Na de afrit schijnt het station vlak bij een korte tunnel te liggen.

Na means after.

So na de afrit means after the exit or past the exit. In context, afrit usually means a road or motorway exit, so the phrase gives a location or point of reference.

It is not necessarily about time only; here it feels more like route description: once you pass the exit / after the exit.

Afrit is a noun meaning exit, especially a road, highway, or motorway exit.

• de afrit = the exit
• plural: de afritten = the exits

It comes from the verb afrijden, literally something like to drive off / off-drive, but learners usually just memorize afrit as exit.

Yes, schijnen can mean to shine, as in light shining.

But it also has another very common meaning: to seem / to appear.

In this sentence, schijnt means seems:

• Het station schijnt vlak bij de tunnel te liggen. = The station seems to be very near the tunnel.

So this is not about literal shining light.

Dutch main clauses usually follow the verb-second rule (V2): the finite verb comes second.

Here, the sentence begins with Na de afrit, which takes the first position. Because of that, the finite verb schijnt must come next:

• Na de afrit = first position
• schijnt = second position
• het station = subject, after the verb

So the basic pattern is:

• Na de afrit | schijnt | het station | ...

If you started with the subject instead, you could say:

• Het station schijnt na de afrit vlak bij een korte tunnel te liggen.

That is also grammatical.

No. Here het is simply the article for station:

• het station = the station

So het station is the real subject of the sentence.

This is different from English dummy it in a sentence like It seems that.... In Dutch, the subject here is not dummy het, but het station.

Dutch often uses position verbs where English would simply use to be.

Liggen literally means to lie, but it is also often used for things being located somewhere, especially when talking about physical location.

So:

• Het station ligt vlak bij de tunnel. = The station is very near the tunnel.

Even though a station does not literally lie down, Dutch commonly uses liggen for location.

In this sentence:

• schijnt ... te liggen = seems to be located

This is the construction schijnen te + infinitive.

It means to seem to ...

So:

• schijnt te liggen = seems to be located / seems to lie

Structure:

• finite verb: schijnt
• te
• infinitive at the end: liggen

This is very common in Dutch:

• Hij schijnt ziek te zijn. = He seems to be ill.
• Ze schijnt hard te werken. = She seems to work hard.

In Dutch main clauses, the finite verb comes early, but other verbs often go to the end.

Here:

• schijnt is the finite verb
• liggen is the infinitive

Because Dutch pushes non-finite verbs toward the end, you get:

• Na de afrit schijnt het station vlak bij een korte tunnel te liggen.

That final position for liggen is normal Dutch word order.

Bij means near / by / at, depending on context.

Vlak bij means very near, right near, or close to. It is stronger and more specific than just bij.

So:

• bij een tunnel = near a tunnel
• vlak bij een tunnel = very near a tunnel / right by a tunnel

A similar expression is dicht bij. In many contexts, vlak bij and dicht bij are very close in meaning.

Because tunnel is a de-word:

• de tunnel

With a de-word, an adjective before the noun normally takes -e:

• de korte tunnel
• een korte tunnel

So korte is the correct form.

Compare that with some het-words in the singular with een, where the adjective may stay without -e:

• een kort station would be possible if station were being described, because station is a het-word

But here the noun is tunnel, which is a de-word, so it must be korte.

That is a matter of definiteness.

• een korte tunnel = a short tunnel
• de korte tunnel = the short tunnel

The sentence uses een, so it refers to a short tunnel, not a specific tunnel already known to the listener.

If both speaker and listener already knew which tunnel was meant, de korte tunnel could be possible.

Yes. Dutch very often starts a sentence with a time phrase, place phrase, or other adverbial phrase.

So beginning with Na de afrit is completely natural, especially in descriptions of routes, maps, or locations.

It gives the sentence a kind of setting first structure:

• After the exit, the station seems to be very near a short tunnel.

Yes. Schijnt adds uncertainty or indirectness.

It suggests something like:

• it seems
• apparently
• it appears

So the speaker is not stating the location as a hard fact, but as something that appears to be true, perhaps based on what they have heard, seen on a map, or inferred.

Without that uncertainty, you could say:

• Na de afrit ligt het station vlak bij een korte tunnel. = After the exit, the station is very near a short tunnel.

Yes, absolutely.

That version is probably the more neutral one if you are not emphasizing Na de afrit:

• Het station schijnt vlak bij een korte tunnel te liggen.

When you move Na de afrit to the front, you are giving that phrase extra prominence:

• Na de afrit schijnt het station vlak bij een korte tunnel te liggen.

Both are grammatical; the difference is mainly focus and sentence rhythm.