Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2012-03-15 Meeting Packet
• • AGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM March 15, 2012 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Regular Meeting of February 16, 2012 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 �4A!State Complete Streets meeting update — Elin Schold-Davis f� Grandview Small Area Study — Kevin Staunton j C.) Safe Routes to School Resolution — Katherine Bass `USpeed Limit Policy / E.; Living Streets Workshop Recap Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws 1494 Auxiliary Lane Municipal Consent H. Updates Student Member 1 Bike Edina Task Force - February 9, 2012 Minutes ("is'.�� Grandview Small Area Study iv. Living Streets Working Group Agenda / Edina Transportation Commission March 15, 2012 Page 2 0 (VTLC Bike Boulevard Update I""" VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. Update on France Avenue Pedestrian Bridge Re -scoping B. Gallagher Drive & Three Rivers Trail C. Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction Project Update 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. JLL SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS Thursday March 15 Regular ETC Meeting Mon Mar 19 Annual Boards & Commissions Dinner Meeting Tuesday April 17 Grandview Area Plan to City Council Thursday April 19 Regular ETC Meeting Mon Apr 23 Annual Volunteer Reception Thursday May 17 Regular ETC Meeting r1 G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 Agendas\20120315 Agenda.docx 6:00 P.M. UUMMUNI I Y KUUIVI 5:00 P.M. HUGHES PV. CENTENNIAL LAKES 7:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 P.M. BRAMAR RM WARREN HYDE CLUB HS 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM . AGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ORIENTATION COMMUNITY ROOM March 15, 2012 5:00 P.M. Orientation for anyone that wishes to attend. • • G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 Agendas\20120315 Orientation Agenda.docx • • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: State Complete Street Meeting Update Agenda Item No.: VI.A. ACTION: ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Info/Background: ElinSchold-Davis will present an update of this item. No additional information is included with this report. G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI A State Complete Streets Meeting Update.docx • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Grandview Small Area Plan Agenda Item No.: VI.B. ACTION: ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Info/Background: Kevin Staunton, Steering Committee Chair of the Grandview Small Area Plan will present an update of this item. No additional information is included with this report. G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\TrafflcVRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 item VI B Grandview Small Area Plan.docx • 0 REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Safe Routes to School Resolution Agenda Item No.: VI.C. ACTION: ® Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Recommendation/Motion: Recommend to the City Council to approve the attached resolution supporting creation and funding of a Minnesota Sate Routes to School Grant Program. Info/Background: Edina Transportation Commission Member Katherine Bass will present the attached Safe Routes to School Resolution. Attachments: • Resolution of Support for the Creation and Funding of a Minnesota Safe Routes to School Grant Program G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI C Safe Routes to School Resolution.docx • Resolution of Support for the Creation and Funding of a Minnesota Safe Routes to School Grant Program Whereas, Minnesota Department of Transportation received 82 Safe Routes to School grant requests in 2011 totaling $23 million but were only able to fund 16 with the $3.8 million in federal funds that were available; and Whereas, about one-third of the children in the United States are obese or overweight; and Whereas, the number of obese and overweight children has tripled in the last 20 years and is expected to increase at an even more rapid rate; and Whereas, 43% of children that live less than a mile from school are driven to school; and Whereas, walking one mile to and from school would equal 2/3 of the recommended daily physical activity, and Whereas, many (most???) children do not get the recommended 60 minute minimum of moderate to vigorous physical activity each day; and Whereas, $14 billion is spent annually in United States on child obesity related health care; and Whereas, studies have shown that physical activity has a positive effect on scholastic achievement, cognitive ability, reducing tobacco use, insomnia, depression, anxiety and body mass index; and Whereas, epidemiologists have forecasted that today's American children may be the first generation to live shorter lives than their parents because of disease related to physical inactivity. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that encourages the Minnesota Legislature to pass and Governor Dayton to sign a bill that creates a Minnesota Safe Routes to School Program and funds it with an allocation of $3 million in the 2012 Bonding Bill. RESOLUTION DECLARED AND ADOPTED. DATED: SIGNATURE: • TITLE: • 0 e o .f 1988 REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Speed Limit Policy Agenda Item No.: VI.D. ACTION: ® Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Recommendation/Motion: If the ETC agrees, forward the attached information in the form of an advisory communication to the City Council. Info/Background: Edina Transportation Commission Member - Chair Jennifer Janovy has prepared the attached memo on the City's speed limits policy Attachments: • Speed Limits Policy memo • City Council minutes regarding speed limits • MnDOT Study and Report on Speed Limits Executive Summary • City of Edina Speed Limits Traffic Policy • House Research MN Speed Limits memo • MS 160.263 Bicycle Lanes and Ways C:\Users\WHoule\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\DYNBNG6J\20120315 Item VI D Speed Limit Memo.docx 0 CITY SPEED LIMITS POLICY MEMO SITUATION The City Council has authority to establish 25 mph speed limits on streets within its jurisdiction on which it has established bike lanes by ordinance or resolution, Bike lanes and a 25 mph speed limit have been established on W. 58th (Xerxes to France) and W. 70th (France to Hwy 100). The Tracy Avenue project (Vernon to Benton) was recently approved with bike lanes and a 25 mph speed limit. The City Council has also established reduced speeds in school zones. BACKGROUND The City's speed limit policy states that speed limits "can only be modified by the Commissioner of Transportation on the basis of engineering and traffic investigation that indicates enhanced safety.... Only a school zone and bridge can be regulated below 30 mph if justification exists." In 2006 the Council discussed speed limits and passed the following motion: "The City of Edina's current City Speed Limits Traffic policy shall be maintained with the basic minimum speed limit of 30 MPH. The City of Edina shall not consider lowering the speed limit of a residential street unless documented safety issues exist and a traffic speed study has been conducted by Mn/DOT indicating the speed should be lowered; or the statewide urban, local, residential speed limit is lowered from 30 MPH to 25 MPH, The updated policy shall be the basis for the City's speed limits traffic policy." At this time, the Council also passed a resolution in support of lowering the statewide residential speed limit to 25 mph. See minutes attached. In 2008 the Council passed a resolution calling for legislation to study the feasibility of a 25 mph speed limit metro -wide. Legislation was enacted and a study completed. The study report can be read at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/speed/pdf/Speed%20Li mit%2OTask%2OForce%20Final%20Repor t.pdf. The report recommended some changes to the State speed limit statutes, but did not recommend lowering the default speed limit in urban districts to 25 mph. See attached Executive Summary. The Comprehensive Plan includes a policy statement on speed limits: "Support state legislation to decrease statutory urban speeds from 30 to 25 mph" (p. 7-42). • Currently, there is no state legislation to decrease the speed limit in an urban district. 3/8/12 0 ANALYSIS Statements in the City's speed limit policy appear to conflict with State statutes regarding speed limits. These statements are highlighted in the attached policy. While the policy does not need to allow the City to exercise all of the authority provided to it by statutes, the policy should accurately communicate that authority. The attached House Research memo explains MN speed limit laws. The Council has demonstrated that it is interested in exercising its authority to reduce speeds on streets on which bike lanes have been established and in school zones. As the policy making body for the City, the Council can adopt a speed limits policy that supports these actions. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt a speed limits policy that: • Allows the City Council to reduce speed limits as provided by law; • Accurately communicates the authority the City has to reduce speed limits; and • Supports Living Streets goals. 0 ATTACHMENTS: • • City Council minutes regarding speed limits • MnDOT Study and Report on Speed Limits Executive Summary • City of Edina Speed Limits Traffic Policy (highlighted) • House Research MN Speed Limits memo • MS 160.263 Bicycle Lanes and Ways 3/8/12 2 0 Excerpts from City Council Minutes Re: Speed Limits June 6, 2006 City Council RESOLUTION NO. 2006-64 APPROVING THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION LOWERING THE STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY SPEED LIMIT TO 25 MPH; AND APPROVING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE 25 MPH RESIDENTIAL SPEED LI M IT Assistant Engineer Lillehaug said the Transportation Commission at their March 16, 2006, meeting, asked staff to review the City's Speed Limit Policy and prepare a report for consideration of a 25 MPH Speed Limit Policy for residential areas. On April 20, 2006, staff recommended that the current Speed Limit Policy of 30 MPH be maintained unless documented safety issues exist and a speed study had been conducted by Mn/DOT or the statewide limit was lowered to 25 MPH. On May 18, 2006, the Transportation Commissioners voted to recommend to the Council adoption of a resolution recommending a 25 MPH speed limit policy in residential areas. Staff evaluated the current policy, including safety, cost, implementation strategy and enforcement. Mr. Lillehaug stated that safety was the most important factor. He said the more consistent something was the safer it was. Mr. Lillehaug added changing the approximately 1100 speed limit signs on residential streets would be expensive and no funds have been designated for this purpose. Mr. Lillehaug noted that a number of requests have been received to lower the speed limit. Streets • classified as collector or arterial could not be posted lower than 30 MPH. Some roads were state aid roads where the City receives funding for maintenance of the roads. Reclassifying the roads could affect the City's budget. Staff recommended rather than adopting a 25 MPH Speed Limit Policy, they recommended a City resolution calling for a statewide lowering of the urban, residential speed limit on local roadways from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. He said if the state to lowered the speed limit statewide, more cities would implement the 25 MPH speeds making more consistent speeds statewide. Jean White, a member of the Transportation Commission summarized the discussion on this issue at the May Transportation Commission meeting. Member Hulbert questioned whether this issue could be used by the Transportation Commission as an addition to their tool box to aid traffic calming. She further suggested not making a decision until information was received from other cities about their speed policies. Mr. Hughes said in summary, a motion could be adopted that would refer the issue back to the Transportation Commission because they did not have a full complement of members when the vote was taken and recommend their focus being on other cities who have implemented a 25 MPH residential speed limit and what criteria they used for their decision. He indicated another scenario would be to keep the issue at the Council level and direct staff to find information from other cities and bring that information directly back to the Council. Following a Council discussion, Member Swenson made a motion approving the following resolution as follows: 1 . RESOLUTION NO. 2006-64 RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR STATEWIDE LOCAL, RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY 25 MPH SPEED LIMIT WHEREAS, drivers traveling at high speeds are less aware of their surroundings and have less time to notice and react to pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, relatively small increases in vehicle speed can greatly increase the chances that a pedestrian will die in a vehicle—to-pedestrian crash; and WHEREAS, experts on street design say that 20 to 25 miles per hour is the maximum safe speed for residential streets; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina supports ensuring speed limits maximize safety for all roadway users including drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHERAS, the City of Edina supports goals that do not unfairly raise the expectations of our citizens with regard to the relative safety of the streets; and WHEREAS, passage would result in a uniform statewide speed limit that would create consistency with regard to the way similar streets are posted and speeds are enforced in our communities. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Edina does hereby strongly support a statewide lowering of the speed limit from 30 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour on local, residential roadways. Passed and adopted this 6th day of June, 2006. Member Housh seconded the motion, Ayes: Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Hulbert Motion carried. Member Masica made a motion approving staffs recommendation regarding the 25 MPH residential speed limit as follows: "The City of Edina's current City Speed Limits Traffic policy shall be maintained with the basic minimum speed limit of 30 MPH. The City of Edina shall not consider lowering the speed limit of a residential street unless documented safety issues exist and a traffic speed study has been conducted by Mn/DOT indicating the speed should be lowered; or the statewide urban, local, residential speed limit is Lowered from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. The updated policy shall be the basis for the City's speed limits traffic policy." Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Hulbert Motion carried. 2 March 3, 2008 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-27 CALLING FOR LEGISLATION STUDYING THE FEASIBILITY OF 25 MPH SPEED LIMIT METRO -WIDE ADOPTED Following discussion, motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Masica to adopt Resolution No.2008-27 calling for legislation studying the feasibility of 25 MPH speed limit metro -wide. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Housh, Hovland Motion carried. July 21, 2009 'RESOLUTION NO. 2009-66 ADOPTED – SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL REPORT AND SIGNAGE PLAN Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to adopt Resolution No. 2009-66 adopting Edina schools speed zone study and signage plan. Motion carried on rollcall vote – five ayes. October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION NOS. 2010-94 AND 2010-95 ADOPTED – RESTRICTING PARKING AND REVISING SPEED LIMIT ALONG WEST 58TH STREET FROM 1116 FRANCE TO XERXES The Council discussed the challenges of configuring parking restrictions and on -street bike lanes and considered whether a "walkable zone" with lowered speed limits, should be created around this and other parks to assure pedestrian and bicycle safety. It was indicated that high "walkability" scores for residential properties also increased value. Mr. Houle reviewed the widths of bike trails that shared roadways and explained the intent was to lower speed in areas of on -street bike lanes on this MSA roadway. The Council considered whether action should be postponed to allow time to research creating a "walkable zone" or if these actions should be taken so it could be determined whether they were effective. Members Bennett and Brindle requested that a joint work session with staff and the ETC should be held to discuss the option of a "walkable zone" to increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2010- 94, relating to parking restrictions on West 58' Street from France Avenue to Xerxes Avenue and No. 2010-95, reducing the speed limit on West 58th Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. December 21, 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-128 ADOPTED — RESOLUTION NO 2010-95 FOR WEST 58TH STREET BIKEWAY CORRECTED Motion made by Member Housh and seconded by Member Bennett to adopt Resolution No. 2010-128, designating West 58' Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue as bicycle route and designating a 25 mph speed limit. 3 0 February 6, 2012 Adopt Resolution 2012-24 correcting Resolution No. 2010-58 — designating bicycle lanes on West 58' Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue and designating a 25 mph speed limit. December 20, 201 1 Adopt Resolution No 201 1-133 West 70th Street speed limit. • II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • This report documents a series of recommendations developed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for speed limits on local roads. The report also describes the process Mn/DOT utilized to reach these recommendations. This process benefited from the participation of several local government engineers in a Task Force convened by Mn/DOT. Mn/DOT has conducted the speed limit study and prepared this report to meet the requirements of Laws of Minnesota 2008, Chapter 287, Section 119, STUDY AND REPORT ON SPEED LIMITS. The input of all of the Task Force members was valuable and informative and helped to form a consensus for the group's recommendations. Implementation of speed limit statutes involves an overlap of two principles: • Definitions: what type of roadway the motorist is driving on, and • Speed Limits: what the appropriate speed is for that roadway. The direction from the Legislature to Mn/DOT acknowledged these two principles. Mn/DOT was specifically tasked to study and report on the following topics: • Are the definitions of urban district, rural residential district and residential roadway appropriate? • Is 30 MPH in urban districts appropriate? • Are there locations where 25 MPH is appropriate? • Is 30 MPH in rural residential districts appropriate? • Is 55 MPH in rural residential districts within a city appropriate? • Are there rural residential district locations within cities where 30 MPH is appropriate? In response to these questions, Mn/DOT has developed proposed changes to the text of the statutes (2008 Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 169, TRAFFIC REGULATIONS). The full versions of those changes appear elsewhere in this report. The remainder of this section presents overviews and highlights of the major recommendations developed by Mn/DOT. Recommendations on Definitions Urban District The current definition of Urban District was found to be acceptable; however some agencies interpret the term "streets" to include highways and others do not. The Task Force concluded all similar types of roadways regardless of ownership should uniformly apply the Urban District criteria. Consequently, the Task Force recommends that highways should be specified to clarify the matter. Rural Residential District In the current statute text, this definition only applies for township roads; it does not apply within cities or for county roads. The definition is confusing and outdated. It does not reflect certain types of modern, large -lot, subdivision designs along roadways (in cities and townships) or well- 40 managed access roadways through commercial or residential areas. The recommended change Page i is deletes the exclusive township reference and allows this definition to be applied regardless of jurisdiction. A Rural Residential District could be located in either a township or city, along a roadway owned by any jurisdiction. The proposed changes also clarify the residence spacing measurements for this definition and recognize the specific development conditions which meet the Rural Residential District criteria. Residential Roadway The current language for this definition reads, in part, "'residential roadway' means a street or portion of a street that is less than one-half mile in length ...." This wording lacks clarity and does not match the intended application. The recommended language has been clarified as to conditions for its appropriate application and includes only short (less than one-half mile) lengths of roadways and not short portions of a long stretch of roadway. Recommendations on Speed Limits 30 MPH in an tfr iskid At this time, MnIC)T r'eQminends rio„ chanerrto the bsc Urha,Distr�ct'sp„ MPH iMn%p() cknowl dges that the Task - ,orce me bef h p riiught different vie s' �sstYe.' evexat embers favor a speed limit change to now, if it";could be suessu: ,.q r aort?xeyedor move it" &d 2 c ie futufe °111 ' yeral fac ox , t �c ati sppFk eed limit'.' ©ne key facer is th.i"czx-leyl dppot,yc�r ith"echget nO,th "n�iprAVIIl ifcbr thd'iricreased pdestranrsuruayal gates at towerpe dh tfi? eoxtt ofelxoe P6 -OW crash'. w 4"xJ h5Y M i H B f°a4B II 1 4 i G IN C�thralc rs were tponitaie Qr argud ag eainst aaag,,, Ahl a pea puhta' betweent?i?oGsota,?Vseontn}' grid Iowa yielded'itkec�ncluseltsa"the f¢tY tieitfits df ," a S at �t',a end W s opsin mer --sus e$ofi aaIM Om 0,04 'p e i Pefuiu'i a;ufiew of tho„sr!1 rates a"dfffezat speeds,; coldtre;,rr�bef "}d1 s q ,, ". u P iii, fly',1. n” t iiii p iostn n fataUtzes,',on how speed roa ,-,, "A ate that t,MllQ c u e` sigt fio ehai% e aped stnan fety," av f rs ee0 �Y,'Vm tied t© eharimfrom to 'AMMor,ft ezY; o or l'h G 'e of re irirpes- urren ly cornu ittecl to law enforc meet'and"g Iver ec de top riake tl f%pu to p a y • . u sr a 3aii r„ f?ce the exstipg 1VIPH limit; The judgon� tjf the "Yash poro xiiembcrs "P of l iifceaet'pe"'►t�nel 4vho"!er�nfroos�hat �n the cirertni onyrdnmd%tfyuulc t�e dffci�t!; etllish proper eaoreemntf a 2' 11Pl-i ttoyc .ii1� axs1'eod dead, ... "%arger"d�spartyu actual.travel spzed.71, ignizt' alt�ri"o}id not epf"dvrezwte' . tli"at. o fpfl i'gns w re,postc l at'` 5'; rnerety, posting l eed n�%t........ g s' of �"# 1 0 aAc�, cau e. p a lige n d r=yb ha tot. b�sp�ersiou iu'traY6�'s��"e„ds ��oft st.� er�.�s � � �o�� adtc�r i; sety than is`t1�e posted,o statntoty speedirnt o f„!,,tMPx o FMPH., Tlte,is coricem tfit loenughe'apced lint tthout a large'norcernnt effort tc,ixpportheange! , re ult in.a safety w zuprovement. 1.n add, 4 it the deed xo pc�st';s gns to% ixc to rivers t the new; speezl limit would be expected to impose a; igtiifcant burden on se ,communities' t psideriri ' ali aspec s of ilte issue, Cn%I tJT dclu s that t ” t s r ” tTIldt' ti iltbp;i;is,t"ilad`�nresota t this tin,'lll'fc�ts ,toda,dul tao,e�'ho'!' dmpliance with„the existing"30MVIPH stattfioy speed limitigT'hpug ltinpic cozld fytxtel Page ii C] • • t '' '° on 1, t k 0" be cleyotetl mto e n prt�v l rif r e' t 30 MPH in a Rural Residential District/ 55 MPH in a Rural Residential District within a City These are related points. Strictly speaking, the term "Rural Residential District within a city" is a misnomer, as by current Minnesota Statute definition a "Rural Residential District" can only occur in a township. It was understood that what was meant by the question is the following: "For areas within a city that would be defined as Rural Residential District if in a township, is 55 MPH the appropriate speed limit?" The Task Force members were unanimous; 55 is not an appropriate speed limit for a rural residential area within a city. Mn/DOT recommends that, in tandem with the revised definition for Rural Residential Districts, a new speed limit should be set for this category of roadway. To determine the correct statutory speed for these roadways, several representative speed studies have been conducted on Rural Residential District roads. As a result of these studies, it was determined that 35 MPH is the reasonable speed limit on these roads. The Rural Residential District definition and its accompanying speed limit are proposed to be consistent for all road authorities. Page iii ° e o CITY SPEED LIMITS SPEED ��`'•t �y TRAFFIC POLICY 30 �RPORP1t 1888 City of Edina PURPOSE: A speed limit sign is a regulatory device informing motorists of the legal speed limit imposed on the roadway. In the United States, studies indicate drivers ignore speed limits and drive at a speed they consider reasonable, comfortable and convenient. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 169.14, speed restrictions are established by State Innes igat� MW that indicates uenfi" needs ; ety�` The entire City of Edina is classified an urban district and the basic speed limit is 30 MPH. lily jastitiat ctd?�,fs�sCertain arterial roads and freeways within Edina have been zoned greater than 30 MPH by the Commissioner. PROCESS: Your traffic safety concern or request will be formalized by the staff member you have contacted. That person will work with you and gather the pertinent facts and help clearly define the problem and seek a solution. Those facts will be reviewed by the City Engineer, the Police Chief, and the Assistant City Manager. That group will make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the matter. The staff safety review recommendation will be shared with you. If you disagree with the recommendation or can bring forth additional information and/or facts that are persuasive as related to the City warrants/policies for the requested issue, you can appear at the second Council meeting of the month and present your viewpoint. We suggest you alert any interested parties to attend the meeting with you. In all cases the City Council is the final authority on traffic safety matters. Any subsequent review of the same or similar request is at the discretion of the City Council. -POLICY: 1. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) shall be followed. 2. Traffic investigation and engineering in accordance with established engineering practices shall occur prior to consideration on requesting a speed limit change. 3. Absent supporting facts, the basic statutory speed limit shall not be 0 altered. CITY SPEED LIMITS (Continued) i�r � a �µ� �i ��d �� 4. �Trk ty,1n�atk��e�s'lat"itriklinG�!,��i a 6. The City of Edina can pursue engineering, education and enforcement efforts to reduce the speed of vehicles on City streets. • 0 • HOUSE RESEARCH Short Subjects Matt Burress Minnesota Speed Limits Updated: August 2010 Minnesota's traffic laws include regulation of speeding. State law sets speed limits on state highways and local roads, establishes penalties, and authorizes the Department of Transportation (MnDOT), and in some case local governments, to change the limit. See Minn. Stat. § 169.14. Basic requirements Speed limits set in statute are default maximums, but under some circumstances and speed limits MnDOT and local government can modify them. The statutory speed limits are: 30 m.p.h. for city streets and town roads in an "urban district," which is any segment of a city street or town road that is built up with structures less than 100 feet apart for a minimum distance of a quarter -mile; 65 or 70 m.p.h. for interstates (depending on whether it is, respectively, within or outside an urbanized area of at least 50,000); 65 m.p.h. on divided highways with controlled access; 10 m.p.h. for alleys, mobile home parks, and campgrounds; and a default of 55 m.p.h. on other roads. Minn. Stat. §§ 169.011, subd. 90; 169.14, subd. 2; 327.27, subd. 2. Under a 2009 change, the speed limit was increased by 10 m.p.h. when passing • on two-lane highways with a posted limit of at least 55 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 2a. A 40-m.p.h. minimum speed limit applies on interstates. State law also requires that "no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions." Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 1. This condition can place an additional obligation on a motorist to lower the speed of travel, particularly if there are dangerous conditions like snow or the presence of a pedestrian. Adjusted limits in MnDOT has the authority to establish speed zones in which the speed limit is speed zones higher or lower than the default limits set in law; such limits go into effect once signs are posted. Speed zones are established after MnDOT conducts an engineering and traffic investigation that analyzes factors like roadway design, physical characteristics, traffic volume, crash history, and observed speeds. MnDOT's policy is that the limit should normally be set near the 85th percentile (the speed at or below which 85 percent of vehicles are traveling). Restricted local Cities, counties, and towns have limited power over setting speed limits, even on authority their own streets and highways. If requested by a local road authority, MnDOT must perform an engineering and traffic study of the road. However, MnDOT— not the local authority --determines the safe and reasonable speed limit as well as whether to establish a speed zone. This general rule has a few exceptions. ► If MnDOT has established a speed zone for a city street or town road in an urban district that is at least a quarter -mile long, the city or town can lower the speed limit to 30 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 5b. ► In a rural residential district, a local road authority may reduce the speed limit to 35 m.p.h. A "rural residential district" is a segment of a city street or town road with houses spaced less than 300 feet apart for a minimum distance of a quarter -mile. Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 69a. • ► On a residential roadway, a local road authority may reduce the speed limit to 25 m.p.h. A "residential roadway" is a city street or town road whose total length is up to a half -mile. Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 64. ► In school zones, a local road authority may prescribe a lower limit that is not less than 15 m.p.h. or more than 30 m.p.h. below the surrounding limit. School zones are defined as a segment of street or highway that abuts school grounds where children have access to the roadway or where a school crossing is established. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 5a. Subject to certain requirements, lower speed limits can also be set on other roadways, including: (1) park roads (at not less than 15 m.p.h., or more than 20 m.p.h. below the surrounding limit); (2) on streets that have a designated bicycle lane (at not less than 25 m.p.h.); (3) in alleys; and (4) in mobile home parks. Minn. Stat. §§ 160.263, subd. 4; 169.14, subds. 5c and 5e; 327.27, subd. 2a. Both MnDOT and local road authorities can set speed limits within highway work zones, which are effective while workers are present, and MnDOT can set temporary construction zone limits along long-term construction projects. Penalties for Speeding is generally a petty misdemeanor punishable by a base fine normally speeding violations ranging from $40 to $150 and no prison sentence. The amount of the fine is doubled if the violation (1) occurs in a work zone or school zone, (2) involves speeds of 20 m.p.h. or more above the posted limit, or (3) occurs when passing a 0 parked emergency vehicle with flashing lights. In addition, a $75 court surcharge is imposed for speeding convictions and there can be a law library fee. If a speeding violation is committed in a manner that endangers persons or property, it can be charged as a misdemeanor with maximum penalties of a $1,000 fine, 90 days' imprisonment, or both. Minn. Stat. § 169.89, subd. 1. A driver's license will be revoked for at least six months for driving over 100 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 1 a. Minnesota does not use a point system, which assigns points to traffic violations and removes driving privileges if too many points accumulate. However, multiple speeding or other traffic violations within a year can lead to loss of a license. Minn. Stat. §§ 169.89; 171.17. Speeding violations A law first enacted in 1986 known as the "Dimler amendment" governs which on a driver's record speeding violations are recorded on a motorist's driving record maintained by the Department of Public Safety and accessed by insurance companies (but records are still kept by the courts). Speeding violations are not placed on the driving record if the driver traveled: ► no more than 10 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 55 m.p.h. zone; or ► no more than 5 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 60 m.p.h. zone. The prohibition on recording violations does not apply when the speed limit is 65 or 70 m.p.h.; if the speeding violation occurred in a commercial motor vehicle; or if the driver holds a commercial driver's license (class A, B, or C). is Minn. Stat. § 171.12, subd. 6. The Research Department of the Minnesota House of Representatives is a nonpartisan office providing legislative, legal, and information services to the entire House. House Research Department 1 600 State Office Building I St. Paul, MN 55155 1651-296-6753 1 www.house.mn/hrd/hrd.htm MINNESOTA STATUTES 2011 160.263 • 160.263 BICYCLE LANES AND WAYS. Subdivision 1. [Repealed, 1987 c 255 s 15] Subd. 2. Powers of political subdivisions. The governing body of any political subdivision may by ordinance or resolution: (1) designate any roadway or shoulder or portion thereof under its jurisdiction as a bicycle lane or bicycle route; (2) designate any sidewalk or portion thereof under its jurisdiction as a bicycle path provided that the designation does not destroy a pedestrian way or pedestrian access; (3) develop and designate bicycle paths; (4) designate as bikeways all bicycle lanes, bicycle routes, and bicycle paths. Subd. 3. Designation. (a) A governing body designating a bikeway under this section may: (1) designate the type and character of vehicles or other modes of travel which may be operated on a bikeway, provided that the operation of such vehicle or other mode of travel is not inconsistent with the safe use and enjoyment of the bikeway by bicycle traffic; (2) establish priority of right-of-way on the bicycle lane or bicycle path and otherwise regulate the use of bikeways as it deems necessary; and (3) paint lines or construct curbs or establish other physical separations to exclude the use of the bikeways by vehicles other than those specifically permitted to operate thereon. (b) The designating governing body may, after public hearing, prohibit through traffic on any highway or portion thereof designated as a bicycle lane or bicycle route, except that through traffic may not be prohibited on a trunk highway. The designating governing body shall erect and maintain official signs giving notice of the regulations and priorities established under this subdivision and shall mark all bikeways with appropriate signs. Marking and signing of bikeways by the designating governing body shall be in conformance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Subd. 4. Speed on street with bicycle lane. Notwithstanding section 169.14, subdivision 5, the governing body of any political subdivision, by resolution or ordinance and without an engineering or traffic investigation, may designate a safe speed for any street or highway under its authority upon which it has established a bicycle lane; provided that such safe speed shall not be lower than 25 miles per hour. The ordinance or resolution designating a safe speed is effective when appropriate signs designating the speed are erected along the street or highway, as provided by the governing body. r� History: 1976 c 199 s 15; 1987 c 255 s 3,4 Copyright © 2011 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. • • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING 10 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Living Streets Workshop Recap Agenda Item No.: VI.E. ACTION: ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Info/Background: This item was continued from the February 16, 2012 ETC Meeting. ETC Chair and ETC Members who attended the Living Streets Workshop will provide an update of the February 15 Living Streets Workshop. Attached are workshop notes compiled by ETC Chair Janovy. Also attached are the slides from the night -before workshop. Attachments: • Complete Street Workshop Notes • Complete Street Night -before Workshop Presentation G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VIE Living Streets Workshop Recap.docx 0 m E 0 El to 0 E 7u tn (U L- 0 0 > Iri U c C: 0 u L -c w E 0 to C m o 75 m Q) m 'U 0 vw 0 4-1 (U -0 (1) 0 w a 0 uo E E 0 tn cu m > w 4-1 4-0 m (D L- 00 4-- 0) 0 m 4-0 0 (5 0 -0 tw 0 V) r- tn to 0 V) kn u 0 E 0 a) 8- "a M (n (U u z. W :E 4, m 0 u -C tn 40 kn 4-; V) p U c - o tf 0 a (A cm 4- W a u m "a W 0 W -0 E M " -0 0 0 0 = E to 0 -c u tw tW c > -0 >- 76b inr.L taA Ci W C (U .— -te E Lp m C o caE (L) Mo m Q) a)> E m 0 CL 0 4-J tn (n u U m IV 4- m 4-J to (1) > CL cn r 0 0 0 4-J C• (U E C 0 L- > cu W w N w U w 0 (D tW E m4-1 M E -0 0 0 4-J w (A IA m M L- :3 4-1 V > w (A m u >. = CL M 0 4- 0 w 4_, M — 41 Ln (U u m bD vU 4- 0 0 u > 0 o = U tn 0 -W 4- = 0 4w- (D *r_ k 2m aE CL E 0 -0 0 c 4-J 4-J E 4n 0 E 0 E 0 U Z W > > a) 0 2 4- w 4-J tn 0 c w 0 -W 4-0 0 0 0 0 cr -1 ui k I r� 0 tio Vl O tto C a) C V o a)� 7 "a S Lcu .. �° .� (D ,�„ E u � .� lao 0-0 v' o � c u o c ^ J t '(, u .- a 4 a. >- © .M E a.� zz 1 c Ex CL v C CU 4-J C : •— ? .X _o N to o •Q) a O- bo m 10 4— I I I I I I I I I • O O o •� •� 0 V1 o V M o o = a J Z3 (A C . O Q) u u N as >► V) U m u ,c„ N Zi > r,.. © C •� �„ {-► V C c6 C (v c O f+.• "p cn .0 _3 m � ,u..r-t � u osz r� � `n ~m � � .3 v V Q � �► � � p n � q) � L utA Em �; a z U•�o Mu �G V. j 3/8/123/8/12 is Edina Living Streets Policy Development Workshop Notes 1. What will be the vision behind a new Living Streets policy? Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in a way that promotes safety and convenience and enhances community identity, economic vitality, and opportunities for active living, better health, and environmental sustainability. Living Streets: • Create space for community connections • Encourage children to walk and bike regularly • Makes Edina a place where friends and relatives want to visit or walk • Are tree lined • Make walking or biking an easy choice • Fit with land use policy and mixed use developments • Apply to new projects and reconstruction • Are a place where you want to walk • Eliminate barriers to key destinations • Provide infrastructure that encourages walking and biking in an attractive environment • Give people options It was noted that the vision statement should be something that residents aspire to; it should be inspirational; and it should be visual (so people can see it). 2. Which users and modes will be included? • All modes, all users, and all abilities • Four priorities: o Safe access for all users o Streets will vary in character (context sensitive) o Transportation network will enhance neighborhoods o Will incorporate green management • Additional attributes: o Foster income equity o Pedestrian -oriented design o Connect people, not just places o Foster active lifestyles o Be inviting places o Support healthy commerce o Be sustainable 3a. How will the policy address Living Streets needs in scoping, planning, 18 design, construction, operations, and maintenance? Living Streets include consideration of all elements of complete streets—all modes and users. Living Streets look to create more value for the investment. Process to include property owners/residents in the design. City provides information as a factual basis for decision making. Residents should be asked for positive identification of wants and goals, not negative "problems." Funding for Living Streets should come from shared public funds, rather than special assessments. City should pursue budget alternatives to minimize direct costs to residents. 3b. To which types of projects will the policy apply (new construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, operations, retrofits, and other maintenance)? All of the above. 4. What exceptions will the policy make, and how are the exceptions approved? Is there accountability? • Incorporate FHWA list for exceptions • Refer to Comp Plan and other approved documents • Have process that includes study and analysis, staff recommendation, ETC review and City Council approval 5. How will the policy address the needs to create a network for all users? How will it encourage connectivity? The policy will identify and then help to overcome barriers to active transportation. It was noted that the city should have a policy of not vacating transportation right of way. There was a discussion about identifying existing right of way easements that may not be obvious and considering whether these could be developed for pedestrian and/or bicycle paths. 6. Which roads would be covered by the proposed policy? How will it apply to roads under another agency's jurisdiction? All roads within the city's jurisdiction (local and collector) will be covered. PUD will give city leverage over private roads. The city can seek to partner with other agencies to influence decisions re: roads not within the city's control. 7. Will design guidelines be specified the policy? If so, which ones? How can it address the need for design flexibility in balancing the needs of all users? Policy should include a palette of design options for street types and should provide guidelines for minimum design. 8. How will the policy take adjoining land use/context into account? 0 City will inventory building and zoning codes to bring into agreement with Living 2 Streets principals and minimum design guidelines. Policy will include a palette of design options for street types and minimum design guidelines, from which developers can choose. Form -based zoning, which has less detail about what uses are permitted and more detail about size, shape, and features. 9. How will you know if the policy is working? What performance measures should be considered? • Percent of bicycle and pedestrian network completed • Measurement of mode shift • Surface water management plan—reduction in impervious pavement • Resident/community satisfaction • Traffic volumes and speeds 10. What implementation steps will be mentioned in the policy? • Modify City code • Review, modify, delete out -dated policies • Review special assessment policy • Educate neighborhoods—communicate • Prioritize projects in CIP—prioritize by modes; prioritize by vulnerability (in other words, look at which users are most vulnerable and address their safety, access, convenience first) • Develop options for design palette • Design charrettes • Seek out additional funding/grants • 3 lwn� Living Streets Ryan Snyder pop, Al all ',ROUTE We know how to build right Yet many roads are built like this 00, Al �•...� -7- ;_'777 a _ •. t Raleigh North Carolina Photo Takaaki Iwabu Raleigh News Observer. s A Complete Street is safe, comfortable & convenient for travel via automobile, foot, bicycle, & transit 7 8 Everyone wins with Living Streets 10 Principles of Living Streets a., a N .t,14g Streitize IIII kilo, People. Not Cars y .M A 1. Living Streets policies provide for all users ' tu. = C 12 2. Living Streets integrate income equity into their design and function `y 1 MIMI, s 4. Living streets connect people through everyday interaction and shared responsibility to street design and planning. 3. Pedestrian -oriented design a ' r 5. Enhance neighborhoods 6. Foster active life styles Aye• r 7r 8. Inviting Places 7. Green management ?AJ F Vu 9. Support Healthy Commerce 10. Vary in Character Why have a living streets policy? To shift transportation investments so they create better streets opportunistically: Take advantage of all planning, construction, operations and maintenance activities Why have a living streets policy? - To make the needs of all users the default for?:r ' everyday street design practices: • No need to prove ped, r bike and transit facilities " are needed • Rather, it's assumed they're needed unless F '' proven otherwise zz Why have a living streets policy? - To ensure existing x funds are used ,* IN differently: ` Every project creates !Fp $,. r better streets now. a MI Why have a living streets policy? To give street design =lt; professionals political and community support for innovative solutions AM that help make active y � � living possible ;_i I T CNV 1 NYC DOT zs Americans want complete streets Roads 37% Roads 79% Public Trans 41% Public Trans 20% Bike/walk 22% Bike/walk 1% From Active Transportation for America: the case for Increased federal and walking. RTC 2008 investment in bicycling 28 04 Who wants Living Streets? 14 _ All, q NIM. Most Americans would rather; i+ drive less & walk more Transit is growing faster than -" = population or driving '.ki About one-third of Americans don't drive: 21% of Americans over 65 Children under 16 x Low income Americans can't afford to drive Benefits: older Americans 21 % over 65 do not drive , Over 50% of non -drivers stay'w at home on a given day because they lack travel WK options � 54% of older Americans living in inhospitable 'r neighborhoods would walk and ride more if things improved I- 27 29 Benefits: health Benefits: physical activi S,,r,,- Pusher, "Walking and Cycling: Path t, Improved Public Health," Fit City Conference, NYC, J— 2009 30 Benefits: physical activity , Residents more likely to walk in lit a neighborhood with sidewalks , Cities with more bike lanes have more bicycling , 1/3 of regular transit users meet min. daily physical activity requirement during their commute 4 Benefits: safety I Intersections designed for pedestrians can reduce la pedestrian risk by 28% Sidewalks reduce ped crash risk by 88% 31 32 = 33 %M400 Now Americans move -14 without moving Healthy water to drink and swim in 60% are at risk for diseases associated with inactivity: • Obesity • Diabetes • High blood pressure • Other chronic diseases Benefits: physical activi S,,r,,- Pusher, "Walking and Cycling: Path t, Improved Public Health," Fit City Conference, NYC, J— 2009 30 Benefits: physical activity , Residents more likely to walk in lit a neighborhood with sidewalks , Cities with more bike lanes have more bicycling , 1/3 of regular transit users meet min. daily physical activity requirement during their commute 4 Benefits: safety I Intersections designed for pedestrians can reduce la pedestrian risk by 28% Sidewalks reduce ped crash risk by 88% 31 32 = 33 %M400 Benefits: people with disabilities Improved mobility for people' with disabilities and reduced +.*, need for expensive paratransit service ff Benefits: Less need to widen roads Trips in metro areas: 50% - less than 3 miles j 28% - less than 1 miler 65% of trips under 1 mile Y ;(V are now taken by car a a 34 36 _ Benefits: the environment _- Fewer emissions -- Less noise pollutionsu Less wear & tear on our w roads Less need to widen roads Less water runoff into local waterways Conserve and reuse water Save energy Reduce waste Benefits: the economy & your wallet Multi -modal streets: Increase home values Revitalize retail ` People can leave their car at home it T., ti V W Benefits: more livable communities Living streets create better laces to live J "` LS changes intersection design How LS changes the built environment E 38 39 40 LS changes intersection design RIM 41 LS changes bicycling AF] LS changes transit 42 LS changes bicycling z ` f LS changes transit m RI a 45 LS changes accessibility Ou- 46 LS changes water runoff treatment HE - 48 LS changes accessibility MPM lot {"$- - -, - 1, HE WhM I I LS changes water runoff treatment 47 S, • 0 The many types of Living Streets s 4Wy S i t r' Jmom `�. The many types of Living Streets 51 M The many types of Living Streets One crossing completes a Safe Route to School The many types of Living Streets 3: The many types of Living Streets m 'R Transit routes Residential skinny streets The many types of Living Street: ltf i 4" P •h" t W 5s Suburban thoroughfares 56 The many types of Living Streets R ..>,. w� t r 2 Historic Main Street 58 The many types of Living Streets y X17, ,. „ iW . w Low traffic shared streets 2 H. The many types of Living Streets ww a P 1 rl a airy �t Low traffic shared streets The many types of Livin%Streets 60 �61 62 C�5+ The many types of Living Streets High Point Redevelopment tib! + The many types of Living Streets Living Streets & Context Sensitive Solutions Living Streets doesn't`.!�(I 91 �� mean every street has sidewalks, bike lanes, transit t Context sensitivity: 1. External context: land use 2. Internal context: who is likely to use the street - bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users, drivers? d NSF A�. 66 What about funding? M Does it cost more? Living streets is about using existing resources 1. Avoid costly retrofits differently: 2. Minimal additional funding STP, Equity Bonus, CMAQ, TE, State, Bond measures, gas tax, sales taxes, and now the stimulus $... the 3. Save money with better design usual suspects While retrofit funding is important, it is not necessary to get started Additional funding is not needed Ot� 67 _ Transformative Moment A Living Streets Policy Faltering national economy ... ensures that the entire right of way is planned, designed, and operated to follow living streets principles." Increasing gas prices (Plan B). M Obesity epidemic: CDC now recommends CS to prevent obesity Growing awareness: quality of life an economic "`"" engine Climate change & sustainability 5` c • Prior to 1939 1940s 1950s 1960s a 1970s ` 1980s fl`f/ 1 1990s • • �.f / . >x� \»,� <\�� \E�%\���\ ��2/ .;� \� § \. \ »� {� ' \ \ /� � � ». 0 R 0 t 0 Separated sidewalks direct pedestrians _03 tocrosswalks 1 Slow speed exit Sputter Wand y Truck aero Crosswalk speed, onecarte \t°spedtlecuon—slow length back throughout Slow speed entry- yield 0 �°- QBa- mom. a axe; rN11AfIME .. fin'. +;krs'ii''�' PROTECTED PERMISSIVE PROTECTED • Es g Pedestrian Push Button Signal • • BEFORE ROAD DIET AFTER ROAD DIET <— •"! Transit Accommodation ARMOv - ��MM r r 1 j - mss' n ` t 1 � � 1 III ► � �' � ,la 1� r r.. 1� y t Jp yyN -40 Streetscape .:. Ecosystem ' P. : .JRf � 0111. Graf c aiming ... W R .. L Al 1� y t Jp yyN -40 Streetscape .:. Ecosystem ' P. : .JRf 0 Selected Plantings Flow From }}� L Street _Sandy Loam or Other Growing Medium Drain Rock Optional Filter Fabric or Impermeable Layer Native Soils � Optional Under Drain • f • IL W � � p ya 1 + r t • Is all • mr-It, It C-' 0 ij d b 7- 7' McDaim rill WIL ���� 7-77- LUM B MMMM 0777 MMMM MU, RR rl aJ M III I M� MM(TM mmmm MM77) TMI Lujr.-C! aimmm MmLliLl LTiLlIc E) 0 • • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws Agenda Item No.: VI.F. ACTION: ® Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Recommendation/Motion: Recommend adoption of the proposed bylaws to be then routed to the City Council by Assistant City Manager Karen Kurt. Info/Background: Attached are proposed bylaws for the Edina Transportation Commission that were distributed to the ETC at the February 16, 2012 ETC Meeting. The attached bylaws do reflect a recent change to the City Code Section 1500.07 on Quorum. These bylaws are the result of an extensive process to create unified bylaws for the City's boards and commissions. The bylaws reflect the input of a panel of representatives from each board and commission (Chair Janovy served as the ETC's representative) and the City Council. Staff is requesting that the ETC review and adopt the proposed bylaws. Assistant City Manager Karen Kurt will be collecting bylaws from each of the boards and commissions and forwarding them to the Council as a group for approval later this spring. Attachments: • Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI F Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws.docx 40 EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Section 1: Introduction The bylaws outlined below are approved procedures for the Edina Transportation Commission. Members should review and understand City Code sections 1500 and 1509 included in the appendix of these bylaws. In the event of a conflict between the City Code and the Edina Transportation Commission bylaws, the City Code will prevail. Some components of these bylaws are common across all City boards and commissions. The City Staff Liaison should be consulted prior to considering bylaw amendments. Proposed bylaw amendments should be announced one meeting prior to voting on the proposed change. Bylaw amendments require the approval of a majority of the voting Edina Transportation Commission members and approval by the City Council. In addition to the city code and these bylaws, the Edina Transportation Commission will be guided by those policies and procedural documents applicable to the Edina Transportation Commission or City advisory boards in general. Copies of these documents will be made available to members at the beginning of their service with the Edina Transportation Commission. ejection 2: Mission and Business Address Refer to city code sections 1500.01 and 1509 for the Edina Transportation Commission mission. The business office for the Edina Transportation Commission is located at Edina Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, Minnesota, 55439. Members of the public can also contact the Edina Transportation Commission at edinamail@EdinaMN.gov. Section 3: Membership Membership Composition Refer to city code sections 1500.03 and 1509.04. Terms of Membership Refer to city code section 1500.04. Contact Information Edina Transportation Commission members are required to provide a mailing address and phone number or email address to the City Clerk. This contact information is available to city staff and members of the public. Responsibilities Edina Transportation Commission members are expected to be present and adequately prepared for all meetings and to actively participate in meeting discussions. Members who are unable to complete assigned tasks should notify the 0airperson as soon as possible. 11Page EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Attendance Refer to city code section 1500.09. If a member cannot attend a regular meeting, he or she should notify the staff liaison as soon as possible and ideally no later than two hours prior to the start of the meeting. Cancelled meetings will be counted as meetings held and attended for purpose of calculating attendance percentages. Resignation or Removal Refer to city code section 1500.04. The Edina Transportation Commission may ask the City Council to review a member's appointment based on the member's failure to perform the responsibilities outlined above. Section 4: Meetings Meeting Notice Refer to city code section 1500.07. All board and commission meetings are open to the public. To comply with legal requirements and ensure accessibility to the public, the City Clerk gives official notice of all Edina Transportation Commission meetings on the City's website and at City Hall. 4egular Meetings Refer to city code section 1500.07. Regular meetings of the Edina Transportation Commission are held at Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota, 55424 or another officially noticed location on the third Thursday of the Month. A regular meeting may be rescheduled by the Edina Transportation Commission at a prior meeting. Annual Meeting In April, the Edina Transportation Commission will hold an annual meeting to: • Elect officers for the upcoming year, • Review and update bylaws as necessary, and • Affirm the regular meeting schedule for the upcoming year. Special Meetings Special meetings of the Edina Transportation Commission may be called by the Chairperson, City Council, City Manager or by the directive of a majority of the Edina Transportation Commission voting members. Members will be notified of the special meeting by written or email communication at least three calendar days in advance of the meeting. To comply with the open meeting law and to ensure accessibility to the public, the City Clerk posts official notice of all special meetings. A quorum is not required for special meetings; however, members cannot take action on a motion unless a quorum is present. Cancelling Meetings Meetings of the Edina Transportation Commission can be cancelled by the Chairperson, City Council, City Manager or by the directive of a majority of the Edina Transportation Commission voting members. Meetings may be cancelled for 10sufficient business, lack of quorum, conflict with a holiday, inclement weather or in the event of a community emergency. 21Page 0, EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Quorum A simple majority of voting members, appointed and serving, shall constitute quorum for any regular or special meeting. If a quorum is not established or maintained during the course of a meeting, no votes on board or commission business may be taken except a motion to adjourn or recess. Meeting Agendas Meeting agendas will be prepared by the Chairperson in consultation with the City Staff Liaison. Members may request that items be added to the agenda; however, the addition of such items is subject to approval by a majority of the voting members. The meeting agenda and related materials will be sent electronically (AND/OR) mailed the Thursday prior to the scheduled regular meeting. Meeting Proceedings During regular meetings, business will be conducted in the order listed below. The order of business may be changed with the support of a majority of the voting members. • Call to order • Roll call • Approval of agenda • Approval of minutes from preceding meeting • Public hearings • Community comment • Reports and recommendations • Correspondence • Commission comments • Staff comments • Adjournment Meetings will be conducted according to the latest edition of Roberts Rules of Order. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about something not on the agenda that is relevant to the Edina Transportation Commission. Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes. Chair has the right to limit the number of speakers making similar statements and to limit comments related to matters previously discussed. The Edina Transportation Commission is not required to respond to the comments. In order to maintain a respectful environment for all those in attendance, disruptive behavior such as the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing is not allowed. Motions and Voting A simple majority of voting members present and voting will decide all motions before the Edina Transportation Commission. At the request of a member, a roll call vote will be taken when there is a divided vote on any item. A tie vote on any motion will result in a failure to pass. Student members are not eligible to vote. •Meeting Minutes 3 1 P a g e EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Refer to city code section 1500.08. City staff will prepare minutes for Edina Transportation Commission meetings. The minutes will include which members were present and absent, a summary of each item discussed and any motions proposed, and the votes on those motions. If a member of city staff is not present to record minutes, the Edina Transportation Commission will appoint a secretary to prepare the minutes. The secretary will prepare draft minutes within two weeks of the meeting date and forward the draft to the Chair and City Staff Liaison. Approved minutes will be posted on the City's website and forwarded to the City Clerk for distribution to the City Council by the City Staff Liaison. Section 5: Officers Refer to city code section 1500.06. The Edina Transportation Commission will hold elections for the officer positions of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson at the annual meeting in April. The Chairperson may make and second motions and vote on all motions. The duties of the Chairperson include but are not limited to: • Prepare the agenda in consultation with the City Staff Liaison. • Lead the meeting in accordance with the agenda and facilitate discussion on agenda items. • Invoke a reasonable time limit for speakers during public testimony. • Ensure that the bylaws are followed and actions are properly taken. • Maintain meeting decorum. • Extend meetings or schedule special meetings as necessary. • Cancel meetings, in consultation with the City Staff Liaison. • Facilitate the development of the annual work plan. • Develop annual calendar of anticipated agenda items for each month. • Consult with members regarding attendance issues. • Encourage active participation by Edina Transportation Commission members and the members of the public. The Vice Chairperson performs the duties of the Chairperson in their absence. If both the Chairperson and the Vice Chairperson are absent, an acting chairperson may be assigned in advance by either officer or at the meeting by a majority vote of the members. Section 6: City Staff Liaison Refer to city code section 1500.02. The Edina Transportation Commission has a City Staff Liaison appointed by the City Manager. The City Staff Liaison is expected to work cooperatively with Edina Transportation Commission members. Members may not direct city staff but can request assistance through the City Staff Liaison to carry out the Edina Transportation Commission mission. The duties of the City Staff Liaison include but are not limited to: • Work with Chairperson to prepare and distribute meeting agendas. • Reserve meeting rooms and other needed meeting equipment. • Record and prepare meeting minutes (or delegate the responsibility to another city staff member). • Provide technical expertise and access to city resources. • Work with Chairperson to ensure bylaws are followed and annual work plans are submitted. 4 1 P a g e 10 EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws • Relay information or directives from City Council meetings or work sessions relevant to the Edina Transportation Commission. • Respond to Edina Transportation Commission inquiries in a timely manner. • Forward information to and between Edina Transportation Commission members. • Record meeting attendance, include the current attendance record with each packet and consult with the Chairperson and City Clerk regarding attendance issues. • Provide orientation materials to new members and chairperson. • Handle funds allocated to the Edina Transportation Commission in accordance with its directives, city policies and legal requirements. • Serve as the custodian of Edina Transportation Commission records. • Work with City Clerk to serve all notices required by law or these bylaws. Concerns with the performance of the City Staff Liaison should be directed to the Assistant City Manager. Section 7: Committees and Working Groups Introduction ommittees or Working Groups may be established by a majority vote of the Edina Transportation Commission to study issues in greater depth and report findings. Committees or Working Groups present their analysis to the Edina Transportation Commission for discussion and recommendations. The Edina Transportation Commission has the sole authority to make final recommendations on all matters on which a Committee or Working Group has given guidance. The Edina Transportation Commission defines the scope and the duration of the Committee or Working Group's mission. In no case may the Committee or Working Group exceed the authority granted by the Edina Transportation Commission. Committee and Working Group participants may not include enough voting Edina Transportation Commission members to constitute a quorum for the Edina Transportation Commission. Committees or Working Groups may be designated as standing (ongoing) or temporary in nature. Definitions Committees and Working Groups may be comprised of two or more people, one of which is the chair appointed by the Edina Transportation Commission. A Committee is comprised of current Edina Transportation Commission members only. A Working Group is led by a Edina Transportation Commission member, but will also include members of the public. Working Group Announcement Public notice will be given of the formation of any Working Group, including a press release from the City to local media outlets. Individuals will have a minimum of 14 days after the public notice to express interest in joining before members are selected. ,mPublic Access rased on the potential public interest in the topic, some Committees and Working Groups meetings may be designated as public meetings by the Edina Transportation Commission or the City Council. If a Committee or Working Group's 51 Page I* EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws meetings are designated as public meetings, official meeting notices, written agendas and written minutes are required. Refer to Section 4 of these bylaws for additional information on meeting notices. Appointments and Chair Assignments Committees: The Edina Transportation Commission Chairperson will ask for Committee volunteers from the Edina Transportation Commission membership. A majority vote may approve the Committee appointments once sufficient volunteers are established. The Committee will elect its own chair and notify the Edina Transportation Commission Chairperson. Working Groups: The Edina Transportation Commission Chairperson will ask for volunteers from the Edina Transportation Commission to serve as the Working Group Chair. The Working Group Chair is approved by a majority of the Edina Transportation Commission members. The Working Group Chair will recommend other Working Group members. By definition, those members will include individuals outside of the Edina Transportation Commission. The Chair may also nominate a co-chair who is not a Edina Transportation Commission member. Working Group appointments will be made by a majority vote of Edina Transportation Commission members. The duties of the Committee or Working Group Chair(s) include but are not limited to: • Set the meeting schedule and, if required, notify the City Staff Liaison for public notification. • • Prepare and distribute a written meeting agenda, if required. • Lead the meeting in accordance with the agenda and facilitate discussion on agenda items. • Ensure that this section of the bylaws and Edina Transportation Commission directives are followed. • Maintain meeting decorum. • Recommend members and notify Edina Transportation Commission of changes in membership (Working Group only). • Report on the Committee or Working Groups activities at each regular Edina Transportation Commission meeting. • Communicate to the Committee or Working Group any directives, questions or input from the Edina Transportation Commission. Resignation or Removal A Committee or Working Group member may voluntarily resign by submitting his or her written resignation to the Chair of the Committee or Working Group. A Committee or Working Group member may be removed by a majority vote of the Edina Transportation Commission. Disbanding A Committee or Working Group may be disbanded at any regular meeting of the Edina Transportation Commission by a majority vote of the members. Committees or Working Groups will automatically be disbanded if no member of the Edina Transportation Commission is available to serve or appropriate volunteer membership cannot be established. 6 1 P a g e 10 EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Section 8: Communication Applicability This section applies to all types of media and communication methods including face-to-face, telephone, email and social media. Communication Between Members Outside of Meetings Edina Transportation Commission related communication between members when a quorum of voting members is present constitutes a violation of open meeting laws if it takes place outside of publicly -noticed meetings. Members are prohibited from discussing Edina Transportation Commission business in such a situation. Since email communication is common outside of meetings, the following email protocol is adopted: • Any email communication intended for a majority of Edina Transportation Commission members should go through the City staff Liaison so that an appropriate record can be established. • Members should not respond "reply all" to group messages. • Members should not blind copy (bcc) other members. Members must not engage in a serial discussion of Edina Transportation Commission business. A serial discussion occurs when members discuss official business with a majority of voting members through successive communications. Serial mmunication can occur through a combination of communication methods such as face to face, email, telephone or on a social media site. Communication with the Public Outside of Meetings Edina Transportation Commission members are encouraged to share their work with members of the public within the guidelines noted in the paragraph below. When communicating Edina Transportation Commission business with the public, members should understand and convey the following: • The deliberations and decisions of the Edina Transportation Commission will be based solely on information contained in the public record presented to all Edina Transportation Commission members participating the deliberation or action. • The member's comments do not represent the opinion or viewpoint of other commissioners or the Edina Transportation Commission as a whole. Members should exercise care not to communicate how they intend to vote on any pending matter or give the appearance any matter has been pre -decided. Public Announcements and Press Releases The City's Communications and Marketing Department will approve and coordinate any public announcements, press releases or other media contact desired by the Edina Transportation Commission. • 7 1 P a g e 16 EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws Section 9: Financial Transactions All financial expenditures by the Edina Transportation Commission must relate to the Edina Transportation Commission mission and be covered under the Edina Transportation Commission budget. All expenditures must be approved in advance by a majority of the voting members. The City Staff Liaison is responsible for ensuring that all approved expenditures or reimbursements meet the criteria above as well as other city financial policies. Expenditures that do not meet the criteria above will not be reimbursed. The Edina Transportation Commission does not have the authority to execute contracts or to otherwise financially obligate the City of Edina. Any contract related to Edina Transportation Commission business will be managed by the City Staff Liaison and may be subject to City Council approval. Section 10: Ethical and Respectful Conduct Conflict of Interest Members may not use their position on the Edina Transportation Commission for personal benefit. The interests of the Edina Transportation Commission must be the first priority in all decisions and actions. Any member who has a financial interest in, or who may receive a financial benefit as a result of, any Edina Transportation Commission action or decision must disclose this fact as a conflict of interest. A member who has disclosed a conflict of interest should abstain from Discussion and voting on the matter. Gifts Edina Transportation Commission members may not receive personal gifts from any "interested person" in conjunction with their board and commission duties. An "interested person" is a person, or representative of a person or an association, who has a direct financial interest in a recommendation under the Edina Transportation Commission's purview. This section does not apply to lawful campaign contributions. The Edina Transportation Commission may recommend acceptance of general gifts or donations through the City's donation policy. Respectful Behavior The City of Edina is committed to providing a work environment free from violence for all elected and appointed officials, employees and visitors. The City does not tolerate any form of violence in the workplace including threats or intimidating actions by or against any of the groups cited above. Violence and threats may include, but are not limited to: • Any act which is a physical assault • Any threat, behavior or action which is interpreted by a reasonable person to carry the potential to harm or endanger the safety of others, or result in an act of aggression, or destroy or damage city property. The Chairperson and City Staff Liaison have the right to call for the immediate removal of anyone who threatens or commits an act of violence on City property. Respectful behavior also includes how Edina Transportation Commission members relate to each other, City staff and members of the public. Members share a joint responsibility in modeling, monitoring and addressing behavior within the oup. 8 1 P a g e EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Bylaws During Edina Transportation Commission interactions, members should strive to: • Treat people with courtesy, politeness and kindness • Encourage others to express their opinions and ideas • Listen to what others have to say • Use the ideas of others to improve decisions and outcomes • Recognize cultural differences Members should avoid: • Speaking over or cutting off another individual's comments • Insulting, disparaging or putting down people or their ideas • Bullying other members by displaying a pattern of belittling, demeaning, judging or patronizing comments. How to Report Members can report cases of unethical conduct to the City Staff Liaison, Assistant City Manager, City Manager or City Attorney. • • 9 1 P a g e c: REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: 1494 Auxiliary Lane Municipal Consent Agenda Item No.: VI.G. ACTION: ® Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Recommendation/Motion: Recommend that the City Council approve the attached draft resolution for Municipal Consent for the 1494 Auxiliary Lanes. Info/Background: Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) presented the improvements of the 1494 Corridor at the January 19, 2012 ETC Meeting. MNDOT is now asking the City of Edina for Municipal Consent for the addition of Auxiliary Lanes on 1494. The bridge replacement project at Xerxes Avenue over 1494 is also scheduled to be replaced at the same time as the addition of the auxiliary lanes. MNDOT staff has agreed to place an enhanced crosswalk at Xerxes Avenue and Edinborough Way as requested by the ETC. A sketch of this intersection will be available at the ETC Meeting. As per State Statute, the City Council has scheduled a Public Hearing for this request for April 3, 2012, see attached report. Staff is requesting that the ETC review and recommend to the City Council to approve the Municipal Consent for this project. Scott Pederson with MNDOT will be present to answer any questions you may have regarding the project. Attachments: • Draft Resolution • City Council Report of March 6, 2012 Setting Public Hearing G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item A G 1494 Auxilary Lane Municipal Consent.docx RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION APPROVING MUNICIPAL CONSENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF 1-494 AUXILIARY LANE Whereas, the Commissioner of Transportation has prepared a final layout for the improvement of Westbound Interstate 494 within the Cities of Bloomington, Richfield, and Edina from Trunk Highway 100 to Interstate 35W and seeks the approval thereof, and Whereas, the final layouts are on file in the Minnesota Department of Transportation Office, Roseville, Minnesota being marked, labeled and identified as Layout No. 1 B SP 2785- 364 from Ref. Pt. 5+00.385 to Ref. Pt. 7+00.254, and Whereas, improvements to City Streets and appurtenances have been included in the said final layout, and Whereas, the Metropolitan Council's "Transportation Policy Plan" the Minnesota Department of Transportation — Metropolitan District's "20 year Transportation Improvement Plan" identifies Interstate 494 as a future managed corridor, and Whereas, the City believes the implementation of a managed corridor on Interstate 494 should only be considered at such time when analysis confirms that the managed lane costs and benefits are positive and consistent with the MnPASS System Study -Phase 2, and Whereas, the City believes that the management strategy for the Interstate 494 corridor should consist of a segment of roadway that provides a logical starting point and a logical terminus supported by analysis. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: The City supports the construction of the proposed auxiliary lane on Interstate 35W and the reservation of that capacity for the conversion to a managed lane as part of a corridor -wide managed lane initiative, and Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: The final layouts designated as Layout Number 1 B SP 2785-364 for the provisions of a lane of capacity on Westbound Interstate 494 between Trunk Highway 100 and Interstate 35W located within the corporate limits be and is hereby approved. 0 G:\PW\INFRAS\AGENCIES\STATE\MNDOT\1494\2010 Auxiliary Lane Proposal\Resolution No. 2012-_ 1494 Auxiliary Lanes.docx • • REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.H. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE ® Action City Engineer ❑ 0— Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution 2012-43 Setting April 3, 2012 Public Hearing for Municipal Consent —1494 Auxiliary Lane ACTION REQUESTED: Set public hearing date of Apri 1494 auxiliary lane between Interstate 494 and the exit ra Highway 100. 13, 2012, to consider adoption of the municipal consent for northbound Interstate 35W entrance loop to westbound mp from westbound Interstate 494 to northbound Trunk INFORMATIONIBACKGROUND: As per State Statutes, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) is required to submit a Municipal Consent Package for MNDOT projects that are proposed within a municipality and that affect certain operations of the transportation system. Attached you will find a letter from MNDOT outlining the city's responsibility along with supporting submittals. The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the preliminary bridge and roadway layout at their January 19, 2012, meeting and is expected to review the final layout at their March 15 meeting. The bridge located across 1494 at Xerxes Avenue will also be replaced at the same time as this project. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012-43 February 8, 2012, Letter from MNDOT G:\PW\INfRAS\AGENCIES\STATE\MNDOT\Xerxes Avenue Bridge over 494\Item W.H. Resolution No. 2012-43 Setting April 3, 2012 Public Hearing for Muncipal Concent - 1494 Auxiliary lone.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2012-43 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR MUNICIPAL CONSENT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF 1494 AUXILIARY LANE WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is improving the 1494 auxiliary lane between northbound Interstate 35W loop to westbound Interstate 494 and the exit ramp from westbound Interstate 494 to northbound Trunk Highway 100; and WHEREAS, MnDOT is required to receive Municipal Consent for projects within a municipality that affect certain operations of the transportation system; and WHEREAS, the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the preliminary bridge and roadway layout at their January 19, 2012, meeting and is expected to review the final layout at their March 15 meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that a public hearing shall be held on the 3rd day of April, 2012, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to consider improvement of 1494 and Xerxes Avenue Bridge; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Dated: March 6, 2012 Atte Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 120 City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.Qov - 952-826-0371 - Fax 952-826-0392 Minnesota Department of Transportation 1500 West County Road 132 Roseville, MN 55113 February 8, 2012 CQrYOFEW Mr. Wayne Houle City of Edina —Director of Public Works 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, Minnesota 55439 RE: SP 2785-364 1-494 Municipal Consent Dear Mr. Houle: I am transmitting a copy of the staff approved layout for the above referenced project. This project provides for the construction of an auxiliary lane on Westbound Interstate 494 between the Northbound Interstate 35W entrance loop to Westbound Interstate 494 and the exit ramp, from Westbound 494 to Northbound Trunk Highway 100. Two other projects are being developed in conjunction with this project that will replace the Xerxes Avenue Bridge over Interstate 494 and resurface Interstate 494 between Trunk Highway 100 and • 24th Avenue. The project(s) are currently programmed for a June 8, 2012 letting. • Construction for the projects is anticipated to begin In the Fall of 2012 and be completed In the Fall of 2013. The proposed project is being funded with Congestion Management/Safety Project funds and does not require any local participation A project requires municipal consent if it alters access, increases or reduces traffic capacity, or the project requires the acquisition of right-of-way. This project is adding capacity to Westbound Interstate 494 and thus requires municipal consent. I have enclosed our guidance regarding the municipal consent process, all applicable laws that relate to municipal consent, a draft resolution for the proposed project, and a copy of the staff approved layout for the project. I would be happy to assist the City of Edina in any way that I can throughout the process with presentations or otherwise. Please feel free to contact me at (651) 234-7726 at any time to discuss this process. An Equal Opportunity Employer E) 0 (5 Q 0 Bloomington Consent Letter February 8, 2012 Page 2 Is Sinc el , Scott A. Pedersen, P.E. • • MnDOT Metropolitan District — Right of Way Engineer Enclosures: Staff Approved Layout 1 B Sample Resolution Guidance for Municipal Consent Applicable Statutes regarding Municipal Consent cc: John Griffith, West Area Manager April Crocket, West Area Engineer File. An Equal Opportunity Employer E) 0 HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Minnesota Department of Transportation 40 Municipal Consent Contact Steve Ryan, P. E. steve.rvan(W-state.mmus Project and Process Guidance Engineer Office of Technical Support 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 676 St. Paul, MN 55155 (651) 366-4675 Forms For a generic layout -approval resolution for use by a municipality, see Sample Resolution in the Appendix. Threshold Criteria Municipal consent should only be requested from a city if it is required. . When Required Municipal approval is required for any trunk highway project that results in any of the following within a municipality: • • Alters access, • Increases or reduces traffic capacity, or • Requires acquisition of permanent right-of-way. • (Changing capacity means adding or reducing the number of through lanes. For example, adding auxiliary lanes is not a change in capacity). Exceptions Municipal consent is NOT required (regardless of impacts to access, capacity, or RNV) for projects needed for any of the following: • Regulate traffic, or • Install traffic control devices, or • Other safety measures • The term `other safety measures" refers to traffic safety measures. For example, the addition of a turn lane is a traffic safety measure; the replacement of a structurally -deficient or fracture -critical bridge is not. 1 of 5 Municipal Consent • HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Mn/DOT Also, maintenance activities do not trigger the need for municipal consent. • Examples Permanent Easements (such as Drainage Easements) require municipal consent (because they take permanent right-of-way). Roundabouts are used for traffic regulation and as a safety measure, and thus are exceptions that do not require Municipal Consent even if they involve permanent right-of-way taking. Roles and Procedures Municipal consent should only be requested from a city if it is required. (See Threshold Criteria above). Sometimes a city may choose to waive municipal consent on a specific project. In that case the city council must pass a resolution clearly identifying the project and waiving its right to municipal consent for that project. However, the typical municipal consent process is as outlined below. Procedure (for obtaining municipal consent) 1. Mn/DOT (District) submits to the city the final layout with a letter requesting city approval. The letter includes a good faith cost estimate of the city's share of the project's cost and the following (either in the letter or in an attached report): • project purpose • route location • short description of the proposed design of the highway • any additional supporting data 2. City schedules and holds public hearing (within 60 days of submittal). City must schedule within 15 days of receiving Mn/DOT's request for approval and must give 30 days public notice. 3. City passes resolution approving / disapproving (within 90 days of public hearing). After 90 from the date of the public hearing, if the city has not passed a resolution disapproving the layout, the layout is deemed approved. 2of5 Municipal Consent 0 HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Mn/DOT 4. If city disapproves, Mn/DOT decides whether to: a. Meet city's condition(s), assuming city approved with conditions: Mn/DOT writes city a letter indicating this and attaches revised layout with change(s). This ends the MC process. b. Go to the appeal process. c. Stop the project (do not build the project, or scale project down so that municipal consent is no longer required). 5. If in the final plan Mn/DOT alters access, capacity or RNV, Mn/DOT must re -submit changed portion of plan for city's approval. (The city is not required to hold another public hearing and has 60 days to approve or disapprove). City Approval The city can approve either by a formal approval resolution (see generic resolution in Appendix), or by not passing a resolution disapproving the layout within 90 days of the public hearing. The city's review — with regards to layout approval — is limited to the project elements in the final layout that are within the boundaries of that city. A city cannot impose a condition on its approval that is outside of the city's boundaries. The process allows the city one opportunity to exercise approval or disapproval of the final layout (unless Mn/DOT alters the plan with regards to access, capacity, or right-of-way). Once a city approves the layout, it cannot rescind its approval later. If a city disapproves with conditions, and if Mn/DOT agrees to meet those conditions — and notifies the city in writing (including copy of revised layout) — then municipal consent has been obtained. The municipal consent statute applies to changes on "any route on the trunk highway system lying within any municipality." If a T.H. borders a city and no section of the T.H. is completely within the city limits, municipal consent is still required for any of the designated changes (access, capacity, or right-of-way) that do occur within that city. However, if the changes triggering the municipal consent process are on the other side of the T.H. — and thus outside the city's limits — then municipal consent is not required from that city and is not requested from that city. 3of5 Municipal Consent • HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance City Disapproval Mn/DOT If a city disapproves the final layout, Mn/DOT can stop the project (or scale it back so that municipal consent is no longer required), or Mn/DOT can take the project to the appeal process. If the city disapproves — but includes condition(s) for approval, Mn/DOT has the above options plus the option of meeting the city's condition(s), and thus obtaining the city's approval. To do this, Mn/DOT sends the city a letter to that effect with the layout attached (revised to show the change(s)). This completes the municipal consent process; Mn/DOT then has the city's approval. (Sending the letter and revised layout is NOT a resubmittal for further consideration by the city). Appeal Process The appeal process is the same for interstate and non -interstate projects. However, the Mn/DOT Commissioner is not bound by the recommendations of the appeal board with respect to interstate highways. If Mn/DOT decides to go to the appeal process, the first step is to establish an Appeal Board of three members: one member appointed by the Commissioner, one member appointed by the City Council, and a third member agreed upon by both the Commissioner and the City Council. (If a third member cannot be agreed upon, the Commissioner refers the selection to the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who then has 14 days to appoint the third member). After the appeal board is established, the Commissioner refers the final layout to the Appeal Board. The Appeal Board then has 30 days to hold a hearing at which the Commissioner and the City Council may present their cases for or against approval of the layout. Within 60 days after the hearing, the Appeal Board must make its recommendation regarding the final layout. The recommendation can be: for approval, or for approval with modifications, or for disapproval. The board can also make additional recommendations consistent with state and federal requirements as it deems appropriate. The board must submit a written report with its findings and recommendations to the Commissioner and the City Council. 4 of 5 Municipal Consent HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Mn/DOT Legal Basis The Minnesota municipal consent statutes (see links below) were revised in the 2001 legislative session. State Municipal Consent Statutes Definitions MN Statute 161.162 Highway Project Review MN Statute 161.163 Final Layout Approval Process MN Statute 161.164 Commissioner Action; Interstate Highways MN Statute 161.165 Commissioner Action; Other Highways MN Statute 161.166 Reimbursement of Expenses (for Appeal Board Members) MN Statute 161.167 Helpful Links Mn/DOT Public Involvement I* Glossary Municipality: A statutory or home rule charter city. Municipal Consent: A municipality's approval of Mn/DOT's final layout for a project on a Trunk Highway when such approval is required by State Statute — see Threshold Criteria below. (Approval is by a resolution passed by the elected council of the municipality — the City Council). Appendix Municipal Consent Process Sample City Resolution • 5of5 Municipal Consent Process Mn/DOT — HPDP/Scoping is Basic Process 1. Mn/DOT submits the final layout to the City with a letter requesting City approval of the layout. 2. The City holds public hearing within 60 days of Mn/DOT's submittal 60 days and gives a 30 -day (minimum) public notice of the hearing. Mn/DOT presents the layout at the public hearing 3. The City Council passes a resolution approving / disapproving the layout (within 90 days of public hearing). If after 90 days from the public hearing the City has not passed a 90 days resolution disapproving the layout, the layout is deemed approved 4. If the City approves, Mn/DOT can proceed with the project. 5. If the City disapproves, Mn/DOT's options are: o Make the changes requested by the City (if any) o Refer the layout to an Appeal Board o Stop the project o Modify the project so municipal consent is not required o Prepare a new final layout and start the MC process over from beginning Before Appeal: Total Maximum time = 150 days Appeal Process 1. Mn/DOT notifies the City that it is appealing. 2. An Appeal Board of three persons is established: o Mn/DOT appoints a member Undefined time to o The City appoints a member establish appeal board o Third member selected by mutual agreement between the City & Mn/DOT. If they cannot agree, Mn/DOT requests the MN Chief Justice to select. The Chief Justice appoints third member within 14 days of Mn/DOT's request. 14 days 3. Mn/DOT refers the final layout to the Appeal Board. Undefined time 4. The Appeal Board holds a hearing (within 30 days of receiving final layout from Mn/DOT). The City and Mn/DOT each present their case 30 days 5. The Appeal Board makes its recommendation (within 60 days of the hearing): 60 days o Approval, or o Approval with modifications, or o Disapproval of the final layout Maximum for Appeal Process = 104 days + (plus time to establish appeal board, etc.) 6. If the Board approves, Mn/DOT can proceed with the project. 7. If the Board disapproves, or approves with modifications, Mn/DOT's options are: o Make recommended modifications (if any), and proceed with the project o Stop the project o Modify the project so municipal consent is not required o Prepare a new final layout and start the MC process over from beginning o If it is an Interstate Highway project, Mn/DOT may proceed with the project using the layout that was not approved (and sends a report to the City and the Appeal Board stating the reasons for doing so). TOTAL Possible Time = 254 days + NOTE: If final construction plans contain changes to access, capacity, or right-of-way from the layout approved by the City, Mn/DOT resubmits the changed portion of the plans to the City for approval. (City has 60 days to approve). This holds whether municipal consent was obtained through the basic MC process or through the appeal process. 0 • 161.162, 2011 Minnesota Statutes 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.162 DEFINITIONS. Page 1 of 1 Subdivision 1. Applicability. The terms in sections 161.162 to 161.167 have the meanings given them in this section and section 160.02. Subd. 2. Final layout. (a) "Final layout" means geometric layouts and supplemental drawings that show the location, character, dimensions, access, and explanatory information about the highway construction or improvement work being proposed. "Final layout" includes, where applicable, traffic lanes, shoulders, trails, intersections, signals, bridges, approximate right-of-way limits, existing ground line and proposed grade line of the highway, turn lanes, access points and closures, sidewalks, proposed design speed, noise walls, transit considerations, auxiliary lanes, interchange locations, interchange types, sensitive areas, existing right-of-way, traffic volume and turning movements, location of storm water drainage, location of municipal utilities, project schedule and estimated cost, and the name of the project manager. (b) "Final layout" does not include a cost participation agreement. For purposes of this subdivision "cost participation agreement" means a document signed by the commissioner and the governing body of a municipality that states the costs of a highway construction project that will be paid by the municipality. Subd. 3. Final construction plan. "Final construction plan" means the set of technical drawings for the construction or improvement of a trunk highway provided to contractors for bids. Subd. 4. Governing body. "Governing body" means the elected council of a municipality. Subd. 5. Municipality. "Municipality" means a statutory or home rule charter city. History: 2001 c 191 s 3; 2002 c 364 s 3 1,++r�o•//csninir ,•Ai,icnr mn Al 1 Al 2/R/2012 • 0 161.163, 2011 Minnesota Statutes ton Minnesota Statutes 161.163 HIGHWAY PROJECT REVIEW. Page 1 of 1 Subdivision 1. Projects requiring review. Sections 161.162 to 161.167 apply only to projects that alter access, increase or reduce highway traffic capacity, or require acquisition of permanent rights-of-way. Subd. 2. Traffic safety measures. Nothing contained in sections 161.162 to 161.167 limits the power of the commissioner to regulate traffic or install traffic -control devices or other safety measures on trunk highways located within municipalities regardless of their impact on access or traffic capacity or on the need for additional right-of-way. Subd. 3. Construction program. Nothing contained in sections 161.162 to 161.167 limits the commissioner's discretion to determine priority and programming of trunk highway projects. History: 2001 c 191 s 4 1�1+r�o•/�.:nin�� rninonr mn Al 1 Al ?/Ri1)n11) 11 161.164, 2011 Minnesota Statutes 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.164 FINAL LAYOUT APPROVAL PROCESS. Page 1 of 2 Subdivision 1. Submission of final layout. Before proceeding with the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of any route on the trunk highway system lying within any municipality, the commissioner shall submit to its governing body a final layout and project report covering the purpose, route location, and proposed design of the highway. The final layout must be submitted as part of a report containing any supporting data that the commissioner deems helpful to the governing body in reviewing the final layout submitted. The supporting data must include a good faith cost estimate of all the costs in which the governing body is expected to participate. The final layout must be submitted before final decisions are reached so that meaningful early input can be obtained from the municipality. Subd. 2. Governing body action. (a) Within 15 days of receiving a final layout from the commissioner, the governing body shall schedule a public hearing on the final layout. The governing body shall, within 60 days of receiving a final layout from the commissioner, conduct a public hearing at which the Department of Transportation shall present the final layout for the project. The governing body shall give at least 30 days' notice of the public hearing. (b) Within 90 days from the date of the public hearing, the governing body shall approve or disapprove the final layout in writing, as follows: (1) If the governing body approves the final layout or does not disapprove the final layout in writing within 90 days, in which case the final layout is deemed to be approved, the commissioner may continue the project development. (2) If the final construction plans contain changes in access, traffic capacity, or acquisition of permanent right-of-way from the final layout approved by the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans where changes were made to the governing body. The governing body must approve or disapprove the changes, in writing, within 60 days from the date the commissioner submits them. (3) If the governing body disapproves the final layout, the commissioner may make modifications requested by the municipality, decide not to proceed with the project, or refer the final layout to an appeal board. The appeal board shall consist of one member appointed by the commissioner, one member appointed by the governing body, and a third member agreed upon by both the commissioner and the governing body. If the commissioner and the governing body cannot agree upon the third member, the chief justice of the Supreme Court shall appoint a third member within 14 days of the request of the commissioner to appoint the third member. Subd. 3. Appeal board. Within 30 days after referral of the final layout, the appeal board shall hold a hearing at which the commissioner and the governing body may present the case for or against approval of the final layout referred. Not later than 60 days after the hearing, the appeal board shall recommend approval, recommend approval with modifications, or recommend 10 disapproval of the final layout, making additional recommendations consistent with state and federal requirements as it deems appropriate. It shall submit a written report containing its findings and recommendations to the commissioner and the governing body. ihttnc-/hxrcxrcxr rPvienr mn crnv/ctnt1itPc/7ir1=1 Al 1114 ?/R/inl i 161.164, 2011 Minnesota Statutes History: 2001 c 191 s 5 I* 11 1AA Page 2 of 2 1)iQnni1) • 161.165, 2011 Minnesota Statutes 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.165 COMMISSIONER ACTION; INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. This section applies to interstate highways. Page 1 of 2 Subd. 2. Action on approved final layout. (a) If the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout or does not submit its findings and recommendations within 60 days of the hearing, in which case the final layout is deemed approved, the commissioner may prepare substantially similar final construction plans and proceed with the project. (b) If the final construction plans change access, traffic capacity, or acquisition of permanent right-of-way from the final layout approved by the appeal board, the commissioner shall submit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 3. Action on final layout approved with changes. (a) If, within 60 days, the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout with modifications, the commissioner may: (1) prepare final construction plans with the recommended modifications, notify the governing body, and proceed with the project; (2) decide not to proceed with the project; or (3) prepare final construction plans substantially similar to the final layout referred to the appeal board, and proceed with the project. The commissioner shall, before proceeding with the project, file a written report with the governing body and the appeal board stating fully the reasons for doing so. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right-of-way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 4. Action on disapproved final layout. (a) If, within 60 days, the appeal board recommends disapproval of the final layout, the commissioner may either: (1) decide not to proceed with the project; or (2) prepare final construction plans substantially similar to the final layout referred to the appeal board, notify the governing body and the appeal board, and proceed with the project. Before proceeding with the project, the commissioner shall file a written report with the governing body and the appeal board stating fully the reasons for doing so. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right-of-way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. _.. _ ..i . .... io:a-141 14C 1)lQl1)()11) 161.165, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 2 of 2 Subd. 5. Final construction plans issued. The commissioner shall send a complete set of final construction plans to the municipality at least 45 days before the bid opening for informational purposes. History: 2001 c 191 s 6 • • 1)i0i1)n11) 161.166, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 1 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.166 COMMISSIONER ACTION; OTHER HIGHWAYS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. This section applies to trunk highways that are not interstate highways. Subd. 2. Action on approved final layout. If the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout or does not submit its findings or recommendations within 60 days of the hearing, in which case the the final layout is deemed approved, the commissioner may prepare substantially similar final construction plans and proceed with the project. If the final construction plans change access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of right-of-way from the final layout approved by the appeal board, the commissioner shall submit the portion of the final construction plan that shows the, changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 3. Action on final layout approved with changes. (a) If the appeal board approves the final layout with modifications, the commissioner may: (1) prepare final construction plans including the modifications, notify the governing body, and proceed with the project; (2) decide not to proceed with the project; or (3) prepare a new final layout and resubmit it to the governing body for approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right-of-way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 4. Action on disapproved final layout. If the appeal board disapproves the final layout, the commissioner may: (1) decide not to proceed with the project; or (2) prepare a new final layout and submit it to the governing body for approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 5. Final construction plans issued. The commissioner shall send a complete set of final construction plans to the municipality at least 45 days before the bid opening for informational purposes. History: 2001 c 191 s 7 • Iioilnil) 161.167, 2011 Minnesota Statutes 201IMinnesota Statutes 161.167 REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES. Page 1 of 1 Members of the appeal board shall submit to the commissioner an itemized list of the expenses incurred in disposing of matters presented to them. The appeal board members shall be reimbursed for all reasonable expenses incurred by them in the performance of their duties. The commissioner shall pay these costs out of the trunk highway fund. History: 2001 c 191 s 8 • is • 0 z �/ I e --i cr- L *1-1 N pp E (D w U v) IC) t� LU Lij UV) d N L_ T 0- m v a1 L con p Q� i 3 0o Z1 O O OI, H N N QI U) L ~I E Ci CL >1 o zl > L al o cr 1 U w- F- i `~ -0 W i to L U WiJ v a + E �iZ Wi ri H 0 � N O N a oi a N 44— . 4— 0 v i- 4- o 7i T 00 4- > 0 4— 4— 4— U C U Q Q Q L (n uo 4-- �7 O U n O c l.� I`- �. 0 45 +- C Q Q Q 3 L -h +- v C C 4. CO M L(7 0 o v V; . + 7i T T 4- 4— 4— 4— U U U Q Q Q to (n uo G n CL n n l.� I`- Q Q Q c!' M L(7 0 V; . as O F -- T O U .U) � L n Qo rn/ 00 tV /lq- T V V) O 4-- U tll O ^L C Q) E U O Q s■ H CL- N Ly m -,I ti 1 O Qr) .. (A I— W Q 4 4 F- V) ,a�o N i o- Icc wW CL egg 4 J _ A 1 �t 1 ► 1 1, � !� N 0 1 1 G HvS r J a Z W WM M M • • • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Bike Edina Task Force — February 9, 2012 Minutes Agenda Item No.: VI.H.ii. ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Attachments: Bike Edina Task Force — February 9, 2012 Minutes G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI H ii Bike Edina Task Force - February 9, 2012 Minutes.docx r Bike Edina Task Force: News & Meeting Outcomes February 9, 2012 Purpose: The Bike Edina Task Force (BETF) meets to serve citizens and partner with City staff and elected officials to promote bicycle improvements in Edina for education, encouragement, infrastructure, enforcement, and ongoing assessment. We support implementation of the approved City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan that serves all levels of bicyclists, connects key destinations including safe routes to schools, and integrates with the Twin Cities' regional bike network. Our vision is a progressive bicycle -friendly community where citizens can integrate cycling into their daily lives. Time & Location: BETF monthly on the 2nd Thursday of each month at 8 p.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room at Edina City Hall. For questions contact Brad Schaeppi or Peter Kelley, Co - Chairs. Guests are welcome. Distribution: BETF, guests, City Manager, Cit Engineer, Edina Police BETF Liaison S g Y g gt. Timothy Olson, SHIP contact Robyn Wiesman, and Mayor & City Council. Also, Jack Sullivan to forward to the Edina Transportation Commission, and Dianne Plunkett Latham to post for the Edina Energy and Environment Commission. • Present: Kirk Johnson, Alex Johnson, Jennifer Janovy, Don Eyberg, Sally Dunn, Peter Kelley, Larry Olson, Tom Randall,, Rob Erickson, Marty Mathis, Carl Follstad • Absent: Brad Schaeppi , Alice Hulbert, Carl Gulbronson, Ellen Jones • Guests: None • Recorded by: Kirk Johnson 1. Tracy Avenue Improvements a. Jennifer Janovy & Peter Kelley have a copy of the feasibility study. b. Peter relayed that Wayne Houle stated that bike lanes do not add significant costs. c. Some widening is needed on the west (4 ft) to accommodate parking on the east side of the street & bike lanes on both sides of street (unless parking is eliminated, then widening is not needed). d. No parking study was completed. If parking were removed, all residents would have side street parking within reasonable distances. Staff is not proposing removing parking, but is proposing reducing the number of spaces by adding parking bays. There are currently about 54 parking spaces on this section of Tracy; with parking bays there would be about 28. e. Noted that there will be a street reconstruction and there will be assessments regardless of the addition of bike lanes or maintenance of parking. Because Tracy is a state aid street, residents are assessed 20% of the project cost. f. Agreed that BETF advocates inclusion of the bicycle lanes on Tracy, due to proximity to Countryside School, connection to Edina High School and Valley View, plus intersection with Benton which is included in a first priority recommendation for bicycle routes according to the Comprehensive Plan. BETF is hesitant to advocate for the roundabout unless specific bicycling facilities are included to make it clear and safe for cyclists. Experienced cyclists may feel comfortable riding in the roundabout; they are advised to take the full lane and not drive near the perimeter for safety. Off -ramps from bike lanes onto an extra wide sidewalk should be provided for less experienced cyclists. It was noted the ramps and extra wide sidewalk are not shown in the current roundabout design. If needing to rank options between roundabout and realignment option, the realignment may be the better alternative as it is more typical for bicyclists, walkers, and motorists. Kirk Johnson and Peter Kelley to prepare a letter of support for the city council. 2. TLC Bicycle Boulevard a. Consultant is moving ahead with plans. b. Formally to be presented at the ETC meeting next week. c. Public meeting will be end of February or later. d. Steve Clark from TLC (grant provider) has been involved. 3. Bicycle Racks Installations: Wayne Houle is waiting for racks to be delivered. The mild winter may allow installation before spring (if the racks are received in time). 4. Road striping priorities: A city engineer is working on these for the four roads (70tH, Cahill, Antrim, and Valley View) selected earlier for first treatments from the Bicycle Plan. 5. Bicycle Rodeo a. Saturday, April 21" at Cornelia from 10 a.m. to noon. b. Larry Olson sent a signup sheet and expects everyone and their helpers to be involved. 6. ETC Topic: Edina Shares the Road signs: Any inputs? There is a goal to have common wayfinding in the Twin Cities metro area. Jennifer Janovy will do some research. 7. Peter's recap from talking with Wayne Houle: a. No particular policy for sweeping routes for bicycle lanes — might be addressed in future policy. BETF supports Edina Engineering Department and or Public Works in defining this policy. b. Discussed benefits of improving the gap in bicycle lane going west on Interlachen to north on Blake. BETF supports Edina Engineering Department to continue working through this issue (apparently tied to a variance from the property owner). 8. Tour de Edina 2012: Marty Mathis is participating this year. Marty will let BETF know how to help behind the scenes. Kirk Johnson will inform Mary Brindle that Peter Kelley and Brad Schaeppi are BETF leads this year. 9. Facebook page is up to 25 people. Peter Kelley will look into settings for adding people. 10. Website: Blog entry is written. Peter will post Kirk's article and photos for winter lighting. Goal is to have at least two articles a month. Peter will have an editorial schedule next meeting to accomplish this. 11. Living Streets meeting: Coming up February 15th. Alice Hulbert and Rob Erickson expressed interest to attend, Jennifer will follow-up. There is an open meeting also on February 14th. Contact Jennifer for more information. • • REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING °I 1 n REPORT/RECOMMENDATION IM��.Ii011111711 To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: Grandview Small Area Study Agenda Item No.: VI.H.W. ACTION: ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ® Information Info/Background: Edina Transportation Commission Member Paul Nelson requested that we distribute the attached Grandview District Development Framework. Attachments: • Grandview District Development Framework G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI H III Grandview Small Area Study.docx ME 10 Q 0 0 0 0 "s O N N N N a c c c :. v a) N N k > > > ` LU � � cr b� L O tQ F �A : 4u .. V 3 � a. Q 0 0 0 0 "s O N N N N a c c c :. v a) N N k > > > ` LU � � cr b� tQ F �A °o Z xw Z= °ateb4j u e r -cc o 14. o C u 0 C ce �., ' Cl. u p Q h C," Q u o u C '�., C �,; �.. 'Lu7 w O by �O. o •C C b u O a O ° ca w N O C O �� bQ O .fl H N a o� .V �u °� C ° �; qw v•C.- bpi; o o ^o r- U�o ��� a.ty Myo �aya3 bt°n QOcV u u„ ai x ,� w u ci Cd uO � 0 a °o a o w ` PI >c" °:?�� a��'o•;�x opa ,C_, ° u a m 'o z dui ui D~ -� >i as o •ten "'C u p., vii � .� u U '� '�"' [ O u Tp u NCIS E un ��'-o cd "o a. o o b o a o G �-o'y w o Co, ° o �ocn� `,30°x' °'�� �O now''o n�'��`° ago �cE �u'� u�a a"i Q O C U > C C Cllu u' +� u„ C ti .0 C cd •yy O .b o O o .� •� OQ ti E o u, c" to U ua U C G U. Q 0. c� U�: �w P, u,'u w U� h H.-+ P, o,u CY, u b u o �•� C P. 4; o u o �Ub u 3 b y � b b OIj ro a� �(7 Q ao O� u p c�1�CQ �^�� o O u eC6w E �3b3P. o cau °n rte° o a� Bob4 Cu Q Co .e u u "n u C v u ,C, C ca C f3 .0 w C C �. cd O> .0 tia3 abn �°bnU�. o° m tj d U o W ° 0 c= bo cd 0 c o 91 'C o m a> C _'d �° �" o � d G G Ei 4 k u N c bqp EU op C u° Q u o ° 5 o ano �Mo.b 5 v u Ccz 'r „cC7�a ua�3U'�cW .P, 0►a o� a+ p 0 am a+ ,C u u u 3 u ca C ed Q C O ca ° Q -v c ° cb >'0 30 a �w U� 4,>> Nd o Cd M C C u E + v C hq d p tC7 '3 �c td N C u O C Y b w o ati ��,�b C o C 3 cn �; ^� h �" •`�'' •u m 'v 'a p U °~ O O aCtii u .Zj u 8 N 'G .�, to J W ,�' ct p cn cd cn�°naC4�°afar F- t7. a+ �, ce � N u Cd Citi a° gi p 3 3 bo q oC .d Cd4.W v�lu N a G b"� o n vv� c bo cn a a° a� W& a bn C o o u u �' v e� ccl Cate+ v W avv o 'ou p > � '� -o a ' a o 6n > C." "3' � o Cs u cq u o C °w''�gu.°�,` of `,-�0 3 ; �ooC�o,'o0„3 C°a.0 M ° va b .O�' tCapC ba..oE03z,- ; ub0u Tv�su��aou� q�ac�o- u �cxv0' `"� --SE3b cC3 vui a. u u y A o C p,.41 � u ..° u ens ti. a.. u u E x O" 5 a+ O "U . u b °u u v '� c, O 'O u "C " u O p p U cd G.. u CC m u h u � ca C y v L7 u p C u> �., o �' x �"' 'U .b �' �. C> a.+ O C bA m w O E fn O +' C .. u u O O C u ca C C R a3i w 'T7 u b u W c$ '� `� o C O>" .0 ti .° O u 5 E O -moo a S. °' a u o ��>ss �: m —r.- vC'su U o g c o bac`��° Q C '� a O j 5 ca C 'o c° a q�q '7 u > .� " b4 O w a. C v p 0. aq U, O bA' 7 u bA U ti cOe �'j bbo- v GD 'Cd c� p L cu aen u �p �!� w cv aQ.�Q w � x CIS� o m M P • Qt m • 14 L� y � G 0 SG C O' c+e+S v C', O C� boo ,5 CCG O '9 mgo C° --no 0 cCd u-00 3 `n u C a� 3 t- cs 4 ae abn C 0 3 w c3i aU a a „ iy� d °o 0 O LL co v, C DCO u a Via' o e X,, (a, CIS u c,: av „ u u u cCa" yj h Ccd bG U o0 42 14 L� • Z5 M 0 c 0 4- (Q O 0 - Ln Ln c (O AW -a N C Q 2 a- x c w A N M r � 0 8 c CL ; • IN • • N M uE 2� v oooaN`u a° Ow �� Nw N 2 n qa o O b u h N •u aN O 0�Z44-1 .) ;; a� °3 C o� o� a� udcd 5�-- w u 'x w ., w C u u n 79 >U �o :1 �u bu C fz Y p L^3 y 7 C �U°C-d3w°���Q°o. U cd u N M • M U � � Y � •U '�' C-' U c� v, au -d a ° ° o cd C a+ b V tg� r- t,.n o o w -u O O -o a -,o 72 o v u C �c � WCd b O C O C �n Dov° 3 w a F— a C CIS ° 3 F; 6. or acd 0 . , � \\ 50 m a \ }\ 2 � � 7 ■ )\ \ }\ |I � \ � a � a . , � \\ 50 m a � }\ � 7 ■ )\ }\ |I � , � •2 c K § d © §�$$/ 42. } ) f±§ / / 2 \$Q © $ ! b c t { ` \ / % LU \£[ k?{%%\ �_ E g ip- e— $ § f ( t Ka\ u c > 5 $ e 0 \ § / ƒ \ S \ 4 � ru 2 v � 41 . , � \\ 50 m §� }\ )\ }\ |I � 42. } ) f±§ / / 2 \$Q © $ cem :\o c t LU \£[ . , � \\ 50 m 0 ZrI / } 0 z B /§ % 2'% \ / ■ § e ; ƒ §$\/� ©$±$w� 20. E { E § E E & E 5 • t, M Li MY 1 0 m r. Mitis I ■NA...0.. r I Fil w C v Q 1- i -9 p be}}v.�� O i : o C's ,u,� "d U -0�'' V . ca M ' h o aQ a c v n o on' 4-1> u C 'otn +-+ Q u 'b�" •a' u ani Q Q N C u ro V. 4 Q C au > CQ E ly m pa ° aa3 0 0 I Fil w • a 0 Ll c X W C .N w GJ 0 0- 0 d 0 0- 0 L 5 � v s a a: d v cu N N d is Z� z� N Z- en 0 0 a ° u U FZlu G a h u cii h 4.)ccss u O h' y ti C p � Cn x � C ti C ^d u a' O Q a �" LYi ti Z 'c u U0 4jO a L v, cdCd a:-aaaCaaa�aQCa.",QaCa:aE°x� cuw a •F-+ � U 0. S � O U O 4 C C u Q cQ v ti b O ti "t7 C bjp X v f� vii Q C C ctic a� y �v 'd C O �i X v �C C a' Q �'' 'O' O •i ,�.u `,� O O �y c�a amu" Q ° L� p 0 gyp". cn �cCa �F CQ �'UUP�,�, �f�' v1 C y 0D a+ aQi u u v E �P I a v � OC G p E 'C W�VJC7(nQ E""��4pF.,iP. u UU.ti"UCA Ln i -I M Ln ko m 144- Ln c 0) +� E C E L V Ln V O j O 4J = O x I— w M 1 4 zo Z y.. H Z � o :n a pq O u .- c; w o 3 mei C C o 'Zi u u w C o 0 C� O u -°o u a axe's' o 3 :n ' ,� b u u> G o 'v �+ w o id y C .� 'c u V ^G Pa R H 'N H O to m u `" H Cp w w ,- .V ti w u u u C o u 41 aQ o "u ua C w •5 o u O.d "q -> -0 u b C cd yj Ll U bCro a.+ u O O> C H y C }' O N h m fL u C 0 n Cd a? 41. C C •b Tu7 u CO H u C2 u H Zo td -0 -CC 'C p cd O o ~ou Cm Cl E H 'Q 0.� u li a�Gr O . C ` i .0 u O cd u w m o bq N o O ,- O u CL V SCA u 'u, 3 •� O u C C .2 Cd E a� CLQ a o o r. Ei .0 w w �vti cd u O w 0 �C C u C u C y ai •C u u a uC, ,a�d q '� o w n E" C G. u N o V � '� U 41 u > C u u Q `� u buo o u o a`di o Cd p p a+ m"U h u a�b CQ 0 3U'� C �' O U U P, 3 u a p .0 m u u u o _CM Ou Wu .5 Hu 3+ Ep^ .scd d -� M w h C u Cd bano.� kva C d� N u o °Cz 1.4 ;� '� C O E 'd u > U u u 'c7 �A Op by c� NUQ 'o, 0. a u.a o C ti �d a wcNd w [ 'y0 .0 .2 o 2 a E i ? b0 .e .s � [ '.`�� N Epi �s Cd o o -d C a u o[ cCd C a. u u u 'C7 7 u° U h +-� ,� 3 H C 'S7 �' p ~N sem. U u w w td y (�. u /`�� , fl 4„ w �++ d• N C C (1" ;+ w O°j ivn� 0 u N 10, -0t4, .0 u o .a u u uv O o -c z a �° E bA ° Lam` 0 o C Q o t o o n a o o H Cd 3 u u c H r. ON w O ci "20 O 0 u bq °¢r -0 q u W u I `p CM UbA u O a, Cd 0u °.? a�'[bnuE w u G v ti v p Q O v w u cd c>d u (� bo pu pC bq u .d o o -cd C O C/J u ..0 k H u C cd c� cd .-� O u a+ p CQ � H H� u u Y u Y Cl y, cd p •N >i u o o W o0 0 o-� v° 3 N ;; °o ° �3 c p� o h ° c 3-V C x u o -c R c° uN 3° o ° u o3 V.`d o'a d ax Q L li a. u U a4 Cl V) o U u C o u U O� w .-i ;� N M 0 • u �.„4 C C u U u p u cU 5.aC,3 cl cdcts p •H .� �, ,� C N p., u u cz O bu0 -G 51:°>� our �-d a o a I2 lu 41 t4. 'tj O u y .w. cCi Q. C u �v o U -S boa z o o w u oc o �c Ea �u C� c ob �3 uCr, yw� u C C f u cdC C O cd y� ca -0u u aj 03 u u u C o �X o u C u o u Q u 3U a° u w ow e m • �MoaR�e 2ti9/ REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 15, 2012 Subject: TLC Bike Boulevard Update Agenda Item No.: VI.H.v. ACTION: ❑ Recommendation/Motion ❑ Discussion ❑ Information . Info/Background: Alliant Engineering is waiting for a reply from MNDOT as to the use of Auxiliary Bike Lanes on the project. We are hoping to share an update at the ETC Meeting, which we will then be able to set public meeting dates. • G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120315\20120315 Item VI H v TLC Bike Boulevard Update.docx 0 L G LI 0 0 Edina Transportation Commission Roll -Call Sign -in Sheet March 15, 2012 La t Name First Name Signature Bass Katherine aden Ann ranzen Nathan er Surya danovy Jennifer aForce Tom lq-elson Paul chwei er Steven Thom son Michael hited Courtney r