Return to: U of M Home
September 6, 1996
Board of Regents approved the Twin Cities Campus Master Plan. The Master
Plan states that Washington Avenue should be changed to a pedestrian-oriented
boulevard with a single lane of traffic in each direction and the two
outside lanes being dedicated to a busway route with the potential to
accommodate LRT in the future.
April 5, 2001
Facilities Committee received information on the proposed Central Corridor
LRT line between downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul and approved
a resolution that stated the
following:
• Rescission of the July 1991 BOR resolution calling for a tunnel because
of intensification of automobile use on Washington Avenue and the expansion
of buildings in the corridor;
• That the Central Corridor planners consider the following alternatives
for LRT or a dedicated busway through campus:
o A route through campus on Washington Avenue below grade (tunnel) on the
East Bank that would cross the Washington Avenue Bridge and connect with
the Hiawatha Line at the Metrodome;
o An alignment over the existing Bridge 9 that would follow the existing
railroad corridor and then follow the University transit right-of-way.
o A route on Washington Avenue at grade.
The resolution also requested that the administration return with recommendations
on the alternatives. The Board unanimously approved the resolution during
the April 6, 2001 Board meeting.
June 7, 2001
Facilities Committee received an update from University administration
on the Central Corridor LRT. The presenters noted that the Central Corridor
planners had asked the University to select two of the four possible
proposed alignments. The four alignments being discussed were:
• Washington Avenue (Below grade – Tunnel);
• #9 RR Bridge and then continuing through the existing railroad corridor;
• Washington Avenue at grade; and
• #9 RR Bridge and then continuing on University and/or 4th Avenues.
The presenters noted that the administration would return with a shortened
list of alternatives at the July 2001 committee meeting.
July 12, 2001
Facilities Committee reviewed and unanimously approved a resolution regarding
the Central Corridor LRT. One condition of the resolution stated that
because of changes on Washington
Avenue since 1996, the Master Plan’s accommodation of LRT at grade on Washington
is no longer determined to be appropriate.
The resolution recommended the
following alternatives be evaluated for the Central Corridor:
• LRT alignment over existing #9 RR Bridge continuing through existing
railroad corridor; and
• A modified Bus Rapid Transit alignment on Washington Avenue with no exclusive
transit lanes.
The resolution also stated that if the Central Corridor planners move forward
with a Washington Avenue LRT alignment, the University requires the line
to be below grade in a
tunnel.
The Board voted unanimously to approve the resolution.
2004-2008
Since 2004, the Facilities Committee has received annual updates regarding
the CCLRT planning efforts.
April 11, 2008
The Board of Regents received a preliminary update on the Northern Alignment
feasibility analysis. No action was taken at the meeting.
April 2008 Presentation (18.4 MB PDF)
Northern Alignment Feasibility Anaylsis (14.1
MB PDF)
May 21, 2008
The Board of Regents received a briefing packet that detailed the results
of the northern alignment feasibility analysis and the Washington Avenue
at-grade alignment with mitigations.
June 12 - 13, 2008
The Board of Regents received a detailed presentation of the results of
the northern alignment feasibility analysis and the Washington Avenue
at-grade alignment with pedestrian mall and
mitigations. The Board approved a resolution specifying that the University
will pursue the Washington Avenue at-grade with a transit/pedestrian mall
alternative, contingent upon the
execution of all necessary agreements needed to achieve a mitigation plan,
betterments, and all future mitigation measures and improvements.
June 2008 CCLRT Report (32 KB PDF)
June 2008 Presentation (6.6 MB PDF)
Memorandum of Understanding (66 KB PDF)
MOU Article (66 KB PDF)
Get
on Board