Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-07-16 TPC PacketAGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS July 16, 2015 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER 11, ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of May 21, 2015 V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Transportation Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS A. Hennepin County 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan Presentation B. 2016 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Update C. Grandview Transportation Study Preliminary Scope of Work D. Traffic Safety Reports of June 3 and July 1, 2015 E. Updates i. Student Member ii. Bike Edina Working Group iii. Living Streets Working Group iv. Communications Committee VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Agenda / Edina Transportation Commission July 16, 2015 Page 2 IX. STAFF COMMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Thursday July 16 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday August 20 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday September 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday October 22 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday November 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday December 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday January 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday February 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday March 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Transportation Commission \Agendas & RR's \2015 Agendas \20150416 Agenda.docx MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM MAY 21, 2015 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were members Boettge, Campbell, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Loeffelholz, Nelson, Olson, and Spanhake. ABSENT Bass and Rummel APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The agenda was revised to combine Bike Edina and Walk Edina Working Groups for discussion. Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member Boettge to approve the revised meeting agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2015 Motion was made by member Olson and seconded by member Spanhake to approve the minutes of Apr. 16, 2015. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS University of Minnesota Capstone Presentation: Neighborhood Traffic Study Traffic safety coordinator Joe Totten presented the capstone project. Mr. Totten said he was part of a team of five students that conducted the traffic study in the Strachauer Park neighborhood in the area bounded by W. 54th Street to the north, TH- 62 to the south, France Avenue to the west and Xerxes Avenue to the east. He said the study was done because of residents' concerns which included cut thru traffic, speeding, lack of crosswalks and sidewalks, uncontrolled intersections and parking issues. Mr. Totten said they evaluated the effects of the traffic calming circles on W. 54th Street and data showed that speeds were lowered by 3.7 mph. He said the bike lanes, bump -outs and narrowed lanes also helped to reduce speeds. Regarding cut thru traffic, he said they looked at W. 58th Street and W. 60th Street and found that at least 85% of the traffic was people leaving or entering the neighborhood. He said eastbound W. 60th Street may have a high amount of cut thru traffic and speeding was observed on W. 58th Street. Regarding parking, Mr. Totten said there were little observable parking issues — one area was because of two remodeling projects and the parking issues were only on week days when the contractors were working; the other area was the business node at Pizzeria Lola where parking increased on Saturdays. He suggested looking at parking again in the summer (to account for patrons using the neighborhood park) because their observation was in the winter. For a bike route, they suggested Beard Avenue which would connect to the Promenade and Minneapolis trails. This would include two bridges, one at France Avenue and TH -62 and the other between Beard Avenue and Colony Way. In summary, their findings are high utilization of parking near 56th Street and Xerxes Avenue; the remaining area of study showed no demand for double -sided parking except during residential remodeling projects; the Living Streets Plan recommends one -sided parking and this was not seen as likely to cause parking capacity issues. And they recommended traffic circles at the intersections of Beard Avenue and W. 58th Street and Beard Avenue and W. 60th Street. Discussion • Any link with requests for stop signs observed? No, but data shows speeds are higher near stop signs. • How was the data collected? Manually for parking and tubes for counting. Member lyer suggested that Edina play a leadership role in automating traffic data collection. • Cut thru traffic entering neighborhood could have exited on a different street; cut thru traffic is seen as negative but this is not necessarily so; was speeding at stop signs on the downstream? On W. 60th Street it was on both sides. • Liked the idea of separate bike routes over the freeway because Cornelia Elementary is the school for students in this neighborhood. • Residents often request stop signs to slow traffic and blame cut thru traffic — this data is validation that neighborhood residents make up for the majority of the traffic; traffic calming circles are a good idea instead of not having a solution. • Multi -use bridge was suggested. Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy Planner Nolan said all cities are required to have a reflective and maintenance sign policy for liability purposes and he is looking for feedback from the ETC before sending the policy to City Council for approval. He said member Janovy provided feedback via email. Faarlhark • Is there a benchmark for cities to have a certain amount and types of signs (because signs are ignored if too many are in place)? Planner Nolan did not know. • How do cities determine the types of signs needed? By doing a sign study. • Bike lanes have too many signs which lead to confusion. • How do you know when there are too many signs and do you have a policy to address this? Planner Nolan said staff would address this by doing sign study. • Policy addressing multiple things: reflective and budget; need different policy for removing signs; make policy clear that City Council has authority to place regulatory signs and not this is not being delegated; policy states Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) has authority. • TSC's authority is the current practice. • What additional authority is being delegated that the TSC does not currently have? If City Council isn't delegating any authority the language should be removed. Planner Nolan will review the language with staff. • Concerned that too much authority is given to City Council who are not trained engineers. • Agreed staff has the expertise and suggested changing the wording to show that City Council has final approval. • Obstruction of signs by overgrown vegetation is not included. Is this addressed in another policy? Yes, said Planner Nolan. Southwest Light Rail Transit (SW LRT) Station Access Planner Nolan said although the SW LRT will not run through Edina, this is on the ETC's work plan and chair Bass included it to begin discussing station access. The closest station for Edina will be Blake Road in Hopkins. Discussion • Blake Road Corridor Study completed by City of Hopkins in participation with Edina and will include a sidewalk from Spruce Road to Maloney Avenue in Edina, and all the way to the LRT station in Hopkins; • It is not known at this time if parking will be available for transit users; • Mayor Hovland and CM Brindle are on a SW LRT committee and may be able to provide information; • What is the ETC's authority at it relates to being able to make certain requests? • Should someone from the ETC sit on a SW LRT committee? Member Nelson once served on a committee. • Request for staff to overlay Edina's sidewalk and bike plan with SW LRT stations on to one map with primary focus on the stations that are accessible to Edina; • Make a map similar to one that Three Rivers District have and have it available during discussion; • Previous discussions about transportation for youths and seniors and this is an opportunity to see if Edina really wants a circulator that would connect the business nodes and SW LRT stations; 2 • Metro Transit looked at feeder systems for the Blue and Green Lines in Minneapolis; what can Edina do to make sure there is a bus line? Planner Nolan said he was not sure what influence the City has with Met Council and Metro Transit; • Invite Metro Transit to a meeting to learn about their plan and how Edina could be included. Traffic Safety Report of MaV 6, 2015 A.2. Member Janovy said she like the idea of doing a trial and suggested a communications plan that would include more than the study area. She asked why they could not add a crosswalk and planner Nolan explained that the resident did not want a landing pad near his property in the right -of -way. B.4. Member Spanhake said as a frequent driver in the area, she agreed with the requestor. She said drivers going south on Tracy Avenue do not know what to do and it would be clearer if the northbound stop sign was removed. She said it is also very difficult to stop in the winter when the road is icy. Planner Nolan was asked if warrants were met for a 4 -way stop and he said no. In reference to further study, he did not believe anything new would be learned. Motion was made by member Spanhake and seconded by member Boettge to forward the May 6, 2015, TSC report to the City Council. All voted aye. Motion carried. Updates Student Members Member Campbell said with the recent approval of the school's referendum which includes expansion of the school's parking lot, his environmental teacher is concerned about the impact the parking lot expansion will have on the prairie. Member Campbell said it is interesting that they have the money but that it will have negative repercussion on the environment but they also need to meet the demands of their customers. Member Nelson asked for his suggestion to reduce parking demands and member Campbell said he did not know what the solution was but felt the school's solution to increase parking fees would negatively impact low income families with students who live outside of Edina and drives to school. Bike Edina and Walk Edina Working Groups Member Boettge reported that she was stepping down as chair of the Walk Edina Working Group and handed out feedback from the group (may not reflect all individuals associated) that included why they joined the group, positive feedback and issues. She said some issues that she ran into was inconsistent or lack of policy for working groups, difficulty finding information on the City's website and her inexperience chairing a working group. Member Janovy said she thought Bike Edina would become more focused after becoming a working group of the ETC but this has not been the case. She said in the beginning Bike Edina was not multi -modal and was more of an advocacy group but now that planner Nolan is on staff, the group has become completely multi - modal. She said the ETC does a good job of reviewing and making recommendations and she sees some duplication with Bike Edina. For Bike Edina, it is more difficult because members look to her to provide all the guidance whereas the ETC has staff support. She said some members also become frustrated when they run into limitations based on the rules and communication is difficult because they are going through the formal City structure. She said one role that needs to be promoted is the City's transportation system through forums and educational outreach. Vice chair La Force summarized the issues as Walk Edina does not have a chair and Bike Edina is asking to change what they are currently doing. He asked if the ETC would be okay if both groups were disbanded. Member Olson, a member of Bike Edina, said after the Bike Plan was completed they lost their focus. Feedback ® Likes the idea of advocacy of both groups and the historical walks that Walk Edina was going to do, bike rodeo, etc. 3 • Anyone interested in chairing Walk Edina? No. • Would Bike Edina want to absorb Walk Edina? Not if the structure is an issue. • Member Janovy said there is a need for more education and outreach and the Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) has a working group with a budget and they've been successful putting together events. She said she needs people with the energy. She said they should maintain the Bike /Walk Edina brand and use it to do outreach. • Bike Edina had a clear focus eight years ago and is struggling now to identify its role. • Need to focus their mission so that they are not duplicating what the ETC does. • Member lyer said when he was on the EEC, the members were motivated; they got $10,000 from the City Council and wrote the solar panel proposal. He said they should disband the groups and they should become advocacy groups that would seek support from the ETC. • Vice chair LaForce asked if this was feasible and member lyer said yes, they could report quarterly and the ETC could ask for their help as needed. ® Member Olson said Bike Edina became a working group of ETC because of liability purposes. Motion made by member lyer to disband the Bike /Walk Edina Work Groups and give them the option of becoming advocacy groups as long as they are vetted by the City to participate in transportation related issues. Motion failed for lack of second. The two groups should be discussed separately. Can the ETC use the working groups as needed to work on specific issues? Member Janovy reminded them that the reason for the discussion is because of the working group structure that requires information, resources, staff support, etc. so whatever they decide to do going forward should address these concerns. Member Janovy said if Walk Edina does not have a chair it is automatically dissolved and the ETC should be mindful of the message that will be sent based on its action. Motion made by member lyer to dissolve Walk Edina and restart it at a future date. Motion was seconded by vice chair LaForce and amended to dissolve Walk Edina because it does not have a chair and restart it at a future date. Amendment seconded by member Nelson. Motion withdrawn by member lyer. Member Janovy said Bike Edina should continue with a narrowed focus and increase membership by having a purpose and she recommended education /outreach. Get feedback from current members to see how they feel. Motion made by member Janovy and seconded by member Loeffelhola to continue Bike Edina but with a narrower focus on education and outreach with goals defined by the ETC. All voted aye. Motion passed. Living Streets Working Group Planner Nolan said the Living Streets Plan was approved by City Council two weeks ago. Communications Committee — None. Member LaForce said the article titled 'Stop Behind the Crosswalks in South Area' that he wrote was published in the May 21St issue of Sun Current. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS 4 Member Boettge asked why the Cornelia Drive sidewalk Safe Routes to School grant application was not approved and planner Nolan said the committee felt there wasn't enough demonstrated risks and lack of support from the school district. He said four grants were awarded from $85,000 to $300,000 and they were for sidewalks across arterial and /or collector streets. Member lyer said he was in a Boston suburb recently and he saw crosswalks similar to the ones on France Avenue which probably means it is a best practice. Planner Nolan said it shortens the crossing distance for pedestrians. Member lyer said it was good to see that Edina was not unique with this design. Member LaForce said he lives three houses away from the Countryside H roadway reconstruction project and within the past two weeks, at least 300 dump trucks have traveled on his street from the project area. He said essentially he is in a construction zone even though his street is not under construction. He said if he was not on the ETC he would not have known what was going on and suggested communicating with residents outside of the direct area because the project has a broader effect. He received a notice that his water would be shut off and suggested including what residents can do to prepare for the shut off. STAFF COMMENTS ® Project area maps for the 2016 neighborhood reconstruction projects were handed out and planner Nolan said staff would seek input at a later date. ® Reminder of the joint work session with City Council and the ETC /Bike Edina on June 17. Motion was made by member lyer and seconded by member Olson to cancel the June 18 regular ETC meeting and reschedule for June 17 immediately following the work session. Motion was withdrawn after discussion. Motion was made by member lyer and seconded by member Loeffelholz to cancel the ETC's regular schedule June 18 meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. ® 2015 project updates ® projects are progressing as planned; Birchcrest is ahead of schedule by a few weeks; Valley View project has started and based on feedback from residents and Council members, staff will be adding striping to define the travel and parking lanes. ® Three pedestrian bridges will be removed as part of the Nine Mile Creek Trail and staff is proposing to reuse one of them to connect the new sidewalk going in on Valley View Road to the trail in Courtney Fields. The abutments would be built in 2016 with PACS funds and the bridge installed when it becomes available: ® The new lights on France Avenue were turned on last night; staff has received more negative feedback than positive. ® Promenade Phase 4, behind Bylery's, is under construction; Phase 5 planning has begun (going north from 701h Street) and design issues will be getting through or around the Galleria and possibly connecting to a trail that is on the Park & Recreation's strategic Grand Loop plan. Member Janovy asked why Park & Recreation did not come to the ETC with their planning of the Grand Loop and planner Nolan said he did not know why. Member lyer said the ETC should see transportation related items that are being proposed within a certain timeframe, i.e., the Grand Loop. ® Hennepin County is hosting a meeting on May 27 for residents on Xerxes Avenue to discuss landscaping the bumpouts. ® The Nine Mile Creek Trail west of Tracy Avenue received funding for 2018; it is not known yet when construction would begin. ® The school district agreed to participate in the Valley View Road traffic study with the City and the costs will be split 50/50. ® MN Greensteps City is hosting a workshop on June 11 and in addition to environmental engineer Bintner presentation, the ETC is scheduled to present on Living Streets but chair Bass will not be available so another presenter is needed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. 5 To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Marl< K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 16, 2015 o e v � 1 f7 E1N Agenda Item #: VI. A. Subject: Hennepin County 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan Presentation Action Requested: None. Information / Background: Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑x Hennepin County, in participation with Three Rivers Parl< District and with the assistance of a consultant team, recently completed and adopted their 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan. City of Edina engineering staff was represented on the Plan's Project Advisory Group. Several commissioners have expressed an interest in learning more about the Plan and how it may affect Edina's transportation system and future planning efforts. The 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan lays out a vision that emphasizes ways to mal<e bicycling safe and comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. The Plan guides how, where and when the County and the parks district will build bil<eways, and outlines an integrated system that will be developed through 2040. Attached is the executive summary of the Plan. For the full 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan please visit the website at http : / /www.hennepin.us /bikgplan. Bob Byers and Kelley Yemen of Hennepin County will give a presentation of the County's Bicycle Plan and will answer commissioners' questions regarding the same. Attachments: 2040 Bicycle Transportation Plan Executive Summary G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Transportation Commisslon \Agendas & RR's \2015 R &R \20150716 \Item VI.A. Hennepin County 2040 Bicycle Transportotlon Plan Presentation.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Hennepin County bicycling vision: Riding a bicycle for transportation, recreation, and health is a comfortable, fun, routine part of daily life throughout the county for people of all ages and abilities. Bike plan purpose Hennepin County envisions a future where residents are healthy and successful, living in safe and vibrant communities. A robust on- and off - street bikeway system serving all ages and abilities that complements other transportation modes and land use will play a significant role in achieving this vision, promoting economic strength, quality of life, and community vitality. The Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan updates the 1997 Bicycle Plan to guide how, where and when the county and Three Rivers Park District build bikeways and support facilities. It sets the expectation that all people should be comfortable and safe while biking. Why bicycling? Bicycling accounts for 2.5 percent of all trips in Hennepin County, more than double the national average. Ridership is increasing rapidly while driving nationwide has been steadily decreasing since 2007. With the expectation that these trends will continue, the county and park district are committed to creating a bicycle environment that meets the needs of people currently biking and those who will be new to biking. A robust, well -used bicycle network benefits far more people than just the person bicycling today. 2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan / / xi A good bikeway system creates the following benefits: Safety: The bikeway system will help reduce crashes by providing a more interconnected network with fewer gaps and more separation from motor vehicles. Livability: Increasing transportation options helps achieve broader community goals such as improved access to jobs, neighborhood schools, and community services. Mobility: Bicycling increases mobility and allows people of all ages to reach more destinations throughout the county. Economic sustainability: Bicycling is an affordable transportation option that reduces the cost of transportation for everyone, including the one -third of people who do not drive, seniors, people with disabilities, children, and low- income populations. Health: Bicycling provides an opportunity for residents to make physical activity a routine part of daily life. Clean air: Bicycling helps reduce Hennepin County's carbon footprint, improve air quality and reduce harmful pollutants. Recreation: Bicycling remains among the top three desired recreation activities in Metropolitan Council surveys, especially among older residents. Parking and congestion alleviation: Bicycling benefits more than just the person biking, it also benefits those who drive. Regional economic competitiveness: Supporting bicycling helps keep and attract talented residents who seek to live, work and play in a vibrant community that embraces their values. Bicycling infrastructure also brings in tourism spending. 160 Existing Facilities New Facilities 140 136 128 124 120 113 too 85 T, 80 74 66 57 I iu:, fi0 52 47 40 35 19 17 i I 20 8 10 4 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure i. Bikeway system implementation by Hennepin County, 1998 -2013 xii / / 2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,0001 I. 102 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07--'08---'09-----'10 111 '12 Figure ii.Three Rivers Park District regional trail visits by bicycle, 2002 -2012. 2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan/ I -cli Iivr, cmoro I ry /xiii The county and park district take great pride in the current bikeway system and will continue to improve it by pursuing the following goals: RIDERSHIP GOAL Promote the bicycle as a mode of transportation that is practical, convenient, and pleasant for commuting, health and exercise, and outdoor recreation. BIKEWAY SYSTEM GOAL Collaboratively build an integrated county bicycle system that allows bicyclists of varying skills to safely, efficiently and comfortably connect to and between all destinations within the county. SAFETY AND COMFORT GOAL Create a safe and comfortable county bikeway system. SUSTAINABILITY GOAL Implement bikeways and support facilities as an essential tool in realizing environmental, social and economic sustainability. MAINTENANCE GOAL Protect the county's and the park district's investments in the bikeway system and reduce seasonal hazards through partnerships. xiv /1' Z- tIt0:,= - I It, I /2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan What People Want Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District reached out to 2,700 people to get their opinion on how to improve bicycling in Hennepin County. They said: » Overcome physical barriers to bicycling, such as rivers, highways, gaps and railroads. » Connect bikeways into a continuous system. » Separate people biking from motor vehicles. » Reduce reliance on personal motor vehicles. » Keep bikeways clear and safe in winter. » Maintain a smooth and predictable bikeway surface. y� U1 1 AL ,. . _. .. t. t,� f r/ _ -�..• bbl, fy�S /K L1]fj • y hx y` � 4 �) • r� . .i, r_ ...v."�'I' _ :: r.- ^`i_?e�`.- rr+^r-:r!ti,-p��+Y?:-, � �tnyrr�.... .•.v.,.i`".. It 2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan/ Executive 5ununa1'y / xv Hennepin County 2040 Bikeway System The existing bikeway system includes 651 miles of on- and off - street bikeways. The 2040 Bikeway System includes 540 miles of new planned bikeways, with almost half of the added system off - street. Implementing the 2040 Bikeway System will require ongoing political and public support to build an average of 20 miles of bikeway each year. Table is Annual mileage target for full system build -out Three Rivers Hennepin Planned Park District County system Off - street bikeways 7.21 1.91 9.1 On- street bikeways 11.5 11.5 Total 1 7.21 13.4 20.6 xvi /Executive Sunm»ary /2040 Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Marl, K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 16, 2015 Subject: 2016 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Update �9� A,I� ch • ,�, ���RPUFA��O e 18AE4 Agenda Item #: VI. B. Action ❑ Discussion ❑x Information ❑x Action Requested: Feedback regarding the preliminary layout of Tracy Avenue from Benton Avenue to TH -62 Ramps. Information / Bacicground: Tracy Avenue from Benton Avenue to approximately Highway 62 is scheduled for reconstruction in 2016. Please recall Tracy Avenue from Vernon to Benton Avenues was reconstructed in 2012. This segment of Tracy Avenue is designated as a Municipal State Aid Roadway (MSA). The 2016 project involves the reconstruction of approximately 3,300 linear feet of road, utility improvements as determined after evaluation, and installation /improvement of pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks and bike lanes. The project will be funded by a combination of MSA funds, special assessments, PACS and utility funds. By using MSA funds, the project must meet MSA design standards or it must receive approval by variance if necessary. That the curves (both existing and as proposed) between Highland Rd and Olinger Blvd will not meet MSA standards; thus, a variance will need to be approved by MnDOT. Please also note the following design considerations: • The proposed typical cross sections of the roadway follow the design similar to phase 1 (2012 Tracy Avenue reconstruction north of Benton Ave). The only difference is that parking will only be allowed at certain locations on the west side. • The Project Layout shows the proposed improvements. The existing curves currently meet 20 mph design standards; this layout is designed to meet 25 mph design standards (to minimize impacts). Additional signage will be installed to alert drivers of the curves. • The second layout sheet shows the curves if they were revised to meet MSA 30 mph design standards (the green lines indicate the impacts to properties if we did so). The north curve would move the roadway 20 feet closer to the house at 6020 Tracy Ave, and the south curve would move the sidewalk 17 feet closer to the house at6109 Tracy Ave. • Parking will be added at Countryside School (lengthening the parking lane) and adjacent to Countryside Park to accommodate parking associated with activities there. A sidewalk will be added adjacent to this parking lane. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 • Existing sidewalk will be maintained on the east side. Areas will only be replaced if they do not meet ADA requirements or are impacted by the roadway construction. • Staff and the consultant are considering adding flashing warning signs near Fire Station I. We will be meeting with the Fire Department regarding this on July 8. Staff held a meeting regarding the project with Tracy Avenue residents on June 22, where we solicited comments on a draft layout. We received very positive feedback on the layout and will continue to use this information during the design process. Additionally, staff is currently receiving input from residents regarding speed limits on Tracy Avenue, and whether they feel that the current 25 mph speed limit north of Benton Ave should be continued south to TH -62 or changed back to 30 mph. Andy Plowman of WSB & Associates will be present to discuss the preliminary layout and to answer commissioners' questions regarding the project. Attachments: Preliminary project layout of Tracy Avenue from Benton Avenue to TH -62 Ramps Preliminary project layout of Tracy Avenue curves if designed to meet MSA 30 mph requirements Typical cross sections G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Transportation Commission \Agendas & RR's \2015 R &R \20150716 \Item VI.B. 2016 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Update.docx he Printed: 7/6/2015 19JU ruename: R:\Ulbeb- b9U \l:aa\LOYOUT \bpI1T LOYOU7.agn 1 -X 1, ?ice li lip 7.t- 0 -• N 1 I I' f �' m I G I'c 0 50 f3 100 ft , .J OF t TRACY AVE - I -__ - -- - � - -- -- --------------------- - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- ------ -- - - -- -- _ -- - - -- -- - - ------------------------------ - -- -- - - -- - -- - —_ - -- r - - -- - - - - --- - -- - - - - -- .F co Uj I / 1 �n , 7' z �yy o so ft .loo f+ 5701 COUNTRYSIDE ELE j I, lf _ o EFtTY ACCESS: ��, �! m si ' '•fir �• RIGHT OF ENTRY _ 1 - - - - - -- �� �SS - - --- - ----------- --- - -- ---- --- - --- ------- - -_ - -- - - O 5909 -- HIGHLAND RD � A' ",' � G °�AC��►' AVl'i �NLJ)E PEASE 2 OMPROV ,Mli , .NTS CONCRETE CURS Project Layou IN l.k Y�e f - _ PAVEMENT �AN® GUTTER SIDEWALK E DRIVEWAY . �� ,� June 22, 2015 Date Printed; 7/5/2015 Ue,- H u �� t, 11I, „�1— L,L,„uu U X, ,,, -,,, ., „ -"- SIDEWALK I)RIV�WAY PAVFIVi[ =N I AND GUTTER �- Alne 227 2015 Date Printed: 6/22/2015 WS8 Filename: K: \01686-640 \Cad \Layout \1686 -64 Typical Sections.cign Proposed 2 Lane Section with Bike Lanes (Looking Northbound) R/W 60' R/W 5' ill ill 5' 3' -5' 5' Bike Thru Lane Thru Lane Bike Blvd Walk - w 32' Section Proposed 2 Lane Section w /Parking (Looking Northbound) R/W 60' R/W 6' 8' 5' ill 1 1 ' 5' 3' -5' 5' f' Walk Parking Bike Thru Lane Thru Lane Bike Blvd Walk Lane �J 40 , Section Tracy A venue Improvements City of Edina, Minnesota Proposed Typical Sections June 22, 2015 To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 16, 2015 Subject: Grandview Transportation Study Preliminary Scope of Worl< �9��^iA, • ,��'Oftt'ORnt� I E3IIII Agenda Item #: VI. C. Action ❑ Discussion 0 Information ❑ Action Requested: Provide feedbacl< on the preliminary scope of worl< for the Grandview Transportation Study. Information / Background: Edina's 2008 Comprehensive Plan identifies the Grandview area as a potential area of change (Page 4 -33). In addition to potential land use changes, re- alignment of roadways and better coordination of multimodal facilities is necessary so that users can more easily and safely access and traverse this busy area as well as crossing Highway 100. Currently, the Grandview area provides few facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, and the 2007 Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies primary and secondary bicycle routes in the Grandview area. Additionally, there are few pedestrian connections between the commercial businesses and the Grandview, Melody Lal<e and Todd Parl< residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the businesses. The Study will address such improvements, which can reduce the need to drive to this area. The 2012 Grandview Development Frameworl< outlines many suggested changes to improve the wall<ability and desirability of the area. The proposed Transportation Study will evaluate different alignments and identify the preferred routes, and will include the current preferred redevelopment concept for the former public works site. The Study will better guide new public and private investments in the area. Preliminary design documents will be needed so that the City can coordinate with other agencies having jurisdiction over Vernon Avenue and Highway 100. The Grandview Transportation Study will be a comprehensive transportation plan for the long -term redevelopment of the Grandview District. The document will provide recommended improvements (with associated cost estimates) that can be installed on a prioritized basis tied to potential future redevelopment catalysts and funding opportunities. Relatedly, it is important that the Study recommendations remain flexible enough to accommodate unknown future events and externalities. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Statement of Project Goals Page 2 The primary purpose of this project is to prepare a comprehensive transportation study for the long -term redevelopment of the Grandview District that guides public and private investments in the area. The Grandview Transportation Study will: • Identify needs, challenges and opportunities for both existing and future "build -out" scenarios; • Re- evaluate transportation changes recommended in the Grandview District Development Framework (2012) and redevelopment concept for the former public works site; • Offer specific recommendations but remain flexible enough to take into account future unknown challenges and opportunities; • Recommend prioritized, phased improvements tied to key redevelopment events; • Recommend improved connections to adjacent neighborhoods, with a focus on bicycle and pedestrian connections; • Analyze motorized travel to guide intersection and roadway modifications that were identified in the Development Framework; • Follow the Living Streets Policy and Implementation Plan guidelines. Summary of Work Tasks The City of Edina anticipates that the selected firm will design and lead a five -part process detailed in this summary of work tasks. City staff and stakeholders will play a prominent role throughout the duration of the project. Overall description of five -part process: I. Meetings with City Staff and Officials 2. Public Engagement Process 3. Prior Study and Planning Document Review 4. Transportation Network Modal Review 5. Develop Study Recommendations Meetings with City Staff and Officials fcials The selected firm will conduct monthly meetings to update the Project Management Team made up staff from several City departments. Attendance to two Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) meetings and two City Council meetings (one work session and one final presentation) are also anticipated. Public Engagement Process The selected firm will design a public engagement process that identifies and involves stakeholders at key moments throughout the study. At minimum, the following shall be included in the public engagement process: • A Project Kick -off Meeting with members of the public (from adjacent neighborhoods), past Grandview project committee members and members of the ETC; REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 • Business Owner Meetings with businesses in and nearby the Grandview district. These meetings may consist of focus group meetings, individual interviews, or a combination of both. • A Final Public Meeting, where the selected consultant will present the findings and recommendations of the final draft study to the public. Prior Study and Planning Document Review Several previous studies and planning efforts have focused on the Grandview Area /District. The selected consultant will review these documents and relevant elements of other citywide plans and documents. These documents include (but may not be limited to) the following, and will be provided by the City of Edina: • Grandview District Development Framework (2012) • Grandview Former Public Works Site Traffic Study (2015) • Edina Comprehensive Plan (2008) • Living Streets Plan (2015) • Northeast Edina Transportation Study (2006) • Metro Transit/Met Council? (SWLRT ?) • 2015 -2019 Capital Improvement Plan (2014) Transportation Network Modal Review The selected firm will conduct a review of the transportation network in the Grandview area, which will include all motorized and non - motorized modes. It is important that each mode be considered not just in isolation but as part of an overlapping transportation network that serves users of all ages and abilities. Both existing and future conditions will be reviewed. Future conditions will consider the transportation network as proposed in the 2012 Development Framework and Comprehensive Plan, as well as redevelopment densities similar to those recently approved in the Southdale area. Additionally, the effects of a "Lid" over TH -100 should also be analyzed, in terms of how increased densities associated with the Lid may affect traffic and mitigation efforts. • Data collection: This task will consist of data collection such as the location, condition and level of service of existing facilities, including roads, bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit routes. • Modal Review: The review and analysis task will use the collected data to assess the multimodal level of service and need for existing and future modal networks. • Roadway: Review existing capacity and future needs for motor vehicles on the roadway network, including levels of service at key intersections. • Bicycle: This will focus on existing and planned bicycle facilities and amenities and their levels of service, particularly as they interface with major trip generators in and around the Grandview area. • Pedestrian: This will focus on existing and planned pedestrian facilities and amenities and their level of service in and through the Grandview area. • Transit: Existing transit routes that service the Grandview area will be reviewed. Potential REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4 transit improvements (e.g. light rail or bus rapid transit in the CP Rail corridor, park -n -ride located at the former public works site, route changes /improvements coincident with implementation of the Southwest LRT line) will also be addressed. Develop Study Recommendations Information from the previous tasks will be utilized to generate recommended future roadway, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements in the Grandview area. Phasing and estimated costs for these recommended improvements will be included, as well as prioritization and potential funding sources. • Roadway and Intersection Improvements: This includes not only recommendations pertaining to roadways in the Grandview area, but also access to and from nearby residential neighborhoods to the north, west and south. • Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements: Recommendations should include improvements to non - motorized infrastructure within the Grandview area as well as connections to adjacent neighborhoods and nearby bicycle and pedestrian facilities. ® Preliminary Designs for Hennepin County /MnDOT Roadways: For improvements requiring coordination with county and state agencies, 30% preliminary designs will be provided (i.e. Vernon Avenue and TH -100 Ramps). • Phasing of Improvements: Proposed improvements will need to be implemented on an as- needed basis in the future, depending on factors both foreseen and unforeseen. Prioritization and phasing of these improvements will be recommended. ® Cost Estimates: An estimate of costs and potential funding sources for the recommended transportation improvements will be provided. Desired Project Schedule The following table demonstrates the key milestones in the project process. 1. Request for Proposals Submitted 2. Request for Proposal Due to City of Edina 3. Potential Interviews 4. City Council Award Contract to Consultant 5. Project Start 6. Project Complete Attachments: None August 3, 2015 September I, 2015 September 21 - 25, 2015 October 6, 2015 November 2, 2015 May 2015 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Transportation Commission \Agendas & RR's \2015 R &R \20150716 \Item VI.C. Grandview Transportation Study Preliminary Scope of Work.docx To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Joseph Totten, Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: July 16, 2015 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Reports of June 3 and July I, 2015 O O IHHH Agenda Item M VI. D. Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Action Requested: Review and recommend Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Reports of Wednesday June 3 and Wednesday July I, 2015 be forwarded to City Council for approval. Information / Background: It is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the meeting. An overview of the comments from the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) will be included in the staff report provided to Council for their August 18, 2015 meeting. Attachments: Traffic Safety Committee Report for June 3, 2015 Traffic Safety Committee Report for July I, 2015 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Traffic Safety Committee \Staff Review Summaries \15 TSAC & Min \6 -03_7 -01 -15 Cover.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 Traffic Safety Report Wednesday, June 03, 2015 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 01. The Public Works Director, City Engineer, Police Lieutenant, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator, and Assistant City Planner were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, these can be included on the July 16 Edina Transportation Commission and the August 18 City Council agenda. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action AI.Request for replacing a Yield sign with a Stop sign at the exit of the parking garage in the 50th and France district This request comes from a resident who noted that the middle ramp in the 50th and France district has a yield sign located at its exit, however this is inconsistent with state statute 169.31. This statute states that "The driver of a vehicle within a business or residence district emerging from an alley, driveway, or building shall stop such vehicle immediately prior to driving onto a sidewall( or into the sidewall( are and shall yield the right -of- way to any pedestrian and all other traffic on the Photo : sidewall<." All other city -owned parking structures and lots have stop signs at their exit, but other driveways in the area have no control at their exit. No other yield signs were observed in the district's driveways. Exit from the Center Ramp Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 3, 2015 Page 1 of 5 After review, staff recommends approving this item, and signing the exit with a Stop sign. This is done for consistency with other city owned parking areas, as well as compliance with the Minnesota State Statute. Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends denial B I . Request for yellow painted curb, between 5105 and 5107 Wooddale Avenue driveways This request comes from a resident on Wooddale Avenue who has a driveway close to the neighbor's, and notes that vehicles park between the two. The end of radius of these driveways is 9 feet apart, with the edge of pavements being 16 feet apart behind the sidewalk. Edina Statue Ordinance Code 26 -35(2) does not allow parking within 5 feet of any driveway. Using the larger measurement, there is 6 feet of space between the driveways available for parking, but a SmartForTwoTM is 8 feet long, and would be unable to fit into the space. Residents of both properties were supportive of a measure to deal with the issue. The adjoining neighbor seconded the request. After review, staff recommends denial of this request. This decision was made considering that both of these properties have secondary access, and that yellow curb painting is rare in the city, and only used for specific circumstances. B2. Increased safety along Creelc Valley Road from Nordic Circle through Scandia Lane, specifically Crosswalks across Creelc Valley Road This request came from a parent of a Creek Valley Elementary student, who believed that the previous action of asking parents not to park in a no parking zone on Gleason Road (item A2 in the February 4th, 2015 Traffic Safety Report) created a dangerous situation on Creek Valley Road, as walkers and bikers from the school now had to navigate several parked vehicles picking up children. A camera was placed in this location for three school days. The vehicle queue did not reach the intersection of Nordic Circle. Safety was seen as a possible concern with the number of drivers using the intersection of Nordic Circle and Creek Valley Road to execute U- Map : 5105/ 5107 Wooddale Avenue Photo : Straight curb between driveways Map : Proposed improvements along Creek Valley Road Photo: The video camera's view during school release. Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 3, 2015 Page 2 of 5 turns or three - point- turns, where all children were crossing Nordic Circle. This action will be restricted with the new island being placed in this location (pending City Council approval). While in excess of twenty pedestrians crossed Creek Valley Road in this segment, no strong concentration of a specific crossing point was seen. Pedestrians and bicyclists also used all areas of the street and drivers were cautious, slowed down, and yielded right -of -way to the children during school release. After review, staff recommends denial of this request. This decision is based on the small number of issues observed, the lack of concentration for crossings, a lack of sidewalks on the south side of the street, and standards for how to wall. in the roadway indicating different crossing points for pedestrians walking in opposite directions. In addition, an island being painted and having flexible plastic posts will soon be tested in the area, and will mitigate some conflicts. B3. Request for a Crosswalk across 66th Street at Warren Avenue This request came from several neighbors in the Brookview Heights neighborhood, who noted that high speeds on 66th Street and the lack of pedestrian infrastructure made the area unwelcoming to pedestrians, and made getting to the park an unwanted experience. Video was gathered of the area on May 8th -May IOth of 2015 and was evaluated. A maximum of 15 people crossed in the maximum two - hour period, which does not meet warrants. The weather was mixed, with temperatures in the sixties, and rain on Sunday, May IOth. There are no sidewalks currently in the area, but one along 66th Street is planned. Crosswalk warrants are attached in Appendix A. After review, staff recommends denial of this request due to not meeting crosswalk volume warrants. In discussion of further warrants, such as adjacent to public parks and having a high concentration of children, staff noted that Edina's crosswalk warrants are much looser than MnDOT recommends, and a lowering of the needed volume by one fourth is too much to be justified. D Items: Other items handled by Traffic Safety Map: 66`x' St and Warran Ave NT ' =� 05109 1 1 Photo: A group of pedestrians, as seen from the video camera D 1. A resident called about the intersection of Trunk Highway 62 and France Avenue, noting the danger present in the intersection. The comment was noted, and requestor was informed that the City of Edina is working with MnDOT and Hennepin County to improve the intersection. D2. A staff person at a local senior apartment complex called for information relating to unsigned lane - drops and merges at the exit of the complex's parking area. The requestor also asked if the Traffic Safety Coordinator would be willing to look at the intersection in person and speak to residents. The Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 3, 2015 Page 3 of 5 site was reviewed and found to be awkward, but on private property, questions were taken at the center with management present. Management has been made aware of the issue several times in the past, and has not taken action to rectify the situation. Recommendations on how to properly mark or sign the exit to clarify the situation were provided. D3. A resident noted that a large tree blocked sightlines and was within the clear zone of 56th Street and Beard Avenue. The site was investigated and the tree was found to be largely in the clear view triangle at the intersection, a letter has been sent to the property owner, and if no action has been taken within ten days, the City Forester will take action. D4. A resident called to inform engineering that Arcadia Avenue was impassable due to the Starbucks queue. This was forwarded to the City Engineer who is currently in talks with the business. D5. A resident and staff person were confused on the right of way rules at the intersection of Merritt Circle and Doncaster Way. General T- intersection right -of -way rules and reasons for why these would not apply were identified, and discussed. D6. A resident of Minneapolis wanted to discuss the City of Edina's experiences with flashing beacon pedestrian signals. D7. The Traffic Safety Coordinator noticed that there was insufficient pedestrian time at the intersection of 77th and Trunk Highway 100, on the west side of the freeway. New timings were sent to MnDOT with a request for change. D8. A resident called to ask about traffic light timings at the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Vernon Avenue, the questions and concerns were forwarded to Hennepin County, which controls the signal. D9. A resident called, concerned about the Southdale Mall exits. In discussion it was found that this exit was not a typical mall exit, but an emergency exit. A quick review of the situation was undertaken to confirm and the exit was clearly not intended for everyday use. The caller was also informed that Southdale is private property and therefore the City of Edina cannot place traffic signs on the property without Southdale's consent. The caller was told that this request was more appropriate for Southdale Mall itself, and not the City of Edina. D.10 Two residents were concerned with sight distances at the corner of Scott Terrace and Morningside Road, due to construction crews in the area. A radar study was performed (for 2 hours and 20 minutes) indicating an 85th percentile speed of approximately 27 miles per hour. Rain likely lowered speeds slightly, thus staff used 30 miles per hour as the design speed of the roadway. This and other sight distance information was then forwarded to the Redevelopment Coordinator. Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 3, 2015 Page 4 of 5 Crosswalk Warrants A. Marked crosswalks are placed at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations not readily apparent as having pedestrian movement. B. Marked crosswalks will only be placed in an area that has 20 or more pedestrian crossings in a two -hour period. C. Marking for crosswalks will be established by measuring the "Vehicle Gap Time ". This is the total number of gaps between vehicular traffic recorded during the average five minute period in the peak hour. Criteria for markings are: a. More than five gaps — pavement marking and signage only. b. Less than five gaps — add actuated pedestrian signals. D. Crosswalks will not be placed on arterial roads or roads with a speed limit greater than 30 mph unless in conjunction with signalization. E. Other conditions that warrant crosswalks: a. Routes to schools b. Locations adjacent to libraries, community centers, and other high use public facilities. c. Locations adjacent to public parks. d. Locations where significant numbers of handicapped persons cross a street. e. Locations where significant numbers of senior citizens cross a street. F. Crosswalks will only be placed at intersections. Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 3, 2015 Page 5 of 5 Traffic Safety Report Wednesday, July 01, 2015 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 01. The Public Works Director, Transportation Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator, and Assistant City Planner were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, these can be included on the July 16 Edina Transportation Commission and the August 18 City Council agenda. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action No Items Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends no action B 1. Request for controlling the intersection of Grove Street and Merold Drive This request was forwarded from residents, by staff on the reconstruction of the Countyside H neighborhood this summer. This intersection was measured for sight- distance, with an uncontrolled intersection requiring 115 feet on each approach for 25 mph design speed (from the AASHTO "Green Book ", A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets), and this intersection was found to not be able to meet those required safe sight- distances. This was due to significant grade changes and small setbacks blocking sight distances. In 2014 Grove Street south of the intersection had an ADT of 363 and an 85th- Percentile speed of 25.5 mph, a count was conducted on Grove Street, east of Map :Grove Street and Merold Drive the intersection which had an ADT of 348 and an 85th- Percentile speed of 20.7 mph. Due to road conditions, Grove Street, east of the intersection was counted close to the intersection and the speeds were likely lower than further from the intersection. Photos : Grove Drive, looking west the intersection, sight distance obstructions are shown here. Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 1 of 7 There have been no reported accidents, correctable by traffic control, in this location in the past 5 years. After review, staff recommends denial of the request. With no history of accidents, it is unlikely that placing a stop sign would increase safety at this intersection. Additionally, the low speeds observed indicate that drivers are slowing as they approach the intersection, likely to gain proper sight distances. B2. Request for alley speed bumps on the block bounded by 55th Street, 54th Street, Xerxes Avenue and York Avenue This request comes from a resident who has concerns that a recent alley paving project increased speeds in the alley, such that it is no longer safe for anything but use by vehicles. A traffic counter was placed in the alley and drivers were found to be in excess of the 10 mph speed limit slightly less than half the time, however, the 85th- percentile speed was 14.5 mph. The policy on alley speed bumps is attached in Appendix A. Another homeowner on the block expressed concern that the speed bumps were a ploy to gain control of the alley. attempt to slow drivers After review, staff does not recommend placing the alley speed bumps. This is based off of low speeds in the alley as it currently exists. A cost estimate has been prepared and has been sent to residents should they wish to circulate a petition. B3. Request for traffic controls and reduced speeds on 64th Street and Wilryan Road This request comes from a resident who is concerned that the intersection of 64th Street and Wilryan Road is dangerous, and that Wilryan Road has too much traffic in excess of the speed limit. A counter was placed and found that Wilryan had an ADT of 676 vehicles per day and 85th- percentile speeds of 29.4 mph. 64th Street was counted last year and has an ADT of 500 vehicles per day. No accidents in the last five years have been reported as related to the intersection. After review, staff recommends denial of this request. The 85th - Percentile of drivers' speeds was below the speed limit, and warrants for controlling the intersection were not met. Discussion of staff also determined that this route was likely receiving higher use than typical due to construction north of the area, but the data collected this year did not meet Map: Wilryan Avenue from W. 66`x' St. to W 64'x' St. warrants, even with the additional vehicle traffic. B4. Request for "Not a Thru Street" sign on Cornelia Drive and Glouchester Road This request comes from a resident who is concerned with the volume of traffic circling the block of Cornelia Drive, Glouchester Road and 72nd Street looking for an access to Interstate 494. A counter was placed at the far southern end of the circular roadway, and it was found that fewer than 100 vehicles per day use the segment, and the 85th percentile speed is 22 mph. There have been no reported accidents due to this condition in the last five years. After review, staff recommends denial of this request. The low speeds and low volumes found indicate that this action of circling the block is infrequent, and likely is due to residents from nearby properties using the segment to access their property. B5. Request for traffic calming on Code Avenue near Windsor Avenue This request comes from a resident who is concerned with vehicle speeds on Code Avenue near Windsor Avenue. A counter was placed in this location, and the 85th- percentile speed was observed as 28.5 mph, and an ADT of 262 vehicles per day was also observed. There have been no reported accidents due to this condition in the last five years. Photo: Southern end of Cornelia /Glouchester Photo: Code Avenue, looking north towards Windsor Map: Code Avenue at Windsor Avenue Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 3 of 7 After review, staff recommends denial of this request, based on 85th- percentile speeds below the speed limit. The area has been referred to the police department for placement of the speed trailer. B6. Request for mitigation of drive -thru queue on Arcadia, from Starbucks This issue was a C item on the November 05, 2014 report, and after further investigation, staff is prepared to make a recommendation on the issue. From the November 05 report; the requestor states that the Starbucks' drive -thru queue consistently is long enough for cars to be stopped on city streets, both Arcadia and Gus Young Lane. The requestor feels that this is an issue because the road is not wide enough for queued cars to be passed on their side of the centerline, and this leads to drivers crossing a double yellow line, violating expectations from drivers. In site visits queues were present in both directions, with both left- turning (northbound) and right- turning (southbound) queues appearing on their respective right hand sides of the roadway. In discussions with property management and Starbucks management, it was made clear that they were aware of the issue and had exhausted all their possibilities in dealing with the situation. Arcadia has 1 186 ADT just north of this location, and Gus Young Lane has 4275 ADT in this location, with 85th- percentile speeds of 20 and 22 mph respectively. Arcadia in this location is 29.5 feet wide. New information from a video study of the site shows that on the two days recorded, the morning rush (from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM) had over 200 left hand turns, which caused most of Map :Queues on Arcadia for Starbucks the issues in the location. While only fifteen times over the two day period did the back -up from the Starbucks cause delays, block, or otherwise impede other traffic. Fourteen of the fifteen issues observed occurred within the hours of 7:30 AM and 9:30 AM, while 107 drivers turned left into the parking lot and drive through during this time. Delays may have lasted a few minutes as drivers waited for a space in the drive -thru line and included delays behind vehicles, as well as delays from the roadway acting as a single lane roadway for a short distance between the two queues out of the parking lot. Map: Queuing along Arcadia After review, staff recommends no action on this item, as even at the highest concentrations of issues, less than ten percent of drivers caused delays to others. Additional reasons for denial include safety concerns being minimal, and inconvenience being seen as the main factor in the requests, as well as the redevelopment planning and Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 4 of 7 transportation study of the Public Works site, Arcadia Avenue may be redesigned in the future to accommodate changing land uses. Section C: Items the Traffic Safety Committee recommends delay, for further study 0C:s[iIT Section D: Other items handled by traffic safet D 1. A resident requested restrictions on truck traffic on Blake Road. The requestor noted that the intersection of Blake Road and Interlachen was congested, that high speeds were present as people are trying to go faster than US Highway 169 on Blake Road, and that a manhole was clanging outside his home. The resident was informed that the City of Edina does not restrict traffic from using roadways, a counter was placed at the location and speed data was forwarded to the police department. In site visits, the manholes did not seem to be moving, this has been forwarded to public works. D2. Residents on Interlachen are doing construction work on their home, and have a retaining wall across most of their frontage with Interlachen. Where they do not have a retaining wall there is a No Parking sign. They requested that the sign be relocated so that work can continue, this was forwarded to the sign shop. D3. A resident was concerned with high speeds on Benton Avenue, as well as the lack of bicycle and pedestrian amenities along the road and the time needed before a reconstruction would be able to address these issues. A counter was placed along Benton Avenue and the speed data has been forwarded to the police department. Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 5 of 7 Appendix A: Edina Alley Speed Bump Policy 1. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) shall be followed. 2. Traffic analysis, engineering, and property use facts and data shall be reviewed when considering on placement of alley speed bumps. 3. The City of Edina will consider the installation or citizen removal of the speed bumps upon receipt of a petition signed by greater than 75% of all adjacent residents /property owners. 4. A minimum of two speed bumps should be used for each alley block. The City of Edina will determine their locations. 5. Speed bumps shall be installed on concrete or bituminous surfaced alleyways only. 6. The affected block is responsible for installation costs. Price per speed bump location will be noted on the petition. These costs must be collected and submitted to staff before installation of the speed bump. The special assessment procedure will not apply to any alley speed bumps requests. 7. The City of Edina will remove the speed bumps by November 1 St and reinstall after April 15th each year. Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 6 of 7 Appendix B: Stop Sign Warrants When it is determined that a full stop is always required on an approach to an intersection a STOP (R1 -1) sign shall be used. At intersections where a full stop is not necessary at all times, consideration should first be given to using less restrictive measures such as YIELD signs. The use of STOP signs on the minor - street approaches should be considered if engineering judgment indicates that a stop is always required because of one or more of the following conditions: A. The vehicular traffic volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles per day; B. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately observe conflicting traffic on the through street or highway. C. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to correction with the installation of a STOP sign have been reported within a 12 -month period, or that five or more such crashes have been reported within a 2 -year period. Such crashes include right -angle collisions involving road users from the minor street failing to yield the right - of -way to traffic on the through street or highway. Additional warrants from the city of Edina list that: 1. If an intersection experiences five (5) or more right angle accidents in a three (3) year period, stop signs should be considered. 2. If the presence of a sight obstruction is contributing to accidents at an intersection, removal of the sight obstruction should be sought before considering a stop sign. 3. If the 85th percentile speed on any leg of an intersection is more than five (5) MPH over the posted speed limit, a stop sign should be considered for the intersecting street. 4. If traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicles per day on each of the intersecting streets, stop signs should be considered. 5. Residential stop signs shall not be installed in an attempt to control speed. 6. Residential stop signs shall not be installed in an attempt to control volume. Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 1, 2015 Page 7 of 7