary responsibility for design and oonstruotion
of LR1
inoorporate oolleotive input of station area plan
into design
use plan to build support and enthusiasm for
LR1's positive impaot on downtown
intuenoe design of 0Ml and impaot on
Lowertown
Publlc Art 5alnt Paul
primary responsibility to ohampion art in 3aint
Paul's publio realm, initiator of the 4th 3treet
Artway, and sponsor of the City's Publio Artist in
Residenoe program
4.5
Leveraglng 5trateglc Partnershls
5alnt Paul Bulldlng 0wners & Managers Assoclatlon
and 0owntown Bulldlng 0wners Assoclatlon
oonsultation on implementing faade
improvements, on-going outreaoh to building
owners and managers to realize the greatest
positive impaot from LR1, and aooomplish improved
oonneotions between street and skyway
0apltol Rlver 0ouncll
advooates of station area plan and
reoommendations
on-going partioipation in planning and
development deoisions
5alnt Paul Berltage Preservatlon 0ommlsslon
stewards of Lowertown's historio fabrio
approval of development applioations and
infrastruoture projeots
reoommends sites and distriots to the City Counoil
for looal designation
Mlnnesota 5tate Blstorlc Preservatlon 0Ice
stewards of Lowertown's historio fabrio, 3eotion
106 Programmatio Agreement
Property 0wners / 0evelopers
work olosely with all oivio partners in promotion of
buildings for adaptive re-use and investment
assist to seek out funds for faade
enhanoements
5alnt Paul 0onventlon and vlsltors' Bureau
promote enhanoed identity and aooessibility of
downtown 3aint Paul within 1win Cities region
improve oonneotion between 4th and Cedar
3tation and Lntertainment Listriot
Ramsey 0ounty Reglonal Rall Authorlty
work olosely on design and integration of multi-
modal transit hub at union Lepot into greater
Lowertown fabrio
5alnt Paul Blcycle Advlsory Board
work to improve bioyole network and to promote
awareness of bioyole network and oyoling as a
viable form of oommuting downtown
5alnt Paul 5mart Trlps
promote the use of transit, bioyoling, walking, oar/
vanpooling, and oar-sharing for both oommute
and non-oommute trips, with a foous on ohanging
the behavior of area residents and employees
Bloomlng 5alnt Paul
street beautitoation and oommunity gardening
projeots
provide assistanoe in identifying greening options
for downtown buildings where sidewalk widths do
not permit street trees
5alnt Paul 0rowers' Assoclatlon
ensure that LR1 best serves the larmers' Market
and oontributes to its on-going vitality and growth
oontinue to work on seouring indoor market in
Lowertown
0apltal 0lty Partnershlp
work to ensure the greatest eoonomio impaot from
LR1 in both downtown and the greater eastern
metropolitan area
Leveraglng 5trateglc Partnershls cont'd
58
DIAMONDDUEDLIGENCE
REPORT
November2011
FormerDiamondProducts
SAINT PAUL PORT
AUTHORITY

1
FORMERDIAMONDPRODUCTS
November2011
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction
The following describes a culmination of due diligence work tasks that the Saint Paul
Port Authority, Liesch Associates, American Engineering Testing, Beazley Consulting
and various sub-consultants have completed. A primary objective of the report is to assist
the Saint Paul Port Authority and the City of Saint Paul in finalizing their real estate
transaction decisions regarding the Former Diamond Products and Midway Stadium sites.
Specifically, the project team collected and analyzed building and site data, utility data,
and infrastructure data from various existing documents, on-site investigations and via
physical environmental/geotechnical borings, probes, etc. (which included laboratory
testing results and analysis).

In July 2010 Ryan Companies US, Inc. completed a study entitled Regional Ballpark
Initiative Feasibility Report (RBI) for the City of Saint Paul, which analyzes the
feasibility of developing a new regional ballpark in downtown Saint Paul on the Former
Gillette site in Lowertown Saint Paul. The study outlines site constraints including
environmental contamination, geotechnical, demolition, utilities, traffic and zoning. In
addition, Ryans work effort included completing a conceptual development program,
site plan, schedule and cost opinion. The Ports due diligence analysis scope goes beyond
the scope of the RBI and includes an evaluation of site redevelopment to the point of
rough grading of the site in preparation for stadium construction. The majority of
information related to conceptual proposed improvements was taken directly from the
RBI report. However, in the course of this due diligence evaluation additional
information related to proposed improvements was discovered. As such, the following
due diligence analysis supplements some of the information contained within the RBI.
Moreover, the information contained within the RBI is integral to the information
contained in this report, and should be considered in concert with this due diligence
study.

In the course of this due diligence analysis the conceptual site plan developed by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) as part of the RBI report was utilized as a basis for evaluation
tasks requiring site plan information. The site plan is not meant to represent the Saint
Paul Port Authoritys position relative to the site planning process with the City, Saint
Paul Saints, etc. The site plan was utilized for due diligence purposes only, in order to
develop cost opinions and identify development issues. Ryan noted in Summer 2011 that
the site plan presented in the RBI is conceptual and what is ultimately constructed could
vary significantly from the currently shown design. As such, the following due diligence
analysis and associated conclusion and recommendations should be updated in the future
to account for revised design features including, but not limited to grading, utility
locations, etc.

2
November2011
The project area consists of not only the Diamond Products properties (as described
above), but a conglomeration of several additional parcels owned by various parties.
Generally, the project area is bound by I-94 to the north, Broadway Street to the west,
Lafayette Bridge to the east and the future Central Corridor Operations and Maintenance
Facility (OMF) to the south.

Key Issues
The following are key issues identified during the due diligence evaluation of the project
area. Key issues are defined as data gaps, large cost items and noteworthy features of the
redevelopment project related to demolition, remediation, abatement, earthwork,
geotechnical corrections, groundwater and proposed improvements.

GENERAL
The scope of this due diligence analysis developed by the Saint Paul Port Authority
does not include information pertaining to a proposed development. However, it does
include an evaluation of the work necessary to transform the site from its existing
condition to the point of rough grading of the site in preparation for stadium
construction.

In the course of this due diligence analysis a conceptual site plan developed by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) as part of the RBI report was utilized as a basis for
evaluation tasks requiring site plan information. Note that the site plan developed by
Ryan is not meant to represent the Saint Paul Port Authoritys position relative to the
site planning process with the City, Saint Paul Saints, etc. The site plan was merely
used for due diligence purposes in order to evaluate cost opinions and identify
development issues.

Ryan noted in Summer 2011 that the site plan presented in the RBI is conceptual and
what is ultimately constructed could vary significantly from the currently shown
design. As such, the following due diligence analysis and associated conclusion and
recommendations should be updated in the future to account for revised design
features including, but not limited to grading, utility locations, etc.

An updated boundary and topographical survey of the project area was underway, but
not yet complete at the time this report was published. However, once completed the
updated survey should be considered an integral component of the due diligence
documentation.

Xcel Energy is planning to reconstruct the overhead and underground electrical lines
along 5
th
Street in 2012. In addition, they are planning to increase the transmission
capacity in this area. Once reconstructed and upgraded the cost to relocate this utility
will increase significantly in terms of time and money. Therefore, it is recommended

3
November2011
that coordination with Xcel begin as soon as possible to minimize future relocation
costs.

The site is relatively small given the size of the building and the extent of earthwork
that will likely occur during redevelopment of the site. As such, close coordination of
demolition and earth moving activities will likely be essential to efficiently complete
the project.

HISTORIC/CULTURAL
Based on the level of disturbance that has occurred in the project area, it is unlikely
that any potential pre-contact archaeological resources would remain intact. The
project area has high potential for containing historical-archaeological resources. An
existing historic-period foundation is present within the Area of Potential Effect
(APE) for direct effects, and there is potential for additional subsurface historical-
archaeological resources to be present within the project area. For these reasons, if
excavation or building demolition will take place within the project area, Summit
recommends further archaeological investigation of the APE for direct effects.

It is recommended that once conceptual designs are brought forward, studies
regarding traffic, noise, and lighting should be conducted to determine the effect, if
any on the Lowertown Historic District.

RELOCATION COSTS
Trans Park may qualify for relocation benefits, as they appear to meet the definition
of a business under the Uniform Relocation Act, in that they lease real property to
others. As a result, they may install a sign, advertise their site or incur increased costs
of operation for a new site. It is recommended the Port Authority budget $50,000 for
re-establishment expenses, as part of the acquisition costs.

It is recommended that $100,000 be budgeted for legal fees, resolving title issues and
cover closing costs.

ENVIRONMENTAL ABATEMENT/REMEDIATION
Prior to beginning physical work on the site, enter the site into the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (MPCA VIC) and/or
Petroleum Brownfields (PB) Programs in an effort to secure the desired
environmental assurances.

Prior to development, complete additional Phase II Investigation necessary to obtain
the desired assurances under the guidance of the MPCA VIC and/or PB Program(s).
This Phase II Investigation work should be outlined in a Phase II Investigation Work
Plan that is submitted and approved by the MPCA prior to completing the Phase II
Investigation Work.

4
November2011

The results of soil samples from boring B-3 and A-1/MW-3 document elevated levels
of SVOCs in the form of BaP equivalents, DRO and GRO. If it is anticipated that
these soils will be encountered during redevelopment activities, additional
characterization of these soils should be completed to determine their proper
management (i.e. hazardous vs. non-hazardous). The potential remediation costs
developed to date assume that these materials are non-hazardous. If they are
determined to be hazardous and are required to be managed off-site, costs for
management will be substantially higher than what is presented in the cost analysis
prepared as part of this due diligence work.

Based on contaminant types and levels identified in soils, groundwater and vapors to
date, it is appropriate to anticipate the design and installation of a sub-surface vapor
barrier system for structures that are built at or below grade. If it is undesirable to
design and install a sub-surface vapor barrier system for at or below grade structures,
additional sub-surface vapor sampling and modeling will be necessary. Indoor air
monitoring may be required if a sub-surface vapor barrier system is not installed.

If recycling and reuse of concrete from demolition of the building is being
considered, additional testing of the concrete will be necessary to more thoroughly
determine what portions of the building are acceptable.

A full destructive Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Survey should be completed
prior to the beginning of abatement activities in preparation for building demolition.

GEOTECHNICAL/EARTHWORK

Based on information gathered to date, the majority of concrete within the existing
FDP building that is available for crushing is contained within the 2
nd
and 3
rd
story
floor slabs.

DEMOLITION
Groundwater monitoring wells are located at various locations throughout the project
area. It will be important to ensure these wells are protected during surface and
underground demolition operations.

Demolition may require access and excavation on adjoining properties and rights-of-
ways. As a result, a temporary construction easement or demolition permit, etc. may
be required prior to beginning work. Therefore, structures and utilities should be
researched and field located to identify potential conflicts during the design phase of
the project.

5
November2011
Contractors should call Gopher State One Call at 651-454-0002 and a private locate
company at least 48 hours in advance of beginning work for the locations of
underground wires, cables, conduits, pipes, manholes, valves or other buried
structures.

Utilities to be demolished and removed may be within areas of soil contamination. As
such, special consideration should be given to soil interaction during utility
demolition, removal and disposal.

For each elevator within the existing building, it will be necessary to hire a qualified
environmental engineer and contractor to coordinate the abandonment with the
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH).

The southerly portion of the Former Diamond Products (FDP) building is
immediately adjacent, and tied to, the northern wall of the future Central Corridor
Operations and Maintenance Facility (OMF). As part of the demolition planning and
design it is recommended that a licensed structural engineer and architect perform an
analysis for disconnecting the buildings, and protecting the OMF building. Further,
coordination with the Metropolitan Council should begin early in the planning and
design process.

The wall heights of the low floor (i.e., first floor) is significant at approximately 26-
feet. As such, the associated wall height from adjacent grades on the north side of the
building will likely present extraordinary challenges during demolition.

BUILDING REUSE
The building has been used as a light manufacturing facility by two companies. It has
been unoccupied for the last 5-6 years. In general, the structure is in good condition
and given the high floor-to-floor heights is conducive to a new buyer operating a light
industrial facility.

SITE IMPROVEMENTS
A Lowertown Master Plan is currently in the review process within the City of Saint
Paul. However, the plan has not been released publically. It will be important to
incorporate components of this plan into the redevelopment of the project area.

The Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) recently completed draft revisions to the
adopted ordinances and regulations for Holman Field. Completion of these ordinance
regulations is on hold. However, once completed it will be important to incorporate
relevant components into redevelopment plans.

A detailed title review relating to survey matters is outside the scope of this due
diligence analysis. However, it is recommended that a licensed surveyor complete an

6
November2011
analysis of land encumbrance issues (including but not limited to boundary
examination, occupation, title-related survey matters represented in various title
insurance commitments, etc.), as represented on a certified ALTA Title Insurance
Survey. An associated course of action and timeline to cure should be included as a
deliverable for this work, as these issues have the potential to be time consuming and
costly to resolve.

Two parallel fiber optic lines running the length of E. 5
th
St. within the project area
will require relocation given the proposed site plan as presented by Ryan in the RBI.
Ownership of these lines is not listed in currently available research documentation.
While difficult to estimate without preliminary design information, it is known that
costs to relocate fiber optic lines have the potential to be significant in terms of
money and time. It is recommended that consideration of design, costs and timeline
begin early in the redevelopment process.

The City of Saint Paul, Metropolitan Council and MnDOT are completing and
planning multiple projects in the immediate are of the project site. Therefore, it is
recommended that City, Metropolitan Council and MnDOT design/as-built
construction plans be obtained for the Lafayette Bridge, OMF building and other
projects adjacent to the project area early in the design process.

A 54-inch storm sewer pipe extending into the project area from the I-94 right-of-way
will require rerouting to the north of a redevelopment. Therefore, design efforts will
require direct coordination and permitting with MnDOT.

Gas main relocation will likely be a required component of a stadium redevelopment
on the site. Because this is a critical utility requiring careful consideration and
handling, it is recommended that coordination with the gas company begin early in
the redevelopment planning.

A currently inactive underground electrical duct line and associated manholes run
along E. 5
th
St. The location/alignment and depth of this underground infrastructure
should be further researched as part of future redevelopment efforts, as information is
currently limited.

Overhead and underground electrical infrastructure relocation will likely be a
required component of a stadium redevelopment on the site. Because this is a critical
utility requiring careful consideration and handling, it is recommended that
coordination with the electric company begin early in the redevelopment planning.

Xcel Energy researched the issues and constraints surrounding the relocation of the
overhead electrical services along E. 5
th
St. and John St., and provided the results of
their initial findings. First, Xcel is planning to upgrade the electrical capacity along E.

7
November2011
5
th
St. in 2012 to accommodate future increased demand. They are also researching
how much additional capacity should be added in the area, and it could be significant.
In addition to the upgrading the overhead power lines, Xcel is planning to rebuild the
electrical duct running down E. 5
th
St. Note that Xcel indicated this duct is currently
inactive.

Because the proposed stormwater management system in Ryans RBI report is within
contaminated soils and groundwater in its currently shown design per the RBI,
construction and operation of said system would incur significant costs and physical
challenges. As such, it is recommended an alternate design location be utilized for an
underground stormwater management system. As indicated above, soils sampled
from boring A-1/MW-3 contained elevated levels of contamination. The cost analysis
has assumed these contaminated soils are non-hazardous at this time. However,
additional, characterization of these soils should be completed to determine their
proper management. If they are determined to be hazardous, costs for management
off-site will increase substantially.
The Saint Paul Port Authority (Port) entered into a due diligence services agreement with
the City of Saint Paul for the evaluation of the existing Former Diamond Products
building and associated parking lots in the Lowertown district of Saint Paul, Minnesota.
The Port retained Liesch Associates, Inc. to complete the due diligence investigation,
which includes (but is not necessarily limited to) on-site investigations including
environmental and geotechnical borings and both on-site and laboratory testing and
analysis; collection and evaluation of building and site information; collection and
analysis of utility and infrastructure information; collection and evaluation of building
demolition information; analysis of earthwork associated with building demolition; and
estimated costs of each. Table E.1summarizes these costs evaluated as part of the
Diamond Due Diligence services agreement described above. Note that some, but not all,
of the costs in Table 13.1 are directly related to site improvement costs, and thusly are
duplicated below in Table E.2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs.

8
November2011
TableE.1DiamondDueDiligenceServices
Title General Description Costs
Related
Due
Diligence
Report
Section
Closing Costs
Determine an estimate of the closing
costs for the acquisition of the
Diamond Products (DP) properties
$100,000 Section 5.0
Relocation
Costs
Determine which entities (if any)
may be entitled to claim relocation
benefits in connection with the Ports
acquisition of the DP properties.
$50,000 Section 5.0
Environmental
Due Diligence
Prepare a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment, a Phase II Investigation
Work Plan, an Asbestos and
Hazardous Materials Survey and an
opinion of Response Action Costs. In
addition, investigate the actions
necessary to obtain a No Further
Action letter from the MPCA.
$2,100,000 Section 6.0
Geotechnical
Due Diligence
Prepare a Geotechnical report
identifying and discussing potential
geotechnical related development
constraints and/or issues.
$2,750,000 Section 7.0
Demolition
Costs
Develop a cost estimate and
associated time frame to demolish
the DP building, including removal
of debris and associated earthwork to
prepare the site for redevelopment.
$2,840,000 Section 8.0
Holding &
Building
Reuse Costs
Develop an estimate of the annual
holding costs (HC) and building
reuse (BR) costs for the DP
properties
$81,702 annual HC

$31 million BR for LI

$12.3 million BR for
Storage
Section 9.0

9
November2011
Table E.2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs summarizes the
engineers opinion of probable construction costs specifically related to the site
improvements components of this due diligence evaluation and the RBI. As indicated
above, the Diamond Due Diligence Services Agreement costs shown in Table E.1
summarizes factors beyond those related to site improvements. Further, the RBI report
went beyond the scope of the Ports analysis with regards to conceptual redevelopment
programming. Therefore, in order to provide an overall financial picture specifically
related to the site improvement components of the project, select costs from those
presented in Table E1 and the RBI are presented below.

Table E2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
Item Cost Opinion (Rounded to the nearest
$10,000)
Demolition $2,840,000
Environmental Remediation/Abatement $2,100,000
Earthwork/Geotechnical $2,750,000
SUBTOTAL $7,690,000

Proposed Redevelopment Programming Costs Directly Evaluated as Part of the RBI
Proposed Improvement Costs from the RBI $41,000,000
SUBTOTAL $41,000,000

OVERALL TOTAL $48,690,000
November2011
TableofContents
1.0 PROJECTTEAM.........................................................................................5
2.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................9
2.1 RealEstateStructure.............................................................................................................9
FIGURE2AVicinityMap..........................................................................................................10
Figure2BALTASurvey.............................................................................................................11
FIGURE2CLegalDescriptionofDPProperties........................................................................12
2.2 SaintPaulPortAuthoritysProjectGoals.............................................................................12
2.3 ScopeofWork......................................................................................................................13
2.4 ProjectArea.........................................................................................................................13
2.5 ConceptualSitePlan............................................................................................................14
Figure2DProjectArea............................................................................................................15
2.6 Demolition...........................................................................................................................16
2.7 Earthwork/SoilCorrection...................................................................................................16
Figure2EConceptualSitePlan................................................................................................17
2.8 Environmental.....................................................................................................................18
2.9 ReportStructure..................................................................................................................18
3.0 EXISTINGCONDITIONS...........................................................................19
3.1 Zoning..................................................................................................................................19
3.2 LandUsePlans,DevelopmentsandConstruction...............................................................19
3.3 AdjacentDevelopmentsandConstruction..........................................................................19
Figure3A-Zoning......................................................................................................................21
3.4 LandEncumbrances.............................................................................................................22
3.5 FormerDiamondProductsBuilding.....................................................................................22
3.6 CurrentandPastUsesoftheProperty................................................................................22
3.7 ExistingSurfaceImprovements...........................................................................................22
3.8 GeologyandGroundwater..................................................................................................24
3.9 Streets..................................................................................................................................25
3.10 TopographyandDrainage.................................................................................................25
3.11 ExistingUtilities.................................................................................................................25
4.0 HISTORICALandCULTRUALREVIEW/SITEHISTORY.................................33
5.0 CLOSINGANDRELOCATIONCOSTS.........................................................34
6.0 ENVIRONMENTALDUEDILIGENCE..........................................................35
6.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................35
6.2 PhaseIESA...........................................................................................................................35
6.3 PhaseIIInvestigation...........................................................................................................36
6.3.1 SoilInvestigation...............................................................................................................37

2
November2011
Figure6AHistoricalUsesoftheSite.......................................................................................38
6.3.2 GroundwaterInvestigation...............................................................................................40
6.3.3 SubsurfaceVaporInvestigation........................................................................................41
Figure6BSoilsBoringsandSoilContaminationLimits...........................................................42
Figure6CGroundwater...........................................................................................................43
6.4 ConcreteTesting/Reuse.......................................................................................................44
6.5 AsbestosandHazardousMaterialsSurvey..........................................................................44
6.6 ConceptualResponseActions..............................................................................................48
Figure6DConceptualDevelopment........................................................................................50
7.0 GEOTECHNICALDUEDILIGENCE..............................................................51
7.1 Geotechnical-Introduction.................................................................................................51
7.2 Geotechnical-SiteConditions.............................................................................................51
7.3 Geotechnical-SubsurfaceSoils...........................................................................................51
7.4 Geotechnical-Groundwater...............................................................................................52
7.5 Geotechnical-EngineeringOpinion....................................................................................52
7.6.1 ConceptDesign..............................................................................................................53
7.6.2 SubsurfaceImprovements.............................................................................................53
7.6.3 SoilRetentionSystem....................................................................................................54
7.6.4 DiamondProductsBuildingGround-FloorSlab..............................................................54
7.6.5 Utilities...........................................................................................................................54
7.6.6 StormwaterManagementSystem.................................................................................55
7.7 Geotechnical-FurtherInvestigation...................................................................................55
8.0 DEMOLITIONDUEDILIGENCE................................................................. 56
8.1 DemolitionIntroduction...................................................................................................56
8.2 DemolitionExteriortotheBuilding..................................................................................56
Figure2DProjectArea............................................................................................................57
8.2.1 SurfaceDemolition.........................................................................................................58
8.2.2 UndergroundDemolition...............................................................................................59
8.2.3 Reuse,Recycle,Reduce..................................................................................................67
8.2.4 CostOpinion...................................................................................................................68
8.3 BuildingDemolition.............................................................................................................68
8.3.1 SpecialConsiderations...................................................................................................69
8.3.2 Reduce,Reuse,Recycle..................................................................................................69
8.3.3 CostOpinion...................................................................................................................70
9.0 HOLDINGANDBUILDINGREUSEANALYSIS.............................................73
10.0 PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS...................................................................75
10.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................75
10.2 SaintPaulDowntownAirportHolmanField......................................................................75
10.3 Utilities...............................................................................................................................76
10.4 PlannedPublicImprovements...........................................................................................78

3
November2011
Figure10ACityProjects,Phase1............................................................................................79
Figure10BCityProject,Phase2..............................................................................................80
11.0 OPINIONOFPROBABLECONSTRUCTIONCOSTS.....................................81
Table11.1DiamondDueDiligenceServices............................................................................83
Table11.2-EngineersOpinionofProbableConstructionCosts...............................................84
12.0 CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS............................................. 86
4
November2011

This page intentionally left blank
5
November2011
1.0 PROJECTTEAM
Saint Paul Port Authority, 1900 Landmark Towers, 345 St. Peter Street, St. Paul,
MN 55102
Name Title Phone Email
Bill Morin Director of Real Estate 651-224-5686 wmm@sppa.com
Monte Hilleman Project Manager/VP Redevelopment 651-204-6237 mmh@sppa.com
Eric Larson Legal Counsel 651-224-5686 edl@sppa.com

Liesch Associates, 13400 15
th
Ave. N., Minneapolis, MN 55441
Eric Hesse, PE Principal Environmental Engineer 763-489-3136 eric.hesse@liesch.com

American Engineering Testing, 550 Cleveland Ave. N., St. Paul, MN 55114
Robert Wahlstrom, PE Geotechnical Engineer 651-647-2743 rwahlstrom@amengtest.com

Stoel Rives, 33 S. 6
th
St., Suite 4200, Minneapolis, MN 55402
Steve Heurung Environmental Analyst 612-373-8861 sheurung@stoel.com

Beazley Consulting, 9301 County Road 15, Minnetrista, MN 55359
Eric Beazley, PE Project Manager/Civil Engineer 651-402-1670 eric@beazleyconsulting.com
BWBR Architects, 380 St. Peter St., Suite 600, Saint Paul, MN 55102
Stephanie McDaniel, AIA Architect 651-290-1872 smcdaniel@bwbr.com

Dunham Associates, 50 S. 6
th
St., Suite 1100, Minneapolis, MN 55402
Randy Olson, PE Mechanical Engineer 612-465-7617 randy.olson@dunhameng.com
6
November2011
DueDiligenceReport
preparedfor
theSaintPaulPortAuthoritys
FormerDiamondProductsAcquisition
November2011
Iherebycertifythatthisplan,specificationorreportwaspreparedbymeorundermy
directsupervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedProfessionalEngineerunderthelawsof
theStateofMinnesota.
EnvironmentalEngineering

EricHesse,P.E.
MinnesotaLicenseNo.22743
Date:December5,2011
GeotechnicalEngineering

RobertJ.Wahlstrom,P.E.,P.G.
MinnesotaLicenseNos.17773/30006
Date:December5,2011
6
November2011
DueDiligenceReport
preparedfor
theSaintPaulPortAuthoritys
FormerDiamondProductsAcquisition
November2011
CivilEngineering

EricW.Beazley,P.E.
MinnesotaLicenseNo.43912
Date:December5,2011
8
November2011
This page intentionally left blank
9
November2011
2.0 INTRODUCTION
estimated costs of each. This report is a culmination of the due diligence efforts described
above.
2.1 RealEstateStructure
The Port and the City of Saint Paul (City) are considering the acquisition of the Diamond
Products (DP) properties and building as a site for possible future redevelopment. Please
see Figure 2B for a graphical depiction of the DP properties, Supplemental Report
Appendix 2.1 for a Certificate of Survey for Diamond Products created by URS and
dated August 26, 2005 and Figure 2C for an associated legal description.

10
November2011
FIGURE2AVicinityMap

.
ro[ecL slLe
FIGURE 2A VICINITY MAP
Page No. FORMER DIAMOND PRODUCTS
nC1 1C SCALL
8LlL8LnCLS:
MA: CCCCLL map daLa, www.google.com, 2011
11
!"#$#"$%&'()$
*)+)*)!&)%,$
%-*.)/,$&01234560$78$%91:0;$871$<=5>7?@$
A17@946BC$-*%$&71DC$EFGHIGEJ$
FIGURE 2B ALTA SURVEY
FORMER DIAMOND PRODUCTS

Figure2BALTASurvey

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
12
November2011

FIGURE2CLegalDescriptionofDPProperties

2.2 SaintPaulPortAuthoritysProjectGoals
The Saint Paul Port Authority (Port) specializes in brownfields recycling and
manufacturing-centered development. This specialization allows the Port to achieve their
ultimate goal of improving the economic environment in Saint Paul. Their assistance to
FIGURE 2C Legal Description of DP Properties
!"#"!"$%"&'
()*+,-).'/0*))1)23'4)35))2'(66/'
728'%,39'873)8'::::;'<=>>'

13
November2011
developers in the brownfields redevelopment process ranges from site selection,
financing and workforce development, which creates opportunities throughout the City
for developers and residents.

The Former Diamond Products (FDP) project is creating redevelopment opportunities for
the neighborhoods and local businesses. The Ports process brings residents, developers
and businesses together to create exciting new growth opportunities, positive change and
revitalization in their communities.
2.3 ScopeofWork
study. The RBI report can be found in Supplemental Report Appendix 2.2
2.4 ProjectArea
The project area consists of not only the Diamond Products properties (as described
above), but also a conglomeration of several additional parcels owned by various parties,
which makes up approximately 9 acres. Figure 2D depicts the project area and ownership
of each parcel within. In addition, Please see Figure 2B for a partial graphical description
of the subject properties per a Certificate of Survey for Diamond Products created by
URS and dated August 26, 2005. URS full survey can be found in Supplemental Report
Appendix 2.1. Further, an additional aerial photo of the project area and surrounding land
uses can be found in Appendix 2.0. Generally, the project area is bound by I-94 to the
north, Broadway Street to the west, Lafayette Bridge to the east and the future Central
Corridor Operations and Maintenance Facility (OMF). Specifically, with regards to the

14
November2011
Ports potential acquisition of the DP properties, the project area is segmented into the
following (see Figure 2D for a graphical depiction of the project area segments):

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A
Parcel B
Parcel C
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G)
REMAINING PROJECT AREA
E. 5
th
Street
Broadway Street
Parcel 1
Vacated Pine Street
Parcel 2
Vacated Olive Street
North Section (boundaries are approximate)
John Street
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7
Vacated 4
th
St.
NE Section (boundaries are approximate)
2.5 ConceptualSitePlan
In the course of this due diligence analysis the conceptual site plan developed by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) as part of the RBI report was utilized as a basis for evaluation
tasks requiring site plan information. The site plan is not meant to represent the Saint
Paul Port Authoritys position relative to the site planning process with the City, Saint
Paul Saints, etc. The site plan was utilized for due diligence purposes only, in order to
develop cost opinions and identify development issues. Ryan noted in Summer 2011 that
the site plan presented in the RBI is conceptual and what is ultimately constructed could
vary significantly from the currently shown design. As such, the following due diligence
analysis and associated conclusion and recommendations should be updated in the future
to account for revised design features including, but not limited to grading, utility
locations, etc.
.
15
!"#$#"$%&'()$
BNSF RAILWAY CO. / PROPERTY TAX DEPT.
APPROXIMATE MARKET HOUSE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION / CO. PARADISE AND ASSOCIATES
APPROXIMATE CITY OF SAINT PAUL
APPROXIMATE R/W OF HWY I-94
(red dashed line)
M. RASOIR LTD/ C/O PRIESE LAW FIRM
M. RASOIR LTD/ C/O PRIESE LAW FIRM (CENTRAL
CORRIDOR OPERATION & MAINTENANCE FACILITY)
ACQUISITION AREA - DIAMOND PRODUCTS CO.
401 E. 4
TH
BLDG. PARTNERSHIP
APPROXIMATE LAFAYETTE BRIDGE
IMPROVEMENT AREA
*)+)*)!&)%,$
%-*.)/,$&01234560$78$%91:0; 871
<=5>7?@$A17@946BC -*%$&71DC EFGHIGEJ
$
"K!)*%LMA,$*0N=7?5O$P5OOD51Q$
M?=252:0$+05B=R=O=6; *0D716C S9O; HETE
Overall Project Area
(solid black line)
FIGURE 2D Project Area

Figure2DProjectArea

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
16
November2011
2.6 Demolition
Surface Demolition consists primarily of extensive bituminous parking surfaces, concrete
curb and gutter, overhead power and sidewalks. Underground demolition is more
complex and includes, but is not necessarily limited to electrical duct lines, gas mains,
watermain, sanitary sewer, fiber optic lines, potential remaining footings from former
buildings, etc. Building demolition on the site includes the northern portion of Former
Diamond Products building, which includes multiple elevators that will require special
attention for potential environmental cleanup and Minnesota Department of Health
approval, prior to removal.

There appears to be potential opportunities on Parcel 5 to recycle several materials such
as concrete materials including, but not limited to, surface, building and underground
non-contaminated concrete, bituminous, compacted base material under streets, chain
link fence and aluminum, steel and copper within the building and underground utilities.
2.7 Earthwork/SoilCorrection
The geotechnical exploration performed at the site indicate soil conditions generally
consisting of existing fill overlying coarse alluvium and glacial till. Minimal amounts
debris was identified within the fill material (based on the soil borings only). The results
of the Phase II environmental assessment indicate a layer of contamination exists
between the fill and natural soils in the eastern portion of the site.

Soil correction methods to accommodate future construction will likely consist of
excavating existing fill. However to reach projected design grades for the stadium,
excavations will occur below the existing fill and extend into the coarse alluvium and till.
It should be noted that additional information will be needed before soils
correction/earthwork is begun to develop a more accurate determination of needs and
adequacy of existing soils for reuse.

The following are some of the key points identified as part of this due diligence analysis
relative to earthwork (note that the following are based on a conceptual site plan
described in Section 2.5 where the ground surface of the playing field is projected
elevation 720 feet to 722 feet):
17
RYAN COMPANES US, NC.
AERI AL PERSPECTI VE
REGI ONAL BALLPARK SI TE PLAN - NOVEMBER 2009
FCURL - CONCLPTUAL STL PLAN
/ BUS DROP- OFF AREA
!"#"!"$%"&'(
!)*+,-./(0.//1.23(4-+5.56)(#).7+8+/+9:(
!)1,29;(<=/:(>?@?(
$AB(BA(&%CD"(
FIGURE 2E Conceptual Site Plan

Figure2EConceptualSitePlan

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
18
November2011
Per AETs geotechnical report, existing fill thickness encountered by the soil
borings range from 1 to 19 feet .
Approximately 40,000 cubic yards of existing in-place, non-contaminated
structurally sound soils (i.e., coarse alluvium, till, existing fill) will likely be
recompacted on-site.
Excess non-contaminated, structurally sound cut materials (i.e., coarse alluvium,
till, existing fill) to be removed from the site are in the range of 120,000 cubic
yards.
Structures constructed in the area of the Diamond Products building will likely
need to be supported on a deep foundation system
2.8 Environmental
Environmental due diligence included the completion of a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment; a Phase II Investigation of soils; groundwater and vapors; a preliminary
investigation into the feasibility of recycling and reuse of concrete generated from
demolition of the existing structure; and an Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Survey
within the existing manufacturing facility. The implementation and results of these
studies are discussed in detail in Section 7.0 of this report. In addition, a discussion of
conceptual response action plan elements is discussed based on Ryans conceptual site
plan.
2.9 ReportStructure
The following report will guide the reader through a sequential progression of the project
starting with a description of existing conditions. Following that are sections on the
history of the site, information on other properties within the project area, environmental
issues, geotechnical issues, demolition issues, building reuse and holding costs and
proposed improvements. Finally, an opinion of probable costs to complete the scope of
work as described in this due diligence report and associated recommendations/
conclusions are presented at the end of the report.

19
November2011
3.0 EXISTINGCONDITIONS
The following existing conditions analysis is a synthesis of the surface and underground
features on the site, geography, surrounding uses, zoning, public utilities and general
characteristics. The project area, as described above is currently occupied by a 620,000
square foot former manufacturing facility that was constructed in 1969/1970. Generally,
other features in the project area include public roads, paved parking lots, a dog park and
greenspace.
3.1 Zoning
As can be seen from Figure 3A below the entire project area is situated within the B5
Central Business Service zoning district. Information of land uses allowed with the B5
zoning district can be found at the following City of Saint Paul website
(http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=798).
3.2 LandUsePlans,DevelopmentsandConstruction
incorporate components of this plan into the redevelopment of the project area. The City
noted in a meeting on July 13, 2011 that the plan is complimentary to a proposed
ballpark.

The City of Saint Paul adopted ordinances and regulations for Holman Field in 1978. The
Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) recently completed draft revisions of these
ordinances, which can be found via the following link:
http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=4124. It should be noted that completion of the
ordinance regulations are currently on hold. However, once complete the revisions may
affect redevelopment efforts of the Diamond Products project area.
3.3 AdjacentDevelopmentsandConstruction
There two construction projects currently ongoing immediately adjacent to the project
area. First, the Metropolitan Council is constructing the Central Corridor Light Rail
Operations and Maintenance Facility immediately south of the Former Diamond Products
building. This project began in Summer 2010 and is expected to be completed in Spring
2013.

Prior to implementation of response actions, a Response Action Plan/Construction

Contingency Plan should be developed and submitted to the MPCA Programs for review

20
November2011
and approval. This will require entry into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) and/or the Petroleum Brownfields
(PB) Programs.

A second project immediately adjacent to the project area is MnDOTs reconstruction of
Lafayette Bridge. This project began in Spring 2011 and is expected to be completed in
Summer 2014.

Per a meeting with the City of Saint Paul on July 13, 2011 capital improvement funds
have been requested for proposed public improvements. However, to date none of the
Citys proposed improvements listed below have been funded. Coordination with the City
during the future planning and design process for the redevelopment of the FDP site will
be important.

PHASE 1
After the Lafayette bridge project is completed, northbound Lafayette will no
longer intersect E. 7
th
St. Rather, traffic will be directed to an exit that travels
under I-94, left onto Kittson, then to E. 7
th
St. As such, at the current E. 7
th

St./Lafayette intersection travelers will only have access to southbound Lafayette
The City of Saint Paul is planning for the Bruce Vento trail to be constructed
along Prince Street turning north at Willius Street.
The City would like to purchase Prince Street and would like to reconstruct it as a
standard City street section.
Reconstruction of Willius Street to a standard section is being plan as part of the
Central Corridor project.
A connection from the Bruce Vento trail to Lafayette is planned.
E. 5
th
Street is planned to be removed from John Street to the east after the
Lafayette Bridge project is complete. However, a utility easement will remain, as
it is a MnDOT right-of-way.

PHASE 2

After the stadium is complete, the City is planning to extend Prince Street to
Trout Brook Blvd. A portion of Trout Brook Blvd. would also be reconstructed to
the north of Prince Street.

21
nC1 1C SCALL
DIAMOND PRODUCTS CO.S PARCELS
BEING STUDIED AS PART OF THIS DUE
DILIGENCE EFFORT

OVERALL PROJECT AREA

B5 ZONING DISTRICT
(CENTRAL BUSINESS SERVICE)
8LlL8LnCLS:
ZCnlnC: Cl1? Cl SAln1 AuL,
www.sLpaul.gov/documenLvlew, MA8CP 2010
ZCnlnC MA
FIGURE 3A - Zoning

Figure3A-Zoning

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1

22
November2011
3.4 LandEncumbrances

A detailed title review relating to survey matters is outside the scope of this due diligence
analysis. However, it is recommended that a licensed land surveyor update URS ALTA
title Insurance survey and complete an analysis of land encumbrance issues (including
but not limited to boundary examination, occupation, title-related survey matters as
represented in various title insurance commitments, etc.). An associated course of action
and timeline to cure should be included as a deliverable for this work.
3.5 FormerDiamondProductsBuilding
The existing 620,000 square foot former manufacturing building constructed in

1969/1970, known as the Former Diamond Products building, currently sits vacant.
Equipment and machinery utilized in former manufacturing processes have been mostly
removed. Generally, the building exhibits three floors consisting of reinforced concrete
construction. Please see Section 9.0 and Appendix 9.0 for a detailed analysis of the FDP
building. Most recently the building was utilized for the manufacture of personal care
products and office supplies such as liquid correction fluid.
3.6 CurrentandPastUsesoftheProperty
In general, the site has historically been used for to industrial businesses, such as coal gas
manufacturing, cold storage, meat packing and plumbing wholesales. Currently, the
building is vacant and the remainder of the project area is utilized as public roadways,
private parking lots, a dog park and greenspace.
3.7 ExistingSurfaceImprovements

The following describes notable surface features within each of the project segments (see
Figure 2D for a graphical depiction of the project segments):

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Three concrete pads exist in the southeast corner of Parcel
A. One of the pads is 10x18 while the other two pads are 4x4. The
entire surface of the parcel is paved with bituminous. A block retaining
wall ranging from two to three feet in height extends the length of the
northern property line.
Parcel B A wrought iron fence and an adjacent guardrail exist on the
northern portion of Parcel B. The entire surface is paved with

23
November2011
bituminous. A 4x4 concrete pad lies in the south central portion of the
site.
Parcel C The western and northern edges of Parcel C exhibit a steep
slope paved with bituminous. Along the western edge of the northern
property line a concrete retaining wall replaces the paved bituminous
slope. The entire parcel is paved with bituminous, and two 4x4
concrete pads are present in the south central portion of the site.
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) A
620,000 square foot building exists on these parcels.

E. 5
th
Street - East 5
th
Street is paved with bituminous and exhibits
concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the street. Concrete sidewalk
exists along entire length of the southern right-of-way. Several concrete
driveway aprons exist intermittently along the northern right-of-way.
Parcel 1 A two-foot high block retaining wall runs the length of north
property line. The entire parcel is paved with bituminous.
Vacated Pine Street This area is bordered to the north with a wrought
iron fence and large wrought iron gate. Half of the surface is covered
with pavers and the remaining area is paved with bituminous.
Parcel 2 This parcel is completely paved with bituminous.
Vacated Olive Street The entire parcel is paved with bituminous.
North Section This entire area is enclosed with a mix of wrought iron
and chain link fence. The northerly most area of the site is an existing
dog park with trees and grass surface. The southern portion is paved
with bituminous. Several parking lot lights are present within the
southern area of the parcel.
John Street John Street is paved with bituminous and exhibits
exists along entire length of the western right-of-way. Several concrete
driveway aprons exist intermittently along the eastern right-of-way, and
one large concrete driveway apron is shown on the southern portion
along the west right-of-way.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 Bituminous paving covers the extents of
this parcel. Other features include a light pole, 4x4 concrete pad and a
steep slope paved with bituminous.

24
November2011
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 The northern portion of this parcel exhibits
a vegetated slope, while the remainder of the site is paved with
bituminous.
Vacated 4
th
St. This area is paved with bituminous.
NE Section This area exhibits a vegetative cover.
3.8 GeologyandGroundwater
The Diamond Products property is located in Lowertown on the east side of downtown
St. Paul. The property is located on land that slopes down to the east along Fifth Street E,
and down to the south along Broadway Street. The ground surface elevation on the
property varies from a high of around 750 feet in the northwest to a low of about 713 feet
in the southeast corner of the site, as referenced to national geodetic vertical datum
(NGVD). The Diamond Products building is cut into the slope on the north side of the
building.

The Diamond Products site resides over an enlarged soil-filled channel eroded into
bedrock. The bedrock channel was eroded by pre-glacial stream flow south to the pre-
glacial precursor of the Mississippi River. The depth to bedrock below the Diamond
Products site varies from about 110 feet to 150 feet. Bedrock underlining the site is
Prairie Du Chien Group, which consists of the carbonate rock dolostone interbedded with
layers of shale and sandstone.

The eroded channel is essentially filled with deposits of coarse alluvial sand and gravel.
Areas of fine alluvium and swamp deposits associated with slack-water wetlands and
mud flats occur on top of the coarse alluvium deposit. The wetlands and mudflats were
situated within low areas of the buried channel. The low areas have been covered up
with fill placed back in the late 1880s to make the Lowertown area more accessible for
urban development.

Regional groundwater flow in the area of the Diamond Product site is generally south
towards the Mississippi River. The Mississippi River flows east-northeast approximately
one-third mile south of the site. The southern flow of groundwater occurs in both the
coarse alluvial deposits as well as the deeper Prairie Du Chien Group bedrock, which
comprises the upper portion of the Prairie Du ChienJordan Aquifer. The groundwater
elevation over the site varies from around 725 feet to 710 feet, as referenced to NGVD.
The Mississippi River is at an elevation of approximately 687 feet, NGVD.

25
November2011
3.9 Streets
The project area is generally bound by I -94 to the north, Lafayette Bridge to the east,
Broadway Street to the west and the future Light Rail Operations and Maintenance
Facility to the south, which border Prince Street. Three former public streets running
through the site, E. 4
th
Street, Pine Street and Olive Street have been vacated.
3.10 TopographyandDrainage
Topography contour data from the City of Saint Paul obtained for this due diligence
analysis from Ryan Companies US, Inc., and a recently completed survey by MFRA
show the project area to slope from the northwest to the southeast from an elevation of
approximately 755 to approximately 710. The southern portion of the site is covered by a
large building and the remainder of the site is mostly paved. As such, drainage within the
project area is managed by storm sewer infrastructure , which ultimately directs
stormwater out of the project area to the southeast along Vacated E. 4
th
St.
3.11 ExistingUtilities

Sanitary Sewer
Please refer to City sewer strip maps for more information on existing sanitary
sewer infrastructure. Appendix 3.0 shows a graphical description of the existing
sanitary sewer lines within, and around the project area. The following is a
description of the existing sanitary sewer infrastructure within and immediately
adjacent to the project area:

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing sanitary
sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel A
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing sanitary
sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel B
Parcel C A 12-inch RCP sanitary sewer lines runs north to south
through the western portion of Parcel C. This line connects to existing
sanitary sewer infrastructure in the north section and within E. 5
th
St.
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) An
abandoned 30-inch sanitary sewer line (and associated manholes)
connects E. 5
th
St. to Broadway through the Former Diamond Products
(FDP) footprint. Further, an abandoned 12-inch sanitary sewer line (and

26
November2011
associated manholes) lies within the southern portion of the FDP
footprint and runs nearly the entire length of building.

E. 5
th
Street - Extensive sanitary sewer infrastructure lies within
boundaries of E. 5
th
St. A 36-inch brick sewer line (and associated
manholes), and a 30-inch cement sewer line (and associated manholes)
run the length of E. 5
th
St. through the project area. The abandoned 12-
inch line from Parcel C connects to the 36-inch line, and the abandoned
30-inch line from within the building footprint connects to the 30-inch
line. A 30-inch brick sanitary sewer line in Broadway Street connects to
the 36-inch line, while a 12-inch sanitary forcemain in Broadway
connects to the 30-inch line.
Broadway Street - A 30-inch brick sanitary sewer line runs along the
west side of Broadway Street north of E. 5
th
St. South of E. 5
th
St.
exhibits two separate sanitary sewer pipes networks. First, the 30-inch
brick pipe and a second pipe from 5
th
Street (West of Broadway)
connect into a 60-inch sanitary sewer south of the westerly 5
th
Street
intersection. Second a 30-inch sanitary sewer extension from E. 5
th
St.
runs southerly to a 12-inch sanitary forcemain running parallel with the
previously mentioned 60-inch pipe.
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing sanitary
sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
Vacated Pine Street Based on available documentation, no existing
sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 Based on available documentation, no existing sanitary sewer
lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel 2.
Vacated Olive Street Based on available documentation, no existing
sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
North Section A 12-inch RCP sanitary sewer line (connecting from
Parcel C) runs along the northern section of the north section. This line
turns at Vacated Pine Street alignment and northerly thusly.
Additionally, an abandoned 12-inch sanitary pipe running east-west
clips the very northerly edge of the north section.
John Street An abandoned 6-inch sanitary sewer line (and associated
manhole) runs north south from John Street to Vacated 4
th
St.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 Based on available documentation, no
existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel 3.
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 Based on available documentation, no
existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries of Parcel 1.

27
November2011
Vacated 4
th
St. The abandoned 12-inch line from within the building
footprint and the abandoned 6-inch line from John Street tie into an
eight-inch line within the Vacated 4
th
St. alignment.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing sanitary
sewer lines exist within the boundaries of the NE section.

Storm Sewer
Please refer to City sewer strip maps for more information on existing storm
sewer infrastructure. Appendix 3.0 shows a graphical depiction of the existing
storm sewer within, and around the project area. The following is a description of
the existing storm sewer infrastructure within and immediately adjacent to the
project area.

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing storm sewer
exists within the boundaries of Parcel A
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing storm sewer
exists within the boundaries of Parcel B
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing storm sewer
exists within the boundaries of Parcel C
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) No
existing storm sewer exists within the footprint of the Former Diamond
Products building.
E. 5
th
Street A 15-inch RCP storm sewer pipe, which increases to a
21-inch RCP runs along two thirds of E. 5
th
St. Four laterals connect
into these pipes. The storm sewer turns south along the John St.
alignment.
Broadway Street Based on available documentation, no existing
storm sewer of relevant to this report exists in Broadway St.
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing storm sewer
exists within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
storm sewer exists within the boundaries of the Vacated Pine Street
Alignment.
Parcel 2 Based on available documentation, no existing storm sewer
storm sewer exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive Street.

28
November2011
North Section An existing 54-inch storm sewer extending from the
north runs into the project area and turns east in the northerly most area
of the subject property.
John Street A 15-inch storm sewer pipe with two connecting laterals
connects from E. 5
th
St. to Vacated 4
th
St.
existing storm sewer exists in this area.
existing storm sewer exists in this area.
Vacated 4
th
St. From John St. a 21-inch RCP storm sewer runs along
Vacated 4
th
St. within the project area.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing storm
sewer exists in this area.

Water
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical description of the existing
watermain within, and around the project area. The following is a description of
the existing watermain infrastructure within and immediately adjacent to the
project area:

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
existing watermain exists within the footprint of the Former Diamond
Products building.
E. 5
th
Street A 30-inch watermain exists in the northern portion of E.
5
th
St. from Broadway to the Vacated Pine St. alignment. The 30-inch
line turns north at Vacated Pine St., while a 12-inch watermain pipe
continues along E. 5
th
St. until turning south at John St. A service
lateral of unknown size extends to the Former Diamond Products
building south of Vacated Pine St.
Broadway Street The 30-inch watermain running along the western
portion of E. 5
th
St. turns south and runs southerly along the western
edge of Broadway.

29
November2011
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
Vacated Pine Street A 30-inch watermain from E. 5
th
St. turns north
along the Vacated Pine St. alignment, runs through the Vacated Pine St.
boundaries and continues north through the North section of the project
area.
Parcel 2 Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
watermain exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive Street.
North Section A 30-inch watermain extending from Vacated Pine
Street runs north-south through the central portion of the North section.
This pipe continues to the north outside of the project area.
John Street A 12-inch watermain pipe runs north-south along the
eastern side of John Street. This pipe extends from both E. 5
th
St. and
Vacated 4
th
St.
existing watermain exists in this area.
existing watermain exists in this area.
Vacated 4
th
St. A 12-inch watermain pipe from John St. turns easterly
and runs along the Vacated 4
th
St. Alignment.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing watermain
exists in this area.

Fiber Optic
Please refer to Appedix 3.0, which shows a graphical description of the existing
fiber optic cabling within, and around the project area. The following is a
description of the existing fiber optic infrastructure within and immediately

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic

30
November2011
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) Based on
available documentation, no existing fiber optic exists within the
footprint of the Former Diamond Products building.
E. 5
th
Street Two parallel fiber optic lines run the length of E. 5
th
St.
within the project limits. One line is labeled as AFS Fiber, but the
ownership of the lines is undetermined. The other fiber optic line has no
listed owner in the research documents. Both fiber lines connect to fiber
within Broadway St. on the west side of the project and extend easterly
past the project limits.
Broadway Street Fiber Optic cabling running north-south along
Broadway Street extends from the project area.
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing fiber exists
within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
fiber exists within the boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 based on available documentation, no existing fiber optics
exist within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
fiber optic infrastructure exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive
Street.
North Section Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
optic lines exist within the boundaries of the North Section.
John Street Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
lines exist within John Stree.t
existing fiber exists in this area.
Vacated 4
th
St. Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
exists along Vacated 4
th
St.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
optics exist in this area.

Gas Main
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical description of the existing
gas main within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the
existing gas main infrastructure within and immediately adjacent to the project
area:

31
November2011
ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
available documentation, no existing gas main exists within the

E. 5
th
Street Starting from the Broadway St. gas main runs along the
northerly portion of E. 5
th
St. At approximately 120 feet from
Broadway St. the gas main crosses E. 5
th
St. and runs along the
southerly right-of-way boundary. Approximately 380-feet from that
point the gas main crosses E. 5
th
St. and begins to run along the north
right-of-way line. At the east side of the John St. right-of-way the gas
main turns south and travels southerly towards to Vacated 4
th
St.
Broadway Street Based on available documentation it appears that
gas main runs along the west portion of Broadway St. between E. 5
th
St.
(east leg) and E. 5
th
St. (west leg). Gas main also travels northerly
along Broadway St. from E. 5
th
St. (east leg)
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
gas main exists within the boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 based on available documentation, no existing gas main
gas main infrastructure exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive
Street.
North Section Based on available documentation, no existing gas
main exist within the boundaries of the North Section.
John Street Gas main extending from E. 5
th
St. runs along the easterly
portion of John Street crossing the right-of-way line at Parcel 3, Block
5.
existing gas main exists in this area.

32
November2011
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 Gas main crosses into this parcel from the
John St. right-of-way at which point it turns and angles southeast into
the Vacated 4
th
St. right-of-way.
Vacated 4
th
St. Gas main extends along the vacated 4
th
St. alignment
from Parcel 3, Block 5.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
Electrical
Existing overhead power lines extend along the north side of E. 5
th
St. and the east side of
John Street. Additionally, per Xcel Energy a currently inactive underground electrical
duct line and associated manholes run along E. 5
th
St. The location/alignment and depth
of this underground infrastructure should be further researched as part of future
redevelopment efforts, as information is currently limited.

33
November2011
4.0 HISTORICALandCULTRUALREVIEW/SITEHISTORY
Based on the level of disturbance that has occurred in the project area, it is unlikely that
any potential pre-contact archaeological resources would remain intact. The project area
has high potential for containing historical-archaeological resources. An existing
historic-period foundation is present within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for direct
effects, and there is potential for additional subsurface historical-archaeological resources
to be present within the project area. For these reasons, if excavation or building
demolition will take place within the project area, Summit recommends further
archaeological investigation of the APE for direct effects.

The Lowertown Historic District is located within the APE for indirect effects. This
district is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and is designated by the City
of Saint Paul. From several potential viewing locations in the Lowertown Historic
District, the existing Diamond Products building is already a visual intrusion on the
district, and future construction would not visually diminish the districts historic
integrity. It is recommended that once conceptual designs are brought forward, studies
regarding traffic, noise, and lighting should be conducted to determine the effect on the
Lowertown Historic District.

34
November2011
5.0 CLOSINGANDRELOCATIONCOSTS
Trans Park is currently operating a parking lot business directly across the street from the
Former Diamond Products building and may have to relocate as a result of the
construction of a new St. Paul Saints baseball park. As such, Trans Park may qualify for
relocation benefits, as they appear to meet the definition of a business under the
Uniform Relocation Act, in that they lease real property to others. At a new site Trans
Park may install a sign, advertise their site or incur increased costs of operation.
Therefore, it is recommended the Port Authority budget $50,000 for re-establishment
expenses. Please see Appendix 5.0 for a memo describing a relocation analysis with
regards to Trans Parks operations.

An allowance of $100,000 is recommended for legal fees associated with title issues and
closing costs.

35
November2011
6.0 ENVIRONMENTALDUEDILIGENCE
6.1 Introduction
Environmental due diligence completed at the Site as part of this work included the
review of historical environmental information, completion of a Phase I Environmental
Site Assessment (ESA) Report, completion of a Phase II Work Plan for approval by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), completion of a Phase II
Investigation/Report and development of conceptual response actions.

A bibliography of existing environmental documents can be found on the Supplemental
Report Appendix 6.0. The following sections provide a summary of the results of the
environmental due diligence conducted on the Site.
6.2 PhaseIESA
Liesch Associates, Inc. (Liesch) was retained by the Saint Paul Port Authority (SPPA) to
conduct a Phase I ESA for the former Diamond Products Site located at 310 5
th
Street
East, Saint Paul, Minnesota. The Site consists of approximately seven to eight acres of
land occupied by a 600,000 square foot former office/manufacturing facility and portions
of the surface parking area to the north currently owned by Diamond Products Company.
The Phase I ESA was conducted to assist the SPPA in evaluating current environmental
conditions of the Site in connection with its purchase. The Phase I ESA was conducted
in accordance with the Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process, American Society of Testing Materials
Designation: E 1527-05. Work performed as part of this Phase I ESA included: review of
Federal, state and local information on the Site; a walk-over survey of the Site to identify
readily apparent environmental concerns on or adjacent to the Site; interviews of
knowledgeable owners and occupants; and a review of historical data for the Site.
The Phase I ESA revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions with the
exception of the following:
On Site RECs
There have been well documented industrial usages and releases on the property
(including a coal gas operation, the St. Paul Gas Light Co.), as described in detail
in the previous environmental reports and summarized in the Phase I ESA. This
contamination of soil and groundwater is located on the southeast portion of the
Property and consists of organic contaminants related to the former coal gas
operation in soil and groundwater and chlorinated solvents in the groundwater.

36
November2011
Inside the building, there are numerous stained areas that may indicate a release to
the environment. In particular, several of the hydraulic units in the loading dock
on the north side of the building showed staining. This likely indicates a release of
hydraulic oil that may have migrated below the concrete. Similarly, there is a
stained area on the north side of the second floor (ground level) related to a hood
and drum storage area (as indicated by grounding straps). This staining was along
the north wall and may have migrated outside the building to the soil. Based on
the age of the building, residue could contain PCBs.
Off Site RECs
The historical record indicates numerous sites in the upgradient direction that had the
potential to impact the Property. Detailed information is included in the Phase I ESA and
the sites are as follows:
The Kaplan-University site is a recycling/salvage operation being worked on
under the MPCAs RCRA program based on enforcement concerns. The listing
states that groundwater is contaminated.
The Twin Tool listing shows groundwater contamination with halogenated
organics.
The Miller & Holmes listing shows groundwater contamination with chlorinated
compounds.
The Car-Lo Properties listing shows groundwater contamination with VOCs,
PAH, PCBs, lead, and petroleum related contaminants.
The Union Gospel Mission listing shows an active VIC site but does not provide
additional information on the contaminants present or the media contaminated.
Metals Reduction Co., is shown as in negotiations with the MPCA Hazardous
Waste Program on a stipulation agreement to resolve violations.
The Wesco Distribution Inc. listing shows an active VIC site but does not provide
additional information on the contaminants present or the media contaminated.

Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions
This assessment has revealed no historical recognized environmental conditions.
A copy of the Phase I ESA prepared for the Site is included on the Supplementary Report
Appendix 6.1
6.3 PhaseIIInvestigation
Historical Phase II investigation work conducted at the Site identified contamination in
soil and groundwater. Contaminants of concern identified in these past investigations
included diesel range organics (DRO), gasoline range organics (GRO), semi-volatile
organic compounds (SVOCs) and cyanide. Minor amounts of chlorinated VOCs have

37
November2011
been identified as well. Soil and groundwater contaminants were generally identified
along the eastern portion of the Site below the floor slab elevation of the manufacturing
facility. In addition to the above identified contaminants of concern, elevated levels of
metals (including mercury) have been identified on sites adjacent to the Property. Figure
6A illustrates historical uses of the Site along with contamination identified at the Site
prior to these due diligence activities.

Generally, the majority of the existing investigation/due diligence studies have focused
on areas south of the Site. In an effort to better define existing and potential
contamination at the Site, Liesch prepared a Phase II Investigation Work Plan for
submittal and approval to the MPCA. The Phase II Investigation Work Plan proposed
soil, groundwater and sub-surface vapor investigation at the Site. The proposed
investigation focused on refining the extent of contamination identified along the eastern
portion of the Site during past investigation and identifying any additional contamination
beneath the floor slab of the former manufacturing facility. Along with soil and
groundwater investigation, the investigation of potential sub-surface vapor contamination
was investigated.
6.3.1 SoilInvestigation
Soil investigation was initiated on May 9, 2011 at the Site. Liesch personnel were on-site
to observe the installation of the test locations and collect soil samples for laboratory
analysis. Investigation of existing and potential soil contamination at the Site consisted
of the installation of seven soil borings outside of the existing manufacturing facility and
22 borings inside, beneath the existing floor slab. The seven borings installed outside
were located in the northern parking lot area. The 22 borings installed beneath the
existing floor slab were generally spaced evenly over the area of the floor slab. Methods
used for the installation of the test locations included hollow stem auger, Geoprobe
TM
and
hand auger borings.

.
38

Figure6AHistoricalUsesoftheSite

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
39
November2011
In accordance with the approved Phase II Investigation Work Plan, soil samples were
collected continuously from each boring and observed for visual and/or olfactory signs of
contamination. In addition, all soil samples were screened with field instrumentation to
measure for the presence of organic vapors. Select soil samples were placed in
laboratory containers and submitted to Legend Technical Services, Inc. (Legend) for
analysis of DRO, GRO, VOCs, SVOCs and metals. A selection of the samples submitted
to Legend was also analyzed for cyanide, sulfate and sulfide.

Analytical results from the soil samples identified contaminants of concern to be DRO,
GRO and SVOCs. Analytical results were compared to MPCA Industrial Soil Reference
Values (SRVs) and Soil Leaching Values (SLVs)
OCs were compared to the MPCA SRV and SLVs for benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) equivalents.
The MPCA SRV for BaP equivalents was exceeded in borings A-1, A-3, SB-3, B-1, B-5
and MW-1. SVOCs were not detected above the Industrial SRV for BaP equivalents in
any of the other soil samples collected. The SLV for BaP equivalents is greater than its
Industrial SRV. Therefore, no additional samples exceeded the SLV for BaP equivalents.
All samples that exceeded the Industrial SRV also exceeded their corresponding SLV.

The MPCA has not developed Industrial SRVs or SLVs for either DRO or GRO. DRO
was detected at elevated levels (>100 ppm) in soil samples collected from borings A-1,
A-3, A-4, A-5, SB-3, B-5, 3C-1 and MW-1. GRO was detected at elevated levels (>100
ppm) in A-1, A-4, SB-3, and 2C-1.

No RCRA metals were detected in soil samples at concentrations above their respective
MPCA SRVs. Cyanide was not detected above its MPCA SRV in any of the soil samples
analyzed for cyanide. Although both sulfate and sulfide were detected in soil samples,
the MPCA has not established SRVs for either compound. The only VOCs detected in
soil samples above MPCA SRVs were 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene and naphthalene in boring
SB-3.

Contamination identified in boring B-3 and A-1/MW-3 consists of elevated levels of
SVOCs and BaP equivalents, DRO and GRO. Review of the Conceptual Development
Plan indicates boring A-1/MW-1 is located in the vicinity of a proposed underground
storm water detention area. Installation of this underground storm water detention
system will require the interaction with a significant quantity of these impacted soils.
Visual observations indicated that these soils had a coal tar-like substance mixed in with
them. At this time, these contaminated soils have not been determined to be hazardous.
However, applicable Resource Conservation and Recovery Act rules and regulations
should be reviewed and discussions held with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) representative to make this final determination.

40
November2011

Refer to Figure 6B illustrating the locations of soil borings and estimated extent of soil
contamination at the Site. Based on the type of contamination and the elevations at
which most of it was identified, it is believed that a majority of the soil contamination
originated from the former manufactured gas plant operations. It is recommended that
additional Phase II Investigation of soils be completed in an effort to further
refine/possibly limit areas of soil contamination relative to a final development plan.
This will require entry into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Voluntary
Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) and/or the Petroleum Brownfields (PB) Programs. Prior
to completion of any additional Phase II Investigation work, it is recommended that a
Phase II Investigation Work Plan be completed and approved by the MPCA.

Refer to Supplemental Report Appendix 6.2 for a copy of the Phase II Investigation
Report.
6.3.2 GroundwaterInvestigation
Three monitoring wells, MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3, were installed as part of the Phase II
Investigation to collect groundwater samples and determine the direction of groundwater
flow on the Site. To date, one round of groundwater levels and groundwater samples
have been collected from the wells.

Based on the first round of groundwater elevations measured, the direction of
groundwater flow appears to be to the southeast towards the Mississippi River. Past
investigations indicate groundwater flows in more of a due south direction towards the
river.

Groundwater samples collected during the first round were submitted to the laboratory
and analyzed for DRO, GRO, VOCs, SVOCs, RCRA metals, cyanide, sulfide and sulfate.
In addition to monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3, groundwater samples were
collected from geoprobes A-3 and A-4. The results of groundwater samples were
compared to Minnesota Department of Health Health Risk Limits (HRLs) or Health
Based Values (HBVs). If an HRL or HBV did not exist for a particular contaminant, it
was compared to Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs).

Contaminants of concern detected in groundwater samples included DRO, GRO,
Cyanide, VOCs and SVOCs. These contaminants were detected above their respective
HRLs, HBVs and/or MCLs in one or more groundwater samples collected at the Site.

41
November2011
Results of groundwater samples were in general agreement with the results of historical
groundwater monitoring. Refer to Figure 6C illustrating the location of the groundwater
monitoring wells, groundwater flow direction.

Groundwater sampling results indicate contamination similar to historic groundwater
investigation conducted at the Site. The Site was previously granted a No Further Action
(NFA) Letter for groundwater. In order to secure this NFA letter, the property owner was
required to complete additional groundwater monitoring to illustrate that the groundwater
contaminant plume had stabilized and was not a threat to human health or the
environment. The previously issued NFA letter was issued based on the site use at the
time it was issued. Because the planned site use is different than what the previous site
use was, additional groundwater monitoring will be required to secure another NFA letter
for the proposed use. It is anticipated that this additional monitoring will include an
additional round(s) of groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1,
MW-2 and MW-3. In addition, off-site, downgradient groundwater samples will likely
be required.
This will require entry into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Voluntary
Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) and/or the Petroleum Brownfields (PB) Programs. Prior
to completion of any additional groundwater sampling and/or investigation, it is
recommended that a Phase II Investigation Work Plan be completed and approved by the
MPCA.

Report.
6.3.3 SubsurfaceVaporInvestigation
Six (6) soil vapor probes were installed at the Site in order to collect subsurface vapor
samples. Three were installed outside within the northern parking lot area and three were
installed beneath the floor slab of the first level inside the manufacturing facility. The
vapor probes were each installed to a depth of approximately 8 feet below grade surface.

Subsurface vapor samples were collected from each of the 6 vapor probes using Summa
canisters and submitted to the laboratory for analysis of VOCs. Results were compared
to MPCA Intrusion Screening Values (ISVs). Laboratory analytical results indicated the
presence of benzene (VP-4), 1,3-butadiene (VP-1, VP-2, VP-3, VP-4 and VP-5),
tetrachloroethylene (VP-2 and VP-3), trichloroethylene (VP-2, VP-3, VP-5 and VP-6)
and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (VP-1, VP-2, VP-3 and VP-5) above their respective ISVs.

Refer to Figure 6B illustrating the locations of the soil vapor probes.

42

Figure6BSoilBoringsandSoilContaminationLimits

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
43

Figure6C-Groundwater

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
44
November2011

Based the results of this sub-surface vapor investigation and soil and groundwater
contamination documented at the site, subsurface structures and/or structures constructed
at grade will likely require a sub-slab vapor control system. MPCA requirements for sub-
slab vapor control should be consulted to determine the level of sub-surface vapor control
system will be required at the site. At this time it appears a sub-surface vapor control
system including a vapor barrier layer and passive venting system will be necessary for
portions of structures constructed underground and/or at grade.

Report.
6.4 ConcreteTesting/Reuse
Seven samples were collected from the first, second and third level floor slabs and
analyzed for DRO, SVOCs and metals. Samples were collected from areas of the floor
slab that appeared visually clean. Areas of staining were considered to be contaminated
and assumed to be managed by disposal at an approved, regulated facility.
The purpose of sampling concrete that appeared visually clean was to determine whether
the concrete mix itself was contaminated and to gain a preliminary understanding of the
feasibility of processing and reuse of the concrete from existing manufacturing facility as
general fill during site redevelopment.
Analytical results of the concrete sampling indicated that some of the concrete samples
were contaminated DRO. Although not elevated levels, the detection of DRO in some of
the concrete samples may render portions of the building as unusable for processing and
reuse. Concrete was also tested for lead using a field XRF unit. Evaluation of the
columns in the building with the field XRF unit suggests that portions of the columns are
contaminated with lead due to the past application of a sealer. However, additional
sampling will need to be completed in accordance with previously approved practices
prior to making a final determination of what portions of the concrete structure are
available for processing and reuse.
6.5 AsbestosandHazardousMaterialsSurvey
Liesch performed a non-destructive asbestos and hazardous materials survey at 310 5

th

Street East in St. Paul, Minnesota. The survey was completed in accordance with
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Asbestos Hazardous Materials Response Act
(AHERA) 40 CFR, Part 743, Subpart E as specified in Minnesota Department of Health

45
November2011
(MDH) and Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) rules and
regulations.

The following summary is provided:

1. Asbestos Containing Materials:

Friable, Category I and II Non-Friable Asbestos Containing Materials were
identified during the Survey which will require management and/or removal
prior to demolition/renovation activities.

In accordance with the State of Minnesota and Federal regulations, all friable ACM
and non-friable ACM that may become friable if disturbed, must be identified and
removed prior to renovation or demolition. All rules and regulations must be
followed, including, but not limited to: notification, permit acquisition and disposal of
ACM at a landfill approved to accept asbestos-containing waste. An asbestos
abatement contractor licensed by the State of Minnesota must perform the work.
Workers, supervisors and air monitoring personnel must be trained, certified and
licensed according to EPA and State of Minnesota regulations. Regulated asbestos
abatement projects require a five-(5) calendar day notification to the MDH and a 10
working day notification to MPCA prior to the start of abatement.

For this Non-Destructive Survey, Liesch conducted visual inspections within all
accessible areas, and employed limited methods to access spaces or material layers
for viewing. Destructive access methods, such as sledgehammers or drills, were not
used. The Building included spaces with only limited access such as inside structural
walls and columns, above hard ceilings, and roofing of the Building. While some
roofing materials and related materials were accessible for sampling, in order to
maintain the integrity of the roofing system the existing roofing materials were not
penetrated to determine if older roofing materials or suspect insulation materials are
present under the existing surface. Foundation waterproofing and potential transite
service piping was not discovered and/or assessable at the project site. If these
materials are discovered this material will require additional sampling prior to impact.
The demolition/renovation plan should include informational language to outline this
potential issue.

Therefore, concealed ACM may be undiscovered at this time.

46
November2011

2. Lead Based Paint (LBP)

Liesch did identify damaged painted surfaces containing LBP at the time of the
Survey which will require stabilization prior to demolition activities. Additionally,
other undamaged surfaces containing LBP were identified during the Survey.
Surfaces containing LBP will require approval through the MPCA prior to being
acceptable for beneficial reuse, which may impact demolition costs/options.

Liesch cost estimate is based upon the stabilization of damaged LBP surfaces
conducted by competent trained personnel in accordance with the OSHA regulation
29 CFR 1926.62. Debris generated during stabilization should be evaluated for
hazardous waste characteristics prior to disposal. LBP connected to its substrate can
be managed as demolition debris and disposed of in a permitted demolition debris
disposal landfill. Any beneficial reuse of these materials may require prior approval
by the MPCA.

3. Hazardous Materials

In addition, the renovation/demolition contractor must file a 10 working day
notification to the MPCA prior to the start of renovation/demolition. In accordance
with MPCAs Pre-Renovation and Demolition Rule (Minn. 7035.0805) all hazardous
materials identified must be managed or removed from the facility two days prior to
the start date that was submitted on the MPCA Renovation/Demolition Notification
form. The following items were noted:

a. PCB Containing Caulking/Ballasts

Liesch identified possible PCB Containing Ballasts during the Survey.
Prior to the start of renovation/demolition activities, all light fixtures with
ballasts that will require removal will need to be examined and those not
marked No PCBs must be placed in a properly labeled metal drum for
management as PCB containing waste and will need to be disposed of in
accordance with state and federal regulations. The contractor taking
possession of any known or suspected PCB containing items for disposal
must have a valid EPA Identification Number for Regulated Waste
Activity.

Caulk with PCB concentrations at or greater than 50 ppm is considered a
PCB bulk product waste and special handling and disposal is required and

47
November2011
regulated under 40 CFR 761.62. The sampling did not identify caulk with
PCB concentrations over the 50 ppm action level. Caulk with PCB
concentrations under the 50 ppm action level were identified during the
Survey. Caulking with PCB levels at less than 50 ppm that has been
removed and separated from the structure may be disposed of as a
municipal or industrial solid waste but may not be disposed of as demolition
debris. Caulking with PCB levels at less than 50 ppm that is still attached to
a portion of the structure may be disposed of as demolition debris. The
demolition landfill used must have PCB caulking addressed in its Industrial
Solid Waste Management Plan. Be aware that even if a demolition landfill is
allowed to accept this waste, it may choose not to.

b. Metal Containing Items

Liesch identified Metal Containing Items during the Survey. Prior to the
start of renovation/demolition activities, fluorescent light bulbs and HID
bulbs requiring removal will need to be removed undamaged and stored in
an undamaged condition until they are reused or recycled in accordance
with state and federal regulations. Prior to the start of
renovation/demolition activities, devices that contain mercury switches
that require removal will need to be reused or removed and disposed of in
accordance with state and federal regulations.
Mercury residue was identified in laboratory drain plumbing. Levels of
mercury vapor as high as 590,000 ng/m
3
were detected in a laboratory
sink. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) recommends
(Minnesota Department of Health memo dated January 30, 2007 to the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding Mercury Cleanup
Concentrations).a clearance level of 800 ng/m
3
for workplaces or schools.
MDH also recommends a long-term residential exposure limit of 300
ng/m
3
, and a clearance level for cleanup of mercury spills in residential
settings not exceed 500 ng/m
3
.

The application of these MDH Guidance numbers is intended as an
average exposure, measured in the breathing zone. However, MDH
acknowledges that in common usage the Guidance numbers are applied as
a maximum allowable concentration. Liesch recommends that laboratory
plumbing be removed as mercury contaminated waste before demolition.

48
November2011

c. ODC Containing Items

Liesch identified possible ODC Containing Items during the Survey. Items
which contain ODCs must be removed and disposed of according to federal,
state and local regulations prior to renovation/demolition. However, if these
items are recycled or reused this option may negate the need for an EPA
Identification Number.

d. Miscellaneous Materials

Liesch identified Miscellaneous Materials during the Survey that will need
to be removed undamaged and stored in an undamaged condition until
they are reused or recycled or disposed of in accordance with state and
federal regulations.

The Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Survey completed was a limited destructive
survey. It is recommended that a full Destructive Asbestos and Hazardous Materials
Survey be completed prior to beginning abatement activities in preparation for
demolition.
6.6 ConceptualResponseActions
On June 23, 2011, the project team held a conference call with the MPCA to discuss the
results of the Phase II Investigation and conceptual response actions. Conceptual
response actions were based on the conceptual redevelopment plan presented in the Ryan
Feasibility Report. Refer to Figure 6D illustrating the conceptual development of the Site
as a regional baseball stadium. Upon completion of the conference call, the following
conceptual response action approach was agreed upon by the MPCA:

Conceptual response actions were based on the assumption that the City will seek
a No Further Action Letter for soil and groundwater from the MPCA as part of
site redevelopment efforts.
Site cleanup levels will be MPCA Industrial SRVs.
Contaminated soils not encountered during redevelopment activities can be left in
place as long as the proper buffer zones are maintained above them. These buffer
zones between redevelopment features and contaminated soil exceeding industrial
SRVs consist of 2 feet of clean soil (<Industrial SRVs) below pavement and
buildings and 4 feet of clean soil (<Industrial SRVs) in green space areas.

49
November2011
Contaminated soils encountered during redevelopment will be required to be
managed off-site or on-site in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.
Collection of a minimum of one additional round of groundwater samples and
elevation measurements from the existing monitoring wells will be required. In
addition, off-site down gradient groundwater samples must to be collected.
Results of groundwater monitoring will be need to illustrate that the groundwater
contaminant plume has maintained its stability since the last No Further Action
letter was issued in 2005 to Diamond Products.
Future structures constructed at or below grade will be constructed with a passive
sub-slab vapor barrier system consisting of a barrier layer and passive venting
system.
Within green space areas of the field, a low permeability (minimum of 1 foot) will
be incorporated into the backfill material to maintain the low permeability
characteristics of the hard surface currently existing at the site.
An Environmental Covenant will be recorded on the property deed.

Prior to implementation of response actions, a Response Action Plan/Construction
Contingency Plan should be developed and submitted to the MPCA Programs for review
and approval. This will require entry into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) and/or the Petroleum Brownfields
(PB) Programs.
50

Figure6DConceptualDevelopment

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
51
November2011
7.0 GEOTECHNICALDUEDILIGENCE
7.1 Geotechnical-Introduction

American Engineering and Testing performed a preliminary geotechnical exploration and
engineering review for the Diamond Products Site (site) in May 2011. The geotechnical
exploration consisted of performing 12 standard penetration test (SPT) to document
subsurface conditions and geotechnical properties of subsurface soils. The STP borings
were also used to perform environmental sampling for the Phase II environmental
investigation. Six of the test borings were performed in the parking lot area along the
north side of Fifth Street East, one test boring was performed outside the southeast corner
of the Diamond Products building, and the remaining four STP borings were performed
inside the Diamond Products building, on the ground-level floor. The locations of the test
borings of the test borings are indicated on Figure 6B in Section 6.0 Environmental Due
Diligence.
7.2 Geotechnical-SiteConditions

The ground surface at the Diamond Products site slopes down gently to the east along
Fifth Street East and also down to the south along Broadway Street. The highest ground
surface is at about elevation 754.0 feet at the northwest corner of the project site, and the
lowest ground surface is at around elevation 713.0 feet at the southeast corner of the site.
The Diamond Product building is cut into the slope on the north side of the building.
7.3 Geotechnical-SubsurfaceSoils

The STP borings were advanced to depths that document subsurface geotechnical
conditions for supporting buildings and structures on a deep foundation system, such as a
pile foundation. The boring depths were based on prior information that indicate the
current Diamond Products building is supported on a pile foundation, and that poor soil
conditions exist at depth to the southeast and south of the project site; earlier geotechnical
borings performed in 2008 and 2009 indicate poor soil generally consist of existing fill
overlying swamp deposits below groundwater. The depth of the test borings performed
on the site, outside the Diamond Products building, ranged from 14 feet to 71 feet below
the current ground surface. Inside the building, the test borings were advanced to depths
ranging from 31 feet to 51 feet below the ground floor level.

52
November2011
The generalized subsurface soil profile indicated by the SPT borings outside the building
is 1 to 19 feet of existing fill overlying native soils consisting of alternating layers of
coarse alluvium and till. Both the coarse alluvium and till consist of sandy soils that
overall, are generally medium dense to very dense. Inside the building, the generalized
subsurface profile is 9 to 18 feet of existing fill overlying the alternating layers of
medium dense to very dense coarse alluvium and till. The composition of the existing fill
is variable and consists mostly of sand, silty sand and/or clayey sand; some of the exiting
fill contains pieces of concrete, brick and/or glass rubble. Both the coarse alluvium and
till consist of sandy soils that are generally medium dense to very dense; some of the till
layers are also composed of clayey soils having a very stiff to hard consistency. Swamp
deposits were only encountered in the test boring (A-6) performed in the southwest
quadrant of the building. The swamp deposits consist of about 3.5 feet of hemic peat
overlain by 14.5 feet of existing fill, and underlain by a 6 foot layer of very soft clayey
sand alluvium.
7.4 Geotechnical-Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered in all but one of the test borings; the test boring where
groundwater did not enter the boring is at the east end of the parking lot and was
terminated just above the anticipated groundwater depth. The depth to groundwater in the
parking lot borings ranges from about 18 feet to 29.5 feet below the current ground
surface. Inside the building, the groundwater depth varies from about 3.5 feet to 14 feet
below the ground-floor level. Groundwater elevations at the test boring locations in the
parking lot area range from approximately 713.3 feet near the midway point of the
parking lot, to 726.7 feet near the west end of the lot. Groundwater is at about 710 feet at
the southeast corner of the site. Inside the building, groundwater elevations at the test
boring locations range from 702.4 feet to 713 feet. In general, soil samples collected
below groundwater from the test boring locations in the eastern half of the site exhibited
a petroleum-like chemical odor indicating contaminated groundwater.
7.5 Geotechnical-EngineeringOpinion

The coarse alluvium and till are generally suitable for support of commercial structures
and buildings, whereas the existing fill and swamp deposits should not be relied upon for
supporting new structures. To prepare the site for new construction, existing fill and any
swamp deposits below planned structures should either be removed down to competent
coarse alluvium or till deposits, or planned structures need to be supported on deep
foundations (e.g., steel piles, Rammed Aggregate Piers, Vibro Pier Columns, helical
piers) extending through the existing fill and swamp deposits to the competent deposits.
In general, subsurface soils in the area encompassing the parking lot and Fifth Street East
can be readily corrected for supporting structures by excavating existing fill soils

53
November2011
exposing the competent coarse alluvium or till. The greatest amount soil correction would
appear to occur in the western end of this area where existing fill was encountered at
depths of 11.5 to 19 feet. The excavated existing fill can be reused as compacted
engineered fill for support of structures provided the material is free of rubble and debris
and is not too contaminated. Once properly corrected, new construction in this area can
be supported on a spread-footing foundation system.

For new construction within the area of the Diamond Products building, as well as just
east of the building, removing existing fill and swamp deposits will be difficult as these
materials occur below groundwater. This area would need to be dewatered to achieve
suitable soil correction. Dewatering will likely make soil correction by excavation
economically unfeasible, especially if the groundwater is contaminated. Any planned
structures in this area will most likely need to be supported on a deep foundation system.
7.6.1 ConceptDesign

The current concept design for the proposed ballpark has the stadium in the northwest
portion of the Diamond Product site with seating sightlines facing south to east. One
wing of the seating stands extends to the south, with another wing of the stands stretching
to the east. The playing field is at elevations ranging from 722 feet within the infield to
720 feet at the perimeter outfield fence. The concourse level is projected at an elevation
of 736.5 feet, and the lower service level with locker rooms and storage is projected to be
near the level of the playing field.
7.6.2 SubsurfaceImprovements

Based on the subsurface soil conditions indicated by the geotechnical exploration, soils
will need to be excavated to construct the majority of the stadium where the lower service
level is at playing field level. Excavating soils will allow supporting most of the stadium
on a spread-footing foundation system. However, the southern wing of the stadium that is
constructed in the area of the current Diamond Products building will most likely need to
be supported by a deep foundation system, such as steel pile, aggregate rammed piers, or
helical piers. Removing unsuitable soils in this area will require excavating below
groundwater likely making excavation more costly than installing a deep foundation
system.

The depth of excavation for the ballpark will be up to about 35 feet to reach the field
level and lower service level. This will result in excavating existing fill as well as coarse
alluvial sands and till. Both the existing fill and these native coarse alluvium and till can
be reused as engineered fill, provided they are void of significant contamination, debris
and rubble.

54
November2011

Groundwater will likely enter stadium excavation in the very northwest where the
stadium service level is below approximately elevation 725 feet. Moreover, below this
elevation the back side of some of the lower service rooms will need to be constructed
with a drainage system to prevent the potential intrusion of groundwater into this level.
7.6.3 SoilRetentionSystem

A soil retention system, such as a soldier pile and wood lagging retaining wall, will likely
be needed along the north and west side of the site for constructing the stadium and
stands. The retention system will need to retain soil up to a height of approximately 35
feet for constructing the stadium at a grade of 720 feet. The length of the soil retention
system on the north side of the site can be reduced if the site excavation can be sloped
back onto MnDOT right-of-way. On the west side of the site, the west basement wall of
the Diamonds Product building can be incorporated into the retention system, provided
the City of St. Paul allows the west wall to be abandoned in place. Back sloping the
excavation into MnDOT rigth-of-way and using the Diamond Product west basement
wall as a soil retaining wall will reduce the cost of a soil retention system for the site.
7.6.4 DiamondProductsBuildingGround-FloorSlab

Under the current design concept for the ball park, the ground-floor slab of the Diamond
Products would be removed and then the underlying wood piles would be covered with 5
to 6 feet of engineered fill. In areas where swamp deposits are present at depth, the
covered piles could become a nuisance if the tops of the piles eventually reflect through
to the field surface (producing small bumps). This would occur in response to the
consolidation of organics and soft soils around the pile from the added fill load. To
minimize this potential nuisance, the field area can be surcharged with a layer of fill to
pre-consolidate underlying soft and loose soils. Alternatively, if the floor slab were left in
place this potential nuisance can be avoided. Leaving the slab would also have the added
benefit of providing a barrier to the migration of precipitation into the groundwater,
which may be an issue where subsurface contamination is present. However, leaving the
slab in place would probably only be viable if buried swamp deposits do not occur north
of the Diamond Products building, which based on the test boring data appears
to be the case.
7.6.5 Utilities

It does not appear buried swamp deposits pose a problem for trenching of new utilities on
the north side of the project site, based on the subsurface data from the test borings. No
swamp deposits were encountered in the test borings in the northern parking lot.

55
November2011
However, utility trenching may encounter contaminated soils, particularly on the east side
of the project site. Contaminated soils that cannot be reused as backfill in the trenches, or
some other locations on the project site, will need to be managed as waste. In addition to
encountering contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater may be encountered on the
east side of the project site, particularly in the very northeast portion of the site. If
dewatering is performed the contaminated groundwater will need to be managed as
wastewater, and in some cases as hazardous waste if free product is present in the
groundwater. For utilities that need to be abandoned and are within contaminated
groundwater, it may be more feasible to abandon the utilities in place to avoid having to
deal with contaminated soil and groundwater.
7.6.6 StormwaterManagementSystem

The concept design for the ballpark indicates stormwater will be collected in an
underground retention system extending down to approximately elevation 705 feet in an
area at the southeast corner of the stadium site. This retention system will also collect
stormwater that infiltrates into a subgrade drainage system below the playing field.
Installing the retention system in the southeast corner of the ballpark will require
dewatering any excavation that extends below approximately elevation 710 feet where
groundwater is present. Moreover, water and soil from the excavation will likely be
contaminated and will need to be managed as waste.
7.7 Geotechnical-FurtherInvestigation
Additional geotechnical exploration will be needed to supplement current test boring
data, and develop a final design for a future ballpark, or any other future structure
planned for the project site. Information from the additional exploration will be needed to
design and construct an economically feasible structure that extends below current site
grades, as well as develop cost effective earthwork and grading plans for constructing
project structures and infrastructures. Further investigation will also be needed for
developing and designing a deep foundation system.

56
November2011
8.0 DEMOLITIONDUEDILIGENCE
8.1 DemolitionIntroduction
The following demolition analysis and associated cost opinion is segmented into parcels,
vacated streets and roadways according to an ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey created by
URS dated August 26, 2005 (see Supplemental Report Appendix 2.1). The following,
along with Figure 2D from Section 2.0, which is duplicated below for convenience,
describe the project segments:
ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A
Parcel B
Parcel C
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G)
E. 5
th
Street
Broadway Street
Parcel 1
Vacated Pine Street
Parcel 2
Vacated Olive Street
North Section
John Street
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7
Vacated 4
th
St.
NE Section
8.2 DemolitionExteriortotheBuilding
The demolition analysis exterior to the building is broken down into surface and
underground items. The primary assumption maintained during the demolition analysis is
all surface and underground features on the site are to be demolished, removed and
disposed. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule, which are described subsequently
on an as-needed basis.
.
57
!"#$#"$%&'()$
BNSF RAILWAY CO. / PROPERTY TAX DEPT.
APPROXIMATE MARKET HOUSE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION / CO. PARADISE AND ASSOCIATES
APPROXIMATE CITY OF SAINT PAUL
APPROXIMATE R/W OF HWY I-94
(red dashed line)
M. RASOIR LTD/ C/O PRIESE LAW FIRM
M. RASOIR LTD/ C/O PRIESE LAW FIRM (CENTRAL
CORRIDOR OPERATION & MAINTENANCE FACILITY)
ACQUISITION AREA - DIAMOND PRODUCTS CO.
401 E. 4
TH
BLDG. PARTNERSHIP
APPROXIMATE LAFAYETTE BRIDGE
IMPROVEMENT AREA
*)+)*)!&)%,$
%-*.)/,$&01234560$78$%91:0; 871
<=5>7?@$A17@946BC -*%$&71DC EFGHIGEJ
$
"K!)*%LMA,$*0N=7?5O$P5OOD51Q$
M?=252:0$+05B=R=O=6; *0D716C S9O; HETE
Overall Project Area
(solid black line)
FIGURE 2D Project Area

Figure2DProjectArea

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
58
November2011
8.2.1 SurfaceDemolition
The following describes notable surface features to be demolished within each of the
project segments. The contractor shall be particularly careful of surface removals within
the limits of hot spots, as pavement may have contaminated soil directly below it that
needs to be handled properly.

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Three concrete pads exist in the southeast corner of Parcel
A. One of the pads is 10x18 while the other two pads are 4x4. The
entire surface of the parcel is paved with bituminous. A block retaining
wall ranging from two to three feet in height extends the length of the
northern property line.
Parcel B A wrought iron fence and an adjacent guardrail exist on the
northern portion of Parcel B. The entire surface is paved with
bituminous. A 4x4 concrete pad lies in the south central portion of the
site.
Parcel C The western and northern edges of Parcel C exhibit a steep
slope paved with bituminous. Along the western edge of the northern
property line a concrete retaining wall replaces the paved bituminous
slope. The entire parcel is paved with bituminous, and two 4x4
concrete pads are present in the south central portion of the site.
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) A
616,000 square foot building exists on these parcels.

E. 5
th
Street - East 5
th
Street is paved with bituminous and exhibits
exists along entire length of the southern right-of-way. Several concrete
driveway aprons exist intermittently along the northern right-of-way.
Broadway Street - A minor amount of parking lot paving demolition
will occur in Broadway Street because the Parcel 1 property line angles
to the northeast. Overhead power lines run along E. 5
th
St. the entire
length of the project. These power lines will require relocation prior to
demolition and removal.
Parcel 1 A two-foot high block retaining wall runs the length of north
property line. The entire parcel is paved with bituminous.

59
November2011
Vacated Pine Street This area is bordered to the north with a wrought
iron fence and large wrought iron gate. Half of the surface is covered
with pavers and the remaining area is paved with bituminous.
Parcel 2 This parcel is completely paved with bituminous.
Vacated Olive Street The entire parcel is paved with bituminous.
North Section This entire area is enclosed with a mix of wrought iron
and chain link fence. The northerly most area of the site is an existing
dog park with trees and grass surface. The southern portion is paved
with bituminous. Several parking lot lights are present within the
southern area of the parcel.
John Street John Street is paved with bituminous and exhibits
exists along entire length of the western right-of-way. Several concrete
driveway aprons exist intermittently along the eastern right-of-way, and
one large concrete driveway apron is shown on the southern portion
along the west right-of-way. Overhead power lines run along John St.
the entire length of the project. These power lines will require
relocation prior to demolition and removal.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 Bituminous paving covers the extents of
this parcel. Other features include a light pole, 4x4 concrete pad and a
steep slope paved with bituminous.
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 The northern portion of this parcel exhibits
a vegetated slope, while the remainder of the site is paved with
bituminous.
Vacated 4
th
St. This area is paved with bituminous.
NE Section This area exhibits a vegetative cover.
8.2.2 UndergroundDemolition
area. See Figure 6B in Section 6.0 for locations of each well. These wells are to remain
and it is important to ensure these wells are protected during surface and underground
demolition operations.

Underground demolition may require access and excavation on adjoining properties and
rights-of-ways. As a result, a temporary construction easement or demolition permit, etc.
may be required prior to beginning work. Therefore, structures and utilities on adjoining
properties should be researched and field located to identify potential conflicts prior to
beginning work. The contractor shall contact Gopher State Once Call at 651-454-0002 at
least 48 hours in advance of beginning work for the locations of all underground wires,

60
November2011
cables, conduits, pipes, manholes, valves or other buried structures. The contractor shall
repair or replace the above if damaged during construction at no cost to the owner.

Note that the following discussion is only for the purposes of this due diligence analysis,
which assumes a proposed Saint Paul Saints baseball stadium will be constructed within
the project area.
Sanitary Sewer
Please refer to City sewer strip maps for more information on existing sanitary sewer
infrastructure. Appendix 3.0 shows a graphical description of the existing sanitary sewer
lines within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the existing
sanitary sewer infrastructure to be demolished and to remain within and immediately

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries
of Parcel A
Parcel B No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries
of Parcel B
Parcel C A 12-inch RCP sanitary sewer lines runs north to south
through the western portion of Parcel C. This line will likely be
demolished and removed.
Former Diamond Products Building (Parcels D, E, F, & G) An
abandoned 30-inch sanitary sewer line (and associated manholes)
connects E. 5
th
St. to Broadway through the Former Diamond Products
(FDP) footprint. Further, an abandoned 12-inch sanitary sewer line (and
associated manholes) lies within the southern portion of the FDP
footprint and runs nearly the entire length of building. Both of these
lines will likely be demolished and removed.

E. 5
th
Street - Extensive sanitary sewer infrastructure lies within
boundaries of E. 5
th
St. A 36-inch brick sewer line (and associated
manholes), and a 30-inch cement sewer line (and associated manholes)
run the length of E. 5
th
St. through the project area. The abandoned 12-
inch line from Parcel C connects to the 36-inch line, and the abandoned
30-inch line from within the building footprint connects to the 30-inch
line. A 30-inch brick sanitary sewer line in Broadway Street connects to
the 36-inch line, while a 12-inch sanitary forcemain in Broadway

61
November2011
connects to the 30-inch line. This infrastructure will likely be entirely
removed and bulkheaded in Broadway Street.
Broadway Street - The 36-inch sanitary line from E. 5
th
Street will
likely be demolished , removed and bulkheaded in Broadway Street.
Parcel 1 No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries
of Parcel 1.
Vacated Pine Street No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the
boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the boundaries
of Parcel 2.
Vacated Olive Street No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the
boundaries of Parcel 1.
North Section A 12-inch RCP sanitary sewer line (connecting from
Parcel C) runs along the northern section of the north section. This line
turns at Vacated Pine Street alignment and northerly thusly. This line
will likely be demolished and removed (and bulkheaded) in its
entirety. The abandoned 12-inch sanitary pipe running east-west, which
clips the very northerly edge of the north section will likely be left in
place.
John Street The abandoned 6-inch sanitary sewer line (and associated
manhole) running north south from John Street to Vacated 4
th
St. will
likely be demolished and removed.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 No existing sanitary sewer lines exist
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within
the boundaries of Parcel 1.
Vacated 4
th
St. The abandoned 12-inch line from within the building
footprint and the abandoned 6-inch line from John Street tie into an
eight-inch line within the Vacated 4
th
St. alignment. These lines will
likely be demolished, removed and bulkheaded.
NE Section - No existing sanitary sewer lines exist within the
boundaries of the NE section.
Storm Sewer
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical depiction of the existing storm
sewer within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the existing
storm sewer infrastructure to be demolished and to remain within and immediately

62
November2011
ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A - No existing storm sewer exists within the boundaries of
Parcel A
Parcel B No existing storm sewer exists within the boundaries of
Parcel B
Parcel C No existing storm sewer exists within the boundaries of
Parcel C
existing storm sewer exists within the footprint of the Former Diamond
Products building.

E. 5
th
Street A 15-inch RCP storm sewer pipe, which increases to a
21-inch RCP runs along two thirds of E. 5
th
St. Four laterals connect
into these pipes. This infrastructure will likely be demolished and
removed in its entirety.
Broadway Street No existing storm sewer of relevant to this report
exists in Broadway St.
Parcel 1 No existing storm sewer exists within the boundaries of
Parcel 1.
Vacated Pine Street No existing storm sewer exists within the
boundaries of the Vacated Pine Street Alignment.
Parcel 2 No existing storm sewer exists within the boundaries of
Parcel 1.
Vacated Olive Street No existing storm sewer exists within the
boundaries of Vacated Olive Street.
North Section An existing 54-inch storm sewer extending from the
north runs into the project area and turns east in the northerly most area
of the subject property. Within the project area this storm sewer will
likely be demolished and removed. Please see Section 12.0 Proposed
improvements for information on rerouting this pipe.
John Street A 15-inch storm sewer pipe with two connecting laterals
connects from E. 5
th
St. to Vacated 4
th
St. This infrastructure will likely
be demolished and removed in its entirety.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 No existing storm sewer exists in this area.
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 No existing storm sewer exists in this area.
Vacated 4
th
St. From John St. a 21-inch RCP storm sewer runs along
Vacated 4
th
St. within the project area. This storm sewer will likely be

63
November2011
demolished and removed slightly outside of the limits of the project
area.
NE Section No existing storm sewer exists in this area.

Water
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical depiction of the existing
watermain within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the
existing watermain infrastructure to be demolished and to remain within and immediately

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A - No existing watermain exists within the boundaries of Parcel
A
Parcel B No existing watermain exists within the boundaries of
Parcel B
Parcel C No existing watermain exists within the boundaries of
Parcel C
existing watermain exists within the footprint of the Former Diamond
Products building.

E. 5
th
Street A 30-inch watermain exists in the northern portion of E.
5
th
St. from Broadway to the Vacated Pine St. alignment. The 30-inch
line turns north at Vacated Pine St., while a 12-inch watermain pipe
continues along E. 5
th
St. until turning south at John St. A service
lateral of unknown size extends to the Former Diamond Products
building south of Vacated Pine St. The entirety of this infrastructure
will likely be demolished and removed.
Broadway Street The 30-inch watermain running along the western
portion of E. 5
th
St. turns south and runs southerly along the western
edge of Broadway. This watermain will likely be replaced Within the E.
5
th
St. alignment and remain connected to Broadway St.
Parcel 1 No existing watermain exists within the boundaries of Parcel
1.
Vacated Pine Street A 30-inch watermain from E. 5
th
St. turns north
along the Vacated Pine St. alignment, runs through the Vacated Pine St.
boundaries and continues north through the North section of the project
area. This infrastructure will likely be entirely removed and
demolished.

64
November2011
Parcel 2 No existing watermain exists within the boundaries of Parcel
1.
Vacated Olive Street No existing watermain exists within the
boundaries of Vacated Olive Street.
North Section A 30-inch watermain extending from Vacated Pine
Street runs north-south through the central portion of the North section.
This pipe continues to the north outside of the project area. This pipe
will likely be demolished and removed to the point of intersection with
a proposed new watermain installation along the northern edge of the
project area. See Section 12.0 for more information.
John Street A 12-inch watermain pipe runs north-south along the
eastern side of John Street. This pipe extends from both E. 5
th
St. and
Vacated 4
th
St. This infrastructure will likely be demolished and
removed in its entirety. See Section 12.0 for information on a proposed
replacement pipe.
Parcel 3 Blocks 2, 3 & 4 No existing watermain exists in this area.
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 No existing watermain exists in this area.
Vacated 4
th
St. No existing watermain will be demolished and
removed within the Vacated 4
th
St. alignment.
NE Section No existing watermain exists in this area.

Fiber Optic
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical depiction of the existing fiber
optic within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the existing
fiber optic infrastructure to be demolished and to remain within and immediately adjacent
to the project area:

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
available documentation, no existing fiber optic exists within the

65
November2011

E. 5
th
Street Two parallel fiber optic lines run the length of E. 5
th
St.
within the project limits. One line is labeled as AFS Fiber, but the
ownership of the lines is yet undetermined. The other fiber optic line
has no listed owner in the research documents. Both fiber lines connect
to fiber within Broadway St. on the west side of the project and extend
easterly past the project limits. It is assumed these fiber optic cables
will likely be demolished and removed as part of the Saints Stadium
project. It should be noted that at this time plans for the relocation of
these fiber optic lines are not available. However, relocation of this
utility could incur significant costs.
Broadway Street Fiber Optic cabling running north-south along
Broadway Street extends from the project area. This fiber will likely
remain in-place.
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing fiber exists
fiber exists within the boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 based on available documentation, no existing fiber optics
exist within the boundaries of Parcel 1.
fiber optic infrastructure exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive
Street.
North Section Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
optic lines exist within the boundaries of the North Section.
John Street Based on available documentation, no existing fiber optic
lines exist within John Stree.t
Vacated 4
th
St. Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
exists along Vacated 4
th
St.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing fiber
optics exists in this area.
66
November2011

Xcel Gas Main
Please refer to Appendix 3.0, which shows a graphical depiction of the existing gas main
within, and around the project area. The following is a description of the existing gas
main infrastructure to be demolished and to remain within and immediately adjacent to
the project area:

ACQUISITION AREA
Parcel A Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
Parcel B Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
Parcel C Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
available documentation, no existing gas main exists within the

E. 5
th
Street The gas main in E. 5
th
St. will likely be removed and
disposed. This gas main will likely be rerouted to the north around the
perimeter of the project area as per the Regional Ballpark Initiative
Feasibility Report.
Broadway Street Based on available documentation it appears that
gas main runs along the west portion of Broadway St. between E. 5
th
St.
(east leg) and E. 5
th
St. (west leg). Gas main also travels northerly
along Broadway St. from E. 5
th
St. (east leg). This infrastructure shall
be protected, as it will likely remain in-place.
Parcel 1 Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
gas main exists within the boundaries of Vacated Pine Street.
Parcel 2 based on available documentation, no existing gas main
gas main infrastructure exists within the boundaries of Vacated Olive
Street.
North Section Based on available documentation, no existing gas
main exist within the boundaries of the North Section.

67
November2011
John Street Gas main extending from E. 5
th
St. runs along the easterly
portion of John Street crossing the right-of-way line at Parcel 3, Block
5. This gas main shall be protected, as it will likely remain in-place.
existing gas main exists in this area.
Parcel 3 Blocks 5,6 & 7 Gas main crosses into this parcel from the
John St. right-of-way at which point it turns and angles southeast into
the Vacated 4
th
St. right-of-way. This gas main shall be protected, as it
will likely remain in-place.
Vacated 4
th
St. Gas main extends along the vacated 4
th
St. alignment
from Parcel 3, Block 5. This gas main shall be protected, as it will
likely remain in-place.
NE Section Based on available documentation, no existing gas main
8.2.3 Reuse,Recycle,Reduce
There are opportunities to reuse/recycle demolition materials. A qualified environmental
engineer and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency must approve the appropriate reuse
of a given material. Refer to Section 7.0 Environmental Due Diligence for further
discussion of concrete recycling relative to potential contamination.

Concrete
There are opportunities for recycling surface and underground concrete materials within
the project area. The concrete materials may be derived from sidewalks, curb and gutter,
storm sewer, manholes, etc. This material could be processed to a Class V specification
(or other appropriate specification as determined by the engineer) and potentially used as
fill material, pavement base material, etc.

Bituminous
An opportunity for recycling bituminous pavement exists on the subject properties. The
majority of the parking areas and roadways are paved with hot mix asphalt pavement
material. This material could be processed to a Class V specification (or other appropriate
specification as determined by the engineer) and potentially used as pavement base
material within public roadways, etc.

Class V
Assuming the on-site pavements include a section of compacted base material such as
Class V, there is an opportunity for stockpiling and reusing the on-site Class V materials.
This material could be stockpiled and potentially reused on-site as fill material, pavement

68
November2011
base material, pipe bedding material or other appropriate applications as determined by
the engineer.

Metal
Miscellaneous metals such as fencing, sign posts, etc. will likely be available for reuse or
recycling.
8.2.4 CostOpinion
The engineers cost opinion to demolish the above and below grade site features within
the project area is approximately $600,000. See Appendix 11.0 for a detailed line-item
breakdown of the opinion of probable construction costs. The opinion of probable
construction costs shown for surface and underground demolition of site features exterior
to the building includes only those items not associated with environmental cleanup
requirements (see Section 7.0 for environmental aspects of the site). The costs prepared
are engineering opinions of projected costs based on experience and past projects. The
cost opinions were based on current labor and material costs at the time the report was
prepared in August 2011. Changing conditions in various markets and other factors
related to the local, national and global economy may have a significant effect on actual
bid amounts. Note that applicable inflation or deflation factors may need to be considered
relative to the shown costs if used in the future. Finally the cost opinions shown in the
appendix include a contingency factor. These estimated factors should be applied, as it
creates an allowance accounting for unknown items resulting from the design and agency
approvals not being completed, variations in actual contractor bids and construction
issues that may arise during physical construction/demolition, etc.
8.3 BuildingDemolition
Building demolition is defined as follows:
Demolition and removal of buildings and associated site improvements
Demolition and removal of floor slabs
Demolition and removal of pile caps
Removing and disposing of all miscellaneous items on the site
Disconnecting, capping or sealing site utilities entering the building
Salvaging items for recycling or reuse.

Please refer to Appendix 9.0 for detailed building plans. Further, Section 9.0 Holding
and Building Reuse Costs provides information regarding the building structure, HVAC
infrastructure, etc.
69
November2011
8.3.1 SpecialConsiderations
There are freight elevators and passenger elevators within the building. It will be
necessary to excavate the required depth to remove the entire elevator shaft. Prior to
removing the elevators, a qualified environmental engineer and contractor should
coordinate with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) to obtain written approval
for the work.

The southerly portion of the building is immediately adjacent to the OMF building. The
north-south building walls are assumed to be tied to the OMF structure. As part of the
demolition planning and design it is recommended a licensed structural engineer and
architect perform an analysis for disconnecting the buildings, and protecting the OMF
building. Demolition may require access across and upon adjoining properties. As a
result, a temporary construction easement will likely be required prior to beginning work.
Careful consideration of buried fiber optics, water forcemains and other utilities on
adjoining parcels, and within right of ways, will likely be required. Therefore, prior to
beginning work, structures and utilities on adjoining properties should be researched and
field located to identify potential conflicts.

Significant soil contamination exists below a large portion of the building slab. As such,
the cost opinion assumes that the building slab will be removed, but the foundation
(footings, piles, etc.) will be left in place except for the piling caps, which will also be
removed.

The depth of the low floor (i.e., first floor) is significant at approximately 26-feet. As
such, the associated wall height from adjacent grades on the north side of the building
will likely present extraordinary challenges during demolition.
8.3.2 Reduce,Reuse,Recycle
There are opportunities to reuse/recycle demolition materials. A qualified environmental
engineer and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency must approve the appropriate reuse
of a given material. Refer to Section 7.0 Environmental Due Diligence for further
discussion of concrete recycling relative to potential contamination.

Given the potential value of various building materials and components, demolition
contracts should be written to include a credit against demolition costs for the value
of salvaged materials.

Concrete
There are opportunities for recycling surface materials within the building. If recycling
and reuse of concrete from demolition of the building is being considered, additional

70
November2011
testing of the concrete will be necessary to more thoroughly determine what portions of
the building are acceptable. Based on information gathered to date, the majority of
concrete within the existing FDP building that is available for crushing is contained
within the 2
nd
and 3
rd
story floor slabs. This material could be processed to a Class V
specification (or other appropriate specification as determined by the engineer) and
potentially used as fill material, pavement base material, etc.

Bricks
A Portion of the building to be demolished exhibits a brick exterior faade. This material
could be processed to a Class V specification (or other appropriate specification as
determined by the engineer) and potentially used as fill material, pavement base material,
etc.

Class V
Assuming the first floor slab includes a section of compacted base material such as Class
V, and that this material does not interact with contaminated soils, there is an opportunity
for stockpiling and reusing the on-site Class V materials. This material could be
stockpiled and potentially reused on-site as fill material, pavement base material, pipe
bedding material or other appropriate applications as determined by the engineer.

Equipment
The majority of the equipment has been removed. Therefore, only minor opportunities
may exist for recycling/reusing on-site equipment.

Steel
The building is primarily constructed of reinforced concrete. However, minor amounts of
steel may be available for recycling.

Copper
A large amount of copper wiring, piping, etc. exists within the building. However, if
economically feasible (given removal difficulty factors, labor factors, copper market
factors, etc.) the copper in the building may present an opportunity for recycling this
resource.
8.3.3 CostOpinion
The engineers cost opinion to demolish the building including the slab on grade is
$2,250,000. The opinion of probable construction costs shown for the building complex
includes only those items not associated with environmental cleanup requirements (see
Section 7.0 for an environmental analysis of the building and the site). The costs prepared
are engineering opinions of projected costs based on experience and past projects, and on

71
November2011
current labor and material costs at the time the report was prepared in August 2011.
Changing conditions in various markets and other factors related to the local, national and
global economy may have a significant effect on actual bid amounts. Note that applicable
inflation or deflation factors may need to be considered relative to the shown costs if used
in the future. Finally the cost opinions shown in the appendix include a contingency
factor. These estimated factors should be applied, as it creates an allowance accounting
for unknown items resulting from unanticipated field conditions and agency approvals
not being completed, variations in actual contractor bids and construction issues that may
arise during physical construction/demolition, etc.
Note that environmental remediation, abatement, hazardous material removal, etc. are not
included in the building demolition cost opinion. The following is an additional list of
items not considered as part of the building demolition cost opinion:
Removal of pilings, footings, foundations
Bonds
Testing, monitoring and inspections, survey, layout work
Soft Costs
Pre and post surrounding conditions survey
Removal and Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste
Removal or relocation of buried debris, rubble and/or obstructions
Restoration of any kind
Dust/weather/safety barriers
Utility relocates
Traffic control

The following costs are generally included in the following building demolition cost
opinion:
Mobilization
Complete structure demolition, including the floor slab
Permits
Water and sewer disconnects
Disconnections from the Future OMF Building
Roadway Support
OMF Wall Support
Removal and Decommission of Elevators
Enclosure of Openings at OMF Building
Appendix 8.0 provides a summary of a demolition cost analysis prepared to evaluate an

opinion of probable demolition costs. Included as part of this analysis are three building

72
November2011
demolition contractor estimates procured as part of this due diligence effort. FDP
Estimates 3, 4 and 5 in the table represent these estimates. See Appendix 8.0 for copies of
the submitted contractor estimates. In addition, the table includes demolition costs
comparisons from two similar projects and two demolition estimates for the Diamond
Products building completed separate from this due diligence analysis. It should be noted
that each of the contractors estimates were slightly different in terms of the items
included as part of the defined scope of work. Therefore, most of the contractors
submitted numbers were refined slightly in an attempt to achieve a more equal
comparison. Thus, the table shown in Appendix 8.0 does not necessarily match the
numbers shown on the contractors estimates.

73
November2011
9.0 HOLDINGANDBUILDINGREUSEANALYSIS
HOLDING COST ANALYSIS

An architectural, mechanical and electrical engineering assessment of the Former
Diamond Products building was completed in Summer 2011. The full reports can be
found in Appendix 9.0 and Appendix 9A. In general the report provides an assessment of
the current property condition and work required to maintain the property in the current
state for a period of two years without further deterioration. The following is a summary
of the holding costs for the Former Diamond Products property, which are based on the
City of Saint Paul/Saint Paul Port Authority holding the property until December 2013.

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION
Description Cost (through 2013)
a) Interior Construction Offices (91,275 USF) $9,172
b) Open Area (553,072 USF) $5,530
c)
Allowance for flashing at southeast corner of roof
to temporarily stop water infiltration
$10,000
Subtotal $24,702

OTHER
Decommission 1 passenger elevator, 2 Freight Elevators
and Reciprocators (temporary abandonment)
$42,000
Mechanical Allowance $10,000
Electrical Allowance $5,000
Subtotal 57,000

OVERALLTOTAL $81,702
BUILDING REUSE ANALYSIS

An architectural, mechanical and electrical assessment of the Former Diamond Products'
building was completed in summer 2011. In general, the report provides an assessment of
the current property condition and work required to upgrade the building for use by a
tenant as a light industrial or storage facility. The following is a summary of the upgrade
costs for the Former Diamond Products property:
74
November2011
Costs to upgrade to High-End (Light Industrial)

General Construction Costs
Exterior Upgrade
a) Replace ex. roofing, insulation, blocking, flashing with new 4 ply built-up
roofing, insulation, blocking, flashing (205,000 s.f. x $20/sf) $4,100,000
b) Allowances for brick repair at northeast entrance $25,000
c) Allowance for entry ramp repair $25,000
Vertical Transportation
a) Replace (1) Passenger Elevator $150,000
b) Replace (3) Reciprocators $144,000
c) Replace (2) Freight Elevators $470,000
General Construction Interior Construction
a) Open Floor Area (553,072 USF @ $2/s.f.) $1,106,144
b) Remodel Office/Lockers/Dining
(Demo and build to suit) (91,725 USF @ $80/s.f.) $7,338,000
Category Medium Remodel

Mechanical Construction Costs
a) Plumbing (644,797 s.f. x $1.50/s.f.) $967,196
b) Sprinkler System (644,797 s.f. x $ 1.00/s.f.) $644,797
c) HVAC (heating/cooling) (644,797 s.f. x $ 14.00/s.f.) $9,027,158

Electrical Construction Costs
Power Distribution: ($3.17 s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $2,044,006
a) Install new Main Switchboard.
b) Replace existing MCCs, Distribution
Panelboards,Lighting and Power Panels
c) Lighting and associated branch circuitry and
upgraded lighting control: ($2.70 s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $1,740,951
d) Fire Alarm & Comm.: ($.83/s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $535,181

SubTotal $28,317,433

Contingency (10%) $2,831,743

GrandTotal$31,149,176
74A
November2011
Costs to upgrade to Low-End (Storage)

General Construction Costs
Exterior Upgrade
a) Patch existing roofing, insulation, blocking,
flashing with new 4 ply built-up roofing,
insulation, blocking, flashing (205,000 s.f.
x $5/sf (allowance) $ 1,025,000
b) Allowances for brick repair at northeast entrance $25,000
c) Allowance for entry ramp repair $25,000
Vertical Transportation
a) Replace (1) Passenger Elevator $150,000
b) Demo & Clean out Hydraulics (3) Reciprocators & (2) Freight Elevators $250,000
General Construction Interior Construction
a) Open Floor Area (553,072 USF @ $1/s.f.) $553,072
b) Remodel Office/Lockers/Dining (walls to remain)
(91,725 USF @ $30/s.f.) $ 2,751,750
Category Light Remodel

Mechanical Construction Costs
a) Plumbing (644,797 s.f. x $ 0.50/s.f.) $322,399
b) Sprinkler System (644,797 s.f. x $ 0.75/s.f.) $483,598
c) HVAC (heating/cooling) (644,797 s.f. x $ 7.00/s.f. $4,513,579

Electrical Construction Costs
Power Distribution: ($1.25 s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $805,996
a) Lighting and Branch Circuits: ($.30 s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $193,439
b) Fire Alarm & Communications: ($x.15 s.f. X 644,797 s.f.) $96,719

Subtotal $11,195,551

Contingency (10%) $1,119,555

GrandTotal$12,315,106
75
November2011
10.0 PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
10.1 Introduction
Please refer to the Regional Ballpark Initiative Feasibility Report dated July 2010 (RBI)
for detailed information regarding proposed improvements on the site, as the scope of this
due diligence report is limited to work related only to rough grading the site for stadium
construction. However, the following section identifies specific items related to proposed
improvements that may cause significant obstacles to development and/or costs. In
general, it should be noted that the RBI analysis shows the majority of the utility
relocates being routed around the northern perimeter of the stadium site. Close
coordination with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) regarding E.
5
th
St. utility relocates will be required because of the Lafayette Bridge Construction
project and because the site is immediately adjacent to MnDOTs I-94 right-of-way.
Appendix 3.0 includes exhibits showing the location of the existing utilities in the project
area. Appendix 10.0 shows proposed utility relocations for reference purposes only. Note
that proposed improvements were taken directly from the RBI report.

Initiative Feasibility Report (RBI), which analyzes the feasibility of developing a new
regional ballpark in downtown Saint Paul on the Former Gillette site in Lowertown Saint
Paul. The study outlines site constraints including environmental contamination,
geotechnical, demolition, utilities, traffic and zoning. In addition, Ryans work effort
included completing a conceptual development program, site plan, schedule and cost
opinion. The Ports due diligence analysis scope goes beyond the scope of the RBI and
includes an evaluation of site redevelopment to the point of rough grading of the site in
preparation for stadium construction. The majority of information related to conceptual
proposed improvements was taken directly from the RBI report. However, in the course
of this due diligence evaluation additional information related to proposed improvements
was discovered. As such, the following due diligence analysis supplements some of the
information contained within the RBI. Moreover, the information contained within the
RBI is integral to the information contained in this report, and should be considered in
concert with this due diligence study. The RBI report can be found in Supplemental
Report Appendix 2.2.
10.2 SaintPaulDowntownAirportHolmanField
The following is a supplementary discussion to that in the RBI report. Per the City of
Saint Paul the Federal Aviation Adminstration (FAA) does not impose regulations on
Holman field. The ordinances and regulations are those that the City of Saint Paul

76
November2011
adopted in 1978. The Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) revised DRAFT ordinance can
be found via the following link: http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=4124.
Per Allen Lovejoy, City of Saint Paul Principal Planner, in general an applicant would
apply for a 7460 review from the JAZB and FAA. The FAA would then determine if
there was an impact on Holman field. If an impact is anticipated the FAA would either
deny the application, or change flight operations to accommodate the development.
Further, MnDOT aeronautics has ultimate review relative to the ordinance for
developments on the Diamond Products project site.

Per the ordinance found in Supplementary Report Appendix 10.0 there are two primary
provisions that deal with land use. The first provision states that no large congregations
of people are allowed via a particular land use within the identified crash zone. The
second provision is in regards to residential neighborhoods stating that a proposed
development should be able to infill at the same densities as already exists. Since the site
is within, or immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood the specifics of the
second provision may apply to this project. However, Mr. Lovejoy noted that completion
of the ordinance regulations are currently on hold.
10.3 Utilities
In general it was noted in the RBI that most of the utilities currently under E. 5
th
St. from
John Street to Kittson Street will likely be reconstructed and/or relocated as part of
MnDOTs Lafayette Bridge Project. The Saint Paul Port Authority has contracted with
MFRA to complete a detailed boundary and topographic survey of the entire project area
in an effort to accomplish multiple goals including identification of utility locations and
elevations within the project area. Unfortunately, this work was not completed at the time
this report was published. However, once completed the updated survey shall be
considered an integral component of the due diligence documentation. It is recommended
that both MFRA and the future redevelopment design engineer obtain MnDOTs design
plans and/or as-built drawings in an effort to integrate their work immediately adjacent to
the project site. For the following discussion refer to Appendix 10.0 for a graphical
representation of proposed utility alignments from Ryan Companies US, Inc. RBI report.

Sanitary Sewer
Per an analysis completed as part of the RBI one 36-inch sanitary sewer pipe and
one 30-inch sanitary sewer pipe in E. 5
th
St. is proposed to be combined into one
36-inch sanitary sewer line and relocated around the northern perimeter of the
stadium site.

77
November2011

Storm Sewer
The 54-inch storm sewer pipe running into the northern portion of the site will
require relocation around the northern perimeter of the site. This storm sewer will
be within MnDOT right-of-way, which will require direct coordination and
permitting with MnDOT.

Watermain
Per the analysis completed as part of the RBI the watermain in E. 5
th
St. will
likely be relocated to the northern perimeter of the project area, as part of the
proposed stadium project.

Gas Main
The gas main in E. 5
th
St. will likely be relocated around the northern perimeter of
the site per the RBI report. Because this is a critical utility requiring careful
consideration and handling, it is recommended the planning and design process
for this gas main relocation begin early in the process to ensure demolition and
construction work is able to proceed per schedule.

Fiber Optic
Generally, two fiber optic lines in E. 5
th
St. will likely be relocated around the
north perimeter of the site. See Appendix 10.0 for a graphical depiction. At the
time of this due diligence analysis ownership of the lines is unknown. Design,
construction, logistical and timeline costs, which will likely be significant for this
work were not included in the RBI. Therefore, it is recommended the City begin
pursuing design and cost options for relocating this fiber optic infrastructure early
in the process in an effort to mitigate budget and timeline impacts.

Electrical
Xcel Energy researched the issues and constraints surrounding the relocation of
the overhead electrical services along E. 5
th
St. and John St., and provided the
results of their initial findings. First, Xcel is planning to upgrade the electrical
capacity along E. 5
th
St. in 2012 to accommodate future increased demand. They
are also researching how much additional capacity should be added in the area,
and it could be significant. In addition to the upgrading the overhead power lines,
Xcel is planning to rebuild the electrical duct running down E. 5
th
St. Note that
Xcel indicated this duct is currently inactive.

78
November2011
10.4 PlannedPublicImprovements
Per a meeting with the City of Saint Paul on July 13, 2011 capital improvement funds
have been requested for proposed public improvements. However, to date none of the
Citys proposed improvements listed below have been funded. However, MnDOTs
Lafayette Bridge improvements have an allocated budget and construction is currently
underway. Please see Figures 10A and 10B to compliment the following discussion.
Coordination with the City during the future planning and design process for the
redevelopment of the FDP site will be important.

PHASE 1 (See Figure 10A)
After the Lafayette bridge project is completed, northbound Lafayette will no
longer intersect E. 7
th
St. Rather, traffic will be directed to an exit that travels
under I-94, left onto Kittson, then to E. 7
th
St. As such, at the current E. 7
th

St./Lafayette intersection travelers will only have access to southbound Lafayette
The City of Saint Paul is planning for the Bruce Vento trail to be constructed
along Prince Street turning north at Willius Street.
The City would like to purchase Prince Street and would like to reconstruct it as a
standard City street section.
Reconstruction of Willius Street to a standard section is being plan as part of the
Central Corridor project.
A connection from the Bruce Vento trail to Lafayette is planned.
E. 5
th
Street is planned to be removed from John Street to the east after the
Lafayette Bridge project is complete. However, a utility easement will remain, as
it is a MnDOT right-of-way.
PHASE 2 (See Figure 10B)

After the stadium is complete, the City is planning to extend Prince Street to
Trout Brook Blvd. A portion of Trout Brook Blvd. would also be reconstructed to
the north of Prince Street.
The City has obtained support for Phase 1 of the proposed improvements shown in Figure
10A. However, a due diligence study for Phase 2 (Figure 10B) needs to be completed in
an effort to gain more support for the listed improvements. Further, a Lowertown Master
Plan is currently in the review process, but has not been released publically. It will be
critical to incorporate components of this plan into the design phase of the stadium. The
City noted that the plan is complimentary to a proposed ballpark.
79
!"#"!"$%"&'(
%)*+(,-(&.)/*(0.12(0132)4(5,678( $9:(:9(&%;<"(
FIGURE 12A City Projects_Phase 1
FIGURE 10A City Projects Phase 1

Figure10ACityProject,Phase1

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
80
!"#"!"$%"&'(
%)*+(,- &.)/*(0.12 0132)4(5,678 $9:(:9(&%;<"(
FIGURE 10B City Projects - Phase 2

Figure10BCityProject,Phase2

F
O
R
M
E
R
D
I
A
M
O
N
D
P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
1
81
November2011
11.0 OPINIONOFPROBABLECONSTRUCTIONCOSTS
See Appendix 11.0 for a detailed line-item breakdown of the opinion of probable
construction costs. The opinion of probable construction costs shown for surface and
underground demolition of site features exterior to the buildings includes only those
items not associated with environmental cleanup requirements (see Section 6.0 for the
environmental aspects of the site). The costs prepared are engineering opinions of
projected costs based on experience and past projects, and current labor and material
costs at the time this report was prepared in Summer 2011. Changing conditions in
various markets and other factors related to the local, national and global economy may
have a significant effect on actual bid amounts. Note that applicable inflation or deflation
factors may need to be considered relative to the shown costs if used in the future.
Finally, the cost opinions shown in the appendix include a contingency factor. These
estimated factors should be applied, as it creates an allowance accounting for unknown
items resulting from the design and agency approvals not being completed, variations in
actual contractor bids and construction issues that may arise during physical construction,
demolition, remediation, etc.

study.


82
November2011
estimated costs of each. Table 11.1summarizes these costs evaluated as part of the
Diamond Due Diligence services agreement described above. Note that some, but not all,
of the costs in Table 11.1 are directly related to site improvement costs, and thusly are
duplicated below in Table 11.2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs.

83
November2011
Table11.1DiamondDueDiligenceServices
Title General Description Costs
Related
Due
Diligence
Report
Section
Closing Costs
Determine an estimate of the closing
costs for the acquisition of the
Diamond Products (DP) properties
$100,000 Section 5.0
Relocation
Costs
Determine which entities (if any)
may be entitled to claim relocation
benefits in connection with the Ports
acquisition of the DP properties.
$50,000 Section 5.0
Environmental
Due Diligence
Prepare a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment, a Phase II Investigation
Work Plan, an Asbestos and
Hazardous Materials Survey and an
opinion of Response Action Costs. In
addition, investigate the actions
necessary to obtain a No Further
Action letter from the MPCA.
$2,100,000 Section 6.0
Geotechnical
Due Diligence
Prepare a Geotechnical report
identifying and discussing potential
geotechnical related development
constraints and/or issues.
$2,750,000 Section 7.0
Demolition
Costs
Develop a cost estimate and
associated time frame to demolish
the DP building, including removal
of debris and associated earthwork to
prepare the site for redevelopment.
$2,840,000 Section 8.0
Holding &
Building
Reuse Costs
Develop an estimate of the annual
holding costs (HC) and building
reuse (BR) costs for the DP
properties
$81,702 annual HC

$31 million BR for LI

$12.3 million BR for
Storage
Section 9.0
84
November2011
Table 11.2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs summarizes the

engineers opinion of probable construction costs specifically related to the site
improvements components of this due diligence evaluation and the RBI. As indicated
above, the Diamond Due Diligence Services Agreement costs shown in Table 11.1
summarizes factors beyond those related to site improvements. Further, the RBI report
went beyond the scope of the Ports analysis with regards to conceptual redevelopment
programming. Therefore, in order to provide an overall financial picture specifically
related to the site improvement components of the project, select costs from those
presented in Table 11.1 and the RBI are presented below.

Table11.2-EngineersOpinionofProbableConstructionCosts
Item Cost Opinion (Rounded to the nearest
$10,000)
Demolition $2,840,000
Environmental Remediation/Abatement $2,100,000
Earthwork/Geotechnical $2,750,000
SUBTOTAL $7,690,000

Proposed Redevelopment Programming Costs Directly Evaluated as Part of the RBI
Proposed Improvement Costs from the RBI $41,000,000
SUBTOTAL $41,000,000

OVERALL TOTAL $48,690,000
Potential construction design measures that can reduce stadium construction costs:

Raising the grade of the playing field will reduce the amount of excavated
material that may need to be shipped off of the site. The geotechnical test boring
data indicates that a considerable amount of native soils will need to be excavated
to accommodate the construction of the grand stand and underlying service level.
This excavated material would be suitable to reuse as compacted engineered fill at
the site; disposing this material off of the site may be complicated as a result of
the contamination present at the site.

The existing west basement wall of the FDP building may be suitable for reuse as
part of the soil retention system (construction retaining wall) that will likely be
needed along Wall Street and MnDOT I94 right-of-way to construct the stadium.
A condition for reusing the basement wall would be the City of St. Paul allowing
the wall to be left in place after the project is completed. Not having to remove

85
November2011
the wall should save time and costs for building demolition as well as time and
costs for constructing the retention system.

It may be possible to leave the existing basement slab of the FDP building,
particularly if the grades of the playing field are raised. This would save both
demolition time and costs. Geotechnical test borings indicate that native soils
north of the FDP building area are generally in dense to very dense condition.
Under these dense conditions, it may be possible to essentially eliminate the
basement slab from reflecting through compacted engineered fill that would be
placed to attain playing field grades.
86
November2011
12.0 CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS
Key Issues
The following are key issues identified during the due diligence evaluation of the project
area. Key issues are defined as data gaps, large cost items and noteworthy features of the
redevelopment project related to demolition, remediation, abatement, earthwork,
geotechnical corrections, groundwater and proposed improvements.

GENERAL
The scope of this due diligence analysis developed by the Saint Paul Port Authority
does not include information pertaining to a proposed development. However, it does
include an evaluation of the work necessary to transform the site from its existing
condition to the point of rough grading of the site in preparation for stadium
construction.

In the course of this due diligence analysis a conceptual site plan developed by Ryan
Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) as part of the RBI report was utilized as a basis for
evaluation tasks requiring site plan information. Note that the site plan developed by
Ryan is not meant to represent the Saint Paul Port Authoritys position relative to the
site planning process with the City, Saint Paul Saints, etc. The site plan was merely
used for due diligence purposes in order to evaluate cost opinions and identify
development issues.

Ryan noted in Summer 2011 that the site plan presented in the RBI is conceptual and
what is ultimately constructed could vary significantly from the currently shown
design. As such, the following due diligence analysis and associated conclusion and
recommendations should be updated in the future to account for revised design
features including, but not limited to grading, utility locations, etc.

An updated boundary and topographical survey of the project area was underway, but
not yet complete at the time this report was published. However, once completed the
updated survey should be considered an integral component of the due diligence
documentation.

Xcel Energy is planning to reconstruct the overhead and underground electrical lines
along 5
th
Street in 2012. In addition, they are planning to increase the transmission
capacity in this area. Once reconstructed and upgraded the cost to relocate this utility
will increase significantly in terms of time and money. Therefore, it is recommended

87
November2011
that coordination with Xcel begin as soon as possible to minimize future relocation
costs.

The site is relatively small given the size of the building and the extent of earthwork
that will likely occur during redevelopment of the site. As such, close coordination of
demolition and earth moving activities will likely be essential to efficiently complete
the project.

HISTORIC/CULTURAL
Based on the level of disturbance that has occurred in the project area, it is unlikely
that any potential pre-contact archaeological resources would remain intact. The
project area has high potential for containing historical-archaeological resources. An
existing historic-period foundation is present within the Area of Potential Effect
(APE) for direct effects, and there is potential for additional subsurface historical-
archaeological resources to be present within the project area. For these reasons, if
excavation or building demolition will take place within the project area, Summit
recommends further archaeological investigation of the APE for direct effects.

It is recommended that once conceptual designs are brought forward, studies
regarding traffic, noise, and lighting should be conducted to determine the effect, if
any on the Lowertown Historic District.

RELOCATION COSTS
Trans Park may qualify for relocation benefits, as they appear to meet the definition
of a business under the Uniform Relocation Act, in that they lease real property to
others. As a result, they may install a sign, advertise their site or incur increased costs
of operation for a new site. It is recommended the Port Authority budget $50,000 for
re-establishment expenses, as part of the acquisition costs.

It is recommended that $100,000 be budgeted for legal fees, resolving title issues and
cover closing costs.

ENVIRONMENTAL ABATEMENT/REMEDIATION
Prior to beginning physical work on the site, enter the site into the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (MPCA VIC) and/or
Petroleum Brownfields (PB) Programs in an effort to secure the desired
environmental assurances.

88
November2011
Prior to development, complete additional Phase II Investigation necessary to obtain
the desired assurances under the guidance of the MPCA VIC and/or PB Program(s).
This Phase II Investigation work should be outlined in a Phase II Investigation Work
Plan that is submitted and approved by the MPCA prior to completing the Phase II
Investigation Work.

The results of soil samples from boring B-3 and A-1/MW-3 document elevated levels
of SVOCs in the form of BaP equivalents, DRO and GRO. If it is anticipated that
these soils will be encountered during redevelopment activities, additional
characterization of these soils should be completed to determine their proper
management (i.e. hazardous vs. non-hazardous). The potential remediation costs
developed to date assume that these materials are non-hazardous. If they are
determined to be hazardous and are required to be managed off-site, costs for
management will be substantially higher than what is presented in the cost analysis
prepared as part of this due diligence work.

Based on contaminant types and levels identified in soils, groundwater and vapors to
date, it is appropriate to anticipate the design and installation of a sub-surface vapor
barrier system for structures that are built at or below grade. If it is undesirable to
design and install a sub-surface vapor barrier system for at or below grade structures,
additional sub-surface vapor sampling and modeling will be necessary. Indoor air
monitoring may be required if a sub-surface vapor barrier system is not installed.

If recycling and reuse of concrete from demolition of the building is being
considered, additional testing of the concrete will be necessary to more thoroughly
determine what portions of the building are acceptable.

A full destructive Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Survey should be completed
prior to the beginning of abatement activities in preparation for building demolition.

GEOTECHNICAL/EARTHWORK

Based on information gathered to date, the majority of concrete within the existing
FDP building that is available for crushing is contained within the 2
nd
and 3
rd
story
floor slabs.

DEMOLITION
area. It will be important to ensure these wells are protected during surface and
underground demolition operations.

89
November2011
Demolition may require access and excavation on adjoining properties and rights-of-
ways. As a result, a temporary construction easement or demolition permit, etc. may
be required prior to beginning work. Therefore, structures and utilities should be
researched and field located to identify potential conflicts during the design phase of
the project.

Contractors should call Gopher State One Call at 651-454-0002 and a private locate
company at least 48 hours in advance of beginning work for the locations of
underground wires, cables, conduits, pipes, manholes, valves or other buried
structures.

Utilities to be demolished and removed may be within areas of soil contamination. As
such, special consideration should be given to soil interaction during utility
demolition, removal and disposal.

For each elevator within the existing building, it will be necessary to hire a qualified
environmental engineer and contractor to coordinate the abandonment with the
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH).

The southerly portion of the Former Diamond Products (FDP) building is
immediately adjacent, and tied to, the northern wall of the future Central Corridor
Operations and Maintenance Facility (OMF). As part of the demolition planning and
design it is recommended that a licensed structural engineer and architect perform an
analysis for disconnecting the buildings, and protecting the OMF building. Further,
coordination with the Metropolitan Council should begin early in the planning and
design process.

The wall heights of the low floor (i.e., first floor) is significant at approximately 26-
feet. As such, the associated wall height from adjacent grades on the north side of the
building will likely present extraordinary challenges during demolition.

BUILDING REUSE
The building has been used as a light manufacturing facility by two companies. It has
been unoccupied for the last 5-6 years. In general, the structure is in good condition
and given the high floor-to-floor heights is conducive to a new buyer operating a light
industrial facility.

90
November2011

SITE IMPROVEMENTS
incorporate components of this plan into the redevelopment of the project area.

The Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) recently completed draft revisions to the
adopted ordinances and regulations for Holman Field. Completion of these ordinance
regulations is on hold. However, once completed it will be important to incorporate
relevant components into redevelopment plans.

A detailed title review relating to survey matters is outside the scope of this due
diligence analysis. However, it is recommended that a licensed surveyor complete an
analysis of land encumbrance issues (including but not limited to boundary
examination, occupation, title-related survey matters represented in various title
insurance commitments, etc.), as represented on a certified ALTA Title Insurance
Survey. An associated course of action and timeline to cure should be included as a
deliverable for this work, as these issues have the potential to be time consuming and
costly to resolve.

Two parallel fiber optic lines running the length of E. 5
th
St. within the project area
will require relocation given the proposed site plan as presented by Ryan in the RBI.
Ownership of these lines is not listed in currently available research documentation.
While difficult to estimate without preliminary design information, it is known that
costs to relocate fiber optic lines have the potential to be significant in terms of
money and time. It is recommended that consideration of design, costs and timeline
begin early in the redevelopment process.

The City of Saint Paul, Metropolitan Council and MnDOT are completing and
planning multiple projects in the immediate are of the project site. Therefore, it is
recommended that City, Metropolitan Council and MnDOT design/as-built
construction plans be obtained for the Lafayette Bridge, OMF building and other
projects adjacent to the project area early in the design process.

A 54-inch storm sewer pipe extending into the project area from the I-94 right-of-way
will require rerouting to the north of a redevelopment. Therefore, design efforts will
require direct coordination and permitting with MnDOT.

Gas main relocation will likely be a required component of a stadium redevelopment
on the site. Because this is a critical utility requiring careful consideration and

91
November2011
handling, it is recommended that coordination with the gas company begin early in
the redevelopment planning.
A currently inactive underground electrical duct line and associated manholes run
along E. 5
th
St. The location/alignment and depth of this underground infrastructure
should be further researched as part of future redevelopment efforts, as information is
currently limited.

Overhead and underground electrical infrastructure relocation will likely be a
required component of a stadium redevelopment on the site. Because this is a critical
utility requiring careful consideration and handling, it is recommended that
coordination with the electric company begin early in the redevelopment planning.

Xcel Energy researched the issues and constraints surrounding the relocation of the
overhead electrical services along E. 5
th
St. and John St., and provided the results of
their initial findings. First, Xcel is planning to upgrade the electrical capacity along E.
5
th
St. in 2012 to accommodate future increased demand. They are also researching
how much additional capacity should be added in the area, and it could be significant.
In addition to the upgrading the overhead power lines, Xcel is planning to rebuild the
electrical duct running down E. 5
th
St. Note that Xcel indicated this duct is currently
inactive.

Because the proposed stormwater management system in Ryans RBI report is within
contaminated soils and groundwater in its currently shown design per the RBI,
construction and operation of said system would incur significant costs and physical
challenges. As such, it is recommended an alternate design location be utilized for an
underground stormwater management system. As indicated above, soils sampled
from boring A-1/MW-3 contained elevated levels of contamination. The cost analysis
has assumed these contaminated soils are non-hazardous at this time. However,
additional, characterization of these soils should be completed to determine their
proper management. If they are determined to be hazardous, costs for management
off-site will increase substantially.

1

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Department of Parks & Recreation
Lowertown Ballpark Property Acquisition

Report Prepared June 15, 2012
Public Hearing Proposed July 18, 2012

PROJECT

The City of Saint Paul proposes to acquire several parcels of real property for a future ballpark in
downtown Saint Paul. The Saint Paul Regional Ballpark Project will replace the existing 30 year-
old Midway Stadium with a new 7,000 seat ballpark to be built on a vacant and polluted
industrial site in the Lowertown neighborhood of downtown Saint Paul. The new ballpark will
take advantage of transit and other downtown infrastructure while still serving state and regional
needs for youth, amateurs and the Saint Paul Saints baseball team. In addition to the two largest
properties anticipated to be acquired by the Port Authority, additional parcels must be acquired to
assemble land for the project.

INITIATING ACTION

This project is initiated by the Department of Parks & Recreation and the Saint Paul Saints, with
the assistance of Financial ServicesReal Estate. The parcels for acquisition are located in the
Lowertown neighborhood of downtown Saint Paul adjacent to I-94, Broadway Street, John Street
and the proposed Central Corridor Operations and Maintenance Facility (OMF). This location
for a ballpark is very desirable because of the high visibility and access it would give to the
regional trail and the nature sanctuary, the location along the Metro Transit bus line, and the
beautification and reinvestment to the neighborhood. In addition, the limits imposed on the site
by the adjacent uses of the Lafayette Bridge, the Central Corridor OMF, and Holman Field, along
with the site topography and poor soil conditions, would significantly limit other commercial
redevelopment opportunities. A regional ballpark appears to be an ideal use for a site that is very
difficult to redevelop, as it would increase transit usage, utilize existing parking lots and generate
economic activity that could support local businesses.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

The parcels proposed to be acquired include:

M Rasoir Ltd

(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-31-0040) - 25,000 square-foot parcel, located northeasterly of
John Street and southeasterly of East Fifth Street, vacant land.

John Street and southeasterly of East Fifth Street, formerly used as a Diamond Products
parking lot.
2

(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0117) - 8,700 square-foot parcel of vacant land, located
northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94 at Broadway Street,
formerly used as a Diamond Products parking lot.

northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94, formerly used as a
Diamond Products parking lot.

Diamond Products Company

northwesterly of East Fifth Street, southeasterly of Interstate 94 and immediately
southwesterly of the northwesterly extension of John Street, formerly used as a Diamond
Products parking lot.



(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0252) - 211,000 square-foot parcel and structure, located at
310 Fifth Street East, southeasterly of East Fifth Street between Broadway Street and
John Street, formerly housing part of the Diamond Products plant.

Market House Condominium Association

(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0363) - 21,000 square-foot parking lot, located northwesterly
of the former Diamond Products and M Rasoir parking lot parcels and southeasterly of
Interstate 94.

BNSF Railway Company


401 East Fourth Building Partnership

(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-31-0048) - 118,5000 square-foot parcel, located at 401 East
Fourth Street, northeasterly of John Street and northwesterly of East Fourth Street. The
City may not need to acquire the entire parcel since only the portion southwesterly of the
Lafayette Bridge is needed for the ballpark project. Also, the State of Minnesota recently
3

acquired a permanent highway easement over this property for the Lafayette Bridge
project, and could potentially release a portion of its easement rights within areas outside
of the bridge right-of-way and within the proposed ballpark project site.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

The existing parcels are vacant land, auto parking lots and a large section of the former Diamond
Products plant building. A new ballpark, accompanying streetscape, outdoor plaza area and
landscaping will add immediate value to the parcels and the adjacent neighborhood as well.

ALTERNATIVES

There are no alternatives; all of the parcels will be needed to construct the ballpark.

POSITIVE BENEFITS

There are several benefits to acquiring this property:

1. Once the new ballpark is constructed and operating, the existing Midway Stadium
ballpark will become a new Port Authority business park, producing jobs and increasing
local tax base.

2. A regional ballpark appears to be an ideal use for a site that is very difficult to redevelop,
as it would increase transit usage, utilize existing parking lots and generate economic
activity that could support local businesses.

3. The revitalization of this neighborhood and the downtown surrounds by the addition of
the ballpark will spur investment and create a beautiful new addition to downtown Saint
Paul.

4. State of Minnesota DEED grant funds are anticipated to be leveraged to help acquire the
property and build the ballpark.

ADVERSE EFFECTS

The adverse effects of acquiring these properties include relocating an existing parking lot for
residential condominium homeowners association and removing properties from the tax rolls.
However, once the existing Municipal Stadium site is converted to industrial use, future property
tax revenues are expected to more than offset the loss of revenues from properties within the
downtown ballpark site.

TIME SCHEDULE

The property would be acquired as soon as an appraisal is completed, an offer made and
negotiations concluded. The City would seek to close on the purchases within four-to-six
months from approval of the Final Order under a direct purchase scenario. If eminent domain
proceedings are required for any of the properties, the purchases could require an additional
4

three-to-five months to complete.

COSTS

The cost to acquire the properties is estimated at $5,125,000. This amount includes typical
acquisition costs, such as land values, relocation fees, appraisal fees, taxes, environmental
testing, demolition and closing costs. The Citys actual cost to purchase the properties will be
based on their appraised values and subsequent negotiations with the property owners.

FINANCING

$2,562,500 State of Minnesota (DEED) grant (50%)
$2,562,500 City of Saint Paul funding sources (50%)
$5,125,000 TOTAL (estimated)

CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Michael Hahm, Parks & Recreation (266-6400)
Jody Martinez, Parks & Recreation (266-6424)
Bruce Engelbrekt, Financial Services Real Estate (266-8854)
Bob Smith, Financial Services Real Estate (266-8860)
Map of Properties to be Acquired by the City of Saint Paul
DISCLAIMER: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and
data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only.
SOURCES: Ramsey County (June 4, 2012), The Lawrence Group;June 4, 2012 for County parcel and property records data; June 2012 for commercial and residential data; April 2009 for color aerial imagery; All other
A. M. Rasoir Ltd
B. Diamond Products Company
C. Market House Condo Association
D. BNSF Railway Co
E. 401 E. 4th Building Partnership
B
A
A
E
E
A
C
D
B
A
B
B
A
Staff Report
City of Saint Paul
City Hall and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Phone: 651-266-8560
File Number: RES 12-1226
ATS Review 6/15/2012 Introduced: Current Status:
1 Resolution Version: Matter Type:
Preliminary Order to set the date of a public hearing to authorize acquisition of properties to
develop a ballpark in Downtown Saint Paul
In the Matter of acquiring the following properties:
M Rasoir Ltd
John Street and southeasterly of East Fifth Street;
(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0117) - 8,700 square-foot parcel of vacant land used for
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94 at
Broadway Street;
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94;
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street, southeasterly of Interstate 94 and
immediately southwesterly of the northwesterly extension of John Street;
(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0252) - 211,000 square-foot parcel and structure, part of the
former Diamond Products plant, located at 310 Fifth Street East, southeasterly of East Fifth
Street between Broadway Street and John Street;
(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0363) - 21,000 square-foot parking lot, located northwesterly of
former Diamond Products parking lots and southeasterly of Interstate 94;
Page 1 City of Saint Paul Printed on 6/19/2012
File Number: RES 12-1226
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94; and
Fourth Street, northeasterly of John Street and northwesterly of East Fourth Street;
for the public purpose of assembling land necessary to develop and construct a ballpark in the
Lowertown neighborhood of Downtown Saint Paul, as indicated on the attached map and
report.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon the above
improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves:
1. That the said report and the same is hereby approved, with no alternatives, and that the
estimated cost thereof is $5,125,000, financed by project funds.
2. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 18th day of July, 2012, at 5:30
p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint
Paul.
3. That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner provided by
the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of the improvement and the total
cost thereof as estimated.
Staff Report
City of Saint Paul
City Hall and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Phone: 651-266-8560
File Number: RES PH 12-193
Draft 6/15/2012 Introduced: Current Status:
1 Resolution-Public
Hearing
Version: Matter Type:
Final Order to authorize acquisition of properties to develop a ballpark in Downtown Saint Paul
In the Matter of acquiring the following properties:
M Rasoir Ltd
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94 at
Broadway Street;
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street, southeasterly of Interstate 94 and
immediately southwesterly of the northwesterly extension of John Street;
(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0252) - 211,000 square-foot parcel and structure, part of the
former Diamond Products plant, located at 310 Fifth Street East, southeasterly of East Fifth
Street between Broadway Street and John Street;
(Parcel ID No. 32-29-22-33-0363) - 21,000 square-foot parking lot, located northwesterly of
former Diamond Products parking lots and southeasterly of Interstate 94;
File Number: RES PH 12-193
parking, located northwesterly of East Fifth Street and southeasterly of Interstate 94; and
Fourth Street, northeasterly of John Street and northwesterly of East Fourth Street;
for the public purpose of assembling land necessary to develop and construct a ballpark in the
Lowertown neighborhood of Downtown Saint Paul, as indicated on the attached map and
report,
under Preliminary Order RES 12-1226, approved June 27, 2012.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a public hearing upon the above
improvement, due notice thereof having been given as prescribed by the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the Council has heard all persons, objections and recommendations pertaining to
said proposed improvement and has fully considered the same; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby order that the
above-described improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby directed and
authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Council hereby determines the estate required for this improvement to
be fee simple, absolute as described above, and the City officers and City Attorney are hereby
authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to acquire said real estate by direct
purchase or eminent domain, including quick take; and be it finally
RESOLVED, that the Council hereby determines that the real property rights required for this
improvement be as described above, and that the proper City officers submit a report to the
City Council for the purpose of the Council's making an award of damages for the interest
acquired on said real property rights.
Nelson Tietz & Hoye
Overview
Helping
business make
effective real
estate decisions
Nelson, Tietz & Hoye, Inc. was formed in 1993 by Russ Nelson, John Tietz and
Tina Hoye. Russ and Tina combined their real estate and finance experience
with Johns design/construction management practice to provide clients with
integrated services for real estate and construction projects.
Clients rely on our team of nine knowledgeable professionals for objective
advice when determining and implementing real estate strategies, including
analysis and planning, property acquisition, and project management. Each
client presents a unique set of needs and requires an individualized approach,
which may include any combination of our full range of services. This flexibility
ensures the delivery of a successful project.
R
u
s
s

N
e
l
s
o
n
Russ has over 30 years of experience providing corporate and non-proft real
estate services including strategic planning, market analysis, lease negotiations,
and other related services. Prior to founding Nelson, Tietz & Hoye in 1993, Russ
was president of the frst Twin Cities frm to exclusively represent the real estate
needs of offce tenants.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
AllinA
Lease negotiation at Midtown Exchange
Xcel energy
Consolidation of Headquarters that includes lease at Marquette Plaza and sale
of Renaissance Square
HgA ArcHitects
Lease negotiation at Ford Center
Us BAnk
Lease negotiation at US Bancorp Center and Meridian Crossings
Purchase negotiation of US Bank Plaza
VAlspAr HeAdqUArters
Lease negotiation at Ameriprise Financial Client Service Center
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT & VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES
Minneapolis Downtown Council
Science Museum of Minnesota
The Trust for Public Land
The Minneapolis Foundation
RUSS NELSON
President & Principal
Real Estate Services
Regions Hospital Foundation
Greater MSP
Minneapolis Club
US Bank Twin Cities
J
o
h
n

T
i
e
t
z

John has been involved in corporate real estate planning, design and construction
for over 35 years. John focuses on project management and the delivery process.
His work ranges from program evaluation, land use analysis, community meetings,
municipal approvals, and site selection through traditional project implementation:
evaluation of alternative project delivery strategies, design/construction team
selection and management of the design/construction process.
John is a registered Landscape Architect in Minnesota.
MinnesotA pUBlic rAdio
Expansion and remodel of existing facilities
ordwAy center for tHe perforMing Arts
Various renovation projects including Concert Hall Renovation
MinnesotA orcHestrAl AssociAtion - orcHestrA HAll
Expanded patron space/renovation
lAkewood MAUsoleUM
New mausoleum construction
VAlspAr
Offce relocation and renovation projects
Lambda Alpha International
Harvard Graduate School of Design Alumni Council
National W Club
Design-Build Institute of America
JOHN TIETZ
Principal
Project Management Services
P
a
u
l

J
o
h
n
s
o
n

PAUL JOHNSON
Senior Associate
Project Management Services

Paul has over 17 years of experience in commercial construction project
management, and works with companies on project budget development,
project scheduling, contractor and architect selection and management, and
related services. Prior to joining Nelson, Tietz & Hoye in 2001, Paul worked
at Ryan Companies, a national design/build general contractor.
rider Bennett
90,000 sf relocation to 33 South 6th Street
Us BAncorp
350,000 sf relocation to US Bancorp Center
AllinA
400,000 sf corporate headquarters consolidation in Midtown Exchange
MAcpHAil scHool for MUsic
55,000 sf music school relocation in the Mill District
AMericAn AcAdeMy of neUrology
62,000 sf corporate headquarters relocation in the Mill District
lAke HArriet coMMUnity scHool
Lower Campus Expansion Steering Committee
MinneApolis downtown coUncil Vision 2025
Development Subcommittee
ABOUT RYAN
It was nice to see the caring that everyone at Ryan had for our team and our project. It was almost as if it
was their building.
Terry Thompson, President, PCT Engineered Systems, LLC
RYAN IS COMMITTED TO BUILDING LASTING RELATIONSHIPS For three generations, Ryans have
led the family business guided by this commitment, based on the highest standards of
quality and service in the industry. While remaining true to the principles the company
was founded on integrity, honesty, civic pride and a sincere regard for people we are
meeting todays challenges, delivering value and exceeding
customers expectations time and time again.
A NATIONAL SINGLE-SOURCE PROVIDER Ryan is a leading
national commercial real estate firm offering integrated
design-build, development and real estate management
services to customers. We specialize in office, industrial,
retail, health care, alternative energy, hospitality, higher
education, mission critical, public sector and mixed-use
projects across the United States. From its early roots
in northern Minnesota, the company has expanded its
Minneapolis, Minnesota, base of operations to include
offices in Chicago, Phoenix, San Diego and Tampa as well as
Cedar Rapids, Davenport and Des Moines, Iowa.
THE EXPERTISE OF RYANS PEOPLE Over the past 70 years, Ryans talented and hard-working
professionals have collaborated with customers and communities. Using a single-source
approach, we offer flexibility in defining the scope of a project, and strength in providing
effective, timely solutions resulting in a higher certainty of success. We are not satisfied
unless our customers are satisfied 100%. We embrace our customers vision, working
with them in every aspect of the design, development and construction process to deliver a
solution that is sure to delight them.
IN ALL WE DO, RYAN DELIVERS VALUE There is a reason why so many of our customers
come back to work with us. It is our dedication to solving their problems, to serving them
better, no matter how big or small their project. That is why our quality of construction
is unmatched and our professionalism sets the standard for the industry. We measure our
success in terms of our
customers satisfaction and
our ability to build lasting
relationships.
A CLEAR POINT-OF-VIEW.
Since 1938 our goal has been to
build lasting relationships.
A more than 73% rate of repeat
business makes our vision a reality.
RYAN TIMELINE HIGHLIGHTS
1938, HIBBING MINNESOTA
At the turn of the 20th century,
Hibbing was a hub for the mining
and lumber industries. It was here
that James Henry Ryan, with his sons,
began what is now known as Ryan
Companies US, Inc.
1949, RYAN REALTY COMPANY
Brothers Russ and Fran Ryan
formed this company, along with
Ryan Lumber and Coal, based in
Hibbing, Minnesota.
1963, RYAN CONSTRUCTION
This name was created to
describe the business accurately.
Later Ryan Properties operated
as successor to Ryan Realty.
1989, RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
Current ownership is held by
Pat Ryan and Tim Gray. Both are
active owner-managers of
2011/2012, RYAN TODAY
The company enjoys a 97% project
delivery customer satisfaction rate,
and a .78 workers compensation mod
rate. For fiscal year 2010-2011 (ended
March 31, 2011), Ryan had revenue
of $572,163,000 and managed
14,065,000 SF in assets.
CORPORATE PROFILE
BUILDING LASTING RELATIONSHIPS SINCE 1938
OWNER/PARENT COMPANY Ryan Companies US, Inc.
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT Patrick Ryan, President/CEO; Timothy Gray, Chairman
Brian Murray, CFO; Jeff Smith, Executive Vice President
Mike McElroy, Executive Vice President
INTEGRATED PROJECT
DELIVERY SERVICES Development, Architecture & Engineering, Capital
Markets, Construction, Real Estate Management
BUILDING PORTFOLIO
UNDER MANAGEMENT 12,500,000 SF
REVENUE $467,375,611 (year end 3/31/2011)
PRODUCT TYPE EXPERTISE Cold Storage/Distribution Centers, Health Care, Retail,
Mission Critical, Public Sector, Office, Industrial,
Hospitality, Alternative Energy, Higher Education, Senior
Housing, Multi-family and Mixed-use
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 550
SAFETY RECORD Since 1997, Ryans safety ratings have continued to
surpass industry averages
REGIONAL OFFICES
Midwest MARC GULLICKSON, President, Iowa
Quad Cities, Iowa 563-823-8100
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 319-363-9245
Des Moines, Iowa 515-309-8500
Great Lakes TIM HENNELLY, President, Great Lakes
Chicago, Illinois, 630-328-1100
NorthCentral COLLIN BARR, President, Midwest
Minneapolis, Minnesota 612-492-4000
SouthWest JOHN STRITTMATTER, President, Southwest
Phoenix, Arizona 602-322-6100
San Diego, California 858-812-7910
SouthEast DOUG DIECK, President, Southeast
Tampa, Florida 813-204-5000
SouthCentral HUNTER BARRIER, President, Southcentral
Austin, Texas 512-633-8544
VISIT OUR WEB SITE www.RYANCOMPANIES.com
mike Ryan, aia, LeeD
aP
Director of Architecture and Engineering
as a master Builder, Ryan provides a unique ability to maximize value and simplify processes for
the betterment of both the building produced and the relationship created.
eDUCaTiOn
Bachelor of architecture,
University of notre Dame
master of Real estate Development,
Columbia University
PROFeSSiOnaL eXPeRienCe
Project manager/Project architect,
Robert a.m. Stern architects
Project architect/Site Superintendent,
Habitat For Humanity - Chile
aFFiLiaTiOnS & memBeRSHiPS
The american institute
of architects (aia)
minneapolis 2025 Plan
LeeD accredited Professional
architecture advisory Council,
University of notre Dame School
Urban Land institute (ULi)
institute for Classical architecture and
Classical america (iCa&Ca)
SeLeCTeD eXPeRienCe
222 Hennepin
mixed-use, Retail, multifamily
Residential, anticipate LeeD Silver
Certifcation for mid-rise Residental
579,706 SF, 286 units
minneapolis, mn
The Hanwha Group
450,000 SF, Luxury Hotel
Seorak, korea
Crown Heights Charter High School
1,600 Students, Charter School
Brooklyn, ny
miami University, Farmer Hall
230,000 SF, LeeD-certifed
Silver Level, School of Business
Oxford, OH
University of Virginia, Bavaro Hall
65,000 SF, LeeD-certifed,
School of education,
Charlottesville, Va
University of kentucky
189,000 SF, College of Law
Lexington, ky
marist College School of Computer
Science and master Plan,
Hancock Center
54,000 SF, master Plan
Poughkeepsie, ny
Bronx Community College
100,000 SF, LeeD-certifed
Silver Level, Library master Plan
Bronx, ny
University of notre Dame,
Stayer Center
54,000 SF, LeeD-certifed,
executive education Center
notre Dame, in
Hun-in Village masterplan
320-home, mixed-use Village
Seoul, korea
yale University
490,000 SF, Residential Colleges
new Haven, CT

As Director of Architecture and Engineering, Mike is responsible for seeing the customers
vision become a reality. He works up front to clarify the project scope, manage the design
process, and coordinate with the construction team. His strength lies in his breadth of
experience in design, development, project management and direct feld work, as well
as his specifc expertise in higher education, campus masterplanning, and urban design.
He believes strongly in an integrated method that balances creativity with budget and
schedule needs. Because of Mikes knowledge of all aspects of a project, he helps the
customer make great decisions in the design phase that directly affect the success of
the project. As a member of the fourth generation of Ryans to join the company, Mike
embodies our mission of building lasting relationships; when working with Mike, a
customer can be assured he will deliver a quality project, as well as a great experience.

As a Team Leader and Civil Engineer, Jared leads Ryans due diligence, site design and
approvals and permitting process. He has experience working throughout the country
with varied product types and different approval processes. Jared uses his extensive
expertise in site layout, grading and drainage, utility layout, wetland and foodplain
mitigation and traffc engineering to solve problems and bring the most value to the
project. This may include getting approvals faster, saving money on construction or
maximizing the site for additional use or beneft. Jared approaches each site design
as if he were the owner, and he continually searches for opportunities to deliver more
value to his customers.
jared olson, Pe, leed
aP
Team Leader, Architecture & Engineering
I appreciate ryans honesty and integrity. everyone is committed to the customers goals. We all
work hard to ensure we are the builder-of-choice on a customers next project.
edUCaTIon
Bachelor of science
Civil engineering
University of Minnesota
ProFessIonal eXPerIenCe
Civil designer, rlK-Kuusisto
aFFIlIaTIons & MeMBersHIPs
Professional engineer (Pe)
leed accredited Professional
International right of Way association
seleCTed eXPerIenCe
Cargill
30,000 sF, offce
Blair, ne
Cristo rey jesuit High school
Colin Powell Youth leadership Center
160,000 sF, High school and Youth
Center, Minneapolis, Mn
Gander Mountain
50,000-120,000 sF, retail
Thornton, Co
Palm Beach Gardens, Fl
st. augustine, Fl
ocala, Fl
Greenwood, Il
joliet, Il
Bowling Green, KY
Blaine, Mn
eden Prairie, Mn
Hermantown, Mn
Woodbury, Mn
Cicero, nY
new Hartford, nY
Huber Heights, oH
Farragut, Tn
College station, TX
Corsicana, TX
Houston, TX
lubbock, TX
spring, TX
sugar land, TX
Texarkana, TX
Tyler, TX
Winchester, Va
roanoke, Va
Kenosha, WI
Waukesha, WI
Camping World
15,000-30,000 sF, retail
little rock, ar
Bryon, Ga
Bowling Green, KY
strafford, Mo
roanoke, Va
Winchester, Va
Burke, WI
Target
120,000-175,000 sF, retail
new lenox, Il
Tinley Park, Il
st. johns, In
Champlin, Mn
Monticello, Mn
savage, Mn
Fitchburg, WI
Gander MoUnTaIn
CrIsTo reY jesUIT HIGH sCHool/ColIn
PoWell YoUTH leadersHIP CenTer
sUPerTarGeT
Mark has extensive project management experience from paper mills to offce towers,
and shopping centers to government facilities. As a Team Leader, he provides leadership
to the Ryan team. His primary responsibilities include estimating, budget preparation,
scheduling, value engineering, subcontractor selection, overall project administration
and proft and loss control. Mark understands the construction process through years
of hands-on construction experience and a degree in Construction Management. He
has established a proven track record of satisfed customers that have experienced his
seasoned abilities.
MARK MAGHRAK, LEED
AP
Team Leader
Ryan has solid values. Our handshake is as good as our word. My customers know theyre
working with a highly reputable team of professionals who are going to deliver the value and
integrity synonymous with Ryan.
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science
Construction Management
North Dakota State University
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
24 Year Industry Experience
AFFILIATIONS & MEMBERSHIPS
LEED Accredited Professional
SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Sage Electrochromics HMV-1
324,000 SF, Offce, Manufacturing
Faribault, MN
University of St. Thomas
36,400 SF, McCarthy Gym Renovation
St. Paul, MN
Gander Mountain Stores
33 Retail Stores Across the US
Totalling 2,275,187 SF
Camping World Stores
8 Retail Stores Across the US
Totalling 199,977 SF
University of Minnesota Coffman
Memorial Union, 360,000 SF
Student Union, Minneapolis, MN
900 Nicollet, 822,000 SF
Offce/Retail, Minneapolis, MN
Minnesota Department of Revenue
386,000 SF, Offce Building, 920-stall
Parking Ramp, St. Paul, MN
John Deere Health Care, 105,000 SF
Offce Building, Moline, IL
John Deere Pavilion, 14,400 SF
Automated Interpretive Exhibition
Center, Moline, IL
T.G.I. Fridays, 7,362 SF
Restaurant, Moline, IL
Radisson at John Deere Commons
101,644 SF, 6-story, 163-room Hotel
Moline, IL
SuperValu, 579,053 SF
Warehouse/Distribution Center
Hopkins, MN
The Quarry, 409,000 SF
Shopping Center, Minneapolis, MN
LPI Linerboard Mill, 214,870 SF
Manufacturing/Industrial
Becker, MN
Northwest Airlines Building J
240,000, Remodel & Addition
Eagan, MN
Oakwood Elementary School
CM Services Remodel & Addition
Plymouth, MN
Wayzata East Junior High
CM Services Fire/Life Safety
Plymouth, MN
Wayzata Senior High
CM Services Fire/Life Safety
Wayzata, MN
Timberwolves Arena
Indoor Sporting Facility
Minneapolis, MN
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
COFFMAN MEMORIAL UNION
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT
OF REVENUE
900 NICOLLET
Logan gerken, aia, nCarB, LeeD
aP BD+C
Senior Architect
eDUCaTion
Master of architecture,
Master of Business administration
University of Colorado
Bachelor of architecture
University of Minnesota
ProFeSSionaL eXPerienCe
Project architect
Populous
aFFiLiaTionS & MeMBerShiPS
nCarB Certifed
LeeD accredited Professional
registered architect: Missouri
american institute of architects
SeLeCTeD eXPerienCe
aT&T Park improvements
San Francisco, Ca
Virginia Tech Football
Blacksburg, Va
aMSoiL arena
University of Duluth, Duluth, Mn
University of South Florida Basketball
Practice Facility, Tampa, FL
University of San Diego Ballpark
San Diego, Ca
University of Minnesota TCF Bank
Stadium, Minneapolis, Mn
University of South Florida Baseball/
Softball Stadium, Tampa, FL
Cleveland indians Spring Training
Facility, goodyear, aZ
rochester rhinos Paetec Park
rochester, nY
northwestern University of athletics
Master Plan, evanston, iL
georgia State University athletics
Master Plan, atlanta, ga
University of arkansas athletics
Master Plan, Fayetteville, ar
gillette Stadium Club expansion
Foxborough, Ma
alamodome Football Locker room
renovation, San antonio, TX
rutgers University Football Stadium
expansion, Piscataway, nY
As a Senior Architect for Ryan, Logan coordinates the design team to deliver high
performance buildings that positively impact places, people and profts. Logan leads
the project design and construction phases with an emphasis on creating functional and
beautiful facilities that meet the client's needs. His duties include master programming
and design charrette sessions, advising the client on design decisions, creating project
documentation, construction administration and project close out. He also incorporates
sustainable design principles into each project he is involved with, while aiding the frm's
sustainability efforts as a whole.
B U i L D i n g L a S T i n g r e L aT i o n S h i P S
F I R M P R O F I L E

JULIE SNOW ARCHITECTS, INC.
2400 Rand Tower
Minneapolis MN 55402
www.juliesnowarchitects.com
Julie Snow Architects is a studio-based practice located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The studio has
developed a philosophy that results in consistently intelligent buildings that are well conceived and
carefully detailed. We focus our efforts on the intensive design exploration each project demands,
bringing a creative intensity to the studio and the work.
A core design team follows each project beginning to end, offering continuity, consistency, and technical
integrity to the design effort. Julie Snow and Matt Kreilich personally participate in every design
project, from conceptual design to detailing and resolving constructional issues. Intentionally limiting
our work to a few select opportunities, we focus our efforts on the intensive design exploration each
project demands. The work is grounded in the specifcs of each projects site and its historic, urban,
and cultural and landscape context. Our work provides a vivid articulation of each clients program
profoundly anchored in its unique context.
At any given time, the studio is capable of providing both large-scale work or modestly scaled projects.
Through collaboration with specialist designers and engineers, we expand our team to accomplish
projects of signifcant size and complexity. We have consistently worked with several key consultants
to develop critical working relationships that allow us to extend our collaborative methodology beyond
the studio. We are fully committed to each project from initial concept through construction and provide
all services from master planning to interior design, ensuring a calm consistency to pervade the work.
Our design process begins with a critical research phase based on the questions specifc to each project.
We have performed master-planning, programming and conceptual design exercises for our clients.
A collaborative studio-based design investigation follows. Detailing, materials and systems are all
part of the designs conceptual basis. Continued evolution of design and detailing is pursued through
the documentation process. Full-scale details, mock-ups, physical and computer models are used to
explore the project in all its dimensions. Interior design services, custom furnishings and furniture
specifcations are also performed in-house.
Our ability to deliver across all measures of design success is evidenced by our numerous awards from
both our clients and design peers.
JULIE SNOW, FAIA
PRINCIPAL & CEO
PRACTICE
1995-present Julie Snow Architects, Inc.
1991-1995 James/Snow Architects, Inc.
1988-1990 Julie Snow Architects
1974-1987 Hammel Green & Abrahamson, Inc.
EDUCATION University of Colorado, Boulder, Bachelor of Architecture
ACADEMIC SERVICE
2011 Syracuse University School of Architecture, Visiting Professor
2006-2008 Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Visiting Design Critic
2007 University of Minnesota, CALA, Visiting Professor
2006 University of Maryland School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation, Kea Visiting Professor
2005 Washington University, Ruth and Norman Moore Visiting Professor
2003 University of Arkansas, John G. Williams Visiting Professor
1997-2001 University of Minnesota, CALA, Adjunct Associate Professor
1994-1997 University of Minnesota, CALA, Adjunct Assistant Professor
ACADEMIC HONOR
1999 Ralph Rapson Award for Distinguished Teaching, CALA, University of Minnesota
Julie Snow is the principal of Julie Snow Architects, Inc., a studio based architectural practice in Minneapolis.The work of the studio
is characterized by refned detail, lightness, spatial clarity and structural directness, exploring an intensity of dialogue between site
and architecture. The use of innovative strategies reveals the studios fascination with the technical aspects of building design that
transform human experience. Julie has most recently been recognized by the American Academy of Arts and Letters with the receipt
of the prestigious Architecture Award.
Since its inception, the studio has received signifcant, consistent design recognition, winning over twenty-fve design awards.
Awards range from a Chicago Athenaeum American Architecture Award, a Design Distinction Award from I.D. magazine, numerous
AIA Honor awards, a Progressive Architecture Award and several GSA Design Awards & Citations. The studios unique combination of
innovation and pragmatism consistently result in effective design solutions that advance our clients measurable goals.
Julies design leadership is evidenced by her participation on juries and delivery of lectures in both academic and professional settings.
She has lectured at the Walker Art Center, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art and the National Building Museum, as well as
making keynote addresses at several AIA conferences across the country. Julie spoke at the XII Bienal Internacional de Architecture in
Buenos Aires and she has participated on many design competition juries, including the AIA American Justice Academy Awards and
the AIA-NY Design Awards. She has also been a peer reviewer for the GSA's US Design Excellence program since 2000.
Julie has presented the studios work at the National Building Museum in Washington DC, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art,
the Walker Art Center, the New York Architectural League and at many professional conferences and university lecture series across
the country. She has participated as a juror for the American Institute of Architects Honor Awards, the Business Week/Architectural
Record Awards, the James Beard Foundation Design Awards and the Dupont Benedictus Awards. In 1998 the New York Architectural
League selected Julie Snow as an Emerging Voice.
MATTHEW KREILICH, AIA, LEED AP
DESIGN PRINCIPAL
PRACTICE
2005-present Julie Snow Architects, Inc.
2001-2005 Hammel Green & Abrahamson, Inc.
1998-2001 The Leonard Parker Associates
1994-1998 Station Nineteen Architects, Inc.
EDUCATION University of Minnesota, Master of Architecture
and Bachelor of Arts, Architecture
ACADEMIC SERVICE
2011, Syracuse University School of Architecture, Visiting Professor
2010, Washington University, Sam Fox School of Design & Visual Arts, Final Reviews
2007, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Visiting Critic
2007, University of Minnesota, College of Design, Adjunct Professor
2001-Present, Visiting Critic at University of Minnesota, College of Design
Matthew Kreilich is a principal of Julie Snow Architects. He is the heart of the frms collaborative working model with an active
participation in both strategic and detail design resolution. Matthew provides his design insight into all of the frms project designs,
as well as acting as the project designer on the studios most signifcant recent projects, including the Land Port of Entry at Warroad
MN, the Land Port of Entry at Van Buren ME, and the new creative advertising offces for Knock.
Matthews commitment is to provide our clients with high performance design, meeting functional requirements, sustainable,
pragmatic, yet elegant and refned designs, executed well within the projects cost and schedule restraints in a energetic, smooth and
gratifying design process.
Matthews design leadership and experience continue to be recognized both locally and nationally. Matt was honored with the 2009
AIA National Young Architect Award for outstanding design leadership. Locally his work has received several AIA-MN Honor Awards.
Matthew is also the recipient of the prestigious Ralph Rapson Traveling Study Fellowship. He has lead studios at the University of
Minnesota and participated in reviews at Harvard Universitys Graduate School of Design and at Washington University St Louis.
Matt has participated on a number of professional juries including AIA Philadelphia, AIA Colorado and AIA Kansas. He has presented
the studios work at 2009 and 2010 AIA National conference as well at the AIA American Academy of Justice 2010 conference.
RELEVENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
- US Land Port of Entry, Warroad, MN
- US Land Port of Entry, Van Buren, ME
- KNOCK Inc. Offce Renovations and Addition, Minneapolis, MN
- Minneapolis Federal Offce Building Renovations, Minneapolis, MN
- Medtronic Orange County Lab & Offce Renovation and Consolidation, Santa Ana, CA
- Medtronic Cardiac Rhythm Disease Management Campus, Moundsview, MN
- dpHUE Concept Store, Maple Grove, MN
- CCVL Law Offce Renovations, MInneapolis, MN
- Target Commons, Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN
- Sonoma Residence, Sonoma, CA
- Lake Minnetonka Residence, Minnetonka, MN
A W A R D S
2012 IIDA FAB Award, dpHUE Concept Store
Residential Architect Design Award, B+W House
2011 AIA-MN Honor Award, Knock, Inc.
Holcim Bronze Award for Sustainable Construction, Van Buren Land Port of Entry
American Academy of Arts and Letters, Architecture Award
IIDA FAB Award, Knock Inc.
Architect of Distinction, AIA/Midwest Home Magazine
AIA Honor Award, Warroad Land Port of Entry
Architect Magazine P/A Award, Van Buren Land Port of Entry
2010 GSA Design Excellence Awards, Architecture and Engineering, Warroad Land Port of Entry
GSA Design Excellence Award, On the Boards, Van Buren Land Port of Entry
GSA Design Excellence Citation, Landscape Architecture, Interior Design and Construction,
Warroad Land Port of Entry
Architecture Magazine Annual Design Review Award, Warroad Land Port of Entry
Architecture Magazine Annual Design Review Award, Weekend House on Lake Superior
Chicago Athenaeum International Architecture Award, Weekend House on Lake Superior
Chicago Athenaeum American Architecture Award, Weekend House on Lake Superior
AIA-MN Honor Award, B+W House
AIA-MN Honor Award, Warroad Land Port of Entry
2009 Honor Award, AIA MN, Weekend House on Lake Superior
2008 Design Award Citation, U.S. GSA, Warroad Land Port of Entry
2006 Heritage Preservation Commission Award, City of Minneapolis, The Museum of Russian Art
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Breck School Commons
Women in Business Award, Minneapolis St. Paul Business Journal
2004 Honor Award, AIA-MN, Humboldt Mill Lofts and Annex
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Vista Building, Great Plains Software
Heritage Preservation Award, City of Minneapolis, Humboldt Mill Lofts and Annex
2003 Honor Award, AIA-MN, Koehler Residence
2002 American Architecture Award, The Chicago Athenaeum Museum of Architecture and Design,
Koehler Residence
2000 Certifcate of Appreciation, U.S. General Services Administration, Design Excellence Program
1999 Honor Award, AIA-MN, Jerstad Center, Good Samaritan Society
Design Distinction Award, I.D. magazine, Quadion Corporation Product Engineering
National Brick In Architecture Award, Brick Industry Association, Minneapolis Fifth Precinct
Police Station
1998 Business Week/Architectural Record Award, Quadion Corporation QMR Production
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Minneapolis Fifth Precinct Police Station
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Quadion Corporation Production Engineering
Brick Award, AIA-MN, Minneapolis Fifth Precinct Police Station
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Minneapolis Fifth Precinct Police Station
Committee on Urban Environment Award, Minneapolis Fifth Precinct Police Station
1997 Business Week/Architectural Record Award, Phillips Plastics Corporation Origen Center
1996 Honor Award, AIA-MN, Quadion Corporation QMR Production
1995 Honor Award, AIA-MN, Phillips Plastics Corporation Origen Center
Honor Award, AIA-MN, Minnesota Children Museum
S E L E C T P U B L I C A T I O N S
Top Architects Go Local, Wall Street Journal, December 20, 2011
Creative & Modern Offce, Hi-Design Publishing, 2011. Knock, Inc.
Architecture Minnesota, September/October 2011. Knock, Inc.
Architecture Minnesota, May/June 2011. B+W House
Midwest Home, April/May 2011. Architect of Distinction
Casas International - Houses by the Sea, 2011. Koehler House
Architecture Minnesota, March/April 2011. Warroad Land Port of Entry.
Eco-Structure, March/April 2011. Warroad Land Port of Entry.
Eco-Structure, March/April 2011. Van Buren Land Port of Entry.
Metropolis, January 2011. Warroad Land Port of Entry.
Dwell, October 2010. B+W House and Koehler House.
Small Scale: Creative Solutions for Better City Living, December 2010, Princeton Architectural Press
Retrospective of Courthouse Design 2001-2010. Warren E Burger Courthouse
Crossings: Accelerated Delivery of Small Land Ports Along the Northern Border, U.S. GSA Offce of the
Chief Architect with Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2009.
Architecture Minnesota, July/August 2009. Weekend House.
Architecture Minnesota, July/August 2008. Metronic CRDM.
Building New Brunswick, Goose Lane Editions, 2008. Koehler.
At Home by the Sea, Down East Books, 2008. Koehler House.
Metro Magazine, November 2007. The Museum of Russian Art.
24 maisons ed bord de mer, Les Editions de Moniteur, 2007. Koehler.
Detail in Contemporary Domestic Architecture, King Pub, 2007.
Sixty Six: World New Architecture, Dalian University of Technology Press (China), 2006.
Enlace (Mexico). July 2006. Koehler House.
A+U (Japan), March 2006. Koehler House.
Modern House 3, Phaidon Press, 2005. Koehler House.
New Voices in Architecture: Julie Snow Architects, Princeton Architectural Press, 2005.
Architecture Minnesota, October 2005. The Museum of Russian Art.
Architecture Minnesota, May/June 2005. Humboldt Mill Lofts.
Designing with Glass: Great Glass Buildings, The Images Publishing Group, 2004. Great Plains Software
and Koehler House.
Architectural Record, November 2004. Humboldt Mill Lofts.
The Phaidon Atlas of Contemporary World Architecture, 2004.
Architecture Now! Vol. 2, 2002, Taschen Press.
Abstract (Belgium), May/June 2002. Koehler House.
Komhatbi (Russia), January 2002. Koehler House.
Bauwelt (Germany), November 2001. Koehler House.
Dwell, August 2001. Koehler House.
Architectural Record, April 2001. Koehler House.
Architecture, October 1999. Jerstad Center.
Contemporary World Architecture, Phaidon Press, 1998.
Architecture Minnesota, March/April 1999. Quadion Corporation Product Engineering.
Architecture Minnesota, November/December 1998. Fifth Precinct.
Architecture, August 1998. Fifth Precinct.
Business Week, November 2, 1998. QMR Product Engineering.
AECOM is a unique provider of professional technical and
management support services to a broad range of markets.
With approximately 45,000 employees around the world,
AECOM provides a blend of global reach, local knowledge,
innovation and technical excellence in delivering solutions.
In late 2009, the century old, Minnesota-based architecture,
engineering, and interiors frm Ellerbe Becket became part of
AECOM. In doing so, Ellerbe Becket joined the renowned frms
of DMJM H&N, EDAW, ERA, HSMM, Spillis Candela, Davis
Langdon, Tishman, and others that have combined to build
the foundation of a new kind of planning, design and sports
consultancy. AECOM currently employs more than 300
professionals in Minnesota, including nearly 250 architects,
engineers and interior designers making us one of the
largest design practices in the state. AECOM has been a
major part of the Minnesota business community for more
than a century. From the Science Museum of Minnesota, the
redevelopment of South Nicollet Mall to the Central Corridor
Light Rail Line, our presence in Minnesota is strong.
AECOMs sport facility practice has designed some of the
most successful buildings of this type in the world. We have
learned to design these buildings to meet the business and
operational goals of clients from both the private and public
sector, setting exceptional design standards and creating
destinations that provide memorable entertainment and fun
for people of all ages. Our mission is to assist clients in
creating the optimum sports and entertainment environment.
Creating this special environment requires a team of experi-
enced professionals committed to exceptional design and
innovation. Our project teams focus on collaboration,
creativity and innovation in our attitude and project approach.
We offer this single source, integrated package of services.
As one of AECOMs most experienced sports facility
architectural designers, Jon Niemuth has lead many project
teams in setting new design standards for sports facilities
that effectively extend the vision of the client. Jon is a Design
Principal and designer for many signature buildings in the
AECOM portfolio. In his 17-plus years at AECOM, Jon has
executed designs with both wide ranging cultural and
architectural infuences while ensuring that each design
integrates todays modern amenities and fexibility.
Jon is the rare architect who excels at all levels of sports
design both domestically and internationally for collegiate,
professional and civic clients. Throughout his career, Jon has
broken new ground in the area of multiple-sport seating bowl
design and continues to infuence the industry in a variety of
ways. The facilities he designs are both studied and
replicated by others and used as benchmarks in the industry.
Jon also speaks at conventions, trade shows and in other
public forums where his words are taken with great respect.
He is a regular guest lecturer at the University of Ohio where
future leaders of the sports industry are groomed.
Education
Master of Architecture, University of Wisconsin at
Milwaukee, 1995
Master of Urban Planning/Urban Design, University
of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1995
Bachelor of Architectural Studies, University of
Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1992
Certifcate of Preservation Studies, University of
Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1995
Affliations
American Institute of Architects
AIA Missouri Board of Directors
Kansas City Chapter of AIA
Kansas City Centurions Program
Kansas City Chamber of Commerce
Kansas City Area Development Council
Accreditation
Registered Architect, CT, GA, ME, MO, WI, WV
NCARB Certifed
LEED AP BD+C
Awards
40 Under 40, Building Design & Construction
40 Under 40, Sports Business Journal
40 Under 40, Kansas City, Ingrams
Jon D. Niemuth, AIA, LEED BD+C
Principal + Design Director

TAB THREE

a. Economic Impact Study
b. St. Paul Port Authority Midway Site Redevelopment Plan
c. Relevant News Articles

Economic Impacts of a Proposed Ballpark in Lowertown
Multipliers for estimating economic impacts
Category Direct Indirect Induced Total effect Direct Indirect Induced Total effect
Food & beverages $2.05 0.66 0.96 3.67 0.59 0.16 0.27 1.03
Night life/bars $2.05 0.59 2.69 5.33 0.74 0.16 0.66 1.56
Retail shopping $2.05 0.47 1.15 3.67 0.46 0.10 0.33 0.89
Lodging expenses $2.05 0.88 1.17 4.10 0.29 0.23 0.33 0.84
Private auto $2.05 0.47 0.41 2.93 0.27 0.14 0.12 0.54
Commercial transportation $2.05 0.45 0.59 3.10 0.52 0.10 0.16 0.79
Other expenses $2.05 0.47 1.15 3.67 0.46 0.10 0.33 0.89
$14.35 $4.00 $8.12 $26.47 $6.53
$14.35
Assumptions:
Total direct spending by fans,
out of ballpark =
Estimated total sales impact of fan spending,
out of ballpark =
$26.47
It is assumed that each visiting, non-resident fan spends an average of $2.05 in each category below*
Categories below represent out-of-ballpark fan expenditures. Expenditures made by fans related to ballpark admission fees, souvenirs, and concessions are counted separately.
Source: Table 1. A Comparison of the Sales and Household Income Multipliers for an Event in a Large City, from "Economic Impact Analysis of Sports Facilities and Events: Eleven Sources of Misapplication,"
Journal of Sports Management, 1995.
*Values in the table above are adjusted for inflation. $10 in direct spending per fan per game in 1994 is equivalent to $14.35 in direct spending per fan per game in 2008. All categories of spending are
assumed, except for admission fees, which can be obtained from Saint Paul Saints revenue data. $14.35/7 categories of spending = $2.05 per category.
Based on Peck, 1985, a typical fan spent an average of $10 per game (in 1994) outside of a ballpark/stadium. This is equivalent to $14.35 in 2008 dollars, i.e. an
average of $14.35 is spent per game by a typical fan in 2008.
Fig. 1. Sales & Household Income multipliers for an event in a large city (minor league baseball event in the City of Saint Paul)
Sales multiplier Household Income multiplier
or
Only the expenditures made by non-local visiting fans should be counted as having significant economic impacts in the local community, given that non-local
visiting fans would not likely otherwise be spending their discretionary income in the local community if it weren't for the Saints game (Crompton, 1995). For
purposes of this analysis, the local community is defined as including the City of Saint Paul, the remainder of Ramsey County, and the City of Minneapolis
Previous studies have shown that typically, 70% of fans are likely to come from the immediate metro area, and therefore 30% of fans are non-local visitors
(Crompton, 1995). Scenario #1 uses this assumption. However, Saint Paul Saints 2008 fan attendance data shows that 41% of fans are non-local visitors, i.e. they
came from zip codes outside of the local community, as defined above. Scenario #2 uses this assumption.
Estimated total
household income
impact of fan spending
Assumptions (Contd):
Calculations:
Sales impacts:
Scenario 1 (rule of thumb,
based on Crompton)
Scenario 2 (Saints data)
Household income impacts:
Scenario 1 (rule of thumb,
based on Crompton)
Scenario 2 (Saints data)
Sources cited:
John L. Crompton (1995). Economic Impact Analysis of Sports Facilities and Events: Eleven Sources of Misapplication. Journal of Sports Management , 9, 14-35, Human Kinetics Publishers,
Inc.
7,000 fans per game X 30% of fans are non-local visitors = 2,100 non-local visiting fans per game X 50 games per season X $26.47 total sales
impact per game = $2,779,350 per season, or about $55,587 per game
7,000 fans per game X 30% of fans are non-local visitors = 2,100 non-local visiting fans per game X 50 games per season X $6.53 total
household income impact per game = $685,650 per season, or about $13,713 per game
7,000 fans per game X 41% of fans are non-local visitors = 2,870 non-local visiting fans per game X 50 games per season X $26.47 total sales
impact per game = $3,798,445 per season, or about $75,968 per game
7,000 fans per game X 41% of fans are non-local visitors = 2,870 non-local visiting fans per game X 50 games per season X $6.53 total
household income impact per game = $937,055 per season, or about $18,741 per game
While 55 events each season will be held where the proposed ballpark would be filled to capacity, there will be 46-50 Saints baseball games held per season
(Saint Paul Saints data)
While the capacity of a proposed ballpark is about 7,500 people, Saints data shows that it is reasonable to assume 7,000 people would attend a typical Saints
game
Wayne P. Miller. Economic Multipliers: How Communities Can Use Them for Planning. University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. University of Arkansas
Cooperative Extension Service Printing Services.
J.E. Peck (1985). An Economic Impact Analysis of South Bend's Proposed Class A Baseball Stadium, South Bend, IN: Bureau of Business and Economic Research.
Data about Saint Paul Saints provided by St. Paul Saints Baseball Club, Inc. , including 2008 ticket buyers from all sources (season tickets, groups, individual) for regular season games
90-95% of US county income multipliers fall within a range of 0.4 - 0.8. Multipliers will tend to be in the upper range if: 1) A region is urban rather than rural,
and 2) Visitors will be buying products/services requiring considerable local labor in production. The multipliers above generally fall in this range. (Crompton,
1995).
Definitions
Multipliers - A multiplier summarizes the total impact that can be expected from a change in a given economic activity. For example, an increase in exports by a
local firm is an economic change which can spur ripple effects or spin-off activities. Multipliers measure the economic impact of these changes, including the
resulting spin-off activities. They usually range between 1.0 and 3.0, are industry-specific, and vary by the amount of economic activity within an area and by the
interaction of industries within the area. The more inputs purchased locally and the more consumer expenditures at local shops, the higher the multiplier. The
larger the area, the more economic activity will likely occur within the area. Multipliers are calculated for each US county and state by the Bureau of Economic
Analysis. Industry-specific multipliers should be used to provide more accurate estimates of economic impacts.
Four multipliers are can be used to assess impacts of an initial increase in production resulting from an increase in sales. They are: (1) Sales/Business output, (2)
Household income (3) Employment, and (4) Value Added Multipliers. This analysis focuses on the first two multipliers.
Three types of multipliers are most typically used:
Sales multiplier - Measures the direct, indirect, and induced effect of an extra unit of visitor spending on economic activity among all businesses in the host
community, in dollars. It is "business output" or "sales" impact created by visitor spending.
Household income multiplier- Measures the direct, indirect, and induced effect of an extra unit of visitor spending on the changes that result in the level of all
household incomes in the host community, in dollars. It constitutes the "earnings" or "income" impacts created by increased economic activity.
Employment multiplier - Measures the direct, indirect, and induced effect of an extra unit of visitor spending on all employment in the host community, in jobs
created. Additional employment in a business is multiplied by the employment multiplier for the business providing an estimate of the total new jobs created in
the host community.
Sales multipliers are often used in economic impact analysis to show the total effect on all business of an increase in activity at one business. However, household
income and employment multipliers are more meaningful to the average host community resident because they measure the actual effects on residents' standard
of living. This is particularly true in the case of the economic activity generated by a sports facility, which is often considered "tourism" if focusing on the impacts
of non-local visitor spending.
Three elements that contribute to the total impact of an initial injection of non-local visitor spending in a host community are:
Direct effect- The first round effect of visitor spending, that is, the change occurring to the initial businesses that provide the goods or services. It is how much the
businesses who received the initial visitor spending are spending on goods in the host community and paying employees who live in the host community.
Indirect effect- The changes occurring to businesses in the "backward linked" businesses that supply the initial business. It is the "ripple effect" of additional rounds
of recirculating the initial visitor dollars.
Induced effect- Further ripple effects caused by the employees of impacted businesses (both direct & indirect) spending some of their salaries and wages in other
businesses in the host community. The "consumption" effect.
The combination of the indirect and induced effects is often defined as the secondary economic impact.
St. Paul's Lowertown: Plans in works for new bars, restaurants,
bakery
By Kathie Jenkins kjenkins@pioneerpress.com TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Posted: TwinCities.com
A new St. Paul Saints ballpark in Lowertown was barely a twinkle in Mayor Chris Coleman's eye
when developers started thinking about bringing more restaurants into the neighborhood.
Now that the city has taken steps closer to the ballpark with this week's purchase agreement for land
and a request for a grant, Lowertown has become a hotbed of activity.
Plans are in the works for restaurants, bars, a bakery and more.
Dave Brooks, who heads the Brooks Group, said he is negotiating with D'Amico & Partners to open
a rooftop restaurant in a parking ramp and office building at Sixth and Wall streets overlooking the
potential stadium and with a view to the St. Paul Cathedral.
The building, which Brooks has already spent $4 million renovating, will feature a top-floor
wedding venue and events center -- called A'Bulae -- complete with a spa, games room, bar and
photography studio. A sports bar is planned for the ground-floor space. The target opening is spring
2013.
"It's going to be just like New York's SoHo down there," Brooks said. "I've been in Lowertown for
40 years, and I can now feel the excitement."
Meanwhile, Jim Crockarell, who owns the nearby Park Square building that houses Bin wine bar, is
talking to owner Rebecca Illingworth about adding a rooftop restaurant. He also met with several
restaurateurs about leasing a 5,000-square-foot space on the first floor.
In addition, Jauna'e Brooks of the Brooks Group is planning a cafe/bakery for her space on East
Seventh Street, between Wacouta and Wall streets.
Crockarell and Dave Brooks also are working with the mayor's office to expand the sidewalk area
in front of the buildings they each own along Sixth Street between Sibley and Wacouta streets for
additional patio space outside Bulldog, Barrio and Bin restaurants.
"This project is one that the mayor supports," said Joe Campbell, spokesman for the mayor's office.
But the project still has several channels to go through and must be approved by the city council.
This week, the city indicated it will apply for a $27 million economic development grant to build
the 7,000-seat ballpark, and the city's Port Authority signed a $1.85 million purchase agreement to
buy the Diamond Products/Gillette warehouse, which will be torn down to make way for the
ballpark. If the funding comes through, it could be completed in time for the Saints' season opener
in 2014.
Meanwhile, Brooks continues to push on. Negotiations are about who needs what, he said.
Page 1 of 2 St. Paul's Lowertown: Plans in works for new bars, restaurants, bakery - TwinCities.com
6/22/2012 http://www.twincities.com/restaurants/ci_20695899/st-pauls-lowertown-plans-works-new-...
"In this case, I need a D'Amico restaurant more than they need me so it's just a matter of how much
I have to give to get them," he said.
The D'Amico company did not return a call for comment.
For the ground-floor sports bar, Brooks is talking to Saints co-owner and actor Bill Murray and his
brothers about opening a Caddyshack Sports Bar.
A Midwest-friendly menu of Sheboygan bratwurst, Chicago dogs and Italian beef likely would go
over big with the baseball crowd, but it's far from a done deal.
"Bill Murray may be funny when he's on TV, but he's not when he's negotiating," Brooks said. "The
first proposal I sent to him, he sent back all shredded up. It was crazy."
For his part, Crockarell is taking a wait-and-see attitude.
"The plans have been developed and everyone is interested in doing it," he said. "But Rebecca
Illingworth still needs to sign a lease."
Bin's Illingworth said the rooftop restaurant will happen; it's just a matter of taking things a step at a
time. Her father, an architect, has designed the plans. Illingworth has also picked out the name: Bin
on Top.
Her first-floor restaurant will be renamed Bin on Bottom.
As for the first-floor restaurant, Crockarell said the family that owns Red Wing Shoes has shown
interest in opening a microbrewery and art gallery on the ground floor. But the current tenant --
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency -- still hasn't decided to give up part of the space it leases.
To open a cafe/bakery on East Seventh Street, pastry chef Alicia Hinze and marketing exec Jennifer
Lueck have applied to St. Paul's Neighborhood STAR Program for a grant and a loan. They expect
to hear in June if they received financing.
If approved, the plan is to be open by October, serving breakfast, lunch and dinner.
"I think we have a really good business plan, and the Lowertown area really needs something like
this," Hinze said. "There are few places that you can go for breakfast in this area."
Jauna'e Brooks, who took her time filling the space, agrees.
"It's a Cinderella-slipper fit," she said. "In Minneapolis, anything kind of goes. But in St. Paul, it's
hard to win them over, so I wanted to find a perfect fit, and I feel this is it."
Kathie Jenkins can be reached at 651-228-5585 or follow her at Twitter.com/JenkinsCritic
Page 2 of 2 St. Paul's Lowertown: Plans in works for new bars, restaurants, bakery - TwinCities.com
6/22/2012 http://www.twincities.com/restaurants/ci_20695899/st-pauls-lowertown-plans-works-new-...
Downtown St. Pauls artsy Lowertown neighborhood is a stew
of resaturants, art, new development and the Farmers Market.
Brian Peterson, Star Tribune

St. Paul's Lowertown has gotten hot
without losing its charm
Article by: ROCHELLE OLSON
Star Tribune
June 18, 2012 - 8:13 AM
Relax with a "Macho Camacho" margarita at Barrio. Savor a
Barnaise sauce with French fries at Faces. Buy peonies at the
Farmers Market. Dance barefoot in Mears Park to live jazz and
blues. Maybe someday stroll into an artsy new St. Paul regional
ballpark that's home for the minor-league Saints.
More than a decade after artists began migrating into the
downtown St. Paul neighborhood near the Farmers Market,
Lowertown is a boomtown, one of the hottest destinations in the
metro area.
"Now it's a 24-hour neighborhood," said Terri Cermak, whose architectural firm has been in the Northwestern Building at 275
E. 4th St. for about 15 years. She and her husband, Todd Rhoades, said they chose the location for the price and the mojo.
"There are so many artists down here, it's a really nice creative atmosphere," Rhoades said.
Once a sleepier part of town, Lowertown has burst onto the urban scene in recent years with new apartments and condos,
music festivals, bars and restaurants. The 58 city-built luxury rental Lofts at Farmers Market were fully leased even before the
building's grand opening. In the next couple of years, the Central Corridor light-rail line will be rolling into a busy, remodeled
Union Station. More city-built apartments, a Lunds grocery store and a new city park are planned. The biggest prospective
coming attraction is a Saints ballpark that would play host to an anticipated 150 events a year, drawing up to 7,000 people
each time.
Mayor Chris Coleman is bullish on St. Paul's prospects for snagging the $27 million state grant needed to begin digging for
the minor league ballpark to replace the deteriorating Midway Stadium. Word is expected by midsummer.
"Even though it will be a very popular place, it's always going to be a small part of [Lowertown]," Coleman said.
Kae Peterson, 96, has watched the area develop for the past 20 years from her home on the top floor of Galtier Plaza.
"Lowertown is developing beautifully," she said. "We really want that ballpark and we're happy about the light rail."
Lowertown's identity started with the Farmers Market, followed by rent-controlled artists' apartments and galleries along with
smaller start-up businesses. The past decade has brought eateries, market-rate apartments and higher-end condos. Live
music in Mears Park is now an integral part of summer in Lowertown.
The Mississippi Riverfront trails connecting to Minneapolis' Grand Rounds are within walking distance, as is the Bruce Vento
Nature Sanctuary.
Lowertown has kept its laid-back bohemian vibe while drawing computer pioneer Cray Inc. and keeping public affairs firm
Goff Public.
The city doesn't track separate data for Lowertown, but overall the number of residents downtown has inched upward since
1990 when 4,410 people lived there. Ten years later that number grew to 5,743. In 2010, downtown had 7,057 residents.
Page 1 of 2 StarTribune - Print Page
6/22/2012 http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=159373645
Mike Zipko, a principal at Goff who also worked for former Mayor Norm Coleman, said Lowertown's tipping point was the
arrival of the Bulldog and Barrio restaurants. "They start feeding into each other," he said of the cluster of eateries that now
includes Bin, the nationally renowned Heartland, Kelly's Depot Bar and Station 4.
Zipko said the neighborhood has developed steadily on its own, adding, "There's not a master plan for Lowertown and that's
probably why it works."
But Faces owner David Fhima said Lowertown needs a more defined identity, such as the Uptown neighborhood in
Minneapolis and 50th and France in Edina. At 10 p.m., people go to Uptown for nightlife, while the Edina area is a daytime
spot.
Fhima, raised in France, praised Lowertown as a melange of younger and older people and "European charm" and
"American ingenuity." But the stew "creates confusion about what Lowertown is about," he said.
Drawn by the mix of ages and incomes, former St. Paul Council Member Jerry Blakey and a partner opened a liquor store
Lowertown in 2004. "You hear about starving artists, but they like their craft beer," Blakey said, adding that he's definitely
looking forward to a ballpark. "We'll be Tailgate Central."
Lowertown's "got life now," said Golden's Deli owner Jim Golden. "It's finally grown to expectations. It's really happening."
Golden started his business selling bagels at the Farmers Market in 1984. He graduated to operating from a $25-a-month
closet, eventually opened a serving window in the Northwestern Building, grew slowly to a full-on restaurant and just received
his liquor license.
Like Blakey's store, the deli is festooned with rotating works by neighborhood artists. "I hope it stays the same," he said of the
area's creative culture. As for an influx of people for possible St. Paul Saints and other ballgames, Golden said, "Ultimately, I
think everybody would do better."
Rochelle Olson 651-925-5035 Twitter: @rochelleolson
2011 Star Tribune

http://www.twincities.com/stpaul/ci_19913736
Page 1 of 2 28/06/2012 10:17 AM
Joe Soucheray: St. Paul ballpark could be a monument to a city of baseball greats
By Joe Soucheray TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Dave Winfield is in the Baseball Hall of Fame. So is Paul Molitor. Jack Morris is likely headed there, possibly as
soon as the next class. And Joe Mauer - if he has, in fact, regained his stamina, and thus his batting average - is also
a cinch for the red brick building in Cooperstown.
You could almost throw a baseball around the horn and tag the front stoop of the four houses where these guys grew
up in the middle of St. Paul. That is an otherworldly statistic. If there is another city in the country that has produced
four players of such achievement in professional baseball, let me know and I will change my mind.
I mean change my mind about a new ballpark in Lowertown. It's on the bonding docket up at the Legislature, St.
Paul seeking $27 million for the development of a 7,000-seat stadium at the start of the light-rail line at the east end
of town.
In an attempt to avoid the usual contretemps about publicly funded ballparks, let me insist that if light rail had an evil
billionaire owner, we would still be fighting it. But it doesn't have an owner, or, more accurately, has the taxpayers
as owners, whether we wanted it or not. The ballpark - it will not be a stadium with a swimming pool in the outfield
or an aquarium behind home plate - will not be built for an owner, other than us.
Yes, the Saints will play there 50 times a year, but so will high schools and colleges and American Legion teams and
for all I know Eddie (The King) Feigner will rise from the long gone and put together another fast-pitch softball
weekend.
Back to the four fellows who could bunt the ball to each other's house. Perhaps we should be making more of our
baseball history. By genetic predisposition, we seem to think of ourselves as hockey people, and we are, to a great
extent. But we can't find four fellows who have starred in the National Hockey League who all played at Groveland
or Hazel Park. It is uncanny that here, in the land of blizzards and the almost-midnight sun, that it is baseball, not
hockey, that has most distinguished the city's athletic history.
It has been reported to me by proponents of the new yard that St. Paul has been the center of amateur baseball in
Minnesota since 1903. Well, they are proponents, and I don't know how they get that year, but there used to be
ballparks downtown, and they are probably right. Not to mention Lexington Park and the original Midway Stadium,
where many a major leaguer played before going to the majors.
Plus, I hold in suspicion the idea that St. Paul and Minneapolis should work together in something that is
euphemistically called "regionalism." It is regionalism, I guess, if Minneapolis always gets what it wants and St. Paul
gets a rail line on which to ship people to Minneapolis. Minneapolis, for example, wants money to renovate the
Target Center as part of the Vikings stadium funding package. Mayor Chris Coleman has finally said "enough" and
has risen to defend the Xcel Energy Center, which would be placed at a competitive disadvantage if a ton of new
money gets dumped into the Target Center.
There is no connection between the $27 million being sought for the Lowertown ballpark and those Target Center
funds, but Coleman is on the right track to protect St. Paul's interests as Minneapolis fiddles and diddles with
Vikings plans.
It would be a ballpark in the truest sense of the word, to replace Midway Stadium, that uninteresting place now
having reached the baling-wire-and-duct-tape stage of its useful life.
If it gets built, we had better figure out a way to incorporate the names of Morris, Molitor, Winfield and Mauer over
the entrance or on the outfield walls or someplace. There isn't another city in the country, much less another single
neighborhood, that can claim those four.
Joe Soucheray can be reached at jsoucheray@pioneerpress.com or 651-228-5474. Soucheray is heard from 3 to 6

Thank you City Council for helping to
build a better Saint Paul
Blog Post by: Lenny Russo
February 29, 2012 - 10:10 PM
I recently took the St. Paul City Council to task in this blog for allowing activist residents to influence them to overturn their
own votes. I felt their original decisions were wisely and thoughtfully made in the best interests of all of St. Paul's citizens,
and I was dismayed to see them cave in to pressure from groups that would put their own self interests ahead of the greater
good of the majority of St. Paulites.
I must now offer my congratulations and compliments to them for their recent decisions to approve financing for the long
delayed Penfield project as well as approval of a TIF district for the redevelopment of the old Schmidt Brewery site on West
Seventh Street which will add 260 units of affordable housing for artists. Additional development and rehabilitation funds
were approved for low income housing at both St. Alban's Park and St. Philip's Gardens. These projects will not only help to
create jobs and stimulate private investment, but they also cut across socioeconomic divides.
It is often said by some that government does not create jobs; the private sector does. That statement is for the most part
true, but government does play a significant role in creating a positive climate for job growth and private investment.
Many people have criticized the federal government's bailout of the U.S. auto industry saying that we should have allowed
General Motors and Chrysler to go bankrupt. In times when the credit markets are stable, that might very well have been the
best approach. Normally, a company would file bankruptcy and use available credit to reorganize under Chapter 11. Facing
the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, the credit markets had dried up. It was up to the federal government
to step in and provide that credit or face what could have been a cataclysmic event. Instead of that cataclysm, thousands of
jobs were saved, and the once proud American auto industry was not only snatched from the jaws of death but rebounded
with renewed vigor and vitality. One can certainly criticize the structure of the bailout, but criticizing the government's role in
averting a financial crisis by providing a means to a positive end seems ill informed.
The same could be said for the Penfield project located at 10th and Minnesota Streets and the recently completed Lofts at
Farmers' Market kitty corner from Heartland on 5th and Wall Streets. Both developments bring much needed market rate
housing to Lowertown St. Paul thereby providing the residential critical mass necessary to attract retail and business
development. In addition, they are located in prime areas within two blocks on the new light rail line. The Penfield will bring
with it a new Lunds supermarket. Not only will that provide good paying jobs, but it will also provide a vital service to the
downtown dweller. One of the keys to attracting Cray to relocate to Lowertown was the Mayor's promise that amenities such
as market rate housing, expanded retail and the light rail line would provide their workers with reasons to live and work in
downtown St. Paul. Mayor Chris Coleman's Rebuild Saint Paul Initiative is a well-designed blueprint for the revitalization of
our great city. These projects are part of that initiative.
In regard to the Penfield development, City Council President Kathy Lantry questioned whether or not it was wise to invest so
heavily in one project thereby exposing the city to greater risk instead of spreading out the money among many other
projects. It's a reasonable question. I would contend that all one need do is look at the federal stimulus funds to gain an
answer to that. Those funds have been spread out so thinly that they haven't been effective enough in creating significant job
growth. Had they been invested more heavily in fewer projects, they would have had greater impact. In addition, Council
Member Dave Thune, acting as the head of the city's Housing and Redevelopment Agency, accurately pointed out that
federal mortgage insurance through HUD is backing up the deal. He also noted that 50% of the apartments in the recently
completed Lofts at Farmers' Market have been pre-leased.
Council Member Dan Bostrom voiced concern over the fact that the Penfield will not be connected by skyway to the rest of
downtown. I would contend that that hasn't been an issue for the new Minneapolis riverfront developments, the revitalization
of Minneapolis' North Loop and the continued growth in Minneapolis' Northeast quadrant. Much of Lowertown including
Heartland is not connected by skyway to the central business district. An entertainment district such as Lowertown and those
in Minneapolis does not depend upon skyway access for its success.
Now that our City Council has declared that St. Paul is not and never will be a bedroom community for Minneapolis, it is up to
our State Legislature to follow suit by approving Governor Mark Dayton's proposal for $27 million in bonds for a regional
ballpark on the site of the old Diamond Products building in Lowertown. The plan calls for the St. Paul Port Authority to swap
the Lowertown industrial area it now owns for the Midway Stadium site which would be returned to more appropriate
industrial use. In return, the Lowertown site, which is badly polluted and will never be redeveloped as housing, would not
only include a new St. Paul Saints ballpark but, in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, it would include spaces for
rotating exhibits by local artists. In addition, it would provide a venue for national tournaments for American Legion and
Division II and III baseball teams. In winter months, the plan calls for converting the ballpark to a skating rink. The large
public plaza that would welcome fans would be a public space for residents and visitors. The site sits within three blocks of
Union Depot and is next to the light rail maintenance facility now being built. The Saints would contribute $10 million to the
project and pay all maintenance costs as the primary tenant, and the city would contribute $13 million toward the land
acquisition and clean up. The city would own the ballpark.
What that would mean to St. Paul cannot be overstated. The projected completion date would be 2014 which would coincide
with the new light rail line debut as well as numerous nearby infrastructure and development projects now underway. Keep in
mind that this development is family oriented. The price of a general admission ticket to a St. Paul Saints game is only $5.
Even if that price was doubled, it would still be comparable to the price of a ticket to a local movie theater. For Lowertown
residents in particular, being able to walk outside one's front door and attend a ball game for the price of admission to a
movie is an amenity akin to the Farmers' Market. By the way, the Farmers' Market is located directly across the street from
the ballpark site. The synergy that this development would create is undeniable.
I have spent a fair amount of time with Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem who was the original sponsor of this proposal
two years ago as well as with the Republican Legislative caucus in hopes that they will support the revitalization of St. Paul. I
continue in that hope as I implore them to recognize that a vital and vibrant Capital City is essential to the overall prosperity of
all of Minnesota, and I urge them to follow our City Council in supporting that dream.

2011 Star Tribune

http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_20039067
Page 1 of 1 28/06/2012 10:06 AM
Editorial: A clear case for a ballpark in St. Paul
Pioneer Press TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Observers have noted that the proposal to build a regional ballpark in downtown St. Paul for amateur baseball in
Minnesota and the St. Paul Saints seems nothing like the contentious Vikings stadium debate.
The differences go much deeper than the team's quirky attitude and its pink pig mascot, "Mudonna."
As we've noted on these pages - while making clear our firm support - the proposal for a 7,000-seat facility in
Lowertown does just what a traditional, effective bonding project should: It leverages public dollars to help build a
public facility that will drive economic development in an area that's primed and ready to produce. The facility
would be owned by the city of St. Paul and would serve players and families statewide.
Bonding for $27 million for the ballpark is among projects in Gov. Dayton's $775 million proposal for public works
programs. The total St. Paul ballpark project will cost around $54 million.
The proposal had its first hearing at the Capitol Thursday, before the House Jobs and Economic Development
Finance Committee. The message from St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman and Matt Kramer, president of the St. Paul
Area Chamber of Commerce: The ballpark at the site of the old Diamond Products building across from the St. Paul
Farmer's Market will incubate 500 jobs and pump as much as $10 million a year into the Lowertown district. It's
hoped it would do there what the Minnesota Wild and Xcel Energy Center did for the other end of downtown near
West Seventh Street.
Rep. Larry Howes, R-Walker, chairman of the capital investment committee, noted the poor facilities at the Saints'
current home at Midway Stadium and, in a report by the Pioneer Press' Frederick Melo, said that there's a role for
government beyond installing traffic lights and fixing sidewalk gutters, one that includes offering public
entertainment.
A Senate committee is likely to review the proposal in March, and Howes' bonding committee may take it up within
the next two months, Melo reported.
Legislators were reminded Thursday that Minnesota's amateur baseball program has produced the likes of Dave
Winfield, Paul Molitor and Joe Mauer. Billy Peterson, the city's former supervisor of municipal athletics and coach
to several of the legends with household names, attended the hearing.
"I'm here on behalf of the names you don't know, the thousands of kids who will play in the ballpark,'' he said,
according to another news report on the hearing. The ballpark, would host more than 180 events during a 210-day
outdoor season, most of them amateur events for players of all ages. The Saints would play 50 games each year at
the venue.
There's much to like about this project. The proposal gives St. Paul a unique economic development opportunity:
The site is a polluted brownfield that would be unsuited to other development. The new facility would replace
long-past-its-prime Midway Stadium and return that land to its "best use" as a job-producing site.
It's also important that the regional ballpark move forward regardless of how a protracted Vikings stadium debate
and a maze of financing schemes - some of which pit the two cities against each other - play out.
Meanwhile, the united front St. Paul city leaders and the business community are demonstrating is a credit to them
and to a strong St. Paul. In the intense competition for public money, they're making their case clearly and
compellingly. We hope legislators listen.

Architects rendering of proposed St. Paul Saints stadium.
File, Star Tribune
A LIFE-SIZED STADIUM
"The scale and scope of the regional ballpark vs. the
Vikings stadium are so dramatically different that it's
like comparing a canoe to the Queen Mary. The
ballpark really is a regional asset. It's not St. Paul
parochialism."
KATHY LANTRY, president, St. Paul City Council

Editorial: A people's ballpark for St. Paul
March 5, 2012 - 8:53 PM
A century ago, the Lowertown district in downtown St. Paul served
as an industrial and manufacturing focal point for the city. As we
evolved from an industrial to technological society, however, many
plants closed, and the area was left to carve out a new identity.
Today Lowertown is a hub for artists, a Farmers' Market, condos
and restaurants. But the area is still in transition from its industrial
past, and more significant development is needed. One promising
site is the home of the shuttered Gillette factory across from the
Farmers' Market.
City leaders wisely want to use the property for a new regional
ballpark that would be the new home for the St. Paul Saints minor-
league baseball team. It's a polluted site with limited options for
reuse, but a good match for a 7,500-seat ballpark. The Central
Corridor light-rail line will feed into the site.
The ballpark is seen as so critical to the downtown's economic
development plans that city leaders have made the new $54
million facility their No. 1 legislative priority, Mayor Chris Coleman
told the Star Tribune Editorial Board last month.
The city has requested $27 million in bonding from the state, which Gov. Mark Dayton has included in his bonding proposal.
The Saints have committed $10 million, and the city would cover the remaining costs.
"The business community is solidly behind this," said Matt Kramer, president of the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce.
"This will draw lot of other people into Lowertown, which generates economic vitality for other businesses in a core part of
downtown. When people look at economic development investments, this is in keeping with the kind of projects the
Legislature has supported for cities."
St. Paul officials want the new ballpark to fuel excitement about downtown, but also to maintain the character of Lowertown.
Their plans call for the ballpark to feature the work of local artists on a rotating basis. Kramer predicts that downtown
businesses will also use the ballpark in employee recruitment and retention efforts.
Dayton has referred to the proposed Minnesota Vikings stadium as a "people's stadium." In that spirit, the Saints have long
been a more affordable pro sports attraction for ordinary people. Instead of million-dollar athletes, players' salaries average
$1,800 per month. Hot dogs sell for $2.50, and some general-admission tickets are priced as low as $4. City leaders promise
those low prices would continue in a new ballpark.
The fan experience is lacking in the team's current home, the grossly inadequate Midway Stadium. Fans are inconvenienced
because the space for concessions and indoor restrooms is insufficient. Who wants to plunk down hard-earned dollars for a
game only to miss two or three innings standing in line at a portable toilet or trying to purchase a hot dog?
Players face unreasonable challenges at Midway, too. The field sinks in the outfield, there are only tiny cubbyholes for gear
and a hallway serves as the workout area. The dingy stadium is inadequate for both the professional and amateur teams that
use it.
Besides 57 Saints games, Midway Stadium hosted dozens of events last year, including competitions involving high schools,
the American Legion, colleges and others. The new ballpark would continue that accessibility, though it's our hope that
greater opportunities would open up for female athletes.
Sen. Geoff Michel, an Edina Republican, said the Saints have put their stadium proposal forward in a smart and strategic
way.
"They've made it bipartisan," he said. "They've got their local chamber leading the way. They've raised private funds. They've
got a strong local partner in the city of St. Paul. They have stepped up so it almost stands in good contrast with the Vikings
stadium drama. This is how to do a stadium."
Let's hope Michel can convince his legislative colleagues that the regional project is worthy of their support.
------------
Readers, what do you think? To offer an opinion considered for publication as a letter to the editor, please fill out
this form. Follow us on Twitter @StribOpinion and Facebook at facebook.com/StribOpinion.
2011 Star Tribune

NEWS THE CURRENT CLASSICAL Archive Events Member info Support Shop About us Search MPR GO
Member Supported Join Now
Mobile
Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Podcasts
Thursday, June 28, 2012
73 in Twin Cities
(more cities)
Weather Report
Traffic Report
SPONSORS
Dayton says public works projects will create thousands of jobs
by Tim Pugmire, Minnesota Public Radio
January 17, 2012

St. Paul, Minn. DFL Gov. Mark Dayton has released a list of public works construction projects that he claims will result in thousands of jobs, mostly in the
depressed building sector.
His proposed $775 million bonding bill would upgrade college buildings statewide, expand regional civic centers and add to the light rail transit system. But Republican
legislative leaders argue the state cannot afford any more debt.
The bonding bill is the centerpiece of Dayton's job-creation agenda for the 2012 Legislative session, which begins next Tuesday. The governor proposing the state issue
$775 million in bonds. But when other leveraged funds are factored in, the total impact of the list is nearly $1.5 billion. He estimates the projects, if approved, would
result in 21,700 jobs. With his likely Republican critics in mind, the DFL governor stressed that most of those jobs would be in the private sector.
"The contractors and sub-contractors are almost all private sector companies. They employ workers in the private sector," Dayton said. "These are exactly the jobs we
all say we all say want to increase in Minnesota. Well, here's our chance."
Dayton's bonding proposal is heavy on higher education projects, mostly for the upkeep of existing facilities. The University of Minnesota would get $107 million, and
the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system would get nearly $112 million. The list of projects also includes upgrades at the Minnesota Security Hospital in St.
Peter, a down payment on the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Transit line, a new St. Paul Saints baseball stadium and civic center expansions in Mankato, Rochester and
St. Cloud. There's also a renovation of the Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis and many more projects. The ballpark and civic centers have been proposed before, and
rejected. But Dayton insists those projects are still important.
"I hope the Legislature will look at them," Dayton said. "If they don't want to take my word for it, they can consult with my father or with other business leaders who
understand the importance to business and to jobs and to economic vitality of downtown revitalization projects."
During a news conference, Dayton highlighted a $3.5 million project to renovate the home of the Harriet Tubman Center East, a domestic violence shelter in
Maplewood, and the $13.5 million expansion of the Hormel Institute, a bioscience research facility in Austin, Texas. Zigang Dong, executive director of the Hormel
Institute, said the project would create construction jobs, as well as 120 additions to his staff.
"These jobs are high-tech jobs, medical research jobs," Dong said. "It's not easy to bring these jobs to Austin, to a rural area of Minnesota."
With the prospects of new jobs waiting, Dayton urged lawmakers to pass a bonding bill early in the 2012 session. He asks for the bill to be on his desk to sign by the end
of February.
Republican legislative leaders were quick to criticize Dayton's proposal, but they appeared to be moving at their own, slower pace on a bonding bill. House Majority
leader Matt Dean of Dellwood isn't convinced that a bonding bill is needed this session.
"We're not constitutionally obligated to a bonding bill. We passed a bonding bill last year, and certainly we have the capacity to do so again, and our bonding committee
is working hard, but we have had sessions in the past where we have not passed them," Dean said. "We are not obligated to do so, by any means."
Dean and other Republicans are concerned about the state's ability to afford additional debt service. Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem of Rochester, who chairs the
committee that will hear the bonding bill, said he and Dayton have a fundamental philosophical difference. Senjem said bonding bills are meant to repair and build
infrastructure, not to serve as a stimulus or short-term jobs program.
"That should not be our jobs program. Our jobs program ought to be about looking at tax climate, looking at regulatory climate and doing things to incent the private
sector," Senjem said. Bonding does not do that to any great degree."
Senjem said he expects Senate Republicans will propose about $400 million in bonding, emphasizing higher education and other core infrastructure projects.
Broadcast Dates
All Things Considered, 01/17/2012, 5:20 p.m.
Recommend 4 recommendations. Sign Up to see what your friends recommend.
Page 1 of 2
6/28/2012 http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/01/17/dayton-bonding-bill/

TAB FOUR

a. Funding Commitment Letters
i. St. Paul City Council Resolution
ii. St. Paul Saints Letter
b. Ten Year Pro-Forma

TAB FIVE

a. Assessors Valuation Lowertown

Office of the County Assessor
Stephen L Baker, SAMA, CAE County Assessor
90 West Plato Boulevard
Suite 400
St. Paul, MN 55107
Tel: 651-266-2150
Fax: 651-266-2101
stephen.l.baker@co.ramsey.mn.us
June 15, 2012
Ms. Jenny Wolfe
City of Saint Paul
Planning and Economic Development
City Hall Annex
St. Paul Mn
We have been asked to estimate the appraised value resulting from construction of the proposed Regional
Ballpark in the Lowertown area of Saint Paul (the "Project"). This request is specifically to accompany an
application for the Minnesota Business Development Capital Projects Grant Program through DEED, and
serves no other purpose.
The proposed Project includes the following ten (10) tax parcels:
32.29.22.33.0252; 33.29.22.33.0117; 32.29.22.33.0005; 32.29.22.33.0122; 32.29.22.33.0001;
32.29.22.33.0004; 32.29.22.33.0121; 32.29.22.33.0365;
32.29.22.33.0364; and 32.29.22.33.0363
The appraised value for the above property for Pay 2013 is $3,218,10 including a contamination value of
$2,100,000.
The above property generates $39,150 in property taxes for Pay 2012.
The City indicates the Project will result in the construction of an approximate 7,000 seat stadium with an
estimated total cost of $54 million as follows:
Amount
Land Acquisition 5,125,000
Soft Costs 6,824,000
Site Prep/Environmental 6,240,000
Site Related (Off-site) 2,600,000
Hard Costs 29,742,000
Financing Costs 3,469,000
$54,000,000
Excellence Respect Diversity
Since -el
The Project will be owned by the City of Saint Paul and will be exempt from property taxes. The City
indicates they will enter into a management agreement with the Saints to operate the facility.
The estimated appraised value for the new ballpark is $30,400,000.
Stephen L. Baker
Ramsey County Assessor

TAB SIX

a. Assessors Valuation Midway

Office of the County Assessor
Stephen L Baker, SAMA, CAE County Assessor
90 West Plato Boulevard
Suite 400
St. Paul, MN 55107
Tel: 651-266-2150
Fax: 651-266-2101
stephen.l.baker@co.ramsey.mn.us
June 15, 2012
Ms. Jenny Wolfe
City of Saint Paul
Planning and Economic Development
City Hall Annex
St. Paul Mn
We have been asked to estimate the appraised value resulting from re-use of the Midway Stadium site by the
Saint Paul Port Authority as contemplated by the land assembly agreement for the proposed Saint Paul
Regional Ballpark. This request is specifically to accompany an application for the Minnesota Business
Development Capital Projects Grant Program through DEED, and serves no other purpose.
The Midway Stadium site includes the following tax parcel and valuation:
28.29.23.13.0008 -- $16,867,400 for Pay 2013
The property is currently owned by the City of Saint Paul and exempt from taxes.
The Port Authority has estimated redevelopment and construction costs based on their business park model.
They estimate redevelopment of the 12.77 acre site could result in the construction of one or more buildings
totaling approximately 195,000 square feet with a total construction cost of approximately $14,600,000. The
Port Authority estimates the cost of preparing the site would exceed $12 million with $7.4 million of these
expenses for pollution remediation and soil correction.
The estimated appraised value for the new business park is $14,650,000 ($3,348,000 in the land valued at
$8.00 psf and $11,302,000 in buildings valued at $58.00 psf)
The total property taxes generated by this appraised value based on Pay 2012 tax rates is $607,641.
Stephen L Baker
Ramsey County Assessor

TAB SEVEN

a. Ticket Sales by Geographic Location USA
b. Ticket Sales by Geographic Location Twin Cities Region
c. Regional Users by Geographic Location
d. American Legion and NCAA Division III World Series Impact

2009 Sai nt s Ti cket Buyer Map - Tot al

Tickets by Zip Code

5,000+

2,501 to 4,999

1,001 to 2,500

101 to 1,000

1 to 100

Mi dway St adi um Regi onal Use

Counties Represented as Users of Midway Stadium

Cities Represented as Users of Midway Stadium

American Legion World Series

Sources: American Legion website
Shelby (NC) Star newspaper

2008 ALWS 8 teams representing different national region
$4mm economic impact
Attendance 45,000
5-day tournament, mid-August annually
ESPN3 broadcast all games
500 hotel rooms occupied

2011 ALWS - $5mm economic impact to region
Eden Prairie, MN team won the title

2010 ALWS Indianapolis - $3mm economic impact

Competitive bid process
Shelby, NC has the tournament through 2014

NCAA Division III World Series

Appleton, WI has hosted since 2006
5-day tournament, over Memorial Day Weekend annually
8 team from around the nation
One local news source stated the economic impact to the city of $150,000, but we would
like to further research it

TAB EIGHT

a. Project Letters of Support

June 8, 2012

Commissioner Mark Phillips
332 Minnesota Street, Suite E-200
Saint Paul, MN 55101-7114

Dear Commissioner Phillips:

As a member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support Saint Pauls application to
fund the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project
will maximize land use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State,
regional and local public investments.

The ballpark project will replace a brownfield site in the middle of an urban neighborhood with a
regional attraction that is desired by residents and better suited for the area. It will be a catalyst for the
emergence and expansion of new businesses, entertainment venues, apartments and condos that will add
to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown district.

Simultaneously, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with nearby
railroad access will be turned over to the Saint Paul Port Authority for industrial development. This
coordinated effort will maximize the land use of not one, but two underproductive sites and drive
economic development opportunities in the East Metro.

Furthermore, this project has the unique ability to create synergy and leverage other significant public
investment projects already underway. Because Saint Paul has taken the steps necessary to make this
project shovel-ready, the facilitys estimated completion date of 2014 will coincide perfectly with the
completion of the Central Corridor LRT line, Ramsey Countys newly renovated Union Depot, private
redevelopment in Lowertown and a host of other projects that are part of the Rebuild Saint Paul
initiative.

This project is a clear-cut win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are excited to see it
become a signature project for the 2012 DEED Capital Projects Grants Program.

Sincerely,

Arthur Morrissey
Corporate Director of Marketing
Morrissey Hospitality Companies, Inc.

Cc: Office of Mayor Chris Coleman

June 13, 2012

Mark R. Phillips
Commissioner, Department of Employment & Economic Development
1st National Bank Bldg.
332 Minnesota St., Ste. E-200

Commissioner Phillips:

I would like to take this opportunity to express my strong support for the construction of a new
baseball stadium in downtown Saint Paul. As the leader of a business that relies heavily on the
activities taking place in our capital city, I ask that you support the continued revitalization of
our citys core. As a fan of the Saints, I ask that you support this initiative to bring the St. Paul
Saints downtown.

It is such a perfectly logical fit. One need only look to the Minnesota Wild to see the economic
impact a sports team can have on our city. Although not as large a revenue generator, the
Saints would make up for it in fan loyalty and pride. Visitors to The Saint Paul Hotel are
constantly asking what there is to do in downtown Saint Paul, and we would be delighted to
offer the ability to catch a Saints game on a beautiful summer afternoon.

My understanding is that the stadium would be a multipurpose facility, and house other events
and festivals throughout the year. The Lowertown area is becoming a true destination; the
addition of a regional ballpark would be an attraction that would draw even more people from
across Minnesota and surrounding states to our lovely, historic downtown St. Paul.

Please know that my staff stands at the ready to assist this effort in any way we can.

Sincerely,

David Miller
General Manager

Cc: Mayor Chris Coleman

I nt er pr et i ng and Tr ansl at i ng

595 Hamline Avenue North
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55104
TF: 888-499-5516 F: 612-605-8006
www.ingcointernational.com

June 7, 2012



As a Board Member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support Saint Pauls application to fund
the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project will maximize land
use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State, regional and local public
investments.

The ballpark project will replace a brownfield site in the middle of an urban neighborhood with a regional
attraction that is desired by residents and better suited for the area. It will be a catalyst for the emergence and
expansion of new businesses, entertainment venues, apartments and condos that will add to the tax base and
enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown district.

Simultaneously, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with nearby railroad access
will be turned over to the Saint Paul Port Authority for industrial development. This coordinated effort will maximize
the land use of not one, but two underproductive sites and drive economic development opportunities in the East
Metro.

Furthermore, this project has the unique ability to create synergy and leverage other significant public investment
projects already underway. Because Saint Paul has taken the steps necessary to make this project shovel-ready, the
facilitys estimated completion date of 2014 will coincide perfectly with the completion of the Central Corridor LRT
line, Ramsey Countys newly renovated Union Depot, private redevelopment in Lowertown and a host of other
projects that are part of the Rebuild Saint Paul initiative.

This project is a clear-cut win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are excited to see it become a
signature project for the 2012 DEED Capital Projects Grants Program.

Sincerely,

Ingrid B. Christensen


370 WABASHA STREET NORTH
ST. PAUL, MN 55102-1390
jim.westerhaus@ecolab.com

James A. Westerhaus
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS VP
651 293 2183
651 225 3274

June 8, 2012

332 Minnesota Street
Suite E-200
St. Paul, MN 55101-7114

Dear Mark:

As a former Board Member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support Saint Pauls
application to fund the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This
project will maximize land use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State,

The ballpark project will be a catalyst for the emergence and expansion of new businesses, entertainment
venues, and residences that will add to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown
District.

This project has the unique ability to create synergy and leverage other significant public investment projects
already underway. Thanks to the vision of Ramsey County leadership, and because St. Paul has taken the
steps necessary to make this project shovel-ready, the facilitys estimated completion date of 2014 will
coincide perfectly with the completion of the Central Corridor LRT line and Ramsey Countys newly renovated
Union Depot.

This project is a clear-cut win for Saint Paul, Ramsey County, and the State of Minnesota. I would be excited
to see it become a signature project for the 2012 DEED Capital Projects Grants Program.

Sincerely,

James A. Westerhaus
JAW/cas
cc: Matt Kramer, President, St. Paul Chamber of Commerce
Kris Taylor, Vice President Community Relations, Ecolab

June 25, 2012

Mark R. Phillip
Commissioner, Department of Employment and Economic Development
1
st
National Bank Building
332 Minnesota Street, E-200
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101

Dear Commission Phillips,

I am writing in support of the City of Saint Pauls application for a $27 million grant to build a
regional ballpark. I was mayor when the Saints were inaugurated and happily purchased the
first two season tickets. The team has been a big hit (excuse the pun) and has provided young
and old to affordable and entertaining baseball.

I am also writing as a former resident of Lowertown. The neighborhood has been developed as
a model urban village. The development has been slow and steady, and each new project has
complemented what is there. A new ballpark would be consistent with the progress taking
place in Lowertown.

Sincerely,

Jim Scheibel
Former Mayor and Lowertown Resident
jimscheibel@mindspring.com

June 7, 2012


As a board member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce and a business and property owner in
Saint Pauls Lowertown district, I fully support Saint Pauls application to fund the Saint Paul Regional
Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project will maximize land use,
expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State, regional and local public
investments.

to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown district. As you are well aware, due
to the disproportionate amount of government buildings, places of worship and educational facilities that
pay no property taxes as well as the fact that Ramsey County has the smallest land area with the densest
population in Minnesota, the tax base in Saint Paul is very narrow. Encouraging development through
DEED funding for this project will bring much needed property tax relief to Saint Paul property owners
through the expansion of that tax base. In addition to owning Saint Paul commercial property, I am also
a Saint Paul homeowner, and property taxes are a major concern for those of us who choose to live and
work in our Capital City.

As part of this project, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with nearby
economic development opportunities and job growth in the East Metro.

initiative.

Sincerely,
Lenny Russo
Chef/Proprietor
Heartland Restaurant & Farm Direct Market

Minneapolis - St. Paul 900 2nd Avenue South
Suite 550
www.colliers.com
MAIN +1 952 897 7700
FAX +1 952 842 7700
June 13, 2012



As a broker in the commercial real estate market in Saint Paul, I know the impact that the
proposed development of the regional ballpark will have on the office and housing market
in downtown Saint Paul. The Lowertown area has begun to see signs of light and energy;
this project will help fuel additional private investment and create a needed amenity for the
downtown business community. If this project does not move forward, we will be stuck with
a wall both figuratively and physically that will limit the development and progress that has
been growing in the downtown Saint Paul area.

In addition, as a member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support
Saint Pauls application to fund the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital
Projects Grant Program. This project will maximize land use, expand the tax base, attract
private investment, and leverage other State, regional and local public investments.

The ballpark project will replace a brownfield site in the middle of an urban neighborhood
with a regional attraction that is desired by residents and better suited for the area. It will be
a catalyst for the emergence and expansion of new businesses, entertainment venues,
apartments and condos that will add to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint
Pauls Lowertown district.

Simultaneously, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with
nearby railroad access will be turned over to the Saint Paul Port Authority for industrial
development. This coordinated effort will maximize the land use of not one, but two
underproductive sites and drive economic development opportunities in the East Metro.

Furthermore, this project has the unique ability to create synergy and leverage other
significant public investment projects already underway. Because Saint Paul has taken the
steps necessary to make this project shovel-ready, the facilitys estimated completion date
of 2014 will coincide perfectly with the completion of the Central Corridor LRT line, Ramsey
Countys newly renovated Union Depot, private redevelopment in Lowertown and a host of
other projects that are part of the Rebuild Saint Paul initiative.

This project is a clear-cut win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are
excited to see it become a signature project for the 2012 DEED Capital Projects Grants
Program.

Sincerely,
S

Louis Suarez, CCIM
Colliers International | Minneapolis-St. Paul
Direct 952 837 3061 | Mobile 651 260 2412
louis.suarez@colliers.com

cc: Office of Mayor Chris Coleman
June 7, 2012



As a member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, and a proud and committed supporter to
the growth of business and jobs in Minnesota; I fully support Saint Pauls application to fund the Saint
Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project will maximize
land use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State, regional and local
public investments.

As you are aware, the ballpark project will replace a blighted area at the Gillette site in the Mears Park
neighborhood with a regional ballpark/attraction capable of hosting numerous events throughout the
year. The project will be the foundation for the emergence and expansion of new businesses,
entertainment venues, and the continued development of residential property in the area. It will add to
the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown district.

The funding of the regional ballpark will enable the Midway Stadium site, to become prime industrial
real estate which could be developed by the Saint Port Authority to become an additional source of new
revenues both through its sale/lease and new jobs created by the new business which will call the site
home.

And finally, because Saint Paul has taken the steps necessary to make this project shovel-ready, the
facilitys estimated completion date of 2014 will coincide perfectly with the completion of the Central
Corridor LRT line, Ramsey Countys newly renovated Union Depot, private redevelopment in
Lowertown and a host of other projects that are part of the Rebuild Saint Paul initiative.

This project is a win-win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are excited to see it

Sincerely,

Michael R. Meyer
MHC Culinary Group, LLC
Suite 2000
345 St. Peter Street


242 East Fifth Street, Suite 2 St. Paul, MN 55101 (651)292-9102 Fax (651)292-9107

B U I L D I N G S U C C E S S
S M
www.pegasusgrp.net

June11,2012
CommissionerMarkPhillips
DepartmentofEmploymentandEconomicDevelopment
332MinnesotaStreet,SuiteE200
SaintPaul,MN551017114
DearCommissionerPhillips:
AsabusinessthathascalledtheLowertowndistrictofSt.Paulhomeforovernineyears,wefully
supporttheCityofSaintPaulsapplicationfor$27milliontofundtheSaintPaulRegionalBallpark
throughtheDEEDCapitalProjectsGrantProgram.Thisprojectwillmaximizelanduse,expandthetax
base,attractprivateinvestment,andleverageotherState,regionalandlocalpublicinvestments.
Theballparkprojectiswellsuitedfortheareaandwillreplaceabrownfieldsiteinthemiddleofan
urbanneighborhoodwitharegionalattractionthatisdesiredbytheLowertowncommunity.Itwillbea
catalystfortheemergenceandexpansionofnewbusinesses,entertainmentvenues,apartmentsand
condosthatwilladdtothetaxbaseandenhancethegrowthofSaintPaulsLowertowndistrict.
Simultaneously,theexistingMidwayStadiumanditshighdemandindustriallocationwithnearby
railroadaccesswillbeturnedovertotheSaintPaulPortAuthorityforindustrialdevelopment.This
coordinatedeffortwillmaximizethelanduseofnotone,buttwounderproductivesitesanddrive
economicdevelopmentopportunitiesintheEastMetro.
Furthermore,thisprojecthastheuniqueabilitytocreatesynergyandleverageothersignificantpublic
investmentprojectsalreadyunderway.SinceSaintPaulhastakenthestepsnecessarytomakethis
projectshovelready,thefacilitysestimatedcompletiondateof2014willcoincideperfectlywiththe
completionoftheCentralCorridorLRTline,RamseyCountysnewlyrenovatedUnionDepot,private
redevelopmentinLowertownandahostofotherprojectsthatarepartoftheRebuildSaintPaul
initiative.
ThisprojectisaclearcutwinforbothSaintPaulandtheStateofMinnesotaandweareexcitedtoseeit
becomeasignatureprojectforthe2012DEEDCapitalProjectsGrantsProgram.
Sincerely,
PamelaS.Beader EricL.Kruse
Principal Principal
Cc:OfficeofMayorChrisColeman
Minnesota Wire 1835 Energy Park Drive Saint Paul, Minnesota 55108 651.642.1800 www.mnwire.com
ISO 9001 Certified / ISO 13485 Compliant

June 20, 2012

Mark R. Phillips
Commissioner, Department of Employment & Economic Development
1
st
National Bank Bldg.
332 Minnesota St., Ste. E-200

Re: Regional Ballpark in Saint Paul

Dear Commissioner Phillips,

We appreciate having good people such as yourself leading us at DEED Mark, and hope all is going well.
Thank you for your involvement and support of the Minnesota Manufacturers Coalition at the Minnesota
Chamber. Fred Zimmerman and I have chatted about you on occasion, as he is a longtime member of
our Board of Directors. As you know, we are neighbors to the St. Paul Saints, which has been great but
we also know the value of moving forward to enhance both St. Paul and Minnesota with a new regional
ballpark in Saint Pauls Lowertown.

Construction of a regional ballpark will help create high-quality construction jobs, foster new economic
activity and development, and lead to increased tax revenues for the state of Minnesota. The new
ballpark will be a multi-use facility that will host hundreds of events each year. We can tell you first-hand
that these are good events that meet the needs of young athletes and young families looking for
affordable and fun entertainment. Weve witnessed it all being well managed in a family-friendly manner
again and again since moving into St. Paul as a business in 1989. The ballpark will also serve as a
community gathering space, capable of holding concerts and other large, important outdoor events. A
great example is the 2012 Military Appreciation Night where Yellow Ribbon Proclamations were
presented.

The timing for the ballpark is right. Downtown Saint Paul is undergoing a significant transformation. The
combination of the Central Corridor Light Rail Transit line, the new Lafayette Bridge and the Union Depot
provide us with a unique opportunity to coordinate the construction of these important projects.

There is broad community support for this ballpark. The business community large and small, the City
of St. Paul, Ramsey County, the Minnesota State High School League, American Legion Baseball,
Minnesota Class A Amateur (our beloved town ball), labor organizations and area residents all support
it. The ballparks positive impact will be felt around the entire Metro East region.

We appreciate your consideration and value your support to get this done. Thank you for taking time to
hear our thoughts.

Kind regards,
Joan C. Thompson
Paul J. Wagner Joan C. Thompson
Chairman/CEO Executive Vice President/CFO

Cc: Mayor Chris Coleman
Tom Whaley, St. Paul Saints

June 8, 2012



As a member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support the City of Saint Pauls application for $27
million to fund the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project will
maximize land use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State, regional and local public
investments.

The ballpark project will replace a brownfield site in the middle of an urban neighborhood with a regional attraction that is
desired by residents and better suited for the area. It will be a catalyst for the emergence and expansion of new businesses,
entertainment venues, apartments and condos that will add to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown
district.

Simultaneously, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with nearby railroad access will be
turned over to the Saint Paul Port Authority for industrial development. This coordinated effort will maximize the land use of
not one, but two underproductive sites and drive economic development opportunities in the East Metro.

Furthermore, this project has the unique ability to create synergy and leverage other significant public investment projects
already underway. Because Saint Paul has taken the steps necessary to make this project shovel-ready, the facilitys estimated
completion date of 2014 will coincide perfectly with the completion of the Central Corridor LRT line, Ramsey Countys
newly renovated Union Depot, private redevelopment in Lowertown and a host of other projects that are part of the Rebuild
Saint Paul initiative.

This project is a clear-cut win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are excited to see it become a signature
project for the 2012 DEED Capital Projects Grants Program.

Sincerely,
MINNESOTA CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY

Ryan Bierwerth

Ryan Bierwerth, PE, CFPS
President


June 20, 2012

Mark R. Phillips, Commissioner
Department of Employment & Economic Development
1
st
National Bank Building, 332 Minnesota Street, Ste. E-200
St. Paul, MN 55101-7114

Re: Regional Ballpark Grant Request


I am writing in regards to the City of St. Pauls application for the 27 million grant
from (DEED) on behalf of the local, regional and statewide Amateur and Collegiate
organizations that are users of Midway Stadium that are in support of the new
Regional Ballpark.

I have been involved with Amateur baseball at all levels in the State of Minnesota
from High School and Legion level to Collegiate and Professional over the last 25
years in many different capacities. I feel this project has the opportunity to provide
the Twin Cities, State of Minnesota and 5 State Region a true Community Ballpark
for the above mentioned levels of ball players for decades to come. There are
countless High School, American Legion, Collegiate and Amateur Tournaments to be
held in this new Regional Ballpark and since Midway Stadium has been used to
death, this area needs a state of the art facility to compete for said Tournaments and
Community events.

This new Regional Ballpark in Lowertown would also will be a big boost to the local
economy and provide a private-public partnership that is needed during this time
when public resources are scarce and the needs to drive public sector job creation and
economic development has never been greater.

And finally, I know the St. Paul Saints support this effort and are prepared to
contribute significant resources to this project. Their ongoing support is critical as
the revenue they provide will enable the new regional ballpark to be financially stable
and well maintained for years to come.

As you and your staff review the funding request before you from the City of Saint
Paul please do all you can to help ensure that Amateur Baseball remains a vibrant
part of our regions future. We appreciate your consideration and value your support.

Respectfully,

Shawn Vellek
Minnesota Amateur Baseball Class A Commissioner
NCAA Baseball Umpire Advisor

June 7, 2012



As a member of the Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, I fully support Saint Pauls application to
fund the Saint Paul Regional Ballpark through the DEED Capital Projects Grant Program. This project
will maximize land use, expand the tax base, attract private investment, and leverage other State,

to the tax base and enhance the growth of Saint Pauls Lowertown district.

Simultaneously, the existing Midway Stadium and its high demand industrial location with nearby
economic development opportunities in the East Metro.

initiative.

This project is a clear-cut win for both Saint Paul and the State of Minnesota and we are excited to see it

Sincerely,

William L Kaphing
651-229-2435


TAB NINE

a. St. Paul Port Authority Letter of Support

City of St. Paul DEED Application Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

City of St. Paul DEED Application Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 Minnesota Business Development

Capital Projects Grant Program Application

Unique Location, Exciting Potential:

the themes disoussed in this seotion. 1his abundant

This page intentionally left blank

Prior to implementation of response actions, a Response Action Plan/Construction

The existing 620,000 square foot former manufacturing building constructed in

Liesch performed a non-destructive asbestos and hazardous materials survey at 310 5

Appendix 8.0 provides a summary of a demolition cost analysis prepared to evaluate an

HOLDING COST ANALYSIS

BUILDING REUSE ANALYSIS

PHASE 2 (See Figure 10B)

Table 11.2 Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Costs summarizes the

You might also like