HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-11-15 Meeting PacketAgenda
Transportation Commission
City Of Edina, Minnesota
City Hall, Community Room
Thursday, November 15, 2018
6:00 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda
IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A.Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of October 25, 2018
V.Community Comment
During "Community Comment," the Board/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 Board/Commission Members to respond to their
comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for
consideration at a future meeting.
VI.Reports/Recommendations
A.Advisory Communication: Chowen Park A/B Beard Avenue
Sidewalk
B.Approve Amended Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy
C.Tra.c Safety Report of November 6, 2018
VII.Chair And Member Comments
VIII.Sta1 Comments
IX.Calendar Of Events
A.Schedule of Meeting and Event Dates as of November 9, 2018
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 ampli6cation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861
72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Date: November 15, 2018 Agenda Item #: IV.A.
To:Transportation Commission Item Type:
Minutes
From:Liz Moore, Engineering Specialist
Item Activity:
Subject:Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of October
25, 2018
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve the meeting minutes of the regular Edina Transportation Commission of October 25, 2018.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
DRAFT Minutes: Edina Transportation Commission October 25, 2018
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Transportation Commission
Community Conference Room
October 25, 2018
I. Call To Order
Vice Chair Ahler called the meeting to order
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call were commissioners Ahler, Ayelomi, Johnson, Kane, Olson, Scherer, Zimbwa
Absent: Commissioners McCarthy, Richman, Ruthruff, and Veluvali
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion was made by commissioner Johnson and seconded by commissioner Olson to
approve the agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion was made by commissioner Olson and seconded by commissioner Johnson approving
the amended September 20, 2018 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried.
V. Special Recognitions and Presentations
A. Living Streets Project Scoring Tool
Mehjabeen Rahman presented the Living Streets Project Scoring tool and some suggestions were
made by the commissioners.
• Add arts and culture into the matrix
• Bump-outs are bad for bikes
• Implement for 2020 projects and pilot with 2019 projects
VI. Community Comment
None.
VII. Reports/Recommendations
A. 2019 Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Draft Engineering Studies
Assistant City Engineer, Aaron Ditzler, addressed the ETC’s questions and discussed the 2019
neighborhood reconstruction projects. The following comments were made:
• Chowen Park:
o Concrete alleys are not proposed for replacement but they may be repaired at no cost
to residents because they would be considered maintenance and paid from a different
fund.
o The number of tear down/rebuilds was requested.
o Beard will be the only sidewalk.
o Boulevards are city right of way but residents are responsible for maintenance.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
o The ETC would like to see the Living Streets scoring tool used for the 2019 projects.
o Beard sidewalk is being paid for using PACS funds.
• Indian Trails
o Assessments are REU’s divided by total cost.
o Indian Trails B and C are being constructed together because they have similar
pavement conditions.
o The cul-de-sacs should be assessed separately.
o The historical pictures are helpful.
o The retaining wall should be paid for by the residents that will benefit from it.
o Paiute Pass had a stormwater project completed in 2015 and the road was repaved
then, why are we reconstructing this when the pavement is still new?
• Todd Park
o Cars will be able to pass but it will be tight.
• Indian Hills
o A concern over this project being a standalone and not being combined with a previous
project was raised since we are combing the Indian Trails projects.
Motion was made by commissioner Olson and seconded by commissioner Johnson to write
an advisory communication to the City Council in support of the Beard Avenue Sidewalk
Construction in the Chowen Park A and B project area. All voted Aye. Motion Carried.
B. CloverRide Route and Stop Recommendations
Commissioner Olson presented the ridership and changes to the CloverRide route.
Motion was made by commissioner Kane and seconded by commissioner Scherer to approve
the updated route map for the CloverRide Circulator Bus. All voted Aye. Motion Carried.
C. Traffic Safety Report of October 2, 2018
Motion was made by commissioner Olson and seconded by commissioner Kane to approve
the October 2, 2018 Traffic Safety Report. All voted Aye. Motion Carried.
VIII. Chair And Member Comments
• Commissioner Kane asked what the plan is for Grandview Green.
• Commissioner Scherer said his daughter was born on the same day as Open Streets.
• Commissioner Olson said Open Streets was a great success and to remember to vote.
• Commissioner Ahler said the at Open Streets, most people stayed on the end that had
entertainment and that there will be a City Council Forum in the Morningside Neighborhood
on Sunday, October 28 at 3:00 P.M. at Weber Park.
IX. Staff Comments
• LimeBike introduced scooters to Edina and bike ridership went down.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
• Metro Transit will begin studying Bus Rapid Transit in Edina and will be having open houses in
December.
• The Three Rivers Park Board approved snow removal along the Nine Mile Creek Regional
Trail and will also be finishing the trail under 169.
• City Manager reviewed the work plan and the following were noted
o Approved TDM and working with planning commission
o Remove #3 due to cost concerns but said #3 & #4 could potentially be combined.
o Add Race and Equity to plan
• 2019 Calendar was presented to the commission.
Motion was made by commissioner Olson and seconded by commissioner Johnson to move
the October 17, 2019 meeting to October 24, 2019 meeting. All voted Aye. Motion Carried.
X. Calendar of Events
A. Schedule of Meeting and Events as of October 19, 2018
For information purposes - no discussion.
XI. Adjournment at 7:40 PM
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE
J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance %
Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
NAME
Ahler, Mindy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90%
Johnson, Kirk 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 80%
Iyer, Surya 1 1 2 100%
LaForce, Tom 1 1 2 100%
Kane, Bocar 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 100%
McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 80%
Miranda, Lou 1 1 2 100%
Olson, Larry 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90%
Richman, Lori 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90%
Ruthruff, Erik 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90%
Scherer, Matthew 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 90%
Veluvali, Shankar 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 80%
Emmanual Ayelomi (s) 1 1 2 100%
Yeukai Zimbwa (s) 1 1 2 100%
Jenny Ma (s) 1 1 1 1 1 5 50%
Tessa Yeager (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 60%
Date: November 15, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.A.
To:Transportation Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Mark Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner
Item Activity:
Subject:Advisory Communication: Chowen Park A/B Beard
Avenue Sidewalk
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve the attached Advisory Communication be forwarded to city council for their consideration.
INTRODUCTION:
See attached Advisory Communication. If approved, staff will include it in the meeting packet for the December
4 city council meeting. Note that the public hearing for the 2019 Chowen P ark A/B project is on December 10.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Advisory Communication: Beard Avenue Sidewalk
The ETC recommends the sidewalk along Beard Ave be included with the street reconstruction. Adding a
sidewalk while streets are being reconstructed is much easier than trying to retrofit one in later. We are
building a sidewalk network for the future. New families moving to Edina generally consider sidewalks to be
a highly desired feature of their neighborhood. Safe walking routes advance our progress in making Edina a
healthy, vibrant and connected community.
On the following page is a snapshot of the map taken from the Draft Edina Engineering Study BA-451.
Date: December 4, 2018
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Transportation Commission
Subject: Beard Ave Sidewalk in Chowen Park A/B Neighborhood Reconstruction
Action
Requested:
The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) recommends City Council approve the
inclusion of the sidewalk with the street reconstruction.
Situation:
This sidewalk will connect to the existing sidewalk on Beard Avenue south of West 60th Street and
to future pedestrian facilities on West 60th Street, West 58th Street and Beard Avenue north of
West 58th Street.
Recommendation and Rationale:
Page 2
Prepared by: Larry Olson
Reviewed by: Kirk Johnson
Date: November 15, 2018
Date: November 15, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.B.
To:Transportation Commission Item Type:
Report and Recommendation
From:Mark Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner
Item Activity:
Subject:Approve Amended Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Recommend that the attached amended Pedestrian Crossing Policy be forwarded to City Council for approval.
INTRODUCTION:
At its May 17, 2018 meeting, the ETC approved a new pedestrian crossing policy, which was later approved by
City Council. Given that the newly-approved policy only addressed uncontrolled crossings, staff worked with its
consultant to amend the policy to include pedestrian crossings at controlled intersections. Attached is the amended
policy. Note that the flowchart and table (pages three and four) have not changed. Pages one and two are new
and serve to explain the overall policy. Note the section titled “Controlled Crossings,” which is the focus of the
amendment.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Amended Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy
PURPOSE
Pedestrian crossings are an integral part of our transportation infrastructure. The Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy provides guidance
to ensure the consistent application and treatment of pedestrian crossings throughout the city.
To be effective and promote safety, marked crosswalks must be installed after careful consideration and review. The review shall be
done with adherence to accepted guidelines and good engineering practice. This policy establishes the guidelines and considerations
for the installation of marked crosswalks from the date of the adoption of this policy.
POLICY
The City of Edina may consider the installation of marked crosswalks where there is substantial conflict between vehicular and
pedestrian movements as an enhancement for pedestrian crossings of roadways under the City’s jurisdiction. Crosswalk installation
shall be in accordance with State Law and the guidelines contained herein.
AUTHORITY
This policy is based on administrative implementation of policy and Minnesota State Statute 169. The policy is administered under the
direction of the Director of Public Works and applies to roadways under the City’s jurisdiction.
DEFINITIONS
Crosswalks: Minnesota State Statute defines that crosswalks exist at intersections, whether marked or unmarked, and provides for
pedestrian and motorist responsibilities. It also identifies the existence of crosswalks at non-intersection portions of the roadway
when distinctly indicated with surface markings.
MN Statute 169.011 DEFINITIONS.
Subdivision 20. Crosswalk. “Crosswalk” means (1) that portion of a roadway ordinarily included with the prolongation or connection
of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections; (2) any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or
other markings on the surface.
MN Statute 169.21 PEDESTRIAN.
Subdivision 2. Rights in absence of signal. (a) Where traffic-control signals are not in place or in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall
stop to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked
crosswalk. The driver must remain stopped until the pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped. No pedestrian
shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible
for the driver to yield. This provision shall not apply under the conditions as otherwise provided in this subdivision.
Uncontrolled Crossings: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines an uncontrolled crossing as “a pedestrian crossing
location where sidewalks or designated walkways intersect a roadway at a location where no traffic control (i.e. traffic signal or STOP
sign) is present. These common crossing types occur at intersections (where they may be marked or unmarked) and at non-
intersection or midblock locations (where they must be marked as crossings).”
Controlled Crossings: A controlled crossing is a pedestrian crossing at a location where traffic control (i.e. traffic signal or STOP sign) is
present.
WHEN TO INSTALL A CROSSWALK AND APPROPRIATE TREATMENTS
Factors such as the presence of a regional trail or school crossing, the number of pedestrians crossing per hour (pph), roadway
geometry, and the volume and speed of motorists impact not only the opportunity for crossing, but also motorist and pedestrian
compliance and the safety of certain crossing treatments.
The following guidelines are intended for use as a decision making tool to identify where it is appropriate to install a marked crossing
based on site-specific criteria that effect the safety and necessity of a marked crossing.
UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS
The Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Location Treatment Flowchart represents up-to-date local and national safety best practices
and federal and state guidance. This policy is based upon the review and compilation of crossing research and policies including, but
not limited to, the FHWA Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations and the City of Boulder Pedestrian
Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines.
If a marked crossing at an uncontrolled location is determined to be appropriate based on the Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing
Location Treatment Flowchart in Figure 1, the Decision Guide for Crossing Treatments in Table 1 will be applied to determine the
need for additional treatments such as in-roadway signs and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs).
CONTROLLED CROSSINGS
Marked crosswalks should be installed at signalized intersections in accordance with the traffic signal design.
It is recommended to install marked crosswalks at intersection approaches controlled by STOP signs if any of the following apply to
the crossing:
• School Crossing or Located in a School Zone – A school crossing is defined as a crossing location where ten or more student
pedestrians per hour are crossing. A school zone is 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 in place.
• Multi-use Trail Crossing – The City of Edina has several multi-use trails including the regional trail system and the inner and
outer loop trail systems.
• Meets pedestrian and vehicle volume thresholds – Pedestrian volumes of 60 or more pedestrians per hour during the peak
hour are expected and vehicular daily volumes of 3,000 or more are expected to cross over the crosswalk. Young, elderly, and
disabled pedestrians count 2x towards volume thresholds.
If a marked crossing at a location controlled by a STOP sign is determined to be appropriate based on the above guidelines, a standard
crosswalk marking should be installed at the crossing. If one approach to an all-way stop controlled intersection meets the criteria for
a marked crosswalk, consider marking all approaches unless crossing is otherwise prohibited on an approach.
This policy is based upon the review and compilation of crossing research and policies including, but not limited to, the SFMTA
Crosswalk Guidelines, San Francisco, CA; the City of Boulder Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines; the Hennepin
County DRAFT Crossing Guidance; the Portland Crosswalk Site Evaluation Guidelines.
No Action
Recommended
Direct Pedestrians
to nearest marked or
protected crossing
Consider installing
“unmarked pedestrian
crossing facilitations”(5),
subject to staff review/
engineering judgment
Direct pedestrians
to nearest marked or
protected crossing or
consider HAWK beacon,
traffic signal or grade
separated crossing
Go to Table 1
ADT ≥1,000 vpd (1)
School Crossing* or
School Zone**?
Multi-Use Path
Crossing?
Adequate stopping
sight distance? (8x
speed limit)
Meets min. pedestrian
volume thresholds? (2)
Nearest marked or
protected crossing ≥ 300’
away? (4)
Remove sight distance
obstructions or lower
speed limit
Crossing serves transit stop
or other noticeable, defined
and regular crossing? (3)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y Y
Feasible
Not
Feasible
Y
Y
(1) Exception to the 1,000 vpd min. roadway volume threshold may be
made for School Crossings* where the peak hour traffic exceeds 10%
of the daily traffic
(2) Minimum Pedestrian Volume Thresholds:
• 20 peds per hour*** in any one hour, or
• 18 peds per hour*** in any two hours, or
• 15 peds per hour*** in any three hours
* School Crossing defined as a crossing location where ten or more
student pedestrians per hour are crossing
** School Zone 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 in place
*** Young, elderly, and disabled pedestrians count 2x towards volume
thresholds
(3) Refer to note 2 for guidance on reasonable volume thresholds
(4) Distance to the nearest marked or protected crossing may be
reduced to 200’ in urban conditions, subject to engineering judgment,
where crossing treatments and crossing activity would not create
undue restrictions to vehicular traffic operations.
(5) An “unmarked pedestrian crossing facility” is any treatment that
improves a pedestrian’s ability to cross a roadway, short of the marked,
signed and enhanced crossings detailed in Table 1. Installation of this
type of pedestrian facilitation is subject to engineering judgment and
may include curb ramps and/or a raised median refuge. However, no
effort is made to attract pedestrians or recommend that pedestrians
cross at this location. The treatments simply provide an improvement
for a low volume pedestrian crossing where pedestrians are already
crossing and will like continue to cross.
City of Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy
Figure 1. Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Location Treatment Flowchart
Y
Start Here
Roadway Configuration
# of lanes
crossed
to reach a
refuge(1)
# of
multiple
threat
lanes(2)
per
crossing
Roadway ADT and Posted Speed
1,000-9,000 vpd (3) 9,000-12,000 vpd 12,000-15,000 vpd > 15,000 vpd
≤ 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph ≤ 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph ≤ 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph ≤ 30 mph 35 mph 40 mph
2 Lanes (one way street)2 1 A B C A B C B B C B C C
2 Lanes (two way street with
no median)2 0 A B C A B C B B C B C C
3 Lanes (w/raised median)1 or 2 0 or 1 A B D A C D B D D C D D
3 Lanes (w/striped median)3 0 or 1 C C D C C D C C E C D E
4 Lanes (two way street with
no median)4 2 A D D B D D B D E D D E
5 Lanes (w/raised median)2 or 3 2 A B D B C D B C E C C E
5 Lanes w/striped median 5 2 D D D D D D D D E D D E
6 Lanes (two way street with or
without median)3 to 6 4 E E E E E E E E E E E E
Notes:
1. Painted medians can never be considered a refuge for a crossing pedestrian. Similarly, a 4 foot wide raised median next to a left turn lane can only be considered a refuge for pedestrians if
the left turning volume is less than 20 vehicles per hour (meaning that in most cases the left turn lane is not occupied while the pedestrian is crossing).
2. A multiple threat lane is defined as a through lane where it is possible for a pedestrian to step out from in front of a stopped vehicle in the adjacent travel lane (either through or turn lane).
3. Additional treatments may be considered if suitable gaps in traffic for safe crossing are not available.
Treatment Descriptions
A
Install marked crosswalk with road-side signs
Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with signs mounted on the side of the roadway (W11-2 and W16-7P) with standard (W11-2) advance
pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations.
B
Install marked crosswalk with road-side and in-roadway (bollard mounted) signs
Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with signs mounted on the side of the roadway (W11-2 and W16-7P) and “State Law – Stop for Pedestrian”
(R1-6) signs mounted on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations.
C
Install marked crosswalk with signs and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure
Specific Guidance: For 2-lane roadways, install marked crosswalk with signs mounted on the side of the roadway (W11-2 and W16-7P) and “State Law
– Stop for Pedestrian” (R1-6) signs mounted on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School
Crossing locations. Add curb extensions (concrete, paint, flexible delineators) or median refuge islands to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and
increase pedestrian visibility to motorists.
For 3+ lane roadways, install marked crosswalk with advance regulatory “Stop here for Pedestrians” (R1-5) signs mounted on the side of the roadway,
(W11-2 and W16-7P) mounted at the crossing location on the side of the roadway and “State Law – Stop for Pedestrian” (R1-6) signs mounted on
in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Add curb extensions or
median refuge islands to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. Advance stop bars may be used in
combination with “Stop here for Pedestrians” (R1-5) sign.
D
Install marked crosswalk with advanced “Stop here for Pedestrians” signs, pedestrian activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs),
and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure
Specific Guidance: Install raised median refuge island (unless it is a one-way street or one already exists) to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance
and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. [If a median refuge cannot be constructed on a two-way street, go to Treatment E]. Install marked
crosswalk with signs (W11-2 and W16-7P) WITH pedestrian activated RRFBs mounted on the side of the roadway and on median mounted signs AND
advance regulatory “Stop here for Pedestrians” (R1-5) signs mounted on the side of the roadway; use standard (W11-2) advance warning pedestrian
warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Consider adding curb extensions at the crossing if on-street parking exists on the roadway
and storm drain considerations will allow. Advance stop bars may be used in combination with “Stop here for Pedestrians” (R1-5) sign.
E
Do not install marked crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing. Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing
Specific Guidance: Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal or grade-separated crossing; application of these treatments will consider,
corridor signal progression, existing grades, physical constraints, and other engineering factors.
City of Edina Pedestrian Crossing Policy
Table 1. Decision Guide for Crossing Treatments
Date: November 15, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.C.
To:Transportation Commission Item Type:
Report and Recommendation
From:Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Traffic Safety Report of November 6, 2018 Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review and recommend the Traffic Safety Report of Tuesday, November 6, 2018, be forwarded to City Council
for approval.
INTRODUCTION:
See attached staff report. An overview of the comments from the Edina Transportation Commission will be
included in the staff report provided to the City Council for their December 18, meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Traffic Safety Report of November 6, 2018
November 15, 2018
Edina Transportation Commission
Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator
Traffic Safety Report of November 6, 2018
Information / Background:
The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on November 6. The Traffic
Safety Coordinator, Police Lieutenant, City Engineer and Transportation Planner were in attendance for this
meeting. The Public Works Director, Assistant City Planner and Traffic Safety Specialist were not able to
attend and were informed of the decisions and did not object to the recommendations.
For these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have
been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if
they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, these comments can be included
on the November 15 Edina Transportation Commission and the December 18 City Council meeting
agendas.
Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action
A1. Review parking restrictions along Creek Valley Rd
Parking restrictions were set along the
southern corners of Creek Valley in 2018
Signs in place state No Parking Begins-Ends
along both corners with a gap allowing
parking next to a fire hydrant
Based on signage, residents are confused
where parking is allowed/restricted
After review, staff recommends removing a
pair of ‘Ends’ and ‘Begins’ signs near the fire
hydrant between the curves of Creek Valley
Rd. Staff sites the space between the signs can
be fully restricted as they are within a close
distance to the hydrant. This should remove
uncertainty if parking is restricted or available
for residents.
Map: The marking is the location of Creek Valley with
parking restrictions
STAFF REPORT Page 2
A2. Request to increase driver awareness of speed limits near Our Lady of Grace School
A resident is concerned with speeds of
vehicles passing by Our Lady Grace along
Normandale Rd
North and southbound traffic has a speed
limit of 20 MPH when children are present
In between the two signs, a 30 MPH sign is
present for southbound traffic
ADT outside of Our Lady Grace is 3349
85% Speed is 38.1 MPH
A sideswipe pass accident was reported in
2012 near the southern parking lot driveway
After review, staff recommends removing the 30 MPH speed limit sign as it is within a
school speed zone, which could have led to drivers increasing their speeds. Staff also
recommends adding a police presence when children are present to slow speeds.
A3. Request to replace two-way stop control at the intersection of Virginia Ave and W 62nd St
This neighborhood was reconstructed in
2018
Previously, east and westbound traffic was
stop controlled as north and southbound
was uncontrolled
Data collected in 2017 shows up to 130
vehicles enter this intersection each day
When this intersection was reconstructed,
the stop signs were removed to make the
entire intersection uncontrolled as stop signs
did not meet warrants
Residents are requesting the signs to be
replaced as a home in the north-east corner
of the intersection has a fence which can
impair sight lines for drivers
After review, staff recommends replacing the two stop signs for east and westbound
traffic. Staff believes this intersection does not meet stop sign warrants based on
volume and crash data, but this intersection is unique with two different corners
causing sight-line concerns. With the stop signs being re-installed, it should give drivers
an improved safety measure to counter the worries regarding these sight-lines.
Map: Normandale Rd along Our Lady Grace
=school zone speed limit sign =standard speed limit sign
Map: Location of Virginia Ave and W 62nd St
STAFF REPORT Page 3
Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends no action
B1. Request for a crosswalk over Cahill Rd at 7625
Resident is concerned with pedestrian safety
stating many children cross over Cahill for
the recently-opened Skyzone
Cahill is classified as a Collector Street
A sidewalk is present on the west side of
Cahill
Cahill has bike lanes
ADT on Cahill is 4400
20 total pedestrian crosses took place in a 24
hour video surveillance
Combined peak hour crosses was nine
Young, elderly and disabled pedestrians count 2x towards total crosses
After review, staff recommends no crosswalk to be installed. Staff cites crosswalk
warrants are not met. The location of the request is not at an intersection, as only
driveways are present.
B2. Request for traffic calming on Tracy Ave between Vernon Ave and Benton Ave
Resident is concerned with pedestrian safety
and speeds of traffic
Tracy Ave was reconstructed in 2012
A dynamic speed display sign, bike lanes,
crosswalks and narrowed travel lanes were
installed to calm traffic
Speed limit in this area is 25 MPH
85% speeds have decreased from 36.7 MPH
in 2008 to 33.6 MPH in 2018
ADT has increased from 3650 in 2008 to
3970 in 2018 (9%)
No crashes have been reported along this
portion of Tracy
After review, staff recommends no changes along Tracy Ave. Staff cites the previous
improvements made from the 2012 reconstruction project have increased pedestrian
safety and lowered vehicle speeds thru this corridor. The EPD is now aware of speeds
along Tracy and will enforce to their discretion.
Map: Location of Skyzone along Cahill Rd
Map: Location of Tracy Ave under concern
STAFF REPORT Page 4
B3. Request to restrict parking on one side of Beard
Place
Resident is concerned when vehicles park on
both sides of Beard curve thinking EMS
vehicles may not be able to pass thru
Beard is 27’ wide
Nearby, Strachauer Park hosts evening
soccer events
After video review, parking was utilized on
both sides of Beard in the evening during
athletic events
Beard Pl was reconstructed in 2016
After review, staff recommends no changes. Staff cited the 2016 reconstruction project
used Edina’s Living Streets plan to design the width of local streets along with how on-
street parking is utilized in this neighborhood.
B4. Request to remove on-street parking restrictions on Saint Andrews Ave
Saint Andrews restricts all on-street parking
on the east, and school days 8 am to 6 pm
on the west
On-street restrictions have been in place
along Saint Andrews prior to 2007
South View Middle School updated its
parking and bus loading bay on the north side
of the school in 2018
Resident is requesting to remove the parking
that is restricted during school days
Saint Andrews is 29’ wide
A letter was sent out with a survey asking for
input along Sherwood, Dalrymple and Saint
Andrews
Questions included which street you reside and if you wish to remove restrictions on your
street. The following were responses to the survey:
Sherwood (18) Dalrymple (17) St. Andrews (17)
Yes No Yes No Yes No
3 3 1 15 7 6
After review, staff recommends no changes. This is based on the survey responses
above (and those that did not respond) which generally do not show support for
removing school-day parking restrictions. The majority of residents that voted “No”
stated they were worried there would be an increased demand for parking due to the
close proximity to schools.
Map: Location of Saint Andrews Ave near South View
Middle School and the Edina Community Center
Map: Location of Beard Pl
STAFF REPORT Page 5
B5. Review placement of ‘Dead End’ signs along York
Ave at W 55th St
Two ‘Dead End’ signs are present on the
north side of W 55th for northbound traffic
on York
Resident is concerned westbound vehicles on
W 55th being unable to see signs until they
make a right turn- northbound onto York
York park is located to the west of this
intersection
13 homes are located along York
York is measured 29’ wide
Parking is allowed on both sides of York
After review, staff recommends no changes.
Staff agrees no changes are needed as two ‘Dead End’ signs are present and appear
offset to inform drivers York Ave ends north of W 55th St. Staff will inform the City
Forrester to review the visibility of these signs as tree branches can cover these signs.
Section C: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends further study
Review school drop-off traffic along Valley View Rd
Resident at 6732 Valley View Rd is
concerned with the amount of vehicles
dropping-off students in front of their home
and walking along their boulevard on Valley
View
The resident is requesting student drop-offs
to be restricted inside this half cul-de-sac
The resident is considering installing
shrubbery where current students walk to
prevent walk-paths to form in their yard
where grass is being trampled
After review, staff recommends reaching out to the four homeowners in this half cul-
de-sac to gage interest in adding signage restricting drop-off/pick-up traffic. This will
help give the committee an idea if the neighbors are noticing this issue as well.
Section D: Other traffic safety items handled
D1. A commuter reached out to traffic safety after witnessing a transit bus was parked along the side of
Xerxes Ave, north of W 66th St. which was impeding northbound traffic on Xerxes and was leading to a
safety concern. The resident was requesting Xerxes to have on-street parking restrictions. Hennepin
County was contacted in regards to this request as Xerxes Ave falls under County jurisdiction. Hennepin
County will be reviewing the request to restrict parking in this area. The transit company was contacted to
make sure buses are not parking too close to the intersection as that may be dangerous.
D2. A resident requested the installation of stop signs at the intersection of Beard Pl and W 62nd St. This
intersection is four-way uncontrolled. After reviewing this intersection for vehicle volume and crash
records, no stop sign warrants were met.
Map: The line represents where students are walking
along resident’s landscaping
Map: Location of York Ave and W 55th St ‘Dead End’
signs
STAFF REPORT Page 6
D3. A resident requested an all-way stop at the intersection of Hibiscus Ave and West Shore Dr. North and
southbound traffic on West Shore are stop-controlled while east and westbound traffic on Hibiscus is
uncontrolled. ADT entering the intersection from West Shore and Hibiscus was 550 and 200, respectively.
No crashes have been reported at this intersection since 2007, so all-way stops were not warranted.
D4. A resident was requesting to add a flashing yellow left turn light for northbound traffic turning left at the
intersection of Vernon Ave and Eden Ave. The resident was interested in adding this light to reduce their
delay at the intersection when turning into the Vernon Terrace senior living apartments. When analyzing
this turn movement, it was found adding the flashing left turn will not improve safety and the overall delay
for very few cars each day, so this request was denied.
D5. A resident reached out to traffic safety requesting a speed deterrent for Cooper Ave. The resident is
concerned with northbound vehicles traveling down a hill at high rates of speeds. The resident was informed
how the temporary speed trailer works operated by the EPD in slowing traffic. This location was added to
the EPD list for the trailer.
D6. An Edina Public School bus driver was having issues with passing thru Rutledge Ave when construction
crews were parking near Brookside Terrace, not leaving enough room for a bus to pass thru. The width of
Rutledge should allow parked cars on both sides of the street and a bus to pass thru in between. The bus
driver was informed to contact the EPD if vehicles are failing to park within an adequate distance from the
curb or too close to the intersection, impacting sight lines.
D7. A resident contacted traffic safety requesting parking to be restricted near their home along Valley View
Rd. The resident was concerned with sight lines when leaving their driveway. Staff agreed to review this
concern following the construction of a sidewalk adjacent to the resident’s home. The sidewalk project
helped improve overall sight lines and the issue was resolved without restricting on-street parking.
D8. A resident reached out to traffic safety requesting the temporary on-street parking to be removed on
France Avenue between W 49th and W 48th St. The resident is concerned with sight lines when exiting their
driveway along France Ave. Edina City Council decided to keep current on-street parking in place until the
fall of 2019 when it will be reviewed again.
Date: November 15, 2018 Agenda Item #: IX.A.
To:Transportation Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Mark Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner
Item Activity:
Subject:Schedule of Meeting and Event Dates as of
November 9, 2018
Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Schedule of Upcoming Meetings/Dates/Events
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SCHEDULE OF MEETING AND EVENT DATES AS OF NOVEMBER 9, 2018
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS
Thursday Nov 15 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Dec 20 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Jan 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Feb 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Mar 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Apr 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday May 16 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday June 20 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday July 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Aug 15 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM
Thursday Sep 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM