Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-21 TPC PacketAGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM May 21, 2015 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of April 16, 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. University of Minnesota Capstone Presentation: Neighborhood Traffic Study B. Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy C. Southwest Light Rail Transit Station Access D. Traffic Safety Report of May 6, 2015 E. Updates i. Student Member ii. Bike Edina Working Group iii. Living Streets Working Group iv. Walk Edina Working Group v. Communications Committee VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Agenda / Edina Transportation Commission May 21, 2015 Page 2 VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS 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 May 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Tuesday June 16 City Council and ETC Work Session 5:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday June 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM 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 G: \ PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Tra nsportation Commission \Agendas & RR's \ 2015 Agendas \ 20150416 Agenda.docx MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 16, 2015 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were members Bass, Boettge, lyer, Janovy, LaForce, Loeffelholz, Nelson, Olson, and Spanhake. ABSENT Campbell and Rummel ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Member LaForce nominated chair Bass to continue as chair and the nomination was seconded by member Janovy. All voted aye. Motion carried. Member Janovy nominated member LaForce to continue as vice chair and the nomination was seconded by member Nelson. All voted aye. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The agenda was revised to do roll call first. Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member LaForce to approve the revised meeting agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 19, 2015 Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member LaForce to approve the revised minutes of Mar. 19, 2015. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS Grandview District Update Economic development manager Mr. Bill Neuendorf and consultant Mr. Dave Anderson with Frauenshuh, presented. Mr. Neuendorf said he first presented to the ETC last year and tonight's presentation would be a summary of ideas since the last presentation. He said the same presentation was made to the City Council and Planning Commission, except the ETC's presentation would be more transportation related. Mr. Neuendorf described the location of the Grandview area and the process used to arrive at the diverse ideas that they currently have. He said a presentation was made to the City Council last week and they offered suggestions that are being implemented. He said the ideas are very fluid and have changed several times and will probably continue to change for some time. He said an open house is scheduled for Apr. 22. Mr. Neuendorf said three of the seven guiding principles are transportation related. He explained that even though businesses in the area are close to housing, residents feel the need to drive. He said the outcome of an image survey of older residents and high school students showed that both groups had the same preference. Continuing, Mr. Neuendorf said from their discovery session which was attended by over 100 participants, three scenarios have been developed with four popular themes — 1)Multi-general Community Center; 2)Fitness Wellness Center; 3)Arts and Culture Center; and 4)Performing Arts Center. He said they arrived at the layout that they have by using the donut analogy — putting what they want in the 'sweet spot' and going further out with things like parking next to the train track, plus a new east/west street that would eventually extend over TH100. He said feedback was not to build up to the street and they'll have a woonerf-style street primarily for pedestrians and bikers but it will accommodate cars too. 1 Mr. Anderson explained that they have three conceptual designs for the 3.3 acre site. He said concept #1 would include three components -- residential tower, office, and civic plus restaurant/retail, and park and ride. The site will be accessible at five points (Eden, Arcadia (two areas) and Vernon (two areas). Concept #2 is different in that it adds another housing unit; and in concept #3, the office tower is moved to the north and the residential tower to the south. Discussion Member Janovy mentioned the density at 7200 France and said the Grandview area is denser. Mr. Neuendorf said currently, they are looking at the possibilities and have not looked at density which is generally taken into consideration with a traffic study. He said since the public works building closed traffic was significantly reduced but he is aware that the new development will bring traffic and a traffic study will be done. Member LaForce said he was not concerned with density but is concerned with crossing Vernon at Interlachen Blvd and current congestion and considering adding more cars. He suggested extending the traffic study further out to include this intersection. Member Nelson said he too was not concerned with density and asked about parking by the civic center. Nr. Neuendorf said the civic center was on top of a parking ramp and the current Jerry's Ramp has approximately 200 stalls. Member Janovy asked about parking requirements for residential housing and offices per code. Mr. Anderson said for medical offices it is 5 per 1000; retail is 6-7 per 1000; and residential is based on the product type which could be 11/4 or 1Y2 vehicles per unit. Chair Bass expressed concerns about directing 1,000 cars to drive through the development while at the same time saying it would be pedestrian-friendly. Mr. Neuendorf said it was a challenge to find the right balance. He said they need to have multiple entrances to the site and they also heard from neighbors about traffic on Eden. He said they do not want the entrances hidden similarly to Excelsior and Grand where it is a challenge to find the parking entrances if you are not familiar with the area. Chair Bass said there is a close connection to parking and transit and she did not want to see a heavy focus on parking to the detriment of pedestrian access to transit. She suggested that they think carefully about locating the residential building so that the businesses are easily accessible by pedestrians so that they do not end up driving. Member Janovy asked about trip generation and Mr. Neuendorf said they have not studied this yet. She said shared streets (woonerfs) works well with low traffic volume but accessing 600 parking stalls would not be low volume and asked if he's thought about this. He said this is a balancing act that they are still working through. He said the City has an easement that could be used for a road if necessary but he is hoping that most of the traffic will not go thru the woonerf but instead turn off towards parking. Mr. Anderson added that it will depend on the programming of the civic center—will there be evening performances with 150 residents arriving at that same time or daytime performances? He said it is hard to speculate now but they have options for parking and managing design. Member Janovy asked when a transportation study would be done for this site and the broader area and Mr. Neuendorf said at this time they are only looking at the old public works site. He said the transportation study and the broader study is on his work plan for 2015. He said a traffic study for the 3.3 acre site would probably occur simultaneously with the broader study. Member LaForce asked if there was any possibility the bus garage may move and Mr. Neuendorf said the City has no control over the bus garage but they did briefly look at a design that would include that area but because of the train tracks the options are limited. Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Multimodal Traffic Survey Planner Nolan said back in January the ETC discussed the reconstruction survey and it was also on their work plan. He said staff met with the ETC's communication committee (LaForce/lyer/Janovy) and member Janovy shared sample questions. 2 Staff reviewed the questions and selected some and called the survey Multimodal Traffic Survey that would be mailed two years before a neighborhood is scheduled for reconstruction. And still continue to use the survey that is sent out one year before a project because it is project specific. The Multimodal Traffic Survey would be mailed out by May 1 to the 2016 neighborhood project areas. Discussion Member Spanhake said the questions seemed clear and she liked that the data would be collected two years prior. She suggested adding another option to 0.4 and 0.5. Member Boettge concurred and said the time of day matters too because she feels safe alone but if she is with the children and there are garbage trucks, school buses, etc. she feels differently. Chair Bass asked if residents would be able to select more than one option from 0.4 and suggested finding a way to capture the views of children related to 0.6 because some of them are out on their own. Member Nelson said using satisfied and dissatisfied in 0.2 may not capture accurate data. Member Janovy said in the original draft, there were choices which would make it easier to quantify the data. Member lyer said the survey looked good. He said the key thing he wanted clarified was what they wanted out of the process. He suggested that staff communicate to residents the general process that the City is following and explain how the survey data would be used. He asked if the survey would be taken one per household or multiple per household. Chair Bass added that it is a step in the right direction and it is important that they communicate with residents how the data will be used. Member Janovy asked why the streetlight question was not included and planner Nolan said because the PACS fund is limited, but it is important. Member Janovy asked if it could be included in 0.5. She said there is also insufficient lighting and she considered this a safety issue. It could also be added in 0.9. Member LaForce said if a design feature was added because of input it would be good to note it in future feasibility studies. He asked if it was really necessary to collect so much demographic information. Member Janovy said there are gender difficulties in traveling and also for children and those with physical disability. Member Loeffelholz suggested creating benchmarks to test the data. Chair Bass asked if staff planned to edit the pre-project survey and planner Nolan said it would stay pretty much the same except where it asked about sidewalks and other transportation related questions. Member Janovy said she can see the benefit in keeping the two surveys separate. 2014 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund Summary Report Planner Nolan said the report was put together for Manager Neal and was shared with the ETC as an 'FYI.' In reference to the Cornelia Drive Sidewalk, member Olsen asked if projects were bidding high or low and planner Nolan said they are coming in lower this year. Member Loeffelholz said it made sense to show 10 years prior for comparison and planner Nolan said 2014 was the first reporting year. Member Janovy asked if public works' budget was being adjusted for maintenance and planner Nolan said staff has been having this discussion and will be discussing this with Council in an upcoming work session and the public works director will ask for an increase. 3 Traffic Safety Report of April 1, 2015 B.1. Member Janovy asked about clearing the brushes and planner Nolan said the current clearing schedule is twice annually and public works will increase this to four clearings. B.2. Member Janovy said it wasn't clear what the recommendation was. Planner Nolan said the area meets warrants for a flashing beacon but it would interfere with the crossing guard that is there. He said director Millner spoke with the school district about doing a joint traffic study and they are considering it. The cost would be $60,000 split equally between the school district and the City. Member Spanhake suggested moving this to C.1. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member lyer to forward the April 1, 2015, TSC report to the City Council. All voted aye. Motion carried. Updates Student Members — None. Bike Edina Working Group Member Janovy said Bloomington Public Health has funding for temporary bike parking and they are working out logistics. They are planning a handlebar assessment of bike routes later this month and interested participants can contact her. Living Streets Working Group Planner Nolan said the draft plan was presented to the Planning Commission. He said communications & technology (CTS) is doing the final edits and graphic placement. The plan will be submitted to City Council on Apr. 21 and a public hearing is scheduled for May 6. Feedback will be taken on Speak Up, Edina! Walk Edina Working Group — None. Communications Committee — None. In response to complaints about drivers stopping in the crosswalks on France Avenue, member LaForce wrote an article titled 'Stop Behind the Crosswalks in South Area' and asked for feedback. He said Planner Nolan spoke with communications director Bennerotte and she suggested sending it to Edina Sun Current for publication in the guest advisory column or the City's advisory blog post. Chair Bass said it's an important message but most traveling on France may not live in Edina. Member lyer said he lives in the neighborhood and is at these intersections regularly. He said he's observed that more drivers are stopping behind the marked crosswalks but when they are making a right turn, they do creep into the crosswalk. He asked if the city engineer reviewed the article for accuracy. He feels like things are getting better as time passes and drivers learn the procedures. Member Nelson suggested using a message board for educational outreach. Member Spanhake suggested working with area businesses to put educational signs in their establishment. Planner Nolan said this was a good idea and he's learned recently that CTS is working on an education video. Member lyer said staff seemed to be reactive instead of being proactive. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Bass said an email received from Mr. Johnson echoed much of the discussion above. Mr. Johnson's email talked about his concern with the improvements at the intersection of 66th & France — it is now more difficult for pedestrians to walk from the Colony to Southdale Mall even though the improvements were to make it safer. Because drivers do not stop behind the 4 crosswalk pedestrians often have to leave the crosswalk as they go around cars that are stopped on the crosswalk. Mr. Johnson blamed the ETC for designing such a project. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Regarding handicap or disability parking at Morningside Church, member Janovy said she is confused because the markings are in conflict with City policy and this issue has come up before. She said a clear policy is needed. Regarding the free range parenting story that has been in the news, she said the current guideline is that children 10 years or younger should not be alone due to development. Regarding riding on sidewalks, she said more people will be doing this and she is still concerned that they are not educating the public. She asked that residents inform their lawn services providers to not blow leaves into the streets and set sprinkler heads so they do not spray the sidewalks. Member Nelson said he was intrigued by student member Rummel's comment last months about solar roads and wondered if they would consider a test area at the high school on Valley View Road. He said there are solar companies in the community and there may be grant money available. He said the power generated could probably be used to power streetlights or a flashing beacon. Member Nelson also talked about the amount of traffic on eastbound W 66th in the evenings — he said it is dangerous for pedestrians because there is no sidewalk from Ridgeview to TH-100. Member LaForce said on Valley View Road toward Benton where a sidewalk was added, the sod seem to be dead. He asked if a missing segment of sidewalk, about 30 ft., could be filled in near the Grandview Library and planner Nolan said at the end of the year they look to see how much money is left over so he will add this to the list. Member Spanhake said the on-ramp from Tracy to the TH-62 has potholes. Planner Nolan will pass this on to Mn/DOT. STAFF COMMENTS Construction started in Arden Park D; staff received a $318,000 grant from Mn/DOT for the 54th St. bridge. Other neighborhoods are scheduled to start mid-May or June. Interlachen Blvd Sidewalk — staff is evaluating filling in the sidewalk all the way to Mirror Lakes Dr. Feedback from residents have been positive. A transportation study for the greater Southdale area is in the CIP for 2015 pending the small area plan. The Nine Mile Creek Trail east of Tracy is scheduled for construction starting in Aug.; this summer they will find out if they'll have funding for the western leg. Staff has put together a proposed annual bike rack cost share program; PACS Fund will contribute $10,000 (50% of cost) and participating businesses the other 50%; currently working on how to promote the program and the application process. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. 5 ATTENDANCE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F MA MJJASOND SM SM WS # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 NAME TERM (Enter Date) (Enter Date) (Enter Date) Bass, Katherine 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 4 100% Boettge, Emily 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 4 100% lyer, Surya 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 4 100% LaForce, Tom 3/1/2018 1 1 1 3 75% Loeffelholz, Ralf 1 1 2 100% 4 100% Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 100% Olson, Larry 2/1/2016 1 1 1 3 75% Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 100% Spanhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 100% Rummel, Anna 9/1/2015 1 1 2 50% Campbell, Jack 9/1/2015 1 1 26% 6 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Joseph Totten, Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: May 2 I , 20 I 5 Agenda Item #: VI. A. Action LI Discussion CI Information Subject: University of Minnesota Capstone Presentation: Neighborhood Traffic Study Action Requested: None Information / Background: Members of the Capstone team will present the final project by the 03M-Edina team of graduating seniors from the University of Minnesota. This was completed as part of the Capstone Design class, and investigated traffic and parking concerns within the Creek Knolls, Chowen Park and Strachauer Park neighborhoods. Attachments: Team 03M-Edina, Capstone Design, Final Report G:\ PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Traffic Safety Committee \Staff Review Summaries \ 15 TSAC & Min \ Capstone Cover.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 MAY 7,2015 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THF, CITY OF 1-4DINA DI(MI3J ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 500 PILLSBURY DR SE, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55455 DKMBJ Engineering 500 Pillsbury Dr. SE Minneapolis, MN 55455 May 7th, 2015 Chad Millner Mark Nolan City of Edina Public Works 7450 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 RE: Neighborhood Traffic Study for the City of Edina Dear Mr. Nolan and Mr. Millner: We trust the following report will provide you with baseline information regarding the traffic conditions in Strachauer Park, Chowen Park and Creek Knoll neighborhoods. We believe that these findings will aid you in your presentation of construction plans to the Edina Transportation Commission. The enclosed report contains our findings from a neighborhood traffic study conducted in Strachauer Park, Chowen Park and Creek Knoll neighborhoods of Edina. DKMBJ Engineering performed a parking and traffic analysis of the area and developed a bike route that could eventually be connected to the Edina Promenade. We identified areas where the neighborhood could be improved to become more livable and sustainable as a part of the City of Edina's Living Streets Policy. We would like to thank you for working with us as we conducted this study. Regards, Derek Walden walde118@umn.edu Michael Narow narow006@umn.edu Ben Curti curti278@umn.edu Joe Totten totte011@umn.edu Kyle Donahue dona0282@umn.edu Certification Page By signing below, the team members submit that this report was prepared by them and is their original work to the best of their ability. Derek Walden Project Manager Michael Narow Project Coordinator Ben Curti Project Engineer Joe Totten Project Engineer Kyle Donahue Project Engineer Executive Summary The purpose of this study was to investigate the vehicle and pedestrian traffic as well as the current parking situation in the Strachauer Park, Chowen Park and Creek Knoll neighborhoods in the City of Edina. These neighborhoods were constructed in the 1950's and 1960's and plans for reconstruction of the infrastructure have already begun. DKMBJ Engineering investigated vehicular speeds and the presence of cut-through traffic on 58th Street and 60th Street to determine how frequently vehicles are traveling through these neighborhoods. Secondly, parking utilization was investigated to determine if there were any parking related issues and whether changes needed to be made. Finally, DKMBJ Engineering developed a proposed route to connect the Edina Promenade with Strachauer Park and York Park. As a result of our study, DKMBJ Engineering recommends the following: • No treatment is needed in regards to cut through traffic on 58th Street and 60th Street. • Traffic calming circles should be placed at the intersections of 58th Street and Beard Avenue and 60th Street and Beard Avenue to better control vehicular speeds. • One area should remain unchanged with regard to two-sided street parking: specifically, the south end of Zone 8 (See figures A-3 through A-5). All remaining areas of study would require no special parking accommodations and the City of Edina may proceed with their construction plans. • The bike route should be implemented as shared car and bike lanes. • Connecting the Edina Promenade bike path with a separate bridge spanning TH 62 from Colony Way on the south to Strachauer Park on the north. The route would travel through Strachauer Park, north along Beard Avenue, east on 57th Street, north on Zenith Street until reaching York Park. The path will curve eastbound through York Park connecting to 55th Street. Table of Contents Executive Summary List of Figures Error! Bookmark not defined. List of Tables ii 1.0 Traffic Study Background 1 2.0 Vehicle Traffic Analysis 2 3.0 Vehicle Parking Analysis 7 4.0 Pedestrian and Bike Traffic Analysis 9 5.0 Sustainability 10 6.0 Recommendations 11 7.0 Schedule and Budget 12 8.0 References 13 9.0 Appendix A-1 List of Figures Figure 1-1: Location of Study 1 Figure 2-1.1: 58th Street Traffic Counts 2 Figure 2-2: Example of Traffic Circle 5 Figure 4-1: Example Section of Proposed Bike Lane Road 9 Figure 7-1: Total Planned Cost v. Actual Cost 12 Figure A-1: Existing Conditions A-1 Figure A-2: Weekday Parking Utilization A-2 Figure A-3: Saturday Parking Utilization A-3 Figure A-4: Sunday Parking Utilization A-4 Figure A-5: Proposed Bike Path Location A-5 List of Tables Table 3-1: Parking Utilization A-8 Table A-6: Traffic Count Data from City of Edina A-6 Table A-11: Traffic Data Collected by DKMKT A-11 Table A-12: Resident Requests in the Area Provided by the City of Edina A-12 11 u.pkfrd IffifirEger7—.. t rT. 1.:".9•117nOee.1,esete.enal, 4*- f - te••• s'Nt• ••n ,, 440.44-444... g +Ave'. 41 et. It 1 e ":61VISI P-4P'r Bre•eei. .4 09 4 „ elv.0 411 •1,1 • • t".• le 1.0 Traffic Study Background The City of Edina encompasses 45 neighborhoods, three of which are Strachauer Park, Chowen Park, and Creek Knoll. These neighborhoods are defined by France Avenue to the west, Xerxes Avenue to the east, Minnesota Trunk-Highway (TH) 62 to the south, and 54th Street to the north (see Figure 1-1)(Google Maps 2015). The clients (city staff) note that the City of Edina has recently received a high amount of traffic safety requests from residents in these three neighborhoods when compared to the rest of the City, this can be seen with the area comprising 3.5% of the city's area, but comprising nearly 8% of all traffic safety requests in the past three years. See Table A-12 in the appendix. Residents are concerned with an increased traffic volume, higher vehicle speeds, and pedestrian safety. The majority of these traffic requests are requests for control at currently uncontrolled intersections. The City of Edina has plans to reconstruct many of the neighborhood's roads in the near future and wants to investigate whether their current plans suffice or if changes need to be made based on resident requests. These city plans are based on necessity. The City tries to reconstruct roadways with the highest needs based on specific metrics. Living Streets, which is discussed later in this report, is then applied to these projects. This policy attempts to make the City of Edina a more livable and sustainable community. It includes aspects such as narrowing roadways, traffic calming techniques, and installing sidewalks and bike paths. The City engineering staff has requested help from DKMBJ Engineering to investigate these requests, assess the traffic conditions in these neighborhoods, and make subsequent recommendations based on the team's findings. Figure 1-1: Location of Study DKMBJ Engineering 1 3500 3000 2500 • 2000 -ci • 1500 _o 0 1000 500 2.0 Vehicle Traffic Analysis The three neighborhoods being investigated are bounded by County State Aid Highways (CSAH), Xerxes Avenue to the east and France Avenue to the west. Minnesota Trunk Highway 62 determines the southern border and 54th Street determines the northern border. The City of Edina does not maintain ownership of these roads, and therefore, the aforementioned roads are out of the scope of this analysis. 2.1 Municipal State Aid Streets in the Neighborhoods 58th Street and 60th Street handle the majority of traffic into and out of these neighborhoods, as they run perpendicular and connect to both France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. Both of these streets are designated as collector streets meaning that they are designed for through traffic and higher levels of use. Concerns have arisen from the neighborhood residents about these streets being used at high speeds and for cut through traffic between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. Differences in traffic control on 58th Street at France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue allow us to predict that 58th Street will see higher traffic at France Avenue, where it has a full signal. Traffic volumes should decrease along 58th Street as it nears Xerxes Avenue, where there is a two way stop. The reversal of this pattern should be noticed on 60th Street, as that street has an all way stop condition on Xerxes Avenue, and a one-way stop control at the intersection with France Avenue. DKMBJ Engineering predicted the highest traffic volumes would be at Xerxes Avenue and will decrease as 60th Street approaches France Avenue. 2.1.1 58th Street These predictions were found to be mostly accurate. Analysis of existing traffic counts reveals that 58th Street, while a busy street, is used predominantly to access the neighborhood. Counts are located in Table A-6 in the appendix. Traffic counts from 2010 showed that most traffic using 58th Street accessed the neighborhood from France Avenue, carrying an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 3,245 Vehicles. Traffic volumes diminished as the counts headed east, with 58th Street carrying only 565 vehicles per day at its intersection with Xerxes Avenue (see Figure 2-1.1). 58th Street Traffic Counts 0 Fraice Ewing Drew Chowen Bea-d Abbott Zenith York Xerxes Figure 2-1.1: 58th Street Traffic Counts DKMBJ Engineering 2 The importance of 58th Street as an access point for the whole neighborhood cannot be overstated. Traffic counts on local crossroads of 58th Street indicate that approximately 600 vehicles on each street use 58' Street to access larger volume roads. Six cross streets intersect 58th Street between Xerxes Avenue and France Avenue, and if all these streets carry 600 vehicles to or from 58th Street, then 3,600 vehicles would be using 58th Street to access local residences. The sum of vehicles accessing 58th Street from both France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue is 3,810. The small difference of vehicles entering and exiting the neighborhood and local roadway volumes supports the conclusion that 58th Street is not being overly used as a through street. The measured 85th-percentile speeds on 58th Street are commonly above 30 mph, while the speed limit on this street is 25 mph. This means that speeding in this area is a concern. It should be noted that on crossroads of 58th Street there was an inconsistency in the data. The counts west of Abbot Avenue of 991, York Avenue of 1,333 and Xerxes Avenue of 565 vehicles showed a sharp drop in vehicle traffic from York Avenue to Xerxes Avenue exceeding the usual traffic volumes seen in the neighborhood. This indicates that one of these counts may have a high error, and be unreliable. The exclusion of counts at either York Avenue or Xerxes Avenue would not significantly alter the conclusions of this report, as cut through traffic would still be the minority of traffic, and most vehicles using 58th Street would be accessing the neighborhood from France Avenue. 2.1.2 60th Street 60th Street also connects Xerxes Avenue to France Avenue. Daily traffic counts for 60th Street were taken in April, 2015. These counts can be found in Table A-11 in the appendix. The analysis of this street was performed in a similar manner, but because the data was collected for the purpose of the report, a more detailed analysis was conducted. 60th Street is not considered a major artery for through traffic, but is more so used for distributing vehicles from the local residences to the regional roadway network. During the study, 60th Street had a maximum traffic count of 2,373 Vehicles in a day. The count was highest between York Avenue and Xerxes Avenue, which supports the earlier prediction that 60th Street is used primarily for access at Xerxes Avenue, where the intersection is controlled by an all-way stop. Using a similar method as mentioned before it was determined that up to 60 percent of vehicles use 60th Street to move between Xerxes Avenue and France Avenue, however because the counts were taken more recently, a further analysis showed that this was not the case. This analysis required newer counts to be analyzed by the computer to separate the traffic volumes in each direction. Applying similar measures as before to the directional counts, it was clear that fewer vehicles were using the area for cut-through traffic. Westbound traffic was the most affected by this analysis, as traffic volumes decreased as the counts got further west of the intersection at 60th Street and Xerxes Avenue. The lowest count was just east of France Avenue, and indicated that only 422 vehicles a day were using westbound 60th Street to access France Avenue, which was approximately one-third of the westbound traffic entering the street at Xerxes Avenue. DKMBJ Engineering 3 Eastbound traffic showed a very different pattern, with volumes growing and diminishing as the counts moved away from 60th Street's intersection with Xerxes Avenue. While the maximum count of eastbound vehicles observed was less than 1,300, at least 1388 vehicles used 60th Street to travel eastbound in this conidor. This indicates that when eastbound traffic is viewed separately than westbound traffic, up to 70% of the vehicles could be through traffic. When the eastbound and westbound traffic considered at the same time, the analysis reveals that approximately 50% of all vehicles could possibly be through traffic, having no connection to the neighborhood. An additional analysis was conducted on 60th Street comparing assumed rates of traffic to the observed rates of traffic at the neighborhood entrances. This analysis is similar to the analysis done on 58th Street. Again, it was assumed that 3,600 vehicles should be using 60th Street to get to and from their home. However, 3,875 total vehicles were observed entering or exiting the neighborhood. This indicates that fewer than 300 vehicles are using 60th Street to transverse from Xerxes Avenue to France Avenue. Speeds on 60th Street were below the speed limit of 30 mph at most locations. Only two locations had 85th-percentile speeds which exceeded the 30 mph speed limit of 60th Street. The few locations where the speeds were above the speed limit allows for traffic calming measures to be focused on these intersections and segments. 2.2 Traffic Calming Measures An investigation into traffic calming measures existing in the City of Edina was conducted in two locations. These locations were east of the intersection of Drew Avenue and 54th Street at the northern edge of the study area, and Tracy Avenue at Hawkes Drive. These locations were selected because traffic data was available prior to the implementing the traffic calming measures which could be used for comparison. Traffic counts can be found in Tables A-6 and A- 11 in the appendix. Neighborhood traffic circles are small roundabouts placed in existing intersections (see Figure 2- 2). The size of these circles is small enough that normal circulation is possible without adjusting the existing curbs of an intersection. On 54th Street, at the northern boundary of the neighborhoods being investigated in this study, neighborhood traffic circles were installed in conjunction with the creation of a bicycle boulevard in 2012. Between 2011 and 2015 the 85th- percentile speeds decreased by 3.7 mph. Misuse of this circle by drivers has been observed, with many drivers turning left in front of the circle instead of going all the way around. Because of these issues, a change in the design of the circle before it is implemented elsewhere should be considered. The options for changes include using the similar mini-roundabouts, adding signage, and adding a median before the neighborhood traffic circle to better direct traffic around the central island. DK1\413J Engineering 4 Figure 2-2: Example of Traffic Circle Bike lanes, narrowed lanes, parking bays, lowering the speed limit, and dynamic speed signs (the type which shows your speed and flashes if it is in excess of the posted speed limit) were all included during the reconstruction of Tracy Avenue. These treatments were accompanied by a reduction in the 85th-percenti1e speeds of 3.0 mph. The combinations of all these treatments may have actually made some of them less effective, as the bike lanes prevented the parking bays from narrowing the width of the street available to automobiles. Four-way stop signs are often thought of, incorrectly, as traffic calming. MnDOT states this in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNDOT 2014). Two observations regarding all-way stop control were made in accordance to the traffic analysis conducted. On 58th Street at Beard Avenue, speed data from the blocks immediately east and west of the all- way stop control exhibited 85th-percentile speeds which were greater than the 85th-percentile speeds further from the stop control. In other words, vehicular traffic closer to the stop signs was actually going faster than vehicular traffic further from the stop signs. The segments directly surrounding the intersection of Chowen Avenue and 60th Street, which has an all-way stop control, were not seen to have lower 85th-percenti1e speeds than other points on 60th Street. This further confirms that these treatments do not reduce speeds nearby. 2.3 Vehicle Traffic Analysis Conclusions We have seen that 58th Street is not being used heavily for cut through traffic, with the corridor's minimum count being only one-sixth of the vehicle count on the street at France Avenue. This is again supported by the volumes of cross streets being less than the volumes of vehicles entering and exiting the corridor by only 5%. This indicates that cut through traffic on this corridor is not DK1n413J Engineering 5 a major issue, especially as this street is designated as a Municipal State Aid street and has regional importance. We have also demonstrated that 58th Street acts as an important access point for the residences in this area. On 60th Street the two studies done were in conflict. With one indicating that eastbound traffic might be cutting through the neighborhood in large numbers, but another showing that there was not more traffic using the street than would be assumed if it was merely providing access to the neighborhood. To determine exactly how much traffic was cutting through the neighborhood would require extensive investigation, but it can be seen that less than 50% of all traffic in this corridor could be going the entire distance between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. Speeds in the area are of some concern, and they can be influenced by the design of the streets in the future. The areas where the 85th-percenti1e speeds exceed the speed limit can be called out specifically for more intensive traffic calming measures. DKIVIBJ Engineering 6 3.0 Vehicle Parking Analysis The City of Edina has received numerous complaints about parking throughout the three neighborhoods, specifically in the northeast portion where 55th Street and 56th Street intersect York Avenue and in the south on the streets surrounding Strachauer Park. Residents would like the City to limit parking in these areas. DKMBJ Engineering is investigating current utilization rates and possible forms of parking limitations to address the concerns from residents. 3.1 Vehicle Parking Study DKMBJ Engineering performed a parking study in accordance with Parking Generation 4th edition from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (McCourt 2010). It was done throughout the three neighborhoods from Wednesday, February 11th through Sunday, February 15th. Parking counts were taken on Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Each day consisted of four counts, one in the morning (around 8 AM), one at midday (around 12 PM), one in the evening (around 5 PM), and one at night (around 9 PM). Based on concerns from residents, DKMBJ Engineering defined ten different zones in which to collect parking data, as is seen on Figure A-2. Parked cars were counted separately for north, south, east and west sides of the street. All cars parked on 55th Street in Zone 8 were considered to be on the north side and all cars parked on 56th Street were considered to be on the south side. It should be noted that some of the data collected during the study may not be an accurate representation of the average utilization. There are multiple home reconstruction projects throughout the neighborhood. These reconstruction projects had more cars parked outside during the day than the average home in the area. It can be assumed from the rest of our data that these anomalies will not continue once the construction is completed. The parking capacity of each zone was calculated in order to find the percent of utilization. To determine the capacity of each zone, the gross length of each parking zone was determined using Google Earth. Thirty (30) feet was subtracted from the gross length for controlled intersection and 20 feet was subtracted for uncontrolled intersections. Driveways were also considered, with driveway width and an additional 5 feet on either side of the driveway subtracted from the gross length. The remaining length was then divided by the standard parking stall length of 25 feet. To determine the percent utilization, the number of cars counted in each zone was divided by the total number of stalls in the zone. These percent utilization values can also be seen in Table 3-1. Parking utilization has been mapped for each day and time using the data from Table 3-1. These maps can be seen in Figures A-2 through A-4 in the appendix. DKMBJ Engineering 7 Table 3-1: Parking Utilization Weekday Capacity Percentages Saturday Capacity Percentages Sunday Capacity Percentages Zone Morning Midday Evening Late Morning Midday Evening Late Morning Midday Evening Late 1 N 0.267 0.267 0,067 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I S 9 1 n -2 0 1:•;.2 0 182 0.091 (i 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 N 0 5:;6 0.333 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 S . 0.72_7 0..7A-- 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 8 ' 3 N 0.063 0.063 0.031 0.063 0 0 0 0 0 0.063 0 0 3S NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO PARKING 4 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 It 4 S _ 0.115 0.038 0.038 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.027 0 0 0 0.027 5W 0 0.033 0 0 0 0 0 0.033 0 0.033 0 0 6N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1 6 S 0.039 0 0.060 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1 0 0 6E 0 0.023 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 E 1 0.058 0.094 0.022 0.014 0.014 0.072 0.014 0.014 0 0.058 0.072 0.029 7W 0.123 0.105 0)4 0.105 0.018 0.018 0.053 0.018 0 0.035 0.018 0.018 8 N 0.036 0.036 0 ( 7n ) 0.179 0 0.071 0 , -- - 0.071 0 0 0.071 0 8 S 0.063 0.5 0.438 (1 0.5 L . I- 0.188 I " 1 - 0.313 0 0 0.375 0 0 0 12 3 0 125 0.003 8E 0.063 0.031 0.094 0.063 0 0 8W : 0.063 0.094 0.063 0.063 0 0.25 9.175 0 0 0 0.0023 0,063 9 E 0.050 0.075 0)75 0 175 0 0 0.050 0,1 0 0.050 0.050 0.050 9W i. () 0.087 0,044 0.022 0 0 0.087 0.087 0 0.043 0.087 0.043 ION - Illir- 0 0 0 0 ._ _ 0.105 0 0 Mill 0 0 1.0 S NO NO NO NO NO NO NI) NO NO NO NO NO PARKING <io%SiA 40% - 50% Prr 10% - 20% 50% - 60% 20% - 30% MI 60% - 70% MI 30% - 40% >70% IN 3.2 Vehicle Parking Conclusion There are few discernible issues with parking throughout the neighborhoods. Specifically, Zone 2 on W 55th Street had multiple home reconstructions. These reconstructs were causing the high amount of on street parking usage. It should be expected that when the constructions are complete the need for on street parking will not be needed. Zone 8 is in close proximity to numerous small businesses and a gas station and displays high parking utilization during popular business hours. It should be noted that Zone 6 and the southern end of Zone 7 surround Strachauer Park. This park receives its heaviest traffic during the summer months and therefore the timing of this study may not have accurately reflected the full utilization of the parking surrounding Strachauer Park. DKMBJ Engineering 8 4.0 Pedestrian and Bike Traffic Analysis As a part of the neighborhood traffic study, DKMBJ Engineering was assigned the task of determining the best route for a bike route through the three neighborhoods. The City of Edina did not request a cost analysis for any portion of this task. This route is envisioned to be an extension of the highly utilized Edina Promenade, which currently terminates half of a mile south of TH 62; with a long range plan to connect the three neighborhoods to Minneapolis' Grand Rounds Scenic Byway, which is a mile north along the south side of Lake Harriet. To connect the Promenade to the Strachauer Park neighborhood, Highway 62 must be crossed. The City of Edina has been considering adding a separate pedestrian bridge just to the east of the existing France Avenue Bridge. As an alternative, DKMBJ Engineering proposes adding a pedestrian bridge that connects Colony Way on the south side of TH 62 to Beard Place on the north side. Although both ideas include separate pedestrian bridges, DKMBJ Engineering's proposal includes a necessary change in elevation to get over the highway, whereas the bridge next to France would cross over at the same elevation as the existing bridge. Although more convenient for pedestrians and bike travelers, the elevation change would require more sophisticated infrastructure resulting in an increased overall cost. The proposed route and pedestrian bridge options are shown in Figure A-5. The bike path shown in Figure A-5 would be implemented through a shared car and bike path option. An example of this street layout is shown in Figure 4-1. This example is a current picture of 54th Street on the north side of the three neighborhood area meaning that there is an added benefit of citizen familiarity with this type of implementation. Figure 4-1: Example Section of Proposed Bike Lane Road DKMBJ Engineering 9 5.0 Sustainability Our team has identified a few aspects of our project that will improve sustainability. To begin, the City of Edina has formulated the Living Streets Policy (Living Streets Policy 2013). This policy is being implemented throughout the City and includes efforts to incorporate sustainable living practices. Sustainability can be incorporated into road design in a number of different ways. One of the most basic practices to aid in sustainability is reducing the amount of impervious surfaces throughout a watershed. Impervious surfaces, like asphalt and concrete, cause precipitation that would otherwise drain through the ground, to be funneled into storm water systems, taking with it all of the chemicals and pollutants already on the ground. To minimize this effect, the Living Streets policy includes the idea of reducing road widths to allow for more pervious area. The parking study suggests that this reduction in road widths will not be an issue, especially if some of the new streets only allow one sided parking. Since some rainwater will inevitably collect on the roads, it is important to implement practices for filtering the runoff before it reaches the storm water system. Rain gardens with curb inlets are a simple but elegant way of filtering storm water runoff from the roads. This is why they are included as a part of the Living Streets vision. Not only do they have a practical use in filtering runoff, but they also add an aesthetically pleasing element to the streets in which they are added. One argument against these rain gardens is that the responsibility of keeping them maintained cannot be forced on residents and that they may be too expensive for the City to keep up with. The neighboring City of Bloomington began installing rain gardens in 2008 and has received very positive feedback from residents and visitors alike (Harrison 2014). To address the continuous maintenance of their rain gardens, the City of Bloomington only installed rain gardens where a homeowner voluntarily agreed to keep the area healthy. The City of Maplewood also has a quality rain garden program in which they educate residents on how to create and maintain their own rain gardens (Maplewood Public Works 2006). They also provide cost sharing options through various watershed agencies for anyone who wishes to participate in the program. DKMBJ Engineering 10 6.0 Recommendations DKMBJ Engineering has formulated recommendations regarding parking, and the proposed bike route connection to the Edina Promenade and Minneapolis' Grand Rounds Scenic Byway. The following subsections are DKMBJ Engineering's recommendations based on the analysis. 6.1 Vehicle Parking High parking utilization was found in two areas: 56th street near Xerxes Avenue, and at the St. Peter's Lutheran Church on Fuller St. We recommend no changes to the parking structure in these two areas as they are close to, or at capacity. In the remaining area of study, our findings pointed to no need for special parking considerations. We recommend the City of Edina proceed as planned with their construction incorporating elements of Living Streets. 6.2 Pedestrian/Bike Route The proposed route for the Edina Promenade connection should proceed as follows: begin in Strachauer Park, continue north on Beard Avenue, turn east onto 57th Street, turn north onto Zenith Avenue, continue through York Park, and exit the City of Edina on 55th Street. We also recommend a separate pedestrian bridge over TH 62 that would connect Beard Avenue on the north side to Colony Way on the south. This proposed path can be seen in Figure A-5. This is seen at the better option due to the bridge's ability to take pedestrians out of the busy, France Avenue and TH 62 intersection. However, a further cost analysis comparing the two options should be completed before a final decision is made. 6.3 Traffic Calming High speeds were an issue on both 58th Street and 60th Street. We recommend the inclusion of traffic calming circles at the intersections of 58th Street and Beard Avenue and 60th Street and Beard Avenue. Medians at each approach to the intersection could also be used to better direct traffic and reduce the misuse of the calming circle. 6.4 Sustainability We recommend that the City of Edina implements a rain garden program that draws on ideas from both Bloomington and Maplewood. Prior to installation of any rain gardens, the City should verify with nearby homeowners and other neighbors to ensure that they are willing to maintain the gardens in the future. They should also set up a program to educate residents on how to maintain them and provide them with cost sharing options if necessary. DKIVB3J Engineering 11 7.0 Schedule and Budget DKMBJ Engineering began our traffic study on February 2nd, 2015 by meeting with our mentors. Our study and report was completed, on schedule, on May 7th, 2015. The project team also completed a presentation of our study that was presented on May 5th, 2015. In the beginning of our project, the project team estimated a total cost of $52,800. After the completion of our project, the final cost ended up being $23,420, or $29,380 under budget. A detailed graph of our cost estimates versus the actual project costs can be seen below in Figure 7-1. 50000 *.nW 30000 0 20000 10000 Tot& P tinned Cost --s— Total Actual Col 2 4 6 S 10 12 14 16 Week Figure 7-1: Total Planned Cost v. Actual Cost DKMBJ Engineering 12 8.0 References Google Maps (2015) "Edina, Minnesota Street Map" <https://www.goog1e.cornimaps/place/Edina,+MN/@44.8958335,- 93.3595726,14z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f6213ace55a039:0xcdaf9c3796fa2779> (March 12, 2015) Harrison, Rich (2014). "Green Streets for Blue Waters." <http://www.metroblooms.org/bloomsblog/green-streets-for-blue-waters/> (March 29, 2015). Living Streets Policy (2013) "Living Streets Overview." City of Edina, Minnesota, <http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=LivingStreets> (January 27,2015). Maplewood Public Works (2006). "Rain Gardens on Maplewood Street Reconstruction Projects." City of Maplewood, Minnesota <http://www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/DocumentCenterNiew/246> (April 20, 2015). McCourt, R. S. (2010) "Parking Generation, 4th Ed., Institute of Transportation Engineers." Washington, DC MNDOT (2014) "Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" <http ://www. dot. state.mn.us/trafficeng/publ/mutcd/mnmutcd2014/mnmutcd-2b .pdf (April 29, 2015) DKNIBJ Engineering 13 9.0 Appendix PARKS STRAC HAUER 1"--- PARK ' Figure A-1: Existing Conditions DKMBJ Engineering A-1 Li 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% I 60-70% >70% Figure A-2: Weekday Parking Utilization DKMBJ Engineering A-2 1-.11fr-i Pkie 01-111.T,1 'CHOWEN PARK •r14i. LEGEND I 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% I 60-70% >70% tre Figure A-3: Saturday Parking Utilization DKMBJ Engineering A-3 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% I 130-40% 140-50% 50-60% 160-70% >70% YCCIKVistRK 58th STREET. poill STREET Figure A-4: Sunday Parking Utilization DKMBJ Engineering A-4 Figure A-5: Proposed Bike Path Location DKMBJ Engineering A-5 Table A-6: Traffic Count Data from City of Edina Location Date of Survey M/F ADT M/F 85% Sat. ADT Sat. 85% Sun. ADT Sun. 85% Abbott north of 62nd @ 07/10/13- 6109 07/18/13 112 24.9 82 28.1 93 25.7 06/20/02- Abbott north W6Ost 06/29/02 269 NA 228 NA 182 NA 06/20/02- Abbott south W6Ost 06/29/02 297 NA 276 NA 210 NA 05/14/01- Beard 5700 05/22/01 288 29 231 28.7 187 28 08/17/00- Beard 6121 08/28/00 125 28.5 101 31 93 29.1 Beard Ave N. of W. 58th 05/25/10- St. 06/04/10 286 27.9 164 28.9 154 27.3 Beard Ave S. of W. 58th 05/25/10- St. 06/04/10 349 27 198 28.1 154 26.1 Beard Ave S. of W. 58th 06/13/14- St. 06/23/14 400 29 244 28.8 252 28.5 Beard Ave. N. of W. 08/23/11- 56th St. 09/01/11 111 19.7 96 18.1 97 19.6 Beard Ave. S. of W. 56th 08/23/11- St. 09/01/11 211 28.6 146 25.5 144 27.3 08/17/00- Beard Pl. 6124 08/28/00 127 27.6 115 27.6 110 28.1 Chowen Ave N. of W. 05/25/10- 58th Street 06/04/10 290 25.7 204 27.8 178 27.8 Chowen Ave N. of W. 05/21/12- 58th Street 05/29/12 265 28.1 168 27.2 113 26.5 Chowen Ave S. of W 05/25/10- 58th Street 06/04/10 313 29.5 227 28.1 184 28.4 Chowen Ave S. of W 05/21/12- 58th Street 05/29/12 235 29 163 27.6 114 27.7 Chowen Ave S. of W 10/01/12- 58th Street 10/05/12 241 29.1 NA NA NA NA 04/10/01- Ewing 6104 04/17/01 311 31.8 329 31.9 258 30.9 09/04/02- Ewing at 5901 09/12/02 297 30.3 248 31.2 194 30.7 08/14/13- Ewing at 6105 08/21/13 334 28.5 362 28.4 265 28.9 Ewing, South of Chowen 06/13/14- Curve 06/23/14 331.6 28.1 385 27.6 292 27.4 DKMBJ Engineering A-6 W 55th St. east of Drew Ave. 03/27/12- 04/13/12 196 24.4 182 24.5 130 25.3 W 57th St, West of 06/13/14- Zenith 06/23/14 226.3 25 205 24.5 172 23.2 W. 57th St west of Drew 05/29/12- Ave @ 3612 06/06/12 898 27 952 27.3 891 26.1 W54th St. East of Drew 10/18/11- Ave. @ 3605 10/26/11 801 30.1 629 29.8 536 28.9 10/22/98- W56st east of Zenith 10/30/98 2580 37.2 NA NA NA 07/19/03- W56st east of Zenith 07/29/03 2623 36.5 1774 37 1595 36.6 W56th st east of York 04/09/12- Ave 04/20/12 986 25.5 1061 24.8 810 24.2 W56th St. west of York 04/09/12- Ave 04/20/12 699 20.3 758 19.8 588 19.6 W58st east of France MSA 1975 2544 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1977 1540 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1979 2336 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1981 1926 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1983 1489 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1985 1851 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1987 1935 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1989 2378 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1991 1310 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1993 2288 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1995 2383 NA NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 1997 2616 NA NA NA NA NA 06/11/01- W58st east of France 06/14/01 2408 26 NA NA NA NA W58st east of France MSA 2005 3245 33.3 NA NA NA NA 05/25/10- W58st west of Abbott 06/04/10 991 31.3 487 30.6 535 30.2 W58st west of Chowen MSA 1975 1575 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Chowen MSA 2005 3245 33.4 NA NA NA NA W58st west of Chowen MSA 2009 1983 30.1 NA NA NA NA 05/25/10- W58st west of Chowen 06/04/10 1873 30.1 942 30 881 29.5 W58st west of Chowen- 10/05/09- RECOUNT 10/08/09 1872 30.4 NA NA NA NA 05/25/10- W58st west of Drew 06/04/10 2109 32 1116 31.7 1023 31.4 DKMBJ Engineering A-7 W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1975 1015 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1977 1917 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1979 1860 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1981 1158 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1983 873 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1985 1310 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1987 1074 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1989 988 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1991 1086 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1993 1070 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1995 1096 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1997 1422 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes 05/19/04- 05/25/04 565 31.1 552 31.7 335 30.6 W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1975 1015 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1977 1917 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1979 1860 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1981 1158 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1983 873 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1985 1310 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1987 1074 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1989 988 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1991 1086 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1993 1070 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1995 1096 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes MSA 1997 1422 NA NA NA NA NA W58st west of Xerxes 05/19/04- 05/25/04 565 31.1 552 31.7 335 30.6 W58st west of York 05/26/10- 06/04/10 1333 30.4 751 28.9 670 27.8 W58st west of York 05/26/10- 06/04/10 1333 30.4 751 28.9 670 27.8 W58th St east of Chowen Ave 05/29/12- 06/06/12 2075 29.4 1582 29.1 1282 28.7 W59st east of Beard 10/09/08- 10/17/08 109 23.6 89 22.3 69 22.8 W59st east of Beard 10/09/08- 10/17/08 109 23.6 89 22.3 69 22.8 W6Ost east Abbott MSA 1977 3351 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of Ewing Avenue 05/13/13- 05/20/13 2569 32.9 1611 32.2 1338 32.2 DKMBJ Engineering A-8 W6Ost east of France MSA 1975 4780 NA NA NA NA NA W60st east of France MSA 1979 4551 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1981 2640 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1983 3032 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1985 2433 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1987 3043 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1989 2724 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1991 2669 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1993 2291 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1995 2448 NA NA NA NA NA W6Ost east of France MSA 1997 2825 NA NA NA NA NA 06/11/01- W6Ost east of France 06/14/01 3153 25.9 NA NA NA NA 06/20/02- W6Ost east of France 06/29/02 2874 35.3 2188 34.7 1825 34.6 10/19/10- W6Ost east of France 10/28/10 1910 26.8 1442 26.4 1309 26.1 W6Ost west Abbott MSA 1979 4551 NA NA NA NA NA 06/11/01- W6Ost west Abbott 06/14/01 3153 25.9 NA NA NA NA 10/27/13- Xerxes Ave @ 54th St. 11/02/13 11772 34.8 NA NA NA NA Xerxes Ave N. of 61st @ 07/23/12- 6040 07/30/12 14590 34.6 13766 34.3 12236 34.5 Xerxes Ave S. of 58th St. 05/13/13- @ 5827 05/20/13 14327 34.4 13565 34.5 11761 34.4 11/08/12- Xerxes Ave S. of 60th St. 11/16/12 13260 34.4 13698 33.4 11889 33.6 York Ave North of 56th 04/12/12- st W 04/20/12 162 24.9 142 25.2 114 25 York Ave North of 56th 04/12/12- st W 04/20/12 162 24.9 142 25.2 114 25 York Ave north of 62nd 07/10/13- ST @ 6029 07/18/13 217 27.2 194 26 186 27.6 York Ave north of 62nd 07/10/13- ST @ 6029 07/18/13 217 27.2 194 26 186 27.6 York Ave South of 56th 04/09/12- st W 04/20/12 275 27.9 242 27.3 199 24.9 York Ave South of 56th 04/09/12- st W 04/20/12 275 27.9 242 27.3 199 24.9 Zenith north of 62nd ST 07/10/13- @ 6016 07/18/13 204 28 151 27.9 171 28.1 DKMBJ Engineering A-9 6/13/2014- Zenith south of 57th 6/23/2014 168.7 24.5 158 24.8 121 23.5 DKMBJ Engineering A-10 Table A-11: Traffic Data Collected by DKMBJ Location M-F ADT M-F 85th % WB M- F ADT EB M- F ADT 60th Street, east of York 2373 29 1237 1135 60th Street, east of Zenith 2317 33.1 1025 1291 60th Street, east of Beard 1952 31.5 862 1090 60th Street, east of Chowen 1846 30 862 983 60th Street, east of Drew 1770 29.7 780 989 60th Street, east of France 1502 26.4 422 1080 54th Street, east of Drew 1006 26.4 NA NA DKMBJ Engineering A-11 Table A-12: Resident Requests in the Area Provided by the City of Edina Year LOCATION REQUEST / ISSUES 2015 Xerxes and 60th St Daughter is disabled, getting to handicapped bus/ vehicles are difficult if not aligned with walk. Parked vehicles in the area needed for the school bus prevents daughter from attending school. Wants handicapped parking to assure access 2014 57th St and Beard Ave Request to either switch the road the 2-way stop is located on, or install an All-Way stop at the intersection 2014 57th and Zenith The intersection is uncontrolled, which is "profoundly unsafe" 2014 Beard and Ewing, close to the park Concerns about speeders (soccer specific) 2014 54th Street Bike Blvd People are unfamiliar with the neighborhood traffic circles we installed. Some sort of explaining to people that they have to yield to the left. 2013 Drew Ave & Fuller St Request for stop signs at the intersection 2013 54th Street and Xerxes Request for crosswalks 2013 58th and Zenith Request for parking restrictions in the area 2013 60th Street W & Ewing Ave s Request for speed counts in the area 2013 Xerxes near 5800 Request for speed counts in the area 2013 55th and Xerxes Request for a crosswalk in the area 2012 56th ST W and York Ave Request for an All Way Stop sign 2012 Xerxes and 60th St W Request for a "Disabled Child" sign 2012 Chowen and 58th Request for an All Way Stop sign 2012 62nd and France Request for traffic calming in the area 2012 5410 York Ave Request for "No Parking" signs for the alley 2012 57th and Chowen Request for speed counts to be done in the area 2012 55th and Xerxes Ave Request for crosswalk across Xerxes 2012 60th and Xerxes Request for speed counts to be done in the area 2011 55th St. & Xerxes Ave Request for Ped. X-walk. 2011 N.W. Corner of 60th St. & Ewing Ave Stop sign is "beat up, rusty and nasty." 2011 56th and Beard Ave. Request for a stop sign on Beard Ave. DKMBJ Engineering A-12 2011 55th W near France Request for speed bumps 2011 W. 56th St. west of Xerxes Ave Cars are parking on both sides of the street making it very narrow. 2011 4515 W. 56th Street Wants to retricts parking on Sundays from 0700-1300 on the south side of W. 56th Street. 2011 W. 56th Street, Xerxes Ave to York Ave Wants residential parking permits so only residents can park here. 2011 Drew Ave & Fuller Street Requesting stop signs at this uncontrolled intersection 2011 Xerxes Ave at W. 64th Street Request for Ped. X-walk at this location 2011 W. Fuller Street & Drew Ave Concerns with traffic. 2010 W. 58th St. & Chowen Ave Request to make the 2-way stop into an all-way stop. 2010 W. 59th Street & Beard Ave Request for a stop sign 2010 W. 56th Street Beard to Zenith Ave Concerns with speed of traffic. 2010 56th St. & Xerxes Ave Request for a pedestrian X-walk crossing Xerxes Ave. DKMBJ Engineering A-13 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: May 21, 2015 Subject: Proposed Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy Agenda Item #: VI. B. Action El Discussion Information El Action Requested: Review and comment on the attached Proposed Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy. Information / Background: Language adopted in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) requires all agencies that maintain roadways open to public travel to adopt a sign maintenance program designed to maintain traffic sign retroreflectivity at or above specific levels. The City of Edina is required to comply with these new MN MUTCD requirements. Implementation of these requirements began on June 13, 2014; up until this time. Traffic signs have always been required to be retroreflective; however, no maximum values had previously been required. A staff team made up of the Directors of Engineering and Public Works, the transportation planner, traffic safety specialist and traffic safety coordinator met several times throughout the past few months. This team recommends the following policy for evaluating the reflectivity, installation and maintenance/replacement of traffic signs in City right-of-way. City of Edina: Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy I. Purpose and Goal The goal of this policy is to improve public safety on the City's streets and prioritize the City's limited resources to install, maintain, and replace traffic signs within the City's right-of-way. The purpose of this policy includes: A. To establish uniform installation and maintenance of traffic signs installed on City right- of-way. B. To comply with Federal and State requirements. City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. ° Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 C. To recognize the Traffic Safety Committee as the authority to approve of traffic sign installation or removal as covered by this policy. This policy recognizes the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) as the standard for all traffic control devices on public roads in the state of Minnesota. All traffic signs/devices installed on City right-of-way shall conform to the MN MUTCD. Traffic signs not required by the MN MUTCD shall not be installed unless otherwise authorized by the Traffic Safety Committee (see below). II. Sign Inventory The City of Edina maintains a sign inventory using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software. This inventory includes the sign type (e.g. regulatory, warning, etc.), location, year installed (if known) and sheeting material type. III. Sign Installation and Removal Because traffic signs must be compliant with legal and technical criteria, and in order to enhance customer service through more timely responses to public inquiries regarding needs for traffic control, the City Council delegates authority for the installation, modification, and/or removal of traffic signs covered by this policy to the Director of Public Works. This delegation is subject to the following conditions: A. Expenditures for the installation, modification, and/or removal of traffic signs must be within budgetary appropriations approved by the City Council. B. The City Council may, at its discretion, direct staff to bring certain proposals to install, modify, or remove a traffic signs before the City Council for consideration subsequent to the development of a recommendation provided by the Traffic Safety Committee. C. Staff will provide, on a regular basis (e.g. monthly), a report to the City Council summarizing public requests that have been processed by the Traffic Safety Committee. Various studies have found that excess road signage reduces the effectiveness of traffic control devices resulting in reduced safety, and imposes an unnecessary financial burden on road authorities. Therefore, the City's policy is to consider removal of signs which are not required to comply with an applicable Federal or State regulation or statute and which have been determined to be unnecessary for safety purposes. The removal of excess signage shall be based on an engineering study or judgment and will be reviewed by the Traffic Safety Committee, the findings of which will be included in a Traffic Safety Report. Studies have also found that various non-standard, non-regulatory signs (e.g. Children At Play) are ineffective. Therefore, non-standard signs, defined as any sign not included in the MN MUTCD, will not be installed within the City, and may be removed at any time, without review through the above- described process. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 IV. Sign Maintenance and Replacement In order to comply with retroreflectivity requirements, the City will use a combination of Visual Assessment and Expected Sign Life Management Methods and replace traffic signs as follows: A. Visual Assessment Method will be used for traffic signs with an unknown installation year (generally before 1998). One or both of the following procedures will be used as authorized by the Director of Engineering or the Director of Public Works. I. Comparison Panels Procedure: If a marginal sign is found during a nighttime field review, a comparison panel (which represents retroreflectivity levels above the specified minimums) is attached and the sign/panel is viewed. The signs found to be less bright than the panel would then be scheduled for replacement. 2. Consistent Parameters Procedure: Nighttime inspections would be conducted under similar factors that were used in the research to develop the minimum retroreflectivity levels. These factors include: using a pick-up truck or sport utility vehicle of a model year 2000 or newer, with an inspector who is at least 60 years old with 20/40 normal or corrected vision and 105 degrees of peripheral vision. 3. The Expected Sign Life Management Method will be used for traffic signs with a known installation year. Signs will be scheduled to be replaced according to the expected life of the sign reflective sheeting (according to current research). Signs may be replaced prior to the expiration date due to damage, vandalism, knock downs or other necessary reasons (see Damaged Sign Replacement below). Replacement will be scheduled as follows: 4. Sheeting Material Types 1 (Engineer Grade) and III (High Intensity) a) South-facing signs: Replace after 12 years b) East and west-facing signs: Replace after 16 years c) North-facing signs: Replace after 20 years 5. Sheeting Material Types IV (High Intensity Prismatic) and VI (Diamond) a) South-facing signs: Replace after I 5 years b) East and west-facing signs: Replace after 23 years c) North-facing signs: Replace after 30 years Priority shall be given to regulatory and warning signs on roads with higher vehicle usage and signs that serve a direct and essential safety function. Damaged, stolen, or missing signs (of any type) will be replaced according to this policy (see Damaged Sign Replacement below). REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4 V. Damaged Sign Replacement Damaged, stolen or missing signs will be replaced according to the following once reported to the Public Works Department: A. High Priority (STOP) within one business day B. Intermediate Priority (Regulatory, Warning and Guide signs required by MnMUTCD) within two business days C. Low Priority (all others) within five business days VI. Modification and Deviation from Policy The City reserves the right to modify this policy at any time if deemed to be in the best interest of the City based on safety, economic, social and political considerations. The Director of Engineering and/or Public Works Director, or his/her designee, may authorize a deviation from the implementation of this policy with respect to a particular traffic sign when deemed to be in the best interest of the City based on safety, economic, social and political considerations. Such deviation shall be documented and include information supporting the deviation. Attachments: Current Traffic Sign Inventory Summary Estimated Costs for Traffic Sign Assessment and Replacement G:\ PW \CENTRAL SVCS\ TRANSPORTATION DIV \ Transportation Commission\ Agendas & RR's\ 2015 R&R\ 20150521 \Item VI. B. Traffic Sign Installation.docx City of Edina: Current Traffic Sign Inventory Summary As of Jan. 12, 2015 Total Signs: 8,820 Total Regulatory, Warning & Guide Signs: 7,828 • Regulatory: 4,529 (1,087 stop signs) * Warning: 1,007 • Guide: 2,292 (2,278 Street "blade" signs) Sheeting Material: • I. Engineer Grade: 3,242 (41%) 12-20 year life expectancy • III. High Intensity: 1,027 (13%) 12-20 year life expectancy • IV. High Intensity Prismatic: 2,510 (32%) 15-30 year life expectancy * VI. Diamond: 1,055 (13%) 15-30 year life expectancy • Unknown: 7 (1%) Year of Installation: • Known: 4,510 (58%) • Unknown: 3,318 (42%) 19.4yr = 8 • Approximate number of applicable signs in the city = 7,800 12yr + 16yr + 16yr + 20yr + 15yr + 23yr + 23yr + 30yr Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Policy: Estimated Costs Visual Assessment Method Staff estimates that the cost to visually inspect the 3,318 traffic signs with an unknown installation date will be approximately $7,500 in wages (these costs can be divided over a number of years). • Average hourly rate for part-time public works staff = $40 ($25/hour for senior-aged staff + $ I4/hour for younger staff) • Estimated number of signs to inspect per hour = 20 (obtained from MnDOT) • Estimated number of total hours needed to assess signs = 190 (assuming assessing 7 hours per day with one hour per day for start/end of day tasks) • Note: these figures represent labor costs for the visual assessments themselves and do not include necessary training costs). Traffic Sign Replacement Staff estimates that the cost of replacing the traffic signs in the City of Edina according to the proposed polity will be approximately $22,000 per year. This figure accounts for the average cost of the sign materials, the average compensation of sign shop members, the average lifespan of signs, and the time it takes to install a sign on a pre-existing pole. This calculation does not account for signs which are knocked over or damaged before their replacement date. • Estimated average time to replace a sign on a pre-existing pole = 10 minutes • Average compensation of sign shop employees = $44 per hour • Average lifespan of signs = 19.4 years The calculation below is based on the expected sign life as indicated in the proposed policy. This calculation assumes that half of the existing signs are Types land III, and the other half are Types IV and VI, and that signs face all four cardinal directions in equal proportions. • Estimated range of costs for sign materials = $20-$60 (for the calculation, $40 was used) • Cost of single sign replacement: $88 (2 employees per hour) $40 sign materials + = $54.67 per sign 6 (signs per hour) Page 1 of 2 • Total cost of sign replacement (for one sign life cycle) $54.67 per sign* 7,800 signs = $426,400 • Estimated annual cost of sign replacement = $21,979.38 per year 19.4 years $422,400 Page 2 of 2 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: May 21, 2015 Subject: Southwest Light Rail Transit Access Action Requested: None. Agenda Item #: VI. C. Action El Discussion Information 111 Information / Background: Please recall that the ETC's 2015 Annual Work Plan includes a new initiative to "study access to and from Southwest LRT stations in St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Eden Prairie." The Southwest LRT line will serve as an extension of the current Green Line and will run from downtown Minneapolis to Eden Prairie. While the line was scheduled to open in late 2019, recently it was discovered that poor soils and project delays will delay opening until 2020. Seventeen (17) stations are planned along the route. None of these stations are located in Edina; however, several stations are located in neighboring cities within one or two miles from Edina's municipal boundary. Based on a very preliminary analysis, staff believes that studying the access to and from the following stations would most benefit this current effort: • Beltline Station, St. Louis Park (I.1-mile walk from city border) • Wooddale Station, St. Louis Park (I.3-mile walk from city border) • Blake Road Station, Hopkins (0.6-mile walk from city border) • Downtown Hopkins Station, Hopkins (0.5 -mile walk from city border) • Opus Station, Minnetonka (0.7 -mile walk from city border) • Golden Triangle Station, Eden Prairie (0.8 —mile walk from city border) For commissioners' information and discussion, attached is a map indicating the alignment of the Southwest LRT line and stations near the City of Edina borders. Additionally, station location maps are also included, as well as summary introduction pages for each of the six stations, taken from the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework. City of Edina ° 4801 W. 50th St. ° Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 It is anticipated that this discussion may be the first of several regarding this topic, and may indeed serve as an introduction to the issues regarding connections to Southwest LRT stations. Commissioners may choose to recommend next steps and to guide how this item is continued in future ETC meetings. For further information, please visit the following websites: • Southwest LRT Community Works — http://www.swIrtcommunityworks.org/ • Southwest Light Rail Transit (Metropolitan Council) — http://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Southwest-LRT.aspx Attachments: Southwest LRT Alignment Map Southwest LRT Station Location Maps Introduction Pages for the above-listed stations, taken from the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework G:\ PW \CENTRAL SVCS \TRANSPORTATION DIV \Transportation Commission\ Agendas & RR's\ 2015 R&R \ 20150521 \Item VI. C. Southwest Light Rail Transit Station Access.docx Beltline Station 11:1i Wooddale Station Ceko ewesi 1r4 7 t, fAtIl•t W It AN**1 1 stp, Downtown -Hopkins Station/ Hopkins Golden Triangle Station 4 km May 12, 2015 - • Tj &Minns 1:72,224 a 0.f, 1 2 mi I ' ' I ' • 1 2 Blake Road Station stotana tr. Opus fj Station n 9.r 4, c, JI t -67 kV • ' *41 Ilyts111 I• It. II .0 • 4,0 • ir; • 1 V ce % 1 Vallov 11'41-1 •mol Iii In torl,)4110r1 Sivj 5 - mu iz w 11. t,1111 1 .',1 isi E.. 46 ti r a a 1,1n 1!, 1.1 1-!n • '414 f 1 1.. 1 iiI, 11,. 8 1 ,4e R d S vi 1.011, Vi ft,t11 si *t V4 494 E viman glvd W " No% SWLRT Alignment_060414 50-11:SE 4ErtE r.c.or-re. ESsS nerrep. rcre•rei F Cm. Fen tET, Fen Cntie (1-tn2 Kork3;.. Er! Tiegvr,c;, ttp7nylree Creen'ep cco:M.res, Flo re SS Ltei Coln:Int; :1-eirepri.ccurtirct:s OX ICH d t , GOO(ItICIV Ate tr ttt c r 1i t Wo 1%)110 0 Path rot ln C.1011)ti4ttio !it in t ;06 \)% 119 ; (1) > 4) II) Mor 11111100de Rd 1 0 4 Ot ts w . a e S M0111111 ir Ir. H. I I I . I • .;Cakiporitin 11,uk• C • cit *2-5 " Beltline Stati tN) Station's , 31111 W• W Ra Ie 4 g h - A v e S % tit 4 1 t. 1 stW CW a r a de k i e 4 bv16 (17 4 0 Ontl St 1:18,056 0 0.15 0.3 0 0,25 ao Scums: BM. I-ERE CeLOtrill, LSC-S, rterrap, lioremorrl P Corp. NRCAN, Esti ,Jagan VETI, Estl CiIi i-g Kong), ESA crhattaict) "roliTO•n, MipOilr04,0 OpelSIteCtoill OntnOLOOrt 410 Int G4 141r COnrhuntri May 12, 2015 jStations SWLRT Alignme nt_060414 0.0 mi km rteetroop0.0.1ep RIDS El AMENITIES+ DESTINATIONS: NORDICWARE BELT LINE BUSINESS PARK ST LOUIS PARK CITY OFFICES NICOLLET MELROSE INSTITUTE FIGURE 7-1. BELT LINE STATION AREA - LOCATOR MAP ci El 11 CARPENTER PARK BASS LAKE PRESERVE ST LOUIS PARK REC CENTER f NMI BlETONKA BLVD !,1 , b., • up co" I El • BELT LINE..,-;...zrs.:- STATJpg.:- 00.0° El .HIG hlW A Y.10 0 , It0 Li ci 15365K Sri 01126X+ NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION I= PARKS & OPEN SPACE MI SPORTS FACILITY 1-1 EDUCATION INSTITUTION MI PLACE OF WORSHIP (1) HISTORIC PROPERTY = HEALTH! WELLNESS FACILITY I—I SENIOR/ELDER CARE FACILITY =I RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATION 111= PROPOSED SOUTHWEST LRT LINE EXISTING RAIL LINE Liii 10-MINUTE WALKSHED 0 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS NOTE: 10-minute walkshed approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute ts alk from the station platform using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walks hed assumptions and methodology. Station Location The Belt Line station is envisioned as one of the major hubs along the SW LRT line. It is located along Belt Line Boulevard, an important employment area and north-south connection in St. Louis Park. It is also located along the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, an important multi-use regional trail, connecting commuters and recreational users to Minneapolis (east) and Hopkins (west). The area is comprised of a mix of land uses, including office, light industrial, residential, commercial/retail, multi- family housing, civic, recreational, parks and open space. Nearby destinations include the St. Louis Park Rec Center, City Hall, Excelsior & Grand, Nordic Ware campus, Park Nicollet Melrose Institute, Wolfe Park, and Bass Lake Preserve. Numerous businesses are located near the transit station and these are expected to generate transit ridership. This station is also expected to serve residents of local neighborhoods, including Wolfe Park, Triangle, and Minikahda Oaks. • • D U C T / BELT LINE STATION AREA TODAY: Highway 25 access via Belt Line Blvd Existing office south of LRT alignment Existing housing Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail/Belt Line Existing industrial building (Nordic Ware) Boulevard crossing SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 7-3 FIGURE 8-1. WOODDALE STATION AREA - LOCATOR MAP F•OX ORD ST I ;i • :4‘ • .1%./ CAMBRIDGE Si', LOUISIANA"NORTAI , --.\LOUISIKNA;SOUTH CfriES DESTINATIONS. c.S2-404 PARK HIGH SCH OL AtISPIANISH IMMERIIIOIN SCHOOL HOIGAA VILLAGE El EI T ET II 0,ERL El !.! I L-1 A _ .4; .1% / • 1 E A STi;%',.- WEST41' !n :--- El r' El El ft / ..."•••• • W 36TTI ST °60-1 n ist El F-1 RETAIL/EIVTERTAINMENT DESTINATION • PROPOSED SOUTHWESTLRT LINE EXISTING RAIL LINE JO-MINUTE WALKSHED 0 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS Eli NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION ET EDUCATION INSTITUTION El HEALTH/WELLNESS FACILITY HISTORIC PROPERTY 1= PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLACE OF WORSHIP Ei SENIOR/ELDER CARE FACILITY "PARK NICOLLET CLINIC BURLINGTON COAT FACTORA MIFROALER 103,.DY Ank Park Spanish Immersion School/ Community Center Adjacent highway access St. Louis Park High School ft ff i tz Ol d W a NOTE: 10-minute walks hed approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute via& from the station plalforn using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walks/Led assumptions and methodology. WOODDALE STATION AREA TODAY: Existing condominiums/apartments Existing rail and trail corridor Station Location Only one of the Wooddale station locations shown here (Wooddale West) is in the SW LRT anticipated base project scope. Wooddale East is an alternate concept location and is not in the anticipated base project scope. In both location alternatives, the station platform is located south of the existing freight rail corridor, between Wooddale and Xenwood Avenues. Both locations are in the Elmwood neighborhood between Highway 7 to the north and W. 36th Street to the south. The station area features a mix of land uses, including residential, office, industrial, retail, and civic/institutional uses. Major destinations in the area include St. Louis Park High School, Park Spanish Immersion School, Target, Park Nicollet Clinic, Burlington Coat Factory, Micro Center, and Byerlys. The Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail runs adjacent to the proposed LRT corridor within the station area. The area has seen a great deal of redevelopment activity in recent years, with new mixed-use and medium- to high-density residential buildings being developed near the proposed station locations, including Hoigaard Village and TowerLight, a senior rental community. Over 1,000 housing units have been developed in the station area in recent years. The station is anticipated to serve primarily the residents of the Sorenson and Elmwood neighborhoods. SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 8-3 Excelsior II" pret:trin Ln Z V > ‘t c Z uttivd v :-. t." 1:1 il 4 a n > 1-• 2nd St NE 1 7 ake Road - Station P A c al r o e A v c Pali; Powell Rd /3 re Boyce Stx 3 73 a r Goodrich St 4 1st StS Mc a dv . v br o a k Rd 3W th O U C R d -isp1;tr.s Oa kw o o d Rd H CC ifF1,,flic 1.0,0 ountly Cita, 4 Mtermar, Ave Anted achen Blvd N tit hW0od _ St a ke R d S 3 br octr ,Cet Beiniore Lu c (1) cn o Allan 3 !! u ac Path > > 4 4 4 ci d 8 Delmore Ln F o L I VI • i < 'EL 111 a . —1 Money 'Ave 6 Van Valhenhaeg 't4N 0:4A* Va n May 12, 2015 j Stations z---, SWLRT_Alignment_060414 1:18,056 o 0.15 0.3 0.0 mi — t-- 4 1 Al 49 I I 0 0,2$ 0.$ I km RuF)?s. Esn. MIRE, cil_orre, LSS,rtecrap, horement P Corp_ Esn Japal LEM Estl Citi] 0.431g Koro EUI (1?1314114) TorriTo'n, Miptrylvo, OpelStrefikq, conit^ivott. alOtr* GS Ut4f CrirAturIty reirepn w inas ,50 FIGURE 10-1. BLAKE STATION AREA - LOCATOR MAP I rro 11 LI CARGILL OFFICE CAMPUS - EXCELSIOR CROSSING'S El COLD STORAGE SITE (OWNED BY MCWD) ,41.HOOPS BASKETBALL ACADEMY-- 13 OAKES PARK icy kV SOX 'LARESI NE Sa. El BLAKE;Al SAVO N t, EXCELSIOR RLS 4' 3 LI AMENITIES +DESIIIN1101iJS: THE BLAKE tCHC;1011. EI COTTAGEVILLE PARK 13 SPRUCE RD Eli NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION I-1 PARKS & OPEN SPACE I I EDUCATION INSTITUTION F1 RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATION Mi PLACE OF WORSHIP • - • MINNEHAHA CREEK •= PROPOSED SOUTHWESTIRT LINE EXISTING RAIL LINE 10-MINUTE WALKSHED O 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS NOTE: 10-minute walkshed approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute walk from the station platform using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walkshed assumptions and methodology. Station Location The Blake station is located along Blake Road, just north of Excelsior Boulevard. The mix of land uses nearby includes retail/commercial, light industrial, office, residential, institutional, parks and open spaces. Local destinations in the station area include The Blake School, Excelsior Crossings office campus (Cargill), retail businesses along Excelsior Boulevard, Minnehaha Creek, and Cottageville Park. The Blake station is anticipated to serve these destinations as well as the residents in the Parkside, Presidents North and South, Minnehaha Oaks, Cottageville, and Interlachen neighborhoods, including many nearby apartment buildings. The City has identified several potential development sites in the area, including a Hennepin County-owned property northwest of the station which houses 43 Hoops, a basketball training facility; and the existing Cold Storage site northeast of the station, recently purchased by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The City has also long-identified the potential for redevelopment along Excelsior Boulevard, near Blake Road. BLAKE STATION AREA TODAY: Existing high intensity office 43 Hoops/County-owned development site Existing low-intensity retail Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail Rail and trail corridor Blake Road SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 10-3 dfiolle1011 4/6,1 reef 3rd St N Z 0 .5. Z 2 < 0 E › a z < > z 2 n d S t N 1... < T .0 1. C, .4 .Q T Z 1: 01 'el :V..: r. r. go r.. ttl" 1-10pkIns bivd 4.4 (70 .g -a 1st St N 0 r- -a ‘- Burnet; Park Mainsheet tn to (6 f14/, v g, s > O S 4 I 5. < < = a 5 r r.... .— an co 1s1 St 14,1- - — 2‘, cA a Akio' • 2 Path c Beirnore Lti Va n Bu re n Downtown Hopkins Station Zr l d A v e S Van votkE>nbtlig Pool. !O.( 8th St S Wel 4.4 o '0 4;) 5th SI S tn 6th St S 2 V 5. < a z iplytt lis 4a n > Z al at I' c (7 > r2 — .c:C >s. F-... C- O • 2ncl St NE Mo n ro e Av e N vokl‘f.' Je ff e rs o n Av e S A da r n t Av e May 12, 2015 Sta (ions • --- SWLRT_Alignment_060414 1:18,056 015 0.3 0.e fri I t '1 &wan: all. t-ERE orm. usas, klevrap, Mtemerl P Corp. ViCAN, Esrl Japri VET, Estl ulna (Hon Korg)a (DialLald) IcenTot, ),P-Sprnitr4=1 0 ope1s:N.0.w oaltfoLon, /60 int G4 tiOr COrfillurAy rtennepric40(pin)pS Elil NON-PROF/TIN- I-1 PARKS & OPEN SPACE FT EDUCATION INSTITUTION In PLACE OF WORSHIP I—I RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT 411 HISTORIC PROPERTY DESTINATION 0= PROPOSED SOUTHWEST IRT LINE EXISTING RAIL LINE 10-MINUTE WALKSHED O 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS FIGURE 11-1. DOWNTOWN HOPKINS STATION AREA LOCATOR MAP Es On ,MAINST , • • DOWNTOWN EXCELSIOR, BLVD . HOPKINS:* S,TATION SHADY OAK e----eiTAT I 011 ENITI +DESTINATIONS: OWNTOWN HOPKINS / MAINSTEET CENTRAL PARK 7TH ST S 07257 457 NOTE: 10-minute walks hed approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute Italic from the station platform using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walks hed assumptions and methodology. Station Location The Downtown Hopkins station is located along Excelsior Boulevard at 8th Ave, approximately 2 blocks south of Mainstreet. The land uses near the station are varied, including a mix of residential, retail, commercial, civic, and light industrial uses. It's proximity to Downtown Hopkins offers a tremendous opportunity to support downtown businesses and residents. This is a highly visible site with access directly onto Excelsior Boulevard, an important east-west arterial in Hopkins. It also benefits from its adjacency to a number of regional multi-use trails, which suggests the Downtown Hopkins station has the opportunity to become a regional multi-modal hub. Access and connection challenges exist to the south of the station due to land uses, large block sizes, and a lack of roadway network. The Downtown Hopkins station is anticipated to serve Downtown Hopkins, 8th Avenue, Peaceful Valley and Park Valley neighborhoods, many apartment developments, as well as local businesses in the area. DOWNTOWN HOPKINS STATION AREA TODAY: Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail 8th Avenue/ARTery connection to downtown Hopkins historic commercial district Picnic shelter adjacent to Cedar Lake Trail Mainstreet/Downtown Hopkins Moinstreet/Downtown Hopkins SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 11-3 S riltaartj• ru3 , smcsona c. 0 5ren Rd IG) 04, .se V O 0 1' ZY Field Way.i.., ,,S'i, C" g c Dovre Dr ti '.',. u c c 0 0 , ..5: ...... o —a , n BlaCttyne Blvd V 3., =, CS i ,-.. a- ...f. al S i-IN Ci. 4,?... ..., 41, -#6er ito W 71, .... ......e.5' 0 ger ,..',... .."?.,:. Nalnut d 94 Londonderry Dt "I' v. •••4. ..' Red Circle Dr _ 1111114.f.62 E 1WZ 14„,. W 62nd Cs, Brice Rd W _ Opus Station Pail< 9111 Carer* DT City West Station Langro, E ott Arctic Way w 1-1S-212 :Jay 19. 9015 0.6 rri .1 1 1 km SOMS:t one- izes. menu rpreffert P saRdiOa.tie,.11NM 1.£7i. ri trim rmits9cotg.sur frullaml), 1:18,056 o 0.15 0.3 I 5 ' o 0.25 0.5 SNLRT Alignme nt_O 60414 neinepttecer4..czam II .... - v. BRED RDW \ 14' ,YELIPAKIRCLE,DRI -th-A ERIC N MEDICAL SYSTEMS II i= EDUCATION INSTITUTION =] RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATION FIGURE 13-1. OPUS STATION AREA - LOCATOR MAP - — - — - — - —SMENTA ----------- LONE LAKE PARK ci OPUS* STATION I—I NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION I=1 PARKS & OPEN SPACE e= PROPOSEDSOUTHWEST LRT LINE w*-4. EXISTING RAIL LINE 10-MINUTE WALKSHED 0 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS 1110MAY 212 100'207 407 14104WAY 62 AMENITIES + DESTINATICINS:- N- — THE O S_G\ROUP UNITED HEALTH GROUP CITY WEST STATION. El Fl NOTE: 10-minute walks bed approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute walk from the station platform using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walkshed assumptions and methodology. OPUS STATION AREA TODAY: Station Location The Opus station is located in the center of the Opus Business Park, a major employment center with a mix of light industrial, office, housing, hotel accommodations, retail, and restaurants in the station area. The area is characterized by its campus-like setting, circuitous one- way road network, and off-street trail system. The Opus station is anticipated to serve local businesses and residents in the area. This station has strong potential to be a transit stop for reverse commuters. West entrance on Shady Oak Road Existing office Local wetland Existing trail underpass SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 13-3 .4/ Q'tthgate Pky 70.th S: Golden Triangle Station 4trorkneaz Lake 0.4 0 7r Apache - Werz, Samuel, Rd- :Sioux Trt Creek'Valley- Rz salder Ln 1:1 5 .s 4 indilN‘414is Rd ll r) 4. .4." r; r..r c. .4- Z ......jc 4.-- - Locr, Mttor rtr e May 12, 2015 SWLRT Align me nt_060414 1:16.656 O 3.15 I I • 0.25 as Static ns SWIMS= Eigt Z.—orme. 1.$415.me-70-3p. nvermn: ARCM. ESX tET, Van :"•Cit;Kee7. EV1 . reirepn.coanti...ma:s FIGURE 15-1. GOLDEN TRIANGLE STATION AREA LOCATOR MAP NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION 1-1 PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLACE OF WORSHIP 1= PROPOSED SOUTHWEST LRT LINE EXISTING RAIL LINE = 10-MINUTE WALKSHED 0 1/2 MILE STATION RADIUS W 69TH ST • GOLDEN TRIANGLE STATION .-;_- VALLEY VIEW RD:, , W 203' 40.T f Fl El AMENITIES+ DESTINATIONS: VISI DATA CENTER ,SUPERVALU CORPORAT EAGLE RIDGE ACADEM HEADQUARTERS R eD U CT I O u OL D E N TR IA N G L GOLDEN TRIANGLE STATION AREA TODAY: Super Valu offices _- Typical existing office development Local wetland Station Location The Golden Triangle station is located in the heart of the Golden Triangle Business Center, which is bounded by Highway 212 on the west, Shady Oak Road on the north and east, and Valley View Road along the south. The area is a major employment center, employing over 20,000 people. The majority of the business center consists of low-rise office and light industrial buildings. Large block sizes, few roads, and few sidewalks make pedestrian and bicycle circulation challenging. The proposed station platform is located in an area where access and visibility are a challenge, however, the redevelopment potential in this area offers opportunities for enhanced access and greater density. NOTE: 10-minute walks/Led approximates the area accessible within a 10-minute italk from the station platform using only the existing sidewalk/trail network. See Glossary for walkshed assumptions and methodology. Existing office use and parking Typical existing office development SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK - TRANSITIONAL STATION AREA ACTION PLANS 15-3 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Joseph Totten, Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: May 21, 2015 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of May 6, 2015 Agenda Item #: VI. D. Action Z Discussion 0 Information El Action Requested: Review and recommend Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Report of Wednesday May 6, 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 June 21, 2015 meeting. Attachments: Traffic Safety Committee Report for May 6, 2015. G:\ PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ TRANSPORTATION DIV \Traffic Safety Committee \Staff Review Summaries\ 15 TSAC & Min \ 5-06-15 Cover.docx - - City of Edina ° 4801 W. 50th St. ° Edina, MN 55424 Traffic Safety Report The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on May 6, 2015. The City Engineer, 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 comments can be included on the May 21 Edina Transportation Commission and the June 16 City Council agenda. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends approval. I. Request to increase sign visibility for the stop sign at the intersection of Valley Lane and Creek Drive A requestor noted that due to significant grade changes, and being near a railroad crossing, visibility for the stop sign at Valley Lane and Creek Drive was less than visible for westbound traffic. He would like to see a sign placed on the opposite side of the intersection, and would also accept adding a sign to the existing post, diagonally across the intersection. The stop sign is visible from about 250 feet away in the city's Traffic Safety Van, a stopping sight distance would require only 200 feet of visibility. After review, staff recommends cutting back vegetation which is partially blocking signage in the area. Map : Valley Lane at Creek Drive Photo : 200 feet from the intersection 2. Request for traffic calming at Creek Valley Road and Nordic Circle This is change in recommendation from the November 6th, 2013 Traffic Safety Report. A crosswalk was suggested at that time for the north leg of the intersection, crossing Nordic Circle. However, the city has not received consent from nearby property owners to place a landing pad for the Map: Creek Valley Road & Nordic Circle Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page I of 7 crosswalk in place of existing landscaping. In response, staff has drawn up the following possible solution, which would force drivers who are turning left from Creek Valley Road onto Nordic Circle to tighten their turn radius and slow down. This design uses paint and plastic bollards to test a possible long term solution or a permanent island. The next two pages are design sketches from the engineering department. Staff recommends that the experimental island be placed as a test. Crosswalks are still warranted and are still a recommendation. A video will be taken of the area after placement to compare with video from 2013 and evaluate the effect of the island in this design and location. Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page 2 of 7 Project Name Ne f'41;C Improvement No Cree h VAky Root Contract No Computalions For Shoot I of 2, By. rofeA Date 573/15 To jry 2-2) •rex/ Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page 3 of 7 Project Name •reitt Ctv 44*A Improvement No a1 eek Vatflp_R joi contract No Cemputatens For Sheet of a By Toe Toritak DatoVIWT 0-- I Sitak DeS. e pi o 671— pecairl 114 5+4 WariS ic, L ' k -11,t itT1 i,, -1,44 Traffic Safety Preview of May 20 I 5 Page 4 of 7 Mob : Johnson Drive and Benton Avenue intersection Photo : Benton Avenue, looking east Section B: Items which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends denial I. Request for further enforcement of speeds on Eton Place, and a way to divert or discourage cut-through traffic This request comes from a resident of Eton Avenue, who is concerned about the volume of vehicles on the street between 44th Street and Morningside Road. A counter was placed in this location and had a volume of 130 ADT and 25.Imph 85th-Percentile Speeds. Eton Place is one block long, and connects 44th Street and Morningside Road, immediately west of France Avenue. Map : Eton Place After review, staff has determined that volumes and speeds are not high enough to warrant further engineering solutions. The traffic count's speed report was forwarded to the Edina Police Department for possible placement of the speed trailer. 2. Request for further signage or change of traffic control at the Benton Avenue intersection with Johnson Drive This request comes from a resident who lives on Johnson Drive. The requestor notes that traffic on Benton approaching the splitter islands does not yield to traffic on the left, as would be typical in a roundabout. Currently there is no signage on Benton Avenue, and Johnson Drive has a stop sign controlling its entrance to westbound Benton Avenue. A camera study was conducted, and found that between three and four percent (3%-4%) of all users on the west side of the pond were using the circulation to go east on Benton. Benton Avenue had a volume of 3300 ADT in 2013 and 30.7 mph 85th-percentile speed in 2009 (2013 was a volume only count). Johnson Drive had a volume of 340 ADT and 27.2 85th percentilespeed in 2014. After review, staff decided that this intersection was not equivalent to a roundabout, but actually functions as a one-way pair and median. Thus, all traffic which is using the provided circulation should act as if making a U-turn and yield to the right. Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page 5 of 7 807 Vehicles 3. Request for traffic calming measures on Sunnyside Road, between France Avenue and Grimes Avenue This request came from a resident who felt that traffic speeds on Sunnyside Road were too high, and created a dangerous situation, especially at the intersection of Sunnyside Road and Grimes Avenue. Sunnyside Road has been studied many times for various projects and since 2009, has had ADT ranging from 2129-4095 vehicles per day, and had 85th-percentile speeds ranging from 27.6-30.5 mph. The speed limit on Sunnyside Road is 30 mph. Map : Sunnyside Road, Grimes Avenue to France Avenue high enough to warrant traffic calming at present. However, this road is scheduled to be reconstructed as part of the 2016 Morningside A Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project; thus, this will be considered when gathering data for and designing the roadway. 4. Request for removing stop signs for Tracy Avenue at the intersection of Tracy Avenue and 66th Street A requestor asked that the city look at the intersection of Tracy Avenue and 66th Street, as it was believed that the stop signs on Tracy Avenue were creating an unsafe situation in wintertime driving, and that the vast majority of all traffic is heading north on Tracy Avenue. The intersection was analyzed and it was seen that the two T-intersections of Tracy Avenue and 66th Street function similar to a four-way intersection. The number of vehicles entering the intersection, by approach, in a 24-hour window was as follows; 66th Street eastbound had 807 vehicles; the northbound Tracy approach had 639 vehicles; westbound 66th Street had 369 vehicles; and southbound Hillside Court had 131 vehicles. There is approximately 85 feet between the two T-intersections. After review, staff decided that the 85th percentile speeds were not seen to be - After review, staff concluded that this area is being used as if it were a four way intersection and that removing control at one leg has the potential to result in motorist confusion. Map: 66th Street, Tracy Avenue and Hillside Court Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page 6 of 7 5. Request for further enforcement of parking issues on 54th Street, near the neighborhood traffic circle on Drew Avenue A requestor noted that drivers were leaving vehicles parked too close to the intersection of 54th Street and Drew Avenue. The requestor asked that signs be placed on the yield signs reading "no parking 30 feet" to comply with state statute parking lengths. Also noted by the requestor was that the issue was most prevalent on the Minneapolis side of 54th St. This request was forwarded to Minneapolis and the Traffic Safety Coordinator painted a mark 30 feet from the intersection. It was not found that anyone was within 30 feet of the intersection during various site visits through multiple weeks. After review, staff concluded that since the issue was not observed within the borders of the City of Edina and thus, no further action should be taken by the City of Edina. D Items : Other items handled by Traffic Safety Map : Intersection of 54th Street and Drew Avenue Dl. Requestor called in to state that the fence on France Avenue over Minnehaha Creek was damaged. This was forwarded to public works. D2. Residents called to ask about camera equipment and other counting equipment and its identification. As a result of this conversation, identification stickers reading "City of Edina, Public Works" and phone number were added to all counting equipment. D3. Calvary Lutheran Church requested signs be provided for their placement in their lot, to delineate handicapped parking. The city no longer provides such services and sign contractors were provided to the church. D4. Requestor called in requesting traffic counts on Valley View Road, near the high school. These were provided. D5. Resident was confused as to why 70th Street has a 25 mph speed limit while Ridgeview had a 30 mph limit. Requestor was informed that on these street types, state statute only allows lowered speed limits in select cases (such as when a bicycle facility is present). Traffic Safety Preview of May 2015 Page 7 of 7 J n.J..JnJ I AREWOMMMOWE MMMM NEWUSEWM 10 4708 4706 4704 4702 4608 4700 4610 4606 4604 4602 4600 5401 5400 5404 5403 5409 5413 5408 5412 5416 5420 5424 617 4615 4613 4611 460946074605 4601 5417 5421 4606 4604 4608 4602 4600 5425 5429 5428 5432 5436 5433 5500 5501 4605 4607 4603 4609 4601 5437 Project Limits 5503 CD CD Iii cc 4612 4608 0 CD 5501 5500 5504 5508 5512 5516 5520 co CO dt- 5505 5504 5509 C•1 CD 4611 4607 4603 5513 4601 5506 5517 4808 LEXINGTON ST 4812 4810 OO D D A LE A V E 5521 5536 Cs) CD 5525 4625 4617 ST JO H N S AV 5525 5524 5540 5601 ! i 5528 ij_ 1 5532 i5605 5606 i5607 5608 5529 5533 5537 5528 5529 4813 5600 CO CO CD CD CD CD 5532 CV (<3 C'it; CD dr 5603 5533 CD di- to 5536 5602 5603 h- co co 't co M ( •.° a) N (C) to (N (0 d' ,—. N (c, 't d. h_ ,— CD ,t co ,—, (0 'I' a) 0 CD ,:i- to 0 CD .t <— 0 CO .cr CD CO (Ni co c0 CD CO ,T co 0 CV CO d1- CO ,— c0 N v- CO dr 03 0 (0 dt- 0 CO ° a)1 T. 1 5600 5604 5605 5601 5604 5607 5606 5609 5609 5610 5608 5613 5611 5609 5608 51 5612 5617 TOWER ST 5613 5614 5610 5611 5633 5611 r-- CD CS) ti") 0, CD C71 0 0 CO 03 5615 5613 5616 5612 CD <.9 10 CD 5645 5615 5615 5617 5618 5614 5633 5619 N co 4620 4616 4604 5655 4608 4600 ,f- 5623 4701 WOODLAND RD W 4629 CO ammo 5705 4630 4) co Po 4601570 .1- dr v 4725 CD 14 CONCORD TER CO 5713 dt- CO CD MMM CD CD 111•Efli 5717 ME '71- o 5721 5724 u. 5721 5720 o o ir co CO < dl-•dr 5725 5728 u.I 5725 5754 c°(N1 CV 5721 ••• ••• mown MMMMM Imo UM W 58TH ST 00 5801 5800 5801 5800 5800 5801 5801 5800 2016 Project Area Golf Terrace B Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No: BA-420 cso WE Engineering Dept October, 2013 CD 4540 4545 4544 4548 4544 4601 / 4603 4607 —A. CD CD Ni CD 03 --5 CD -A. 8 Co 4081 4503 4650 4505 WHITE 4507 OAKS 4509 4700 4511 4513 4701 4515 4702 4517 4611 4613 4615 4617 4622 L 4626 14624 4630 4634 4638 4640 4646 4650 4620 4701 4704 4703 4700 4701 4708 \ 8 BRIDGE LN 5 4716 4719 leo CD CD 4311 4313 Ni Ni Ni CD Ni CD Ni CD 03 Ni Ni CD 310 4i1 I 3936 CD 312 4313 01 Ni D 4324 03 -1=• CD CD 03 CD CD CD 431 4315 CD CD 04 3? 4=- PROJECT LIMITS 0 f•-+ 40 402j 0 0°. 4141 4101 4121. ••°`• 00'4406 4410 412 4417 FR A N C E A V E 0). Ni CD 4416 4420 CD 4101 4508 4615 Ni )1 " CD 4501 4503 4505 4507 4609 4619 MMMMMMM ion 4605 \ ..........4608 It 4607 \\• 4611 4621 TOWNES CIR p. 0 0 7. 0 WM MON -• ONal• ••• U. 4600 11141604 4617 4501 4500 4503 4502 4505 4504 4507 4506 4509 4508 4511 4510 4513 4512 4515 4514 4517 4516 4519 4518 4521 4520 4523 4522 4525 4524 4527 4526 4529 4528 4531 4530 4601 4600 4603 4602 4703 4705 4707 4709 4711 II 4715 ^ • - 4713 15 502 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 2 4 6 8 4519 4521 4523 4525 4527 4529 4531 4601 4603 D 2016 Project Area W+ E Morningside A & White Oaks C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction s Improvement No: BA-422 Engineering Depl October, 2013 OLO ULU 5932 IN c0 CD 00 CD CD 00 5920 _O (7, CD 5929 5933 5932 5933 3808 5933 5945 5932 5936 C,) 5924 _4 5933 W 60TH ST ramp 6001 6000 5928 6000 6001 6000 8 6001 6000 5937 3813-1 6001 6005 6009 6001 6000 CH O WE N A VE 3 DR E W A V E PROJECT LIMITS EW I N G A V E 6004 6005 6004 6004 6005 6004 6005 3904 32 5941 6005-0 6008 6009 6008 6009 6008 6008 6009 6008 6009 6009-1 6012 6013 6012 6016 n 6013 6017 6021 6012 6013 6012 6012 3905 6013 6013-1 6016 Cy') 6016 6017 6017 6016 6016 6017 6016 6020 6021 9 6020 6017-1 6021 6020 6020 6024 13 6100 6104 6108 6112 6116 BE A R D A VE 6101 6025 6024 6021-2 6024 CJ 00 CD 6029 6028 CD CD 6105 6028 3025-2 (73 6101 6100 6109 6100 6101-0 6105 6104 6113 6104 CD CD 6109-1 6117 6120 6109 6108 6108 LU > 5113-1 LU 3117-1 re 6121-2 6121 612 6108-10 6113 CHOWEN CR 6112 6112 6128 6125 G112-14 6132 6117 3709 3705 6116 6132 6116 6129 6124 6116-18 6136 6121 6120 6133 6121 6136 6120-22 6140 6137 6125 6124 6125 6125-2 6 6129 140 6124-26 6141 6144 6129 6128 3129-3 6128 W 62ND ST 6201- 6132 6201 6200-02 204 6 6205 6208-10 6209 6212-14 6215 6216-18 6219 6220-22 6223 6224-26 6301 6228-30 6305 6232-34 6309 6300 6313 6304-08 6317 6312-14 6321 6316-18 03 6200 6201 6200 6205- 6201 6200 6204 07 6209- 6205 6204 1 6205 6204 6208 11 6213- 6209 6208 6209 I 6208 6212 15 6213 I 6212 6213 6212 6217- OW E N 6216 19 6217 I 6216 6221- 93 6225- 6220 6221 6220 q 6221 I 6220 6224 27 6229- 6229 6224 I 6225 6224 6228 31 6301 6300 6301 apos.06, 0 rn 6300 6305 630 6304 63 6309 6308 6304 65N\ 6353-67 6301 6308 63 6316 6305 6325 6322-24 6320 6309 onto 6369-83 6329 6326-28 3333-35 6315 6385-99 6328 nArli Project Area Strachauer Park A Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No: BA-421 WE Engineering Dept August, 2013 --r N .4- co co co co co co r- r•-• r- 1,- 01 cr) c,r) 111111-111-11111-111 /210 7301 7224 7225 7224 7305 7301 7300 7 7309 300 7305 7304 7304 7313 7309 7308 7308 7317 7312 731 3 7312 7321 7317 7316 7316 7325 7321 7320 7320 7329 4440 W 76TH ST • 4417 4413 44094405 4401 4416 4412 4408 4404 4400 .1 `c71 ‘N= : g iL,' E. t 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 CO CV co "1' 0 1 44214417 4413 4409 4405 4401 4421 14420 )1 7400 /G. I 7221 7301 7303 7305 7320-30 7307 7309 7311 7340 7313 7315 7350-60 -7317 9 PROJECT LIIVIITS saaavair 7300-10 7333-55 N- 7380 La. 7390 I 0- 1 0 0 C 4100-20 7404 7410 M-11-MME 4250 PARKLA1NN AVE 4251 4201 <,P 4000 7400 co co 00-MaNa mmmmm 5 9 1 7 1 1 mmmmmmmmmm 7 7450 3955 7500 ARNOMMEJI MMMMMMMMMM ARUM 78 7550 4000 4480 11111-1B-1111-1** M 7636 7600 7625 4451 4175 4401 7600 4550 4530 7685 451 0 7725 W7 8TH ST 4545 4455 4445 4425 7700 35 2016 Project Area Parklawn Ave Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No: BA-429 WE Engineering Dept September, 2014 DOU0 I 12 DI U0 J1,1 Ul/ 58 21 58 09 5813 5817 58 21 58 25 to to LO 57 16 56 00 58 08 5608 56 04 58 09 59 00 58 05 5812 58 12 5825 smisitivara MMMMMM L BENTON AVE to 58 04 58 16 5816 5511 5501 820 G) CD 59 04 to 55 21 55 17 to in 560 CO to to 5909 5908 to 59 00 5919 58 05 5915 5912 CD CD to to 57 01 12 54 20 to to 59 04 CD 56 08 8 to in OUNTRYSIDE RD CO CD LO to CD LO CN1 to LO 5416 54 24 Lo 6044 59 08 6048 LU c7j > Es (-) 60 01 re 60 05 5912 60 52 411•1111•11111F•11-** 5940 5950 60 56 5960 PROJECT LIMITS 60 60 59 70 072 60 68 6064 6008 59 80 6013 Z'{-1 WO° 60 20 60 04 6012 5816 5812 58 08 58 04 5800 58 20 60 24 61 00 CD to 61 04 CO to CO to 61 00 61 09 61 04 61 08 MON 57 04 57 00 C CO 00 10 to 00 00 10 L) 10 61 13 1.0 RIDGEWAY RD 61 17 cq co 0 to Lo OLINGER BLVD .-•-•••••• 62 01 ista 62 01 204 62 05 62 09 62 00 6240 SM-E-EW rami 62 50 ***iwalir 6212 63 01 63 00 63 05 63 04 63 08 63 38 6213 63 00 63 09 -111-1•111 62 2016 Project Area Tracy Ave Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No: BA-399 WE Engineering Dep. September, 2014 P e d e s t r i a n B r i d g e L o c a t i o n Date, Printed, 5/13/2015 WSB Filename, K,\01556-590\Cad\Exhibits\Pedestrian Bridge Exhibit. dgn Walk Edina Feedback from Walk Edina Working Group: --as with any group, this feedback may not reflect all individuals associated with the group Why Join Walk Edina? • Walking is main source of exercise for themselves or a family member • Concerns that walking in areas of Edina is unsafe • Available time now that children are grown • Students who either enjoyed walking to school, had difficulty walking to school, or currently walk for exercise • Concerns that 20-30 years is too long to wait for sidewalk network to be built without also encouraging other safety measures o Concerns that sidewalk network is too conservative • Interested in changes in their neighborhood and would like to be involved in knowing what the city is planning as well as offer more input • Concerns that the city/ETC is not doing enough for walking in Edina • Concerns about initiatives (sidewalks/Living Streets) in their neighborhood • Wish to promote walking in ways that are exciting, fun, unique, innovative, and incorporate social media and technology Positives: • Willingness to volunteer, give time for cause • Creative Ideas o Interest in the topic • Support for a better walking environment • Genuine concern/love for Edina • Wish to see more people, especially kids/seniors, out moving and being healthy • Enthusiasm Issues : • Members' high expectations o goals o chair/ETC o staff/city o access to information o scope of influence • Inconsistent policies, staff support, resources, access to information • Lack of experience for chair • Lack of realistic goals, and members' disinterest in realistic goals and/or goals suggested by ETC • Members frustrated with protocols/city structure • Misunderstandings about ETC • Misunderstandings about Engineering Department • Communication issues • Members frustrated that the process is too slow/desire to act now • Members making decisions without chair/ETC • Size of group • Member selection process