Fairview Heights-Station Area Plan

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN
St. Louis, Missouri | July 2013
Fairview Heights Station Area Plan

July 2013
Prepared for
East-West Gateway Council of Governments
By
In consultation with:
Nelson Nygaard
BAE Urban Economics
Hudson Associates
In partnership with:
City of Fairview Heights
TOD Advisory Committee
Paul Hubbman, East West Gateway Council of Governments
Mary Grace Lewandowski, East West Gateway Council of Governments
Jessica Mefford-Miller, Metro St. Louis
John Langa, Metro St. Louis
Mark Phillips, Metro St. Louis
Kim Cella, Citizens for Modern Transit
Lonnie Boring, Great Rivers Greenway
Nancy Thompson, Great Rivers Greenway
Marielle Brown, Trailnet
Glenn Powers, St. Louis County Department of Planning
Bill Grogan, St. Clair County Transportation District
Don Roe, City of St. Louis Planning Department
Amy Lampe, St. Louis Development Corporation
Mark Vogl, HOK St. Louis
Contents
PROJECT BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................1
STATION AREA ANALYSIS/ EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................5
Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS AND RESULTS ..........................................................19
STATION AREA PLAN.............................................................................................................21
Development Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Phasing Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Street Sections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Building Heights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Parks and Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Bike and Pedestrian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Walk Score. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Landscape Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Parking and Replacement Parking Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Stormwater Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Land Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Form Based Code. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A, B and C Streets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
ZONING/ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION.........................................................................69
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY...................................................71
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Strategies to Create an Inviting Walking Environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Strategies to Welcome Bikes to the Station Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Pedestrian Access Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Specific Bicycle Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................91
APPENDIX.............................................................................................................................A-1
LEED ND Scorecard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3
Public Survey Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-7
Records of Public Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-26
Online Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-32
| i
Page intentionally left blank
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Project Background | 1
Over the last several decades, growth in the St. Louis metropolitan area has traditionally
followed lower density suburban patterns. Leaders from throughout the region, however,
have continued to search for appropriate strategies to promote transit-oriented development
(TOD), or mixed-use development designed to maximize access to, and promote use of,
public transportation. As the St. Louis MetroLink system marks over two decades in service,
these leaders have engaged in the study of how to maximize the investment made in light
rail for the region and its various jurisdictions and how also to increase the overall ridership
rate metro-wide.
East-West Gateway Council of Governments (EWG), in conjunction with Metro and a host
of regional stakeholder organizations, completed a TOD Framework Master Plan as part of
the Regional TOD Study for the St. Louis region in 2013. This study included the following
components:
Completion of a regional market study documenting the potential for various forms of TOD
at each station area between 2012 and 2040, based upon demographic and market data
and analysis and input from local stakeholders and real estate experts.
Completion of site analysis and development feasibility analysis for each of the 37 existing MetroLink stations, outlining the key issues that have an impact on development viability
and providing recommendations and action steps for local jurisdictions, Metro, and other
stakeholders to promote TOD at each station area.
Completion of detailed station area plans for five of the existing MetroLink station areas, or
combinations of stations, including North Hanley, Rock Road, Union Station / Civic Center,
Emerson Park / Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Fairview Heights.
The intent of EWG, Metro, and its project partners is to outline a set of implementation tools
and recommendations for all 37 MetroLink stations that respond to market realities and
provide specific guidance to each jurisdiction within the system that will move TOD forward
over the next few years. Rather than outlining general principles applicable to TOD, these
plans aim to tie specific site analysis and feasibility with appropriate tools and strategies to
move development efforts along.
The specific station area plans for North Hanley, Rock Road, Union Station / Civic Center,
Emerson Park / Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Fairview Heights are intended to serve as detailed models of TOD, adhering to a range of station typology classifications. These classifications acknowledge that stations in urban downtown centers may serve different uses
and transit riders than perhaps those in neighborhood or suburban contexts. The station
area plans will provide momentum to implement TOD in the St. Louis region over the next
few years, establishing precedents for best practices and standards of development that all
communities along the MetroLink can emulate.
The five selected station areas were selected according to their regional location in the Metropolitan Area, the support of local leaders and citizens for further study of the stations, and
their varying representation of different station area typologies. In addition, these stations
ranked high for market viability; transit supportive potential and existing ridership; proximity
to services, civic amenities, and recreational opportunities; proximity to housing and jobs;
walkability and bikeability; existing supportive zoning; and available developable lands.
2 | Project Background
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri
Fairview Heights was selected for detailed study for a variety of reasons. First, the station
area is in close proximity to a large amount of vacant and underutilized lands, with approximately 52 acres of vacant lands adjacent to the station. In addition, Metro holds 18 acres
of land in ownership, mostly in the form of surface parking lots that have the potential to be
reconsidered for higher yielding uses in a denser development pattern. The location of the
Fairview Heights MetroLink Station is also in close and convenient location to Interstates
255 and 64, providing opportunities for regional connectivity and easily accessible industrial
and commercial uses. Furthermore, State Highway 161 and St. Clair Avenue, bordering the
station, provide access to surrounding communities like Belleville, Swansea, and Fairview
Heights.
The Fairview Heights station experiences a very high level of ridership, averaging 52,300
monthly boardings and serving commuters in Fairview Heights and surrounding suburban
communities. It is also the terminus of the Blue Line. This high level of ridership demonstrates a larger community supportive of transit use in this locality.
The station area plan will be used by local leaders, both as a visioning document and as a
guide with tools that enable the station areas to develop according to TOD principles. The
station area plan outlines the form-giving networks for roads, parks and open space, bike
and pedestrian connections, and transit services. Comprehensive plans, zoning codes, and
ordinances can be revised and adopted immediately, ensuring that the sites are designated
for TOD development patterns when investors are ready to move forward with development.
Localities can also pursue short-term steps such as establishing tax incentives to facilitate
private sector development, purchasing or assembling land around MetroLink stations for
development, and investing in civic infrastructure.
Metro will use this plan as a guide to consider the future of their land holdings. In addition, they can also consider any enhancements to the transit offered at these select station
areas in planning for future development, including parking replacement strategies and any
expanded transit services.
Various components of this station area plan provide guidance to the city, Metro and other
partners in implementing TOD. The market study completed as part of this process provides
a greater degree of specific guidance concerning near-term opportunities (within the next
five to ten years) but provides a more general, order of magnitude forecast of development
potential for the next ten to twenty years. The development strategy identified in this station
area plan identifies opportunities for short term real estate development, but a good deal of
the future development outlined in this plan represents a longer term vision for the development potential around the Fairview Heights station over the next twenty years, or more. Local officials will need to work with Metro and other partners to update this station area plan
periodically (over the next ten to twenty years) as demographic and market changes unfold
in the local area.
Project Background | 3
STATION AREA ANALYSIS/

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 5
Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions

LAMBERT
NORTH
HANLEY
UMSL NORTH
UMSL SOUTH
ROCK ROAD
WELLSTON
UNIVERSITY
CITY
DELMAR
FORSYTH
FOREST PARK
CLAYTON
SKINKER
RICHMOND HEIGHTS
BRENTWOOD
SUNNEN
CONVENTION
EAST
CENTER
RIVERFRONT
8th & PINE
ARCH
GRAND
CENTRAL
EMERSON
WEST END
JJK
5th &
UNION
STADIUM
MAPLEWOOD/
MISSOURI
STATION
CIVIC
MANCHESTER
CENTER
SHREWSBURY
WASHINGTON
PARK
FAIRVIEW
HEIGHTS
MEMORIAL
HOSPITAL
SHILOH-SCOTT
SWANSEA
BELLEVILLE
COLLEGE
The Fairview Heights MetroLink station is located within the City of Fairview Heights. In addition, the light rail tracks create the boundary to the west, separating the Fairview Heights
portion of the station area from adjoining portions of the City of East St. Louis, where singlefamily residential neighborhoods dominate the station area. Direct access does not currently
exist from these adjoining neighborhoods to the station platform, to the east. A variety of
land uses surround the Fairview Heights station in East St. Louis and Fairview Heights, in
addition to a large amount of vacant or underutilized land. The French Village Industrial Park
and various commercial uses line Route 161 to the east of the station area. To the north,
various strip commercial and residential land uses line St. Clair Avenue. An existing residential neighborhood in East St. Louis flanks the station area to the south and west. A number
of larger vacancies exist in the vicinity of the station area, including several vacancies in the
French Village Industrial Park, vacant lots along St. Clair Avenue, and two large vacant lots
of 18 and 6 acres, respectively, along the west side of the MetroLink tracks within East St.
Louis. The disjointed nature of the existing development pattern inhibits TOD and fails to
maximize the development potential of the area. In all, private sector vacant lots total over
36 acres. Metro owns surface parking lots at
the station and vacant parcels in adjoining
areas totaling nearly 19 acres.
In general, the orientation of the local land
uses remains somewhat disjointed and unorganized. With the exception of the main arterials (Route 161 and St. Clair Avenue) the
area lacks connectivity in terms of interconnected street grids and arterial streets. Most
of the residential uses in the station area orient around dead end streets or cul-de-sacs
and do not allow for connectivity to surroundSchoenberger Creek currently serves as a natural
ing transit facilities or other land uses.
barrier between the Fairview Heights station and
areas within East St. Louis, to the west
6 | Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions
Topography
The area to the east of the station features some flat terrain before ascending into a hilly topography where existing residential uses are situated. Bluffs to the north also create impediments to development. The area to the west of the Fairview Heights station features very
hilly and bluff oriented neighborhood conditions with some low-lying marshy areas along
Schoenberger Creek. The topography has created impediments for the creation of a grid
system in this portion of East St. Louis in the past.
Streams and Floodplains

Schoenberger Creek runs to the west of the
station area and through the project site,
but it is not classified as a floodplain directly
adjacent to the station. A streamway flows
into this creek from the northeast, across the
middle of the Metro owned parcel adjacent to
the station area platform. This drainageway
may limit potential development and detailed
development plans should account for how
to treat and manage this flow of stormwater
Existing streamway that runs across the middle of
runoff.
the MetroLink station area, from the northeast.
Cultural Resources
Archaeological sites have been identified within the property of the MetroLink station. Detailed planning and design efforts for specific projects in the Fairview Heights station area
should account for the specific locations of Native American burial mounds in terms of the
siting of buildings.
Transportation Network
The arterial highways and streets in the vicinity, including Route 157, Route 161, and St.
Clair Avenue, provide good connectivity to surrounding areas in Belleville, Fairview Heights
and East St. Louis. Route 157 provides direct access to the I-64 corridor and thereby provides increased connectivity to the larger Metro East region. These streets and roadways
carry fairly typical traffic volumes for major arterials in suburban areas. Route 161, which
runs parallel to the MetroLink line and adjacent to the station area, carries around 15,000
vehicles per day. St. Clair Avenue carries over 25,000 vehicles per day between Route 157
and the junction with Route 161, but only around 10,000 vehicles per day east of Route 161
within Fairview Heights. Route 157, despite its status as a higher speed four lane highway,
carries fewer than 10,000 vehicles per day south of St. Clair Avenue, but over 17,000 per
day between St. Clair Avenue and I-64.
Bike and Pedestrian Environment

The creation of a multimodal transportation environment requires the development of facilities for pedestrian, bicycles, transit, and automobiles. One way of determining the success
of these improvements is a level of service analysis (LOS). As it relates to the pedestrian
environment, LOS only considers such issues as physical improvements to sidewalks and
pedestrian safety. A LOS analysis typically does not consider land uses. As a response
to the need to consider land use in measuring walkability, Walk Score was created. Walk
Score rates urban environments based upon a sites proximity to a variety of land uses.
Sites are ranked in the following categories:
90100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Walkers Paradise
Daily errands do not require a car.
7089 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Very Walkable
Most errands can be accomplished on foot.
5069 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Somewhat Walkable
Some errands can be accomplished on foot.
2549 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Car-Dependent
Most errands require a car.
024 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Car-Dependent
Almost all errands require a car.
By large measure, the greater the variety of land uses within close proximity of a given location, the higher the walk score. Used in combination with a level of service analysis, Walk
Score can provide a good understanding of current pedestrian conditions in the vicinity of
an existing light rail station.
As part of this planning effort, each of the stations within was evaluated using the Walk
Score service. Walk Score calculates a continuous score for any site from 0-100 based
upon its proximity to thirteen categories of amenities. Walk Score should not be confused
as a total measure of neighborhood walkability. It does not consider such factors as street
width, sidewalk width, block length, street design, safety from crime and traffic, topography,
or natural walking barriers such as freeway, natural barriers to walking such as freeways
and bodies of water, and/or weather. Nonetheless, Walk Score does provide one way of
measuring an areas walkability. Researchers are increasingly testing Walk Score as a
means of measuring public health. Results suggest a positive relationship between a high
Walk Score and public health.
The area around the station currently registers a Walk Score of 14 (or, a car dependent
location as defined by Walk Score methodology). The Fairview Heights station area is
relatively isolated from shopping areas, government facilities, parks, dense residential
neighborhoods, and employment centers. Therefore, the station remains fairly unwalkable
for most people in most situations, who instead utilize the large surface park and ride lots at
this location.
In general, the Fairview Heights station remains isolated from the rest of the community and
orients around a very vehicular dominated highway environment. Route 161 and St. Clair
Avenue lack sidewalks, as do many of the neighborhood streets in the nearby areas. The
MetroLink station, itself, is the only place where a formal, accessible walkway exists, circling
the property. The residential areas to the south and west of the platform have no direct
pedestrian connections to the station. There is also a bus stop on along St. Clair Avenue
without a firm, accessible path or landing pad for bus riders. The surrounding vehicular network lacks any accommodations or provisions for bicyclists, as well.
Transit Supportive
From the Fairview Heights MetroLink station area, three MetroBus lines provide connections
to surrounding destinations in Belleville, Fairview Heights and other communities within
Metro East.
#01 Main Street State Street MetroBus connects to:
East St. Louis
St. Elizabeth Hospital
Belleville MetroLink station
#12 OFallon-Fairview Heights MetroBus connects to:
Highway 158 into OFallon
OFallon Transfer Center
Highway 50 into Fairview Heights
St. Clair Square
Vatterott College
#13 Caseyville-Marybelle MetroBus connects to:
Illinois Route 157, to Collinsville
Route 15 and Route 163 to Alorton and Centreville
Madison County Transfer Center in Collinsville
As illustrated in the table below, the Fairview Heights station reports much higher ridership
compared to the averages for the Illinois portion of the system and for MetroLink overall.
The Blue Line terminates at this station area, and as a result many travelers depart the
system at Fairview Heights. In addition, Fairview Heights represents the first station east of
I-255, serving suburban communities such as Fairview Heights, Swansea, and Belleville.
Many suburban customers drive to Fairview Heights from various locations in Metro East
and then ride MetroLink into St. Louis. The station area enjoys good connectivity to surrounding communities via Route 161 and Route 157 and this transportation framework
further supports higher ridership numbers at Fairview Heights.
MetroLink Station Boardings
Existing Zoning and Entitlement Considerations

The zoning classifications around the Fairview Heights station do not support a full range of
TOD. The R-1 residential zoning within the East St. Louis portion of the station area, to the
west of the station platform, does not allow for multi-family residential land uses. The zoning
to the east, in Fairview Heights, includes mainly commercial and industrial classifications
that do not allow for residential land uses. Throughout the station area, current zoning limits
both residential and commercial buildings to no higher than two to three stories in height.
The Planned Business district, located in the northern portion of the Metro park and ride lot,
may allow taller buildings with City approval. Minimum residential lot dimensions range from
6,000 SF to 10,000 SF in size and 50 to 75 feet in width. The residential zones also require
front yards ranging from 25 to 75 feet. Commercial and industrial uses require lots of 10,000
to 20,000 SF in size and 80 to 100 feet in width. Front yards for commercial and industrial
land uses must measure from 75 to 115 feet from the street centerline. All of these requirements may discourage the type of higher density and pedestrian friendly development that
is conducive to TOD.
The parking requirements in the vicinity of the Fairview Heights station also discourage the
creation of successful TOD. General retail uses in the area must provide one parking space
for every 200 SF of floor area, and offices must provide three spaces for every 1,000 SF.
Typology
This station has the potential to develop as an example of the Suburban Town Center typology in the future. Suburban Town Centers contain a mix of residential, employment, retail
and entertainment uses and can serve as both origins and destinations for commuters.
Ideally, these types of stations contain of mix of transit types including various levels of bus
service, with high frequency service. In general, the Fairview Heights station has the potential to emerge as a Suburban Town Center serving the entire Metro East area in coming
decades.
Existing Development Density

The station area within one quarter mile of the Fairview Heights platform currently includes
residential densities of .75 units per acre, on average, and employee densities of .84 employees per acre, on average. Housing types are typically one- and two-story single-family
homes. Given that, according to LEED ND and other sustainability standards, developments around light rail stations ideally include residential densities of 20 units per acre and
employment densities of 25 employees per acre, the current orientation of the station area
does not facilitate or support enhanced ridership on the MetroLink system and does not
reflect the standards of TOD.
Market
According to the regional TOD market study, between 2010 and 2040 the station area
around the Fairview Heights station is likely to experience demand for an additional 125 residential units and additional commercial space totaling around 68,000 square feet. Given
the local economic conditions and the context of the local area in Fairview Heights and St.
Clair County, the additional residential development would likely include a mixture of single
family and multi-family residential units, including the potential to develop a portion of the
program as senior or active adult housing. In particular, the area around the station platform
would appeal more to younger professionals who may desire the access to the city provided
by living in close proximity to the MetroLink system. Housing geared to Empty Nesters may
more logically locate on the outer edges of the development in order to better integrate with
surrounding parts of Fairview Heights.
The additional 68,000 square feet of commercial space may include local serving retail
uses, including convenience stores, a small grocery, and tenants catering to the daily needs
of commuters (including tenants such as Walgreens, dry cleaners, and small restaurants).
The station area could also include small local serving office uses, including offices for professional services (dentists, lawyers) and service industries (such as an insurance agency).
Beyond this amount of quantifiable new demand, the development depicted in the station
area plan graphics is likely to simply represent the repositioning or reconstruction of existing
space in the station area plan area. For example, a portion of the development to the east of
Route 161 will represent merely the conversion of existing office or light industrial space into
new construction.
A portion of the development depicted on the station area plan diagrams will represent
growth in terms of built space beyond the amounts supported by the market study. In this
sense, part of the vision plan is designed to anticipate the full buildout of the station area,
beyond even the twenty year horizon.
The market study for the St. Louis region emphasized that, if all 37 station areas were to
develop the amount of square footage outlined for that particular location, the sum total
of square footage would exceed the potential growth of real estate in the St. Louis market
over the next twenty years. The market will naturally pick its prime candidates for growth
along the MetroLink line, and the station area plan depicted in this document assumes that
the Fairview Heights station emerges as one of the key development areas along the line in
Illinois. The St. Louis area is a very slow growing region and therefore market demand for
TOD is naturally more muted compared to other cities.
Site Aerial
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
ST. CLAIR AVE. TO ROUTE
MO
fairview heights
metrolink
94TH ST.
EAST ST. LOUIS
ES
TB
LYNN LEE CT.
NT
CL
AI
159
DR
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
61
Y1
WA
GH
HI
Design Workshop, 2013

0
100
200
400
1 in = 200 feet
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS]
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [SITE ANALYSIS]

52
0
580
MetroLink Station Area Profile*

Identifies Metro-owned parcels that have the potential to encourage new
development around the station; other vacant and under-utilized sites that
may provide opportunities for infill development; and physical, policy, and
zoning barriers to TOD that currently exist.
0
48
540
catholIc
NOLES DR.
00-2
10.78 ACRES
600
Physical Barriers to Development | Access to the surrounding station site

lacks formal pedestrian crossings between the MetroLink Station and the
western portion of the station site.
0A
DT)
ST. CLAIR AVE.
park rIde
Regulatory Barriers to Development | Zoning around the station may

create barriers because of limitations in allowing multifamily housing and
mixed-use development. Building heights are also limited in this area to
two or three stories.
520
prIvate
Development Opportunity
ES
Pros
TB
560
estate llc
24.6 ACRES
prIvate
ownershIp
17 ACRES
E
AT
ST
goedecke
HW
cemetery
580
Y1
0
60
Cons
Approximately 52 acres of vacant land Somewhat limited potential in terms

of market viability for larger scale
exists within the station area
This station has the potential to support residential and commercial uses
a range of residential TOD and a limited
amount of mixed-use
Highway 161 provides access from the
site to Belleville and 0Swansea, and St.
50
Clair Avenue connects to the heart of
Fairview Heights, to the east
hess real
ST
.
480
UL
440
ST
AT
EH
560
WY
15
500
540
(10
500
AD
540
ownershIp
T)
Station Configuration | The station is has two Metro-owned Park-Ride

lots with 18 total acres and 853 parking spaces located at the intersection
of St. Clair Avenue and IL-161/94th Street.
540
480
.
AV
E
3R
D
(250
ownershIp
Average Monthly Boardings580| 52,300 (MetroLink Station Average = 36,500)
bellevIlle
dot
480
prIvate
dIocese of
IllInoIs
560
MP
AV
E
RA
AI
R
Context | This station is located in the City of Fairview Heights and

extends into the City of East St. Louis. It is surrounded by residential
neighborhoods to the west while the eastern side contains mostly
commercial and light industrial uses.
48
0
MA
GD
AL
EN
AA
VE
(178
CL
RAM
50
0
MP
460
IES
JA
M
ST
RA
00 A
DT)
ON
AV
E
440
Site Analysis
61
520
560
540
480
500
1/2 MILE RADIUS STUDY AREA
500
MISS
IS
SIPP
)
DT
0A
I RIV
ER
0
51
0-1
580
50
(14
58
0
CULTURAL PLACE OF INTEREST

METROLINK RED/BLUE LINE
VACANT PARCELS OVER 10 ACRES (2 TOTAL)

METRO OWNED PARCEL (33.7 ACRES)
440
520
PUBLIC OWNED PARCEL (17 ACRES)
0.18
500
VACANT PARCEL (117.5 ACRES)

HISTORIC DISTRICT
ADT
520
*Dataand
andinformation
Information
provided
Design
Workshop,
East West
Gateway
and Metro.
See
*Data
provided
by by
Design
Workshop,
East-West
Gateway,
and Metro.
See the
the MetroLink Station Area Profile Catalog for additional information. All extracted data is
MetroLink Station Area
Profile
Catalog
for
additional
information.
All
extracted
data
is
clipped
clipped and calculated to a one-half mile radius by Design Workshop.
and calculated to a one-half mile radius by Design Workshop.
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC

0.27
0.36
Miles
roLink
IT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STUDY
DRAFT: JUNE, 2012
Existing Conditions Analysis
TO
1/2
MIL
EW
AL
KI
schoenberger
creek
1/4 M
ILE
D.
FR
RA
DI
US
RA
US
DI
grade
change
WA
LK
IN
NG
ST. CLAIR AVE. TO

RO
UTE 159
HW
AY
1
57/
BL
UF
HIG
fairview
heights
metrolink
RD.
TE
TA
HI
NON
LEBA
1
AY
HW
61
STA
TE
mixed-use
employment
or residential
district
ROAD NETWORK
REGIONAL (50,000+ ADT)
ARTERIAL (30,000-49,999 ADT)
COLLECTOR (10,000-29,999 ADT)
LOCAL (>10,000 ADT)
POTENTIAL ROAD ALIGNMENT

RAIL ROAD LINE
BUS LINE
SECURITY GATE
PARKING LOT
T
C
TENANT PARKING
COMMUTER PARKING
METRO OWNED PARCEL
EXISTING AND POTENTIAL OPEN

SPACE CONNECTIONS
EXISTING TRAIL CONNECTION
PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTION
PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION
GRADE CHANGE
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING FRONTAGE - SHORT-TERM
HISTORIC DISTRICT
BUILDING FRONTAGE -LONG-TERM
CORRIDOR REVITALIZATION

0
200
400
800
1 in = 200 feet
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
PROCESS AND RESULTS
Public Participation and Results | 19
The project team conducted a series of three public meetings in the Fairview Heights area
to gain input from interested community members, business owners, and other stakeholders
concerning the potential for transit oriented development at this station and to review preliminary and final versions of the station area plans for the area.
The first public meeting was held on December 12, 2012, and discussed the publics broad
goals for the station planning effort and the types of development and features that they
would prefer to see at the station area. In general, meeting attendees were in favor of developing a mixture of uses and in creating a neighborhood oriented center at the Fairview
Heights station including retail, office, and residential land uses. Members of the public
expressed concern about the potential to develop residential land uses at the station area,
given the perceived low quality of the East St. Louis school district, which has jurisdiction
over the area. However, the project team indicated that housing that is more geared to
households that do not include school age children may gain traction in the local market.
For example, townhomes and apartments targeting young professionals and Empty Nester
households are more likely to gain market acceptance at the station area. The public also
provided input concerning some general land use concepts and supported the idea of a mixture of land uses in the quadrant to the south and west of St. Clair Avenue and Route 161,
as well as the concept of business park uses to the east of Route 161.
At the second public meeting held on February 27, 2013, the public provided additional
detail concerning the preferred look and feel of development in the station area. Participants
supported residential densities of around twenty units per acre, and buildings of four to five
stories. Members of the public at the second public meeting also provided input concerning
preliminary station area plans that depict the potential locations for streets, building outlines,
open space connections, and related amenities. The project team used input from the attendees to formulate a final plan recommendation for the Fairview Heights station.
At the third and final public meeting, members of the public provided input concerning the
phasing and prioritization of improvements and development in the station area and also
provided input concerning a range of implementation issues.
Residents ranked the improvement of lighting and various other streetscape elements as
more important than completing improvements to bicycle facilities in the area. The vast
majority of participants favored adopting the station area plan as part of the comprehensive
plan for the City of Fairview Heights. Furthermore, the majority of participants supported the
land use and transportation concepts depicted in the station area plans and supported the
City using an Enterprise Zone to promote redevelopment in the station area. All of the participants in the final public meeting supported the Metro board making the implementation
of transit oriented development at Fairview Heights and other stations a core mission of the
agency. In terms of implementation ideas, the public most strongly supported the City using
zoning changes to promote redevelopment at the station area, along with targeted funding
of streetscape and infrastructure improvements in the station area.
The full set of results from online and in-person surveys for this project are available in the
Appendix to this document along with the records of the public meetings.
20 | Public Participation and Results
STATION AREA PLAN
Station Area Plan | 21
Development Strategy
The development strategy for the Fairview Heights station involves formulating an urban
framework of streets, bicycle and pedestrian connections, and open space amenities in the
area between the station platform and Route 161, in order to leverage the adjacency to the
MetroLink line and the ample landholdings controlled by Metro. This development area near
the MetroLink station may include a mixture of multi-family residential units, neighborhood
serving retail, and small format office uses. Around the edges of this development program,
fronting St. Clair Avenue and Route 161, potential developers may have the ability to introduce junior box or somewhat larger format neighborhood retailers in order to leverage the
higher traffic volumes on the adjacent arterial roads. Across Route 161 to the east, potential
development may involve the installation of a network of urban streets that would serve
as the backbone for business park or office uses. The existing French Village Industrial
Park may integrate with this new development and therefore help to establish the Fairview
Heights station area and the Route 161 corridor as a sub-regional node of business park
and employment center land uses. To the west of the station area, the communities of
Fairview Heights and East St. Louis should consider the completion of pedestrian and bike
connections from the station platform area to neighborhoods to the west.
94th Street would become the formalized entrance into the station area, establishing an
east-west grid against Highway 161. Development is encouraged to front 94th Street and
St. Clair Avenue in order to maximize visibility, particularly for retail uses. Building setbacks
should be reduced in order to create a comfortable pedestrian environment while maximizing visibility to retail and other commercial uses. Public space is incorporated into the
breaks between buildings and parking lots, while parking is primarily tucked behind the
building facades. The overall urban design strategy encourages active uses (such as retail
and office) on the first floor of buildings, in order to create greater levels of activity at the
street level.
22 | Station Area Plan
Illustrative Plan
OR
CH
AR
1/4
2M
ILE
WA
LK
I
DS
T.
NG
RA
DI
US
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING

0
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Fairview Perspective View

The perspective rendering depicts a view looking down 94th Street (the main street in the
station area) toward the west, and toward the
station platform area. This illustrative captures
the long term vision for the core portion of the
station area, reflecting the full buildout of the
area over the next twenty years or more. Retail
and other active uses would line the first floor,
encouraging a greater level of pedestrian activity
on the street. Residential or office uses would
line the upper floors of the buildings. The overall
scale of these buildings aligns with the overall
density and height for buildings that the public
found acceptable during public input meetings
for the station area plan. While the particular
architectural style and building design may of
course differ from this vision, the perspective
illustrates how buildings would relate to the
main street. Along 94th Street, the provision of
angled parking along with street trees and various streetscape elements would help to create
a more active Main Street environment and
therefore support adjacent retail uses.

159
FAIRVIEW PERSPECTIVE VIEW
fairview heights
metrolink
E
AT
ST
61
Y1
WA
GH
HI
Phasing Strategy
Phase 1
OR
CH
AR
1/4
2M
ILE
WA
LK
I
DS
T.
NG
RA
DI
US
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
Phasing at the Fairview Heights station has

been considered in four segments. Phase 1
formalizes the entrance into the station area on
94th Street by creating definition with new development fronting both sides of the street. This
axis is important in highlighting the visual and
physical connection to the station platform. The
new development will provide services for transit
riders, local commuters, and future station area
users. This phase of development maintains all
existing surface parking.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
Phase 1 is more likely to contain convenience

retail uses initially, including sundries, dry cleaners, a bank, and the like, along with perhaps
a very small residential or office component.
Phase 1 may encompass the first five years, or
up to the first ten years of initial development activity. During this phase, all land uses to the east
of Route 161 would likely remain in their current
configuration. Phase 1 represents a degree of
development that ties fairly closely with the conclusions of the market study. Phases 2 through 4
primarily represent either a long term vision for
additional growth in the Fairview Heights area,
or the repositioning of existing square footage of
space into new or different buildings over time.
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING

0
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | PHASE 1
Phase 2
OR
CH
AR
1/4
2M
ILE
WA
LK
I
DS
T.
NG
RA
DI
US
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
Phase 2 begins to expand development around

the station platform. This new development may
include a mixture of residential, office, and retail
uses. A few buildings may develop along St.
Clair Avenue, to the north, to serve commuters.
Commuter lots are maintained through Phase 2,
providing parking in the northern portion of the
Metro owned property and to the south.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING

0
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Phase 3
OR
CH
AR
1/4
2M
ILE
WA
LK
I
DS
T.
NG
RA
DI
US
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
In Phase 3, most of the remaining Metro owned

land around the station area develops as a
mixture of residential, retail, and office uses. Developers may need to construct surface parking
lots within the new projects in order to serve the
new development as well as provide for parking for MetroLink riders. In Phase 3, development would spread to the east of Route 161, as
well. Lynn Lee Court would serve as an eastern
extension of the Main Street along 94th Street
and may include a greater emphasis on retail
uses. Buildings located to the east of Route 161,
between St. Clair Avenue and Lynn Lee Court,
may more logically develop as business park or
office uses.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING

0
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Phase 4
OR
CH
AR
1/4
2M
ILE
WA
LK
I
DS
T.
NG
RA
DI
US
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
Phase 4 envisions the eventual development of

the French Village Industrial Park area, to the
south and east of Route 161, as a business park
area. The plan anticipates the road network for
the French Village area logically connecting up
with the road network for the Fairview Heights
station area in order to encourage greater use of
the light rail line by business park users.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING

0
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Street Sections
Keymap
Refer to the following pages for each of these
section renderings. The purpose of these street
sections is to provide depictions of the layout of
potential types of streets within the station area
going forward, including the number of lanes,
the layout of sidewalks and bicycle facilities, and
the overall relationships between the streets
and nearby buildings. While the exact design
of streets within the station area may of course
vary over time, these street sections should
provide planners guidance going forward.
2
159
5
MO
fairview heights
metrolink
94TH ST.
NT
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
1
E
AT
ST
61
1
AY
HW
HIG
SECTION 1: Existing
Street Section 1
Highway 161
Where existing sidewalks are adjacent to the

roadway, future repairs or improvements should
consider incorporating a landscaped buffer
between the sidewalk and road. This buffer
separates pedestrians from vehicles, providing a
greater sense of comfort to the pedestrian, and
it also creates a space for trees and landscaping, providing shade and visually softening of
the streetscape environment.
SECTION 1: Proposed

Street Section 2
SECTION 2: Existing
St. Clair Avenue
Where existing sidewalks are adjacent to the

roadway, future repairs or improvements should
consider incorporating a landscaped buffer
between the sidewalk and road. This buffer
separates pedestrians from vehicles, providing a
greater sense of comfort to the pedestrian, and
it also creates a space for trees and landscaping, providing shade and visually softening of
the streetscape environment.
SECTION 2: Proposed - Option A
SECTION 2: Proposed - Option B

Street Sections 3, 4 and 5
SECTION 3: Proposed - Next to Tracks
SECTION 4: Proposed - 94th Street

SECTION 5: Proposed - Residential Street

Building Heights
OR
CH
AR
In order to increase density and compactness

around MetroLink stations, building heights may
need to increase from existing zoning allowances around several of the stations in order to
support more vertically integrated uses in close
proximity to the station platform. The building
heights analysis considers existing zoning, existing neighborhood scale and architectural character, the study and understanding of regional
Form Based Code, and the predicted market
each station is anticipated to be able to support.
In addition, urban form is often determined by
the relationships of buildings to one another and
to the public realm. Form based code may allow
taller buildings of up to eight stories for general
TOD and TOD mixed use areas, but it also dictates that buildings step back after the third story
in order to prevent a dark cavernous effect from
occurring.
dS
T.
RENOLLETT dR
SCHOENbERGER
CREEk
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

mO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
At Fairview Heights, the existing zoning limits

building heights to only two to three stories high.
The station would benefit from my higher yielding land uses. The proposed plan calls for taller
buildings, six stories, along 94th St. and Lynn
Lee Ct. The buildings would step down from this
main entry into the station area and core.
dR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
Tb
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
61
1
AY
HW
HIG
ONE STORY
TWO STORIES
THREE STORIES
FOUR STORIES
SIX STORIES
EIGHT STORIES
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Parks and Open Space

The station area plan recommends a variety of
parks and open civic spaces to enhance livability and the character of place. A series of
parks, greenways, plazas, and natural spaces
have been integrated into the plan. The area to
the west of the station platform, encompassing
Schoenberger Creek, and its tributary running
through the station area, create a low-lying
marshy area. There is the opportunity to utilize
this area as natural open space with trail connections. A small neighborhood park has been
identified at the intersection of St. Clair Avenue
and Highway 161. In addition, a greenway has
been incorporated into the right-of-way of Highway 161 and connecting to the station plaza.
A plaza located at the station platform creates
a space for a high level of detailed design that
serves as a gateway for those who arrive by
transit, while providing a focal point for district
users within the development.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
METROLINK
METROBUS
HIG
OPEN SPACE
1
AY
HW
PARK
61
PEDESTRIAN/BIKE
PARKWAY
PLAZA
CEMETERY
BIKE ROUTE
MULTI-USE TRAIL
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM
Bike and Pedestrian
Metrolink station
Metrobus stop
sidewalk
crosswalk
Major intersection access
cross street access
OR
t street access
CH
AR
proposed curb-cut access
DS
T.
new signal when developMent and traffic

voluMes warrant
existing signal
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENbERGER
CREEk
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
The Fairview Heights plan incorporates pedestrian and bicycle facilities through the inclusion of accessible sidewalks, crosswalks, and
bicycle paths. Much of the development plan
concentrates uses within mile of the station,
or a comfortable five-minute walking distance.
Medians are used on State Highway 161 and St.
Clair Avenue, providing traffic calming and refuge islands for crossing pedestrians. In addition,
small block sizes combined with the reduction
and consolidation of driveway entrances helps
to establish a pedestrian friendly environment.
Other provisions, such as street furniture, lighting, landscaping, and wayfinding and signage
also contribute to a comfortable and pleasant
pedestrian environment.
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
Tb
Well-planned Transit Oriented Development

combines transit-based regional access with
local mobility that emphasizes non-motorized
transport modes. Streets that are designed to
support bicycling and walking provide people
with safe and direct access between destinations via a well-connected network. Designing
streets for bicycling and walking supports more
people using active transportation and contributes to placemaking on residential and commercial corridors.
UL
ST
.
IGH
EH
AT
ST
not to scale
Y1
WA
35 mph
61
150
220
1540
Median spacing
35 Mph
460
driveway
proposed traffic signal
crosswalk and
pedestrian signal
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | ACCESS MANAGEMENT DIAGRAM
Walk Score
LEGEND
LAMBERT
NORTH
HANLEY
UMSL NORTH
UMSL SOUTH
ROCK ROAD
POPULATION
WALK SCORE
(within 1/4 mile)
Walker's Paradise
1000+
Very Walkable
500-1000
Somewhat Walkable
126-500
Car-Dependent
0-125
WELLSTON
UNIVERSITY
CITY
DELMAR
FORSYTH
FOREST PARK
CLAYTON
SKINKER
RICHMOND HEIGHTS
BRENTWOOD
SUNNEN
CONVENTION
EAST
CENTER
RIVERFRONT
8th & PINE
ARCH
CENTRAL GRAND
EMERSON
WEST END
JJK
UNION
STADIUM 5th &
MAPLEWOOD/
MISSOURI
STATION
CIVIC
MANCHESTER
CENTER
SHREWSBURY
WASHINGTON
PARK
FAIRVIEW
HEIGHTS
MEMORIAL
HOSPITAL
SHILOH-SCOTT
SWANSEA
BELLEVILLE
COLLEGE

Landscape Criteria
OR
CH
AR
Often local governments seek to manage street tree plantings by implementing ordinances. Such
ordinances typically provide a list of acceptable street trees, a minimum size at installation, and
minimum tree spacing. However, such an approach does not insure a consistent and quality street
tree planting along any given street because of the random selection of street trees by each property owners. In addition, the street tree diversity of a given area may be reduced if all property owners select a limited variety of species. Clear and consistent street tree planting can give character
to local streets and assist in wayfinding. To address these issues, each station area plan includes
a street tree diagram, which defines the specific species to the planted on each street. All trees
should be planted 36-40 feet on center. All trees should be provided with at least 1000 cubic feet of
planting soil and a minimum tree opening of 100 square feet. By defining the desired tree species
from the outset the administration of the street tree requirement is simplified. The developer of a
particular land parcel simply needs to consult this diagram and meet the spacing, soil, and opening
SUGAR MAPLE / RED MAPLE / PIN OAK
requirementsPARKWAY
to insure conformance
with the planting standards.
dS
T.
RENOLLETT dR
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

mO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
BOULEVARD
BLACKGUM / SYCAMORE / AMERICAN LINDEN / TULIP TREE
GREEN CONNECTOR
PARKWAY
RED MAPLE / SYCAMORE FLOWERING DOGWOOD

Landscape and
streetscape
treatments
within
the /study
area/ PIN
should
respond to placemaking,
STATION
AREA GATEWAY
AMERICAN LINDEN
/ RED MAPLE
EASTERN REDBUD
OAK
BOULEVARD
RESIDENTIAL
EASTERN REDBUD / FLOWERING
DOGWOOD / SYCAMORE
/ TULIP TREE of trees and other vegetastormwater management,
and microclimate
benefits.
planting
GREEN CONNECTOR
RED MAPLE / SYCAMORE
FLOWERINGCareful
DOGWOOD
LIGHT IND.
MOUNTAIN ASH / SYCAMORE
STATION
AREA GATEWAY
AMERICAN
/ RED MAPLE / EASTERN
/ PIN OAK
tion can helpOFFICE/
enhance
the livability
and LINDEN
attractiveness
of REDBUD
the station
area for residents, tenants, and
SPECIAL CHARACTER
SPECIAL CHARACTER
RESIDENTIAL
EASTERN REDBUD / FLOWERING DOGWOOD / SYCAMORE / TULIP TREE
visitors. In addition,
planting
can
be
used
to
highlight
businesses
within
the station area, as well as
PARKING LOT
BLACK GUM / WILLOW OAK / SWAMPWHITE OAK
OFFICE/ LIGHT IND.
making the station
platform more SPECIAL
visible
and appealing.
SPECIAL CHARACTER
CHARACTER
dR
fairview heights
metrolink
PARKING LOT
ES
Tb
UL
A street tree planting scheme has been developed based on varying aesthetic characteristics of
different types of streets and neighborhoods. Within Fairview Heights, the street tree road type
classifications include Parkway, Boulevard, Green Connector, Station Area Gateway, Residential,
Office/Light Industrial, Special Character, and Parking Lots. Each street type has been assigned a
range of native tree species appropriate to achieve a particular visual characteristic.
ST
.
E
AT
ST
61
1
AY
HW
HIG
AMERICAN LINDEN
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | STREET TREE TYPES
50
100
AMERICAN SYCAMORE
EASTERN REDBUD
MOUNTAIN ASH
RED MAPLE
200
1 in = 100 feet
AMERICAN LINDEN
PARKWAY
BOULEVARD
GREEN CONNECTOR
RED MAPLE / SYCAMORE FLOWERING DOGWOOD
STATION AREA GATEWAY
AMERICAN LINDEN / RED MAPLE / EASTERN REDBUD / PIN OAK
RESIDENTIAL
EASTERN REDBUD / FLOWERING DOGWOOD / SYCAMORE / TULIP TREE
OFFICE/ LIGHT IND.
SPECIAL CHARACTER
SPECIAL CHARACTER
PARKING LOT
TULIP TREE
TREE
STREET TREE TULIP
TYPES
AMERICAN SYCAMORE
PIN OAK
PIN OAK
EASTERN REDBUD
SWAMPWHITE OAK
SWAMPWHITE OAK
MOUNTAIN ASH
RED MAPLE
FLOWERING DOGWOOD
FLOWERING DOGWOOD
STREET TREE TYPES
INTERSTATE BUFFER
Parking and Replacement Parking Strategies

Transit-oriented development requires parking replacement strategies inherent in promoting dense and walkable development centers while providing continued transit service to
existing commuters. When net parking spaces are lost to development, the transit provider
must ensure ridership counts do not drop or suffer from the reduction. In addition, reallocating parking uses to TOD uses, or instituting paid parking where free parking currently exists,
may cause commuters to seek out nearby parking in surrounding neighborhoods. This
burden of shifting parking and traffic patterns should be discouraged. Parking scenarios
must therefore accommodate community, stakeholder, and station needs, while promoting
the goals of TOD.
The Fairview Heights MetroLink station supports a significant amount of commuter spaces.
This is due to its location at the fringe of the city, making it an accessible commuter lot from
outlying areas. The existing MetroLink surface parking lot currently provides parking on 18
acres for approximately 853 spaces.
MetroLink stations with existing park-ride facilities show a range of parking occupancy
patterns. This study represents parking counts taken during a few days in the summer of
2011. In order to get an accurate reading of park-ride utilization, regular and frequent counts
during peak hours need to be gathered at each station. In addition, utilization counts also
need to be taken during special events, such as during Rams or Cardinals games. This data
will provide a baseline for transit trends today, and help in measuring outcomes in the future
with development.
The parking strategy at Fairview Heights works with phasing to gradually reduce the number
of surface parking spaces in close proximity to the station platform and replace them within
the framework of the new development. Many of the blocks are designed to wrap buildings
with mixed uses around surface parking lots in the center. Over time, as development gains
momentum, the surface lots can evolve into structured lots, within the footprint and parameters of the wrapped buildings. The parking strategy for Fairview Heights also maximizes
curb parking, providing flexibility and short-term access to businesses located within the
station area. Finally, bus bays and drop-offs remain located in close proximity to the MetroLink platform and development core, promoting arrival by means other than just by personal
automobile.
At Fairview Heights, a number of appropriate parking strategies can be considered. For
example, some of the site parking can be provided for a fee. In addition, zoning ordinances
can be changed with lower or flexible minimum parking threshold requirements, or conversely set maximum parking standards rather than minimum. Since TOD inherently supports alternative modes of transportation, including light rail, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle,
the promotion of these other modes helps the station to meet lower parking requirements.
TOD parking strategies can also include the establishment of a parking district, whereby
a managing entity gives developers the option of paying an in lieu fee for parking, rather
than constructing it themselves. This provides a buy-in at a rate that is less expensive than
the actual cost of constructing the parking space. The managing entity then constructs the
pooled parking for the entire district, likely in the form of a parking structure. Parking districts
work best when a station has an existing supply of parking to fill parking needs while the
overall parking fund is growing. The phasing strategy of Fairview Heights supports this parking replacement strategy.
Transportation Circulation
Bus routes
Bus service will circulate through the site along 94th Street, approaching the station from
either St. Clair Avenue or Highway 161.
54 | Station Area Plan
Stormwater Management
The stormwater management strategy at Fairview Heights incorporates a range of detention,
retention, and infiltration methods in an effort to capture 100% of stormwater on site. The main
goals in stormwater management are to reduce quantity and improve quality of stormwater
runoff, which can be achieved by incorporating open space and landscaped areas and reducing
hardscape. The site currently contains two significant paved parking lots which do not provide
a means for infiltration. The proposed plan looks at various ways to incorporate stormwater
interventions in a series of smaller devices used throughout the plan. These infiltration and storage
devices include detention ponds, infiltration basins, rain gardens, bioswales, permeable paving, and
increased canopy cover.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
159
Detention Ponds
Detention Ponds are used to store and slow runoff in large storm events before it leaves the site.
While detention ponds create a delay that allows sediments to settle before leaving the site, they do
not necessarily provide any other means to improve the water quality before exiting.
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
Linear Infiltration Basins
DR
Integrating smaller scale biofiltration systems, such as infiltration basins, rain gardens, and vegetated bioswales throughout development is often a better strategy than providing one or more large
detention or retention pond. The smaller infiltration systems disperse water treatment throughout
the site, while simultaneously creating opportunities for enhanced planting, traffic calming, and even
pedestrian safety.
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
Rain Gardens
TB
A rain garden is defined as a planted depression that allows rainwater runoff from impervious urban
areas to be absorbed into the ground. Studies have shown that effective rain gardens can reduce
the amount of stormwater and pollution reaching creeks by as much as 30 percent. Rain gardens
should incorporate native plantings because these varieties typically do not require irrigation and
maintenance, and they are more hardy and adaptable to the local conditions. Examples of plants to
include in rain gardens to absorb the greatest amount of runoff include wildflowers, rushes, ferns,
shrubs and small trees.
UL
ST
.
GENERAL WATERFLOW
MAIN RAIN COLLECTOR
Vegetated Bioswales
61
STREET W/RAIN GARDEN
1
AY
HW
LINEAR INFILTRATION BASIN
HIG
DETENTION POND
E
AT
ST
SECONDARY RAIN COLLECTOR
PROPOSED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
RESIDENTIAL STREET W/ BIOSWALE

OR LINEAR INFILTRATION STRIP
STREET W/BIOSWALE
PARKING LOT W/BIOSWALE &
POROUS PAVEMENT
50
1 in = 100 feet
100
200
Vegetated Bioswales are similar to rain gardens in that they absorb and filter runoff before the
stormwater exits the site. In general, native plants such as perennials and grasses do more to slow
down and infiltrate stormwater than mowed turf grass.
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DIAGRAM
Canopy Coverage
Typical street trees intercept water in their leaves and crowns, ranging from 760 gallons per tree per
year to 4000 gallons per tree per year, depending on their species and location. In addition, the soil
layer below also serves to filter water and slow down the pace at which it leaves the site. This station area plan calls for a goal of 30% urban tree cover to realistically maximize the amount of water
intercepted by tree canopies.
Permeable Paving
Permeable paving systems should be utilized in parking lots, as well as for on-street parking spaces. Permeable paving systems should be utilized in parking lots, for on street parking spaces, and
even for sidewalks. Permeable paving allows water to infiltrate into the ground, rather than channeling it directly into a surface stormwater system. Permeable pavers slow the velocity of the water
moving across a site during a storm event.
Stormwater Management Types
Central Bioswale
Porous Pavement
Bioswale
Rain Gardens
Multiuse Trail w/ Porous

Pavement
Porous Pavement
in Parking Bays
Green Area
Permeable Pavers
in Sidewalks
Small Bioswale
or Linear
Infiltration Trench
PorousPavement
in Parking Bays
Permeable Pavers
in Sidewalks
Rain Gardens
in Corners
GREEN STREET WITH BIOSWALE
GREEN STREET WITH RAIN GARDENS
RESIDENTIAL STREET WITH BIOSWALE

OR LINEAR INFILTRATION TRENCH
PARKING LOT WITH BIOSWALE AND

POROUS PAVEMENT
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES | TYPICAL

Land Use
OR
CH
AR
While the station area plan calls for the entire

area to be zoned as Mixed Use and therefore
allow for a variety of land uses within a given
project, this diagram outlines the various sub
districts within the station area. Within each sub
district, certain land uses may logically carry
greater weight as development proceeds. For
example, the area around the station platform
and connecting to the east toward Route 161
would likely represent a retail core for the station area. Areas to the east of Route 161 would
logically develop with a greater emphasis on
business park or office uses.
DS
T.
RENOLLETT DR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
NT
94TH ST.
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
ES
TB
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
METROLINK STATION
METROBUS STOP
HIG
RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT
1
AY
HW
RESIDENTIAL/STUDENT HOUSING
HOTEL SUBDISRICT
61
FESTIVAL/RETAIL SUBDISTRICT
MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT
CONVENIENCE RETAIL SUBDISTRICT
OFFICE SUBDISTRICT
CIVIC/COMMUNITY SERVICES
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL SUBDISTRICT
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | LAND USE DIAGRAM
Form Based Code

The Fairview Heights station area plan incorporates the concepts of Form Based Code (FBC) into
the physical plan of the development district. Using the Sustainable Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Revisions for Saint Louis County, Missouri, drafted in February 2013 by Clarion Associates
as a guide, all of the station area plans respond to FBC principles within Transit Oriented Development place type districts.
General Block, Lot, and Street Design for Place Type Districts dictate that interconnected street patterns apply to all districts. The Fairview Heights station area plan works with existing road infrastructure and environmental factors like topography and creeks to extend and establish a well-connected
system of proposed roads, as closely as possible aligned to a grid. Where the existing neighborhoods to the west of the station, along Woestboul Street, and to the east, along Montclair Drive,
cannot be provided with vehicular connections due to environmental constraints, the plan includes
pedestrian linkages. FBC prescribes that the use of cul-de-sacs and dead end streets is avoided.
Existing cul-de-sacs are found in the station area, and due to topographical constraints, will remain
as such at Fairview Heights in those situations. FBC also dictates that streets terminate on an architectural focal point or open space. 94th Street achieves this by terminating on the station platform
plaza, a visual cue that pulls users into the site and directly links them with the transit lines.
Block orientation is to be provided for maximized solar access, ideally on an east-west grid. While
much of the station area adheres to this, the rest lies within a 30 degree axis. Block configuration
should generally be rectangular, but varies in this station area due to existing environmental constraints, road infrastructure, and parcel configuration. Blocks are designed so that buildings front on
the streets, and parking is tucked in behind. Preferred block sizes for TOD Place types range between 400 and 600. At Fairview Heights, the typical block size is around 350 feet in length based
on urban design standards for buildings that wrap parking structures. Parking should not be located
on corners, and this plan responds to that requirement by tucking it behind in most instances. Parking should be in close proximity to the associated use. Parking lot entrances occur through alleys,
providing mid-block access.
The TOD Place Type District typically allows taller buildings for increased density with a maximum
building height of 8 stories for general TOD and TOD mixed use areas. The architecture has fewer
setback requirements and should generally step back after the third story. Accessible sidewalks
are consistent in all street right-of-ways. Along commercial and office fronting streets, the sidewalk
is provided at a minimum of 8 feet in width. Other street type design elements include street trees,
bicycle paths or routes, on-street parking, and pedestrian safety measures such as crosswalk and
bulb-outs.
Open space requirements are recommended for districts larger than 15 acres. The Fairview
Heights station includes a plaza at the MetroLink platform and extending to the MetroBus loading
and unloading zone. The park and open space lands are also incorporated in natural areas, trails,
and a neighborhood park. Furthermore, stormwater management strategies have considered the
movement of water through the site in a responsible way during storm events. This includes planted
parking lots, reduced impervious surfaces, and infiltration features to collect, infiltrate, and distribute
stormwater.
FBC also dictates that 50 foot buffers be utilized to separate two distinct districts, such as the TOD
Place Type and the existing residential neighborhood surrounding the station area. At Fairview
Heights, Schoenberger Creek would also require a 50 setback, measured from the top of the
stream bank on both banks.
A, B and C Streets
OR
CH
OR
CH
OR
AR
CH
DS
T.
AR
AR
SCHOENBERGER
CREEK
DS
T.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
RENOLLETT DR
DS
T.

159
NOLLETT DR.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
.
RENOLLETT DR
St. Louis County recently retained a consultant, Clarion Associates, to prepare a model form
based code for the county. The plans for each of the five stations have been reviewed in the
context of this draft plan. It is anticipated that North Hanley will be the first application of the
county form based code. Similarly, the Beyond Housing has retained Development Strategies has
retained Rock Road to prepare a form based code for that site. Although Union Station, Fairview
Heights, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Emerson Park are not in St. Louis County, these principles
have been applied to the stations as a means to test Form Based Code.
FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS
RE
159
In anticipation of the creation of these codes, this station area plans define A, B, and C streets.
Street character under form based codes is often defined by a system and hierarchy of streets. Not
all buildings can front and put their best face to the street, not all streets are Main Streets, and
buildings require service entries and access. Buildings need locations for loading docks, transformers, and other utility infrastructure. The designation of A, B, and C streets, is a means of suggesting which streets should be the primary focus of new architecture and which can be the focus of
service entries and less attractive portions of new development. Service uses are intended to go
on C Streets, and to a lesser degree, B Streets. Conversely, A streets should receive the greatest
emphasis in terms of streetscape improvements. Major building entries and lobbies should also
be oriented toward the A Streets. While the footprint of buildings may vary along the B Streets in
response to functional requirements, along A Streets, buildings should be pulled forward to the right
of way.
159
EAST ST. LOUIS

MO
LOUIS
NT
EAST ST. LOUIS
LYNN LEE CT.
94TH ST.
MO
LYNN LEE CT.
94TH ST.
fairview heights
metrolink
Tb
UL
ST
.
ES
fairviewNheights
T
metrolink CL
94TH ST.
AI
DR
NT
LYNN LEE CT.
CL
AI
AI
DR
DR
fairview heights
metrolink
MO
CL
TB
ES
Tb
UL
ST
.
UL
ST
.
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
E
AT
ST
E
AT
ST
1
AY
HW
HIG
1
AY
HW
HIG
61
61
METROLINK STATION
METRObUS STOP
A STREET
METROLINK STATION
STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | STREET TYPE DIAGRAM
METRObUS STOP
A STREET
b STREET
HEIGHTS/CITY
STATION | FAIRVIEW
OF EAST
HEIGHTS
ST. LOUIS]
[FAIRVIEW
| STREET
HEIGHTS/CITY
TYPE DIAGRAM
OF EAST ST. LOUIS] | STREET TYPE DIAGRAM
C STREET
b STREET
METROLINK STATION
C STREET
METROBUS STOP
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
A STREET
0
50
1 in = 100 feet
100
200
B STREET
C STREET
50
100
200
1 in = 100 feet
Street Type Diagrams Typical

A Grid Streets
Thoroughfares that by virtue of their pre-existing
pedestrian-supportive qualities, or their future
importance to pedestrian connectivity, are held
to the highest design standards.
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
BUILD-TO ZONE 0-5

FRONT AND CORNER

PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
B GRID STREETS
Street Type Diagrams Typical
BUILD-TO ZONE 5-15

FRONT AND CORNER
FRONT SETBACK | 5
SIDE SETBACK | 15
B Grid Streets
Thoroughfares that by virtue of their use, location, or absence of pre-existing pedestriansupportive qualities, may meet a standard lower
than that of the a-grid streets and are more
readily considered for warrants allowing automobile-oriented standards.
PROPERTY LINE
C GRID STREETS
REAR YARD SETBACK | 5 MIN.
C Grid Streets
In order to minimize traffic congestion, noise,
and pedestrian conflicts, a defined service route
has been identified for service and back street
movement.

ZONING/ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDATION
Zoning/Ordinance Recommendation | 69
Establishment of a TOD Zoning Classification for the

Entire Station Area
While some of the zoning classifications in the station area vicinity allow for residential uses,
several of the zoning types do not, and all of the zones allow for various setbacks, densities, and other guidelines related to development that are not particularly conducive to the
creation of TOD. While parts of the existing regulations allow for TOD, East St. Louis and
Fairview Heights should work to establish a consistent zoning code for TOD at the station
area to guide development and set expectations for developers and other partners. The
TOD zoning should specifically promote mixed-use and more compact development directly
around the Fairview Heights station platform.
The public supported the use of mixed-use zoning to promote redevelopment at this MetroLink station. The cities should pursue mixed use zoning designations that encourage residential densities of 20 dwelling units per acre and encourage vertical, as well as horizontal,
mixing of land uses within the station area.
Establishment of Form Based Codes for the Station Area

As a substitute for (or in addition to) the creation of a TOD specific zoning classification,
Fairview Heights and East St. Louis should consider establishing a Form Based Code (FBC)
for the station area and the surrounding vicinity in order to articulate the design of streets
and building frontages within the station area district. A parallel zone district approach would
allow developers to elect to follow FBC regulations or continue with current regulations. The
cities should follow the outline provided in the previous chapter regarding how to proceed
the establishment of a Form Based Code in this station area.
70 | Zoning/Ordinance Recommendation
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Bike and Pedestrian Implementation Strategy | 71
Introduction
Almost all trips begin and end with walking, whether a person is traveling by walking, cycling,
driving or taking transit. Reflecting that, it is critical that streets accommodate pedestrians
- whether from the house to the bus stop, from the parking garage to the office, or for the
stroll through the park. While this may be contrary to the current state of play, it is imperative
if one wants to transition to a more sustainable, resilient, and healthy city.
Cycling is transformative. It has the ability to efficiently move people and goods at low cost.
It expands transit networks by expanding the catchment area of stations. It reduces the need
for auto parking. It provides a better integration with parks and trails, which in turn enhances
the operational value of transit. A good transit system embraces the bicycle, rather than
confronting it as a competitor.
Community Values
Designing streets for bicycling and walking provides numerous direct and indirect benefits.
Direct benefits can include safer travel choices for all road users, including those desiring to
walk, bicycle, drive, or take transit. Improved signage, signal timing and other treatments can
provide clarity and ease for drivers navigating city streets and a reduction in potential crash
points. More people may walk or bicycle in their daily lives, because the street networks provide more, and safer, facilities for active transportation. Vulnerable populations, such as the
young, elderly and disabled, may benefit from a transportation network that supports their
independent mobility. Walkable communities locate goods and services (such as housing,
offices, retail, transportation, schools and libraries) so that they are easily and safely accessible by foot.
Economics
Indirect benefits include placemaking opportunities on residential and retail corridors, increased retail spending, and stronger local economies as a result of improved accessibility.
Shoppers who arrive on foot, bicycle or transit are found to visit more frequently and spend
more money in some multimodal shopping corridors. Providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities, as well as safe, direct connections between commercial areas and nearby neighborhoods and patrons, can encourage these shopping trips, as well as contribute to improved
air quality and healthier communities.
Choice and Redundancy
Walkable communities provide safe and convenient transportation choices when streets
support a variety of users, not just drivers. Doing so allows municipalities to meet the needs
of different types of users and provide alternatives to traffic congestion and auto-dependency. Complete Streets support this goal by ensuring the transportation network can accommodate a wide variety of users including cars, transit vehicles, bicycles, and those who want
to walk from point A to point B.
Providing choice also spans across age groups and abilities. Many older Americans today
are faced with mobility challenges that are a result of losing the ability to drive. This population can stay independent and age in place through different transportation options.
Multiple options create redundancy and resilience through market changes.
72 | Bike and Pedestrian Implementation Strategy
Serve Existing Users
Even when pedestrian and bicycle facilities are missing or incomplete, users are still often
present and being underserved. Complete Streets ensures that all users are considered
whenever roads are constructed, reconstructed, or repaved. All types of projects can be opportunities to improve safety and provide facilities that support bicycling and walking.
Balance Varying Needs
Each street and its environs are unique. Complete Streets is a process whereby design
interventions support and balance mobility for all users and provide appropriate provision
for the safe and convenient travel of transit riders, pedestrians, bicyclists, and personal motor vehicle drivers. Complete Streets result in better connections between street users and
desirable places to live, work, learn, and play around the MetroLink network. The process
of improving streets for walking and biking should be an ongoing effort which reflects the
needs of current and future street users.
Site-specific, Human-scale
Pedestrians and bicyclists rely on site-specific and human-scale elements to facilitate trips
and the safety thereof.
Streets can be narrowed via curb extensions and medians to reduce crossing distances
and time.
Bicycle facilities can be designed to spatially or temporally segregate cyclists from drivers, thus protecting them from errancy.
Desire lines can inform design by revealing where people walk along and cross the
street.
Traffic signals can be timed and phased to reduce delay, prioritize pedestrian movements, and protect crossings.
Traffic calming can create slower speed streets which can be shared by all users.
Paths, small streets, and crosswalks can be coordinated to form a convenient and interconnected network for walking and cycling.
Barriers created by large roads, railroads, rivers, and walls can be bridged.
Prioritize Improvements
While creating and improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities is a priority on all corridors
and routes, the reality is that there are real constraints in implementing improvements,
including physical, financial and political constraints. The challenge is determining where to
begin.
Solve the most dangerous problems first. Mapping crashes is an important step in
project selection and development to address crash locations which involve high numbers of people, high injury severity, and/or high volume of near-misses.
Improve what already works. Complete Streets implementation does not mean that
all streets in the St. Louis region will need to be modified or changed. Many streets
function well for all users presently or with small interventions, with no need for extensive modifications. Improving facilities and the streetscape where people are already
walking and bicycling could unleash latent demand for these transportation modes and
attract more people, benefiting the vitality of the street and community.
Work where there is support. Prioritize improvements in areas such as schools, hospitals and parks, that attract high numbers of people, including vulnerable populations,
such as children, the elderly and disabled. Improve connections to transit for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as commercial corridors and retail districts, as these support
increased ridership and sales.
Strategies to Create an Inviting Walking Environment

A station area should be safe, comfortable and inviting for people walking to and through
the district. The following is a tool box of strategies that can help contribute to a better
walking environment in the vicinity of MetroLink.
Sidewalks
Sidewalks are a key feature in any successful development. These separated pedestrian
lanes allow people walking along the streets to feel safe and out of the way of traffic.
A Complete Sidewalk Network
A complete sidewalk network will allow residents and visitors to comfortably walk to their
destinations and encourage people to move around the station area on foot. Sidewalks
should be provided on both sides of the roadway throughout the station area.
Connectivity
A successful network is well-connected for pedestrians. Sidewalks should link with other
modes of travel including MetroLink to increase the opportunities for mixing travel modes.
Internal connectivity addresses the circulation within the station area, whereas external
connectivity looks at the connections to adjacent neighborhoods and minimizing existing
barriers, such as busy or intimidating intersections, to ensure that residents and visitors can
access the station area.
Limited Curb Cuts
Curb cuts increase the danger to pedestrians using the sidewalks because of the inherent
conflict between vehicles entering and exiting the driveways and pedestrians crossing. In
general, driveways and curb cuts should be consolidated to create a safer and more enjoyable pedestrian experience, however, where curb cuts are necessary they should be well
marked.
Buffered Sidewalks
Sidewalks that include a landscaped buffer from the street enhance the feeling of safety
and comfort as well as improve the overall aesthetic appearance of local streets. Buffers
can help to provide a sense of enclosure for the pedestrian with space for seating or bike
racks to create a social space for pedestrians. On the local streets throughout the station
area a buffer of two to four feet is ideal.
Sidewalk Width
Sidewalks within the station area on busy retail streets with pedestrian activity would ideally
be 16 to 20 feet in width, allowing for a minimum four foot wide pedestrian clear zone and
a pedestrian amenity zone or places where restaurants can host sidewalk sales or outdoor dining. Where space is constrained in the area sidewalks of 10 feet are desirable on
streets with more pedestrian activity. In areas where pedestrian activity is not as prevalent,
sidewalks should be a minimum of eight to 10 feet in width where they come right up to the
street and six to eight feet if they are separated from the street by a planting strip or buffer.
Sidewalk Condition
Sidewalks should have a smooth surface to ensure safety and comfort for walkers as well
as wheelchairs or strollers. Paths should be maintained to be cleared of snow and encroaching plants or other impediments to sidewalk users. Wherever it is feasible, street
lights, utility poles, sign posts, fire hydrants, benches and other street furniture should be
located so they do not obstruct the pedestrian clear zone; ideally they should be located in
the amenity zone or grouped out of the way of pedestrians.
Pedestrian Amenities
The context of the built environment includes the elements that make a place visually interesting including the design and scale of buildings, the transparency of ground floor uses, as
well as the amenities that are provided including lighting, street trees and
seating.
Lighting
Pedestrian scale lighting is an amenity that can enhance the physical safety of people
traveling at night, as well as safety from crime. Walkers are most comfortable with street
level lighting that is bright enough to illuminate faces, pavement obstacles and changes in
sidewalk levels. Lighting features are also used to provide visual cues that define the retail
and pedestrian core of the station area.
Street Trees
Street trees can provide economic, environmental, physical, and financial benefits to a
community. In hot summer months, a consistent tree canopy provides a shaded respite
from the sun, areas of visual interest, and seasonal change as well as positive impacts on
perceived pedestrian safety. Urban street trees reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff and
in the air, mitigate stormwater runoff, sequester carbon, raise property values, and reduce
energy costs. Each station area should strive to reach a minimum of 15 percent tree canopy
coverage within the study area as recommended by the Davey Resource Group.
Strategies to Welcome Bikes to the Station Area

The following list of strategies can be implemented in the station area to improve the biking
environment and meet the needs of recreation and transportation:
Bicycle Lanes
Bicycle lanes serve an important function in the transportation network for several reasons:
they define a space dedicated to the preferential use by bicyclists and they help heighten
the awareness of motorists to the presence of bicyclists on the roadway. Properly designed
bicycle lanes encourage bicyclists to operate in a manner that is consistent with the legal
operation of all vehicles. The AASHTO Guide to Bicycle Facilities recommends bicycle
lanes be at least five feet wide; however, in extremely constrained circumstances, bicycle
lanes can be four feet wide. When possible, drive lanes can be narrowed to 10 to 11 feet in
order to provide a buffer space between cyclists and vehicular traffic. In cases where the
bicycle lane is adjacent to parking, the bicycle lane should be striped to identify the separation from the parking and travel lanes.
Shared Lane Markings
A shared lane marking is generally used when there is not enough room in the roadway for
a separate bicycle lane. Shared lane markings were developed primarily for local streets
and work best on low-traffic and low-volume streets. Shared markings can also be used on
a wider roadway where the traffic volume may not justify a bicycle lane. The marking helps
to encourage safe lane positioning and operation for bicyclists as well as to remind motorists about the presence of bicyclists. Bike lanes are much more likely to increase safety,
increase predictable riding, and attract users. Advisory bike lanes can be a good treatment
for narrow streets without room for an official bike lane.
Neighborhood Greenways
Neighborhood greenways are typically low-speed, low-volume streets that have been
designated as priority bikeways. These streets include both identifying and route signage
and they may include traffic calming devices such as speed tables and roundabouts. These
boulevards are effective because they provide a higher level of comfort for many users.
Wayfinding/Route Signage
Developing and installing wayfinding signage can go a long way to creating the feeling of a
bicycle-welcoming place. This wayfinding signage can also assist pedestrians and drivers. The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices describes signage protocol that can
be incorporated into any signage that the city may develop for the station area. Important
features of a wayfinding sign include a directional arrow, the destination name and a mileage distance numeral. Time is also helpful information to include on signage for cyclists, as
many people do not understand how long it takes to bike to various destinations.
Bicycle Parking
The availability of bicycle parking in the form of bike racks, bike share facilities, and bike
lockers is important to encourage people to ride to particular destinations. Without a secure
place to lock a bicycle, the potential bicycle rider may choose to make his or her trip by vehicle. The installation of sufficient bike racks is important to encourage and increase bicycle
usage to particular destinations. The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals
has published a best practices guide and recommendations about the types of racks to be
installed. Standard options include the inverted U design and the post and ring. An inverted
U-rack, either singularly or in a series, is space-efficient and allows bicycles to be secured
to the racks in two places, supporting the frame. A single U-rack can park two bicycles.
A post and ring rack may be useful in locations where space is tight. This rack allows two
bicycles to be parked at a time and encourages proper use with its intuitive design.
On Street Vehicular Parking
On street parking must be planned in accordance with bicycle facilities. In some instances,
front-in angled parking can be dangerous for cyclists passing behind due to limited sight
lines. Back-in angled parking can reduce this conflict where such a traffic configuration is
appropriate.
Pedestrian Access Recommendations

The Fairview Heights MetroLink station is located on St. Clair Avenue and Illinois State
Highway 161 in Fairview Heights, Illinois. The station serves a low density, suburban area in
Fairview Heights and East St. Louis. The station is generally inaccessible, except by motor
vehicles, which utilize the large park and ride lot at this station. The residential neighborhood located to the south and west of the station platform has no direct connection to the
station. Sidewalks are missing or incomplete along St. Clair Avenue, Illinois State Highway
161 and neighborhood streets in the station area. The map below shows the 1/2 mile radius
station area. Listed are seven specific locations which are further described below.
1. St. Clair Avenue
2. Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and Third Avenue
3. Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and State Highway 161.
4. State Highway 161
5. Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and South Bluff Road
6. South Bluff Road
7. Neighborhood Around Woestboul Street
Recommendations Reference Map
Nelson\Nygaard, 2013
St. Clair Avenue

St. Clair Avenue lacks any sidewalks except for the sidewalk circling MetroLinks Fairview
Station property. The north side of St. Clair Avenue has a mix of residential and commercial
properties with many driveways and intersecting streets. The frequency and width of driveway entrances contributes to the difficulty of walking. On the south side of St. Clair Avenue,
on MetroLink property between 3rd Avenue and 1st Avenue, a well-worn desire path is used
by pedestrians traveling between the station platform and neighborhoods to the north side
of St. Clair Avenue and destinations off South Bluff Street. Several MetroLink bus stops are
located along the north and south side of St. Clair Avenue between the station and the Bluff
Street overpass. These is a lack of firm and accessible walkways connecting these stops to
the station.
EXISTING
Missing sidewalks on north side of St. Clair

Avenue, east of 1st Street. An abundance of
driveways discourage pedestrian access on the
north side of St. Clair Avenue.
Pedestrian activity is evidenced by the wellworn path between Fairview Station and St.
Clair Avenue at 1st Street
Bus stops on the south side of St. Clair Avenue

lack a safe, stable and firm landing pad and
accessible path, compromising bus rider safety.
Recommendations:
Pave a pathway from the end of the bus bay lane to approximately 1st Avenue, where
the desire path on the south side of St. Clair Avenue is located.
Install a sidewalk on north side of St. Clair Avenue between station and Bluff Street
off-ramp, including sidewalk treatment through driveway and parking lot entrances, and
accessible bus stop waiting areas.
Install a sidewalk along the south side of St. Clair Avenue, extending west from the
3rd Avenue to approximately 1st Avenue where it joins the path and continues to the
intersection with the Bluff Street overpass. The path includes accessible waiting areas
at bus stop.
Reduce and/or consolidate driveway entrances along St. Clair Avenue.

Create continuous walkway of asphalt or concrete on north side of St. Clair Avenue with
raised driveways. Enhance pedestrian experience using street furniture, lighting, landscaping and furnishings that contribute to an active pedestrian realm supporting mixed
use development.
Extend path described above along south side of St. Clair Avenue further northwest
past South Bluff Street. This could be park of longer multi-use path that extends east
along St. Clair Avenue towards Route 159 and south along State Highway 161.
Add new pedestrian crossings across St. Clair Avenue, with protected pedestrian median, at Magdalena Avenue, 1st Avenue, and 2nd Avenue. Along with the crosswalks
added at South Bluff Street and 3rd Avenue, this will provide crosswalks approximately
every 200 to 300 feet on this section of St. Clair Avenue.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Replace desire path with paved pedestrian path,

which joins with a new sidewalk on the south side
of St. Clair Avenue at approximately 1st Avenue.
Extend sidewalk on south side of St. Clair Avenue

to approximately 1st Avenue to join with the
proposed path.
Create a sidewalk on the north side of St.

Clair Avenue, between 3rd Avenue and the
South Bluff Street overpass with sidewalk
treatments that extend through driveways.
Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and Third Avenue

The intersection of St. Clair Avenue (Illinois State Highway 161) and Third Avenue is the primary vehicle entrance for buses and private vehicles entering the Fairview Heights station.
Sidewalks which run the perimeter of the MetroLink property terminate at these intersections. One crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection crosses St. Clair Avenue, leading to
an embankment without curb ramp or sidewalk. The standard parallel line crosswalk offers
low visibility, and westbound vehicles on St. Clair Avenue frequently stop beyond the stop
line, infringing further on the pedestrian crossing. The crosswalk on the south side of the
intersection, crossing the park and ride entrance, crosses four lanes, which expose pedestrians to turning vehicles approaching from multiple directions. The west leg of the intersection lacks a crosswalk and adjoining sidewalks.
EXISTING
The crosswalk across St. Clair Avenue on the east

leg lacks a curb ramp, adjoining sidewalk, and an
accessible pedestrian signal actuator.
Westbound vehicles on St. Clair Avenue

often stop beyond the stop line, infringing
further on the pedestrian crossing.
The west leg of the intersection lacks a crosswalk

across St. Clair Avenue and features a sidewalk
that abruptly ends. The crosswalk on the south
side of the intersection crosses four lanes,
exposing pedestrians to multiple lanes of turning
vehicles.
Recommendations:
Add zebra crosswalks, curb ramps, and pedestrian signals on all legs of intersection to
improve visibility to motorists.
Add protected pedestrian median to crossings on St. Clair Avenue.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Install zebra crosswalk to all legs

intersection, with curb ramps connection to
recommended sidewalk on St. Clair Avenue.
Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and State Highway 161

EXISTING
Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and State

Highway 161
No crosswalks exist at the intersection of St. Clair Avenue and State Highway 161. There is
a slip lane for vehicles turning right from St. Clair Avenue east to State Highway 161 south.
No pedestrians were observed crossing this intersection. This intersection is a major traffic
thoroughfare which will require a serious transformation as the station area is redeveloped.
Recommendations:
Redesign slip lane to slow drivers and increase visibility, or convert it to a standard right
turn lane.
Add protected pedestrian median to crossings on St. Clair Avenue and State Highway
161.
State Highway 161

EXISTING
Sidewalks are lacking along State Highway 161

near the French Village Motel.
Intersection of State Highway 161 and Lynn

Lee Court
State Highway 161 lacks any sidewalks, except for that circling the Fairview Station property. The intersection of State Highway 161 and Lynn Lee Court The intersection of St. Clair
Avenue (Illinois State Highway 161) and Third Avenue is the primary vehicle exit for buses
and private vehicles entering the Fairview Heights station. There is a slip lane for vehicles
turning right from State Highway 161 south to enter the station. To the northeast of the intersection is the French Village Motel, which generates pedestrian traffic across State Highway
161 to the station. Lynn Lee Court is a cul-de-sac with light industrial properties. East of
Lynn Lee Court is Montclair Drive, a residential street which could be connected with a pathway to reduce the walking distance to the Fairview Station by more than one third of a mile.
Recommendations:
Add zebra crosswalks, curb ramps, and pedestrian signals on all legs of Lynn Lee Court
and State Highway 161 intersection to improve visibility to motorists.
Create an informal path, using signage or markings but no pavement, connecting Lynn
Lee Court to Montclair Drive.
Install sidewalk along east side of State Highway 161 between Lynn Lee Court and the
French Village Motel.
Convert the slip lane to a standard right turn lane at the intersection of State Highway
161 and Lynn Lee Court.
Add protected pedestrian median to crossings on State Highway 161.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Install zebra crosswalk to all legs intersection, with

curb ramps connection to recommended sidewalk
on State Highway 161.
Intersection of St. Clair Avenue and South Bluff Road

The Bluff Road intersection is a barrier to current pedestrian access between the station
and adjacent neighborhoods. No sidewalks or pedestrian crossings are present. Slip lanes
for traffic turning east from St. Clair onto South Bluff Road north contribute to the difficulty of
this crossing.
EXISTING
The intersection of St. Clair Avenue and the

eastern ramps to South Bluff Road features a slip
lane and a lack of pedestrian facilities, making
crossing difficult.
The South Bluff Street overpass features

one sidewalk in poor condition and a
circuitous connection to St. Clair Avenue
Recommendations:
Pave pathway between St. Clair Avenue and South Bluff Road overpass.
Add protected pedestrian refuge to crossings on St. Clair Avenue.
Construct at-grade pedestrian rail-crossing over MetroLink tracks between North 89th
Street and St. Clair Avenue to provide direct pedestrian access to areas west of MetroLink station.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Build up slip lane triange and install zebra

crosswalks and adjoining sidewalks
Extend sidewalk along St. Clair Avenue and

install path up embankment to South Bluff
Road.
South Bluff Road

Desire paths along South Bluff Road indicate pedestrian activity, though pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks and crosswalks, are missing.
EXISTING
Sidewalks on South Bluff Road are not

continuous and poorly maintained.
Pedestrians walk on the shoulder of the

road, comprised of grass and dirt.
Barriers block vehicles from accessing

an old bridge over Schoenberger Creek,
located at the north end of North 89th Street
Recommendations:
Add new pedestrian crossings with protected pedestrian median across South Bluff
Road at Church Lane and Vieux Carre Drive to access bus stops and the adjoining
sidewalk.
Install sidewalks along South Bluff Road, including accessible waiting areas for bus
stops.
Install asphalt path along east side of South Bluff Road connecting to St. Clair Avenue
via an at-grade crossing at North 89th Street and extending south to State Street.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Install sidewalks and paved waiting areas at bus

stops
Install at-grade crossing over MetroLink

tracks, linking intersection of St. Clair
Avenue and South Bluff Road with the
bridge at North 89th Street.
Neighborhood Around Woestboul Street

The neighborhood located around Woestboul Street is currently not directly accessible from
the MetroLink station. Pedestrians must take a circuitous route along South Bluff Street and
St. Clair Avenue. The area to the west of the Fairview Heights station is very hilly and the
hills to the south and west have created impediments for the creation of a grid system in this
portion of East. St. Louis. Additionally, a stream and marshy area separates the neighborhood from the MetroLink station.
EXISTING
The La Pleins Drive cul-de-sac shows

where a potential pedestrian connection to
the Fairview Heights Station could connect.
Recommendations:
Create a direct connection between the station platform and the neighborhood via a
path or pedestrian bridge.
EXISTING
Establish pedestrian connection between

station platform and the neighborhood around
Woestbould Street.
Specific
Bicycle
Strategies
Specific
Bicycle
Strategies
The following section explores possibilities to increase bicycle access to the five stations. It is based on a
four step process:
Mapping origins and destinations within the catchment area
Plotting routes from the station to those destinations
Prioritization of routes
Designing facilities along those routes
The scope of this exercise includes only the first two steps. The latter two will involve a more extensive
analysis of the routes, selecting preferred routes, then designing facilities accordingly. Ideally it would
include a more robust stakeholder outreach effort, field observations of existing conditions and
possibilities for interventions, and cost calculations. It is also effective to integrate the work as much as
possible within other efforts (roadway construction and maintenance, bridge rehabilitations, sewer and
stormwater work, park design and maintenance).
Step 1: Origins and Destinations

The catchment area for bicycle trips is determined by a radial measure of 3 miles. This is based on a 20minute ride at 10 miles per hour (a no sweat pace). An optimal bicycle route network connects the
origins and destinations of existing and potential bicycle users, which can include schools, houses of
worship, parks, residential areas, shopping centers, office buildings, etc. In some circumstances, the 3mile radius may be extended to connect with other regional greenways, priority bicycle routes and
destinations.
Destinations were selected based on their likelihood to increase MetroLink ridership. Residential and
employment areas are a source of potential commute trips. Parks and trails are destinations - cyclists
can take MetroLink to ride in parks and on trails not near their homes, and MetroLink can be used during
poor weather or when your bike has a flat tire. Shopping areas are noted as they are part of "trip-chains"
- cyclists stop and shop during their commutes.
Step 2: Routes
With the origins and destinations mapped, the next step is to identify potential routes. Every attempt was
made to create the shortest and most direct route between origins, destinations, and the station. They
were adjusted based on factors including:
Directness: Routes are prioritized which follow a linked chain of the shortest links between
origins and destinations, while providing access to secondary destinations along the way.
Bicyclists are unlikely to use facilities which greatly increase the travel distance or trip time over
that provided other transportation options, so it is important that routes are reasonably direct.
Continuity: Routes connect to existing, planned and proposed bicycle routes to create a dense
network of continuous bicycle routes. The bicycle route network should have as few gaps as
possible. A key focus is missing links missing links in the network - gaps that if bridged can have
a tremendous impact in terms of connectivity. These can be a simple as providing a safe crossing
of a busy street to building an actual bridge over a creek or railroad tracks.
Obstacles: Routes are selected which minimize conflicts between motor vehicles and bicyclists,
and limit exposure to obstacles and barriers, such as highways, on-ramps, high-speed traffic,
bridges, and tunnels. Conversely, alternate direct routes do not exist in many areas, requiring that
bicycle routes provide links across these barriers and through large blocks or parcels of land.
Street networks which rely on a high number of discontinuous minor roads limit bicyclists ability
to travel to transit.
In addition, potential routes are evaluated on the basis of the number of residents and commuting
workers who live within a half-mile of the route. While the bicycle facility type and design is not considered
at this stage, it is important that route is accessible to users as people living within a half-mile of a bike
path are at least 20% more likely to bicycle at least once a week, compared to people living slightly
1
farther away from the path.
Steps 3 and 4: Prioritization and Facilities

As mentioned above, these steps fall outside the scope of this project. Going forward, the routes
identified will need to be prioritized based on feasibility of implementation, cost, demand probability,
political considerations. Conceptual facility design will inform prioritization. Finally, actually interventions
will need to be designed and implmented.
Vernez-Moudon, A.V., Lee, C., Cheadle, A.D., et al., 2005. Cycling and the built environment, a US perspective. Transp. Res. Part
D 10, 245261.
Fairview Heights
The map below shows the 3-mile radius station area with desire lines between the station and various
origins and destinations, including:
Schools and residential areas in Fairview Heights, Caseyville, and East St. Louis
Malls and shopping centers in Fairview Heights
Frank Holten State Park
Commercial and retail corridor on Route 161
Metro BikeLink Trail at the Memorial Hospital Metrolink Station
The map following shows the recommended bicycle routes linking the station area and various origins and
destinations in a 3 mile radius. The table indicates the existing population of potential bicycle users along
each route or segment.
Figure 1 Fairview Heights Station Origins and Destinations Map
Figure 2 Fairview Heights Station Bicycle Routes Map
Figure 3 Fairview Heights Station Population by Route
IDRoute
1 Bunkum Road
Commuting
Population
Workforce
within .5
Length
miles
within .5 miles
(mi.)
Per
Total
Total Per Mile
Mile
Selected
Destinations
Major Obstacles
2.57 2,989 1,163 1,482
577
Caseyville, Fairview Heights
Lebanon Road - Old

3.19 4,682 1,467 2,178
Lincoln Trail
682
Schools, Fairview Heights, Commercial and

Retail
3 Rail with Trail
6.47 10,626 1,643 4,410
682
Metro BikeLink Trail at Memorial Hospital

Metrolink Station, East St. Louis
New construction
required
4 Rt. 157
6.18 7,173 1,161 2,944
476
Caseyville
West Main Street

intersection
5 Rt. 161
3.26 5,807 1,779 2,765
847
Commercial and Retail
High-traffic stre
3.28 4,546 1,386 2,279
695
Fairview Heights, Commercial and Retail,

Parks
Rt. 161 intersection
7 State Street
2.09 5,042 2,411 1,913
915
Frank Holton State Park, Schools, East. St.

Rt. 157 intersection
Louis
8 West Main St
2.98 6,884 2,307 3,129
St. Clair Ave Lincoln Trail
1,049 Commercial and Retail, Schools
High-traffic
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS
Development Strategy Recommendations | 91
The development strategy pairs concepts of phasing of development with a toolbox of

implementation ideas in order to outline a roadmap for ongoing development in the Fairview
Heights station area over the near term and the long term.
In terms of phasing, the initial development plan would likely involve converting at least a
portion of the existing Metro owned land to the east of the station area into an initial area
of development. The area along either side of 94th Street could be developed into an initial
development project involving local serving retail and perhaps a small amount of residential.
This initial move could be completed within the first five to ten years of development. Subsequent phases would involve developing a mixture of residential and retail areas to the north
and south of 94th Street and eventually moving east across Route 161 to incorporate the
business park and office development areas.
The following development strategy tools will assist the city, Metro, and other partners in
moving development forward at the station area:
Negotiation between Metro and Federal Transit Authority (FTA) to facilitate transfer
of Metro owned land to developable purposes: Metro should work with the FTA to declare parts of the parking lot area near the station area platform as excess inventory and
then facilitate the transfer, sale or lease of this land for development. The initial phases of
development will likely involve this Metro owned area of land near the station platform and
therefore facilitating an orderly transfer of lands from Metro for private sector development is
highly important in driving real estate activity.
Issuance of Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for development: Unless Metro or the City
wish to enter the development business, these two parties should use the tenets and vision
outlined in this station area plan to develop RFPs to solicit developer involvement. The RFP
should articulate the development and design standards required for a development deal
and should outline other requirements expected of developers. This process should help to
attract interest from St. Louis and beyond for parties interested in developing at the station
area.
Rezoning of the station area: The City should proactively rezone the station area to densities sufficient to provide transit supportive development. In the case of Fairview Heights, the
city should zone for at least 20 dwelling units per acre. The zoning should allow for a variety
of land uses and therefore should constitute mixed use zoning.
Adoption into comprehensive plan: The City should work to adopt the station area plan
into its Comprehensive Plan in order to ensure that the vision and goals articulated by the
community are memorialized and recognized by the governing body and the city as a whole.
Adoption of Form Based Code: The City should work to institute a form based code for
the station area in keeping with the goals and guidelines outlined in this station area plan.
This strategy will help to maintain the levels of quality and design expected by the community for the station area.
Explore Potential for PPP (Private Public Partnership): The City should explore opportunities to participate in potential development deals either by providing equity, loans, and
related financing, or other financial incentives to constitute a public private partnership.
92 | Development Strategy Recommendations
APPENDIX
Appendix | A-1

A-2 | Appendix
LEED ND Scorecard
LEED 2009 for Neighborhood and Development
Fairview Heights TOD
Project Checklist
Updated 04/18/2013
Project Information Forms
Possible Points: N/A
Assigned
Notes:
Minimum Program Requirements

Project Summary Details
Occupant and Usage Data
Schedule and Overview Documents
15
d/C
Smart Location and Linkage
Possible Points: 27
Assigned
Notes:
Prereq 1
Smart Location
Prereq 2
Imperiled Species and Ecological Communities
Prereq 3
Wetland and Water Body Conservation
Prereq 4
Agricultural Land Conservation
Prereq 5
Floodplain Avoidance
Credit 1
Preferred Locations
10
Credit 2
Brownfield redevelopment
Not attainable - No brownfields
Credit 3
Locations with Reduced Automobile Dependence
Check how many possible points
Credit 4
Bicycle Network and Storage
Credit 5
Housing and Jobs Proximity
Credit 6
Steep Slope Protection
Credit 7
Site Design for Habitat or Wetland and Water Body Conservation
Credit 8
Restoration of Habitat or Wetland and Water Body Conservation
Schloenberger Creek restoration
Credit 9
Long-Term Conservation Management of Habitat or Wetlands and Water Bodies
Schloenberger Creek restoration
2
7
1
1
19
19
Neighborhood Pattern and Design
Possible Points: 44
Check how many possible points yes and maybe
Implement a Stormwater Management Plan. Civil Engineer/ Design Workshop
Assigned
Notes:
Prereq 1
Walkable Streets
Prereq 2
Compact Development
Determine base line and calculated design case. Will be doing same for WE 3. Architect
Prereq 3
Connected and Open Community
Credit 1
Walkable Streets
12
Facades and Entries (a,b,c,d) / Ground-Level Use and Parking (f,g, i, j, l ) (2 possible: h, m) / Design Speeds for Safe Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel (2 possible: n, o) / Sidewalk Intrusions (1 pos
Credit 2
Compact Development
Depends on Density, we can probablly get between 4-6 points (4 points: 25-38 DU/acre ; 6 points +63 DU/acre)
Credit 3
Mixed-Use Neighborhood Centers
We need more than 19 diverse uses within 1/4 mile walk distance of 50% of dwelling units
Credit 4
Mixed-Income Diverse Communities
Points depend on Simpson Diversity Index for Housing Types and/or Affordable Housing
Credit 5
Reduced Parking Footrpint
Not attainable - Off Street surface parking is more than 20% of Development Footprint
Credit 6
Street Network
Do connectivity calculations (internal and within 1/4 mile from project boundary)
Credit 7
Transit Facilities
Credit 8
Transportation Demand Management
Credit 9
Access to Civic and Public Spaces
Credit 10
Access to Recreational Facilities
Credit 11
Visitability and Universal Design
Credit 12
Community Outreach and Involvement
Credit 13
Local Food Production
Credit 14
Tree Lined and Shaded Streets
Credit 15
Neighborhood Schools
4
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
9
13
Green Infrastructure and Buildings
Possible Points: 29
Prereq 1
Certified Green Building
Prereq 2
Minimu Building Energy Efficiency
Prereq 3
Minimum Building Water Efficiency
Prereq 4
Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
Credit 1
Certified Green Buildings
Credit 2
Building Energy Efficiency
Credit 3
Building Water Efficiency
Credit 4
Water-Efficient Landscaping
Credit 5
Existing Building Use
Credit 6
Historic Resource Preservation and Adaptive Reuse
Credit 7
Minimized Site Disturbance in Design and Construction
Credit 8
Stormwater Management
Credit 9
Heat Island Reduction
Credit 10
Solar orientation
Credit 11
On Site Renewable Energy Sources
Credit 12
District Heating and Cooling
1
1
2
1
1
1
2 points has to include a Design Charrette or Interactive Workshop
Not attainable - Closer schools more than 1/2 mile away
Assigned
Notes:
Not sure about this onecheck
LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations Project Checklist
Existing Archaeological Site

2 points for 85% Percentile Rainfall Event (20-40 years) / 4 points for 95% Percentile Rainfall Event
1 of 2
Appendix | A-3
Credit 13
Infrastructure Energy Efficiency
Credit 14
Wastewater Management
Credit 15
Recycled Content in Infrastructure
Credit 16
Solid Waste Management Infrastructure
Credit 17
Light Pollution Reduction
1
1
1
Possible Points: 6
d/C Credit 1.1
Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
d/C Credit 1.2
Credit 1.3
d/C Credit 1.4
d/C Credit 1.5
d/C Credit 2
LEED Accredited Professional
1
1
1
1
1
43
Assigned
Notes:
48
Innovation and Design Process
Regional Priority Credits (Zip Code 62203)
Possible Points: 3
Yes
Assigned
Notes: 1-4 Points Possible. A project that earns a Regional Priority credit automatically earns one point in addition to any points awarded for that credit.
d/C Credit 1.1
Regional Priority: Credit: NPDc1 Walkable Streets
d/C Credit 1.2
Regional Priority Credit: NPDc3 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Centers
d/C Credit 1.3
Regional Priority Credit: NPDc4 Mixed Income Diverse Communities
d/C Credit 1.4
Regional Priority Credit: SLLc1 Preferred Locations
d/C Credit 1.5
Regional Priority Credit: GIBc2 Building Energy Efficiency
d/C Credit 1.6
Regional Priority Credit: GIBc8 Rainwater Management
Total
Possible Points: 110

Certified 40 to 49 points
Silver 50 to 59 points
LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations Project Checklist
Gold 60 to 79 points
Platinum 80 + points
2 of 2
Appendix | A-5
Public Survey Results

December 2012
1.Whatwouldyouliketoseeasaresultofthisstationareaplanningeffort?
(chooseyourtopthree)
6.Betterconnectionsforbicyclistsandwalkers
20%
4.Placestoshopandgetgroceries
20%
1.Placestoeatanddrink
20%
9.Morehousing
10%
8.Fewercarsandtraffic
10%
7.Morepeopleridingtransit
10%
2.Morelocaljobopportunities
10%
10.Noneoftheabove
0%
5.Serviceslikedaycarecentersordoctorsoffices
0%
3.Parks,plazas,libraries,andthelike
0%
2.WhatIdislikethemostaboutthisMetroLinkstationisthe
following:(chooseallthatapply)
8.Therearenostoresorservicesnearby
6.Icantbikethere
5.Icantwalkthereeasily
7.Thereisnoplacetoeatordrinknearby
10.Ittakestoolongtogetanywhereon
2.Ifeelunsafe
9.UsingMetroLinkistooexpensive
4.Busconnectionstothestationarepoor
3.Drivingthereisdifficult
1.Thisstationishardtofind
Appendix | A-7
3.ThetopthreethingsIwanttoseeatthisMetroLinkstationare:
(rankyourtopthree)
4.Forthisstationareatofeelmorelikepartof
7.Tohavemorekindsofhousingaroundit
5.Forittofeelsafer
8.Tohavebettershopsandrestaurants
6.Toprojectabetterimageofthecommunity
2.Betterbikeconnections
10.Other
9.Toconnecttomorejobs
3.Betterpedestrianconnections
1.Betterbusconnections
4.RegardingparkingspacesatthisMetroLinkstation,thereare:
(chooseone)
2.Justenough
80%
5.Idontknow
20%
4.Usuallynotenough
0%
3.Sometimesnotenough
0%
1.Toomany
0%
5.Regardingeconomicgrowth,planningforthisstationareashould
focuson:(chooseone)
1.Supportingorencouraginggrowthof
60%
3.Usingtransittoattractcompanies
4.Noneoftheabove
40%
0%
2.Supportingvisitationtotheregion 0%
A-8 | Appendix
6.Themostimportantenvironmentalissuesforthisstation
areaare:(rankyourtopthree)
6.Shadeandtrees
26
1.Noise
20
7.Other
18
5.Stormwaterrunoff
18
4.Renewableenergy
10
2.Airquality
10
8.Idontknow
3.Waterquality/waterpollution
9
0
7.Regardingaestheticissues,planningforthisstationareashould
focuson:(chooseone)
2.Improvingthequalityofstreetscapesaround
80%
7.Idontknow,Iwouldliketolearnmore
6.Other
20%
0%
5.Improvingtheappearanceofparkingareasin 0%
4.Improvingtheappearanceofpark/open 0%
3.Improvingtheappearanceofbuildings 0%
1.Providingpublicartaroundthestationarea
0%
Appendix | A-9
8.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypesoflandusesaroundthis
MetroLinkstation:(selectallthatapply)
4.Retail
3.Restaurants
2.Entertainment
7.Civicbuildings(libraries,communitycenters,
5.Educationalfacilities(K12,College,etc.)
1.Offices
9.Lightindustrialuses
8.Hotel/lodging
Other
6.Placesofworship
9.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypesofresidentialusesaround
thisMetroLinkstation:(selectallthatapply)
5.Apartments(forrent)
2.Duplexes
4.Multistorycondominiums(forsale)
3.Townhomes
1.Singlefamilydetachedhomes
7.Iamnotinfavorofhavingresidentialuses 0
6.Other
A-10 | Appendix
10.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypesofretailaroundthis
stationarea:(selectallthatapply)
4.Neighborhoodretail(florists,bookstores,gift
shops,etc.)
3.Convenienceretail(sandwichshops,drycleaners,
bank,etc.)
4
4
1.Grocerystores
2.Bigboxretailers(Walmart,Target,Kohls,etc.)
5.Other
1
0
11.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypeofentertainmentuses
aroundthisstationarea:(selectallthatapply)
5.Familyentertainmentcenters(arcades,game
6.Amphitheaters
4.Bars/taverns
2.Comedyclubs
8.Other
7.Dancehalls/nightclubs
3.Sportsvenues/sportsarenas
1.Movietheaters
9.Iamnotinfavorofentertainmentusesnear 0
Appendix | A-11
12.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypeofdevelopmentaround
thisstationarea:(chooseone)
3.Largeformat,regionaluses(retail,orbusiness
parks)
2.MixedusedevelopmentorientedaroundaMain
Street
43%
43%
1.Conventionalsuburbandevelopment
14%
5.Idontknow,Iwouldliketolearnmore
0%
4.Noneoftheabove
0%
13.IwouldbeinfavorofexploringthefollowingComplete
StreetsstrategiesforRoute161nearthestationarea:(chooseall
theapply)
4.Installingpublicarttoimprovethecorridors
appearance
2.Installingbikelanesorpathsalongtheside
oftheroad
6.Installingbenches,trashcans,andother
streetscapeelements
3
3
2
5.Installingimprovedsignageandwayfinding
1.Conversionoftrafficlanestoaccommodate
bikefacilities
7.Noneoftheabove
3.Usingatravellane,ortheshoulder,for
expressbusservice
14.Ienvisionthisstationareaevolvingtorepresentthefollowing:
(chooseone)
2.Aneighborhoodcenterwithretail/officeuses
servingthecommunity
50%
3.AregionalcenterservingtheMetroEastarea
33%
1.Continued,existingpatternsofdevelopment
andlanduses
4.Noneoftheabove
A-12 | Appendix
17%
0%
15.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingdevelopmentstrategy
forthisstationarea:(chooseallthatapply)
3.Revisezoningtoallowawiderrangeofland
uses
5.Implementdesignguidelinestocreatea
desiredlookorfeelfornewdevelopment
4.Revisezoningtoallowhigherdensity
development
1.Allowcurrenttransportationandlanduse
planstoguidedevelopment
3
2
2
1
6.Noneoftheabove
2.Donotalterexistingregulations,butfocus
onimprovingbikingandwalkinghere
16.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingtypesofpublicinvestmentin
developmentaroundthisstationarea:(chooseallthatapply)
7.Purchasingorassemblinglandtofacilitate
6.Subsidies(suchastaxincentives)tosupport
5.Investmentinparks,openspace,andtrails
4.Investmentincivicfacilities(libraries,
3.Investmentinparkinglotsaroundthe
2.Investmentinutilitiesservicingthestation
1.Investmentinroadsservicingthestationarea
9.Idontknow
8.Noneoftheabove
Appendix | A-13
17.Iwouldbeinfavoroflocaljurisdictionsalteringtheir
regulationstoallowgreaterlevelsofdensityatthisstationarea:
(chooseone)
1.Yes
100%
3.Idontknow
0%
2.No
0%
18.Howdidyoulearnaboutthismeeting?(selectallthat
apply)
9.Other
43%
8.Announcementatanothermeeting
14%
6.Anotherwebsite
14%
4.Email
14%
3.Mailing
14%
7.Poster
0%
5.Projectwebsite(www.stlouistod.com)
0%
2.Radio
0%
1.TVinterview
0%
A-14 | Appendix
19.Wheredoyoulive?(chooseone)
4.ElsewhereinMetroEast(Illinoisside)
50%
1.FairviewHeights
50%
6.Other
0%
5.ElsewhereintheStLouisregion(Missouri
side)
0%
5.St.LouisCity
0%
3.Swansea
0%
2.EastSt.Louis
0%
20.Thefollowingindicatesmycurrentage:(chooseone)
4.3549
50%
5.5064
33%
3.2534
17%
7.80+
0%
6.6579
0%
2.1824
0%
1.Under18
0%
Appendix | A-15
February 2013
1.Inordertoencouragethecreationofnewdevelopmentaroundthese
stations,Iwouldbeinfavorofbuildingheightsofupto(chooseone):
4stories
38%
5stories
25%
2stories
25%
3stories
13%
10ormorestories
0%
9stories
0%
8stories
0%
7stories
0%
6stories
0%
1story
0%
2.InordertoencouragedevelopmentaroundthisstationareaIwouldbein
favorofresidentialdensitiesofthefollowing(chooseone):
12 20
44%
8 12
22%
30 50
11%
5 8
11%
3 5
11%
Idontknow,Iwouldliketolearnmore
0%
50+dwellingunitsperacre
0%
20 30
0%
1 3
0%
A-16 | Appendix
3.Iwouldbemostinterestedinpursuingthefollowingasaninitial
developmentprojectaroundtheFairviewHeightsstation(chooseallthat
apply):
Smallprojectcombiningretailandresidential
Smallneighborhoodretailcenter(includingdry
Residentialuses(apartmentorcondominium)
Coffeeshop/retail(giftshop,conveniencestore,
Ahoteldevelopment
Noneoftheabove
Smallprojectcombiningofficeandresidential
Corporatecampusormajoremploymentcenter 0
4.IwouldliketoseeMetro,overtime,convertsomeoftheexisting
surfaceparkingatFairviewHeightstodevelopment,whileproviding
forreplacementparkingfacilities(chooseone).
Somewhatfavor
43%
Stronglyfavor
43%
Neutral
14%
Stronglyoppose
0%
Somewhatoppose
0%
5.Iwouldbeinfavorofhavingmoreparkinggaragesandfewersurface
parkingspotsinordertoencouragemoredevelopmentatthisstation
(chooseone).
Somewhatfavor
33%
Stronglyfavor
33%
Stronglyoppose
11%
Somewhatoppose
11%
Neutral
11%
Appendix | A-17
6.Iwouldbeinfavorofhavingreplacementparkinglotslocatedatthe
followinglocationinthevicinityoftheMetroLinkstationarea(choose
one).
OptionA(northofStClairAve)
44%
OptionB(eastofRoute161)
33%
Idontknow,Iwouldliketolearnmore
11%
OptionC(southwestoftheMetrolinkplatform)
11%
Noneoftheabove
0%
7.Iwouldpreferthefollowingtypesofbikeaccommodationsin
thestationarea(chooseallthatapply):
Bikelockers
Bikesharingfacilities(Bcycle)
Acommercialbicycleshopwithbikerentals.
Noneoftheabove
8.IwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingoptionforRoute161inthe
FairviewHeightsstationarea(chooseone):
OptionA
78%
Noneoftheabove
11%
Existingsection
11%
9.IwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingoptionforStClairAveinthe
FairviewHeightsstationarea(chooseone):
OptionB
63%
OptionA
25%
Noneoftheabove
13%
OptionC
0%
Existingsection
0%
A-18 | Appendix
10.Iwouldmostbeinfavorofthefollowingkindofcivicamenity
aroundthisstationarea(chooseone):
Communityservicescenter
63%
Recreationcenter
Policestation
25%
13%
Branchlibrary
0%
School(elementary,middle,orhighschool)
0%
Smallcommunitycenter(activityrooms,etc.)
0%
11.Iwouldmostbeinfavorofthefollowingkindofparks/openspace/
greenspaceamenitiesaroundthisstationarea(chooseallthatapply):
Jogging/walkingtrailconnections
Naturalopenspaceareanear/atthestationarea
Parkaroundthestationwithgrass&seating
Openspaceforgreenstormwatermanagement
Playgroundwithequipmentforkids
4
3
12.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingideasforprovidingasafer
pedestriancrossingacrossRoute161totheeastfromtheFairview
Heightsstationarea(chooseallthatapply):
LandscapedmedianalongRoute161
Bulboutorcurbextension
Trafficsignalforpedestrians
Betterlightingandsignage
Appendix | A-19
13.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingideasforprovidingasaferpedestrian
crossingacrossStClairAvetothenorthfromtheFairviewHeightsstationarea
(chooseallthatapply):
LandscapedmedianalongStClairAve
Bulboutorcurbextension
Trafficsignalforpedestrians
Betterlightingandsignage
14.IwouldbeinfavorofchangingMetropolicytoallowfoodanddrinkto
betransportedonthetrain(chooseone):
Stronglyagree
33%
Stronglyoppose
22%
Neutral
22%
Somewhatagree
22%
Somewhatoppose
0%
15.IaminfavorofthepreliminaryplanshownforFairviewHeightsas
shown(chooseone):
Somewhatagree
44%
Stronglyagree
44%
Somewhatdisagree
11%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Neutral
0%
A-20 | Appendix
16.Ifeelthatthelevelorintensityofdevelopmentshownintheplan
forFairviewHeightsappropriate(chooseone):
Somewhatagree
67%
Stronglyagree
22%
Neutral
11%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Somewhatdisagree
0%
17.Iamaresidentofthefollowingarea(chooseone):
ElsewhereinMetroEast
44%
FairviewHeights
44%
Elsewhereinthemetro(Missouriside)
11%
StLouisCity
0%
EastStLouis
0%
18.Iampartofthefollowingagegroup(chooseone):
55 64
33%
35 44
22%
25 34
22%
65 74
11%
45 54
11%
Over75
0%
18 24
0%
Under18
0%
Appendix | A-21
April 2013
1.-12.) To prioritize streetscape improvements on the pedestrian priority streets identified for downtown, participants
were asked to rate the IMPACT of each element and the URGENCY of implementing them on a scale from 1 to 5
where 1 = lowest and 5 = highest.
Public Meeting Results
4
6
3
1
urgency
impact
A-22 | Appendix
Healthy Street Trees
Greem Stormwater Strategies
Lighting Enhancements
Improved Signage
Improved Bike Facilities
Improved Site Furnishings

| 1
13.Doyousupporttheproposedtreeplantingstrategy?(choose
one)
Yes
100%
Idontknow
0%
No
0%
14.Iwouldbeinfavorofcreatingamoreenhancedpedestrianand
bicycleconnectionfromthestationareatotheneighborhoodsto
thewestofthetracks.(chooseone)
StronglyAgree
38%
Disagree
25%
Neutral
25%
Agree
StronglyDisagree
13%
0%
15.Whatisyourpreferredgatewaymarkingstyleforkeylocations
approachingthisdevelopmentdistrict?(chooseone)
Publicartelement
29%
Verticalelementonbothsidesofthestreet
29%
Gatewayentryplaque
29%
Archwayorelementthatspansthestreet
14%
Noneoftheabove
0%
Other
0%
Appendix | A-23
16.IwouldbeinfavoroftheCityofFairviewHeightsadoptingthis
planfortheMetroLinkstationareaaspartofthecomprehensive
planforthecommunity.(chooseone)
Stronglyagree
63%
Agree
25%
Disagree
13%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Neutral
0%
17.IwouldbeinfavoroftheCityofFairviewHeightsimplementingan
EnterpriseZoneinthestationareainordertomoreformallypromote
developmentofthisstationarea.(chooseone)
Agree
50%
Neutral
25%
Stronglyagree
25%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Disagree
0%
18.Iaminfavorofthedevelopmentandlanduseconcepts
depictedforthisstationarea.(chooseone)
Agree
63%
Stronglyagree
25%
Neutral
13%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Disagree
0%
A-24 | Appendix
19.IaminfavoroftheMetroboardendorsingthisstationarea
planandpromotingitsdevelopmentaspartofacoremissionofthe
agency.(chooseone)
Agree
57%
Stronglyagree
43%
Stronglydisagree
0%
Disagree
0%
Neutral
0%
20.Iwouldbeinfavorofthefollowingstrategiestopromotethe
developmentofthisstationarea:(chooseallthatapply)
Updatezoningtoencourageflexibility,buildings
upto4stories,andmixeduses
50%
Citytocoordinatestreetscapeimprovementstied
toredevelopmentefforts
38%
Citypurchasingland
13%
Noneoftheabove
0%
Other
0%
City/Privatepartnershipsforissuingofdeveloper
RFP(s)
0%
Cityofferingtargetedtaxincentives
0%
Appendix | A-25
Records of Public Meetings

RECORD OF PUBLIC MEETING
Public Meeting description/purpose: St. Louis Transit Oriented Development Study
Public Outreach Meeting
Location of the meeting: City of Fairview Heights Public Library, 10025 Bunkum
Road, Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Meeting Date: December 12, 2012
Form prepared by: Crystal Howard
1. Describe how the public hearing/meeting was advertised to adequately inform the community.
The public meeting media advisory was distributed to the follow media outlets:
KMOV-Channel 4
KSDK - Channel 5
KTVI/KPLR-Channel 2/11
KWMU- 90.7 FM
KMOX-Radio 1120AM
Shine 690 AM (Minority radio station)
East St. Louis Monitor (Minority print

publication)
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Suburban Journal (IL Bureau)
Belleville New Democrat
The three public meetings were also listed in the calendar section of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. A press
release was also carried in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch online version stltoday.com. The following Study
partners also blogged about the meetings, placed information on their websites, placed variable message
boards on major county roads, Twitter feed or distributed the eBlast/eNewsletter to their mailing list: East
West Gateway Council of Governments (EWG), Metro, Citizens for Modern Transit (CMT), St. Louis
County, St. Louis County Economic Council, St. Clair County Transit District, City of Fairview Heights,
St. Clair County Board Chairman, East St. Louis Mayor, Jackie Joyner-Kersee Foundation, East St. Louis
Parks District and Heartland Conservancy.
2. Was the public hearing/public meeting held at an accessible place and at a time convenient to the
participating community? Identify the specific building and room where the meeting was held. Provide the
meeting times.
The meeting location was on the lower level of the City of Fairview Heights Public Library. The meeting
location was disability accessible via elevator. Meeting times were 4-7 PM.
3. Were any requests for special accommodation received prior to or at the meeting?
No requests for special accommodation were submitted.
4. During the public hearing/public meeting, were all concerns heard without regard to race, sex, color,
familial status, LEP, age, disability, or national origin?
Yes, all comments were address as questions were asked without regard to race, sex, color, familial status,
LEP, age, disability or national origin.
5. Describe how persons in attendance were advised of the complaint procedures in the event they felt
discriminated against because of race, color, LEP, familial status, sex, disability, age, or national origin.
A-26 | Appendix
We did not receive any requests or complaints regarding discrimination issues. However, the consultant
team had the necessary complaint procedures and language available in the event any complaints were
raised.
6. Describe efforts to ensure citizen participation in the hearings, particularly by minorities and women.
Media interviews were conducted prior to the meeting to encourage participation. In addition to print
publications notices, EWG and Study team members were interviewed by the following media:
KWMU News interview
KMOX radio interview (Study team)
KSDK Channel 5On-air mention and website posting
Shine 690 AM (Minority radio station- Public Service Announcement)
Metrorider alerts on MetroLink trains
Mayor Alvin Parks (East St. Louis)encouraged attendance via his Facebook page
7. What was the total attendance at the meeting? How many minorities and women were represented at
the meeting? This should be based on staff observation.
A total of 40 attendees signed in at the meeting. Of the 40, 13 were women and approximately 4 minorities
were in attendance.
Appendix | A-27

Location of the meeting: Caseyville Township Senior Center, 10001 Bunkum Road
Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Meeting Date: February 27, 2013
KMOV-Channel 4
KSDK - Channel 5
KWMU- 90.7 FM
KMOX-Radio 1120AM
publication)
St. Louis American

St. Louis Beacon (online newspaper)
St. Louis Business Journal
St. Louis Patch (online newspaper)
Suburban Journals
The five public meetings were also listed in the calendar and press release section of the St. Louis PostDispatch. The following Study partners also blogged about the meetings, placed information on their
websites, placed variable message boards on Hanley Road near Evans Ave and Hanley Road near Natural
Bridge, Twitter feed, Facebook page or distributed their mailing list: East West Gateway Council of
Governments (EWG), Hudson and Associates, Metro, Citizens for Modern Transit (CMT), St. Louis
County, St. Louis City, East St. Louis Mayor, City of Fairview Heights.
meeting times.
The meeting location was held at the Caseyville Township Senior Center. The meeting location was
disability accessible. Meeting times were 5:30-7:30 PM.
A-28 | Appendix
We did not receive any requests or complaints concerning discrimination issues. However, the consultant
raised.
KWMU News interview
KMOX radio interview
St. Louis Post-Dispatch calendar announcements and press release section
A total of 31 attendees signed in at the meeting. Of the 31, 15 were women and approximately 9 minorities
were in attendance.
Appendix | A-29

Location of the meeting: Caseyville Township Senior Center, 10001 Bunkum Road,
Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Meeting Date: April 18, 2013
KMOV-Channel 4
KSDK - Channel 5
KWMU- 90.7 FM
KMOX-Radio 1120AM
publication)
St. Louis American

St. Louis Beacon (online newspaper)
St. Louis Business Journal
St. Louis Patch (online newspaper)
Suburban Journals
The five public meetings were also listed in the calendar and press release section of the St. Louis PostDispatch. The following Study partners also blogged about the meetings, placed information on their
websites, placed variable message boards on Hanley Road near Evans Ave and Hanley Road near Natural
Bridge, Twitter feed, Facebook page or distributed their mailing list: East West Gateway Council of
Governments (EWG), Hudson and Associates, Metro, Citizens for Modern Transit (CMT), St. Louis
County, St. Louis City, Village of Shiloh, East St. Louis Mayor, City of Fairview Heights.
meeting times.
The meeting location was held at the Caseyville Township Senior Center. The meeting location was
disability accessible. Meeting times were 5:30-7:30 PM.
A-30 | Appendix
We did not receive any requests or complaints concerning discrimination issues. However, the consultant
raised.
KWMU News interview
KMOX radio interview
St. Louis Post-Dispatch calendar announcements and press release section
Belleville-News Democrat
A total of 9 attendees signed in at the meeting. Of the 9, 5 were women and 1 minority were in attendance.
Appendix | A-31
St. Louis TOD Study - Fairview Heights MetroLink
Online Survey Results

Station
Survey #1
1. What would you like to see as a result of this station area planning effort? (choose your
top three)
Rating
Choice 1
Choice 2
Choice 3
Places to eat and drink
30.8% (4)
15.4% (2)
53.8% (7)
13
More local job opportunities
46.2% (6)
23.1% (3)
30.8% (4)
13
Parks, plazas, libraries, and the like
33.3% (3)
22.2% (2)
44.4% (4)
Places to shop and get groceries
25.0% (2)
37.5% (3)
37.5% (3)
0.0% (0)
50.0% (2)
50.0% (2)
64.3% (9)
21.4% (3)
14.3% (2)
14
More people riding transit
20.0% (2)
30.0% (3)
50.0% (5)
10
Fewer cars and traffic
33.3% (2)
0.0% (0)
66.7% (4)
More housing
0.0% (0)
40.0% (2)
60.0% (3)
None of the above
25.0% (1)
0.0% (0)
75.0% (3)
Services like daycare centers or

doctor's offices
Better connections for bicyclists
and walkers
Count
answered question
24
skipped question
1 of 19
A-32 | Appendix
2. What I dislike most about this MetroLink station is the following (choose all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
This station is hard to find
4.0%
I feel unsafe
40.0%
10
Driving there is difficult
8.0%
12.0%
I can't walk there easily
40.0%
10
I can't bike there
36.0%
48.0%
12
40.0%
10
16.0%
8.0%
answered question
25
skipped question
Bus connections to the station are

poor
There is no place to eat or drink

nearby
There are no stores or services
nearby
Using MetroLink is too expensive
It takes too long to get anywhere
on MetroLink from this station
Appendix | A-33
2 of 19
3. The top three things I want to see at this MetroLink station are (rank your top three)
Rating
Choice 1
Choice 2
Choice 3
Better bus connections
60.0% (3)
20.0% (1)
20.0% (1)
Better bike connections
72.7% (8)
18.2% (2)
9.1% (1)
11
Better pedestrian connections
20.0% (2)
50.0% (5)
30.0% (3)
10
50.0% (4)
25.0% (2)
25.0% (2)
52.9% (9)
5.9% (1)
41.2% (7)
17
16.7% (2)
33.3% (4)
50.0% (6)
12
0.0% (0)
75.0% (3)
25.0% (1)
50.0% (7)
21.4% (3)
28.6% (4)
14
16.7% (1)
16.7% (1)
66.7% (4)
For this station area to feel more

like part of the neighborhood
For it to feel safer
To project a better image of the
community
To have more kinds of housing
around it
To have better shops and
restaurants
To connect to more jobs
Other (please specify)
A-34 | Appendix
Count
answered question
25
skipped question
3 of 19
4. Regarding parking spaces at this MetroLink station, there are (choose one)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Too many
4.3%
Just enough
69.6%
16
Sometimes not enough
4.3%
Usually not enough
4.3%
I don't know
17.4%
answered question
23
skipped question
5. Regarding economic growth, planning for this station area should focus on (choose one)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Supporting or encouraging
growth of mom and pop
45.5%
10
13.6%
31.8%
9.1%
answered question
22
skipped question
businesses
Supporting visitation to the region
(including tourism)
Using transit to attract companies
from outside the region
None of the above
Appendix | A-35
4 of 19
6. The most important environmental issues for this station area are (rank your top three)
Rating
Choice 1
Choice 2
Choice 3
Noise
50.0% (4)
25.0% (2)
25.0% (2)
Air quality
50.0% (5)
10.0% (1)
40.0% (4)
10
Water quality / water pollution
50.0% (4)
25.0% (2)
25.0% (2)
Renewable energy
63.6% (7)
27.3% (3)
9.1% (1)
11
Stormwater runoff
12.5% (1)
75.0% (6)
12.5% (1)
Shade and trees
50.0% (8)
25.0% (4)
25.0% (4)
16
I don't know
33.3% (1)
0.0% (0)
66.7% (2)
A-36 | Appendix
Count
answered question
22
skipped question
5 of 19
7. Regarding aesthetic issues, planning for this station area should focus on (choose one)
Providing public art around the

station area
Response
Response
Percent
Count
8.7%
13.0%
34.8%
34.8%
4.3%
4.3%
Improving the quality of

streetscapes around the station
area
Improving the appearance of
buildings around the station
area
park / open space amenities or
connections
parking areas in the station area
I don't know, I would like to learn
more
answered question
23
skipped question
Appendix | A-37
6 of 19
8. I would be in favor of the following types of land uses around this MetroLink station
(choose all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Offices
45.5%
10
Entertainment
59.1%
13
Restaurants
68.2%
15
Retail
72.7%
16
27.3%
4.5%
36.4%
Hotel / lodging
31.8%
Light industrial uses
27.3%
Educational facilities (K-12,

College, technical school, etc.)
Places of worship
Civic buildings (libraries,
community centers, governmental
centers, etc.)
A-38 | Appendix
answered question
22
skipped question
7 of 19
9. I would be in favor of the following types of residential uses around this MetroLink station
(select all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Single family detached homes
26.1%
Duplexes
13.0%
Townhomes
26.1%
Multi-story condominiums (for sale)
39.1%
Apartments (for rent)
30.4%
43.5%
10
I am not in favor of having

residential uses around this
station
answered question
23
skipped question
Appendix | A-39
8 of 19
10. I would be in favor of the following types of retail around this station area (select all that
apply)
Grocery stores
Big box retailers (Walmart, Target,
Kohls, etc.)
Convenience retail (sandwich
shops, dry cleaners, bank, etc.)
Neighborhood retail (florists,
book stores, gift shops, etc.)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
66.7%
14
19.0%
85.7%
18
85.7%
18
A-40 | Appendix
answered question
21
skipped question
9 of 19
11. I would be in favor of the following type of entertainment uses around this station area
(select all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Movie theaters
31.8%
Comedy clubs
9.1%
Bars / taverns
27.3%
27.3%
Amphitheaters
18.2%
Dance halls / night clubs
0.0%
50.0%
11
Family entertainment centers

(arcades, game centers, etc.)
I am not in favor of
entertainment uses near this
station
answered question
22
skipped question
Appendix | A-41
10 of 19
12. I would be in favor of the following type of development around this station area (choose
one)
Conventional suburban
development
Mixed-use development oriented
around a "Main Street"
Large format, regional uses (retail
or business parks)
None of the above
I don't know, I would like to learn
more
A-42 | Appendix
Response
Response
Percent
Count
8.7%
60.9%
14
8.7%
13.0%
8.7%
answered question
23
skipped question
11 of 19
13. I would be in favor of exploring the following "Complete Streets" strategies for Route
161 near the station area (choose all that apply)
Conversion of traffic lanes to

accommodate bike facilities
Installing bike lanes or paths
along the side of the road
Using a travel lane, or the shoulder,
for express bus service
Installing public art to improve the
corridor's appearance
Installing improved signage and
wayfinding
Installing benches, trash cans, and
other streetscape elements
None of the above
Response
Response
Percent
Count
31.8%
68.2%
15
13.6%
27.3%
45.5%
10
63.6%
14
13.6%
answered question
22
skipped question
Appendix | A-43
12 of 19
14. I envision this station area evolving to represent the following (choose one)
Continued, existing patterns of

development and land uses
Response
Response
Percent
Count
0.0%
52.4%
11
19.0%
28.6%
answered question
21
skipped question
A neighborhood center with

retail / office uses serving the
community
A regional center serving the Metro
East area
None of the above
A-44 | Appendix
13 of 19
15. I would be in favor of the following development strategy around this station area
(choose all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Allow current transportation and

land use plans to guide
13.6%
18.2%
22.7%
22.7%
68.2%
15
13.6%
answered question
22
skipped question
development
Do not alter existing regulations,
but focus on improving biking and
walking here
Revise zoning to allow a wider
range of land uses
Revise zoning to allow higher
density development
Implement design guidelines to
create a desired look or feel for
new development
None of the above
Appendix | A-45
14 of 19
16. I would be in favor of the following types of public investment in development around
this station area (choose all that apply)
Investment in roads servicing the
Response
Percent
Count
34.8%
39.1%
8.7%
21.7%
60.9%
14
26.1%
34.8%
None of the above
21.7%
I don't know
13.0%
answered question
23
skipped question
station area
Investment in utilities servicing the
station area
Investment in parking lots around
the station area
Investment in civic facilities
(libraries, community centers, etc.)
Investment in parks, open space,
and trails
Subsidies (such as tax incentives)
to support private development
Purchasing or assembling land to
facilitate new development
A-46 | Appendix
Response
15 of 19
17. I would be in favor of local jurisdictions altering their regulations to allow greater levels
of density at this station area (choose one)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Yes
39.1%
No
26.1%
I don't know
34.8%
answered question
23
skipped question
18. How did you learn about this survey / planning process (select all that apply)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
TV interview
0.0%
Radio
0.0%
Mailing
0.0%
Email
31.6%
31.6%
Another website
31.6%
Poster
0.0%
Announcement at another meeting
15.8%
Project website
(www.stlouistod.com)
answered question
19
skipped question
Appendix | A-47
16 of 19
19. Where do you live? (choose one)

Response
Response
Percent
Count
Fairview Heights
75.0%
18
East St. Louis
0.0%
Swansea
8.3%
12.5%
0.0%
4.2%
0.0%
answered question
24
skipped question
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Elsewhere in Metro East (Illinois

side)
St. Louis City
Elsewhere in the St. Louis region
(Missouri side)
Other
20. The following indicates my current age (choose one)
A-48 | Appendix
Under 18
0.0%
18 - 24
8.3%
25 - 34
33.3%
35 - 49
12.5%
50 - 64
37.5%
65 - 79
8.3%
80+
0.0%
answered question
24
skipped question
17 of 19
Fairview Survey #2
Survey #2
1. In order to encourage the creation of new development around these stations, I would be
in favor of building heights of up to (choose one):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
1 story
25.0%
2 stories
16.7%
3 stories
8.3%
4 stories
12.5%
5 stories
12.5%
6 stories
4.2%
7 stories
4.2%
8 stories
0.0%
9 stories
0.0%
10 or more stories
16.7%
answered question
24
skipped question
1 of 11
Appendix | A-49
2. In order to encourage development around this station area I would be in favor of

residential densities of the following (choose one):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
13
15.4%
35
34.6%
58
0.0%
8 12
0.0%
12 20
23.1%
20 30
7.7%
30 50
0.0%
50+ dwelling units per acre
0.0%
19.2%
answered question
26
skipped question
I dont know, I would like to learn

more
A-50 | Appendix
2 of 11
3. I would be most interested in pursuing the following as an initial development project

around the Fairview Heights station (choose all that apply):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Coffee shop/retail (gift shop,

60.0%
15
56.0%
14
40.0%
10
20.0%
36.0%
24.0%
A hotel development
16.0%
None of the above
16.0%
answered question
25
skipped question
convenience store, etc.) oriented

to transit riders
Small neighborhood retail center
(including dry cleaner, bank, daily
uses, etc.)
Corporate campus or major
employment center (complex of
office buildings)
Residential uses (apartment or
condominium)
Small project combining retail and
residential
Small project combining office and
residential
Appendix | A-51
3 of 11
4. I would like to see Metro, over time, convert some of the existing surface parking at
Fairview Heights to development, while providing for replacement parking facilities (choose
one).
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Strongly favor
25.0%
Somewhat favor
20.8%
Neutral
16.7%
Somewhat oppose
12.5%
Strongly oppose
25.0%
answered question
24
skipped question
5. I would be in favor of having more parking garages and fewer surface parking spots in
order to encourage more development at this station (choose one).
A-52 | Appendix
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Strongly favor
28.0%
Somewhat favor
24.0%
Neutral
4.0%
Somewhat oppose
12.0%
Strongly oppose
32.0%
answered question
25
skipped question
4 of 11
6. I would be in favor of having replacement parking lots located at the following location in
the vicinity of the MetroLink station area (choose one).
Option A (southwest of the
Response
Response
Percent
Count
28.0%
Option B (east of Route 161)
16.0%
Option C (north of St. Clair Ave.)
4.0%
None of the above
36.0%
16.0%
answered question
25
skipped question
Metrolink platform)
I dont know, I would like to learn

more
7. I would prefer the following types of bike accommodations in the station area (choose all
that apply):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Bike sharing facilities (B cycle)
36.0%
Bike lockers
52.0%
13
40.0%
10
20.0%
answered question
25
skipped question
A commercial bicycle shop with

bike rentals.
None of the above
Appendix | A-53
5 of 11
8. I would be in favor of the following option for Route 161 in the Fairview Heights station
area (choose one):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Existing section
14.3%
Option A
66.7%
14
None of the above
19.0%
answered question
21
skipped question
9. I would be in favor of the following option for St Clair Ave in the Fairview Heights station
area (choose one):
A-54 | Appendix
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Existing section
14.3%
Option A
23.8%
Option B
52.4%
11
None of the above
9.5%
answered question
21
skipped question
6 of 11
10. I would most be in favor of the following kind of civic amenity around this station area
(choose one):
Branch library
Response
Response
Percent
Count
4.3%
13.0%
Recreation center
4.3%
Police station
65.2%
15
13.0%
0.0%
answered question
23
skipped question
Small community center (with

activity rooms, etc.)
Community services center (social

services offices, govt branch
offices, etc.)
School (elementary, middle, or high
school)
Appendix | A-55
7 of 11
11. I would most be in favor of the following kind of parks / open space / green space
amenities around this station area (choose all that apply):
Central park around the station area

with grassy areas and seating
Jogging / walking trail
connections
Playground with equipment for kids
Natural open space area near/at the
station area
Open space for green stormwater
management
Response
Response
Percent
Count
31.8%
59.1%
13
36.4%
45.5%
10
50.0%
11
answered question
22
skipped question
12. I would be in favor of the following ideas for providing a safer pedestrian crossing
across Route 161 to the east from the Fairview Heights station area (choose all that apply):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Traffic signal for pedestrians
57.1%
12
Bulb-out or curb extension
66.7%
14
61.9%
13
66.7%
14
answered question
21
skipped question
Landscaped median along Route

161
Better lighting and signage
A-56 | Appendix
8 of 11
13. I would be in favor of the following ideas for providing a safer pedestrian crossing
across St Clair Ave to the north from the Fairview Heights station area (choose all that
apply):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Traffic signal for pedestrians
60.9%
14
Bulb-out or curb extension
69.6%
16
65.2%
15
65.2%
15
answered question
23
skipped question
Landscaped median along St Clair

Ave
Better lighting and signage
14. I would be in favor of changing Metro policy to allow food and drink to be transported on
the train (choose one):
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Strongly agree
8.3%
Somewhat agree
20.8%
Neutral
12.5%
Somewhat oppose
25.0%
Strongly oppose
33.3%
answered question
24
skipped question
Appendix | A-57
9 of 11
15. I am in favor of the preliminary plan shown for Fairview Heights as shown (choose one)
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Strongly agree
4.3%
Somewhat agree
47.8%
11
Neutral
26.1%
Somewhat disagree
8.7%
Strongly disagree
13.0%
answered question
23
skipped question
16. I feel that the level or intensity of development shown in the plan for Fairview Heights
appropriate (choose one)
A-58 | Appendix
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Strongly agree
13.0%
Somewhat agree
34.8%
Neutral
26.1%
Somewhat disagree
8.7%
Strongly disagree
17.4%
answered question
23
skipped question
10 of 11
17. I am a resident of the following area (choose one)

Response
Response
Percent
Count
Fairview Heights
65.2%
15
East St Louis
0.0%
Elsewhere in Metro East
26.1%
St Louis City
0.0%
8.7%
answered question
23
skipped question
Response
Response
Percent
Count
Elsewhere in the metro (Missouri

side)
18. I am part of the following age group (choose one)
Under 18
0.0%
18 24
4.2%
25 34
25.0%
35 44
4.2%
45 54
29.2%
55 64
29.2%
65 74
8.3%
Over 75
0.0%
answered question
24
skipped question
Appendix | A-59
11 of 11

Fairview Heights-Station Area Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Fairview Heights-Station Area Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN

St. Louis, Missouri | July 2013

Fairview Heights Station Area Plan

Page intentionally left blank

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri

Page intentionally left blank

STATION AREA ANALYSIS/

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 5

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions

6 | Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri

Streams and Floodplains

Bike and Pedestrian Environment

8 | Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri

MetroLink Station Boardings

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 9

Existing Zoning and Entitlement Considerations

Existing Development Density

10 | Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 11

Page intentionally left blank

ST. CLAIR AVE. TO ROUTE

EAST ST. LOUIS

LYNN LEE CT.

Design Workshop, 2013

STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS]

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 13

Page intentionally left blank

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [SITE ANALYSIS]

MetroLink Station Area Profile*

Physical Barriers to Development | Access to the surrounding station site

ST. CLAIR AVE.

Regulatory Barriers to Development | Zoning around the station may

Approximately 52 acres of vacant land Somewhat limited potential in terms

Station Configuration | The station is has two Metro-owned Park-Ride

Average Monthly Boardings580| 52,300 (MetroLink Station Average = 36,500)

Context | This station is located in the City of Fairview Heights and

1/2 MILE RADIUS STUDY AREA

CULTURAL PLACE OF INTEREST

VACANT PARCELS OVER 10 ACRES (2 TOTAL)

PUBLIC OWNED PARCEL (17 ACRES)

VACANT PARCEL (117.5 ACRES)

AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC

STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS]

IT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STUDY

DRAFT: JUNE, 2012

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 15

Page intentionally left blank

Existing Conditions Analysis

ST. CLAIR AVE. TO

POTENTIAL ROAD ALIGNMENT

METRO OWNED PARCEL

EXISTING AND POTENTIAL OPEN

BUILDING FRONTAGE - SHORT-TERM

BUILDING FRONTAGE -LONG-TERM

Design Workshop, 2013

STATION | FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS [FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS/CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS]

Station Area Analysis/Existing Conditions | 17

Page intentionally left blank

Public Participation and Results | 19

20 | Public Participation and Results

FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS STATION AREA PLAN | St. Louis, Missouri