Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-06 Meeting PacketAGENDA Special Meeting of the Edina Transportation Commission 6:00 PM, Thursday, January 6, 2005 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Community Room I. Call to Order II. New Business a. Handout — 1-494 Corridor Commission Information* III. Old Business a. Public Comments Received to Date* b. DRAFT Policy Benefited and Impacted Areas— Alternate A and Alternate B* c. Transportation Commission Policy (October 2004 DRAFT) — Review and Consideration for Recommendation to the City Council IV. Approval of Minutes a. November 18, 2004* b. December 9, 2004* V. Adjournment VI. Open Discussion * Note: Attachment included. 1-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION Proposed 2005 Meeting Schedule January 12, 2005 February 9, 2005 March 9, 2005 April 13, 2005 May 11, 2005 June 8, 2005 July 13, 2005 August 10, 2005 September 14, 2005 October 12, 2005 November 9, 2005 December 14, 2005 a Infrastructure Preservation (23%) Interregional Mobility (15%) Trade Center Mobility (47%) 57 Safety (15%) sEigsED tirt, 2008-2030 Investments to Meet Performance Targets $38.1 billion Safety. Preventive Pavement 11.9% 12.4% Safety. Corrective RTC Mobility- Greater MN 13% Highway Related dvantages for Transit 0.1% RCS & RCs 14.6% Bridge 5.6% Other Infrastructure 4.8% RTC Mobility - Metro 45.7% Safety - Preventive 8.0% RTC Mobility - Greater MN 1.7% RTC Mobility - Metro 14.0% Highway Related Advantages for Transit 0.3% CIPPs 1.9% im Infrastructure Preservation (61%) Interregional Mobility (7%) Trade Center Mobility (16%) —77 Safety (14%) Community Investments (2%) 2008-2030 Available Funding Scenario $14.5 billion Other Infrastructure 11.9% ),/i/i/44,1z9 ta/Dy 2008-2030 Funding Gap $24.1 billion -1024-ti CIPPs Highway Related Advantages for Transit 0.0% IRCs & RCS 18.7% Safety - Corrective 2.1% RTC Mobility- Greater MN 1.0% Bridge 0.1% Pavement 0.0% Other Infrastructure 0.7% 11714A0 Akeutej aA-c 711A-eitcw kr-7 -IA ITA/ 14- 1.9% Safely- Preventive 13.7% im Infrastructure Preservation (1%) Interregional Mobility (18%) Trade Center Mobility (63%) 71 Safety (16%) IIII Community Investments (2%) If you build it, mg,-,:4- stock it, sell it, or ship it, trucks bring it. Good stuff. Sure, you know good stuff comes by truck. Now tell the world. Spread the "Good Stuff — Trucks Bring It" message. Go to www.trucksbringit.com to learn how. .ISTATE NEWS Vlinnesota Chamber of Commerce Proposes Fuel-Tax Increase By Sean McNally Staff Reporter The Minnesota Chamber of ,mmerce said it proposed raising state fuel tax by 10 cents over years to increase the state's I ding for transportation, but .ded the size of the tax increase it "mild seek probably would change after the group's board makes a for- mal recommendation. The fuel tax hike was just "one part of an overall package" worth $684 million, said Carolyn Jones, director of health care and trans- portation policy for the Minnesota business group. In the draft pub- lished late last month, the tax increase was the largest single line item, raising just over $300 million for the state's transportation pro- grams, she said. Currently, the tax on motor fuels in Minnesota is 20 cents per gallon, said John Hausladen, president of the Minnesota Trucking Associa- tion. "We oppose the Chamber's proposal, because it uses a fuel tax as a cornerstone of their efforts," Hausladen said. "We think there's still money on the table, specifically the motor vehicle sales tax that right now goes to the general fund. We think that should be dedicated to transporta- tion," Hausladen said. He added that registration fee reductions for passenger vehicles enacted under former Gov. Jesse Ventura could be rolled back and the state should look at forms of bonding to pay for transportation projects. Both MTA and the Chamber of Commerce were represented in "an ongoing transportation coalition," Hausladen said, and MTA is a mem- ber of a business lobbying group. "We're uncomfortably at odds right now," he said. "We agree with the Chamber that there is a need for more transportation funding and the .question is how to do it. We just believe that a massive fuel tax increase is not the right way" Jones said the plan was drafted because members of the Minneso- ta Chamber of Commerce were concerned about incroasing con- gestion on the state's highways, particularly around Minneapolis. Both Hausladen and Jones indi- cated that the proposed tax increase would probably be revised downward before the Chamber makes any formal recommenda- tions to the governor or legislature. "A 10-cent fuel tax proposal has no legs politically in Minnesota," Hausladen said. Virginia (Continued from p. 5) New York, New Jersey, Pennsylva- nia, Massachusetts, Maryland, West Virginia and Delaware. According to the state's press release, plans existed for E-ZPass to be accepted in Illinois, New Hampshire and Maine in 2005. State officials said that most SmartTag users do not have to make any changes, including obtaining new transponders, in order to use their tags on E-ZPass roads. However, vehicles "with both SmartTag and E-ZPass transpon- ders need to remove one of them to avoid charges to both accounts," the state's announcement said. "Commercial trucks with dual wheels, more than two axles and weighing more than 7,000 pounds that travel to New York need to exchange their white SmartTag transponder for a blue one because motor carriers in New York are required to have blue ones," the state said. Dale Bennett, executive vice president of the Virginia Trucking Association, told TRANSPORT TOP- ICS the move would help truckers in the state. "We're pleased that VDOT decided to move in this direction," he said. "There will be a lot less of an administrative burden on those trucking companies [that use E- Zpassl." In Virginia, the state uses elec- tronic toll collection on the follow- ing highways: • The Dulles Toll Road, between Washington and Dulles Interna- tional Airport in suburban Virginia. • The Downtown Expressway, Interstate 195, in Richmond. • The Coleman Bridge carrying Route 17 over the Chesapeake Bay in Hampton Roads. • The Chesapeake Expressway', Route 168, in Hampton Roads. • The Dulles Greenway in Northern Virginia between Dulles airport and Leesburg. With the adoption of E-ZPass, Bennett said VIA would now push DOT to adopt volume discounts for commercial users like the ones "other states offer across the board." MEMORANDUM CITY OF EDINA DATE: January 6, 2005 TO: Transportation Commissioners FROM: .5S- Steven Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E., Edina Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy Comments Attached are additional comments received regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy for your consideration. Page 1 of 2 From: Gordon Hughes Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:10 AM To: Wayne Houle; Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Resident input on last night's City Council meeting Original Message From: Rob Webb [mailto:rwebb3@mn.mcom] Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 5:09 AM To: jhovland@krauserollins.com; Immasica@aol.com; SWENSONBOYS@aol.com Cc: Gordon Hughes Subject: Resident input on last night's City Council meeting Dear City Council: I understand your desire for due-process and significant residential input into the Traffic Policy, but I implore you to balance your desire to "take your time" with a sense of urgency on this matter. Your suggestion for another public hearing is very practical. I just want to be careful we don't delay longer for the following reasons: 1) Every day of delay keeps hundreds of children legitimately in harms way-children not unlike your grandchildren and/or other relatives. I see us play with imminent danger every day, and the risk will accelerate the minute that school lets out for the summer. I see the opportunity to positively impact summer of 2005 slipping away. I take little comfort that no one has been seriously injured to date. Every summer we mix a dangerous cocktail of young children and thousands of cars inside of residential neighborhoods. It is only a matter of time before something happens. By the time a child is hurt or killed it will be too late, and I can only imagine the remorse of knowing that something could have been done, but wasn't. 2) There has been a mind boggling amount of time and input into this process. This process started in 1993 or before, not 2003. We have over a decade into this process. Also, we are not paving new ground here. There are literally 100s of cities with these policies. We are led by a City staff that is competent in these matters. They are indirectly benefiting from the input of residents on the policies developed in other cities, and they are learning from real-world application of the policies over periods of many years. In addition, Edina has worked diligently with a 7-person commission for almost 1.5 years to make sure that all of this resident input and learning is integrated and tweaked to suit the needs of Edina's constituents. This process has been open to the public for all 1.5 years. Don't forget either that there was a Traffic Taskforce that preceded the Traffic Commission, and neighborhood-level taskforces before that. Edina can be proud of the amount of resident input that it has garnered, I'm sure that it places this City in the upper 99th percentile of its class. I just don't want to see us become a lifetime academic either. We are at risk of too much input. We are getting to the point where we are second-guessing the engineers and City staff beyond what is practicable. Most residents are not traffic engineers. At some point we need to get out of the engineers' and City staff's way. Also, as Gordon said, this is a City that errs on the side of resident input. The passing of the Policy is not the end of the opportunities for resident input. I know that you weren't suggesting a belabored process, and your suggestions for another public forum to discuss the Policy are very practical, but I get nervous when there are more comments about caution than there are about a sense of urgency in resolving time-sensitive problems of significant gravity. I just want to be sure that we are talking about weeks not months. I do not have an interest in truncating due-process, or for shuttering resident input prematurely. I just know that there is an unlimited appetite for resident input, especially from certain constituencies. I just want to be sure that it is balanced with a drive, pardon the pun, to keep this moving forward with a sense of urgency commensurate with the gravity of the situation. Thank you for listening. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/6/2005 Page 2 of 2 Rob Webb Edina Resident P.S. I don't have an e-mail address for Scot. I'll track that down or get it to him via other means. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/6/2005 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:29 PM To: 'mrazidlo@always-thinking.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Trans. Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@cLedina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:29 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Original Message From: Mark Razidlo [mailto:mrazidlo@always-thinking.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:22 AM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Mr. Houle, Let this e-mail serve as notice that I am opposed to the traffic calming measures proposed for the Country Club area of Edina. I have lived in Edina most of my life. I grew up in Morningside, and now live in the Melody Lake neighborhood. The proposed changes would present a hardship for me personally in the form of longer drives through more crowded traffic on 50th Street and France Avenue. But even more importantly, I feel it will present the same hardship to thousands of other people live in or visit Edina every day. I share the concern of Country Club residents, as traffic is getting worse in Edina and throughout the Twin Cities every day. It's an issue that needs to be addressed. But that's also part of life when you choose to live in a first-tier suburb in a major metropolitan area, about two minutes from the Minneapolis city line. Through this proposal, I feel the residents of Country Club are file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/6/2005 Page 2 of 2 trying to take their portion of that joint burden, and thrust it onto the rest of us. Where will it end? Should we close off Momingside? Melody Lake? Edina itself? Simply put, the proposed plan benefits too few to the detriment of too many. Respectfully, Mark Razidlo 5616 Melody Lake Drive file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/6/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:30 PM To: 'Bright Dornblaser' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Plan Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Bright Dornblaser (mailto:dornb001@umn.edu] Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 12:03 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Transportation Plan Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the plan. First, I recommend the Commission look at the Citizens League Report re Transportation for it's definitions, concepts and other content. May find it useful going forward with Edina's plan. Next, despite the opposition received it is essential for Edina's long term strategic interests to proceed as designed, with some twicking here and there. The issue of conclusion is difficult as changes do involve more than the immediate surroundings, but those most immediately affected, such as Country Club residents, are likely to be outvoted by those cutting through, eg. from Morningside. As one living on the corner of Drexel and Country Club I would be most interested in reducing the speed. It is a higher priority than volume. Making turns into and out of Drexel and Wooddale on to Country Club right angle turns would help on both issues. To control speed, two bumps from Country Club and Bridge and another between Bridge and Sunnsyside would be quite helpful. The potential plans to make Wooddale and connector are not desirable to those on Drexel as well as Wooddale. Thank you. Bright M. Dornblaser 4630 Drexel Av Edina, MN. 55424 MEMORANDUM CITY OF EDINA DATE: January 4, 2005 TO: Transportation Commissioners FROM: SteverAillehaug, RE., P.T.O.E., Edina Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy Comments Attached are additional comments received regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy for your consideration. If further comments are received prior to the January 6, 2005 Transportation Commission meeting, they will be distributed to you at the meeting. Please contact me with any questions. Thanks. Steve Dec 30 04 08:15a Alison Yeamen 952-285-7872 p.2 December 30, 2004 The Edina Transportation Committee The Edina City Council The Edina Engineering Department 4801 West sr Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: POTENTIAL CHANGES TO EDINA TRANSPORTATION POLICY To All of the Above: My husband and I currently reside at 4394 Mackey Avenue in Edina and have been residents since August 2003. We purchased our new home for many reasons, but the main one being a strong and equal community. As equal residents of Edina, we do no understand why other residents would be favored more than others. It is our understanding that the proposed changes to the transportation policy would favor only those that reside in Country Club. In addition, the traffic near our home would substantially increase causing the value of our property and anyone else along 44th Street to decrease. There are also numerous families within our neighborhood that have small children. The proposed traffic increase on 44th Street poses many dangers to children. These changes may cause families to relocate. Additionally and therefore: • We are opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. • We are opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. • We are opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. • We are opposed to limiting citizens' access to residential streets. • We want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. • We want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". • We want at least 80% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. • We want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the ENTIRE community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 952-920-8212. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, ele.cAe.d' r',7;r4zow..4., Alison & Chris Yeamen 4394 Mackey Avenue Edina, MN 55424 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:03 AM To: ljplantl@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Comments on Draft Traffic Management Policyj Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:00 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Comments on Draft Traffic Management Policyj Original Message From: Judy Plant [mailto:jplantl@mn.rr.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:57 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Comments on Draft Traffic Management Policyj Dear Members of the Edina Transportation Commission, Edina City Council, and Edina Engineering Department: I would like to express the following concerns about the Draft Transportation Policy for the City of Edina: 1) I object to a "neighborhood" approach to traffic management. Such an approach encourages micro-management of traffic flow within small areas of our city. Traffic problems seldom exist in isolation. The effects of a solution to any given problem can ripple outward and change traffic flow over a wide area. Therefore, traffic management needs to be considered from a much broader viewpoint than neighborhood by neighborhood. 2) The inclusion of road closings as an option for traffic calming is not wise. Along with cut-through traffic, emergency vehicles will also be diverted. Cut-through traffic is a problem in many of Edina's residential areas. Excluding traffic from one neighborhood is likely to increase unfairly the traffic burden on surrounding neighborhoods. 3) The definition of "impacted area" in the draft policy is too narrow. All citizens who reasonably see themselves as impacted, positively OR negatively, by a proposed change should be encouraged to voice their opinions. Furthermore, a 60% - 70% threshold of support should be the minimum before any project moves forward. I attended the joint meeting of the Edina City Council and the Edina Transportation Commission on December 9. The prevailing mindset of the Transportation Commission and City Council seemed to be: "Anything is better than nothing, so let's approve this draft and learn of its shortcomings as it is put into practice." While no new plan is likely to be perfect from the outset, I feel that such a cavalier attitude so soon into the process of crafting a policy is dangerous. Taxpayer monies will surely be used, at least in part, to implement the Traffic Management Policy, and more tax dollars will be required to undo mistakes that may be made as a result of a hastily approved plan. Much good work has gone into drafting the Policy as it currently stands. Please take some more time and work to refine it into a plan that is acceptable to all of Edina's citizens. Sincerely, Judy L. Plant 4350 Morningside Road Edina, MN 55416 Ph: 952/922-0354 Darlene Wallin From: Gordon Hughes Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:02 AM To: Darlene Wallin Subject: FW: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street Original Message From: AnnaLom@aol.com [mailto:AnnaLom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:01 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes; plombardo@statesupply.com Subject: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street To all persons: -I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy as WE ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED by ANY traffic changes that impact 44th Street -I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times -I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets -I want the definition of an "impacted area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access -I wanted the IMPACTED AREA RADIUS INCREASED for all purposes, INCLUDING NOTIFICATION and public hearings, to include ALL ALL ALL ALL RESIDENTS who reasonably self-define as "impacted" -I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated -I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the ENTIRE community, NOT just residents of a single neighborhood Sincerely, Anna Lombardo 4401 North Avenue Corner of 44th and North 1 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 "'A threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Print Name: 5‘A,e-t a c-,-% Address: LI 50'2 usi , , ork 5 k-k. December 27, 2004 Dear Edina City Council Members, City Engineering Staff and The Edina Transportation Commission, As requested, we are writing the Edina Traffic Commission (ETC), Edina City staff and the Edina City Council with our thoughts and concerns about the transportation policy draft and—more importantly—the process through which it has been developed. Our immediate impression and concern is the obvious conflict of interest held by Commissioner Marie Thorpe. The Thorpe family developed and built the Country Club District—another clear conflict of interest. This gives the impression that she has preferential access to City Hall that most residents of Edina do not, and her past involvement with Country Club traffic issues render her role on the Commission disingenuous at the very least. Her direct involvement as the Chairperson of a ten member committee attempting to close off the County Club neighborhood to "outside" residents are outlined and documented in a 2001 Fall issue (August 29) of the Edina Sun Current. She is also involved as a volunteer on the Edina Country Club web site (interestingly only accessible with a password) where the very same traffic changes and issues that were voted down in 2001 are being discussed and promoted by Thorpe, Country Club resident Robb Webb and others. Clearly the commissioners are entitled to their own opinions regarding various issues, but it is egregiously cynical to appoint someone to the ETC who has previously led the charge to deliberately close off access to certain neighborhood streets (her own, of course) in order to redirect traffic onto nearby neighboring streets. Such traffic management changes most certainly would benefit a very small minority at the expense of the majority of Edina residents. This is not the kind of mentality we want serving as our "representative" on any Edina commission. Her past involvement with this very sensitive issue is common knowledge among most Edina, Country Club and Morningside residents. Why would the City and Mayor of Edina risk even a "perceived" conflict of interest with matters that have such a long history of contentiousness in the Edina community? It is time for the Edina Transportation Commission to cease any efforts to forward approval of a policy until Commissioner Thorpe has been removed and someone else is appointed who has the objectivity and the ability to assess these very important and sensitive issues in a professional, reasoned and less self-serving manner. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. E. J. Everett December 28, 2004 Edina Transportations Committee 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Transportation Committee Members, I am a nine-year resident of the Country Club neighborhood in Edina, and I am opposed to the Transportation Policy draft now being considered by your Committee. I am also opposed to the previously proposed street changes in this neighborhood. In my opinion, these changes would have a negative effect on the Country Club neighborhood, and also the surrounding neighborhoods. The current street setup and street usage works well for the residents of Edina, by spreading traffic out over the entire area. The previously proposed street changes would increase traffic levels to an unacceptable level on several streets, while impairing residents ability to maneuver in their neighborhoods. As you proceed with discussions on traffic patterns in this area of Edina, I request that you notify all residents of Edina and schedule public hearings for this issue. Ultimately, I would like any policy to serve the entire community rather than a favored few. Thank you for taking time to consider my concerns! Sincerely, Michael Brower 4409 West 44th Street Edina, MN 55424 Edina Transportation Commission 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Wednesday, December 29, 2004 Dear Commission members, Those who would be impacted by "inconvenience" have information and knowledge to contribute. To exclude them compromises the ability of the City to learn valuable information about citizen use of roadways. Years ago, before a 50th street project, I attended a meeting at the City. When I described some of my circuitous routes to successfully reconnect with France Avenue south of 50th at certain times of day, one of the contractor's staff said to me, 'Oh we hate that, it is so hard to measure'. I remember it still because the conversation betrayed a tendency toward analytical weakness. The multiple time-of-day options in any direction contribute to a high quality of life in this congested area where I live, and therefore these are critical variables to identify and quantify. For a truly informed policy implementation anywhere, it is essential to not simply address complaints, but to aggressively identify and actively discuss those positive aspects of the things that people so typically take for granted every day, such as a flexible route network. For example, on a day-to-day basis, people will not actively seek you out to exclaim how wonderful their multiple time-of-day routes are in my neighborhood. Dear people, if a proposal has sufficient merit, then it should be able to stand the test of public comment. Furthermore, it would be terrible to see the politics of social disorder imposed via the forcible exclusion of affected citizenry. "I don't see you—you don't see me" is a cute game to play with a 2 year old, but in the context of policy language, it has very limited appeal. I am therefore of the strongest opinion that the following language should be removed from the policy draft, in order to better dignify us all: From the Definitions section: Impacted area: "... Inconvenience cased by limitation of access is not considered to be a negative impact under this definition" Additionally, I would be ever so pleased if you would pursue innovative new policy initiatives to encourage driver compliance rather than the more typical passive practices that currently prevail. Would love to discuss further. Sorry to cut this short. Such limited time having become aware of this at the holidays. Thank you for your work and your time and for additional considerations. Kisses and a Happy New Year, Roberta Castellano 4854 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55410-1756 Dec 29, 2004 Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 I am writing to express my opinion on the flagrantly outrageous proposed traffic changes within the Country Club area of Edina. As a lifelong resident of either Edina or St Louis Park, I am shocked at the audacity of the suggestion that unless you live within a confined neighborhood, you are to not use the streets. A major change of the street structure within an already established area effects the value of all surrounding areas also. Houses have been purchased and businesses established in part based on traffic patterns, convenience and access. The consideration of where I live in St Louis Park was influenced definitely on my ability to access any surrounding neighborhood and business district. The proposal is self-centered and sets a scary precedent for other neighborhoods. Couldn't the Creekside or Brookside neighborhoods decide they do not like the through traffic coming from Edina and close off most access on Brookside at 44th St? Or the Browndale or Miimekada neighborhoods for that matter? The Impact Area is definitely greater than that one immediate neighborhood. A community does not end at the political border. I grew up in Edina and now live in St Louis Park, these are streets that I have always driven. Tam embarrassed at the arrogance of the notion, "Keep your traffic out of our neighborhood." Sincerely, /(1414- Nancy 4150 Xenwood Ave St Louis Park 952-928-9956 December 28, 2007 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department The Edina Sun Current As residents of the City of Edina, we're writing to express our concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public on December 6th. Specifically, it is the following items that draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process used to develop the plan. • Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. • There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th—Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. • At the open house at City Hall, residents were presented with a very abbreviated version of the plan that lacked many critical facts and information relevant to those who would be most impacted by any proposed transportation changes and measures (e.g. notification areas, priority ranking of traffic study requests, etc.). The City Engineer's presentation was an even more distilled version of the policy draft, which offered little in terms of substance and specifics as to how the policy will be implemented. • The arbitrary deadlines attached to the approval timeline of this policy have clearly taken precedent over thoughtful consideration and public input. This draws into question how a January or February approval deadline coincides with the street reconstruction schedule for identified neighborhoods in 2005. • The policy needs to provide context for acceptable and reasonable (realities vs. engineering principles) traffic volumes based on accurately defined street classifications; the policy does not provide (accurate) classification definitions for "local", "collector" and "arterial" streets. Distinctions need to be made between local, collector and arterial streets collectors are not arterial. The plan conveniently blurs these definitions. • The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). • The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. • The City so far has not released information on how many traffic studies and change requests have been made to the city in recent history, who has made them and at what expense to the tax payers such studies have been performed. Requests have been made, but the City to date has not provided this information. This includes releasing for public review the most recent traffic counts in Edina (keeping in mind that the most accurate traffic count study is a license plate study). • The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and projections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. • The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. • The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, Engineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. • As it is currently drafted, the policy does not go far enough to represent the interests of all Edina residents; operationally, it pits one neighborhood against another, rather than looking at the community as a whole—a city-wide approach is paramount for resolving traffic issues. • Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). It is our expectation that the City will address the concerns held by all Edina residents when furthering an Edina transportation plan to fairly address the serious issue of traffic volume and speed throughout our entire community. Sincerely, Residents of 44th Street West, Edina December 27, 2004 TO: The Edina City Engineering Department As a resident of the City of Edina, I am writing to express my concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public December 6th. I am particularly concerned with the polarizing effect this policy has imposed on our community. Although Country Club and Morningside are considered separate neighborhoods, we are all neighbors living within a mile of one another. Some residents of the two neighborhoods are separated by a single Street. However, the impact of street closures or other "traffic-calming" devices will have a much greater reach that a single street, or a single neighborhood. It is my understanding that neighbors living more that a street away from the "traffic-calming device" will not have any input into their placement. This is ridiculous and should not be tolerated by residents or by the city. Has it gotten to the point where Country Club will be gated off so that Morningside neighbors will be cut off from driving through that area, while Country Club residents will be free to drive on Morningside streets on their way to Excelsior Blvd? It is obvious why tensions exist. Perhaps less money should go to traffic studies and more towards speed and traffic enforcement on neighborhood streets. Country Club residents I have spoken to complain about speeders and people running stop signs, not neighbors from Morningside driving on local streets. Sincerely, Elizabeth Heinecke 4213 Branson St. p.s. It is my understanding that the following items draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process with which it was developed. • Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. • There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 2561—Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9m—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. • At the open house at City Hall, residents were presented with a very abbreviated version of the plan that lacked many critical facts and information relevant to those who would be most impacted by any proposed transportation changes and measures (e.g. notification areas, priority ranking of traffic study requests, etc.). The City Engineer's presentation was an even more distilled version of the policy draft, which offered little in terms of substance and specifics as to how the policy will be implemented. • The arbitrary deadlines attached to the approval timeline of this policy have clearly taken precedent over thoughtful consideration and public input. This draws into question how a January or February approval deadline coincides with the street reconstruction schedule for identified neighborhoods in 2005. • The policy needs to provide context for acceptable and reasonable (realities vs. engineering principles) traffic volumes based on accurately defined street classifications; the policy does not provide (accurate) classification definitions for "local", "collector" and "arterial" streets. Distinctions need to be made between local, collector and arterial streets collectors are not arterial. The plan conveniently blurs these definitions. The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). • The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. • The City so far has not released information on how many traffic studies and change requests have been made to the city in recent history, who has made them and at what expense to the tax payers such studies have been performed. Requests have been made, but the City to date has not provided this information. This includes releasing for public review the most recent traffic counts in Edina (keeping in mind that the most accurate traffic count study is a license plate study). • The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and projections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. • The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. • The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, Engineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. • As it is currently drafted, the policy does not go far enough to represent the interests of all Edina residents; operationally it pits one neighborhood against another, rather than looking at the community as a whole—a city-wide approach is paramount for resolving traffic issues. • Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, IANT 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. 4 I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. 4 I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". 4 I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. CI ‘,1) b Sincerely,4)-- Print Name: Address: tfrt I ut) 1 4 A__ 6 -e yyLi-v To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: V I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 Vo threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Print Name: Address: - The Edina Transportation Committee - The Edina City Council - Edina Engineering Department 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55242 Thursday, December 30, 2004 (delivered personally this date to Edina City Offices) To All Persons: In the last month I have been informed by two bulletins circulated in my neighborhood of changes being considered in the City of Edina's Transportation Policy; and also by an article in the 12/16/94 Edina Sun-Current commenting upon a 12/9/04 Edina Transportation Commission open house meeting; as well as by a Letter to the Editor in today's 12/30/04 Edina Sun-Current. I have not yet been able to responsibly familiarize myself with the matter—but perceive the neighborhood notices to be recommending vehement opposition to several aspects of the plan that is being developed; and the 12/16 Sun-Current article quoting some City of Edina officials or advisors seeming to discount or at least diminish the current concerns of some parties or neighborhood groups; and the Letter to the Editor today suggesting in part that there was limited-time notice given for the matter to be fully aired. I do not consider myself able at this time to confidently take the stand suggested in all of the points contained the sample letter offered in the latest neighborhood bulletin for signing and forwarding to all parties noted above, but am signing it "conditionally" and attaching it to this letter, due to the deadline today of registering comments for consideration at a next meeting of the Committee on January 6, 2005 (which meeting I do plan to attend). However, if some of the research done by its authors is accurate, and the negative implications for all neighborhoods contiguous to and surrounding the Country Club District are valid—I am indeed concerned enough to register my "unconditional" disapproval of the plan as it is presently being advanced, until further, wider public engagement can be arranged to more openly and thoroughly consider all implications of the matter. The appropriate guiding principle in the difficult decisions that will have to eventually be made seems to me to be that the disruptions and disadvantages of increasingly burdensome traffic demands in the entire sector under consideration must to be accepted and equitably shared by all legitimately affected parties and neighborhoods. Respectfully submitted, William L. Harmon 4701 W. 44th St, Edina, MN 55424 952-929-7973 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 °A threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, L , 1>i 27.e"( c9 Print Name: Address: 1AR {_Lc AU- L. l-i-Aatro-Ai 4101 (A) 44_4 fA, 2-> wyce( a/we 31c6.2eC „x,ii„„Lp ai 5-A iZZA_ 5tte0 LAJL44 December 30, 2004 Karen Hinz 4194 West 44th St. Edina, MN 55424 PAID DEC0 2004 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department The Edina Sun Current As a resident of the City of Edina (or St. Louis Park), I am writing to express my concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public December 6th. Specifically, it is the following items that draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process with which it was developed. • The city of Edina is situated in the heart of the metropolitan area. It borders several other large cities and is therefore in the midst of many traffic patterns. The concept of a "neighborhood" traffic policy seems like a bad policy that is destined to pit neighbor against neighbor. Unfortunately for all of us that live in Edina, the traffic volume will not be reduced until other arterial routes are corrected such as highway 100. In the meantime, the traffic volume should be shared by all those who enjoy this great community instead of pushing it from one neighborhood to another. • Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. • There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 2511—Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. • At the open house at City Hall, residents were presented with a very abbreviated version of the plan that lacked many critical facts and information relevant to those who would be most impacted by any proposed transportation changes and measures (e.g. notification areas, priority ranking of traffic study requests, etc.). The City Engineer's presentation was an even more distilled version of the policy draft, which offered little in terms of substance and specifics as to how the policy will be implemented. • The arbitrary deadlines attached to the approval timeline of this policy have clearly taken precedent over thoughtful consideration and public input. This draws into question how a January or February approval deadline coincides with the street reconstruction sche.dule, for identified neighborhoods in 2005. • The policy needs to provide context for acceptable and reasonable (realities vs. engineering principles) traffic volumes based on accurately defined street classifications; the policy does not provide (accurate) classification definitions for "local", "collector" and "arterial" streets. Distinctions need to be made between local, collector and arterial streets—collectors are not arterial. The plan conveniently blurs these definitions. • The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). • The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. • The City so far has not released information on how many traffic studies and change requests have been made to the city in recent history, who has made them and at what expense to the tax payers such studies have been performed. Requests have been made, but the City to date has not provided this information. This includes releasing for public review the most recent traffic counts in Edina (keeping in mind that the most accurate traffic count study is a license plate study). • The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and projections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. • The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. • The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, Engineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. • Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). Regards, Karen Hinz To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50 Street Edina, MN 55424 To an persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. am. opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. 4 I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. 4 I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to inchide those negatively affected by limitation of 2CCOSS. VI I want the "Impacted Area” radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted", want at least a 70 °le threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. 0-4.1z4-1,4-1 C.11,‘1, d Sincerely, C -e".4. rrint Name: Address: "-frt. c---e.. 1443 4132 (( 1./01 4k 67.-Ae,e S 24.1 - The Edina Transportation Committee - The Edina City Council - Edina Engineering Department 4801 W. 501h St. Edina, MN 55242 Thursday, December 30, 2004 (delivered personally this date to Edina City Offices) To All Persons: In the last month I have been informed by two bulletins circulated in my neighborhood of changes being considered in the City of Edina's Transportation Policy; and also by an article in the 12/16/94 Edina Sun-Current commenting upon a 12/9/04 Edina Transportation Commission open house meeting; as well as by a Letter to the Editor in today's 12/30/04 Edina Sun-Current. I have not yet been able to responsibly familiarize myself with the matter—but perceive the neighborhood notices to be recommending vehement opposition to several aspects of the plan that is being developed; and the 12/16 Sun-Current article quoting some City of Edina officials or advisors seeming to discount or at least diminish the current concerns of some parties or neighborhood groups; and the Letter to the Editor today suggesting in part that there was limited-time notice given for the matter to be fully aired. I do not consider myself able at this time to confidently take the stand suggested in all of the points contained the sample letter offered in the latest neighborhood bulletin for signing and forwarding to all parties noted above, but am signing it "conditionally" and attaching it to this letter, due to the deadline today of registering comments for consideration at a next meeting of the Committee on January 6, 2005 (which meeting I do plan to attend). However, if some of the research done by its authors is accurate, and the negative implications for all neighborhoods contiguous to and surrounding the Country Club District are valid—I am indeed concerned enough to register my "unconditional" disapproval of the plan as it is presently being advanced, until further, wider public engagement can be arranged to more openly and thoroughly consider all implications of the matter. The appropriate guiding principle in the difficult decisions that will have to eventually be made seems to me to be that the disruptions and disadvantages of increasingly burdensome traffic demands in the entire sector under consideration must to be accepted and equitably shared by all legitimately affected parties and neighborhoods. Respectfully submitted, William L. Harmon 4701 W. 44th St, Edina, MN 55424 952-929-7973 Sincerely, trooff -6%64a:403,-i $312, Ckx061( Alve,s Sart-foe mt.) 6544?,41 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: 4 I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. 4 I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. 4 I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. 4 I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. 4 I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. 4 I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". V I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. V I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. To: Mayor Dennis Maetzvold, Council Members- Mike Kelly, Scot Housh, James Hovland, Linda Masica Transportation Commission Members- Joni Bennett, Dean Dovolis, Warren Plante, Chairman Fred Richards, Marie Thorpe, Les Wanninger, Jean White Edina Engineering Staff From: Jennifer Bunkers, 4209 Scott Terrace, Edina, MN, 55416 Subject: Public Comment Date: December 28, 2004 The following notes are from my comments made at the Edina Transportation Commission "Open House" on Thursday, December 9, 2004. One Saturday morning last spring I was at Weber Park pushing my two kids on the swings when I overheard an interesting conversation. Being that I am never one to wait to be invited into a conversation, I simply began asking questions. The men I spoke with were residents of the Country Club neighborhood. They went on to explain that a group was again spearheading efforts to close roads in the neighborhood to reduce the amount of traffic. Traffic deemed excessive, at least by residents. I asked more questions about which roads residents wished closed and where. By the time I left the park I had gotten quite an earful about what roads they wanted closed and where. I open with this comment because I believe the traffic "problem" within Country Club is the elephant in the room. I want to be clear that I do not believe this to be the agenda of all Country Club residents. I understand that the true issue being discussed this evening is not Country Club and the past and present desires of a few who live there. However, I believe the traffic problem perceived by this small, but tenacious group of Country Club residents is inextricable from the push for policy approval at this time. That being said, I would like to move on to express my two main objections to this traffic policy. The first of these objections pertains to the Plan Development portion of the Policy. In my personal experience it always works best in any circumstance to be as inclusive as possible. To disenfranchise interested individuals because they do not live within a 1 block radius of a proposed project is absurd. I can stand on any street corner in Edina, count cars and declare it a traffic problem. However to do so would be to suggest that one street or another operates in a vacuum. It is only by studying how one borough of Edina affects another and hearing the voices of all citizens that a conclusion can truly be reached. I am reminded of an article that recently ran in the Star Tribune on tax burden and debt. Jenny Wahl a Carleton College economist was quoted as saying, "There will be winners and losers, think carefully about where you want those burdens to fall, rather than pretending nobody's bearing them." I believe this is applicable here as well. This policy as it currently stands allows for the declared burdens of one to become the burdens of another, without offering that other a voice. I have to stop and ask myself, who benefits from exclusion? For the life of me, I can not come to a positive conclusion when I ask this question? My second objection speaks largely to the speed with which this measure is being pushed through. We should perhaps rename this policy "The Something is Better than Nothing Policy". Science says one must define one's terms. This policy while defining some terms to death does a poor job of defining others. Terms such as "Impacted Area" and "Discretionary" leave me crying out for further explanation. I would like those terms defined upfront, not later when I find out that because I am not an impacted individual I have no impact on a situation that affects me as a citizen. I have no doubt that all of you on the traffic commission have spent a great deal of time and energy on what has been produced thus far. So take more time. Obtain consistency of definition. Educate yourselves further with practical knowledge. Because until you have witnessed, I mean physically witness through controlled demonstrations how specific traffic management devices impact emergency services I do not understand how you can deem yourselves educated on the topic of traffic calming and management. "If my own family in a burning house and it is going to take the fire trucks 3 more minutes to get here will I be happy?" Unless you can answer "yes" then I think we need to take more time on the front end of this policy establishment. Currently I have a venue where I can air concerns regarding traffic issue — the City Council. My understanding of this commission and its mission is that it is to assist in public process as it relates to traffic. If this policy is approved, then this commission has only succeeded only in further disenfranchising the members of this community Additional Comments: 1. I would like to expand for a minute upon my opening comments and the conversation I heard in the park last spring. The gentlemen I overheard and eventually spoke with specifically referred to Marie Thorpe as the individual spearheading the "campaign" to close roads in Country Club. I was disgusted to find her sitting on this commission. She has been carrying the torch for road closure for years now and the fact that not a single individual on the commission sees this as a conflict of interest is incomprehensible. You should all be embarrassed by this display of impropriety. 2. Your inability to properly publicize the Transportation Policy Draft discussion to the residents of Edina flies squarely in the face of some of the reasons why this commission was established. Yet, despite your ineptitude no provision was made to expand the public comment period. December 30, 2004 The Edina Transportation Committee The Edina City Council The Edina En&ineering Department 4801 West se Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: POTENTIAL CHANGES TO EDINA TRANSPORTATION POLICY To All of the Above: My husband and I currently reside at 4394 Mackey Avenue in Edina and have been residents since August 2003. We purchased our new home for many reasons, but the main one being a strong and equal community. As equal residents of Edina, we do no understand why other residents would be favored more than others. It is our understanding that the proposed changes to the transportation policy would favor only those that reside in Country Club. In addition, the traffic near our home would substantially increase causing the value of our property and anyone else along 44th Street to decrease. There are also numerous families within our neighborhood that have small children. The proposed traffic increase on 44th Street poses many dangers to children. These changes may cause families to relocate. Additionally and therefore: • We are opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. • We are opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. • We are opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. • We are opposed to limiting citizens' access to residential streets. • We want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. • We want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". • We want at least 80% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. • We want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the ENTIRE community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 952-920-8212. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Alison & Chris Yeamen 4394 Mackey Avenue Edina, MN 55424 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:34 AM To: tielkins@tfs.psych.umn.edut Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Re-routing of Country Club traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. However, you have a misconception that there are plans to reroute traffic from the Country Club to 44th Street. There are none that are currently being considered by the City. Your claims of a 'short-sighted approach'... a short sighted approach to what? To aid in dispelling any incorrect information out there, it would be good to know your source so I may aid in insuring correct information is available to the public so opinions and comments that we are requesting on the transportation policy are not skewed in any way. Please see the following website for the Transportation Commission Policy that the City is currently considering: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L4-19a_TrafficNews.htm Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:26 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Re-routing of Country Club traffic Original Message From: Irene Elkins [mailto:ielkins@tfs.psych.umn.edu) Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:58 AM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Re-routing of Country Club traffic To Whom it May Concern: I am a resident of St. Louis Park, but live in the Brookside neighborhood just north of the 44th and Brookside intersection. Therefore, I was deeply disturbed to learn that 44th, which has been a really nice neighborhood street, is likely to take the brunt of the increased traffic flow if the proposed re-routing of traffic from the Country Club area is adopted. While I sympathize with the residents of the Country Club area in the sense that I understand anyone who doesn't like traffic, I don't see why the feelings of residents of an upper-class neighborhood should be given greater weight by the city of Edina than those of the middle- to upper-middle class area that will bear the brunt of the increased traffic. This is not only unfair, in my opinion, but reflects a short-sighted approach that will only make the neighborhoods surrounding the Country Club area go downhill. Keeping the whole area as livable and pleasant as possible should take priority. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my opposition to this issue. Irene Elkins, Ph.D. Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research Dept. of Psychology, University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455 (612)626-8777 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:38 AM To: 'jim.bullard@leonard.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Policy and Country Club Traffic Issues Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. However, you have a misconception that there are plans to reroute traffic from the Country Club to 44th Street. There are none that are currently being considered by the City. To aid in dispelling any incorrect information out there, it would be good to know your source so I may aid in insuring correct information is available to the public so opinions and comments that we are requesting on the transportation policy are not skewed in any way. Please see the following website for the Transportation Commission Policy that the City is currently considering: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L4-19a_TrafficNews.htm Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Bullard, Jim [mailto:Jim.Bullard@leonard.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:36 AM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: Transportation Policy and Country Club Traffic Issues Gentlemen, I am a resident of Edina and live on 44th Street in the Morningside neighborhood at 5016 West 44th Street. I have just learned of (1) the possibility that Edina may adopt a new Transportation Policy that might significantly reduce my ability to voice concerns in the future about plans to re-route traffic in my neighborhood, and (2) renewed plans to actually re-route traffic from the Country Club neighborhood on to 44th Street. Both of these possibilities are deeply troubling to me. As I live on 44th Street, I will be obviously and adversely affected by any increase in traffic that is shunted on to 44th Street. In addition, my ability to travel through the immediately adjacent neighborhood will be adversely affected to the extent that traffic is restricted on north/south streets through the Country Club neighborhood, such as Browndale and Wooddale. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 2 Changes such as these should not be undertaken without input from everyone who is likely to be affected. Furthermore, I am strongly opposed to any traffic plan that simply protects one neighborhood at the expense of another. Any Transportation Policy, and any plan to re-route traffic from one neighborhood to another, must take into account the needs of the larger community. I am strongly opposed to any plan that pits the interests of the Country Club neighborhood against the similar interests of other surrounding neighborhoods. And, I am strongly opposed to any plan that will put increased traffic on my street (44th Street), curtail my access to other residential streets (Browndale and Wooddale), increase emergency response times, and do nothing to improve my family's situation. I know we can do better than this. Thank you for considering my views. Jim Bullard 5016 West 44th Street Home: (952) 926-9588 Work: (612) 335-1512 Email: jim.bullard@leonard.com file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:39 AM To: ithomas.plant@ge.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Draft Traffic Management Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:12 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Draft Traffic Management Policy Original Message From: Plant, Thomas (GE Commercial Finance) Emailto:Thomas.Plant@ge.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:55 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Draft Traffic Management Policy Dear Members of the Edina Transportation Commission, Edina City Council, and Edina Engineering Department: I would like to express the following concerns about the Draft Transportation Policy for the City of Edina: * I object to the use of road closure or diversion devices to control traffic flow. First from a safety consideration, these devices prohibit the most optimum flow of fire, police and medical emergency personnel. Secondly, I do not believe we, as a community, should ever transfer a traffic flow problem in one neighborhood to another by closing roads or diverting traffic. Thirdly, we all contribute taxes to the maintenance and creation of our roads -- I want to drive on the public roads that get me where I want to go by the most expeditious route. Of course, we must always obey the speed limits! * I do not believe that a "neighborhood" approach is appropriate. The current draft policy appears to allow a small "neighborhood" to work with the city to solve its traffic issues without concern for, or participation by, those other nearby citizens who will be affected by the "neighborhood" solution. All citizens who are affected by a traffic flow changes should be allowed to participate in commission and council decisions. While the current draft proposal is a good start, it should at a minimum be amended to address the issues I listed above. Tom Plant 4350 Morningside Road Edina, MN 55416 (952) 922-0354 Page 1 of 3 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:41 AM To: 'cjmaichen@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 1:54 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Original Message From: Cjmaichen@aol.com [mailto:Cjmaichen@aol.corn) Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 1:32 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Below is a letter expressing residential concerns regarding the proposed Transportation Policy. Thank you for listening. December 30, 2004 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department As residents of the City of Edina, we are writing to express our concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public December 6th. Specifically, it is the following items that draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process with which it was developed. • Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 3 • There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th--Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. • At the open house at City Hall, residents were presented with a very abbreviated version of the plan that lacked many critical facts and information relevant to those who would be most impacted by any proposed transportation changes and measures (e.g. notification areas, priority ranking of traffic study requests, etc.). The City Engineer's presentation was an even more distilled version of the policy draft, which offered little in terms of substance and specifics as to how the policy will be implemented. • The arbitrary deadlines attached to the approval timeline of this policy have clearly taken precedent over thoughtful consideration and public input. This draws into question how a January or February approval deadline coincides with the street reconstruction schedule for identified neighborhoods in 2005. • The policy needs to provide context for acceptable and reasonable (realities vs. engineering principles) traffic volumes based on accurately defined street classifications; the policy does not provide (accurate) classification defmitions for "local", "collector" and "arterial" streets. Distinctions need to be made between local, collector and arterial streets—collectors are not arterial. The plan conveniently blurs these definitions. • The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). • The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. • The City so far has not released information on how many traffic studies and change requests have been made to the city in recent history, who has made them and at what expense to the tax payers such studies have been performed. Requests have been made, but the City to date has not provided this information. This includes releasing for public review the most recent traffic counts in Edina (keeping in mind that the most accurate traffic count study is a license plate study). • The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and projections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. • The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 3 of 3 in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. • The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, Engineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. • As it is currently drafted, the policy does not go far enough to represent the interests of all Edina residents; operationally it pits one neighborhood against another, rather than looking at the community as a whole—a city-wide approach is paramount for resolving traffic issues. • Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). These are the reasons that we are opposed to the proposed changes that the Transportation Committee has brought up. If you need further clarification or any further written notification from us please free to let us know. Sincerely, Timothy and Caroline McGowan 4021 West 44th St. Edina, MN 55424 952-929-1604 file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:44 AM To: 'julia.silvis@gmail.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Comment on Draft Transportation plan Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:03 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Comment on Draft Transportation plan Original Message From: Julia Silvis [mailto:julia.silvis@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:02 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Comment on Draft Transportation plan Dear Transportation Commission, I have writtn to you previously to urge a more public review, and am pleased to hear of the public meeting you held and are will hold, and am also pleased that you are soliciting public comment on the draft of the plan. Allow me to take up your time once again with a few comments on the current draft, which included, to your credit, several steps that would be taken to involve and educate the public about the plan. First and foremost, I strongly object to objective four of "Roadway Design," which states that the city will "design residential street systems to discourage through traffic." This conflicts with the goal stated in objective three, which states that the city will strive to maximize the efficiency and capacity of the existing road network. It also conflicts with the goal to "provide logical street networks to connect residential areas to the regional highway system and local activity centers." Objective 11 under Roadway Function raises similar objections, but it also is too vague to be included in a plan of this kind. I would like to see a definition of what the effects of cut-through traffic are. One effect that springs immediately to mind is access to places by the most direct and logical route. The city should not be mitigating that effect, but seeking to promote and replicate it. Furthermore, the word "implement" is too strong. That could bind the city to take foolish, harmful actions on behalf of a small group of citizens requesting traffic calming (objective 10). The definition of traffic calming is also sufficiently indistinct as to create potential conflict as the plan is implemented. It is one thing to discourage fast traffic to make streets safe for bikes and pedestrians, and quite another to discourage the free flow of cars. The city's proper goal in traffic calming should be to control speed, not to control volume. By reducing speed, volume reduction will occur in tandem, as people seek roadways where they can travel at higher speeds. Controlling for speed is both less invasive, less expensive in terms of infastructure installed, and within the appropriate role of city government. Controlling volume is not. Finally, I am happy to see sections on transit and bike modes in the plan. With the success of the new light rail, there is an exciting opportunity to work with the city to ensure that Edina benefits directly from any new extension of the Hiawatha line. And it would be a lovely thing if the signature feature of Edina's roads became their generous bike lanes, rather than the chokers and cul-de-sacs and diagonal road blockages put in to appease small minorities. Thank for you reading this letter; I look forward to reviewing the next draft. Sincerely, Julia Silvis From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:45 AM To: 'D. Dege' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Objections to Proposed Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: D. Dege (mailto:ddegelgvisi.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:20 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Objections to Proposed Transportation Policy Please, can we have some sanity in this process? Problems I have with the plan are: 1. The arbitrary 5-year moratorium on a neighborhood applying for a re-assessment. A 50-unit apartment building could be built in a neighborhood a year after an assessment, but its traffic problems couldn't be evaluated for another four years? 2. The focus during the one meeting I attended (which may have been the one and only meeting??) on just one or two streets instead of on a city-wide plan. 3. Who pays for the audits? I hope it's the individual or neighborhood who asks for it, and NOT the entire City of Edina. Who paid the $30,000 cost of the previous study requested by Country Club? 4. "Any individual or neighborhood" can request an assessment, and they are "rated" by the city. What does that mean? Who decides, and what is the rating process? It isn't stated. 5. But my strongest objection is the lack of publicity given to the process. The City of Edina has an obligation to be an open, forthcoming, honest body that serves ALL, not just the most wealthy, its constituents. Dolores A. Dege, Ph.D. 4012 Kipling Av So Edina, MN 55416 P.S. - I'd like to go on record as saying it may be time to open up Bridge Lane to traffic, to alleviate the traffic problems at 50th & France. Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:48 AM To: 'Pat Bennett' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Draft Edina Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Pat Bennett [mailto:PBENNETT@mn.mcom] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:27 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Draft Edina Transportation Policy To:Edina Transportation Commission Members Edina City Council Edina City Manager Re:Draft Transportation Policy Public Comments I am writing to express my concerns not only with the Draft Policy and Transportation Commission process, but with what this process says about the public process in Edina. I first moved to Edina as an elementary school student in 1955. Over the years I have lived in the Pamela Park, 50th West of France, Grandview, and Morningside neighborhoods. In the course of living,working,shopping,parenting,coaching,recreating etc. , I traverse many of Edina's streets on a daily basis. To place restrictions and characterizations on my use of those streets puzzles and concerns me greatly. I, purely and simply, want to state that no matter where I go in this city, I am not "cut-through" traffic. While traffic issues are of concern to us all, the process in front of us today is bigger than just traffic. It is about sound, representative City Government. Among the questions that come to my mind as I have viewed this process of repetitive agitation to address one neighboorhood's concerns over the past number of years are the following: *Who determines public policy in Edina ? *Who does City Staff serve ? *What direction is provided to City Staff by our elected officials regarding repetitive expenditure of city resources regarding traffic issues benefiting primarily one neighborhood ? *To whom are City Staff and City officials ultimately accountable ? Beyond the bigger questions, what are the problems with the Transportation Commission's work and the Draft Policy ? Here's what. lf,as they say, knowledge is power, this has to be true in an area as complex as traffic design and management. Yet our Transportation Commission was comprised of traffic neophytes, file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 2 whose primary objective appears to have been to adopt a spoon-fed Draft policy prepared by City Staff rather than become the experts that this topic demands and the residents of this city deserve. Additionally, insufficient measures taken to include the public in this process, combined with the measures recommended in the plan that would restrict notification to a small circle of beneficiaries, and leave open the possibility of road closures for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, taint the Draft Policy with the specter of a Trojan Horse. So, in view of all of the above , what needs to be done to ensure that Edina develops and executes a traffic plan that will serve the city residents, businesses, customers, worshipers, parents and students long term ? Here are some guidlines: *Place a cease and desist on the current draft Policy. *City elected officials should provide clear instructions to the Transportation Commission to begin their work by studying regional and city-wide problems and solutions. *City Staff should be relegated to the role of executing public policy, not writing it. *Existing traffic laws in Edina should be rigorously enforced. Finally, as an observer at the December 9th meeting, in contrast to the description that this was a topic of narrow division and narrow interest, i was struck with the width and breadth of the interest in this issue. I was also disappointed that only one City Council member chose to attend. If the others had attended, they would have a greater appreciation for the groundswell of interest that exists in the neighborhoods not only around this issue but around holding City Government accountable for fair,open,effective and cost efficient public policy. Thank you. Patrick Bennett 4003 Lynn Avenue Edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\trafficUransportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Draft transportation policy Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:48 AM To: tterryw@crassmonroe.conf Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Draft transportation policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:09 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Draft transportation policy Original Message From: Terrance 3. Wagener [mailto:TerryW@krassmonroe.corn] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 5:28 PM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: Draft transportation policy To the Edina Transportation Committee; the Edina City Council; and Edina Engineering Dept. I reside at 4520 West 44th Street in Edina; our home occupies the NE corner of 44th and Browndale. While I am open to traffic calming methods in general, I am opposed restricting traffic flow through street closure. I am also opposed to the draft transportation policy. The Impacted Area as as defined in the draft should include all households affected by the proposed limited access. I want the policy to consider the residents of the entire community, not just a narrowly defined neighborhood or street. Thanks. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:51 AM To: 'billcompass@worldnet.att.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: draft transp plan comment Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@cLedina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:09 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RN: draft transp plan comment Original Message From: William Hannon [mailto:billcompass@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:34 PM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: draft transp plan comment Mr. Houle and Mr. Hughes: FYI (and in case reading it here is easier/quicker for you), earlier this afternoon I dropped off hard copies of the letter attached to this message, conveying comments on the Draft Transportation Policy currently being developed by the Transportation Commission. Thank you for your consideration of its content. William Hannon, 4701 W. 44th St., Edina; 952-929-7973 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:53 AM To: 'plombardolgstatesupply.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Calming in Country Club Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:13 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Traffic Calming in Country Club Original Message From: Patrick Lombardo [mailto:plombardo@statesupply.com) Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:36 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes Subject: Traffic Calming in Country Club From: Patrick Lombardo Subject: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street To all persons --- I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy as we are directly affected by any traffic changes that impact 44th Street. We live on the of 44th Street and North Ave. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times and limit citizen's access to residential streets. Also, the definition of an "impacted area" should include those negatively affected by limitation of access, such as yours truly. Therefore, the Impacted Area Radius should be increased for all purposes. This would include both notifications and public hearings for all the folks who can reasonably be determined to be potentially impacted by the decision involving traffic calming methods. The currently proposed traffic calming method for the Country Club neighborhood will benefit one Edina neighborhood while causing harm to other adjoining neighborhoods. Please consider the well-being of the families in the surrounding Edina neighborhoods. Sincerely, Patrick Lombardo 4401 North Avenue Corner of 44th and North Ave. You may reach me at 952-925-3375, or my office at 651-774-5985 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:54 AM To: 'bullardcm@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: New Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, PE., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:13 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: New Traffic Policy Original Message From: Bullardcm@aol.com [mailto:Bullardcm@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:30 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes Subject: New Traffic Policy To whom it may concern: It has recently come to my attention that the Country Club neighborhood is seeking to limit access to their neighborhood streets. As a resident of 44th and Vernon, I'm greatly displeased by the prospect of increased traffic flow to my neighborhood, not to mention the additional inconvenience of the proposed measures. I strongly oppose the current draft Transportation Policy, traffic calming measures for traffic volume control, all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times, and limiting citizen's access to residential streets. Thank you for your time. I trust that you will do all that you can to relieve traffic problems and answer my concerns. Sincerely, Christine Bullard (Edina Resident) file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 3 From: Nancy Ritzman [nancy.ritzman@mindspring.com] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:03 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Re: Country Club Traffic Issues I guess it is a question in who is considered 'Impacted." I do not live in the immediate Country Club neighborhood, however any changes to the traffic patterns will definitely effect my daily life. I live in St Louis Park, in a nearby neighborhood. St Louis Park does not have the same local paper as Edina and therefore public notices in Edina's Sun Sailor will not reach all surrounding neighborhoods. I hope this is considered when offering public comment. Nancy Ritzman Original Message From: Steve Lillehaug To: Nancy Ritzman Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:53 AM Subject: RE: Country Club Traffic Issues Hi Nancy, Just a quick comment. The City will be notifying people that are impacted - the City Transportation Commission and Council make this very clear. Additionally, any proposal that the Council directs staff to move forward with will be part of a public hearing process. This requires public notification in the local newspaper. Any traffic calming in the City of Edina will be part of this procedure and approval process. Thanks. Steve Original Message From: Nancy Ritzman [mailto:nancy.ritzman@mindspring.com] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:43 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Re: Country Club Traffic Issues Mr Lillehaug, Thank you for your response. I have read the draft. I guess I put the cart before the horse, so to speak. The new transportation policy makes it easier for neighborhoods to push modification of traffic patterns to limit access while reducing the imput of those living just outside of the immediate neighborhood. The impact area of any street changes is much more than a 300-foot radius of the proposed change area. Your proposed policy will basically give those outside of that area no avenue for notification or comment. The Country Club neighborhood area is just waiting for the Transportation Commission Policy to be approved so they may more quicky push through their proposed traffic plan which previously did not pass under current policy. All the objections I gave earlier will then be relevant. You understood what I was getting at in my email. It is the results that the new Policy will allow that I truly object to. I still say, that Edina needs to look beyond its borders to truly see the impact of any policies change. Nancy Ritzman St Louis Park Original Message From: Steve Lillehauq To: nancy.ritzmanmindspring.com file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 3 Cc: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:59 AM Subject: RE: Country Club Traffic Issues Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. However, you have a misconception that there are proposals by the City for 'flagrantly outrageous proposed traffic changes within the Country Club area of Edina.' There are none that are currently being considered by the City. To aid in dispelling any incorrect information out there, it would be good to know your source so I may aid in insuring correct information is available to the public so opinions and comments that we are requesting on the transportation policy are not skewed in any way. Please see the following website for the Transportation Commission Policy that the City is currently considering: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L4-19a_TrafficNews.htm Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:26 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: PN: Country Club Traffic Issues Original Message From: Nancy Ritzman [mailto:nancy.ritzman@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:32 AM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Country Club Traffic Issues Dear Mr Houle, I am writing to express my opinion on the flagrantly outrageous proposed traffic changes within the Country Club area of Edina. As a lifelong resident of either Edina or St Louis Park, I am shocked at the audacity of the suggestion that unless you live within a confined neighborhood, you are to not use the streets. A major change of the street structure within an already established area effects the value of all surrounding areas also. Houses have been purchased and businesses established in part based on file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation CommissionTorrespondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 3 of 3 traffic patterns, convenience and access. The consideration of where I live in St Louis Park was influenced definitely on my ability to access any surrounding neighborhood and business district. The proposal is self-centered and sets a scary precedent for other neighborhoods. Couldn't the Creekside or Brookside neighborhoods decide they do not like the through traffic coming from Edina and close off most access on Brookside at 44th St? Or the Browndale or Minnekada neighborhoods for that matter? I grew up in Edina and now live in St Louis Park, these are streets that I have always driven. I am embarrassed at the arrogance of the notion, "Keep your traffic out of our neighborhoods." Nancy Ritzman 4150 Xenwood Ave St Louis Park file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:07 AM To: 'martep@msn.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: DRAFT TRANSPORTATION POLICY Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. However, you have a misconception that there are current plans to close streets and make some one ways. There are none that are currently being considered by the City. To aid in dispelling any incorrect information out there, it would be good to know your source so I may aid in insuring correct information is available to the public so opinions and comments that we are requesting on the transportation policy are not skewed in any way. Please see the following website for the Transportation Commission Policy that the City is currently considering: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L4-19a_TrafficNews.htm Thank you. Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:32 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: DRAFT TRANSPORTATION POLICY Original Message From: MARTE PALM [mailto:Martep@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:33 PM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes Subject: DRAFT TRANSPORTATION POLICY I was just notified today by a neighbor of your Draft Transportation Policy that you are thinking of implementing. First of all why wouldn't you tell your neighbors in St Louis Park of your plan to close streets and make some one ways. I would like more information and to know how this is going to affect my Brookside Neighborhood. Thank you. Martha Palm 4115 Yosemite Avenue I AM OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT DRAFT TRANSPORTATION POLICY. file://0\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:09 AM To: 'diablo@gyyv.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Control Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:34 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Control Original Message From: D'ablo [mailto:diablo@gyyv.net] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:25 PM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: Edina Traffic Control To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Linda Hatfield 4181 Zarthan Ave. S. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:11 AM To: Ist@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: draft transportation policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:43 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: draft transportation policy Original Message From: Restorative Learning [mailto:st@mn.mcom] Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 10:23 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes Subject: draft transportation policy To: The Edina Transportation Committee and the Edina City Council and the Edina Engineering Department From: David St. Germain, 4650 W. 44th St. Edina, MN 55424 Sally Bulleit, 4650 W. 44th St. Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "impacted area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 2 access. I want the "impacted area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted." I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:13 AM To: 'ayeamen@earthlink.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Comments on Edina Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. However, you have a misconception that there are plans that will increase traffic on 44th Street. There are none that are currently being considered by the City. To aid in dispelling any incorrect information out there, it would be good to know your source so I may aid in insuring correct information is available to the public so opinions and comments that we are requesting on the transportation policy are not skewed in any way. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:44 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Comments on Edina Transportation Policy Original Message From: Alison Yeamen (mailto:ayeamen@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:10 AM To: Wayne Houle; ghughes@ci.edina.cmn.us Subject: RE: Comments on Edina Transportation Policy Dear Wayne & Gordon, Attached you will find a letter expressing our concerns and opinion regarding the proposed Edina Transportation Policy. We are faxing a hard copy to 952-826- 0389. Please let us know if you have any quesitons or if you do not receive our letter. We appreciate your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Alison & Chris Yeamen 4394 Mackey Avenue From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:14 AM To: 'annalom@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:44 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street Original Message From: AnnaLom@aol.com (mailto:AnnaLom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:01 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Gordon Hughes; plombardolgstatesupply.com Subject: Transportation Policy affecting 44th Street To all persons: -I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy as WE ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED by ANY traffic changes that impact 44th Street -I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times -I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets -I want the definition of an "impacted area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access -I wanted the IMPACTED AREA RADIUS INCREASED for all purposes, INCLUDING NOTIFICATION and public hearings, to include ALL ALL ALL ALL RESIDENTS who reasonably self-define as "impacted" -I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated -I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the ENTIRE community, NOT just residents of a single neighborhood Sincerely, Anna Lombardo 4401 North Avenue Corner of 44th and North From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:52 AM To: 'katy_stites@cargill.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Draft Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Gordon Hughes Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:22 PM To: Wayne Houle Subject: FW: Draft Transportation Policy Importance: High Greetings Wayne. Just so we don't double up on things, I'm assuming that you are arranging thru Darlene or Sharon the copying of these e-mails when they're jointly addressed to you and me or if they are only addressed to you. If they are only addressed to me, I'm forwarding to Darlene for copying. Original Message----- From: Katy_Stitesgicargill.com [mailto:Katy_Stites@cargill.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:13 PM To: Gordon Hughes; Wayne Houle Cc: Katy_Stites@cargill.com Subject: Draft Transportation Policy Importance: High Gentlemen: I am writing to let you know that I vehemently oppose the current draft Transportation policy in its present form. Specifically: * I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. * I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. How can we even consider endangering our families in order to make a few streets quieter for a very limited number of people??? * I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. In addition: * I want the definition of an "Impacted area" radius increased for all purposes (including notification and public hearings) to include all residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". * I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for a project to be advanced or defeated. This would seem to go without saying... Most of all, I endorse - and hope that both of you do as well - a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Katy Stites 4311 W 44th St Edina, MN 55424 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:54 AM To: ijstites@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Draft Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:14 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Draft Transportation Policy Original Message From: John Stites [mailto:jstites@mn.rr.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:35 AM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Cc: Katy Stites Subject: Draft Transportation Policy Gentlemen: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include all residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for a project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, John Stites 4311 W 44th St Edina,MN 55424 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:16 AM To: 'hburke@mplib.org' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: comment on Edina Transportation Plan Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:03 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: comment on Edina Transportation Plan Original Message From: Burke, Helen (mailto:HBurke@mplib.org) Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:48 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: comment on Edina Transportation Plan Thank you very much for seeking public input to the Edina Transportation Plan. Please emphasize controlling traffic by enforcement of existing speed limits. Please do not enact traffic calming measures that limit traffic volume; such measures need to be implemented carefully so that the preferences of the residents of a particular street are not place higher than the needs of the residents of the entire city to move about freely. I would appreciate having a study done of the existing traffic calming measures undertaken several years ago in the Country Club neighborhood, with specific reference to the impact upon the Morningside neighborhood. Thank you very much for your dedication to studying the impact of transportation in, through and around Edina. Sincerely, Helen Burke 4246 Grimes Avenue South Edina, MN 55416 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:18 AM To: limegrime@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Propose Edina Transportation Commission's New Draft Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:05 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Propose Edina Transportation Commission's New Draft Policy Original Message From: Timegrime@aol.com [mailto:Timegrime@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:35 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Propose Edina Transportation Commission's New Draft Policy I would like to add my comments to that others regarding your new draft policy. I am concerned about the new draft policy that indicates one neighborhood can have nearly exclusive influence over future traffic routes. Any alteration in current traffic patterns needs to consider the impact on adjacent neighborhoods, the city and the surrounding communities. The process of planning needs to be transparent, all citizens informed of the process and consulted on the options as things progress. Further, we have concerned about some of the underlining objectives of draft plan. I have lived at 4410 Grimes Avenue for 16 years. My wife and I were attracted to this part of Edina in part because of its urban like setting and traffic patterns with streets that actually lead to someplace in an efficient manor. We do not want the grid as it now stands disturbed and requiring even longer trips by car. The traffic is not bad on my street for an urban area nor are the surrounding streets except maybe 44th street could use some measures to slow traffic a bit. As far as safety goes, there are kids on my street too including mine. We on Grimes do not want to absorb more traffic just for the sake of another neighborhood. When I attended the meeting at the old city hall a couple of years ago on this topic, the traffic consultant file://GAInfrastmeture\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Conespondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 2 noted that much of any traffic problem in the neighborhood was a result of the affluence of the residents and their dependency on cars. He really did not think there was much of a problem except at 50th and France. If the streets are clogged at all; it is because of the various contractors expanding and remodeling houses, delivering groceries, providing clean services, bringing lawn services, hauling garbage by four or five firms in the same area and numerous school buses crossing each other's paths. Perhaps we could all learn to walk a little more and do more for ourselves. However, the narrow two way streets as they exist requires us all to drive a little slower and with caution. As far as concerns about drive through traffic, we all do that once we leave our street and neighborhood which is the only choice one has living in the North eastern part of Edina if one wants to go someplace like work, shopping, schools, etc. Perhaps if there is a traffic problem, the city may want to promote a more extensive network of side walks, bike and walking trails. I would appreciate if my children in middle school could walk safely from school on sidewalks. Thomas Koon (952) 929 4996 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\trafficUransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:18 AM To: ipsledin@aol.comi Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: transportation policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:07 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: transportation policy Original Message From: PSLedin@aol.com [mailto:PSLedin@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 4:22 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: transportation policy December 21, 2007 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department As a resident of the City of Edina,Morningside, we are writing to express our concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public December 6th. - There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th--Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiarransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 2 - The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". - The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). - The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. - The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and projections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. - The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. - The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, Engineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. - As it is currently drafted, the policy does not go far enough to represent the interests of all Edina residents; operationally it pits one neighborhood against another, rather than looking at the community as a whole—a city-wide approach is paramount for resolving traffic issues. - Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). We all appreciate your work, transparency, and openness to input. Paul+Sharon Ledin file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:25 AM To: 'dluger@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Please see the following website for the Transportation Commission Policy that the City is currently considering: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L4-19a_TrafficNews.htm The City is not currently considering any solutions for any traffic situation in the Country Club area as you elude. I suggest you speak with the people who are spreading rumors to find the source. I would also be interested in discussing these rumors with your sources to help dispel any incorrect information. Thank you. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:10 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Original Message From: Dave Luger [mailto:dluger@mn.mcorn] Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 4:58 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Where can I find out more information regarding the rumors I've heard about the Country Club traffic situation/suggested solutions and the impact it may have on 44th St. and the surrounding area. Thank you Dave Luger dluger@excite.com file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 1 of 3 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:04 AM To: 'mmherrmann@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Country Club Traffic Patterb Modifications Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:31 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Country Club Traffic Patterb Modifications Original Message From: Mmherrmann@aol.com [mailto:Mmherrmann@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 3:41 PM To: Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes; info@edinamorningside.org Subject: Country Club Traffic Patterb Modifications December 28, 2007 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department The Edina Sun Current As a resident of the City of St. Louis Park, I am writing to express my concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission— and presented to the public December 6th. Specifically, it is the following items that draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process with which it was developed. Most importantly, as the mother of a daughter who was struck by an SUV at the corner of 44th and Wooddale in 2002,! am vehemently opposed to any traffic modification that would increase the traffic volume on 44th Street and Wooddale Avenue. The proposed changes to the Country Club area (making Wooddale a one-way entry, Browndale a one-way exit, cutting off Sunnyside at Grimes, etc.) would increase the volume of traffic in this area dramatically. Four mothers, including myself, were at the intersection when my 7-year file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 Page 2 of 3 old daughter was waved forward by the SUV. There was nothing any one of us could do but scream. Another car was already on its way into the intersection and struck her head on. She recovered physically, but retains emotional scars, especially regarding crossing streets, parking lots, etc. Further, another child was struck by a car at 44th and Browndale a few years ago. MANY children ( including infants and toddlers) reside on 44th street between France and Brookside and should this traffic plan be instituted, it is almost a given that another child will be hit by a car and possibly killed. There is simply too much traffic, and too few people driving who actually stop at the stop signs. To my knowledge, no child has been struck by a car in Country Club (indeed, there is far less traffic in this area), and to increase the traffic on 44th, while further reducing the traffic in Country Club is fundamentally wrong and fails to protect the children of not only Edina (on 44th) but also of St. Louis Park. The life of one child is not greater than the life of another, and regrettably, this is the message being sent, should this traffic policy be approved. The community-at- large should be served, not merely one segment of that community. • Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. • There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th--Thanksgiving Day—almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th—the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. • At the open house at City Hall, residents were presented with a very abbreviated version of the plan that lacked many critical facts and information relevant to those who would be most impacted by any proposed transportation changes and measures (e.g. notification areas, priority ranking of traffic study requests, etc.). The City Engineer's presentation was an even more distilled version of the policy draft, which offered little in terms of substance and specifics as to how the policy will be implemented. • The arbitrary deadlines attached to the approval timeline of this policy have clearly taken precedent over thoughtful consideration and public input. This draws into question how a January or February approval deadline coincides with the street reconstruction schedule for identified neighborhoods in 2005. • The policy needs to provide context for acceptable and reasonable (realities vs. engineering principles) traffic volumes based on accurately defined street classifications; the policy does not provide (accurate) classification definitions for "local", "collector" and "arterial" streets. Distinctions need to be made between local, collector and arterial streets—collectors are not arterial. The plan conveniently blurs these definitions. • The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/3/2005 !!!! Neighborhood Action Required!!!! DECEMBER 30TH DEADLINE In 1993, and again in 2001, the Country Club neighborhood sought the City of Edina's approval to modify access to their neighborhood due to concerns that non-Country Club residents were using their streets. The plan did not pass due to various technical City policy issues. Those issues are now being addressed within a new draft Transportation Policy that significantly reduces your right to voice your concerns about traffic modifications that could negatively affect you. If adopted, The City of Edina's proposed new Transportation Policy will make it dramatically easier to adopt County Club's traffic modifications to the significant detriment of non-Country Club residents. THE DEADLINE FOR YOUR COMMENTARY ON THIS PROPOSED POLICY IS DECEMBER 30TH. NO NOTICE OR COMMENT: Under this new Policy the Country Club District will have the ability to begin street closures, re- routing and traffic calming techniques to reduce a perceived problem with traffic within Country Club. If you live outside of a 300-foot radius of the proposed change area or are not, by their definition, an "affected person" (Edina or St. Louis Park) you will NOT receive notice of the changes and will have no right to comment. (Inconvenience does not count for anything by their current definition.) THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED STREET CHANGES: The previously proposed traffic plan completely closed Sunnyside between Arden and Grimes Ave. The Browndale Bridge becomes a one-way westbound exit only, leaving Country Club. To the North, Browndale becomes one-way, outbound exit only to 44th Street from Country Club. Wooddale becomes an inbound-only entrance from 44th Street. VASTLY INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR NON-COUNTRY CLUB RESIDENTS: The result of the above actions, by Edina's own consultants' estimates, will only reduce traffic volumes by a few hundred vehicles per day per street; however, it will INCREASE the traffic on 44th street and others by THOUSANDS of vehicles per day. Specifically, 44th Street will go from 3400 vehicles per day at Kojetin Park to 7380. AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 117% ! At 44th and Browndale the vehicle count goes from 2500 vehicles to 4600, an equally unacceptable increase of 84 % . While numbers for Morningside and Browndale neighborhoods were conveniently not shown, it can be reasonably assumed that traffic on Wooddale, Browndale and in those non-Country Club areas will SKYROCKET as France Avenue is already at full capacity NO NORTH - SOUTH NEIGHBORHOOD INTERCONNECTIVITY: These street closure and traffic calming actions will significantly impair your ability to travel north and south through Country Club and will greatly add time and inconvenience to your ability simply to maneuver around the neighborhood. ACTION: You must notify the City of Edina immediately, IN WRITING, EMAIL or FAX if you are opposed to the new Transportation Policy and/or if you are opposed to street closures and re- routing of traffic through Country Club that result in increased traffic in other nearby neighborhoods. A HARD COPY LETTER TO THE CITY IS SUGGESTED. <over> IF YOU OPPOSE HAVING MORE TRAFFIC IN YOUR AREA, A SAMPLE LETTER IS ATTACHED FOR YOUR USE AND/OR USE THE BELOW EMAIL ADDRESS TO VOICE YOUR OPINION ON THE DRAFT TRANSPORTATION POLICY. VIA EMAIL: WAYNE HOULE, EDINA CITY ENGINEER AT: WHOULEACLEDINA.MN.US AND GORDON HUGHES, EDINA CITY MANAGER gh u 2hesAci. edina. mn. us VIA EDINA FAX: 952-826-0389 (The entire draft policy can be found at: http://www.cityofedina.com/Pages/L5- 63 TransportationCommissionPolicy.htm) A WCCO News video briefly outlining the issue is at : http://wcco.dayport.com/launcher/4348/ YOU MUST RESPOND BEFORE DECEMBER 30, 2004 TO HAVE YOUR OPINION HEARD AND COUNTED! To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: V- I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. V- I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. V- I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. N/ I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. V- I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. V. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". V. I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. V- I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Print Name: Address: 12/30/04 Attached is a hard copy of my comment on the draft ETC Policy, with referenced attachments. An email version of the same was sent on 12/28/04. If you have any questions, please contact me. er Jennifer Janovy 952-920-4373 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 11:17 AM To: 'Jkj966@aol.com'; Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Cc: Steve Lillehaug; Sharon Allison Subject: RE: draft ETC Policy public comment Good morning Jennifer. Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Although I will not comment on every point you made, I would like to point out that it appears you spent a considerable effort compiling information regarding the derivation of the DRAFT Policy and points throughout the past year where you feel staff is misleading to one extent or another. First, I have never tried to mislead anyone where the information in the DRAFT policy was derived partly or wholly from nor tried to mislead anyone on any other Edina matter. Yes, we referenced Bloomington's policy as well as many, many others (as acknowledged in Appendix D). Another point I will continue to echo: Traffic control measures that divert traffic are included in the DRAFT policy (and, yes, I definitely support including them as a potential tool). The majority of substantial policies throughout America include these exact tools (contrary to what you claim, only a few minority exclude). It is my opinion that there may be an appropriate application of one of these volume mitigating tools in Edina and to exclude would be very short sighted as a professional engineer. Does this mean one of these measures will be implemented in an area that you elude to - possibly not or possibly, but only upon after completion of a traffic study, scrutinized and recommended by staff, public involvement, recommended by the ETC, public hearing process and approved by the Council - regardless of any one neighborhood group's or individual's intentions and desires. You and others continue to reiterate the need to increase the size of the benefited areas and impacted areas - its been well stated and heard by your Transportation Commission and Council. I've given my recommendation which is a minimum and allows for expanding these areas on a case by case scenario. No two areas in Edina are the same and it is my opinion that impacted areas may need to be adjusted based on a proper evaluation of the area and the potential impact to the area. If you are able to quantify this in a more logical manner, please give a suggestion rather than telling me what we currently have is wrong and too exclusive, narrow, inherently unfair, etc. Give me an example of another community that does this in a different manner. If I saw a more logical way to define this without having to spend the taxpayers money to send notifications to the entire City in every instance, I would recommend it. Meeting the Council objectives: the draft policy does not give a specific step by step methodology for addressing some of the other transportation issues such as mass transit. The ETC will be working with staff, consultants, etc. regarding these issues on a short and long term basis but does not require (in my opinion) a step by step procedure to do so. I've only been with the City of Edina for a short time (almost a year) and it is my strong opinion that this policy is extremely important and needed to avoid the paths that the City has went down in the past and has been extremely scrutinized for. I take pride in my work, will continue to put transportation safety issues at the forefront, and am not here to mislead anyone in this City. I'm willing to meet with you anytime to further discuss any of your issues or recommendations with the DRAFT policy or any other Edina infrastructure matter. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jkj966@aol.com [mailto:Jkj966@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:55 AM To: Steve Lillehaug; Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: draft ETC Policy public comment Below and attached is public comment for the ETC and City Council regarding the draft ETC Policy. I will send a paper copy with referenced enclosures also. Thanks. Jennifer Janovy 12/27/04 To: Edina Transportation Commission Gordon Hughes CC: Edina City Council Re: ETC draft Policy Public Comment Dear Mr. Hughes and Members of the Edina Transportation Commission: The 12/16/04 article in the Edina Sun Current, Traffic Talks, includes statements attributed to Commission members and City staff that require some clarification. Issue 1: Creation of the Policy "The draft Transportation Commission Policy garnered attention in recent weeks after Commissioner Joni Bennett spoke out against the policy she and six other appointed residents comprising the Edina Transportation Commission spent the past year creating." "They started with nothing," [Gordon Hughes] said. "They now have a very strong policy that provides the framework it was intended to provide." What Is Misleading: Assertion that the Commission spent the past year creating the draft ETC Policy. Assertion the ETC started with "nothing." Clarification: Material in the draft Policy originated with City staff. A large part of the Policy was taken directly from other publications, specifically the Edina Transportation Plan (1999) and Bloomington's traffic management policy, as shown below. The following points in the ETC draft Policy come from the Edina Transportation Plan (1999): Roadway Design: Points 1-4, 6-7 Roadway Function and Access: Points 2-7 Roadway Maintenance & Operation: Points 1-5 Transit/TDM: Points 1-5 Parking: Points 1-2 Pedestrian/Bicycle: Points 1-4 Goods Movement: Point 1 Funding and Jurisdiction: Points 1-4 The ETC was given a copy of the Edina Transportation Plan (1999) on April 22, 2004 and went through it in a single meeting. At the following meeting (May 27, 2004) the ETC received the first draft of their Policy, which incorporated portions of the 1999 Plan. The following points in the ETC draft Policy come from Bloomington's traffic management policy: Process and Schedule, Table 1: All or part of Steps 1-4, Step 5b, Step 6, Steps 8-10 Criteria for Screening: All Scoring for Ranking: Points 1-5 Removal of Traffic Calming Methods: All Benefited Area (Assessed Area): Benefited areas for speed hump, speed table, center island narrowing, choker, and chicane. Benefited area for partial street closure. Benefited area for cul-de- sac. Bloomington's transportation policy was not presented to the ETC prior to portions of it appearing in the draft ETC Policy. Because much of the draft Policy comes directly from other sources and because it was presented to the ETC by City staff, it is misleading to state the ETC created the Policy or started with nothing. Regarding the timeline for creating the Policy, the ETC began meeting on January 20, 2004 and received the first draft of the Policy on May 27, 2004—a span of FOUR months, not a year as stated in the article. I question how in this length of time they could have studied the issues sufficiently to come up with a Policy on their own or knowledgably edit the Policy handed to them. "They started with nothing," [Gordon Hughes] said. "They now have a very strong policy that provides the framework it was intended to provide." What Is Misleading: Suggestion that the draft ETC Policy meets the objectives laid out for the ETC by the City Council. Clarification: The draft ETC Policy largely overlooks issues the ETC was formed to address, such as mass transit, while including objectives beyond the Commission's scope of responsibilities. For these reasons the draft Policy falls short of fulfilling the Council's intentions. Issue 2: Street Closure "The group of Edinans—and some non-residents—who use the local streets as commuter routes—who attended the meeting had to be reminded by Commission Chairman Fred Richards that there is no such proposal from the Country Club District or any other neighborhood to close off streets at this time." "Lillehaug said misinformation has led people to believe that there is some type of imminent threat that streets will be closed." What Is Misleading: Suggestion that concern over street closures is the result of misinformation. Failure to disclose that that some in the Country Club District continue to advocate for street closures in their neighborhood. Failure to disclose Commissioner Marie Thorpe's past and possibly current advocacy of street closures in the Country Club District. Clarification: In many conversations with others about issues related to the draft ETC Policy I have never said, nor have I ever heard said, there is a current proposal with the City to close off streets in the Country Club neighborhood. Instead, discussion has focused on the following facts: Significant changes to streets in Country Club are still being discussed in the neighborhood, as evidenced by the article "Traffic Primer," by Country Club resident Rob Webb, which appeared this fall on the Country Club District web site. The article discusses making Browndale Ave. outbound only at W. 50th St. and W. 44th St.; Wooddale Ave. inbound only at W. 44th St.; and closing Sunnyside Rd. between Grimes and Arden Aves. Commissioner Marie Thorpe, as past chairperson of the Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues, has been an outspoken supporter of traffic calming measures, including street closures, in her neighborhood. In 2001, this group developed a plan with the assistance of City staff and taxpayer-funded consultants that included closing off Sunnyside between Grimes and Arden Avenues and adding one-way portals to Browndale and Wooddale (see attachment). According to an August 29, 2001 article in the Edina Sun Current, "A majority of the 10-member committee also believed it [proposal to close Sunnyside between Grimes and Arden and add one-way portals into/out of the neighborhood] was the least restrictive alternative to neighborhood traffic, Committee Chairperson Marie Thorpe said." It is interesting to note that in 2001 the City committed resources to studying the perceived problem in the Country Club neighborhood even though a November 2000 Traffic Safety Staff Review indicated no problems with excessive speed or volume in Country Club. .9. Regarding the issue of addressing cut-through traffic in Country Club, staff concluded, "under our present policies we have done all we can do." The draft ETC Policy, by including the option of street closure for volume control, provides the change in City policy needed for residents of Country Club to petition the City to implement street closures, as proposed in 2000/2001 and advocated in the recent Country Club District web site article. The participation of Ms. Thorpe on the ETC adds to the concern; as a Commissioner, she has supported the draft Policy, aspects of which clear the way for the City to spend time and money revisiting the proposal to close off access to her neighborhood that she advocated. This is a conflict of interest that must be addressed. Issue 3: Area of Notification "Lillehaug said the provision is a minimum area of notification. He said that if the city were to reach a point where it had to notify property owners, it would not be difficult to expand the area. 'This is another example of some thing you see in other cities' plans,' Lillehaug said. 'This policy is meant to be a framework. It is not set in stone and does not bind us to its language.'" What Is Misleading: The City will fairly expand the notification area; therefore, the minimum notification area in the draft Policy is acceptable. Clarification: Because the area of notification is too narrow, exceptions will become the rule. One project may get broad notification, while another gets narrow notification. This is inherently unfair. If a minimum notification standard cannot be fairly adhered to in most situations, the area needs to be expanded and criteria for diverging from the standard must be clearly defined and publicly stated. It is my belief that the ETC should suspend work on the draft Policy and take some time to review their process. Requests for information that would indicate a need or lack of need for a neighborhood traffic management approach should be honored and this information carefully analyzed. Staff should review manpower needs associated with a neighborhood traffic management plan and provide a cost-benefit analysis for residents to review. Steve Lillehaug conceded at the December 7, 2004 joint meeting that the manpower needs associated with implementing the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan had not been analyzed. All available traffic safety data should also be reviewed. If the ETC goes forward with a neighborhood traffic management policy at this time, it should not include the option of traffic calming for volume control. Communities with similar traffic management plans have wisely not included these options because they are known to shift traffic onto other local streets. If traffic calming for volume control were not included in the Policy, I believe much support for the Policy among certain Country Club residents would dwindle, as it seems it is just this aspect of the Policy these residents support. Finally, the City should take care to not represent citizens' concerns as resulting from misinformation when, clearly, there is significant documentation and history to support these concerns. Sincerely, Jennifer Janovy 952-920-4373 jkj966@aol.com Enclosures: 12/16/04 Edina Sun Current article, "Traffic Talks" Rob Webb article, "Traffic Primer," Country Club District web site Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues, July 5, 2001 August 29, 2001 Sun Current article Traffic Safety Staff Review, November 2000 Sincerely, r- Jennifer Janovy 952-920-4373 jkj966@ao1.com Enclosures: 12/16/04 Edina Sun Current article, "Traffic Talks" Rob Webb article, "Traffic Primer," Country Club District web site Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues, July 5, 2001 August 29, 2001 Sun Current article Traffic Safety Staff Review, November 2000 9 1"Alf -;n11. Residents voicezoncems over proposed transportation plan_ BY JAMES ZWILLING David Eyestone/Sun Neyd*vers- ..:EasthOund traffic moves swiftly near the intersection of 50th and Wooddale Avenue. Observers expecting to see a neighborhood vs. neighborhood battle play out at the Dec. 9 Edina Transportation Commis- sion open. housewere left.disap, pointed.: : While More th'aii 296-people packed the City Council's cham- bers and spilled into-the City - Hall's foyer for the meeting, there was little disagreementto be had by those in attendance. The draft Transportation Commission Policy gariiered at. tention in reeerit weeks after . Commissioner Joni Kelly Ben, nett spoke out against the policy she and six other appointed res- idents comprising the Edina Transportation Commission spent the past year creating. The policy is designed to sup- plement the Edina Transporta- tion Plan created in 1999, and provide a framework for the City Council and city staff to implement future transporta- tion policies and initiatives. But two facets of the pro- posed transportation policy - the city using street closures as• a traffic-calming measure and transportation-related notices to property owners - had Ben- nett calling foul and voting against the plan. Nearly all of the people who meeting. Closing streets • At the center of much of the debate between Bennett and fel- low commissioners is the poten- tial that residents in the' Coun- try Club District would seek to close off their streets. These streets are often used by resi- dents of the Morningside neigh-borhood, where aennett lives, and commuters as alternate routes. The group of Edinans — and some non-residents who use local stxeetsaicarnmuter routes who attended the meeting had to be reminded by Commission Chairman Fred Richards that there is no Such Proposal from the Country Club District or any other neighhorhood to close off streets at this time. Richards .said any such pro- posal would be subject to the commission's recommendation as well as that of the City Coun- cil before it would ever move for- ward., "Closing off streets is a nec- essary and effective traffic- calming measure," said Steve Lillehaug, the city's assistant engineer and a staff liaison to --the- l4,179Ftaticm CAMPUS' sion. "There are places in Edina right now where it's been used as a traffic-calMing measure, and .it's been' very successful," ..-1-illehang said :tpisinforma- timi „has led..pe4Ple to: believe „ , that there is some type.of nent threat that streets will be closed. 'This is a traffic-calming measure that we see in other plans from other cities all of the time," he said. "It's a tool. It's a tool that we want everyone to have should it be determined to be appropriate in certain situa- tion." Whether or not a plan to Ira- piementl. it exists, residents don't deserve the possibility of street clostires hanging over their heads, Bennett said. :_conncil members have pub- licly stated they -wouldn't sup- port such a closure in the Coun- try Club District even if it was to present itself. TRAFFIC: To Page 35A spoke at the.neAring supported .,Bennett's position .More than '20 of them voiced their concerns publicly during the two-hour Traffic: Meeting well attended From Page lA Public notification Bennett, and many of the residents speaking at least week's meeting, also criticized the planfor requiring notifica- tion of traffic and transportation changes only-to the affected areas of the project. The policy defines affected areas as an: "Area for a project that is defined' as those residences along local residential streets that are positively or negatively impacted by excessive through traffic volumes and speeding, or that inay be positively or negatively impacted by pro- posed traffic calming. InconVenience caused by limitation of-access is not con- sidered to be a n.egative impact under this definition." The idea that the impacted area could be confined to a single block was a con- cern many residents shared with the commission. Richards said the commission would likely revisit that issue at its Jan. 6 meet- ing, but he did not indicate whether any changes would be made. Lffiehaug said the provisionis a min- - inium area of notification. He said that if the city were to reach a point where it had to notify property Owners, it would not be difficult to ex- pand that area. "This is another example of some - thing' you see in other cities''' plans," Lillehaug said. "This policy is meant to be a framework. It is notset in stone-and does not bind us to its lifigtiage." Lillehaug said thnkcity hasanany . els of communiCation .irf-place toloal with traffic and otherissues, and the pro- posed policy would not exclude those practices. Bennett said the city is already ex- cluding the public from the process and has done so during the formation of the plan. Some citizens shared her concerns, but others pointed to the commissioners and asked why they weren't out in the community talking about the plan. City Manager Gordon Hughes defend- ed the city's communication efforts. "The city has a reputation of being open," lie said. "This is no different. There is always going tote comment and review of any plans" for any neighbor- hood." Hughes, and those who spoke at last week's commission meeting, had good things to say about the work of the com- mission so far. "They started with nothing," he said. "They now have a Very strong policy that provides the framework it was intended to provide." The next step in the process is a Jan. 6 Transportation Commission meeting in which commissioners will review the public comment received at the meeting, prior to the meeting and since. Should the majority of the commis- sion vote to move forward with the poli- cy, as it is, Bennett intends to produce a minority report, she said. The minority, report idea stemmed from a suggestion of Mayor Dennis IVIaatzold in a joint meeting of the com- mission and the council held Dec. 7. The policy and rninorityreport, if one is produced, would then be sent to the City Council for discussion and possible „action. , — The draft Transportation Policy is available online at www:cityofedina.com. h JI.S.:.7.4 LAY IAA/1V NO — ce /41,1-2, Directories Neighborhood Info News Interest Groups Street Info Template Articles Traffic Info Traffic Primer - Rob Webb Traffic has been the number one interest area for most residents. The CCNA survey identified 68% of respondents as "very interested", and 32% as "moderately interested"; or 100% interested. The appetite for knowledge on the subject is high. I've avoided it to date as topic since it can be controversial. 8 out of 10 streets in the neighborhood have fairly significant Cut Through traffic volumes, and 2 have almost none. That said, I believe the CCNA needs to provide information on subjects of interest. This has overwhelming interest, and many of you inquired about the subject during the neighborhood block party, in addition to trees and architecture. The timing is important since there is a lot of activity at the City on this subject right now, and many decisions that affect the neighborhood will be made in coming months. The City is seeking to pass a traffic policy by September/October that will determine the process by which traffic issues will be addressed in the City for the foreseeable future. The baseline of knowledge on traffic in general and traffic in the neighborhood is disparate. The CCNA will provide the facts as they have been provided and explained to volunteers by the City or by research into the subject. These facts have been substantiated to the extent possible. Traffic Primer: • In any street system there are Residential streets, Collectors, and Arterials • Residential streets are designed to carry traffic derived primarily from the residences on that street. According to a City consulting study, residents become uncomfortable when traffic volumes exceed 500 vehicles per day, and a common maximum threshold for maximum recommended vehicles is 750 to 1,000 vehicles per day. • Collectors are designed to carry heavier volumes of traffic, and bear the primary burden of providing vehicle mobility within a community. Examples surrounding the neighborhood are 50th, France, 44th, and Brookside. • It is noteworthy that, according to City policy, 80% of the cost of major maintenance on Collectors is borne by the City, whereas on Residential streets 100% is borne by the homeowners. • When the Arterial and/or Collector street system fails to meet demands, cars begin to utilize Residential streets for mobility. This is often termed as "Cut Through", and is defined as a vehicle that does not begin or end its trip on the street affected. Cut Through definitions are independent of whether the driver is a resident of Edina, Hennepin County, the United States or any other land mass—if the driver doesn't have a destination on the street, then they're Cut http://www.countryclubdistrict.org/ReadArticle.asp?articl 10/25/2004 JIAA,CIA4 1.14./14, r Through by most definitions. Many cities target Cut Through volumes to be less than 20% of a street's traffic. • One common source of confusion is that Residential streets are public streets and open for anyone to access. The logic goes then that cars have an inherent ( right to drive on those streets. This is true. The issue isn't about rights, but is about appropriate traffic system design. Design objectives for street systems seek to keep traffic on Collectors vs Residential streets, and to keep the Residential streets below targeted levels (see above). In most cities the homeowners are prioritized over the drivers since the drivers are mobile, and have 150 to 300 horsepower pulling them around. • The ideal is for the street system to handle the demands placed on it by vehicles ("the best defense is a good offense" approach), but if that is not possible, then traffic engineers often pursue "traffic calming" measures such as speed bumps, one-ways, no left turns, speed limit changes, etc. These measures essentially try to make the Residential street equally as unattractive to a Cut Through driver as the Collector or Arterial street. By definition, they require some level of sacrifice of mobility by the residents--the extent of the sacrifice will vary depending on the situation. • The resident-derived traffic in the neighborhood varies by street but is generally less than 450 vehicles per day. According to the City, total Country Club traffic volumes, inclusive of Cut Through, by street were approximately as follows(much of this data is 4 years old, so volumes may be different at this time, the last time the City did a survey was 2000): Sunnyside (3,000 vehicles per day or VPD), Wooddale (2,000 VPD), Arden (1,900 VPD), Edina (1,600 VPD), Country Club (1,600 VPD), Drexel (1,500 VPD), Browndale (1,200 VPD), Bruce (600 VPD), Casco (450 VPD), Moorland (400 VPD). Total Cut Through traffic volumes are about 5,000 vehicles per day. Speeds are averaging 30 MPH on most streets, with <1% going over 40 MPH. • Country Club has streets as high as 3x the Residential thresholds of 1,000 VPD and 70% of the streets are well above it. 80% are above "comfort" levels. Over 50% of the traffic in the neighborhood does not originate or terminate in the neighborhood. • What is the source of the problem? The City is quick to point out that the highway system is not adequate, but most Country Club streets continue to bear high volumes even when the highways are not congested. The Edina Collector street system is not adequate. • Another source of confusion is the fact that other Edina neighborhoods would like to maintain easy passage through Country Club for their convenience. While many view this as an adversarial interest. They actually are lobbying for an easy way to get access to their homes from various points in the City. The City needs to provide them with adequate Collector streets to accommodate their mobility needs as best possible since a neighborhood thoroughfare is not consistent with most street system design principles. • What can be done? The City of Edina is developing a Traffic Policy to address the traffic issues in the City. It is targeted to complete its policy for City Council approval in September 2004. • There are three potential remedial courses of actions: 1) improve the Collector system; or 2) put in traffic calming measures; or 3) a combination of both. • A little more detail on the nature of calming measures considered. A plan was developed several years ago that would make the neighborhood less porous. It http://wwvv.countryclubdistrict.org/ReadArticle.asp?articleMla 10/25/2004 IN.GCLU LAI t.ic would make the Browndale bridge one way out at 50th street to prevent people from coming off 100 and shooting up Browndale and/or across the other neighborhood streets (many people enter the neighborhood there to avoid Wooddale traffic signal even if their destination is to exit by 44th and France ). Then Wooddale would be one way into the neighborhood at 44th . This would prevent people from cutting straight across the neighborhood north to south, or from backtracking off eastern streets. The last, or perhaps first, move would be to close or make one way inbound Sunnyside at Grimes. The number of cars passing this way is 3,000 per day, and they find their way through the neighborhood all different ways (some straight up Arden, some up Bruce, some across Country Club, some up Drexel, some clear across from Browndale bridge). The net effect of the changes is that someone that wanted to Cut Through south to north (whether a bias to the west, or east) would need takck-track all the way to Browndale to exit the neighborhood to the north. The ief is ko that many people would instead choose to go throu,g10--0th and France, r go Brookside to 44th (all collectors). This increase in traffic still netted out to a Jr — material reduction for Browndale. It has the inconvenience of also having this effect on residents. One estimate indicated that the average trip to 44th and France would require 60 seconds longer. As discussed, traffic calming, by definition is breaking the traffic system a little bit to incent traffic to use appropriate roadways. The cost of this proposal is nominal, and is highly reversible. This proposal was projected by traffic engineers to reduce traffic on all streets by an average of 37%. • Other proposals include speed humps, or other traffic calming measures. These measures cost, by one estimate, $20,000 to $30,000 per street depending on the number of bumps, are difficult to reverse. No traffic reduction projections have been developed by the City. Depending on design speed bumps reduce average speeds by 5 to 10 MPH. There are concerns about emergency vehicles being able to reach destinations in the neighborhood, and their affect on snow plows. Some neighborhoods have removed speed bumps due to increased noise as cars brake and accelerate at each hump. • What can you do? Attend the Traffic Commission meetings. All residents are given an opportunity to comment at the conclusion of the meetings. They are held the 4th Thursday of each month at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. You can also write to the City officials. Their numbers and e-mails are listed under "Directories" on the web site. Last, the CCNA will be conducting a survey of residents on the web site in the near future regarding traffic. You can take the survey which will provide information regarding the views of the residents regarding traffic. I will send an e-mail when that survey is ready. • This information is also on the web site under "Interest Groups", "Traffic" http://wwvv.countryclubdistrict.org/ReadArticle.asp?articlellat 10/25/2004 - C-7 2 Urf.-1,L2 1.3 1_1=3 rT3C1 C , Itie 4-1 952-926-4445 P-01 Country Crub District Committee on Traffic Issues Neighborhood Update - July 5, 2001 Country Club Neighbors and Friends: "WS:: (4-AaDi 1.1314.- ropi -11404,10, ribs, Pk, FA Alma Last November, the Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues made a presentation to the Edina City Council based on your feedback showing that our neighborhood is concerned with traffic volume, speeds and stop sign compliance. The committee requested the City's review of-these concerns. In response, the City of Edina retained SRF Consulting Group to study the issues and recommend potential solutions. SRF 's findings are compelling. The Metropolitan Council Guidelines for the Functional Classification of Streets and Highways denotes 750 cars/day as appropriate for residential streets. Many streets in the neighborhood experience daily volumes that are up to four times that level Furthermore. SRF has determined that OW 50 percent of our neighborhood traffic is non-resident, cut-through traffic. SRF' e engineers have identified a possible solution that will effectively reduce traffic volumes (primarily cut- through traffic) throughout our neighborhood without increasing traffic volumes on any neighborhood street. The engineers considered speed, safety, convenience and accessibility to ensure the plan recommended for testing would be effective. The engineers indicated that by reducing traffic volumes in our neighborhood, we should also see an opportunity for reduced speeds, as the majority of-the remaining traffic will be residential traffic that should have a vested interest in the safety of our pedestrians. The engineers will consider additional traffic calming devices to enhance the recommended plan if tested and proven effective PROPOSED PLAN TO REDUCE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC In order to reduce our cut-through traffic, the engineers recommend making changes to the portals (access points) of our neighborhood, rather than modifying the interior streets. They also noted that the majority of our cut-through traffic iseraveling-between 50Ih Street at the Browndale Bridge. andthe441" and,Francearea in an effort to avoid congestion at the 50°' and France area intersections. Because of this, the engineers stated that the single most effective change to address this problem would be to close off access to/from our neighborbood at Sunnyside between Arden and Grimes. The proposed plan modifies access to our neighborhood on the south side by making the Browndale Bridge onseway, westbound, leaving the Country Club neighborhood. On the North end of the area, Browndale becomes -outbound-only' at 44Ih Street; Wooddale becomes "inbound-only" at 44" Street; and Sunnyside Road it closed between Arden and Grimes. NEXT STEPS 1. An informal Neighborhood Meeting is set for July 12 at 7:00 Pen. at Edina-City Hall. SRF Consulting Group will present the results of their evaluation and their recommendations, Neighborhood residents will have the opportunity to ask questions and show support/concern for the plan that is being considered for testing. 2. With the support of the neighborhood, a presentatioftwould be made to- the Edina City Council to request approval to move forward with the testing process. • Prior to testing, the City of Edina will take daily traffic volume counts by block to obtain a baseline for evaluating the effectiveness of the plan. • The engineers have recommended that the plan be tested for a minimum of 4 weeks. • Traffic volumes and speeds will be recorded on each block during the testing phase. • Following the testing period, all traffic conditions/access will return to normal. • The City of Edina, the consulting engineers and the committee members will review the data collected during the testing phase. Based on that data, a recommendation will be made to the neighborhood. We encourage you to attend the Neighborhood Meeting on July 12th. as it's an excellent opportunity for you to ask questions and share your feedback. Sincerely, 'Me Country OW; 'District Committee on Traffic Issues +1 952-926-4445 sxr- LoNsuLTINC 6ROVp 21003,.003 Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Study Alternate 8-1 (5-16-01) —4.-AsnY 84C*RiPany.ikuMwitArewved. 14:JOkil 11;dv14014 r.?:C:64a 101 to-tio-nni g eau At, V•tore,1 eV —,n4nn•• • • ea. .4r : CnC tao 1* I - • Arttnis. P,Poiorado Av$ Brumetvick Av S Annvetscgt •-• 4 s Av euistiete ?n•f; sYfr.VW 40 Gimes Av S !: Juanita Av "LI/5 Map* Rd : U. ii S LIPUO2is, AV 141!..AZ • .* 6 • . f`i• 9 :• Abbott Av S , , — — — • senetstevrnsi4nAefoce!oraddsr..n. • s hv uttpez f: • • JJeL 011)04 t Westb k t r: Becifocd ; R .•sm,” • • - 6956 17 Brookside Av .Y4WhAv Tbieian Av g Av ebtuescv, s Av (v.ex Webster Av S V K P 18Z6 4' Vernon Av S 4 . ''''''' '-'.."'” ""'"''...••%i,y..ill..,•••*.A,Itv, !rts.....r,-, 1.7.....n••or........ T.,. .' 1:•.* !PP , ' r A• %tr. t., • t Twee° Av ,1 , - I v,Se.: . ' :— .. ••i, T. ,,...% ,.,• ..,,.7 : C.00Jidp.0,A. y f ....-,..,.......--“,...... • _ ...185rown,,,,...Oa.„...sle,A.v P Mackey Av "277" r. frIA-A-AV.40 • wyweAu- osicANOrtima. 44,904. :11-.:..nhb op Gis 01'13144 Av ht4 : • ti5 pAig eutP3 Dc. iric 1116 t e, are r 1:4 D4XISO • • 3(03 . •.$ ..1:•n• • • • `1,0 41::nVe -•• • tn•, ft t izao bk,4 7gt, - ••• r 4- Lynn Av S . Crocker Av F: tr. Halifax Av • ; Ay setboD 1 entuAtrovApavve.14:00,4% : ! ,„„„„ I: ."*C• it,. ....1,44111tr.,144,r.„A 5:4;:tal:T.04Y::n•:e4:artna:..14.e.44'-'40.,K,Z1 F:.,:i.2,41.- •Z If,: P.:ZrIV,L'rkrAiXi!'t.:1•,-V14; . :Z!YOkag..t : t.. ::: !V.Ant, . . : Ewhp Av 1 SULU S Atl Lt . . . 4 . . . . . Q 1:4 • , , S AV OUY°3 .4 • i • .. ...4,1, : prew,Av s E 1, r °rev/Ay i: -6'41°*en Av S :to . t-: t:. t ' . 1.1. soaro Av S L. t.... n i. ,..... t. ..... • • f .0, t & . • f ! 0 ?•• • •Af• A...a • ...t.ri,!•••. Ceumoil -7 tit ^ Eaton Pi ustny ..••••••• 119111°29 4r4n1 014. AMINIII•MINIMMOWIPMME 4•0111•11 TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW November 8, 2000 Page 2 The staff recommends a playground advisory sign for Tingdale Avenue at north end of park for southbound traffic. SECTION B: Requests on which the staff recommends denial of request. None. SECTION C: Requests which are deferred to a later date or referred to others. 1. A group from the County Club area has informed the staff that it will attend the November 21' City Council meeting in order to address what they feel are traffic safety problems in the County_ Club area. The core group consists of approximately eleven members that are from all the streets located in the Country Club area. They have named their group "the Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues". They appear to be well organized as they have sent out a survey to the entire County Club area regarding traffic issues and hope to have the results by November 21'. They have done some research and developed a mission statement: "To ensure the traffic speeds and volume levels are consistent with the safety concerns of the residents of the County Club area". i The staff has had discussions with and passed on information regarding traffic surveys done in the County Club area to some of the members of this group. The staff feels that under our present policies we have done all we can do. In 1992-1993 a similar group approached the City Council for assistance regarding traffic problems in the Country Club area. A task force was formed and an outside consulting group, SRF, was hired to study the problem and make recommendations. From the study some changes were made. A major objective of the plan was to reduce traffic on Wooddale and Browndale which it did do. However for the most part that traffic was just redistributed to other streets, mainly Edina Boulevard and Drexel Avenue raising their traffic significantly from what it had been prior to the changes in 1993. Whether or not the changes made in 1993 helped the traffic situation depends on who you talk to. Some felt it helped and others thought it made things worse. The staff has continued to study the issue of too much traffic and the speed generated by that traffic in the County Club area. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW November 8, 2000 Page 3 1 In regards to the volume of traffic it's not likely to change. The is no where else for it to go and much of it is generated by the area itself. This volume of traffic in the Country Club arca is generated by several different facets. There is the conduit factor in which traffic flows north and south connecting the area south of West 50th Street to the area north of Sunnyside Avenue. Wooddale Avenue has been a collector type street since the early 1930's. There is another 'conduit' connecting the east with the west via Sunnyside Avenue. France Avenue is the only other route that traffic east of Highway 100 can use to move north and south. There is no denying that there is cut through commuter traffic but much of it is Edina residents traveling north and south and also east/west on Sunnyside Road. There is also the local traffic factor that adds greatly to the traffic volume in the Country Club area. SRF and other consulting groups like them use the figure of 10-14 trips a day generated by the average household in a area like the County Club. The homes in the -Country Club-area-have atleast two vehicles and_many cases more. It's a yew mobile area with no buses in the immediate area. Being an affluent community there are many trips generated by work, activities, etc. that probably pushes that trip generation figure higher. An area like the County Club also generates a large amount of various service vehicles. And in the last few years there has been substantial renovation projects going on in the Country Club area bringing many construction type workers with their vehicles. The staff and the Police Department have looked at the speed issue in relation to the 30 mph speed limit and can find no excessive speed patterns in the Country Club area. Speed surveys were done on all streets in the County Club area except Moorland Avenue. The highest 85 percentile speed was 33 mph in the 4600 block of Edina Boulevard. What is interesting is there are stop signs at either end of that block. Other than Edina Boulevard the 85 percentile speeds were in the 30-31 mph range. The speed percentiles were as hi h on the weekends as they are during the week. The speed surveys were conducted on a week long asis with hundreds of vehicles surveyed. In relationship to accidents the Country Club area has a yeg low accident rate. From January 1, 1997 to December 31, 1999 a 3 year period there were 19 reported accidents, 10 in 1997, 6 in 1998, 3 in 1999. This is very good in relation to the volume of traffic. It would be very hard to improve on this figure. Even with the higher traffic the area is yery pedestrian friendly when compared to other areas of Edina. It has wide sidewalks separated from the street with wide boulevards. To lower the traffic volumes and speed in this area from what it already is would require actions beyond the scope of what we presently do. The Country Club area traffic is a TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW November 8, 2000 Page 4 very complex situation and would require a extensive study prior to imposing any more restrictions or changes. If the City Council would like to proceed further on this situation the staff would recommend some kind of process to include the following: 1. A neighborhood committee, representative of the entire area involved, to formulate the problem areas and present them in petition form with at least 50% of the residents signatures. The committee would then continue to work with the City and any consultants that might be hired for the project. 2. The hiring of a private consulting group to work with the neighborhood in addressing problems. 3. Require before and after data collection. 4. If physical changes are to be made, determine the criteria for selection of devices/techniques to be used. This would require a consensus of sort between neighborhood, consultant, and city. 5. Workout the cost participation for physical geometric changes. Who is going to fund these improvements? This is a crucial area as it will probably set precedent for future like projects in the city. Also, it is imperative that the residents know up front what their individual cost will be. 6. Any proposed changes would also have to be reviewed by the Historical Society and other agencies such as the Watershed District. Again, this area has a very complex traffic pattern and great care should be taken to study all the ramifications that could possibly occur with any changes to that pattern. oker in ,EDINA eel A, S3.000 in cash & pans tnven away each month! svwsv.Inn On.com Augus149, 2001 • '• • Neighborhoods gra le with tr c issues One neighborhood regroups, while a second seeks city assistance By Kim Johnson Sun Newspapers , Edina residents and city staff are strug- gling to come up with ways to combat in- creasing traffic volumes and violations on 'residential streets. People in two Edina neighborhoods have formed committees, hoping to secure City Cmineil support for traffienitigation plans. One neighborhood group received that support last fall, but has since encountered resistance from community members. Earli- er this montli, a second committee ap- proached the council, but found Ji more hes- itant governing body that has chosen to seek information about traffie-taInting theasttres- . before designating city funds- to complete a neighborhood study. "We understand that this {traffic] is a very serious problem," douncilineMber Mike Kelly said at the Aug. 21 Edina City Council meeting. He added that Council Membe and city staff have had extensive discussioi on the issue of increasing traffic volurco along, residential streets, particularly Pri, . to the construction of the Opus office dew opment on U.S. Highway 169 tWo years ag "We're sympathetic and we'll try to find solution that works for everyone," Kei added. "Fm just not convinced that. any these traffic-calming measures will make difference." TRAFFICi To-Psige 12 ay, Aug. 29, 2001 www.mnSun.cort na to ask Minneapolis for presentation on mitigation A 1993 traffic study stated the neigh- borhood, which includes about 550 1, West- househOlds,.had an unusually high traf- s about fic volume for a residential area s btorists The: number of vehieles traveling Onts de- through the neighborhood has since M- ate the creased and residents have growing con- cerns about traffic volume, Speed and ed. stop-sign violations, Thorpe said. • After working with the city hired firm of • SIT Consulting Group, the committee con- ducted 6. neighborhood meeting in Mid-July to present the mitigation plan in recominend- Lich pre- . effective way to linfit tut-through traffic, recommend- senting ed by the company's engineers as the most ition in Thorpe said. She defined ant-through traf- ome up fic as motorists from outer-ring suburbs latively who drive' through the neighborhood on hrough their commutes to and from Minneapolis to ed. avoid congestion on Highway 100. imittee "We're cognizant and sensitive of tive al- being surrounded by our neighboring car- 't- neighborhoods," she added, explaining the committee did not consider any Edina source residents as cut-through traffic, The proposed plan included closing off oOd in Suithyside Road at Grimes Avenue and r 44th adding one-way access in and out of the in the neighborhood's northern portals, without td Min- converting entire streets to one-way streets. The plan also included adding stop signs at multiple intersections and making the prowndal6 bridge a one-waY street to 50th Street. The committee's goal was to make im- provements in the Country Club neigh- borhood, but not at the expense of the surrounding community, Thorpe said. This was intended to be a test, not a per- manent solution: "We -didn't know if this test would work," she said. "If it did impact other neighborhoods or streets within Country . Club adversely, then it wouldn't be a good plan." ReSidents in and around the Country, Club neighborhood who attended the July. 12 meeting 'voiced concerns -about the proposal and the process that was used to develop it. In letters to City doun- cil members, some people suggested clos- ing Sunnyside at Grimes would segre:- gate neighborhoods Mid increase the dif- ficulty of traveling in and around the city. Several people also stated they Would like to have been included in the devel:: , opment protess of the plan; so that their- opinions would have been heard. The committee followed city staff sug- gestions to first come up with a neighbor- hood consensus before presenting the traf- fic mitigation plan to surrounding neigh- borhoods, Thorpe said. However, she adde that not eyeryone on the committee ha agreed the proposed plan was the best. Without that consensus, the plan will ric be implenaented at this time, according to cit staff reports. The committee will contirme-t work with the city to create a solution that i • acceptabletoall,'Ilhoiiie said. She added tha a successful plan from them might be use by other Edina neighborhoods. . "It's been a learning experience for a) parties involved — the city, the commit tee," she said "We're trying to be good cit izens. We're tding to naake our neighbm hood safe and maintain its integrity." She added that •there have been acci dents in the area, but not traffic fatalities . "But why Wait for a fatality? Our un paralleled traffic situation is projected engineers to only get worse," Thorpe said Thorpe said she remained optimisti that the committee could come up with plan that would be successful and bene ficial to other neighborhoods facing simi lar traffic problems: She added that till committee did have one success — gettini local officials to synchronize traffic sig nals at 50th Street and France Avenue tt improve the flow of traffic. COUNTRY CLUB: To Next. Pago gclIP0.9.5"Cl#014tWeiirpa'sday, Aug 29, 2001 wwwannStm.con 1m to ask eapohs for presentation on mitigation d, West- co.ns about **torists idents de- ',se:Orate the Vensi sen ...Which pre- . ,4gation in d come up latively - ,-..cut74hrough bcd190d. 'TA ,,3mittee etive al- ommit- e-szn fie a source "A1e1ghtiorhood in ''..kby 44th if in the find Min- e !• A 1993 traffic study stated the neigh- borhood, which includes about 550 househOlds, had an-unusually high traf- fic volume for_ a residential area. The number of vehieles traveling through the neighborhood has Since in- creased and residents have growing con- cerns about traffic volume, speed and stop-sign violations, Thorpe said. After working with the city-hired firm of SRF Consulting Group, the cortunittee con- ducted a neighborhood. meeting in Mid-July to present the mitigation plan recommend- ed by by the company's engineers as the most effective way to limit cut-through traffic, Thorpe said. She defined tit-through traf- fic as motorists from outer-ring suburbs who drive through the neighborhood on their commutes to and from Minneapolis to - avoid congestion on Highway 100. "We're cognizant and sensitive of being surrounded by our neighboring neighborhoods," she added, explaining the committee did not consider any Edina residents-as cut-through traffic. The proposed plan included closing off Sunnyside Road at Grimes Avenue and adding one-way access in, and out of the neighborhood's northern portals, without converting entire streets to one-way streets. The plan also included adding stop signs at multiple intersections and making the Brownclale bridge a one-way street to 50th Street. The committee's goal was to makeim- provements in the Country Club neigh- borhood, but not at the expense of the surrounding community, Thorpe said. This was intended to be.a test, net a per- manent solution: - "We 'didn't know if this test would work," she said. "If it did impact other neighborhoods or streets within Country Club adversely, then it wouldn't be a good plan." Residents in and around the Co-untr3 Club neighborhood who attended the July, 12 meeting voiced concerns-about the proposal and the process that was used to develop it. In letters to City Coun- cil members, some people suggested dos- ing Sunnyside at Grimes would segre- gate neighborhoods and increase the dif- ficulty of traveling in and around the city. Several people also stated they Would like to have been included in the devel- opment process of the plan; so that their- opinions would have been heard. - The committee followed city staff sug- gestions to first ceme u,p with a neighbor- hood consensus before presenting the traf- fic mitigation plan to surrounding neigh- borhoods, Thorpe said. However, she adde that not everyone on the committee ha agreed the proposed plan was the best. Without that consensus, the plan will nc be implemented at this time, according te dt, staff reports. The committee will continue t work with the city to create a solution that i acceptableto all,Thorpe said. She added tha a successful plan from them knight be use by other Edina neighborhoods. "It's been a learning experience for al parties involved — the city; the commit tee," she said. "We're trying to be good cit izens. We're trying to make our 'neighboi hood safe and maintain its integrity." She added that there have been acci dents in the area, but not traffic fatalities . "But why wait for a fatality? Our un paralleled traffic situation is projected b: engineere to only get worse," Thorpe said Thorpe said she remained optimisti that the committee could come up with plan that would be successful and belie ficial to other neighborhoods facing simi lar traffic problems: She added that th4 committee did have one success — gettim local officials to synchronize traffic sig nals at 50th Street and France Avenue t( improve the flow of traffic. COUNTRY CLUB: To Next Pop eta , ro:t Yf .omniission , efore finlin-.& out more in- on which traMe' w-: vo&c'd md which did not kaxcpren- héit imi Iiitio - I. ,rMe ipn onrnLhudii that city ii- itikete' fief& eh aye *y:en 0. he " dititibte, : o.m rinmtibn e6ORI be resèñtcd ata • with°1it-Cd.10g,tliii''titi-:. '0 Mi tI*6-- -;---,-, P;xsin Page Ily. said sW*.elg shore Drive; experienced 1110 triffic volumes, 'pec axici stop- ta*d tosidcwalks 461, froth the ' ut:thigi;costg-liior4 me: Co sénted its: " MiIh af'eohttiori i#40.6115+;14e0:-'s PtbfaCliO*tfli' 3 majoritoI 6 belie - tetnetiye te: g to Chairperson Marie Tho We never §r4t$01741,!4Thorpe, e Country-mw nertheget Street in Abejlo.rt„,i.A 69i-itN*44ehArve66.$1:li in lieUt-MiWvaa December 29, 2004 Edina Transportation Committee Dear Sir or Madam: Please consider the following as you continue your difficult work to draft a comprehensive policy to serve all citizens of Edina: 1. Please be sure the policy considers the effect of traffic on the entire community, not just neighborhoods separately. To this end, please expand the community notification area for traffic changes beyond the current suggestion of just a few hundred feet to community-wide notification prior to public hearings, as changes to a grid-based traffic plan will have far-reaching impact. Your current definition of "Impacted Area" is grossly inadequate. 2. Consider defining what "percentage over average" for volume or speed on similar streets constitutes a "traffic problem" worthy of expending precious city dollars to improve or even investigate. People wanting to live on a quiet street may have perceptions that traffic volume is higher than it actually is, or have expectations for lower volumes than is reasonable. Defining the stage at which traffic measures will be implemented will prevent unnecessary spending of precious city resources due to a group of neighbors intent on shielding themselves from "pass-through traffic" in the middle of a grid-based traffic system. Please consider including guidelines for use of traffic calming measures that increase response times for emergency vehicles, suggesting they be a last resort, for use only after trying traffic-calming measures that do not affect response time for emergency vehicles. All citizens of Edina deserve the most prompt emergency help available, and traffic diversions should be reserved for the most serious traffic problems only. Citizens are concerned that the suggested Transportation Policy draft will allow a neighborhood to hijack traffic calming measures intended for the most serious situations and use them to shield their neighborhood from sharing some of the traffic burden we should all share. We should put more of a focus on enforcing the traffic laws already in place, through low-cost radar stations or even more police enforcement, rather than costly street changes to alter traffic flow, including that of emergency vehicles. Creating a step-like approach to choosing traffic calming measures would be invaluable, encouraging the city to first try less-expensive measures that do not compromise citizen safety before other more expensive and permanent options are tried. The street could then be reexamined after implementing a first-stage measure, for example, to evaluate how the traffic volume and speed now compare to similar streets as a "percent over average." 4. Please define the threshold for support (or opposition) before a project may be advanced. Changing traffic patterns for an entire traffic grid to gratify a few is unacceptable. Reducing volume on one street only to inflate volume on other streets is not helpful. Please define a threshold of support for a project to ensure unreasonable proposed changes cannot be pushed through engineering and city approval by a group of well-heeled and powerful neighbors at the expense of "the lithe guy." 5. Restricting access to residential streets in the middle of a grid-based traffic pattern to reduce traffic volumes for a select neighborhood is un-neighborly, un-Minnesotan, and not commensurate with the spirit of community that citizens of Edina like to share. We all pay taxes and deserve access to city roads that are the most convenient possible to keep traffic moving efficiently. Again, ensuring that permanent traffic calming measures such as Sim/ / 1411‘ , .A • Dr. Lin Mr. Jeffrey B. 4605 West 44th Street Edina, MN 55424 • Page 2 December 29, 2004 street closings, cul-de-sac creations, and other permanent traffic diversions are to be a last resort for the most serious traffic problems only will keep the fabric of our community intact. Thank you for your service to our great community. Please consider these suggestions thoughffully to ensure a traffic policy that will serve all citizens of Edina equally. cc: Edina City Council, Edina Traffic Engineering Department Page 1 of 3 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 4:06 PM To: 'Connie_Soteropulos@MarshallFields.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Engineering Dept/Traffic Issues Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steven L. LiHehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Connie_Soteropulos@MarshallFields.com Ernailto:Connie_Soteropulos@MarshallFields.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 12:01 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Engineering Dept/Traffic Issues January 4, 2005 TO: The Edina City Engineering Department As a resident of the City of Edina I am writing to express my concerns and opinions about the Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff-with input from the Commission-and presented to the public December 6th. Specifically, it is the following items that draw into question the credibility of the proposed plan and the process with which it was developed. _ Public input was not sought until the draft and process were near completion and the holiday season was in full swing. _ There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th--Thanksgiving Day-almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th-the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transnortation Commission\Corresnondance\2004 Cor... 1/4/2005 Page 2 of 3 approval. The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". — The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. The City so far has not released information on how many traffic studies and change req- uests have been made to the city in recent history, who has made them and at what expense to the tax payers such studies have been performed. Requests have been made, but the City to date has not provided this information. This includes releasing for public review the most recent traffic counts in Edina (keeping in mind that the most accurate traffic count study is a license plate study). The City Council should not approve this policy before some financial data and pr- ojections are provided on what most recent traffic studies to date have cost tax payers and what the financial projections are for implementing this more formal policy. _ The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. The City's summer 2004 reviews of traffic calming devices done by City Planning, E- ngineering, Public Works and emergency responders should be available to the public on the City's web site as well as incorporated into the draft policy. As it is currently drafted, the policy does not go far enough to represent the interests of - all Edina residents; operationally it pits one neighborhood against another, rather than looking at the community as a whole-a city-wide approach is paramount for resolving traffic issues. Finally, the plan should ensure projects that benefit a small minority do not receive approval (particularly when study findings do not warrant their approval), at the expense of all residents of Edina (e.g. the $30,000 spent on consulting fees alone for studies done in the Country Club District in 2000-2001). Connie Soteropulos 4155 West 44th Street Edina, MN 55424 c.soteropulos@att.net fra structure\ Streets \frafficUransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Cor... 1/4/2005 Original Message From: Rob Webb [mailto:rwebb3@mn.mcom] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 11:28 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Sun Current Article Steve, Please pass this along to Fred. Fred, Thank you for all your work on the Traffic Commission. The policy goes a long way towards removing the subjectivity from the appropriate engineering of the City's traffic system. Now the City staff can get back to designing a road system in accordance with widely accepted traffic design principals instead of the whims of a vocal few. On that subject, I was disappointed to see Joni Bennett speaking on Traffic Commission matters at length in the Sun Current. Given that Joni was the only dissenting vote to passing the policy through the Commission (6 votes for and Joni against), she clearly was representing the minority view, not the view of the Commission. It did not come across this way in a widely-read community publication. It may make sense to have Commission members, and City staff, agree that the Chairperson is the only one that can speak to the press on Commission matters. Joni is clearly using the Commission to further her own agenda, which I believe is an inappropriate use of City resources. Her misappropriation of City resources is a serious offense in my opinion, and no different than if she had embezzled money from City coffers. I believe this offense should be grounds for removal from the Commission. This is consistent of the biases Joni has demonstrated throughout her participation on the Commission. On the MNA web site the response to, "Who is Joni Bennett, and what is her role?" is: Bennett has lived in the Morningside neighborhood since 1987. She first became involved with City issues In 1993, when she spoke before the City Council against proposed restrictions to through traffic sought by the Country Club Traffic Committee. She also joined others in the neighborhood to fight the threatened loss of Weber Park in 1998. She has been active in the Morningside Woman's Club and local politics. She also has planned the neighborhood parties in September for the past six years. Bennett has applied to serve on Edina's new Transportation Commission [and was appointed in December 2003.] I find it interesting that of the six data points she chooses to define herself, she chooses one of them to be clearly anti-Country Club traffic calming. I didn't think the Traffic Commission was intended to foster biases, and the misappropriation of City resources. Please call with any questions at (952) 922-1034. Sincerely, Rob Webb 4516 Drexel Avenue Edina, MN 55424 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:53 AM To: 'Wayne Whitman' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Whitman (mailto:wwhitman@fastmail.fm) Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 4:01 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: CCNA Subject: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Dear Steve, I am a Country Club neighborhood resident who is very concerned about cut-through traffic in our area and I am willing to support any measures to reduce the volume of this traffic. While we no longer have small children in our house, many residents on Drexel Ave. do and the children are frequently playing on front lawns and the city sidewalks. It concerns me greatly to see many vehicles travelling down our street quite often above the speed limit, with no regard for the local residents safety. I suspect this is also the case on a few other Country Club streets such as Wooddale Ave. and Edina Blvd. To be frank, I am tired of living on a speedway for Morningside and Minneapolis residents on their way to Hwy 100. or points west. Any action you can take to improve this situation would be welcome. Thanks, Wayne Whitman Cell :612-270-1522 wwhitman@fastmail.fm Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:50 AM To: 'DSUNBERG' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: country club traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: DSUNBERG [mailto:DSUNBERG@msn.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 4:16 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: country club traffic We desperately need to do something about the amount of traffic that is going throught this neighborhood. we live on sunnyside and not only is it too busy, but people are driving so fast. My daughter needs to cross Sunnyside to the corner of Bruce to catch her bus to OLG for 2nd grade, and there are many times that we have to run across because cars come barreling over the hill heading east on sunnyside. And I realize this is small compared to other traffic issues on these streets. There is too much cut through traffic. We have noticed people using the alley behind our house to go from Grimes to Wooddale and Woodale to Grimes. Hope that we can change something in the neighborhood to help resolve some of the traffic issues. Thanks for your time Angela Sunberg file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:49 AM To: 'Pat McKinley' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Issues Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Pat McKinley [mailto:mmckinley@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:34 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: DEAR STEVE, I AM HOPING THAT ONCE HWY. 100 IS THREE LANES WIDE, WE WILL SEE LESS TRAFFIC THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. MY SUGGESTION TO HELP UNTIL THEN IS TO OPEN FRANCE AVE. DURING RUSH HOURS. THAT WOULD MEAN NOT ALLOWING PARKING ON FRANCE FROM 7-9AM AND 4-6 PM.THIS WOULD MAKE FRANCE FOUR LANES DURING THESE TIMES. IT WOULD HELP TO TIME THE LIGHTS BETTER, ALSO. LETS NOT SPEND ALOT OF MONEY CHANGING STREETS ETC. UNTIL WE SEE WHAT HAPPENS AFTER HWY 100 IS IMPROVED. SPEEDING AND RUNNING STOP SIGNS IS A HUGE PROBLEM NOT ONLY IN THE COUNTRY CLUB NEIGHBORHOOD BUT EVERYWHERE. HOW TO CHANGE THIS I DO NOT KNOW BUT I SEE IT DAILY IN THE C.C. AREA ESPECIALLY WHEN CHILDREN ARE GETTING ON BUSES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, PAT MCKINLEY 4510 MOORLAND AVE. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:46 AM To: 'Douglas Gervais' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Douglas Gervais [mailto:DGERVAIS@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 11:10 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: We approve of the traffic commissions' policy. Thank you, Douglas and Lisa file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:36 AM To: 'lisa miller' Cc: Steve Lillehaug; Wayne Houle Subject: RE: traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Traffic Commission and Council for consideration. Regarding your comments and questions for the TH 100 sound wall project, I have forwarded them to Wayne Houle, City of Edina's City Engineer/Public Works Director. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: lisa miller [mailto:clmiller@flash.net] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 4:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic From the Millers 4600 Sunnyside rd Please leave the traffic issue alone. Keep it the way it is. Every idea makes it better for some and worse for others. I am tired of trying to spend money and time on this issue. Thank you for your consideration. Also, I would like to know who I need to email in regard to the sound barrier for 100: Which effects us. I am very unhappy that it passed. We were out of town an unable to attend the meeting. The original one was switched. What is next? Lisa and Clay Miller file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:44 AM To: 'Michael Fernandez' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Michael Fernandez [mailto:mhfernandez@msn.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 8:00 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic policy I am for the traffic policy. Arden Avenue has major cut through traffic. Having three children under the age of 5 my wife and I are very concerned about the number of vehicles and the speed these vehicles go through Arden Avenue. We would like to see a study sanctioned on Arden Avenue. Mike & Heather Fernandez 4630 Arden Avenue Edina 55424 mhfernandez@msn.com file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:43 AM To: 'Rusk, Shannon' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Rusk, Shannon [mailto:srusk@northstarpartners.net] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:33 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic policy I am for taking more serious measure in studying the traffic problem in Country Club. I have lived here with my family for 9 years and the traffic only gets worse. I fear the final decision will not be made until one of the small children is hit or killed by an unsuspecting, non resident who does not appreciate the character of the neighborhood in that children do play freely. It needs to be studied again and remedied. How can Minneapolis figure this out and we can't? Shannon Rusk file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 9:06 AM To: 'todd.riddle@fallon.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: edina traffic commission policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: todd.riddle@fallon.com [mailto:todd.riddle@fallon.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 9:00 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: edina traffic commission policy hi steve- i'm a resident of country club neighborhood- living on drexel, and just wanted to pass on my support for the traffic commission policy. the neighborhood has way too much dangerous traffic - and is constantly used as a major thoroughfare. if there's anything you could do to help reduce the traffic to a tolerable level it would be greatly appreciated by the residents. best, todd riddle 4517 drexel ave edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:14 AM To: 'Michael Fernandez' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Michael Fernandez [mailto:mhfernandez@msn.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:12 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic Our household supports the Edina Traffic Commission policy. The city needs to reduce the number of "cut through" cars driving on our streets. Neighborhoods do not need cars rushing to and from work. I think of the children waiting at their bus stops and playing after school. We bought a family neighborhood home not a condo on Vernon Ave.. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:11 AM To: 'CiscoandClint@aoLcorre Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Feedback Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. A quick response to one of your comments: The Transportation Commission does not have the final say on implementing any type of plan. The Commission will be making recommendations to the City Council based on requests, information, studies, concerns from residents, etc. The City Council still remains the approving authority. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thanks. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: CiscoandClint@aol.com [mailto:CiscoandClint@aoLcom] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:22 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Feedback Dear Steve, This e-mail is feedback for the Edina Traffic Commission Policy recently released. Although I have only seen a review of the policy via e-mail, it sounds like the city traffic commission has final say on which traffic routes get altered and which do not. I have no problem with the policy being set and determined by the commission as long as the commission is willing to carefully listen and fully review all legitimate requests. I live at 4624 Drexel Avenue. My name is Dan Delianedis. I am amazed that none of the children or pets on our street have been seriously injured or worse due to speeding drivers that cut through our neighborhood at both morning and early evening rush hours. My street and a few others - Woodale, Edina Blvd., Casco, Bruce, and Arden unfortunately get the majority of the "cut through" traffic that wants to avoid 50th/France. The residents on Woodale and Edina Blvd. have a little reprieve (but not much) in that their roads are much wider and property setbacks much larger than the other streets. If my kids just step off of the curb on Drexel, they are into oncoming traffic. We had many close calls this summer. It is a very dangerous situation. Many of the children at the south end of Drexel (there are over thirty kids under the age of 10 on the south block alone) are just learning to ride bicycles. I worry that next spring will be an even more dangerous situation of you don't implement some changes. This is my written notice therefore, to you and the Edina Traffic Commission to consider making some file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 2 of 2 changes in our neighborhood. The cut through traffic must be stopped or at least slowed. It is simply too dangerous and unsafe for our families and children. I know that there is not a simple fix to any traffic problems. A few low cost interum solutions that I ask you to consider are the following: 1.) Install speed bumps on Drexel, Arden, Casco and Bruce. This will at least slow traffic down so the speed at which drivers travel will ultimately be reduced. My neighbors and I have seen many drivers (of all ages) traveling along Drexel at rush hour well over 50 miles per hour. A few speed bumps will leave those cars and drivers without a transmission and maybe someday save a life. 2.) Eliminate the turnouts at each end of the above streets. I argue that drivers increase their rate of speed once they come through the stop signs off of Countryclub Drive. The drivers do not have to come to a full stop to turn onto our streets. They accelerate much more quickly through the turnout. Some residents in our neighborhood have mentioned that certain streets become one way streets. This is probably unfair to some and more fair to other neighbors. Others have suggested that we simply close off Sunnyside by France Ave so that cutting through is not an option. This is unlikely as you can argue that businesses could get hurt or lose customers that are unwilling to drive another route for dry- cleaning, bagels, convenience stores, and gasoline (a few of the businesses on the Sunnyside/France Ave block). Speed bumps might work and not be harmful to anyone except those drivers that speed. Three on the North side and three on the South side blocks of each street ought to be enough. Please consider this request Steve. Best Regards, Dan Delianed is file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 12:11 PM To: 'Anita Hidding' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding the DRAFT Transportation policy for Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Anita Hidding [mailto.anitahmostholytrinity.org] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 12:06 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Policy I am in favor of the policy Anita Hidding Sunnyside Rd file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Coffespondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:16 AM To: 'Maureen Brener' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. An Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Maureen Brener [mailto:Maureen.Brener@genmills.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 4:01 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: I am a resident of the Country Club neighborhood and live on 46th and Wooddale, in regards to the current work being reviewed by Traffic Commission, I would strongly ask hat somthing be down to slow down the traffic that comes thru this street. I realize that we can't cut off the traffic down the street, but most people that do not live in the neighborhood - drive over the speed limit and am very concerned that one of the kids on the street will get hurt. Have we ever considered speed bumps to cut down traffic on Wooddale. Please strongly consider this request. Maureen Brener 4621 Wooddale Avenue file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 7:12 AM To: 'Xet33@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding the DRAFT Transportation Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. The DRAFT policy is available for your review on the City's website or you may stop by City Hall to review a copy. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thanks. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wwvv.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Xet33@aol.com [mailto:Xet33@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 5:43 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Policy I would suuggest a policy which has the following features: 1) There should be an approriate amount of support from the citizens of a particular area to initiate a study by the city to determine what changes if any should be made. 2) If the city authorities deem the proposed changes to be viable then communicate this to people in the area and conduct a test. 3) The test should be conducted and feedback invited to determine if changes are to be made. I think that this would be a better process than what occurred with the Country Club study where it was not even tested. Paul Kennedy 4502 Moorland Ave file://GAInfrastructureStreets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/3/2004 Holmaile My E-mail Sent Messages - loublemaster@msn.corn I 1(11i0.0 %,a11111116 III 11.11,Ir 'LA./ uutilay iviusattgc rage i or Free Newsletters Write E-mail Address Book I Special Offers I From: Lou BLEMASTER Save Address I Thursday, December 02, 2004 8:42 PM! fro: slillehaug@ci-edina.mn.us.1 Save Addresses Subject: Traffic calming in the Country Club District I A few years ago the city went to great expense to hire a traffic consulting firm to study the traffic issue in the Country Club District. They gave an excellent presentation with suggested improvements. The meeting seemed to go array as some folks became a little unpleasant. A part of their recommendation was to block off Sunnyside at Grimes. I have lived at 4212 Sunnyside Road since 1979 and continue to see constant increases in the traffic in front of my house. When my little grand children visit I have to keep the front door locked to prevent them from going in the front yard. There are numerous little children on our block and it is a shame their front yards are unsafe. Years ago I did some historical research on 44th, as I was about to list a house there. Forty Fourth Street was originally along the trolley line and the homes built there have a very large set back from the street. The Sunnyside traffic should be routed back to a street that was designed to carry it. A few blocks of extra drive time is no inconvenience when considering the safety of children. Surely Sunnyside is only a part of the calming issue but I urge you to consider the blocking of east/west cut through traffic here. Thank you for your consideration, Lou Blemaster Previous Message (2 of 13) Next Message Lou Blemaster 62CEPIIONIL MEMBER OF EXCEPTIONAL PROPERTIES NETWORK Corporate Relocation Specialist 5 REALTOR®, GRI 8 ; Bus: Fax: (952) 924-8700 Home Off: (952) 920-3442 Dir: (952) 924-8744 (952) 920-1960 3930 West 491/2 Street Edina, MN 55424 Edina 50th & France Office crimis PROPITTIFS msn://gmail.mar@/msg.htm?FID=Ox0000000B&MID=Ox00000148 12/2/2004 Message Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:28 PM To: 'annie.obrien@earthlink.ner Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: The O'Briens [mailto:annie.obrien@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 4:41 PM To: Steve Lillehaug; Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: CCNA Subject: Traffic Policy I have read and am in support of the Transportation Commission Policy Draft. I only wish that the process could go faster and hope that aggressive measures are approved in our neighborhood. I moved into the Country Club neighborhood nearly 2 years ago. We were from out of state and unfamiliar with the Twin Cities, but chose this location largely on the charm and neighborhood feel of the community. Since moving in we have been surprised and disappointed at the level and speed of traffic on our street. We continue to be concerned for the safety of our children. Not only has the traffic tarnished our experience here it has really called into question our decision to choose this community. We have since met other people in the area who have moved out of the neighborhood and Edina completely due to traffic and safety concerns. We don't want to move. We want something done to protect the quality of life in the city, on our street, and in the neighborhood. When I view the lengths that the city has gone to to calm traffic at 50th and France, a busy business district, I question why something has not already been done for the residents of this community with the means available and efforts there? We are especially concerned that minimal efforts will be quickly negated by the continuing deterioration on the area expressways. When I consider the level of cut through traffic on our streets today I can envision only an acceleration of the problem as construction at Cross-town and 35W starts combined with worsening on Hwy 100; an Expressway already in critical condition with improvement surprisingly far off in the plans. Thank you for your efforts, your time and consideration Chris & Anne O'Brien file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffie\Transportation Commission\Correspondanee\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Message Page 2 of 2 4627 Drexel Avenue Edina, MN 55424 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:33 PM To: 'Mark Mooers' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Mark Mooers [mailto:mgmooers@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 8:27 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffice Commission Policy Steve, A note to let you know that we support the Edina Traffic Commission Policy. We're residents on Arden Avenue in the Country Club District. Please contact us if you have any questions. Thank you, Mark & Gina Mooers 952-922-3951 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:34 PM To: 'Kitty O'Dea'; Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: I Support Proposed Process Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. They will be forwarded to the Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 vvvvw.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Kitty O'Dea [mailto:kittyodea@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 10:03 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: I Support Proposed Process Importance: High I strongly support establishing a process for dealing with traffic issues in Edina. We need an objective versus and emotional approach to dealing with these issues. Kitty O'Dea 4610 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 file://G: \Infrastructure\ Streets \ traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:36 PM To: 'Rob Webb' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Commission Policy Input For Open House Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Rob Webb [mailto:rob_webb@uhc.com] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 10:55 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: jhovland@krauserollins.com Subject: Traffic Commission Policy Input For Open House Steve, Please foward the following letter to the Traffic Commission. Thank you. Dear Edina Traffic Commission: Thank you for all of your hard work on the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. I am supportive of the Policy you have proposed. The Policy will make Edina a stronger community by addressing a very quantifiable problem that is damaging the sense of community in our neighborhoods. It will also introduce a problem solving process that is based on facts versus self-interests and opinion, therefore reducing the amount of conflict between residents over traffic issues. Traffic issues in Edina have historically often pitted one constituency against another in a battle of banter that is detrimental to the sense of community, and is an unconstructive use of energy. All of this is unnecessary, and the Traffic Policy takes steps to rectify this unfortunate situation. While many residents have an opinion on traffic system design--typically driven by their inherent desire to drive the straightest and fastest line between their current location file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 and their destination regardless of whether a neighborhood lies between these two points or not--in the final analysis traffic problems are more a matter of traffic engineering than a lack of constituent input. Imagine a plane designed by consensus of the pilots, flight attendants, accountants, mechanics, passengers, etc. Only one thing is assured of a plane designed in this way--it probably wouldn't be able to fly due to the plethora of instruments and features installed to appease the various constituents. Let's not make the same mistake in how we design traffic systems. The constituents need to provide input to the engineers, and then get out of the way. The Traffic Policy accomplishes this by facilitating resident input to the process, and then lets the engineers develop an effective traffic system without incessant resident disruption. Much of the negativity surrounding the Policy seems to originate from a vocal minority trying to protect their right to mow over neighborhoods to serve their convenience. I have to believe that this is more a lack of education on the issue than the selfishness that it appears to be. Although it's not part of the Policy itself, I'd hope that the city will provide for community education on the negative impacts of excessive neighborhood traffic. Robert Webb 4516 Drexel Avenue Submitted on his own behalf as a citizen of Edina This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Conespondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:37 PM To: 'Hoven, David (RBC Dain)' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Calming Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Dept tment 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wwvv.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Hoven, David (RBC Dain) [mailto:David.Hoven@Rbcdain.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:09 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Calming Good Morning: I'm a twenty year plus resident of country club, and definitely can see a large increase in "out of neighborhood" traffic on my street. In the past two years, I have had three cars in my yard. Two did damage to my lawn on the boulevard, and one even crossed the sidewalk and was in my front yard. As you probably guessed, I most definitely urge some type of traffic calming in the country club neighborhood. This type of situation will end up with someone being hurt or killed because of excessive traffic. Thanks Dave Thanks, David A. Hoven Restricted Securities Group Mail Stop P21 612-371-7809 612-313-1189 Fax RBC Dain Rauscher does not accept buy, sell or cancel orders by e-mail, or any instructions by e-mail that would require your signature. Information contained in this communication is not considered an official record of your account and does not supersede normal trade confirmations or statements. Any information provided has been prepared from sources believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed, does file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 not represent all available data necessary for making investment decisions and is for informational purposes only. This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. If you receive this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e- mail or otherwise) immediately. Information received by or sent from this system is subject to review by supervisory personnel, is retained and may be produced to regulatory authorities or others with a legal right to the information. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:38 PM To: 'Kate Boyer' Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, PE., P. TOE. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@cLedina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Kate Boyer [mailto:bkatel@msn.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:11 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Policy My husband and I are for the Edina Traffic Committee Policy. We are tired of people trying to stand in the way of fixing a huge problem because it may "inconvenience" them. Kate and Jack Boyer Arden Ave file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:40 PM To: tStakeFam@cs.corn' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Support for the Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ciedina.mmus City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: StakeFam@cs.com [mailto:StakeFam@cs.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:59 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: jbstake@mmm.com Subject: Support for the Traffic Policy We will try to attend the meeting on Dec 9th if we can adjust our schedules. However it is important to share our views at least via email. We support the efforts of the Commission to develop a traffic policy. I have not studied the policy in great detail but I did read through it enough to know that it adresses many of the issues important to our community. We support the Policy. Thank you Jim and Mimi Stake 4617 Edina Blvd file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:41 PM To: 'Anreav@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Anreav@aol.com [mailto:Anreav@aol.corn] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:36 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Policy I support the traffic policy approach. (I am a longtime resident of Country Club). MOR file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:45 PM To: tmabnulty@usfamily.nett Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Please forward any ideas for a "creative" plan that would "last longer" as you indicate. Any specifics would be very beneficial to the Commission for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:42 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: Mab Nulty [mailto:mabnulty@usfamily.net] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:51 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft We would like to see your commission spend more time on developing a better plan to deal with the traffic in Edina. We have read the draft and it appears you are proposing the same old strategies that according to other communities have not worked in the long term. Take the time to plan a better, more creative plan that would last longer. We are particularly concerned about the idea of using blocked streets as a way of dealing with the problems. This is not an answer since traffic will merely be routed onto someone else's street. Those people don't care about the traffic on their street?! Research successful plans that have been implemented in other cities. Take the time to do it right and fairly. Thank you for your attention, Mab Nulty and Larry Sutin 4212 W42 St USFamily.Net Unlimited Internet From $8.99/mo! file://G.\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of I From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:47 PM To: 'Scott Taylor' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, PE., P. TOE. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Scott Taylor [mailto:Scott.Taylor@sctc.mnscu.edu] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:04 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Policy Good Morning, I've reviewed the traffic policy and it appears a prudent course of action. Go for it. I am for the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Happy Holidays, Scott Taylor 4528 Casco Ave Edina 952 929 0019 Scott M. Taylor Ed.D. M.B.A. Small Business Management South Central Technical College 507-354-5858 952-929-0019 file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondanee\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:48 PM To: 'Bright Domblaser' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Polity Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Bright Domblaser [mailto:domb001@tc.umn.edu] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:35 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Polity I am for the proposed policy as written. Without it redress of by-pass traffic on Drexel can not be addressed. We need to reduce such traffic on Drexel. Thank you Bright M. Domblaser 4630 Drexel Av Edina, MN. 55424 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:49 PM To: 'Anderson, Dave (50th and France)' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Anderson, Dave (50th and France) [mailto:DaveAnderson@edinarealty.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:38 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Steve, As a 16 year resident of Sunnyside Road, I adamantly support the need for the Edina Traffic Commission Policy and it's ability to further review traffic situations as they arise. Needless to say, there has been a tremendous increase in daily traffic on Sunnyside over the years, and at a higher rate of speed. Now, as a parent of three young children, it is obvious to me to review what can be done to curb the onslaught of commuters through the neighborhood. If you ever drive downtown in the morning around Lake of the Isles, you will see no right turn signs off the parkway into the residential neighborhoods from 7-9 am. Why not, similarly, place no left turn signs off 50th from east bound lanes at Arden, Bruce, Wooddale and Browndale between 7 and 9 am, and no right turn off south bound France at 42nd, Morningside, 44th and Sunnyside between 4 and 6 pm? Thank you for your consideration of this, Dave Anderson DAVE ANDERSON EDINA REALTY 952-924-8724 direct 612-750-2209 cell file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffierransportation Commission\Cormspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:50 PM To: 'Blyth.S.Bailey@wellsfargo.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Please approve the Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Blyth.S.Bailey@wellsfargo.com [mailto:Blyth.S.Bailey@wellsfargo.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:13 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Please approve the Edina Traffic Commission Policy I am for the Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Blyth S. Bailey 4521 Drexel Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Phone: 952/922-3157 E-mail: blyth.s.bailey@wellsfargo.com file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:51 PM To: Tuthmelcher@usfamily.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Committee Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Ruth Mel cher [mailto:ruthmelcher@usfamily.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:02 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic Committee Policy Just a note to say I am FOR the Traffic Committee Policy. I firmly believe the traffic situation in Country Club needs to be looked at. Most of these narrow streets were not designed to carry this amount of traffic. Thanks Ruth Me!cher USFamily.Net - Unlimited Internet From $8.99/mo! file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:52 PM To: 'Allitot@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Allitot@aol.com [mailto:Allitot@aol.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:33 AM To: Steve Lillehaug; rwebb3@mn.mcom Subject: Edina Traffic Policy I am for the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. I grew up in a neighborhood with a "cut-through" traffic problem and speed bumps were finally put in a few years ago, which have helped. Also, to cut down on crime, an exclusive neighborhood in my hometown rerouted the streets to allow fewer entrances to the area. Hope everything gets resolved. --Allison Totaro Allison Baler Totaro 4509 Drexel Ave. Edina, MN 55424 952-929-0234 917-742-6856 allitot@aolcom file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:53 PM To: 'evmacs@worldnet.att.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic control through Country Club Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: evmacs@worldnet.att.net [mailto:evmacs@worldnetatt.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:23 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic control through Country Club We are not interested in having any further traffic controls in the Country Club neighborhood. We border on an urban area, and that fact should have been considered by the people who have bought here. Mary Ann and Everett MacLennan, 4510 Edina Blvd. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondancel2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:54 PM To: 'Jayne Tuttle' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wvvw.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jayne Tuttle [mailto:jb.tuttle@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:26 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic I have read the proposed policy. I am for the proposed Edina Traffic commission policy. I would like the commission to review the amount of cut through traffic in the country club area and make recommendations. Jayne Tuttle file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:55 PM To: 'sandy sirtunons' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: sandy simmons [mailto:SSIMMONS@mn.mcom] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 3:19 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic policy After living in Country Club on Wooddale for the past 25 years, we feel the traffic issues have been blown out of proportion and do not support the new policy. No neighborhood should operate in isolation of the entire city. The streets belong to anyone who needs to use them. We are in complete agreement with the letter to the Edina Sun last week from the lone dissenting traffic committee person. There will always be issues when Highway 100 or any other major route is slow and not flowing well. Country Club traffic is fine other than when 100 is at a standstill or when 50th gets backed up. Change the lights along 50th to move the traffic at a better pace. Our neighborhood (or any other) should not operate in isolation. Diverting techniques will only move the problem somewhere else. A good part of the Country Club traffic IS Country Club. The traffic commission needs input and concerns from neighborhoods but the decisions must be made with the whole city of Edina in mind, independently and unselfishly. One example of a knee jerk decision for one person is the 'no turn on red' at 50th and Wooddale for all day - every day. That was made for one biker who was not careful. All the traffic at that intersection would move much more smoothly without the no turn on red. At the very most it should only be at rush hour times. That was decided because of ONE incident, one person. There is a can of worms about to be opened when neighborhoods start to decide their own policies and direction. As happened with Country Club - no consensus can be reached anyway. There needs to be expertise and an overall plan. Thanks for listening! Cal and Sandy Simmons file://G:Unfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 4619 Wooddale Avenue file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:57 PM To: 'Renelle Nelson' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 vvvvvv.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Renelle Nelson [mailto:rnelson@PACER.org] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 3:11 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Traffic policy My husband, Doug Nelson and I have some grave concerns regarding the amount of pass-through traffic that occurs on Browndale Ave. We have lived at 4905 Browndale Ave. for the past 10 years, and during that time have seen an incredible increase in traffic volume going over the Browndale Bridge. Our concerns are safety issues. While it is often difficult for us to get out of our driveway during higher volume times (morning and evening), our concerns are more about the increasing number of accidents, near accidents and vehicles getting "stuck" and not being able to navigate the 90 degree turn onto the bridge, and the narrowness of the bridge. The bridge is barely a 2 car bridge, and we have personally experienced being forced so far to one side because of the oncoming traffic, that we have lost side view mirrors. Drivers unfamiliar with the narrow bridge often stop unexpectedly when turning off 50th and encountering bridge traffic, causing problems for drivers behind them who are also turning. This becomes extremely dangerous as traffic on 501h is heavy and fast. We can count on at least several accidents each year occurring with drivers not being able to make the right turn on to or off of the bridge- and during the winter months have cars frequently ending up in our yard and our neighbor's yard, on the sidewalk and lodged against the side rails by the mill. In the summer, there is increasing traffic with people portaging their canoes at that spot as well. In our opinion is it merely a matter of time before a fatal accident will occur in an area that can be easily and proactively managed by a traffic commission that recognizes the mounting data and decides to either cut off access entirely, or making that small section of Browndale (from the intersection of Country Club to 50th) one way. We actively support the establishment of this policy so that there will be a forum to address these issues. Please feel free to contact us at 952-920-4771. Sincerely, Douglas C. and Renelle Nelson 4905 Browndale Ave. Edina, MN 55424 Wptel,Th Nerson file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation CommissionTorrespondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 EOD Project Coordinator, PACERCenter 8161 Nonnandak Blvd Winneaporis, 511X 55437 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:57 PM To: 'Web, Steve' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Web, Steve jmailto:Steven.B.Welo@pjc.comi Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 4:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I am supportive of the City's policy regarding performing a study of traffic patterns in east Edina. I have recently purchased a home on Edina Boulevard and am particularly concerned about the effects of heavy traffic in Country Club. I look forward to seeing the results of the December 9th meeting. Steven B. Web, CFA Managing Director - Investments Piper Jaffray & Co. 612-303-1087 steven.b.welo@pjc.com Guides for the journey. Piper Jaffray & Co. Since 1895. Member SIPC and NYSE. Learn more at piperjaffray.com. Piper Jaffray corporate headquarters is located at 800 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Piper Jaffray outgoing and incoming e-mail is electronically archived and recorded and is subject to review, monitoring and/or disclosure to someone other than the recipient. This e- mail may be considered an advertisement or solicitation for purposes of regulation of commercial electronic mail messages. If you do not wish to receive commercial e-mail communications from Piper Jaffray, click here to request to unsubscribe. mailto:can- spam@pjc.com file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 For additional disclosure information see http://www.piperjaffray.com/info2.aspx?id=298 file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:14 AM To: 'Sharon Pugh' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic policy --Edina Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Sharon Pugh [mailto:spugh@mnsr.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 6:02 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic policy --edina I will not be able to attend the upcoming meeting on the traffic issue, but wanted someone to know that I believe that we need a policy in place to address traffic issues in our community. I believe that the commission has worked a long while on this policy and we should approve it and move forward with studies on traffic problems. Thank you Sharon Pugh 4526 Drexel Ave Edina MN 55424 file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:22 AM To: 'Margaret Winters' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Currently, the City is not analyzing or gathering any traffic data in the Country Club neighborhood. As you may well know, this has been done in the past and these records and studies are open for your review at anytime. Please coordinate this with me directly if you wish to further pursue gathering data as you requested and I will make it available to you. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wvvw.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Margaret Winters [mailto:mrwint@qwest.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:41 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: rwebb3@mn.IT.com Subject: Traffic Policy Dear Mr. Lillehaug, We were present a few years ago when traffic calming measures were proposed for the Country Club area. At that time, we (and many others) felt that certain people involved with the commission had a personal agenda vis-a-vis their neighborhood which, despite being advantageous for them, was detrimental to the other residents of the neighborhood. To eliminate that kind of animosity from future traffic calming discussions, we would strongly favor that members of the commission living in an affected neighborhood recuse themselves from decisions directly related to their neighborhood. We believe that eliminating any perception of self-interest on the part of commission members will make community acceptance of their votes more acceptable to Edina residents. Secondly, We have many questions regarding the science of the baseline numbers you have for the trip numbers/household. We are interested in file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 2 of 2 knowing when those numbers were calculated, what effort has been employed to update those numbers -- not to mention how valid the numbers obtained are, in the first place, given the constant construction on the highway and in the neighborhood (back-and-forth traffic by household members and by contractors employed by households would seem to account for a great deal of the Country Club area traffic). Thank you for your attention to these questions. We appreciate the efforts you have put toward the issue of traffic patterns in Edina and wish you success in your endeavor. Sincerely, Kurt and Margaret Winters 4504 Moorland Avenue Edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Coirespondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:31 AM To: 'Meggan Bowlby' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Meggan Bowlby [mailto:mbowlby@mnsr.corn] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:54 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Steve I wanted to write a quick e-mail letting you know that our family is for the proposed Edina traffic commision policy in hopes that a resolution for our traffic issues will not be too far behind. Thank you Meggan and Scott Bowlby 4625 Drexel Ave file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:33 AM To: 'mkapsner' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P,T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: mkapsner [maillo:mkapsner@mn.a.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:30 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I am against the traffic policy for the following reasons: 1. The minimum distances are too small. A seemingly small change can have great impact for a wide area. 2. There is no percentage approval set before a plan is put into place. 3. Volume reduction measures should be removed from the list of approved options. 4. Inconvenience is a negative impact. We buy our homes for location, so changing access is a negative impact. I would like to see the definition for impacted area changed to reflect this fact. After working on the country club district traffic committee for almost a year, I feel traffic impact areas must be made bigger not smaller. Looking at traffic as a street by street problem can have disastrous affects for other streets. The 1993 changes to Browndale and Wooddale Avenues helped reduce the volume on those streets, but they also diverted significant traffic to other streets in the neighborhood. Arden Avenue is well beyond the minimum distances stated in this policy; yet it's traffic was increased because of those changes, as were several other streets. I also feel the focus of traffic policy should be speed and safety, not volume. Unless the cars are put onto major collectors, volume control only moves cars from one residential street to another. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 2 of 2 Thank you for this opportunity to voice my objections. Sincerely, Molly Kapsner file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:34 AM To: 'Joanne Patterson' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Joanne Patterson [mailto:jccp@usinternet.corn] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:04 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy My name is Joanne Patterson and I live at 4218 Sunnyside Road with my husband Bill and our three children. We are writing to say that we are for the Edina Traffic Commission Policy. We have lived in our house for 5 years and the traffic seems to get a little worse every year, not just the volume but the speed, too. Every day I watch people run through the stop sign going west on Sunnyside to round the corner onto Wooddale. Cars driving North or South on Wooddale barely tap their brakes at the stop signs while crossing Sunnyside. And the cars driving North from Drexel and turning either East or West onto Sunnyside are equally fast, dangerous and oblivious to any stop signs. There have been so many near misses involving speeding cars (driven by people who do not live in the neighborhood) and the various children who live on Sunnyside and Drexel and Wooddale as the children try to navigate crossing the street that it is truly a miracle that no one has been hit or killed. Plain and simple, people do not stop at the stop signs. I have followed the efforts by the city to try to address the traffic issue over the years. Three years ago the city devised a traffic calming plan, yet before it could even be tested it was shut down because of the very loud yet small opposition of the Morningside neighborhood and one street out of ten in the Country Club neighborhood. I appreciate their apprehension about the possibility of one neighborhood's traffic simply rerouted to another neighborhood or one street's traffic rerouted to another street. However, it seems to me that this Traffic Commission Policy is very thoughtful in that it describes in great detail how all neighborhoods, even streets, have options to deal with the traffic on their streets and also petition the city if one neighborhood's solution or one street's solution becomes another neighborhood's problem or another street's problem. It would be a travesty if the City of Edina did not pass this policy because of the unfounded fear of one neighborhood or one street. (The lone dissension to the policy in the recent 5 - 1 vote was a person who lives in the Morningside neighborhood). I know that cut-thru traffic is a problem all over Edina, not just the East side, and I know that neighborhoods other than the Country Club and Morningside neighborhoods are also very eager to have an official policy to petition the city for traffic calming measures, crosswalks, and more. The bottom line is the city of Edina needs to have a policy on its books so all the neighborhoods in all of Edina can petition the city for their own traffic needs. The end result - traffic calming measures - may not file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 2 of 2 make everyone happy, it may not even make me or my family happy depending on what traffic calming measures are decided - but to do nothing seems wrong. The traffic will never go away anywhere in the city and the traffic issue will come before the City Council over and over and over, year after year after year because there will always be someone worried about it and wanting to control it because cut-thru traffic is dangerous, life-threatening, and detrimental to the value of the City. Thank you very much for your time. Joanne and Bill Patterson file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:35 AM To: 'Trierweiler' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Support of new Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Trierweiler [mailto:trierweiler@qwest.nei] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 12:53 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Support of new Traffic Policy I strongly support the propsed Edina traffic policy and strongly desire to see some measures taken to reduce the speeding traffic in our neighborhood. We live on Arden Avenue between Country Club and Bridge. The amount of traffic on our street is very high and extremely dangerous. Much of it is cut through traffic avoiding the 50th/France intersection during rush hour. However, this is exactly some of the items when our children our most apt to crossing the street. Arden Avenue is one of the more crowded streets with sinngle family homes in Edina. It is full of homes wiht small children that are here for the schools. Between Country Club and Bridge alone, there are over 60 children under the age of 12. I was furious when the traffic proposals of a couple of years ago went no where. What will it take, some of our children being run down in their street? I was especially upset when some of the neighborhood committee members "ruled' that the number of children and houses should not be part of the equation. I strongly believe that should be criteria #1. Please consider us strongly in support of new traffic policies that can return our neighborhood to being the safe, residential area that we moved here for. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 2 of 2 Chuck and Gina Triervveiler 4623 Arden Avenue 952 924 1193 trierweiler@qwest.net file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:36 AM To: 'Gary Hauck' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Gary Hauck [mailto:gary.hauck@amec.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:40 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: Trwebb3@mm.rr.com' Subject: Traffic Commission Policy Hi, I won't be able to attend the City Hall meeting on the subject policy, but I would like you to know that I strongly favor the policy as it would give my Country Club neighborhood a procedure for addressing the severe traffic problems. I live on one of the busiest streets in the Country Club area (Arden Avenue). It is a narrow street and handles a huge volume of traffic for its size. It is classified as a residential street but it is actually used as a major connector. Even though parking is permitted on only one side, there is insufficient width for the volume of traffic. My legally parked car was damaged in October as a truck moved over too far trying to accommodate an oncoming car. Many children live on this street. The traffic volume combined with the narrow width of the street presents a significant hazard to them as the traffic operates very close to the curb line and to the parked cars, leaving little time for drivers to react to children's unpredictable behavior. Please consider my opinion as being among the voices to be heard at the meeting. Thank you, Gary Hauck 4625 Arden Avenue The infoiniation contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Traffic Commission Policy Page 2 of 2 information. If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:41 AM To: 'Lynn Geesaman' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Statement of Support - Transportation Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Lynn Geesaman [mailto:Lgeesaman@visi.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 9:33 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Statement of Support - Transportation Commisssion Policy Statement of Support - Transportation Commission Policy 12/6/04 I am submitting this directly to you, as my hearing is too impaired to attend a public meeting. I am a resident of 28 years. I would summarize my position as follows: 1) For over 10 years the Country Club neighborhood has had a documented traffic problem of ever-increasing severity. 2) For whatever reasons, the City has been notably and provenly ineffectual in dealing with this problem. 3) While the Traffic Commission Policy seems to me an awkward substitute for common sense, if it contains what the City requires for effective action, then I support it whole heartedly. Donald P. Geesaman 4606 Drexel Avenue file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:43 AM To: 'db45@core.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. If you have any further constructive criticism, please forward your comments to me. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 9:55 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: traffic Original Message From: Beverly Goerisch [mailto:db45@core.com] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 2:12 AM To: Jennifer E3ennerotte Subject: traffic WAKE UP THIS IS NOT A MYSTERY, I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE MNDOT MYSTERY FOR THE PAST EIGHT YEARS THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS CHAIN OF COMMAND WHO REALLY WANTS TO CLAIM COMMAND. THESE PEOPLE SPEND 99% OF THEIR TIME PASSING THE BUCK, DOING STUDIES,MAKING CHARTS, DRAWING AND RE-DRAWING MAPS, MAKING MODELS, GOING ON RETREATS, CONDUCTING USELESS MEETINGS, ATTENDING CONFERENCES, SENDING OUT NEWSLETTERS AND PATTING EACH OTHER ON THE BACK TELLING EVERYONE WHAT A GREAT JOB THEY HAVE DONE WITH THEIR 2030 PLAN, WHICH BY THE WAY BECOMES MOOT AS EACH DAY PASSES. LETS ALSO NOT FORGET HOW MNDOT CONTINUES TO CRY ABOUT MONEY, LIKE THEY JUST LOST THEIR WALLET WHEN IT COMES TIME TO ACTUALLY PUT ONE OF THESE ILL CONCIEVED ROADWAY PLANS INTO EFFECT. IS THE WASTE ANY WONDER. I THINK ITS HIGH TIME ALL CITIES IN THE METRO BAND TOGETHER AND DEMAND THAT MNDOT PUT THE SHOVEL IN THE DIRT AND GET IT DONE, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY AND LET THE CITIES DO THE JOB. GOOD LUCK--- HOPE YOU DON'T HURT YOURSELF BANGING YOUR HEAD INTO THE WALL, YOU MAY GET A MNDOT MIGRAINE. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/7/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:16 AM To: 'gwoessner777@hotmail.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Comments from a resident Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:11 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Comments from a resident Original Message From: Garry Woessner [mailto:gwoessner777@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:09 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Comments from a resident I cannot make the Thursday meeting, so here are a few comments and suggestions: 1. The area around Southdale is extremely congested, particularly between the mall and Byerly's. Traffic congestion could be greatly eased by creating connections between the parking lots of the various strip malls to get more traffic off the streets. For example, you cannot get from US Bank parking lot to Leisure Lane, or Original House of Pancakes parking lot to Leisure Lane. Creating connections between all the various parking lots in the same city block would be very beneficial to traffic and help shoppers get between more stores with ease. 2. Add another exit out of Target onto 70th, close to the Chinese restaurant. This would distribute the traffic more evenly onto 70th. 3. There is a very dangerous street configuration built around an old tree in west Edina. I am surprised there have been no fatalities yet, but am concerned that someone will be seriously hurt in the future. The location is the intersection of Valley View Road and Dewey Hill Road, just west of Braemar park and near the pedestrian entrance to the ball fields. Valley View makes a hair pin turn here. There is an old tree in the middle of the road that creates a great deal of confusion to drivers unfamiliar with the area. It is only a matter of time until someone hits the tree during limited visibility or from taking the corner too fast. I would suggest cutting down the tree and re-configuring the intersection. 4. Gleason overpass to Hwy 62 - there are no curb cuts onto the sidewalk on the overpass. It is impossible for bikers and wheelchairs to get from Creek Valley sidewalk to Bredesen Park without riding in the street. This is very dangerous. Many families ride their bikes over to Bredesen and are forced out into the middle of the street by the lack of curb cuts and pot holes in the road. Thank you for adding curb cuts to Gleason in front of Creek Valley, but we need to finish the job all the way to Bredesen. Thanks for allowing resident input. I look forward to the outcome. Garry Woessner 6602 Scandia Road Edina, MN 55439 952-944-5415 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:19 AM To: 'ralph herda' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: re Traffic Commissions Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. And, yes, the procedure for petitioning for sidewalks remains the same. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: ralph herda [mailto:rherda@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:49 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: re Traffic Commissions Policy Dear S Lillehaug, I've read the proposed traffic policy and support having one that defines good process, which this generally seems to do. So I support it. I do not support the prioritization grading scheme as it stands, since its weighing of sidewalks makes them an 'issue neutralizer'. I believe that is incorrect because sidewalks have no effect on either traffic volumes or speeds. In addition, I thought sidewalks could be installed in neighborhoods independently of traffic solutions and this policy, or by developers, or at the request of the neighborhood, and assessed to the neighborhood. An entirely different process financed by a different revenue stream than traffic solutions, so it should not be used in the prioritization calculation. Thanks for your attention to these comments. Please contact me if you have questions. Ralph Herda 4501 Drexel Ave 651.582.4219 office Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:20 AM To: 'Sean.T.Faeth@WellsFargo.COM' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Sean.T.Faeth@WellsFargo.COM [mailto:Sean.T.Faeth@WellsFargo.COM] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:04 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy As a resident of Edina, the purpose of this note is to express my support for the proposed policy. While not policy is perfect, I believe that the proposal provides a fair, objective, and balances means to address traffic issues they arise in our city. The policy does not advocate a particular measure be applied to a particular situation, but it provides an important framework for all affected parties to participate in and ultimately achieve a resolution to traffic-relation issues and questions. Please do not hesitate to contact me for any questions or if you need additional feedback. Sean T. Faeth Senior Vice President/Finance Manager Private Client Services / Wells Fargo Investments sean.t.faeth@wellsfargo.com phone: 612/316-1323 fax: 612/667-5756 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/8/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:18 AM To: 'Sandy Bainbridge' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Country Club Traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Sandy Bainbridge [mailto:sandybainbridge©yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 5:20 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Country Club Traffic Thank you for addressing the traffic issue in Country Club. My family lives on Country Club Road, 2 houses east of Wooddale, front door facing Drexel. From my vantage point, my front window, I view daily near misses and frequent accidents with cars and pedestrians, cars with other cars, cars with dogs and in the summertime, cars with kids and adults walking and on bicycles. We are really fed up with cars speeding and cars not stopping for the stop sign at the crosswalk of Wooddale and Country Club Rd. The volume of traffic coming in front of my home in the morning and late afternoon rush hour is excessive. I would support anything that would discourage cut through traffic and speeding even if it meant inconvenience for our block. If there is anything I can do, let me know. Let's hope there's some resolution to this issue before a tragedy occurs. Thanks again for your efforts. Sandy Bainbridge 4225 Country Club Rd. Edina Sandy Bainbridge sandybainbridge@yahoo.com Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/8/2004 From: Sharon Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 11:38 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Draft Policy Comment From: Mrs. Covlin, 5508 Dever Drive - poorly timed because many people are out of town; concerned about congestion; uses residential streets to avoid congestion. She has not read the document. From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:17 AM To: 'larry_seckinger@juno.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Local Traffic Task Force Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 3:35 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Local Traffic Task Force Original Message From: Larry Seckinger (mailto:larry_seckinger@juno.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 3:12 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Edina Local Traffic Task Force 12-8-04 Edina Local Traffic Task Force We are absolutely opposed to any additional traffic control measures being taken in the Country Club area. We believe that the additional stop signs and other measures that were installed in our neighborhood approximately ten years ago for traffic control purposes only exacerbated the situation because many people choose to ignore the stop signs. This fact has caused a more dangerous situation for walkers, runners, bicyclists, children at play and other motorists. We feel that Edina's traffic laws should be enforced by existing Edina police department personnel in the Country Club area to correct any real or perceived problems. We think that an attempt to correct the situation should be made by raising the fines in the area substantially and heavily patrolling the neighborhood by defined streets during defined times during the day and week when the problem is at its worst. The consequences of speeding, running stop signs, etc. should be monetary (large fines and higher insurance rates) and possible loss of the driver's licence, not inconvenience to the residents or shifting of one street's problem to another street. Larry and Sue Seckinger Larry_Seckinger@Juno.Com Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:20 AM To: 'Jim Maciej' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jim Maciej [mailto:jvm@mn.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 4:09 PM To: Rob Webb Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Robb, Having reviewed the draft October, 2004 City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy, I am sending you this message in support of the document. Though I have some concerns about certain aspects of the report, I my wife and I approve of what the commission has proposed. Traffic in the County club neighborhood is bad and is getting worse, so something needs to be done.. .sooner than later. The commission has done a very through job in its work and members are to be congratulated for their efforts on behalf of the city.. .and making it a better place to live and do business. And, thanks to you, Robb, for getting word out concerning the report. We have a bad traffic situation in Edina due in large part to the fact that a huge bottleneck remains on Highway 100 from 36th in St Louis Park to 1-394. Until that segment is rebuilt, we will suffer from inordinate amounts of traffic coming into the Country Club neighborhood. We should all be putting more pressure on the state to redo the segment ASAP.. .maybe from unallocated MDOT funds. After all, we have allies in the governor's office, the It. governor is sympathetic to the SW metro area (and she heads MDOT ) and Representative Ron Erhart heads the Transportation Committee. Every day frustrated drivers exit Highway 100 to cut across the neighborhood because this bottleneck exists. Finally, a system of "gentle" speed bumps does wonders to slow traffic. Minneapolis uses both the gentle file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 2 of 2 and "hard" speed bumps to slow traffic, with good results, I believe. This might be an inexpensive way to deal with slowing and possibly reducing traffic flow through the neighborhoods of Edina. Jim Made] 4630 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952-922-9240 file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Conespondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Traffic Info Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:24 AM To: 'sue@toths.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Info Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:06 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Traffic Info Original Message From: Sue Toth [mailto:sue@toths.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 9:58 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Info Dear Mr. Lillihaug, I am very concerned about what the Edina Transportation Commission and the City Council are attempting to do regarding traffic control in Edina. The neighborhood by neighborhood approach is not one that I support. It seems good in theory, but gives too much power to the city officials to make changes without input from the community. Streets should not be closed to ease traffic in some areas while overburdening other areas. A comprehensive approach needs to be taken to allow for the traffic flow to be the best it can be in all neighborhoods. Someone needs to review the big-picture and make decisions that benefit the majority of the residents. Every neighborhood should have equal representation and should be able to vote on issues if they are impacted by the change. That's what democracy is all about! I encourage you to look for a policy that is more far-reaching than one neighborhood's concern. This policy allows for a few people to make decisions that could compound the traffic problems which the Edina Transportation Commission was formed to eliminate. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. I know I can count on your support in striking down the Traffic Commission's policy. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Traffic Info Page 2 of 2 Sue Toth 952-927-7120 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:27 AM To: lberg921@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:06 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: JBERG921@aol.com [mailto:JBERG921@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 10:50 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft To whom it may concern, I am writing to let you know how concerned I am as a Morningside resident that you are so willing to direct traffic on our already crowded congested streets. Don't these people realize our streets are very busy as well and the effect they would have on 44th street and surrounding areas incredible? When these esteemed Country Club residents purchased their homes they should have realized that they were buying in a city not a gated community. These traffic patterns have gone on for years. There are no new highways that have been constructed, no new suprises. All the people of Edina need to be educated about the expenses a few people in Country Club are trying to incur for our city. I really don't think this is a wise use of our tax dollars. Perhaps these disgruntled city dwellers should consider moving to Bear Path. And, that after research you are actually considering closing streets and delaying response times for emergency vehicles is incomprehensible to me. From what I could gather from the information provided street closure was not a highly efficient use of traffic control. I understand several city council members and our mayor live in this area, maybe that is why this issue is being pushed through as quietly as possible during this incredibly busy time. Also, I know there are residents that have lived in the Country Club are for close to fifty years that find this plan ridiculous. From friends in the Country Club area I have learned that it is the force of a few very connected neighbors that is creating the pressure for this issue to move forward and quickly. We all live in this city and we all need to try as a community to be more inclusive and get along. This is part of city dwelling. I will try my hardest to let all our community know about the endless money we have available for a few. One area that really file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 2 of 2 needs addressing for traffic issues is at the high school and middle school, perhaps you should focus there. Please contact me at Jberg921@aol.com so I am certain you have received this correspondence. Thank you, Julie Berg file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:21 AM To: 'AMY GUSTAFSON' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Proposed Traffic Commission Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: AMY GUSTAFSON [mailto:gustafson123@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 9:15 PM To: Steve Lillehaug; The Webbs Subject: Proposed Traffic Commission Dear Steve Lillehang, We are residents living on Arden Avenue (specifically 4612 Arden Avenue) in the Country Club district. We wanted to send an email letting you know we are SUPPORT the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. We are FOR the policy because we are worried about the safety, the speed and the volume of cars using our residential street. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Rick and Amy Gustafson and family (952)929-4969 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Traffic Info Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:26 AM To: 'edmathie@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Info Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:06 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Traffic Info Original Message From: Ed Mathie [mailto:edmathie@mn.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 10:19 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Info Attn: Steve Lillehaug, Transportation Commission Policy (Draft) I've read the draft policy and wanted to send you some comments. While the city needs a plan to deal with changing traffic realities, this plan lacks the community notification and involvement necessary to make changes fair and effective. This plan unfortunately follows what feels like a growing pattern of secret dealings and no-notice decisions by the city. It should not be hard for citizens to know what the city is considering, but this draft plan offers too little public review. The city's dealings should be an open book. A few examples. Step two of the NTMP schedule says the city will notify all study requestors of the status of their request. Why not publish the whole list for everyone to see? Ranked top to bottom. The city shouldn't be file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Traffic Info Page 2 of 2 considering anything that can't hold up to public discussion. The way the plan is written now, it's impossible for anyone to know if their request legitimately didn't make the list, or got put behind the pet project of the council members neighbor. Step three of the same process only involves people who live in a 'defined study area' but lets the city decide who they think will and won't be impacted - without any public review. The plan talks about approximately 1 block from the project as a possible area for a survey-to-test. One block? That smells like an unwillingness to admit and talk about the negative impact 3, 4, even 5 blocks away. In summary, I am against the draft plan as it stands because it lacks what this city needs most: open, all cards on the table dealings with the public regarding issues that significantly influence quality of life and property values. This process should be wide open to the public - but it's not. People want to trust the city but too many of these plans are written to let a small group of people push their personal agendas. Open up the process and people will be supportive. regards, Ed Mathie 12 year Morningside resident 4239 Grimes Avenue (past 3 years) 4015 Sunnyside Road (9 previous years) file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:29 AM To: 'Lynn Geesaman' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: 12/9 Public Meeting on Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Lynn Geesaman [mailto:Lgeesaman@visi.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 10:10 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: 12/9 Public Meeting on Traffic Policy 12/8/04 4606 Drexel Ave. The notion of 'traffic calming' led me naturally to consider the question of 'crowd calming.' Because of my deafness, I did not attend the 1991 public meeting on traffic issues, but all reports were that some of the behavior was shamefully uncivil. I wonder if, perhaps, a beneficial effect might derive from videotaping the meeting. It could well be that people might think twice about behaving badly if they knew they were being recorded on film. Donald Geesaman From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:08 AM To: 'Scott Thiss' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Commission Report Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Scott Thiss (mailto:Scott.Thiss@SWPLASTICS.COM] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:00 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Commission Report Steve, We will not be able to attend tonight's public hearing on the Transportation Committee's recommendations. After reading the report summaries and policies we support the proposed recommendations as drafted. Scott & Abbie Thiss 4518 Drexel Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952-929-4628 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:16 AM To: 'greg_fancher@us.ibm.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Steve Lillehaug -- Traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wvvw.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:10 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Steve Lillehaug -- Traffic Original Message From: greg_fancher@us.ibm.com [mailto:gregiancher@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:28 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Steve Lillehaug -- Traffic Steve: From previous comments derived from a perception that most emails forwarded agree with the traffic policy: Lets be careful in assuming agreement with looking at traffic issues constitutes agreement with an over reaching, noncitizen input draft policy. As a member of Morningside I remember the one sided attempt at reviewing street closures for the benefit of a few members of our city at the expense of many others. Input and direction from those directly affected is the cornerstone of our democracy. Attempting to circumvent that process can only produce pain for all. I would like to see traffic slowed and monitored, but I also understand that living within a first ring suburb brings a need to accept some congestion for all the benefits of living where we choose to live. As long as laws are obeyed, who are we to determine whom may drive through our streets? The last time I looked, this was still America and public throughways were still public. If a group wants to block off their neighborhood, may I recommend Bearpath in Eden Prairie -- lovely $1M+ homes in a gated area far removed from any sense of community. I am being light-hearted here -- but the premise holds. I, and many others, are not in favor of a neighborhood approach. Who defines a neighborhood? Why would you pit one neighborhood against another? Why would you ever consider a closure as a file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 2 of 2 means to an end? If this is even a thought -- every resident could provide you with a street or two they would like closed. Do we have enough high walls to surround the city completely? Reviewing traffic flow is fine -- implementing a plan without full thought and input from the citizens (all of them) is not the way to proceed in our Government. There are an incredible amount of highly intelligent, successful people in Edina. We can work together to review traffic flow patterns and usage of slowing devices to make our streets safe and less congested without resorting to a one sided, non-input policy of "the neighborhood with the loudest voice, or most resources, or greatest show of force" wins. I look forward to the meeting tonight. Greg Greg Fancher Client Services Manager Public Sector (612) 397-2627 Office (612) 940-1450 Mobile gregJancher@us.ibm.com vvww.ibm.com E file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Ce V-E'cP Date: December 8, 2004 RE: Excerpt of emails being circulated in Morningside The entire focus of the policy is a neighborhood-by-neighborhood approach. It sounds good in theory, but doesn't the entire city need to be evaluated and involved, doesn't every neighborhood count. One neighborhood gets most of the attention and public money. One commissioner said, "We need to be the ones to solve Country Club's traffic issues." Most importantly, Country Club starts restructuring their streets this spring. It is on the road construction calendar. With this timeline, it makes me wonder who is in such a rush? Why? What can you do? First, come December 9th. If you cannot make it, find others that can. Remember this summer? Second, if the traffic commission doesn't alter their policy, phone your city council members. Mike Kelly was clearly antagonistic to our concerns this summer, and he is vacating his seat soon. Housh and Hovland live in Country Club. Maetzold is also vacating his seat. Macisca was helpful this summer and with our help was re-elected! We also need to get other Edina residents involved, they deserve to be heard about their traffic concerns and demand accountability for how public money is spent. As long as it is Morningside versus Country Club, we all lose. Third, write letters to the editor. We cannot get too much press involved in this matter. Fourth, please forward this to anyone who will use it wisely. Country Club has a website that is password protected and they did publish our 44th and France flyer on it. We have nothing to hide, we want full disclosure from all parties involved and to work together to benefit all Edina residents. Next e-mail will have City Council meeting date and their contact information. Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:23 PM To: Ifitti@onvoymail.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:56 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: Lisa Fittipaldi [mailto:Ifitti@onvoymail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:54 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; sillehaug@cLedina.mn.us Cc: LEE MARKS Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft Dear Steve, Unfortunately I will not be able to make the traffic meeting today, as I have a band concert for my daughter which I must attend instead. However, I wanted to voice my opinion on having a procedure and policies in place to address traffic issues in Edina. I think that we have seen in the past that the absence of a traffic policy is frustrating to everyone, and is certainly frustrating to someone who lives on a narrow street, with nearly 100 elementary age school children and a traffic volume of almost 2000 cars a day. While I understand that we need a traffic plan in place that meets the needs of all constituents in Edina, "a non-plan" or ignoring traffic issues is simply not a solution. Bad news does not get better with age. The city of Edina can no more ignore traffic problems than it can sewage problems, snow removal -- or you name it. As traffic is a matter of public health and safety, it is an issue that must really be addressed. I don't know if the proposed traffic policy and procedures will solve our traffic issues. I just know that we need to try something. Because having no policy has resulted in maintenance of the status quo and that is not a solution. I appreciate your taking the time to let me voice my concerns on this issue. I hope that the meeting goes well tonight and that you have a productive discussion. In the end, please remember that you can not make effective decisions by consensus. Sometimes the City has to take a stand to act on the behalf and well being of all Edina residents. It would seem to me that having a traffic policy of some sort would be in file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 2 of 2 the best interest of everyone. Sincerely, Lisa Fittipaldi 4502 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:24 PM To: 'joan bonello' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: joan bonen() [mailto:jbonello@mn.rr.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 10:14 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft As a residents of Country Club neighborhood on Arden Ave. I would like to voice my support for the proposed Traffic Commission Policy. I will not be able to attend the meeting at City Hall tonight, but would like to have my voice heard. The residents on Arden Ave. between 50th and Sunnyside have dealt with far too much traffic, speeding and disregard for stop signs. We have a very large population of children under the age of 12 on this block and it is just a matter of time before one of them will be hit by the careless drivers who cut through our neighborhood. I was around for the last attempt to rectify this problem, which turned out to be a disaster. I am all for an organized, thoughtful look at traffic flow in our neighborhood. Thank you. Joan Bonello 4621 Arden Ave. Edina MN 952-926-9057 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:25 PM To: 'LEE MARKS' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Proposed Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.conn (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: LEE MARKS [mailto:marks-sanford@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 10:47 AM To: Steve Lillehaug; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Proposed Traffic Policy Please let the Traffic Commission and Council members know that we support the proposed Policy concerning traffic. We live on Arden Avenue (4602) and are appalled at the high volume of traffic and at the number of cars that speed past our home each day and that do not even bother to stop at the stop sign which is right outside our home (Bridge St.). Over 100 small children live on Arden Avenue (north of 50th). A huge safety issue exists. We strongly support having procedures in place which will enable action to be taken to reduce the traffic volume on our street and will slow the cars down! Opposition by individuals not experiencing (or even acknowledging) our safety issue has thwarted past efforts for volume reduction and traffic calming on our street and in our neighborhood. Arguments of convenience should be disregarded in the face of the safety issues presented. We just want our kids to be safe. Traffic volume, speed and signal violations must all be reduced on our street. One of these days, a truly horrible accident will happen -- it is just a matter of time Please get procedures in place to enable our problem to be addressed and resolved. It is really inexcusable and incomprehensible that the City has had the facts documenting this safety issue for years and yet nothing has been done. Thank you, Ann Sanford 4602 Arden Ave Edina, MN 55424 952 920 6085 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:26 PM To: 'Dan Cavanaugh' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Congestion Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Dan Cavanaugh [mailto:DCavanaugh@cpa-consultants.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 10:49 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Congestion I think starting at Wooddale that 50th should have a center turn lane like it is once you to the Minneapolis side. I drive both areas frequently and the traffic flow on the Minneapolis side is much better with that change. Plus, it is much safer as speeds have dropped and you don't have people suddenly cutting over to miss cars turning left or cars parked on the right. Parking on this street is not really needed as all of the residents homes are on the cross streets and parking is available there. I think France Avenue, south of 51st should be painted with parking on both sides of the street resulting in one official lane in each direction. This road is terrible as some people treat is as a 4 lane road and others as a two lane. There have been numerous times where people have suddenly cut over to avoid a parked car or blow by me on the right or left, cutting it close, as they are treating France as a 4 lane road. I also think this will slow down the speeds and overall make this a safer road. I don't believe this will have any impact on the businesses in the 50th and France area I rarely see any of the vehicles traveling on either road during peak times actually stopping. I know I avoid going down to the shopping areas at 50th and France during these times as traffic is a nightmare and many of my friends in the area do the same thing. There is going to be a bottleneck at some point, seems to me it makes more sense to leave the bottleneck at the freeway area instead pushing it in to the neighborhood. Dan Cavanaugh 5116 France Avenue South file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:27 PM To: 'Jkj966@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Comment on draft ETC Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jkj966@aol.com [mailto:Jkj966@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 12:56 PM To: Steve Lillehaug; Wayne Houle Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: Comment on draft ETC Policy To: Edina Transportation Commission CC: Edina City Council Re: Edina Transportation Commission Policy (Draft) December 9, 2004 Dear Commissioners: I have read and considered the draft Edina Transportation Commission's Policy. I attended two ETC regular meetings and the joint meeting with the ETC and City Council on December 7. I was also a member of the Edina Local Area Traffic Task Force in 2002/03. I have a number of concerns: First, I am confident that Commissioners had very little to do with crafting this Policy. And so it is interesting that you will bear the responsibility in public for a Policy you had no substantial hand in. The Policy, in my read, is exclusive in that it limits who will be invited to participate in a public process. The minimum benefited and impacted areas are too narrow. Akin to a street closing, they close off access to information and the opportunity to influence decisions that will impact their travel and traffic on their streets. City staff can broaden the benefited and impacted areas if they choose. But they don't have to, and there will be cases when they won't. In those cases, it will be clear that this Policy can be used to exclude. My guess is that when the minimum notification/inclusion standards in the Policy are adhered to, the project will one favored by City staff. Next, the Policy is too inclusive of traffic calming methods. Emergency Services don't like closed roads. But that option is included anyway. Why? When you consider that one of your Commissioners was a vocal advocate for cutting off access to her neighborhood by closing a street, you might think that had something to do it. So there is no plan now to close off streets (as Mr. Lillehaug mentioned in his "Misconceptions"). There was a proposal in 2000/2001, which if I read the report correctly, came to the conclusion that the only way such a street closure could happen was if Edina changed its policy. Perhaps that is exactly what you are doing now. As Mr. Richards said at the December 7 meeting, the Commission wants to "get through" the Policy so it can move on to other more substantial issues, such as mass transit, pedestrian walkways, bike paths. I hope none on the Commission has been seduced by this promise to hurry through a process that demanded more intellectual and common-sense investigation. My guess is, if implemented, much of the Commission's time will be spent handling NTM requests. The "man-power" issues associated with the NTMP have not been evaluated by City staff (Lillehaug 12/7/04). Several—Commissioners and City staff—spoke in favor of the Policy on December 7. Some said it's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be perfect to be adopted. I hope they understand that those who want changes to the Policy aren't demanding perfection, just better. I hope there's room for "better" here. But I sometimes wonder. Dissent isn't handled well in this Commission from what I've seen. I've seen anger, rancor directed at one particular Commission member. I've witnessed her studied opinions summarily dismissed. Nearly all of you have directed some kind of ugliness toward her. During this public comment period, if your ears are open, I think you'll find that her views--her well-considered opinions—were aimed at helping the Commission craft the best possible policy for all Edina residents and that she was speaking not only for herself, but also for the residents who were not invited to the table for comment—the citizens that citizen commissions are there to represent. Sincerely, Jennifer Janovy 4016 Inglewood Ave. Edina Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:29 PM To: 'dfeldman@mn.rr.come Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Policy Draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 WWW.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:55 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Policy Draft Original Message From: Feldman, Diane [mailto:dfeldman@mn.rr.conn] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:40 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Policy Draft Dear Transportation Commission, Having read the draft of your commission I am very impressed with the hard work and attention to detail you have demonstrated. This is a very important and somewhat difficult process. I am proud of your efforts. One concern I have is about the "Petition to Study"a highly ranked item (NTMP #3). I hope that the study area for a complex issue will include all the people actually impacted by any recommended change. This is important, for example, when one segment wishes to close off a road to reduce traffic. Often people in this segment do not appreciate how the traffic will increase on other nearby roads. Therefore it is necessary, in this instance, that residents from those nearby roads become part of the study. In the past neighboring residents have been perceived as people who didn't need to be part of the process. This has resulted in subdividing our community instead of encouraging all residents of Edina to work file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 2 of 2 together. Sincerely, Diane Feldman 4083 Sunnyside Rd Representative of White Oaks Association file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:30 PM To: 'owlsong@highstream.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:19 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Original Message From: Owl [mailto:owlsong@highstream.net] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:21 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission I am writing to express my opposition to certain aspects of the draft Transportation Plan. While the commission's vision is a good one, the final draft appears to rely heavily on road diversions and closings. This is not in Edina's best interest. In particular, the section "The survey-to-test area includes all properties located on the project street and on adjacent local residential streets within an area approximately 1 block from the project street," is very troubling. Does the transportation commission actually mean to pit one block of residents against another? To divert traffic off one block and dump it onto the next is not sound planning, nor is it conducive to solving the transportation problems of the city as a whole. Enforcing the existing speed laws, modifying these as needed, installing speed bumps - these are all good ideas. Turning selected blocks into dead ends, while forcing additional traffic onto neighboring blocks - with the neighbors more than a block away unable to even comment - is a very, very bad idea. I look forward to seeing this issue addressed at the Dec. 9th meeting. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 2 of 2 Laurine Ford W. 44th St. Edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:30 PM To: 'Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, an Open House is scheduled for tonight, Thursday, December 9th from 6 to 8 p.m. at Edina City Hall regarding the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. Steven L. Lifiehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 vvww.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis [mailto:Brian.Fogelberg@cbre.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:13 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I am writing this email to let the Commission know that I am in full support of the proposed Transportation Commission Policy. I would also like to add what I think to be an obvious fact, and that is that the dissenting voices, and one in particular belonging to Joni Bennett, are not based upon the policy itself but instead a self-serving desire to keep the roads open for Morningside residents to drive through Country Club, unfettered. They apparently fear that any logical, fact-based approach would result in changes that would inconvenience them, regardless of the safety issues may be addressed. I think Ms. Bennett should be disqualified from further activity on any city-wide panels or boards based on her inability to fairly represent the entire City. Thank you. Brian Brian Fogelberg I Director, J.D. CB Richard Ellis I Global Corporate Services 7760 France Ave. S., Suite 770 I Minneapolis, MN 55435 T 952 924 4609 I F 952 831 8023 I C 952 200 8904 brian.fogelberg cbre.com I vvvvw.cbre.com/brian.fogelberq CBRE CB RICHARD ELLIS file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Comrnission\Correspondance\2004 Co... 12/9/2004 Ne ee;q.eJ ( tot{ 1(4_ Mori-A K.ty rt% e jto si Pio org Its.sTc (.421(%al Information on Edina's Draft Transportation Commission Policy Why We're Concerned The draft Edina Transportation Commission Policy (Policy) advances a neighborhood traffic management approach that focuses City resources on single neighborhoods, restricts citizen input on traffic issues, and promotes the use of traffic management techniques that burden adjacent streets and neighborhoods with additional traffic and interfere with emergency response from police, ambulance, and fire fighters. Background The Edina City Council established the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) in December 2003. The Council charged this small citizen commission with advising the City Council on matters relating to the operation of the local street system; reviewing and commenting on plans to enhance mass transit; and evaluating methods for and implementation of traffic calming and other speed and volume mitigation measures. The proposed Policy is intended to guide the ETC in identifying and evaluating traffic and transportation issues and in prioritizing projects and improvements to the local transportation system. Issues The draft Policy: • Favors a neighborhood-by-neighborhood traffic management approach that fails to address traffic and transportation issues on a comprehensive citywide basis • Focuses City resources on single neighborhoods while limiting who has a voice regarding traffic management techniques to narrowly defined benefited and impacted areas • Promotes the use of traffic calming for volume control, a strategy largely abandoned by other cities because these measures typical redirect traffic onto other local streets • Includes traffic calming methods known to increase response time for police, ambulance and fire fighters ' • Was developed by City staff without public input • The cost of instituting this neighborhood-by-neighborhood approach and how it compares to current practice is unknown • The case for needing the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) in the draft Policy has not been made, in that information on how many neighborhoods have in the past sought traffic calming has not to date been disclosed • The public comment period on the draft Policy was opened on October 28, 2004; however, notice of the comment period did not appear in the Edina Sun-Current until November 25, 2004 NTMP Overview The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan in the draft Policy involves a complex series of steps. The process begins with any Edina resident or neighborhood group requesting a traffic management study. These requests are then reviewed by City staff and ranked. The highest ranking requests are handled first. Once a request is selected for study, City staff determines who will be involved in the study process by defining a petition-to-study area (as limited as one block in any direction from a requested traffic calming device) and notifies residents within this area of the proposal. With City Council approval, a project will move from petition to plan development. Once a plan is developed, City staff prepares a survey-to-test document that describes the proposed traffic management measures. The survey-to-test is then circulated to a defined area, with residents outside of this area but affected by the change not receiving notice. Once the survey-to-test process is completed, the proposed project is installed on a temporary basis. The installation is then reviewed and, if reviewed favorably, the measure is installed on a permanent basis. The NTMP appears to provide ample opportunities for residents to voice their concerns regarding proposed traffic management measures. In actuality, the NTMP greatly limits who has a formal voice in the process and who the City will notify of any proposed change. The NTMP also does not specify how selected citizens will be notified (Mail? Notice in Sun-Current?) or give an indication of how citizen views will be weighed. The NTMP in Practice The following scenario illustrates how the NTMP in practice could negatively impact traffic and quality of life in the Morningside neighborhood. In 1993 and 2001 residents of the Country Club neighborhood notified the City of perceived excessive speed and volume on their neighborhood streets and requested changes to their street system. The problem was attributed in large part to excessive "cut-through" traffic. The City was asked to close off Sunnyside Rd. at Grimes Ave. to discourage travel through the Country Club neighborhood. Many Morningside residents opposed this idea, understanding that the closure would simply redirect traffic onto Morningside streets. Although Morningside residents did not receive any official notice that the City was in discussions about closing off Sunnyside at Grimes, there was no City policy that would have precluded them from receiving notice. With the NTMP, there will be a polig that excludes residents potentially affected bji a traffic calming measure from receiving notice if the City chooses not to give that notice. After learning of these discussions, a number of Morningside residents spoke up in opposition to the street closure idea. Although there was no formal public hearing on the issue, there was also no policy at the time that would have limited who had a voice in the process. With the NTMI there wi//be apolig that limits who has a voice in the process— only those who live in a City staff-defined benefited or impacted area will be surveyed or able to sign the petition. Instead of citizens decidingfor themselves whether a change will impact them, City staff will decide. A significant number of Country Club residents also opposed the closing of Sunnyside at Grimes. An issue many opponents had, whether they lived in Country Club, White Oaks, or Morningside, was that the request to close the street was made by a small group who had the ear of City staff. Opponents had to organize to be heard. At the time, there was no City policy that gave a small group of proponents an audience at City Hall. With the NTMP, any Edina resident or neighborhood group can request a petition-to-study and begin the process of committing Cig resources to a special project. In 2001, the City spent approximately $30,000 on the Countg Club question alone. Whereas some cities with similar NTM policies require 70% of petitioned residents to approve of a project, the Edina NTMP sets no threshold, meaning that a project could goforward even with vast disapproval. Action • Read the draft Policy. Copies are available through the Engineering Department at Edina City Hall (826-0371) and online at www.cigofedina.com • Attend upcoming meetings. Residents have several opportunities to get more information about the proposed ETC/ NTMR Please mark the following dates on your calendar and attend to learn more and voice your support or concerns: December 7—Joint Meeting of the Edina City Council and Edina Transportation Commission. No public comment will be heard. 5:30-7:00 p.m., Community Room, City Hall December 9—Edina Transportation Commission Open House. YOUR FORMAL OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE POLICY. 6:00-8:00 p.m., City Council Chambers January 6—Edina Transportation Commission meeting to review/revise Policy for final draft. 6:00-8:00 p.m., Community Room, City Hall January 18—City Council meeting. FINAL POLICY IS SCHEDULED TO BE PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL. 7:00-9:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, City Hall EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Joni Bennett Dean Dovolis Warren Plante Fred Richards, Chair Marie Thorpe Les Wanninger Jean White Write your concerns to Edina Transportation Commission, Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424. It is a good idea to copy the Edina City Council on all correspondence. City Engineering staff, who drafted this Policy, can be contacted directly at whoule@ci.edina.mn.us Recommendations We suggest the ETC make the following changes to the draft policy: • Disallow traffic calming measures for volume control • Delete all traffic calming methods known to increase response time for ambulance, police, and fire fighters and that limits citizens' access of to residential streets • Change definition of Impacted Area to include those negatively affected by limitation of access • Increase "impacted area" for purposes of petition-to-study, survey-to-test, notification, and public hearings to include all residents who reasonably self-define as impacted • Institute a 70% threshold of respondent support/ opposition required to advance or defeat a project • Delete extraneous content from the policy that simply repeats existing Edina Transportation Plan (1999) and is beyond the ETC's scope of responsibility • Extend the public comment period on the draft Policy through January to compensate for failure to give timely public notice • Foremost, develop apolig forEdina that looks at and serves the City as a whole About This Effort The effort to share information about the draft Policy is undertaken by the Steering Committee of the Morningside Neighborhood Association. For more information, please go to the MNA web site at www.edinamorningside.org The information in thirfiyer is accurate to the best of our knowledge and ability. c 2004 Morningside Neighborhood Association ETC/NTMP D-6 September 29, 2004 Dear Editor, I write to call attention to the activities of the Edina Transportation Commission. Attending the commission meeting last month, in August, and I was struck by both the scope of their activities and the relative closeness of their doors. The main task of the Commission is to write a city-wide transportation policy. To that end, the meeting I attended featured a discussion of definitions. It was clear, however, that another, unspoken and much more specific, discussion was occurring. The definition that demanded the most time was that of 'cut-through traffic.' One commissioner proposed that it be defined as "any traffic that has no business being in a neighborhood." This definition is too flimsy and subjective for any policy crafted around it to have meaning, but it went unchallenged. Some light on where these definitions could lead was shed at the end of the meeting. Keith Wolf, a resident of the Country Club neighborhood, and the only other member of the public present, urged the Commission to safeguard 'livability,' another highly flexible term. Underlying Mr. Wolf's comments, I heard that voiced that the city should inhibit traffic, even to the point of blocking roads, to enhance 'livability.' I believe the euphemism used was "traffic calming." But for me, livability means access: I want to be able to choose from several direct and efficient routes from my home to my destination, whether downtown Minneapolis, Southdale, or City Hall. I heard no one speak for this, or any other, meaning of livability. A possible reason for this silence emerged with Chairman Richards' assertion (in response to a query about public input) that the Transportation Committee is the public. The seven commissioners, while certainly upstanding Edina citizens, were appointed, not elected, and are not accountable to constituents. Furthermore, the comprehensive policy they are writing will be sent to the City Council for approval before the public sees it. Shutting the public out of a citywide plan jeopardizes the usefulness and longevity of any plan, especially one concerning a changeable, wide-reaching phenomenon of transportation. In closing, I respectfully suggest that members of the public attend the next Transportation Commission to open this discussion up to all. They will meet Thursday, October 21 at 6:00pm in the Community Room at City Hall. The keys to an efficient, safe, effective and enduring transportation plan lies in careful consideration of the issues, which can only occur in an open public debate. Sincerely Julia Silvis 4246 Grimes Ave S Edina MN 55416 jsilvis@ucdavis.edu Kristi Anderson 4140 West 44th Street Edina, MN 55424 December 9, 2004 Edina Transportation Commission Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Commissioners, In addition to last Tuesday's joint City Council/Edina Transportation Commission ("ETC") meeting, I have also attended regular meetings of the ETC on October 28, September 23, July 22 and June 24. I have also read the draft Policy. In addition to the following comments, I would also like to call your attention to my letter in today's Sun Current (a copy of which is attached). At Tuesday's meeting, Mayor Maetzold indicated that each of you were selected and appointed by him, in part, based upon your residence in different geographical areas of Edina. I am thankful that Commissioner Bennett, who resides in the same general area as I, was appointed. At each of the ETC meetings I attended, I observed Commissioner Bennett to be well studied and prepared, articulate and well mannered. She knows this - draft Policy well. She has pointed out specific shortcomings of the Policy in the various meetings and, more recently, in the December 2 edition of the Edina Sun Current. I have the utmost confidence that Ms. Bennett, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Maca1ester College and a Columbia Law School graduate, as well as a resident of the Morningside neighborhood for 17 years, has served the citizens of Edina well in her capacity as Commissioner. I've lived on 44th Street between Grimes and Wooddale Avenues since 1999 and so I was around in 2001 when Morningside residents learned, after the fact, that the city had undertaken a study of traffic volumes within the Country Club neighborhood which, I understand, cost the Edina taxpayers somewhere around $30,000 in consulting fees alone. A rather large number of us made our way to the then City Council chambers to hear the consulting firm representative deliver the results of the study. In return, we delivered a very loud and clear voice opposing any proposal to close off Sunnyside Avenue just west of Grimes Avenue as well as proposals to reconfigure certain Country Club streets as one-ways. Such a plan would divert all Sunnyside traffic north on Grimes Avenue and across 44th Street in front of my home. It would also interfere with my ability to drive, for example, to City Hall or to Clancy's pharmacy or the Edina Pool in a direct fashion. At Tuesdays joint meeting, Chairperson Richards stated we "can't have enough public hearings". Mayor Maetzold and Mayor-elect Hovland also spoke to the importance of public hearings and adequate notice. I have expressed my concern about inadequate notice and public discussion in my aforementioned letter to the Sun Current. With respect to the NTMP portion of the Policy, I believe greater debate of the opposing positions is necessary. After listening to each of you speak at previous meetings and at Tuesday's joint meeting, I am aware that each of you have certain transportation issues that are of special concern to you. For example, Commissioner Wanninger is interested in implementing a public education campaign and Commissioner White has expressed interest and concern about the lack of viable mass transit options to the our west, and interfacing with the 494 Corridor Commission. You must understand that, while I consider these valid and relevant, I have no choice but to focus on the street right in front of my house. I have friends and acquaintances in the Country Club neighborhood and am aware that activity is currently afoot among some residents therein to revive proposals to close off Sunnyside Avenue just west of Grimes Avenue — surreptitious maneuverings once again. I have also seen official maps (I believe generated by the Metropolitan Council), presumably based on information provided by the City of Edina, which show projected traffic volumes for 44th Street between Grimes and Wooddale increasing dramatically in the near future. And yet there is no open discussion regarding the basis for these projections. This is a real threat to me and my neighbors and our families. - At Tuesday's joint meeting, Commissioner Dovolis (and, I believe, others) commented on how this Policy "isn't perfect", but that "we need to get moving on it". If this is so, I would urge the Commission to adopt the Policy exclusive of the NTMP portion until such time as legitimate concerns regarding aspects of the NTMP can be adequately addressed. I would even propose a public debate among yourselves of the merits of the NTMP policy. Because the NTMP portion of the Policy seems to be the most controversial and because it is potentially capable of pitting neighbor against neighbor, neighborhood against neighborhood and even Edina against another community (in the Country Club case, St. Louis Park, for example), the Commission should not proceed with it. To adopt a bad Policy for the sake of moving forward is bad policy. When considering this, I'd like you to also consider or refer to a book I've been reading to my children: "Manners Matter" by Hermine Hartley. In the introduction, the author points out "Manners are more than using the right fork — they're using the right attitude. Our behavior affects our relationships. . . Good manners show respect and consideration for others." She then turns to the Golden Rule, listing the different versions: So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them. (- Christianity) That which is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. (- Judaism) One precept to be acted upon throughout one's whole life. . . Do not unto others what you would not have them do to you. (- Confucianism) Do not hurt others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful. (- Buddhism) Not one of you is a believer until Anderson he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. (- Mohammadism) This is the sum of duty: Do nothing to others which would cause you pain if done to you. (- Hinduism) This is what is at the heart of the opposition to the NTMP as crafted. It's about manners and the Golden Rule. And about your duty to create good policy which will foster both of those. Respectfu ly and sincerely, Attachment cc: Scot Housh, City Council Member James Hovland, City Council Member Michael Kelly, City Council Member Linda Masica, City Council Member Dennis Maetzold, Mayor Wayne Houle, City Engineer Steve Lillihaug, Assistant City Engineer Kristi Anderson 4140 West 44th Street Edina, MN 55424 December 2, 2004 VIA EMAIL Editor Sun Current, Edina Edition 10917 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Editor, Substantive shortcomings of the proposed Edina Transportation Commission Policy ("Policy") aside, the push to have this Policy presented to the City Council for its approval in January with only perfunctory public process concerns me. At the October 28, 2004 Edina Transportation Commission ("ETC") meeting, which I attended, the ETC adopted the draft Policy. At that meeting, the City staff was charged with the responsibility, as I understood it, to immediately commence publication of the adoption of the Policy, to notify Edina citizens of the opening of the official public comment period (making copies of the Policy available at the City Engineering Department as well as posting it on the City's website), and of the December 9 Open House where citizens would have a formal opportunity to speak with Commissioners and City staff about the Policy. It is unclear when the information was fully accessible through the City's website in that, I am told, City staff was unable to access it at the November 18 ETC meeting. The first publication in the Sun Current occurred on November 25, Thanksgiving Day —four weeks after the initial October 18 publication directive. The Policy indicates that Neighborhood Traffic Management Applications are due on the second Monday in February. It also indicates that in a "typical" period, a General Traffic Management Information Open House will be held in late September. This year's "Open House" is being held exactly two weeks after the first newspaper mention of the existence of the Policy, sandwiched nicely between Thanksgiving and Christmas, certainly ensuring less public consideration and input. The public at large should not be expected to learn of, obtain, peruse, consider, critique and show up to discuss a document of about 57 pages (including appendices) in such a short period of time. There should be no rush to adopt a Policy to meet an application deadline contained within it; we need to take time to analyze the Policy. The application deadline can easily be modified. I think that a second Open House should be scheduled for no sooner than late January (with City Council presentation delayed) to give Edina citizens a meaningful opportunity to participate in the development of a policy that stands to affect all of us. Kristi Anderson 4140 West 44th Street Edina Contact information: 952 928 9027 (home); 952 292 8332 (cell); ktisti@toofarnorth.com From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:46 AM To: 'Shannah Gillespie' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic in CC Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Shannah Gillespie [mailto:shannahgillespie@earthlink.net) Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 5:32 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic in CC My wife and I would like to voice our support for the traffic commission and its efforts that would hopefully result in the calming of the traffic in the country club area. We live on Sunnyside Road which carries a huge amount of the traffic that should be on 50th street. We are not only concerned about the amount of traffic but also the speed in which they fly through the neighborhood. Therefore, anything that can be done to slow down/calm the traffic would be greatly appreciated and significantly add to the safety of the adults and children in the area. Thanks for supporting our concerns. Shannah and Doug Gillespie, 4115 Sunnyside Road. Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:48 AM To: 'Tommyleewilson3@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: AGAINST proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Tommyleewilson3@aol.com [mailto:Tommyleewilson3@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:32 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: AGAINST proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy To whom it may concern: I am against the proposed Traffic commission policy. It is a waste of our tax payer's efforts. Stop the action, now. Thank you. Tom Wilson 4519 Casco Avenue file://GAInfiustructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/16/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:49 AM To: 'Bernie Beaver' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy Draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Bernie Beaver [mailto:bbeaver@bhz.com] Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 9:30 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Steve Lillehaug; Wayne Houle Subject: Transportation Commission Policy Draft My compliments to the Commission for the excellent job in developing the policy. This is a difficult topic that is challenging and emotional as evidenced by the comments at the public hearing on Thursday. I have two suggestions that, I hope, you will find may improve the policy statement. 1. Add empirical evidence that supports the benefits to the community of providing for alternative methods of transportation. (See items 4 and 5 in the Roadway Design section [p. 2] and item 6 in the Roadway Function and Access section [p. 3]). If alternatives to the automobile are supported by the City, it increases the likelihood that people will use those options thus fewer vehicles on the roads. Intuition tells me that a small decrease in the number of vehicles on the road will have a dramatic impact on traffic congestion. Many people do not accept that statement and thus do not support options such as sidewalks, bike paths and mass transit options. Can the statement be supported by engineering studies or analysis? 2. Use broader terminology when referring to "crashes" as the criteria for evaluation the need for traffic calming or control devices, see item 5 in the Criteria section, page 15. The term "crashes" sounds very abstract and sounds like insurance company terminology for rating purposes. I suggest that a broader term such as "incidents" is more descriptive of the problems. Furthermore, I think most that would agree that an incident that involves a pedestrian is much more serious than a "fender bender" and should not be rated the same when evaluating a need. Bernie file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Comniission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/16/2004 Page 2 of 2 Bernie H. Beaver Boulay, Heutmaker, Zibell & Co P.L.L.P. 7500 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite 800 Minneapolis, MN 55344 Direct dial: (952) 893-3803 Fax: (952) 835-7296 "Helping you get there..." This message (including any attachments) is confidential and intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondanee\2004 C... 12/16/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:50 AM To: Idack@dack.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: yes to the Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: dack@dack.com [mailto:dack@dack.com] Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 4:00 PM To: Steve Lillehaug; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: yes to the Edina Traffic Commission Policy Hi. Just wanted to offer our support to the Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Traffic issues in Country Club will *need* to be addressed at some time in the future, and it's important to have a framework for dealing with them. Thanks. Dack Ragus & Jen Klise 4614 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:50 AM To: 'sdkliner@earthlink.net' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: sdkliner@earthlink.net [mailto:sdkliner@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 12:34 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Cc: rwebb3@nnn.rr.com Subject: traffic policy I am writing to express my support for the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Unfortunately I was traveling last week and unable to attend the meeting on the 9th to express my support in person. As a 20+ year resident of Edina we have seen many changes with traffic over the years, some good and some not so good. The proposed Policy is long overdue and I commend the Commission on its work. Hopefully the Commission members, after having worked over a year on formulating and drafting a well thought out policy, are not swayed by a small number, but extremely vocal, opponents of it. Regards. Richard Kliner sdkliner@earthlink.net file://G. \Infrastructure\ Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:52 AM To: 'benandjudy@mindspring.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 8:08 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: Ben and Judy [mailto:benandjudy@mindspring.com] Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 2:43 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft I support the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Cut-through traffic on Arden Avenue is a real problem. There are lots of families with young children who live on Arden. Non-residents cut-through Arden, disregarding traffic signs and speed limits, and create a dangerous situation. Thank you for your consideration. Judy Randall 4906 Arden Ave. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:53 AM To: trkengel@mnsr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 vvww.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 8:10 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: rkrengel imailto:rkrengel@mn.mcom] Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 10:08 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft To the members of the Traffic Commission, A big thank you for taking on the tremendous task of traffic and finding solutions for the City of Edina. I admire your volunteering for such a huge task. The documents have been read and analyzed. There are some good points arrived at calming traffic problem areas and some items have not been addressed fully in my opinion. One item which I thought more study and discussion would be the arterial and collector streets. What was noticeable was most calming solutions were not applicable to arterial and collector streets which I could see would not apply or could not be applicable. I thought there would be more proactive discussions and solutions applicable to arterial and collector streets namely more patrolling and enforcement of speed limits. As I suggested in one of your earlier meetings, I thought it might be wise to have resident involvement with local area meetings to get input prior to submitting a policy. But for 11 months, you have been rather busy. I would like to suggest a postponement or delay of the enactment of the traffic policy. Reason being more people are busy with holiday season right now, there are a lot of holiday parties scheduled for the nights of the open meetings and residents are paying little attention much the same as the City Budget received attention. I sent a note to Jennifer to have the Traffic Open meeting put on the City Calendar as it was not posted much the same as the Budget meeting was not on the calendar.. After the first of the year, more advanced notification to the citizens with possible two meetings for discussion might be in order. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Page 2 of 2 Thank you in advance for acknowledging my request and hopefully my thoughts will provide input into your discussion and decision. Thank you, Bob Krengel 405 Blake Road S. Edina, MN 55343 952-936-9358 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Transportation Policy Draft Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:55 AM To: 'kwille@briggs.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Policy Draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 8:10 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Policy Draft Original Message From: Wille, Karin L. [mailto:KWille@Briggs.comi Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 5:11 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Policy Draft Dear ETC, I was unable to attend the open house last night and have given the draft Policy only a cursory review. I live at 4701 Meadow Road, and would like to get my "two cents" in about the unique situation of those of us who own property on Meadow Road between 47th and 48th Streets. As you probably know, Meadow Road is a lovely street in White Oaks. Although some of the houses on my block are small, they are all well maintained. Most of us are active in the White Oaks Neighborhood Association and take great pride in our neighborhood. All of our back yards "front" on France Avenue. In the nearly 7 years since I purchased my home, the biggest downside and disappointment to living in Edina has been the increasing traffice on France. The noise and pollution from cars, trucks and busses significantly diminishes my enjoyment of my home during the summer months (not to mention the difficulty of making a left hand turn onto France from 47th). Despite my (new) six foot fence and several trees in the yard, the noise is so bad I hear it on the patio, the deck and even in the house. In fact, as I write this with my storms pulled down and the windows locked, I can hear the busses even now. I recognize that development at 50th and France has increased significantly over the last 7 years - the Standard station was still on the corner when I moved in. I assume the city has benefitted from increased tax revenue due to that development. However, I see no comcomitant recognition of the file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Transportation Policy Draft Page 2 of 2 downside to me in the assessed value of my home, which has continued to rise significantly. I was pleased to see, the Roadway Design section of the draft Transportation Policy, recommendations 6 and 7, which focus on the use of adequate buffers to mitigate the undesirable impact of high volume roadways, and the use of sound mitigating features along residential development adjacent to high volume roadways. I spoke to Wayne Houle about my concerns about the traffic noise in the summer of 2003. He indicated a noise barrier might be possible but that I would have to get consensus among my neighbors and that the cost of the barrier would be assessed back to the property owners. That seems unreasonable, in view of the fact that all of Edina benefits from the development at 50th and France. Those of us who purchased property on Meadow before France became the new Highway 100 shouldn't have to bear the entire financial burden of making our property more liveable. I have also noted that much of the property on the Minneapolis side of France is rental, further supporting my theory that the traffic really impacts quality of life. Finally, I have concerns about the "cut-through" traffic from 50th to Maple. While a lot of those people zoom out 48th, many also come around the meadow and out 47th. Obviously, everyone is trying to avoid going through 50th and France. However, the net result for me is traffic assault on three sides (Meadown, 47th and France). This traffic doesn't bother me (yet) as much as the traffic on France, but I'm guessing it will get worse over time. So I'm glad you're looking at these issues - from my perspective, the sooner the better. I hope some relief for the Meadow Road homeowners will be high on the list. Please let me know if I can provide further information. Sincerely, Karin Wille CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail communication and any attached documentation may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s). It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized person. The use, distribution, transmittal or re-transmittal by an unintended recipient of this communication is strictly prohibited without our express approval in writing or by e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please delete it from your system without copying it and notify the above sender so that our e-mail address may be corrected. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client or work-product privilege. This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. (http://www.messagelabs.com) file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Cornmission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 9:00 AM To: 'josh.simpson@mw.bbdo.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Regarding traffic policies Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 8:39 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Regarding traffic policies Original Message From: Simpson, Josh [mailto:Josh.Simpson@mw.bbdo.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:15 PM To: Wayne Houle Cc: simpsonfamille@juno.com Subject: Regarding traffic policies To whom it may concern, My name is Josh Simpson and I live at 4229 W. 441h St. (the SW corner of 44th St. and Wooddale Ave.). I've just been made aware of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Policy (NTMP) set forth by the Edina Transportation Commission. It is my understanding that this policy both 1. prevents residents from receiving sufficient notice regarding traffic-calming issues and 2. limits the opportunity for residents to voice their opposition to any measures. This evening my wife will attend a council session regarding this issue. It goes without saying that we are and will remain intolerant of any traffic calming measures which divert traffic flow from the "Country Club" neighborhood at the expense of the "Morningside" neighborhood. I would be grateful if you acknowledge the receipt of this message and share any comments. Thank you for your attention. Regards, Josh Simpson Edina Resident 4229 W. 44th St. josh.simpsonebbdo.com file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 Page 2 of 2 612-371-2315 This message and any attachments contain information, which may be confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please refrain from any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information. Please be aware that such actions are prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, kindly notify us by calling 1- 800-262-4723 or e-mail to helpdesk@bbdo.com. We appreciate your cooperation. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/15/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 9:01 AM To: iloub0005@umn.edui Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic issues Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 4:29 PM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: traffic issues Original Message From: Kristine Ann N Loubert [mailto:loub0005@umn.edu) Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 4:27 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: traffic issues edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us <edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us> edinamail@ci.edinI just found out that the transportation commission had a public meeting about traffic issues. Since I heard about the meeting after the fact I wanted to take the opportunity to write about some issues that are important to me. I live on 70th street and Cornelia Drive. The traffic speed and volume have increased in the ten years that I have lived there. I want to remind the commission that while 70th and Cornelia are both "through streets" they are also residential. I know people that tell me they use 70th Street because it is faster than taking 494 or 62 to get to France a.mn.us <edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us>I just found out that the transportation commission had a public meeting about traffic issues. Since I heard about the meeting after the fact I wanted to take the opportunity to write about some issues that are important to me. I live on 70th street and Cornelia Drive. The traffic speed and volume have increased in the ten years that I have lived there. I want to remind the commission that while 70th and Cornelia are both "through streets" they are also residential. I know people that tell me they use 70th Street because it is faster than taking 494 or 62 to get to France Avenue. 70th Street should not be faster than the freeway! I, like many of my neighbors, have improved my property and like my home in Edina. We need, however, to have some traffic calming especially on 70th Street. A "through" street does not need to become a highway. It is also frustrating that so few streets are "through streets" in Edina. If more streets were open AND controlled (stop signs, calming strategies) it could be safer and quieter for more residents, not to mention a bit easier to get around. Too few streets to continually handle more cars is not smart nor safe. Some suggestions/issues: -Put a stop sign at one of the intersections between Hiway 100 and Cornelia Drive. -Put a stop sign at one of the intersections between Cornelia Drive and France Avenue. -Put photo control at 70 and Cornelia to catch all the folks that run the red lights (many--I would know) -Take the stop lights out at 70th and Cornelia and put in Stop signs. Put warning signs of upcoming stop signs. -When 70th Street is repaired or resurfaced replace it with a quieter surface and no seams. Again the street runs through a residential neighborhood. We need noise reduction and speed reduction for calm and for safety. -Very loud CD or radios in cars -- I hear them through closed home windows! Edina is a lovely place to live. I have put a lot of money into my property upgrading and maintaining it. I want to keep my property value at a high level like everyone else in Edina. If the traffic problems aren't addressed and changed I will be hurt in terms of my quality of life and financially. I would appreciate being notified of any future meetings. I would like to know if my ideas have merit and support. Thank you. Kristine Loubert 952-920-6548 4301 W. 70th Street Edina, MN 55435 y F-2 /7th 4r7-u 79IP .-61t)---01/bd- L44/21 b-'t .t/ ra,,_ „d- 1771".011AV //t I -7/1r71172'U-' i/Q-Z-Zy 1,11 ,hz) ry34//, zu2., 1/(17-(i- jh z /2 1Y /1J C L--//- '7,-e• , 5_/>-92-/- 40e4} (21 c -7/Le,/ CL/ ri7ct,L, /1i-/-171 1---k- c / k7ze7-e-1-, 7Wy?"4,eJ- .//-d-- t4L itivtt 4(5; 7V-e_ (eft fd_y- •=.17 (P-L — i I j er '77Z-Z-aj,e!_i_ •C -"LL.' _>___/'79L) _T-11:1L/-/-(1,- C(8( 1-11- ..-2-z-/- 7---z a ' Z-1 -1721_7 , Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:08 AM To: 'esyday@ix.netcom.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, just to clarify, according to the City boundaries at my disposal, your address of residency is St. Louis Park - not Edina or both as you listed. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 7:51 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Policy Original Message From: Yesnes David [mailto:esyday@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 10:07 PM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Transportation Policy I would just like to advise you, we have sent a hard copy of the attached letter to the Edina Transportation Committee, the Edina City Council and the Edina Engineering Department. Sincerely, Lori J Larson and David A Yesnes 4379 Wooddale Ave. St.Louis Park/Edina, MN 55424 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 Sincerely, Lori Larson and David Yesnes 4379 Wooddale Ave. St. Louis Park/Edina, NM 55424 December 20, 2004 To: The Edina Transportation Committee The Edina City Council Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want an "Impacted Area" increased for all purposes, including public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as Impacted. I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. ‘..- I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:54 AM To: 'meg kruse 2' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: meg kruse 2 [mailto:mkruse2@mn.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 12:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic policy I am for the proposed traffic policy. Meg Kruse -Edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:55 AM To: 'Joanne Patterson' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: traffic again Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Joanne Patterson [mailtolccp@usinternet.com] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 12:49 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: traffic again My name is Joanne Patterson and I live at the corner of Sunnyside and Wooddale in the Country Club neighborhood. I am writing this letter after having read the article in the Sun Current about the traffic meeting. I am frustrated, disappointed and saddened by the hostility that surrounds the issue of cut- through traffic in the Country Club neighborhood. I feel like the city and my neighborhood in particular are being held hostage by the Morningside neighborhood. We all live in the same area - why can't there be a solution for all areas? I believe that any traffic calming measures that may be suggested for the Country Club neighborhood will be continually shut down by Joni Bennett and her group. Obvioulsy there needs to be discussion and compromises from both neighborhoods but I don't know if that is possible with the Morningside neighborhood. But to do nothing about the cut-through traffic which is dangerous, unhealthy, etc. (you've heard it all before) seems wrong. And I completely disagree with any comments or opinions from non-residents about cut-through traffic - it is not their right to dictate what happens on my street or in my neighborhood. I think the City Council needs to be aware of the suspicion and hostility that is continually generated by the Morningside Neighborhood Association and Joni Bennet. The following is an e-mail that has been circulated throughout the Morningside Neighborhood Association: Here is one example of relevant portions of an e-mail being circulated in Morningside: The entire focus of the policy is a neighborhood -by - neighborhood approach. I sounds good in theory, but doesn't the entire city need to be evaluated and involved, doesn't every nieghborhood count. One neighborhood gets most of the attention and public money. One conunisioner said, "We need to be the ones to solve country club's traffic issues." ... Most importantly, County Club starts restructuring their streets this spring. It is on the road construction calendar. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 Page 2 of 2 With this timeline, it makes me wonder who is in such a rush? Why? What can you do? First, come December 9th. If you can not make it, find others that can. Remember this summer? Second, if the traffic commission doesn't alter their policy. Phone your City Council members. Mike Kelly was clearly antagonistic to our concerns this summer, and he is vacating his seat soon. Housh and Hovland live in Country Club. Metzold is also vacating his seat. Macisca was helpful this summer and with our help was re-elected! We also need to get other Edina residents involved, they deserve to be heard about their traffic concerns and demand accountabliity for how public money spent. As long as it is Morningside versus Country Club, we all lose. Third, write letters to the editor. We can not get too much press invloved in this matter. Fourth, please forward this to anyone who will use it wisely. Country Club has a secret website that is password protected and they did publish our 44th and France flyer on it. We have nothing to hide, we want full disclosure from all parties involved and to work together to benefit all Edina residents. And in regards to the Country Club "secret" website - the website is password protected because we have listed over 20 babysitters i.e. young girls with phone numbers and addresses that no parent in their right mind would allow to post on any website unless there was protection. I would be glad to show any council member our website using my password. Thank you for your time. Joanne Patterson file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lifiehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:02 AM To: 'injones3@mn.rr.comi Cc: Steve Lifiehaug Subject: RE: traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 wvvw.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 7:50 AM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: traffic Original Message From: Marcia Jones [mailto:mjones3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 5:09 PM To: Wayne Houle Subject: traffic We have lived at 4709 W.44th Street since 1981 and for those 23 years have made numerous trips through the Country Club area. I noticed this past week as I drove to the bank that I did not see one single speed limit sign. I even drove up and down most of the streets on the return trip looking for one. Perhaps the public needs more reminders about the speeds allowed on our city streets. My suggestion is to post numerous speed signs (also paint it on the streets) and then enforce the limit. It would not take many tickets for drivers to take notice. I think setting the speed limit at 25 mph on the Country Club streets would make them less attractive for people out of the area to cut through. ...and perhaps the same tactic could be used on 44th Street to slow the traffic. Marcia Jones 922-2502 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:10 AM To: 'dmdegrood@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Country Club traffic Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: DMdeGrood@aol.com (mailto:DMdeGrood@aol.com) Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:33 AM To: Wayne Houle; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club traffic Dear Mr. Houle and all other persons on this committee, My name is Michaelanne deGrood abd I live at 4315 Wooddale Ave. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. To close streets so some of my neighbors have fewer cars driving in front of their homes will only increase the traffic for my other neighbors. I have three small children that wait for the schoolbus at the corner of 44th Street and Wooddale Ave. Day after day I stand at the corner watching people disobeying the traffic laws. Very few people actually stop at the stop sign and many do not obey the speed limit. For the traffic to double on 44th Street only puts those children at risk for being hurt. We have all chosen to live in the city--with the conveniences of city living comes traffic. If we would all drive repspectfully--there wouldn't be as much of a problem. Thank you. Michaelanne deGrood 952-926-5313 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:20 AM To: 'dmdegrood@aol.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: New Traffic Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Also, your comments are geared towards one neighborhood as you indicate. Please feel free to view the draft policy at the following website: http://ci.edina.mn.us/Pages/L5-63_TransportationCommissionPolicy.htm As you suggest, you are commenting on the "New Traffic Policy". No where in the policy does it mention specific areas or neighborhoods in Edina nor does it mention any specific plans or proposals of traffic calming for any area in Edina at this time. The DRAFT policy is a framework to address calming in the Community as a whole. You suggest that "...this needs to be rethought. Possibly speed bumps;" Please review the DRAFT policy as the DRAFT policy currently includes devices as you suggest. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: DMdeGrood@aol.com [mailto:DMdeGrood@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 8:42 AM To: Wayne Houle; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: New Traffic Policy Dear Mr. Houle and the Traffic Commission, I don't believe that there is a traffic problem within the Country Club neighborhood. There are more than 1,000 cars in Country Club alone--making various trips many times a day. The "cut through" traffic that they perceive are their neighbors. People that live in the Morningside, Browndale and South Harriet Park neighborhoods need to be able to travel north and south. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. 44th Street cannot handle its traffic to be doubled. Is it right to force neighborhoods against each other? I think that this needs to be rethought. Possibly speed bumps? Thank you. Doug deGrood, 4315 Wooddale Ave., 926-5313 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:31 AM To: 'ddegrood@always-thinking.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Traffic Proposal Good morning Mr. deGrood. Thank you for your additional comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. You are eluding that streets will be closed in your neighborhood. As I previously indicated to you, there are no traffic calming measures proposed for the Country Club neighborhood - especially no plans to close any streets in your area. Additionally, I request you indicate where you are obtaining this misinformation so I can help you and others understand the true intent and framework of the DRAFT policy and clear the air of all misinformation that helps no one. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Wayne Houle Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 8:33 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Traffic Proposal Original Message From: Doug D [mailto:ddegrood@always-thinking.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 6:40 PM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Traffic Proposal Mr. Houle, Let this e-mail serve as notice that I am opposed to the traffic calming measures proposed for the Country Club area of Edina. I live one block north of Country Club on Wooddale. Not only would be the measures present a hardship for me personally (as I would have to drive significantly farther to go south to 50th street), but it would also add greatly to the traffic on our already busy street. The simple fact is, we already experience much more through traffic than the folks in Country Club. file://G:\Infi-astructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 Page 2 ot 2 I understand their concern. As I've already pointed out, it's a concern that I share as well. However, it is my opinion, the proposed plan benefits too few to the detriment of too many. Respectfully, Doug deGrood 4315 Wooddale Ave. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/22/2004 mpson Edina Resident 4229 W. 44th S iosh.simps n@bbdo.com —812-571-2315 December 20, 2004 Wayne Houle Edina Engineering and Public Works Department 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Wayne, My name is Josh Simpson and I live at 4229 W. 44th St. in Edina (the SE corner of 44th St. and Wooddale Ave.). I've just been made aware of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Policy (NTMP) set forth by the Edina Transportation Commission. It is my understanding that this policy both 1. prevents residents from receiving sufficient notice regarding traffic-calming issues and 2. limits the opportunity for residents to voice their opposition to any measures. My wife attended the council session regarding this issue. It goes without saying that we are and will remain intolerant of any traffic calming measures which divert traffic flow from the "Country Club" neighborhood at the expense of the "Morningside" neighborhood. Our neighborhood group discussed this situation. For the record we are opposed to: - I'm opposed to the current draft of the Transportation policy - I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control - I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. - I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets - I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by access limitation - I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" expanded for all purposes, including public hearings, so it includes ALL residents who reasonably would be self-defined as impacted. - I want at least a 70% threshold of support/opposition for a project to be advanced or defeated - I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Thank you for your attention. Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:04 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Please say NO From: Tommyleewilson3@aol.com [mailto:Tommyleewilson3@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:36 PM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: Please say NO I've been out of town this week, and was not able to attend the meeting. I am against the proposed Traffic commission policy. It is a waste of our tax payer's efforts. Stop the action, now. Thank you. Tom Wilson 4519 Casco Avenue file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 RE: CCNA meeting Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:06 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: CCNA meeting Rob and all, I'll be in Duluth this weekend for a hockey tournament. Depending on the Win/Loss record, I may be back early or late Sunday (possibility missing the meeting). In case I miss the meeting. In regards to the Welcome letter, overall very nice. My suggestion is to lead off with a true welcome paragraph. Something like, "Welcome and congratulations in moving into one of the nicest/friendliest/etc. neighborhoods in the metro area. We love it here, and think you will too " In regards to the traffic, my contacts and neighbors' initial review is negative about the ETC proposal. My read lends to many questions--namely trying to understand the definition of impacted area. It is used several times, but the definition seems to change from section to section. An example, top of page 12, in regards to petition-to-study, defines "impacted". On the same page, in the Plan Development section, "survey-to-test", "impacted area" is used; but then in the last paragraph, the survey-to-test includes a different definition. From my involvement in the traffic committee in the early 2000's, we learned that narrowing the scope caused lots of resentment. It appears this proposal leads down the same path. Hope to see everyone Sunday. David B. Farmer 4612 Casco Ave file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transnortation Commission\Corresnondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:07 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Original Message From: Rcj4502@aol.com [mailto:Rcj4502@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:50 AM To: CCNA Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Ron- Thanks for your informative emails. With regard to Traffic Policy, I don't really see anything wrong with the policy and procedures, but I am probably not in favor of any of the proposed "traffic calming" methods for our neighborhood. I will oppose any solution that restricts my travel, specifically ingress or egress, from the neigborhood. Ultimately, the cause and solution to the cut-through traffic problem is Hwy 100. I think any efforts to get the proposed widening of Hwy 100 in St Louis Park accelerated so that it occurs prior to the Hwy 62/135 exchange rather than after would be a huge improvement. Ron Erhard should be leading the charge on this. Any other approach is a band-aid with significant trade-offs in mobility and general quality of life in our neighborhood. We would just be pushing the problem onto another neighborhood. There is simply not enough capacity because of the Hwy 100 bottleneck in SLP and drivers will avoid it. Thanks again for providing this useful forum. Roger Jones 4502 Drexel From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:08 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: traffic Original Message From: Shannah Gillespie (mailto:shannahgillespiegearthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 5:32 PM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: traffic My wife and I would like to voice our support for the traffic commission and its efforts that would hopefully result in the calming of the traffic in the country club area. We live on Sunnyside Road which carries a huge amount of the traffic that should be on 50th street. We are not only concerned about the amount of traffic but also the speed in which they fly through the neighborhood. Therefore, anything that can be done to slow down/calm the traffic would be greatly appreciated and significantly add to the safety of the adults and children in the area. Thanks for supporting our concerns. Shannah and Doug Gillespie, 4115 Sunnyside Road. Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:09 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: Heather Dexheimer [mailto:hdexheimer@visi.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:05 PM To: 'CCNA' Cc: 'Karl Dexheimer' Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Hi Rob, We (Heather and Karl Dexheimer at 4619 (Drexel Ave) are in favor of the Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Please let us know if there is anything that we can do to help outl We are very much in favor of finding traffic solutions in our neighborhood! Heather and Karl Dexheimer 4619 Drexel Avenue 952-922-2583 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffie\Transportation CommissionTorrespondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:12 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: CiscoandClint@aol.com [mailto:CiscoandClint@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:11 AM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Rob, Thanks for being a great steward to the neighborhood. We cannot attend tonight's' meeting regarding the traffic policy. I agree that we need to pass or vote in favor of creating a policy that addresses the needs to abate traffic issues in Edina. Selfishly, I hope we can quickly address the "cut through traffic" in our own neighborhood. In principal therefore, I vote in favor of a policy. What I want the commission to reconsider is the process through which a neighborhood undertakes to have a study completed, approved, and implemented. The one outlined in the October 2004 draft of the TCP has far too much red tape. It will take years to implement any abatement requests. There needs to be a more streamlined approach so in its current form, I do not approve the draft policy as of October 2004. I sent an e-mail to Steve Lillehaug regarding a simple fix in our neighborhood -- install speed bumps so that cut through traffic at least is slowed down -- unfortunately, it is not diverted to other streets. I do not think that the city or even neighbors will all agree on diverting traffic to other streets or shutting off certain streets in or around the Country club area that have historically been "cut through" streets. I believe that we as a neighborhood should have the ability (sovereignty) to come together and take measures (like speed bumps or some other idea(s)), that we can implement fairly quickly without the TCP red tape. Let me know if you need us to sign anything. Our street in particular is dangerous at the rush hour. Dan Delianedis 4624 Drexel Avenue file:11G:\Infrastructure\Streets\trafficUransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:13 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: Jim Maciej [mailtolvm@mn.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 4:09 PM To: Rob Webb Cc: slillehaug@cLedinann.us Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Robb, Having reviewed the draft October, 2004 City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy, I am sending you this message in support of the document. Though I have some concerns about certain aspects of the report, I my wife and I approve of what the commission has proposed. Traffic in the County club neighborhood is bad and is getting worse, so something needs to be done.. .sooner than later. The commission has done a very through job in its work and members are to be congratulated for their efforts on behalf of the city.. .and making it a better place to live and do business. And, thanks to you, Robb, for getting word out concerning the report. We have a bad traffic situation in Edina due in large part to the fact that a huge bottleneck remains on Highway 100 from 36th in St Louis Park to 1-394. Until that segment is rebuilt, we will suffer from inordinate amounts of traffic coming into the Country Club neighborhood. We should all be putting more pressure on the state to redo the segment ASAP...maybe from unallocated MOOT funds. After all, we have allies in the governor's office, the It. governor is sympathetic to the SW metro area (and she heads MDOT ) and Representative Ron Erhart heads the Transportation Committee. Every day frustrated drivers exit Highway 100 to cut across the neighborhood because this bottleneck exists. Finally, a system of "gentle" speed bumps does wonders to slow traffic. Minneapolis uses both the gentle and "hard" speed bumps to slow traffic, with good results, I believe. This might be an inexpensive way to deal with slowing and possibly reducing traffic flow through the neighborhoods of Edina. Jim Maciej 4630 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 I 952-922-9240 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:14 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Statement in Support of Traffic Commission Policy From: Lynn Geesaman [mailto:Lgeesaman@visi.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 9:24 AM To: CCNA Webb Subject: Statement in Support of Traffic Commission Policy To: R. Webb From: Don Geesaman Re: Statement in Support of Traffic Commission Policy Thank you for another wondrously clear and helpful description (12/5). In the context of what you say, I would summarize my position as follows: 1) For over 10 years the Country Club neighborhood has had a manifestly obvious traffic problem of ever-increasing severity. 2) For whatever reason, the City has been notably and provenly ineffective in dealing with this problem. 3) While the Traffic Commission proposal seems to me to be a poor and awkward substitute for common sense, if it contains what the City needs for effective action, then I support it whole heartedly. Finally, because I have severely impaired hearing, I do not attend public meetings, so I appreciate your willingness to aggregate and share viewpoints with the commission. file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:16 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: From: Douglas Gervais [mailto:DGERVAIS@mn.rr.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 4:44 PM To: The Webbs Subject: We are supportive of the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Douglas and Lisa Gervais 4514 Drexel Ave file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: Tanya Kovacik [mailto:tank@mn.mcom] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:42 AM To: CCNA Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thanks again for the update. On the whole, I would say that I am for the policy, especially if it can move us ahead in taking some concrete action. My questions were geared towards clarification so that when it came down for writing our proposal we would understand the key drivers and could move it ahead as quickly as possible. -Tanya Kovacik 4507 Drexel Avenue file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Original Message From: Angela Decubas [mailto:a-decubas@bethel.edu] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:09 AM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: Rob, We wish to lend our support for the proposed Edina Traffic Commission Policy. Luis and Angela DeCubas 4512 Drexel Ave Edina, MN 55424 Thank you traffic issue Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mnxr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:18 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: traffic issue From: Pat Conlin [mailto:PConlin@Milestoneusa.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:17 AM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: traffic issue Rob Thank you for the update. I am for the proposed traffic policy. Pat Conlin 4629 Drexel Edina file://GAInfrastnicture\Streets\trafficUransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:19 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: I am in favor of the Edina traffic policy We strongly support it! Sincerely, Tammy and Marty Miller 4527 Drexel Avenue Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mnincom] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:20 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Traffic Policy From: Randy and Chrissy Harrison [mailto:Charrison1@mn.mcom] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 2:01 PM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: Traffic Policy Rob, Randy and Chrissy Harrison agree with the traffic policy. Regards, Randy Harrison 4631 Arden Avenue file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:22 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I guess I don't have any real issue with the policy per se. My questions are more specific. We see cars zipping along Edina Blvd. at 40+ mph. Do you know how to ask for an assessment of speed bumps on each end of the street? Thanks, the Malmquists 4614 Edina Boulevard Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy comments and questions Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:23 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy comments and questions We certainly support the basic tenants of the policy and would like to assume that this methodology was already in use in our city. Don't spend money, (The taxpayers) if not needed, on more committees. Is there some kind of a cap on spending in the proposal and will the policy plans have any deadlines. Open ended planning can get nowhere, as we are all aware. Gaius and Ann Slosser - hoping to stay retired at 4602 Browndale, Edina file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Connnission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mnsr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:25 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis [mailto:Brian.Fogelberg@cbre.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 10:41 AM To: 'CCNA' Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Rob: Please forward this email to the City that we fully support the traffic policy and feel it is imperative that it passes. Thank You. Brian Fogelberg 4632 Bruce Avenue file://G:\Infrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\CoiTespondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:26 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy The policy works for me. Kitty O'Dea 4610 Bruce Avenue Edina Traffic Commission Policy Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:29 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: Willie Eden [mailto:willie_th@yahoo.corn] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 12:34 PM To: 'CCNA' Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I am for the policy as you outlined before. However, I am in no way in favor of anything that resembles the proposal of three years ago which would have made getting in and out of the area hard for residents. Willie Eden 4501 Browndale Avenue file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:31 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Original Message From: Scott Taylor [mailto:Scott.Taylor@sctc.mnscu.edu] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 9:13 PM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Hi, I think the procedure looks AOK. Scott Taylor 4528 Casco Avenue From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:32 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Original Message From: ralph herda [mailto:rherda@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 9:08 PM To: CCNA Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Rob, I assume the members of the commission did a thorough job so since they support it I support it. However, 3 serious concerns 1. It sounds like a long administrative process, they need faster deadlines for action. 1 yr to pilot, 2 yrs to solve? 2. Landuse reviews by traffic happen 'at the request of the planning commission', rather than 'landuse reviews are done by both planning AND traffic'. Left hand and right hand need to work together. Look at development of France/50, also new library/center/apartments all of which compounded 50th issues, also CC cutthroughs, and should have been considered when building density increased, its late now. 3. Scoring is flawed, remove sidewalks question. If you have them, you don't have a volume or speed problem? Not true. Also, sidewalks are paid for by the neighborhood so if you choose to do that, you shouldn't drop in priority of city traffic planning. THIS IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM OF THE 3. It will also knock down any requests from CC. Thanks for asking. Ralph Herda 4501 Drexel Avenue Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mnsr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:32 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: db [mailto:dbearm@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 6:50 AM To: CCNA Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy We support the policy. Diana and Paul Bearmon 4526 Arden Ave. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:33 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Original Message From: The Hauckster (mailto:hauckster@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 4:07 PM To: CCNA Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy Thanks for passing along the links to the traffic policy. I think it is balanced and well thought out; I agree with most of its points. Gary Hauck 4625 Arden Avenue Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mnsr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:34 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: StakeFam@cs.com [mailto:StakeFam@cs.com] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 3:45 PM To: rwebb3@mn.rr.com Cc: jbstake@mmm.com Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy We are for the Traffic Commission Policy. Jim & Mimi Stake 4671 Edina Blvd file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 of 1 From: Rob Webb [rwebb3@mn.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 9:35 PM To: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Commission Policy From: MKEllingen@aol.com [mailto:MKEllingen@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 2:56 PM To: rwebb3@mn.mcom Subject: Re: Edina Traffic Commission Policy I support the traffic policy. Thanks. Mary Ellingen 4603 Wooddale Avenue file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 ot 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:32 AM To: ibillcoop@goldengate.nett Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:08 AM To: Isallison@ci.edina.nm.us' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy Original Message From: Bill Cooper [mailto:billcoop@goldengate.net] Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 2:26 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy To whom it may concern I am writing to voice my opinion on the proposed City of Edina Draft Transportation Commission Policy. In general I am appreciative of the time and energy you have all put into this project, yet I am also wholeheartedly in agreement with the majority of opinions voiced at the public meeting on December 6th. Specifically, I believe the policy as it currently stands is unacceptable for the following reasons: • The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". o Staff members and one public speaker noted that the follow up evaluation period would offer opportunity to involve those adversely affected, however political history is clear in it's view of these kinds of policies and procedures: policies and procedures designed to limit input before and offer redress after favor those with influence and silence those opposition. I consider policies and procedures like this to be unacceptable from my community leaders. • The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents). file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffierransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 2 ot 2 • The proposed policy promotes traffic calming measures for volume control (reduction of traffic on local streets by partial or full street closure). Most communities have either discontinued use of volume control because it diverts traffic to adjacent streets and neighborhoods; it interferes with access by emergency vehicles, and interferes with local travel on local streets. • The definition of "cut through" traffic needs to be reflective of that fact that every resident in Edina could claim this to be a traffic issue on their street. Further review should address what is considered "cut through" instead of the commonly implied ownership of streets in front of one's house. Any definition must apply equally to Morningside Road as it does to those in Country Club's main streets. • Lastly, I believe more time needs to be given for public comment on the proposed policy. file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:32 AM To: 'greg_fancher@us.ibm.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Edina Traffic Plan Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:11 AM To: Sharon Allison; Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Plan Original Message From: gregiancher@us.ibm.com [mailto:gregiancher@usibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 6:16 PM To: jzwilling@mnsun.com Cc: info@edinamorningside.org; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle Subject: Edina Traffic Plan In regards to the Edina Transportation Plan up for consideration, I would like to express my concern at the method to which this policy was devised and the potential negative impact to all residents of Edina. Issue: Full disclosure: There was no public notice of the public comment period or the availability of the draft policy for public review until Thursday, November 25th--Thanksgiving Day- almost one month after the public comment period opened. This gave the public very little time to learn about and respond before the "open house" on December 9th-the only meeting held to gather public comment before the policy is taken by the Commission to the Council for approval. Issue: Impact Area: The policy's definition of "impacted area" does not include residents who are negatively affected by traffic policies and changes. Notification and the "impacted radius" needs to include, for all purposes, all residents who reasonably self-define as "impacted". file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Conunission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 Page 2 of 2 The policy should specify a minimum of a 60%-70% threshold of support or opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated (and paid for by all Edina residents Issue: Methods under consideration to stem traffic flow: Simply put --- No policy which impacts one neighborhood for the benefit of another should be under consideration. A recent article by a resident printed in the Sun Current stated that this policy should be considered and that closures, and re- routes where measures which have been proven successful with other communities. Of course any closure would slow or stop traffic -- that's what the word closure means -- to stop a traffic flow. Interestingly enough, there is no follow up statement on what happened to surrounding neighborhoods. This traffic policy has become a tool of division within Edina, pitting neighbor against neighbor. Those that favor closure believe they will benefit, even if others suffer. I would like each person in favor of such a method to commit to all other residents that they will never cut through another's neighborhood for their own benefit. That means no cut through to 50th and France, no cut through to 44th and France, no cut through to St. Louis Park, no cut through to Linden Hills, no dropping off of children at Golden Years or Calvin Christian Schools, etc... -- all these require going through someone else's neighborhood after all. When seriously reviewed, our traffic needs monitoring and consideration of methods that will ensure law abidance to the use of public streets within a first ring city suburb. There is no issue with stop signs, speed bumps and traffic enforcement. Bring up the idea of closing streets and one can envision an elitist attitude of a "not in my neighborhood" mentality that goes against the grain of a caring, supportive community that wants access for all. I've lived in both the Country Club and Morningside neighborhoods over the past 15+ years and understand that most cars using the streets around my home(s) were and are from out of the neighborhood. Keep your speed within the legal limits, obey all traffic laws, give consideration to children and others when driving and WELCOME TO OUR CITY! Thank you, Greg Fancher 4247 Grimes Avenue, Edina, MN 55416 952-925-2204 GPFedina@msn.com file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffie\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/27/2004 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:40 AM To: 'crazidlo@mn.rr.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Country Club traffic proposals Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Currently, there are no proposals as you indicate. Public notification will occur with any future proposal being considered by the Transportation Commission as well as the City Council. Sincerely, Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Conrad Razidlo [mailto:crazidlo@mn.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:00 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Mark & Jeanne Razidlo Subject: Country Club traffic proposals I've been an Edina-Morningside resident for the past 37 years (30 years at 4237 Lynn and the past few years at 4622 France). I hear that Country Club residents are proposing that their neighborhood become a virtual gated community. They want residents in adjoining neighborhoods to drive AROUND the Country Club area to get to and from their homes while they in their travels would of course continue to drive THROUGH everyone else's neighborhoods in the metro area. Many of us feel that the proposal is blatantly elitist and if pursued will ignite an organized protest from hundreds of non-Country Club Edina residents. Meanwhile could you inform me regarding any future hearing or Council vote on this matter. Thank you, Conrad Razidlo, 4622 France Ave. So., Edina, MN 55410 (952)927-4199 crazidlo@mn.rr.com December 20, 2004 To: Edina Transportation Commissioners Cc: City Attorney, City Manager, and City Council Members Re: Personal communication distorted and entered as public comment The week before last, I sent an email to women in my neighborhood. My email outlined some of my concerns about the draft Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) Policy, encouraging them to get informed and involved. My email stemmed from a conversation in which several women asked to get more information about the ETC Policy. I sent the email as an individual citizen and not a representative member of any group. I was surprised to learn that an excerpt of my email was published in the public comment packet sent to ETC members. Apparently, my personal e-mail made it to city hall without my knowledge, effort or name. This was a misuse of my private correspondence that greatly concerns me. My email was not intended as public comment. If it had been, it would have been addressed to the ETC. Instead, it was addressed only to friends, with the option for them to forward it to others who would "use it wisely." The excerpt was not attributed to me. It appeared anonymously under the heading: Excerpts of emails being circulated in Morningside and dated December 8th. This mislabeling gives a false context for my email. I didn't send it out anonymously and I only sent it to a specific list of friends. Also, the excerpt comes from a single email, not multiple emails. A major portion of my email was not included in the excerpt. Why did the person who edited it leave out my concerns about closing streets and increasing response times for emergency services? If the intention was to inform the ETC, wouldn't that information have been important too? I don't know who forwarded my email to City staff, I don't know who edited my email and I don't know who made the decision to include it in the ETC packet. But by putting it in the ETC packet with no attributes—no indication of how it got there—and by disguising it as public comment when it was not, crosses the line. The action is at best unethical, and trespasses on my right to decide the time and place of my public comments. A copy of the full text of my original email is attached, along with a copy of the excerpted email as it was presented in the ETC public comment packet. I ask that whoever is responsible for placing my excerpted email in the ETC packet apologize to me in writing. If you have any questions, or would like to discuss this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Mary Carte 952-929-0247 Attachments: Full text of original email Copy of excerpted email as it appeared in ETC public comment packet From: To: dal11n111111.1.11111.111110 Sent Friday, December 03, 2004 10:16 PM Subject Edina Transportation Policy - 5:15 Dec 9 City Hall HORMIMONSMINOPMEMMIll At thellalM/ORMINEM I was asked to compose this e-mail. Sorry, you may receive it twice and let me know if you don't want to be included in the follow-up e-mail. My goal is to inform, not offend. The only public hearing on the Traffic Commission policy is this Thursday, December 9th at City Hall. It is called an Open House, and a representative from the MNA will be in the lobby starting at 5:15 with background information. The Open House is from 8-8, but will probably run longer. Here are some highlights: Joni Bennett is one of the commissioners and the only one opposed to the policy. The entire focus of the policy is a neighborhood -by - neighborhood approach. I sounds good in theory, but doesn't the entire city need to be evaluated and involved, doesn't every nieghborhood count. One neighborhood gets most of the attention and public money. One commisioner said, "We need to be the ones to solve country club's traffic issues." Most traffic policies have a basic percentage of agreement among affected residents before a change can be made. Generally, it is 60 to 70%, this policy has none. The policy controls the number of residents impacted and if they have the right to be involved at all. A survey of different types of traffic calming devices was sent to emergency services, planning, engineering and public works. They could resond thumbs up, down or nuetral. One device that got 4 thumbs down was street closings. When it was suggested that this option be elimentated from the policy, since it was clearly not in anyone's best interest, that idea was rejected. You will not find those survey results anywhere in the policy. When seconds count, who in Edina wants to to cause another resident to have longer emergency response times? Street closures, and controlled access roads will cause this to happen. Why is this urgent? First, December 9th is the only public hearing on this matter. Officially, the public comment period started in late October, though the document wasn't available on-line until late November. The first mention of it in the sun- current was Thanksgiving Day. Second, it will be taken to City Council in January for final approval. 414001-14 Third, applications for consideration are due in early February. Most importantly, County Club starts restructuring their streets this spring. It is on the road construction calendar. With this timeline, it makes me wonder who is in such a rush? Why? What can you do? First, come December 9th. If you can not make it, find others that can. Remember this summer? Second, if the traffic commission doesn't alter their policy. Phone your City Council members. Mike Kelly was clearly antagonistic to our concerns this summer, and he is vacating his seat soon. Housh and Hovland live in Country Club. Metzold is also vacating his seat. Macisca was helpful this summer and with our help was re- elected! We also need to get other Edina residents involved, they deserve to be heard about their traffic concerns and demand accountability for how public money spent As long as it is Momingside versus Country Club, we all lose. Third, write letters to the editor. We can not get too much press invloved in this matter. Fourth, please forward this to anyone who will use it wisely. Country Club has a secret website that is password protected and they did publish our 44th and France flyer on it. We have nothing tojii0A—rs„wmt,Lull cii§g.lommre from all all parties involved and to work together to benefit all Edina residents. Next e-mail will have City Council meeting date and their contact information. 1?€Ce Ned ,(9/0Lf Date: December 8, 2004 RE: Excerpt of emails being circulated in Morningside The entire focus of the policy is a neighborhood-by-neighborhood approach. It sounds good in theory, but doesn't the entire city need to be evaluated and involved, doesn't every neighborhood count. One neighborhood gets most of the attention and public money. One commissioner said, "We need to be the ones to solve Country Club's traffic issues." Most importantly, Country Club starts restructuring their streets this spring. It is on the road construction calendar. With this timeline, it makes me wonder who is in such a rush? Why? What can you do? First, come December 9th. If you cannot make it, find others that can. Remember this summer? Second, if the traffic commission doesn't alter their policy, phone your city council members. Mike Kelly was clearly antagonistic to our concerns this summer, and he is vacating his seat soon. Housh and Hovland live in Country Club. Maetzold is also vacating his seat. Macisca was helpful this summer and with our help was re-elected! We also need to get other Edina residents involved, they deserve to be heard about their traffic concerns and demand accountability for how public money is spent. As long as it is Morningside versus Country Club, we all lose. Third, write letters to the editor. We cannot get too much press involved in this matter. Fourth, please forward this to anyone who will use it wisely. Country Club has a website that is password protected and they did publish our 44th and France flyer on it. We have nothing to hide, we want full disclosure from all parties involved and to work together to benefit all Edina residents. Next e-mail will have City Council meeting date and their contact information. To: The Edina Transportation Committee Re: Proposed Policy Dear Committee Members: Thank you for your hard work on the proposed Transportation Policy. I have spent hours reading it thoroughly and more hours typing these suggestions. Please consider them carefully. I know it is long but I have put forth a considerable effort. Please respect that effort and read the entire report. Thank you. Considering how volatile this issue is, you need to reassure people that the ETC and City Council will base decisions only on facts, not perception. This is easy to do. When dealing with traffic you are dealing with volume & speed issues. These are numbers and numbers are facts.. The City already has numbers relating to volume & speed on streets that they've gathered over the years. This information MUST be made readily available to the citizens in order to keep emotions in check. By seeing the numbers, everyone will start with the same factual reference points when discussing traffic concerns. Put that information on the web in an easily read chart. Also, you refer to many City codes in your report. Again, put those codes on the web, or in the appendix of the report, so people can reference them. I believe it is important for government to be accessible to the average citizen. For this to happen, policies need to be written so that people can easily understand them. With that in mind I recommend the following changes in wording, and/or sentence structure. Also, I believe more words should be included in the Glossary. Clearly defining terms in the glossary will go a long way toward convincing people that policy will be based on facts rather than a few people's perceptions. 1. On page 2, in the Introduction, the 2" sentence begins... "The purpose of this policy is...,, It is unclear if you are referring to ETC's proposed policy that the reader is about to read, or if you are referring to the Edina Transportation Plan. 2. On page 2, in the rd paragraph, the sentence, "The City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy 'implements' the purposes & objectives of the ETC....." It is unclear to me what you mean by "implements". Perhaps you could use a different word. Also, you refer to "Section 1225 of the City Code". I believe it would be helpful to understanding your policy better if this "Section" was included in the appendix of this report. cvs-1/4,\20 3. On page 2, under Roadway Design, #2, the word "warranted" should be & included in the glossary; #4, the word "residential" should be defined & included in the glossary and "through traffic" should either be changed to "cut-through traffic" since you do have that term in the glossary, if that is what you mean. 4. On page 3, #1 "....when warranted." again needs to be defined. I suggest defining it in terms of numbers and a formula, rather than a perception of need. 5. On page 3, #2, "Provide 'logical' street networks..." is a sound idea but by whose logic will the networks be governed? Your idea of a "logical" path may not be mine. et bk 6. On page 3, #3, "Adequately 'control' access points.., in terms of driveway openings & side street intersections." The word "control", when applied to driveways, appears to mean "limiting" driveways. If that is true, then, to be consistent, your intent would be to "limit" side street access to the regional highway system. If that is what you mean, then you should use the word "limit" so as to be truthful and clear in your intentions. I would also encourage you to replace the word "roadway" with the word "highway" as that more clearly defines what you are talking about. Finally, the premise that controlling or "limiting" access to regional highways may not seem "logical" as proposed in item #2.....hence the need for clarity on these words. 7. On page 3, #4, "....need for access to 'land' is unclear. Is "land" the same as "private property"? If so, I believe that term would be more understandable. 8. On page 3, #5, "... intra-area trips..." and "...regional trips..." need to be defined. How far does one drive to qualify as making an "intra-area" trip or "regional" trip? Further, what does "... serving regional trips.." mean? 9. On page 3, #6, "...conflicting uses..." needs to be defined. What are they? 10. On page 3, #7... I have no idea what that sentence means, and, I would bet, few other people do either. Please clarify. 11. On page 3, #9 "...campaigns that focus on individual responsibilities to each other..." is an admirable idea. However, to do this you would have to make value judgments that some may not consider to be within the realm of government. You could still educate the public on vehicle operations as proposed. 12. On page 3, #11. Again, "non-local" needs to be defined. If I live 6 blocks from an intersection am I a local? Who is a "local" and who is a "non-local"? 13. On page 4, The items under Roadway Maintenance and Operation are written as if the ETC will be doing more than advising. Please rewrite them to clarify how much power the ETC will have in making decisions about maintaining roads. Also, under #2, if you were to insert the words "to promote" after "Continue" the sentence would be more easily read. 14. On page 5, #3 and #4 are turned around. #4,"... .identifying parking based on needs." should be done first, then #3, "Find location of an additional Park & Ride facility..." And, again, if you refer to a "...City Code, Section 850.08.." please include that in the appendix for readers to reference. 15. On page 5, #5... please explain your reasoning behind this recommendation. Why should citizens of Edina be interested in allowing commuters to park in city owned ramps? How would that help our traffic problems? 16. On page 6, #3... Again, this sentence makes no sense. I think the word "roadway" is distracting. Using "highway" would be better. Even so, how will the ETC "support" government jurisdiction? 17. On page 7, 2nd paragraph, "....the City Council established the guidelines by which decisions regarding transportation facilities are made... ". In my mind a "facility" is a building. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Can you clear this up? 18. On page 8, 3rd bullet point under Long Term.... I think quarterly meetings would be better than yearly. This would address people's concerns that the ETC is inaccessible to the public. 19. On page 8, under Sources of Funding, you refer to the Transportation Plan. Again, please include it in the appendix, or on the web if it is too big, so the reader can reference it. 20. On pages 10- 11, the wording regarding all the different petitions & surveys is very unmanageable. Please consider changing "petition-to-study" to simply "petition", and "survey-to-test" to simply "survey". Furthermore, there is no explanation why you have established the timeline of accepting & acting on applications once/year. Why can't people present an application at any time during the year? 21. On page 11, #1, allowing an individual citizen to request a NTMP study opens the city to harassment by any person so inclined, thus using up valuable tax dollars and personnel time in dealing with this person. I would like this option eliminated and changing that wording to "...studies can be requested by any group of citizens who are able to collect 100 signatures in support of their request. Only one signature per address, within 4 blocks in all directions of the area of concern, will be accepted." I calculated the number 100 by counting 16 houses/block (both sides of the street) and multiplying that by 8 (4 blocks each way). This would include almost 3/4 of the addresses. If there is a cross street nearby, an additional 128 houses would be available for signatures. Therefore, I believe getting 100 signatures is reasonable. It also makes people think about their commitment to the idea before getting a couple of neighbors together and dashing off a request for a study. 22. On page 11, #2, paragraphs 4 & 6, you use the words "..study requestors..". This is unnecessary jargon. Rewrite it to read...." The City notifies all people who requested a study of the status...." 23. On page 12, in the first paragraph.....The "minimum" area of"... one block in all directions.." should be increased to a "minimum" of 6 blocks. Also, in the last paragraph on that page, ".....residential streets within an area approximately 1 block from the project..." should be increased to "...approximately 6 blocks from the project." 24. On page 13, Another survey.....The purpose of each survey needs to be explained on each survey so that residents do not toss surveys aside believing they are simply information gathering tools. If a decision will be made based on the survey, the importance of returning the survey, on time, needs to be communicated in bold letters on the survey. 25. On page 14, #2, Please re-write for clarity. For example: All of the following criteria for Minimum Distance must be met before a traffic calming device will be eligible for installation. 26. On page 14, Under Access.... how "adequate" will the turn around space be? Big enough for an Excursion to turn around in? How about a hook & ladder truck? A VW bug? Please clarify. 27. Page 18, Benefited Area is different from an area that would be affected by any change in volume or speed of cars. Please clarify. Also, under the first bullet point, the words ".....whichever is less." should be removed. Using the "whichever is less" option creates disparity. Decide on a distance and use it in all circumstances. 28. Page A-1, Definitions: Collector Street... ."Roadways that are designated .." by whom? And, again, can the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan referred to be included in the appendix or on the web site? If on the web site, please note that the information is available there. 29. Page A-1, Cut-through traffic.. ... "Traffic that intrudes...." The word "intrudes" is subjective and inflammatory. The definition is adequate without that word. Delete the word "intrudes" and rewrite the sentence to simply read..... "Traffic moving into a residential subdivision in order to avoid....." Also, in order to truly define cut- through traffic, you must define "....a residential subdivision... " . For example, if the Country Club "residential area" is bounded on the north by 44th St., does someone living on the north side of 44th St. and Wooddale Ave., who drives down Wooddale to get to the park at Wooddale & 50th St. commit a "cut-through" traffic violation, even though that would be the most "logical" route? ee.. -0 S- 30. Page A-1, Local traffic.. _again, where do "... neighborhood or area." boundaries begin & end? How is a driver to know s/he has crossed a boundary? 31. In general, please use common words that people understand and use them consistently. Using the same words consistently helps people understand what they are reading when trying to comprehend a lengthy and complicated issue. Use "highway" not "roadway" and do not interchange neighborhood street or area and residential street or area... .pick one way to refer to the idea and stick with it. 32. Finally, (I bet you thought I'd never say that) when you buy a house it is a buyer beware situation. This includes researching the neighborhood you want to buy into. Perhaps you might recommend that houses sold in Edina have a "truth in traffic" clause that refers to volume & speed on the street they are considering. Or, a clause directing them to a web site for information regarding those issues. Again, thank you for this opportunity to critique your work. I hope this has helped you in some way. Sincerely, 7,2_1UV) ,aLer4A_L Sharon Gregoire 5101 W. 44' St. Edina, MN. 55436 cc: Joni Kelly Bennett Dean Dovolis Warren Plante Fred Richards Marie Thorpe Les Wanninger Jean White Dennis Maetzold Mike Kelly Jim Hovland Linda Masica Scot Housh Steve Lillehaug Dear Edina Traffic Commission: Executive Summar), • The traffic policy needs a quantitative definition of traffic problems to reduce subjectivity which is fueling some of the emotional objections that are being witnessed from a few residents and a commissioner. o I would suggest a threshold of 1,000 vehicles per day (VPD) be used as a guideline to define volume thresholds; generally streets with volumes in excess of 1,000 VPD are considered collectors. A speed limit threshold should be 30 MPH on residential streets. o There are a number of things that could be considered in the Policy directly, or part of a broader communication and education strategy that the Commission may choose to employ. • Street closure, which has been a source of controversy for several residents, is an effective traffic calming measure, and has been used for the benefit of at least one Edina neighborhood. Ironically, the neighborhood with the street closure is the same neighborhood that is out-spoken about street closure use, and it is Joni Kelly Bennett's street. o Ironically, Joni Kelly Bennett, who has been publicly outspoken against potential road closures, lives two blocks from a street closure, which protects her street, and her neighborhood from potential cut-through traffic. Her street, Lynn Avenue, is closed off to two arterials—Excelsior and Monterey/38th. This is an almost identical closure to the one proposed in Country Club three years ago. o This, and other traffic calming measures in that neighborhood, have kept traffic volumes around 400 VPD, and less than 20% cut-through, which is a small fraction of what Country Club and other Edina neighborhoods are experiencing. • If there is going to be so much banter about the Country Club neighborhood during this process, this Commission should have some facts surrounding the issue. o The Country Club is a friendly neighborhood, and wants to welcome all people into it. However, there is a difference between being friendly and being a doormat. The neighborhood is being taken advantage of for its geographic location and convenience as a short-cut. o The systemic nature of the problem is unsolvable without traffic calming measures. It is significantly faster for drivers to cut-through Country Club than to use 50th and France to access South Minneapolis residencies and businesses via 44th. This is driven by laws of geometry, not congestion. o Data suggests that a majority of the cut-through traffic is driven (pardon the pun) by South Minneapolis origins and destinations. Morningside residents are likely <10% of the cut-through traffic. o 7 of 10 streets have average daily volumes significantly in excess of collector volumes (generally defined as 1,000 vehicles per day). These are volumes unprecedented in any truly residential neighborhood, according to traffic engineers, anywhere in the Twin Cities. o According to traffic studies, over 55% of the total traffic in the neighborhood isn't derived by residents. On some streets this figure is almost 85%. o No one has proposed to close off the neighborhood, but closing 1 of 8 (-12%) portals was evaluated 3 years ago as one alternative to reduce cut-through traffic. 1 o The cut-through traffic adversely affects that neighborhood residents, their quality of life, and the sense of community. • The Policy this Commission has developed is the only chance for the neighborhoods to protect their homes, children, and sense of community from continued traffic levels, by measures of volume, velocity, road-rage, and other measures, that are not congruent with residential streets. o Homes affected by cut-through traffic are out-numbered by the vehicles by 14-to- 1 or more. Policies left to subjectivity will consistently see the homeowners being out-shouted. Quantifiable Traffic Threshold Guidelines The number "1,000" will save the Commission and the citizens of Edina a lot of grief and unnecessary conflict. The Traffic Policy, as it is defined, is a good process to begin to pursue solutions. However, it leaves the gaping question of what defines a problem. Without some agreement on what defines a problem, other than a citizen complaining, all of us are prone to subjective infighting similar to what was witnessed on December 9. I would propose a residential threshold of 1,000 vehicles per day (VPD). This is the threshold used by the City of Minneapolis and other cities. Perhaps an average speed threshold of greater than 30 MPH should be used as well. For example, I have a hard time believing that those who spoke on December 9th against Country Club getting some remediation are actually against the residents of that neighborhood getting a resolution to their traffic problem. I believe the disconnect is that they don't understand that there is a quantifiable problem. Once a problem is defined, I believe that their sense of neighborliness would allow them to see past their self-interests and cooperate with the city pursuing a solution instead of the antics that we have witnessed. I don't want to have to stand in front of a venomous crowd, and subjectively claim to have a traffic problem in what can only sound like whining to the people with less information about the problem. I believe a quantitative threshold would allow this Commission, and the City to say objectively, "hey, these guys have traffic well in excess of residential volume and velocity thresholds, and we need to alter the traffic system to return the traffic to the arterial streets." If the Policy had quantified thresholds, then you wouldn't need me to stand in front of that crowd, and, frankly, neither would the commission, because it wouldn't be a subjective or political issue. In the scenario of the public having this objective information, I trust that the claims of favoritism, the claims of elitism would go away for the rational residents. For those that are not rational, or are so self-absorbed that they can't sympathize with a neighborhood that is being trounced by 7,750 cars (about 14 vehicles for every home as in the case of Country Club), I'm not sure that any Policy can adequately address their needs, nor should it. I had an interesting interaction with one cut-through driver that illustrates the power of objective data. (TRUE STORY) The person was driving especially fast through the neighborhood. I flagged him down, and he was kind enough to pull over. He identified himself as a south Minneapolis resident. When questioned why he was driving so fast through the neighborhood he 2 stated, "the way I see it, it is your fault for having children and living here. This is so much faster than going through 50th and France. I usually go down Edina Blvd because I can get going 40 MPH there. These are public streets and I have every right to drive down your street." I then told him that we had 1,500 cars per day on our street. To my amazement, his attitude dramatically changed. He then said, "1,500 cars is a lot! I'd be upset too. You should talk to the city about trying to find a solution. Minneapolis has redirected the street that I live on, and we get no cut- through traffic. Also, there are round-a-bouts in Linden Hills that drive me crazy, I never cut- through there. You should come over and take a look at my neighborhood sometime." Even one of the more defiant people I've talked to on the issue was materially swayed by the quantification of the problem. This is a focus group of one I know, but still an important data point. Policy Suggestions Additional suggestions for the policy: 1. In the interests of being comprehensive, from above, include a 1,000 VPD desired residential street volume threshold. It will give residents a quantified benchmark with which to define a problem. In its current construct residents have to rely on subjective matters to define a problem. 2. If people want more input to a proposed change, let them have it. 3. Do not allow a situation where neighborhoods, which by definition are out-numbered by drivers, could be out-voted by the drivers regarding a remedial action. 4. Please don't allow impact areas to be defined by where residents are driving from, since this is giving too much acknowledgement to people with 150 horsepower to whisk them around. I understand an impact area that would include residential areas that might have traffic diverted to them. However, the Policy should be careful not to allow collector streets to objectively resist traffic from being put back onto a street intended to handle the diverted traffic. 5. I'm open to no one voting. If the city wants to fix a cut-through problem I don't understand why that isn't just in the latitude of what they do every day for their jobs. 6. I do question why neighborhoods bare the whole cost burden. If the state, county and city maintained adequate arterial streets neighborhoods wouldn't have this problem. However, I'm willing to pay if that is what it takes. It just seems like neighborhoods are funding the arterial roadways in an indirect way. 7. People have suggested that the commission push the state and counties to do their part. I agree. I think the policy should include the concept of working with the state and county on their construction planning. I know about 400 neighbors of mine that would back you in any type of campaign you wanted to initiate to get the state and county to understand the urgency. 8. A continuation of #7 in some ways... Speed limit changes absolutely should be part of the tool kit. The commission needs to work with the state to get latitude to change the speed limit. I, for example, would prefer a 15 MPH speed limit with enforcement to speed bumps. Sound unreasonable? My neighborhood streets in Chicago were 10 MPH on internal streets and 20 MPH on the larger thoroughfares. See picture below: 3 They were enforced to within 2 MPH frequently. I took many cabs from O'Hare home. The cabs would drive a good 20 MPH in excess of the speed limit the whole way, and then crawl through my neighborhood because they knew that they'd get a ticket in all likelihood if they sped. Many residents' friends and family had gotten tickets. It drove visitors crazy sometimes, but the residents appreciated it. My Chicago neighborhood was an attractive cut- through similar to Country Club, but no one did due to speed limitations. As you may know, Edina Police will not stop someone in Country Club, or any neighborhood for that matter, until they are going 38 MPH since, according to Edina Police, the courts will not enforce tickets below that. When they only can catch 3 cars per hour on Drexel they spend their time on more heavily trafficked streets, where they can write more tickets. I don't even care if people speed on those streets for the most part. Mike Siitari has admitted that this enforcement policy may push even more speeders and criminals into Edina neighborhoods because they know this is the one place they reliably won't be caught. According to Edina police, Country Club has been a popular drunk driver cut-through between Southdale area establishments and Excelsior Blvd establishments due to difficulty of enforcement. Street Closure Can Be an Effective Traffic Mitigation Tool. The Out-Spoken Opponents of Country Club Traffic Remediation Are Not Operating With a Fact-Based Understanding of the Issue, and Exhibit a "Not In My Backyard" Bias Street closures can be an effective traffic calming measure. For example, Joni Kelly Bennett's street, Lynn Avenue, is closed off two blocks from her home where it would otherwise intersect with Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive (turns into 38th once it crosses Excelsior). Excelsior Avenue and Monterey have similar volumes to France and 44th (the two streets from which a closure of Sunnyside at Arden would protect Country Club). Additionally, 38th Street has a stop sign every 300 feet (300% of the density of Country Club stop signs) to defeat cut- through traffic, and there are no left turns into the neighborhood at 39th, 38th and 371h during rush hours. It is also worth noting the discontinuity of Natchez and other streets in the area which inhibits cut-through traffic. The result is that there are about 400 VPD on these streets, which is a fraction of what Country Club streets see. License plate studies have estimated that cut-through volumes are less than 20% versus 75% or more for most Country Club streets. 4 Grimes Ave S :••• I encourage the whole Traffic Commission to take a drive through the area, because it is a nice example of effective traffic mitigation for the benefit of a neighborhood. See map below: Joni's Street, Lynn Avenue, is Closed to Monterey and Excelsior ' a F.,300m ;,.... 9001t 36 1/2 Sty', , so Z ..,<2 Minikalula . 3 til St W 1:411No left turn (rush hours) 4.- . 1 ... a o to 7c S s14.1. . 4ts o ea gl 38th 'Y‘ - & %i,1111 No left turn (rush hours) > oX-- --- . 39111 St r e; 70 . 1 I No left turn (rush hours) 0 o 0 i g itkVt.., :11, Is N 2 UV 0 u.i to to et ‘c 1 0 to < \P.- a* >-. - --- c 44 00-. A 1 X .6 3 0 I.1 .1. 0 6'0 t• W 42nd SI: o i r • 164, d' 1 0 a e Ave,' 0 OBt,..... 0 y 0 > , y ft. —,eyst y > ; 4;) 2004 MapQuest.corn, Inc.; 2004 NIAVTEQ Also, St Louis Park traffic engineering is focused on protecting this area from cut-through traffic. A year 2000 study stated, "...Each of the parallel local roadways including Joppa Avenue and Inglewood Avenue, serve [as a local neighborhood roadway] as they all were found carrying less than 600 vehicles per day, a very typical daily traffic volume for a local neighborhood roadway. Potential Traffic Calming Measures Recognizing that the current levels of traffic and the neighborhoods perception of future levels related to the development of the Park Commons East and Park Commons West sites are still of concern, alternative traffic calming measures were discussed that may help in alleviating or redirecting the potential cut-through vehicles. The measures include: 1. Chokers 2. Traffic circles 3. Raised tables 4. Partial roadway closure... For each of the primary roadways throughout the Minikahda Vista and Browndale neighborhoods, Average Annual Daily Traffic (4ADT) volume thresholds were defined that suggests when an increased change in traffic from the normal may be perceived. When this threshold is reached, each of the measures would be analyzed in detail to determine effectiveness, corridor implications of implementing, if and how beneficial and whether the increased traffic is actually regional cut-through traffic or neighborhood related traffic.. .11 is beneficial for the City of St. Louis Park to have a set of guidelines to follow in addressing potential future growth in Bass Zaki Pi.ssents 60°4 5 neighborhood traffic levels and to have a toolbox of possible mitigation measures that may help calm traffic. The next section discusses the primary concern of the impact the proposed development scenarios may have on the Excelsior Boulevard Corridor roadway network..." As an experiment, go stand on Grimes, a major connector for the Morningside neighborhood, on any given day. Then go stand on Drexel, Edina, Arden, Browndale, etc. There is no comparison in volumes and velocities. One of the central issues around street closure seems to be that the streets are public and should be open for all to use. Yes, they are public, but they are also residential, which means they should handle volumes and velocities congruent with a residential area. People don't seem to understand that differentiation, which will be an important PR element that should be tackled by the Traffic Commission. I've never seen people feel so sorry for themselves having to drive a few extra seconds (arterial roads have been determined by traffic engineers to take only 60 seconds longer for many of the trips they are using Country Club streets to avoid) when they are pulled by 150+ horsepower engines in a climate-controlled environment, especially when it comes at the expense of the sense of community for others. I can't move my house. Cars can easily move where they go. While I could move somewhere else, and many Country Club residents have, someone else is going to move in here, and they're going to have an issue in all likelihood as well. Plus, I shouldn't have to move from my home to find appropriate traffic systems that preserve residential street volumes and velocities. Country Club: As an Illustration of Situations the Policy Will Need to Address Since the subject of the Country Club neighborhood has been front and center, I'd appreciate the opportunity to illustrate the type of situation that the Traffic Commission, and the proposed Policy will need to deal with. The situation is truly exceptional, quantifiable, and other citizens resisting this neighborhood getting remediation is frustrating. The Country Club neighborhood, according to a third-party engineering survey conducted in 1993 (over 10 years ago when traffic volumes were likely much less), has the following volumes: 11,750 total vehicles passing through it each day - 4,000 of those trips are resident-derived 7,750 cars cut-through a neighborhood of 550 homes every day That's one car every 7 seconds cutting through the neighborhood over a 16-hour traffic day. On an individual street level, 7 of the 10 streets in the neighborhood have volumes well in excess of 1,000 vehicles per day, meaning they are handling collector-street volumes, while only about 450 VPD are resident-derived. See the chart below: 6 NIIIIMMIVehicles/Day --• —CC Resident Dethed 3500 3000 — 2500 — 2000 — 1500 — 1000 — 500 — 0 \e, At,o t+c- 6 CP <Se \e, at'ffr —A—Collector Threshold - - - - Residential Desired Limit Based on a 16-hour traffic day the average cut-through-affected street has one car every 30 seconds or so. Volumes Are Unprecedented in All of Twin Cities SRF, a third-party traffic-engineering firm hired by the City of Edina says in a 1993 report about Country Club traffic (over 10 years ago), "this large volume of through trips through a truly residential neighborhood is unusual for the Twin Cities Area. Other traffic studies where the City of Edina's traffic engineering consultant, SRF, Inc., has been involved, particularly in Edina, have not uncovered neighborhoods with through traffic volumes of the same magnitude." People have said that the traffic volumes are caused by residents of the neighborhood, or that it is due to construction traffic, and a host of other causes. However, Casco Avenue has as much construction, and residential volume as any street in Country Club, yet only 447 VPD travel on it. The difference is that Casco is not a major thoroughfare for cut-through traffic. 447 VPD is also approximately consistent with average vehicle trips per day of 7 to 10 per day per household. A 1993 license plate survey conducted by SRF further confirmed that 2 out of 3 vehicles were not neighborhood residents. Also, it isn't residents of the neighborhood cutting from one street to the other, as some have suggested. The surveys were taken at points where this would be mathematically impossible (can't cross cordon line on an adjacent street and get home without incurring a count on your own street as well). Even if this were possible how would 30% of the streets generate substantial volumes on the other 70%? Again, this is mathematically impossible. People are sometimes confused that there is not unanimity among Country Club residents that there is a problem. As you can see, 3 streets don't have significant traffic volumes, which has been a source of isolated disagreement between the streets that bare significant traffic volumes and those that don't. 7 Systemic Cut-Through Traffic is Driven By South Minneapolis Origins and Destinations, Situational Cut-Through is Driven by Hwy 100 Failings and 50th and France Congestion Several speakers at the December 9th meeting made the Country Club traffic issue sound like it was Country Club trying to block Morningside residents from cutting through the neighborhood. The data would not support this. Statistically the Morningside residents are likely a small fraction of the cut-through traffic in Country Club. Analyzing travel times from various points in the city to the middle of Morningside suggests that there is usually a faster or negligible- difference-in-travel-time alternative to cutting-through Country Club. The same analysis on traffic patterns between Highway 100 and South Minneapolis does not yield the same result. The Country Club neighborhood is the fastest route for South Minneapolis to gain access to and from Highway 100 by an over 1 minute discrepancy (plus additional time for 501h and France congestion). This creates a huge sucking sound of cars right over the neighborhood. Also, there is a pattern that has drivers avoiding Hwy 100 due to congestion or just seeking the convenience of cutting through a neighborhood with slower speeds and scenery. This can be remedied by Hwy 100 fixes, whereas the South Minneapolis problem cannot. See the data table below. Route Via Country Location Club From Various Points To Center of Edina Momingside (42 Brookside To 44th 1/2 and Princeton) Excelsior 50th & France Times Via Various Routes Fastest Route Minutes Faster (Slower) Than Cutting Thru Country Club City Hall 5:16 6:16 5:57 NA (0:41) Library, Jerry's, Other Retail on Vernon 6:26 5:14 5:57 NA 1:12 Southdale 13:09 12:20 10:23 NA 1:46 Concord 7:41 9:03 7:07 NA 0:36 From Hwy 100 Off-Ramp (Southbound) 6:18 5:13 3:05 NA 1:05 From Hwy 100 Off-Ramp (Northbound) 5:15 6:15 6:01 NA (0:46) To Hwy 100 On-Ramp (Southbound) 5:42 6:33 5:47 NA (0:05) To Hwy 100 On-Ramp (Northbound) 5:28 6:04 1:30 NA 3:58 From Various Points To South Minneapolis (Big Mike's Subs) Times Via Various Routes Hwy 100 (Southbound) to South Mpls 6:29 7:56 6:54 7:36 Hwy 100 (Northbound) to South Mpls 5:46 8:50 NA 6:53 No number of lane additions to Highway 100 or fixes at 50th and France will solve the problem that it is geometrically more attractive, by Pythagorean Theorum (X^2 + YA2 = Z^2) for geometry buffs, to cut across country club versus going 50th to France to 44th Street. See chart below: 8 Traffic Flows Diagonally Across Neighborhood, Which According to Pythagorean Theorum Is the Shortest Distance Closing Off Country Club Streets Being Proposed, or Ever Proposed in the Past? There has been a lot of controversy about closing off the Country Club neighborhood. I'm not sure that you know what this is about, but there was a scenario evaluated by an independent traffic engineering firm that entailed closing 1 of the 8 major portals into and out of Country Club (-12% of the portals). Over 3,000 cars leave and enter the neighborhood via Sunnyside Road, many vehicles are cutting-through the neighborhood to connect with France Avenue or 441h Avenue in Minneapolis. Some residents of the neighborhood also use it for mobility (since there are only 4,000 resident-derived trips per day in the whole neighborhood, statistically there aren't likely to be a material number of resident-derived trips included in the 3,000 vehicles using that portal). Closing this exit and entrance, along with other non-closure changes, would make the neighborhood less attractive as a cut-through. This change means that it takes an extra 60 seconds for most trips through the neighborhood—enough to tip the balance in favor of not cutting through the neighborhood. This was one proposal, and there are many that don't include any closures. This is the only scenario, that I know, of that includes any consideration of a closure. This is hardly consistent with the characterization of closing the neighborhood. The neighborhood would still be 88% open even if the proposal was pursued. The residents of the Country Club neighborhood are very friendly, and don't want any portals closed unless absolutely necessary. People are welcome in the Country Club neighborhood, especially for neighborly interaction. Give me a little notice and I'll do my best to provide libations for anyone that wants to stop by. Further evidence that Country Club residents welcome others into their neighborhood: Country Club was the first to open up the neighborhood for the Holiday Home Tour to raise funds for the Edina Community Foundation—a foundation committed to building a stronger community within Edina; and residents go to significant logistical lengths and personal 9 expense to put out luminaries on December 24, which draws hundreds of cars into the neighborhood to see the decorations—this is a concerted effort to share the neighborhood's sense of community with the rest of Edina. There is a difference between being friendly and being a doormat. People don't need friends that take advantage of them. People are taking advantage of the porous design of the Country Club neighborhood and the unfriendly nature of the traffic is witnessed every day in volume, velocity, rudeness, unfriendliness, etc. Country Club Cut-Through Justified? People at the December 9th meeting stated that people in Country Club should know that there is a traffic problem, and to move to Bear Path if we don't like it. Some also said that the traffic is justified because we supposedly live in a city. This one got many favorable head nods from attendees. I just moved here from Chicago and this is not the city. Even if it were, Chicago does a phenomenal job of keeping cut-through traffic off of its neighborhood streets. Tom Samuels, a project director in the Chicago department of transportation says, "The city is concentrating on livability by preventing the inappropriate use of residential streets like cut-through and speeding traffic. There's an inverse correlation between the amount of cars of vehicles [on a street] and the social interaction between neighbors." (see http://pti.nw.dc.us/task forces/transportation/docs/trafcalm/CASE6.HTM ). Chicago is a city of 3 million people. Why can Chicago preserve their residential streets, and our city of 47,000 can't come to terms with the fact that you don't mow over neighborhoods to suit drivers' convenience? Also, people didn't know there was a problem in Country Club because the problem wasn't always this bad. When traffic calming was done at 50th and France in the late 1990's it almost doubled the amount of traffic on the eastern side of the neighborhood. Drexel went from 900 VPD to over 1,600 on weekdays. In 1993 there were only 600 VPD on Drexel. Many of the residents have lived here since before the problems were of this magnitude. Also, I didn't pay that much attention. Having moved from Chicago, it didn't even cross my mind that a city would allow a residential street to be used as a collector street. Because I live in Country Club I've been made to feel like I have less rights to a residential street than other neighborhoods in Edina. People make me feel like I'm being elitist in not wanting cut- through traffic. I don't want to be elite. I want to be normal. As the study comments above point out, these levels of cut-through are not normal in a truly residential neighborhood, nor tolerated anywhere else in the Twin Cities that the traffic engineers are aware of. The Impacts of Traffic For those of you that don't live on cut-through streets, the levels of traffic are noisy, intrusive and dangerous. As you can imagine, the volumes peak in the afternoons and early evening, when you want to be outside your home. There are at least 3 cars per afternoon/evening in front of my house, for example, honking at each other as 2-way, frenzied traffic tries to navigate what is a one-lane residential road (after a car is parked on the street). Not that the honking matters because a Suburban or its equivalent going 30 MPH, and accelerating up a hill is plenty loud already. The result of all this is that people spend less time outside interacting as neighbors. Kids spend less time playing outside, and when they do it is a source of stress for the parents. Extreme 10 parental vigilance is the only reason we haven't had a child hit and seriously injured in the neighborhood. People don't walk to the park, and choose to spend time in their own backyard instead. Many social opportunities that build the foundation of the neighborhood and community of Edina no longer occur on cut-through streets. The fence companies are making a fortune as more and more backyard fences are erected. One of my neighbors redid their home, in part, to move the master bedroom to the back of the house to get less street noise in their bedroom. Also, many homes are being remodeled to get the family room to the back of the house since the roadways are a noisy intrusion when the family rooms are at the front of the house. Also, more backyard playsets are being erected and park usage is dropping as people don't want to hazard the noise and danger of walking to the park Also increased anonymity makes it difficult for the residents to distinguish who is in the neighborhood for criminal activities versus resident-derived activities. As a result, the neighborhood oflen deals with more nuisance crimes and major break-ins than I've experienced living in similar neighborhoods with less cut-through traffic. The Policy this Commission Has Developed is the Only Chance for the Neighborhoods to Protect Their Homes, Children and Sense of Community We have a situation in Edina that has a few homeowners getting trounced for the convenience of other people, many, or most of which, are residents of other cities. If you open that to public debate, of course those that desire to cut-through neighborhoods for their convenience are going to gang up on the few that are adversely affected by the cut-through patterns. I've never seen such playground antics of ganging up on a minority, at least not since elementary school. For example, I witnessed one December 9th meeting attendee whisper that they were going to speed down Bruce Avenue to spite one of the speakers in favor of the Traffic Policy. Several people at the December 9th meeting tried to act like the victim, "this is elitism", or "this is a class issue". What? The neighborhood is the "little guy" in this equation. There are 7,750 drivers armed with as much as 300 horsepower and 7,000 pound vehicles while me and my neighbors are armed with a 7 pound "go slow" figurines and a Traffic Policy written on 12 ounces of paper that will blow away if I don't rest my "go slow" figurine on it. The Traffic Commission and the City Council are the only defense we have to return appropriateness to the traffic system. We need a Traffic Policy that protects the City's neighborhoods, and doesn't force residents into a shouting match where they are out-numbered and out-shouted 14 to 1 or more. For example, I'm in the situation where 1,050 (1,500 less 450 resident-derived) people want to use my street of about 55 homes for a cut-through. We'll get out-voted, or out-shouted, or whatever metric is used, every time if this issue is made subjective and a matter of public opinion. There are 19 driver votes or shouts for every homeowners' voice. We need the City to help us. We can't leave the neighborhood to face an angry mob of 7,000+ people who don't seem to care about much more than their personal convenience. Thank you for all your time. Please help. Rob Webb 4516 Drexel Avenue 11 Appendix So many people want to talk about their convenience, and their desire to drive wherever they want. Very few people talk about what it feels like to live on a cut-through street. I live on an Edina residential street in Country Club; Drexel Avenue. This is just an average street. It has only enough width to support one lane of traffic due to parked cars. I have two boys ages 5 and 3 that like to play in the front yard, on the sidewalk, and occasionally fetch a ball from the street. My older one has friends across the street that he'd like to be able to go see, especially when he feels the draw of friends playing in their front yard. Here's what this experience feels like to a new resident. I move into my home two years ago in the dead of winter. My first experience as a resident is almost having someone crash into me at the bottom of Drexel at Country Club road as someone cut that rounded corner that does such an effective job of throwing traffic onto my street. My first experience as a resident was thinking, "gee my neighbors drive awfully recklessly—seems a bit unneighborly." My neighbor, months later, was hit by a cut-through driver at that same intersection. I went on in future days to experience people trying to pass me on the left as I drove home because I wasn't driving fast enough. On many occasions I was tailgated driving on my neighborhood streets. One morning the woman driving a minivan full of children was so close to my bumper that I could read her lips. She was saying over and over, "go, go, go, go, go, go..." with a panic stricken look in her eyes and white knuckles on the steering wheel. I watched her then blast past me and out of the neighborhood down Wooddale towards the schools. I then noticed that it was almost the start of school and she must have been running late. She wanted to be one of the cars going over 40 MPH through a neighborhood to make up time for her being late. I know my neighbors, she was not a neighbor. One day a driver honked at me for not using my turn signal while turning into my driveway. He shouted out his window, "nice turn signal!" And then he roared down the street and out one of the 8 neighborhood portals. Spring arrives. I for some reason am still somewhat naïve to the traffic situation. On the first warm day, I stand in my front yard doing some yard-work. As cars drive by I wave to them. This is what I was used to doing. In my Chicago neighborhood when cars went by you waved because they were your neighbors, and that's what neighbors do. But no one waved back at me. So I'm thinking, "people sure are unfriendly in Minnesota." Then I noticed that none of the cars I was waiving at were pulling out of or into driveways on Drexel. It finally dawned on me, these people aren't residents of my street. I then learned that only about 450 of the 1,500 vehicle trips on my street are derived on my street. This means that 70% of the people driving past my home aren't my immediate neighbors. These people are using Drexel mostly as a short-cut to South Minneapolis. I sympathize with their plight, but someone needs to understand the impact this has on a neighborhood and figure out a way for these people to get around on arterial streets. I first resisted the traffic from driving me out of my front yard. I bought a little green figurine with "go slow" printed on it. It also had an orange flag that it held. So then I watched the teenagers continue to race down my street, but now they stuck their hand out the window to see 12 if they could touch the flag on the little green man. Then the little green figurine was finally stolen in broad daylight. I bought another, the flag on this one was stolen first, then the rest of him was stolen. I bought another. This one was stolen, but later recovered by police over near 44th and France. I gave up on the green figurines. One day a resident from a neighborhood south of Country Club was strolling through our neighborhood on a walk. She stopped and asked if traffic was always this bad. "She said I thought it was so beautiful here that it'd be a nice place for a stroll due to the sidewalks, but the traffic is just too stressful. I'm staying down in my neighborhood, even if I have to walk in the street." There is a positive correlation between the number of cars on Drexel and how nice the weather is. Why? Because people use it to cut-through to south Minneapolis and the Lakes area. We see more teenagers in convertibles with their tops down, talking on their cell phones, radios blaring, as they race down our street—oblivious to the residents trying to have a normal, peaceful life. Then I started to give up. I fenced in my backyard. I put a gate across my driveway so that I could be outside and know that my kids hadn't wandered out into the street. I started to hang out in my backyard like the rest of my neighbors. This is what people do on busy streets in Country Club. I wondered if this was a "Minnesota thing" or was this due to traffic. Then I drove down Casco Avenue, one of the 2 Country Club streets without significant traffic volumes, and I saw people all over the place. Kids were playing in their front yards, parents were socializing on the sidewalk, and then I realized that the anti-social aspects were probably largely correlated to the traffic, and not the neighborhood. Discussions with my neighbors on the subject have verified this to be true. I used to walk to Wooddale Park with my kids, but even that tradition was squashed because there was no sidewalk to get from Drexel onto Country Club and across Wooddale. It was always a stressful and scary ordeal trying to keep 2 active boys moving across a busy residential street in a series of hazardous maneuvers required to navigate the streets to get to the park without crosswalks and a car is coming every few seconds to connect with Country Club road (1,600 VPD) and Drexel (1,500 VPD). I spent so much time at the public parks in Chicago, I wanted to maintain this tradition here in Minnesota since it is such an important social activity for the kids and the parents. Due to the traffic stresses I eventually gave in and just bought a playset for my backyard like the rest of my neighbors. Once again, social interaction was impaired by traffic. I now know my neighbor that lives on the other side of my backyard fence better than I do my neighbors across the street, which is a sad statement. Still we need to get out on Halloween and other occasions. On several, I've seen my kids' life flash before my eyes. On our first Halloween as a resident of Country Club my son was departing one of the homes with a steep front yard. Momentum of the hill had my son going faster and faster down the hill towards the road. As this is happening I see a delivery truck going 35 MPH+ right towards my son. I had the most helpless feeling as I stood at the top of the hill and saw my son rolling to what I thought was going to be the end of his life. He sailed straight across the side walk and managed to stop right at the curb. The mirror on the truck missed his 13 head only because he is still short enough. The delivery truck never even slowed down. I'm not even sure they saw him because it is dark in Minnesota during trick or treating. It was quite an ordeal, parents had come running from tens of yards away trying to stop my son from flying into the street. We then stood there and watched the truck slip out of the neighborhood to the north on Wooddale. It was one of the 2 out of 3 vehicles cutting through. This is very common. Most driveways and yards in the neighborhood slope markedly towards the street. Do you know what it feels like to watch your kid scooter down the driveway right towards a car (there's one every 39 seconds)? What are you going to do? Not let them scooter like normal kids? Why can't we just have normal traffic like a normal neighborhood? On the last 4th of July we stopped a car that was trying to cut-through a block party. The person was visibly and audibly intoxicated. Every BBQ I go to with neighbors has the discussion topic of traffic at some point if not a majority of the time. I want to go to one BBQ and not discuss traffic. Please help. 14 Sunday, December 26, 2004 TO: The Edina Transportation Commission The Edina City Council The Edina City Engineering Department As a resident of the City of Edina, I am writing to express my concerns and opinions about the (October 2004) Draft Transportation Policy written by City staff—with input from the Commission—and presented to the public December 6th. Although the purpose of the Policy as stated on page 2 in the Policy Framework Section is laudable, the document as structured and written inadequately addresses the issues necessary to achieve its goals: The purpose of this policy is to guide the ETC in the identification and evaluation of traffic and transportation issues in the community and the prioritization of projects and improvement to the transportation system. The policy is created to encourage public input and decisions that will be made on quantitative, qualitative, and objective factors. Instead, the bulk of the document focuses on the description of a procedure by which a resident can petition the city staff to create a localized Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, and on descriptions of the possible methods and devises that staff can employ for traffic calming. Although acceptance of this policy would ease the job of city staff in responding to residents who are upset with the increase in traffic volume in front of their homes, it does nothing definite to establish reasoned guidelines to help the ETC evaluate the appropriateness of projects and solutions on a community-wide basis. The Draft Policy as proposed does the ETC, and therefore the Edina City Council, a great disservice by promising administrative vision but delivering only non-standard, self-serving definitions and bureaucratic procedures. Even the proposed "Scoring for Ranking" system (p.15) that appears quantitative and objective at first glance, is a twisted version of the Bloomington formula from which it was derived; in its contrived form, it contains a selection of factors, weightings, and upper limits with outcomes that do not reflect a community-wide management policy of the public street network. Although I have every confidence in the technical abilities of the city staff to carry out any projects described in the Policy, the content of the Draft Policy is perversely skewed to encourage the very opposite of its stated goals; it provides no guidance to the ETC for making critical choices on these complex and sensitive issues, and it potentially sanctions a small group of residents to use city resources to gate their neighborhood by officially excluding from the process citizens who are likely to object to the project. This Draft Policy contains so many biases, omissions, and contradictions of the existing Edina Transportation Plan policy that it would be impossible to address them all without producing a document several times the length of the obfuscated original. I encourage the City Council to postpone acceptance of the Draft Policy and return it to the ETC for major revision until it matches its stated goals of: • providing guidance for identification, evaluation and prioritization of traffic and transportation issues in the community, • encouraging public input, and • defining quantitative, qualitative, and objective factors by which decisions can be made. 1 Many communities, both nationally and locally have already completed this task, so there is a large body of knowledge, existing policy, and experience on which to draw. Edina is not alone in trying to manage the rapid growth in vehicular traffic. I suggest that the Commission Members request that staff provide them with information on the Traffic Calming policies of Minneapolis and Bloomington, if Members have not already had a chance to personally review them. Since I cannot possibly address all the shortcomings of the Draft Policy with enough specificity to earn credibility, I have chosen four specific issues from (or omitted from) the Draft Policy, and then I make several recommendations that I would like the commission to consider adopting as modifications to the Policy. It is my hope that the alternative perspective of this letter will provide the Commission and City Council with an insight into how poorly the Draft Policy meets its stated goals. The four issues over which I have concern are: 1. The definition and emphasis on volume control of cut-through traffic that does not conform the "General Objectives of Traffic Calming" as published by the United States Department of Transportation FHWA, and runs counter to the objectives of existing city code. There is no discussion in the Policy of the serious problems other communities have encountered with diverted traffic. Without a description of these consequential problems, the ETC and Council are not fully informed. 2. The lack of sufficient differentiation in the Policy between traffic calming methods that employ localized speed control and those methods of wider impact, particularly volume control traffic calming methods that deny access to existing public roads. Although there is some crossover between these methods, it is common to treat them differently because of the fundamentally different problem that they address, and the different scope of their consequences. 3. The narrowly circumscribed areas of study that do not reflect the interests of the Edina residents actually affected by proposed projects, particularly volume control methods. 4. A ranking system with factors out-of-balance with stated Policy objectives. I consider these issues individually, and in combination because they are interrelated, and because used in combination the current Draft Policy has the potential of enabling the abuse of city resources to benefit the interest of a few vocal residents at the expense and safety of citizens outside immediate area of benefit. 2 Non-local Cut-through Traffic Objective number eleven of twelve objectives listed in the Draft's "Roadway Function and Access" section is quoted from the amended policies of Edina's existing Transportation Plan (section 1225 of the City Code): Implement measures to reduce non-local cut-through traffic in cooperation with the County and State efforts by developing a local traffic calming policy to mitigate the effects of cut-through traffic (emphasis added). Identify the origin and destination of cut-through traffic. However, the Draft Policy in Appendix A defines Cut-through Traffic - Traffic that intrudes into a residential subdivision to avoid congestion or other problems from an arterial or other high level street. What's missing from the ETC's Draft Policy definition, but is included in the Transportation Plan, is the essential notion of "non-local" (through) traffic. To reinforce that the "non-local" qualifier is not a trivial omission, consider objective number six of the six General Objectives for Traffic Calming listed on the FHWA's websitel: • To discourage use of residential streets by non-citizens'2 cut through vehicular traffic (emphasis added). So when two existing policies list the discouragement (volume control) of cut-though traffic either dead last or near the very bottom of their objectives, and both statements specifically exclude locally originating traffic from the definition of cut-through traffic, why does the Draft policy: 1. first omit this important "non-local" qualification from its definition of cut- through traffic, and 2. then prominently include through traffic volumes as the primary component in the definition of an impacted area for study as shown below? Impacted area - Area for a project that is defined as those residences along local residential streets that are positively or negatively impacted by excessive through traffic volumes and speeding, or that may be positively or negatively impacted by proposed traffic calming. Inconvenience caused by limitation of access is not considered to be a negative impact under this definition. That these contrived definitions go out of their way to mischaracterize the use of local streets by local citizens as "cut-through traffic" and trivialize the restriction of access to local public streets as a simple inconvenience is misleading, inconsistent with community goals, and fundamentally elitist. While no residents should have to tolerate speeding or unsafe traffic in front of their homes, the increase in traffic volume experienced by almost all Edina residents over the last decade is inappropriately commingled in these definitions with speed enforcement issues. This is basically a bait and switch tactic that indirectly justifies closing streets in one neighborhood to citizens living in adjacent neighborhoods by linking traffic volume to speed control. These non-standard, altered definitions confuse legitimate locally originating traffic with undesirable non-local through traffic, and the raise the priority of its http://www.fhwa.dot.ciovienvironment/tcalm/partthtm 2 Citizen 1) an inhabitant of a city or town esp: on entitled to the rights and privileges of a free man. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 3 "mitigation" by combining it with higher priority speed control objectives. Legitimate traffic appropriate to the capacity of a street is not by itself a problem. In fact, limiting access to existing roadways appears to run counter to the existing higher priority Roadway Design policies stated on page 2. Discouraging through traffic is down at number four on the list, while design goals number two and number three are: 2. Upgrade existing roadways when warranted by demonstrated volume, safety or functional needs, taking into consideration environmental limitations. 3. Emphasize improvements to management, maintenance and utilization of the existing street and highway system. If the current emphasis is on the effective utilization of the existing roadways, then perhaps an additional term needs to be defined for the vocabulary of the Draft Policy. Relief Traffic - Dispersed traffic locally originating from adjacent neighborhoods, increasing a street network's overall vehicular throughput by distributing traffic volume over multiple parallel minor streets, and thereby reducing volume congestion on surrounding major streets. Diverting local traffic from underutilized residential streets to the already congested higher order roads on the perimeter of some neighborhoods is counterproductive based on the stated objectives of existing policies and on Federal recommendations. Restricting access does not improve utilization. It disrupts the street network. Perhaps restricting parking would be an appropriate response to a demonstrated increase in traffic volume. In other words, why should it be assumed that a volume control method is the solution to increased volume on a local street when demonstrated volume is the stated prerequisite for a roadway upgrade? This solution might be especially appropriate considering the Policy's goal of "decisions that will be made on quantitative, qualitative, and objective factors." I point this out as an example of how the Draft's definitions of terms and emphasis on NTMP with its undercurrent of street closures are so at odds with existing policies and the stated goals of the ETC. The Draft Policy definitions subvert the objectives of existing City Transportation Policy using non-quantitative, non-objective factors by erroneously including locally originating traffic from adjacent neighborhoods in the same category with undesirable non-local "cut-though" traffic, and by failing to acknowledge that legitimate traffic between neighborhoods actually increases vehicle throughput, better utilizing existing roadway capacity. Diverting traffic naturally causes the traffic volume to appear elsewhere. The Draft Policy does not adequately advise the ETC of the City Council on the tradeoffs associated with volume control methods, and to some extent associated with speed control methods. Without a more complete picture of the inevitable consequences resulting from alternative choices, the Draft Policy is actually misleading in its guidance. 4 Little Differentiation between Narrow-impact and Wide-impact Traffic Calming Methods. Although the Draft Policy clearly categorizes the Traffic Calming methods of Appendix B into four useful categories on page 17 (Speed Reduction Traffic Calming Measures, Volume Reduction Traffic calming Measures, Education and Enforcement, and Regulatory Measures), it does not fully incorporate the differentiation of these categories into the procedures described or into any suggested guidelines for the ETC. In particular, the area of impact, and therefore the inclusion of residents into the decision making process, is vastly under-recognized. This avoidance is particularly egregious in the definition of the impacted area for diagonal road closures, partial road closures, forced turned islands, and cul-de-sacs as categorized as Volume Reduction Traffic calming Measures, for one-ways, or for any other traffic calming method that limits access to existing public streets. The very limited area definition is inconsistent with a policy that is "created to encourage public input and decisions that will be made on quantitative, qualitative, and objective factors." Even though Commission Chair Richards has stated that the ETC is not now considering a street closure, at the same time Assistant City Engineer Steve Lillehaug stated, "Closing off streets is a necessary and effective traffic calming measure."3 While there may be some very special cases where closure is warranted4, I would think that the lack of clear guidelines in the draft policy would be a serious concern to the ETC since without then how is the Commission to fulfill its mission of "evaluation of traffic and transportation issues in the community and the prioritization of projects and improvement to the transportation system." Although much of the material in the Draft Policy appears to have come from the FHWA publication "Traffic Calming: State of the Practice", here is a table from page 21 of that publication that was not included in the Draft Policy: 3 "Traffic Talks" by James Zwilling, Edina SunCurrent , December 16, 2004 "For example, when a local street intersects with a highway more than two orders above it, such as a local street intersecting with a state highway. 5 Reid Ewing, 1999, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington DC 5 Table 3.5 Sam le Street Closure Policies and Procedures Community Policies and Procedures Austin, TX Closures discouraged but not ruled out as part of neighborhood plans Bellevue, WA Closures considered only on residential streets with 20 percent or more cut-through traffic and at least 3,000 vehicles per day Berkeley, CA Closures discouraged where other methods will address the problem _ closures and other traffic diversion schemes must be referred by city council or city manager Boulder, CO Closures discouraged but listed among program options — planning board policy against additional closures due to effect on network connectivity Charlotte, NC Closures not listed among program options — barriers occasionally erected without abandoning street right of way Dayton, OH Neutral Eugene, OR Special study required for closures and other volume control measures Ft. Lauderdale, FL Permanent closures discouraged — two public hearings and a super majority of resident support required — temporary closures allowed for crime prevention Gainesville, FL Closures discouraged Gwinnett County, GA Neutral Howard County, MD Unofficial ban on street closures Montgomery County, MD Closures difficult to effect under county code Phoenix, AZ Closures discouraged but listed among program options — street abandonment process inhibited by a filing fee, public hearing, and likelihood of no action — residents redirected to other options. Portland, OR Closures discouraged but listed among program options San Diego, CA Closures discouraged Sarasota, FL Closures not listed among program options — considered only as a last resort, if an alternative route exists Seattle, WA Closures discouraged but listed among program options —larger impact area from which petition signatures must be obtained for volume controls than for speed controls Tallahassee, FL Closures discouraged — no closures planned — no formal policy West Palm Beach, FL Moratorium in effect When the most positive policies listed are "Neutral", then clearly these methods are not preferable. When the stated purpose of the Draft Policy is "is to guide the ETC in the identification and evaluation of traffic and transportation issues in the community", it seems appropriate to include guidelines with regard to volume control methods. Street closures and other volume control methods that deny access to street are undesirable solutions that should only be employed when other methods fail to mitigate a defined problem. 6 A Ranking System with Factors Out-of-balance with Stated Policy Obiectives I apologize in advance for the detailed analysis required to understand how policy bias and hidden agendas can be enshrined in seeming objective ranking formulas. The scoring for ranking of study requests is outlined on page 15 of the Draft Policy. It is summarized in the table below: Factor Description Max Points % Relative Factor 1 No Sidewalk 100 10% 2 2 Public kid space 200 19% 4 3 Residential 100 10% 2 4 Crashes*20 (last 5 years) 200 19% 4 5 Residential Density 50 5% 1 6 (Average Traffic Volume)/10 200 19% 4 7 (% Speeding)*2.5 200 19% 4 Total 1050 100% 21 It contains a number of important factors, including some related to safety. For example if we look at the factors that have a relative ranking of 4, we find: • Traffic near children on public property. • Areas with a history of crashes • Streets with an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of up to 2000 cars a day • Streets with a high percentage of speeders up to 80% The last two factors related to traffic calming taken together, account for nearly 40% of the total maximum score. Notice, however, that these two factors have been artificially decoupled, scaled, and limited. Even though the purpose of traffic calming methods is to use the laws of physics to help enforce traffic regulations on city streets, under the proposed scoring system, normal street traffic volume has more contribution towards ranking than dangerous, speeding drivers. With the proposed formula, for example, a street with 1500 car a day traffic volume and 3% speeders gets more priority (157.5 points) than a street experiencing 500 cars a day and 40% speeders (150 points) even though the lower ranking request represents more than four times (200 vs. 45) the number of speeding drivers in a day. Other possible anomalies include: • 100 speeders on a road with an ADT of 125 yield 200 points while the same 100 speeders on a road with an ADT of 500 yield only 50 points. • 1,600 speeders a day are required to yield 200 points on a road with ADT of 2,000. • A street with an ADT of 1200 contributes 120 points toward the Petition-to-study ranking based on traffic volume; that same street must exhibit 60% speeders (720 a day) just to match the ranking contribution of the volume factor by itself. Although the introduction to Section IV claims that NTMP studies are designed to respond to "speeding and excessive cut-through traffic", clearly priority is being awarded based on simple ADT with the ranking points inequitably scaled to promote studies for streets whose normal traffic volumes correspond to a "sweet-spot" in the evaluation function. 7 As a comparison to understand just how distorted the proposed Draft Policy ranking really is, compare it to B • ioominctorrs ranging system as aescripea in tneir I ratric uaimii Factor Description Max Points % Relative Factor 1 No Sidewalk 100 11% 2 2 Public kid space 200 21% 4 3 Residential 100 11% 2 4 Crashes*20 (last 5 years) 200 21% 4 5 % of potential assessment supporting project by petition 300 32% 6 6 Residential Density 50 5% 1 Total 950 100% 19 Note that the single largest factor in the Bloomington formula, consensus of those to be assessed (32%), has been removed entirely from the proposed Edina ranking system. As importantly, the Bloomington formula contains a minimum number of 180 ranking points for this factor because the process requires at least 60% support to even be considered for ranking. The Bloomington formula considers safety and consensus with a required minimum threshold of consensus. The proposed Edina formula also considers safety, but incorporates no measure of consensus, and overwhelms the ranking of safety considerations by including an arbitrary traffic volume factor that: • Starts accruing ranking based on normal traffic volumes without consideration of street design, designated capacity (e.g. local residential street vs. MnDot designated collector), or even traffic origin. • Limits the contribution of traffic volume to the first 2000 cars per day so that streets experiencing significant volumes in excess of that number gain no additional ranking. • Backhandedly gives priority to requests using routinely collected traffic volume data, but requires a request for speed control to have a completed speed study. The metrics indicating a need for volume control are actually the proportion of non-local through traffic and the peak vehicles per hour. Since these are the results of a study and may not be known at the time of the request, they cannot be used in the ranking for study, and only a simple traffic count is required. On the other hand, in order to get ranking for speed control, a request must have the results of a previously conducted speed study. Therefore, a request for a complex volume study could easily be given priority over a request for speed controls. • The formula uses counts (ordinal numbers) for crash and volume related factors, but switches to proportion (%) for the speeding related factor, thereby minimizing its contribution to ranking even though it is directly related to safety and regulation issues. Using a percentage gives disproportionately high priority to low volume streets. If the commission chooses to incorporate factors six and seven into the proposed formula, then those factors need to be normalized' so that their relative contributions are comparing the proverbial "apples to apples". To not do so is mathematically dishonest. Here are the requirements: 1. Establish a threshold volume for the street in question that is the logical equivalent normal or expected use. In the same way that non-speeding 6 http://www.ci.bloomington.mn.uskityhall/commissittac/calming/calmingdoc.pdf 7 To convert to a normal form by transformation of variables. 8 vehicles are not counted in the priority ranking, an ATV below this threshold would not contribute to the request's ranking. 2. Either convert the percent of speeding into an estimated count of the number of speeders per day (simply %Speeder times ATV), or convert the ATV count into a proportion over the threshold volume ((ATV minus threshold) divided by threshold). 3. Establish the scale factors as dependent variables. As an example, suppose the AN threshold for a local street is set a 1000 and the upper limit for ranking is 3,5008 vehicle/Day. The scale factor is then (Maximum-Minimum)/Points=(3,500-1,000)/200=12.5 Normalizing the speeding factor proceeds as in the following example: since the % of speeders already has a threshold built in9 (> than speed limit), convert the current factor to an absolute amount. Say for example, 200 speeders a day ranks as 200 points. Simply one point per estimated speeder: (Maximum-Minimum)/Points =(200-0)/200=1 Factor 7, if the Commission chooses to include it becomes: % Speeders times AN to a limit of 200. In addition to the bias and inequities accorded to the ranking of traffic volume compared to speeding, is the conflicting statements surrounding the selection and scheduling of studies as described on page 9 of the study. The NTMP studies are intended to respond to speeding and excessive cut-through traffic on streets in a residential neighborhood and on multiple streets in one or more neighborhoods yet are intended to be sensitive to areas where there may be the potential for diversion of this traffic onto other streets and/or into other neighborhoods. While on the surface this statement seems to profess an even-handed multi-neighborhood approach by mentioning speeding and its intent to be sensitive, it fails again to identify only non-local through traffic as defined in existing policy as qualifying for mitigation, aggregates the traffic volumes on adjacent streets to artificially inflate the volume numbers even though individual streets may not meet objective criteria for mitigation, and implicitly presumes that traffic diversion will be the preferred solution of a study that has not yet been scheduled let alone completed! It's difficult to imagine a statement more tailor made to circumvent existing traffic policy and objective evaluation criteria until one gets to the bottom of the same page. Although the Draft Policy describes a numerical process for ranking petition-to-study requests, the actual scheduling of studies is based on the factors listed on page 9, including but not limited to: • Previous efforts, requests and studies in the area • Intensity and extent of the problems • Degree of conflict between traffic conditions and land uses The upper limit of 2,000 is the maximum in the proposed formula. The ETC should determine if this is reasonable. Looking at the relative volume on local streets, perhaps 3,500 or 4,000 is fairer to those residents who live on higher volume streets. 9 Traffic traveling below the speed limit is not counted. 9 • Availability of data • Regional improvement projects scheduled or planned • Feasibility of solutions This statement and list could be easily read as a shameless attempt to pervert public policy by someone whose pervious requests had been denied by the City Council. Although the scheduling factors for studies are not limited to the list provided, it is still astounding that the numerical ranking system described within the section itself is not even mentioned as a priority factor. And of course, by not limiting the factors to a predefined list, the City may as well have no policy at all. But one needs not go that far to have serious concerns about this list becoming public policy. I'm unsure how to interpret the item "Previous efforts, requests and studies in the area." Does this raise or lower the priority of an item? The factor deserves clarification because if a previous study resulted in a denial of action by the City Council, then it's hard to imagine why that request would be given priority over a new one that deserves study and evaluation. The "availability of data" as a factor is also a little confusing. Presumably if data is available then some studies or measurements have already been made. Should priority be given to a study where some existing, but possibly obsolete data exits as apposed to a higher-ranking request? This is a little like the story about a man looking at night for his lost car keys on the ground next to a lamppost; that's not where he lost his keys, but that's the only area with enough light to see. "Intensity and extent of the problems" — Aren't these factors supposed to be indicated by the numerical ranking and not by some unspecified subjective determination. "Degree of conflict between traffic conditions and land uses" — This one's fairly nebulous, but lets see if I can decode it. Even though the numerical ranking system provides priority for requests based on the proximity of the traffic to public lands where children gather, on the location of residences on one or both sides of the street, on sidewalks as a mitigating factor, and on extra points for housing density, perhaps traffic conflicts with the land use in front of some people's homes more than it does in front of other people's homes, so it's necessary to have an additional subjective factor to take this into proper account. "Regional improvement projects scheduled or planned" — while it is certainly efficient to consider the cost savings realized by combining projects (how many of us have seen a nice new asphalt top dug up a week after it was put down?), this factor smacks of putting the cart before the horse. Isn't the initial temporary installation of calming measures (Step 5c) supposed to be removable in case it doesn't meet the goals? This items seems like another excuse for circumventing equitable policy if, for example by pure chance, the roads in the Country Club area were scheduled for maintenance this summer. And wouldn't be wonderful if the cost of installing permanent modifications during construction were shown to be significantly less than the expense of following the defined steps outlined in a plan that includes a temporary installation, evaluation, removal, and then a possible permanent installation? Evaluation can be such a superfluous step when it performed only by those who made the request in the first place. 10 Recommendations 1. That the City Council not accept the Draft Policy as written and structured, and request that the ETC provide a document that meets its stated goals, including guidance (ranked alternatives and tradeoffs) for making decisions related to the transportation systems in Edina. This guidance must include probable negative aspects of alternatives as wells as their positive benefits. 2. That the definitions in the Policy be rewritten to conform to well-accepted standards, and that they reflect the stated goals of the Policy. 3. That the procedures for responding to citizen requests truly reflect input and decisions that will be made on quantitative, qualitative, and objective factors. Arbitrary exceptions to stated policies and procedures should be recognized as potential system manipulation points, and should therefore be both minimized and made transparent. 4. That the goals of and solutions to Traffic Calming issues should be consistent with Edina's existing Transportation Plan, and appropriate to defined, measurable problems. 5. That While Neighborhoods may be an appropriate unit with which to manage traffic problems, it is unacceptable to foist one neighborhood's traffic problems onto another, and will destroy the cohesiveness of the City. Neighborhood plans without a community wide Policy is inadequate. 6. Redefine the areas of impact in the Policy to reasonably include all citizens impacted by projects with consideration of the actual effects of the particular methods proposed. 7. Adjust the study ranking system to reflect the stated goals of the Policy with normalized factors that are proportionate to their relative priority. Sincerely, Jonathan R. Gross 4208 Grimes Ave S Edina, 55416 11 '71 cA4) t,La, rji-4+9 er“-h C5?,yLU); 4l ecp.c_ e)\ CYE- • ()U-1?‘-JL-c)n C-Z__DeLD C.T2-t , • „rt 1.1 • (114)7 I es ,, cr_cl . To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, t.,01.1erv-\ Print Name: Name: Address: REV AND MRS. B.L. BOIWV 43., THIELEN AVE. MIK MN 55436 12/29/2004 10:25 FAX 6512092928 BANKERS MORTGAGE Z 001/001 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 5011' Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limit:164m of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Print Name: Address: :/74 662est- ,5 605 '5 T -"y , • • - 4 w ( Dec 28 04 02:46p KELLER 952 922 4888 p.1 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. V I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". V I want at least a 70 °A threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Print Name: Address: ,„;",elf 5770 7 GO t(1( 57 n./ / • / ,,••• •••"" To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. --T I I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. 4 I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Print Name: Address: 4401 /-1 AL Vic_42com 1-14 z- z-It 7 to: A EPLL7 6 pp_r o /c/ 77/ e 4E7— -ryteL 4 / F poL - A- ti'EC Ill' / 7 n / eiP 4/ 1741-Pril 1-4-7 Arz:. A./ A,c,D. i)o)/ j A-7- AF T//&7' / ‘7--/ P4147— / tric:e7f:)A.e02/_5-- ka4A., KARY E C4 bLa Z4395 a ic2-/ Sincerely, CIA Print Name. Address: To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: 4 I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. 4 I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. 4 I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. 4 I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. 4 I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. 4 I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". 4 I want at least a70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. 4 I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. C. To: Mayor Dennis Maetzvold, Council Members- Mike Kelly, Scot Housh, James Hovland, Linda Masica Transportation Commission Members- Joni Bennett, Dean Dovolis, Warren Plante, Chairman Fred Richards, Marie Thorpe, Les Warminger, Jean White Edina Engineering Staff From: Jennifer Bunkers, 4209 Scott Terrace, Edina, MN, 55416 Subject: Public Comment Date: December 28, 2004 The following notes are from my comments made at the Edina Transportation Commission "Open House" on Thursday, December 9, 2004. One Saturday morning last spring I was at Weber Park pushing my two kids on the swings when I overheard an interesting conversation. Being that I am never one to wait to be invited into a conversation, I simply began asking questions. The men I spoke with were residents of the Country Club neighborhood. They went on to explain that a group was again spearheading efforts to close roads in the neighborhood to reduce the amount of traffic. Traffic deemed excessive, at least by residents. I asked more questions about which roads residents wished closed and where. By the time I left the park I had gotten quite an earful about what roads they wanted closed and where. I open with this comment because I believe the traffic "problem" within Country Club is the elephant in the room. I want to be clear that I do not believe this to be the agenda of all Country Club residents. I understand that the true issue being discussed this evening is not Country Club and the past and present desires of a few who live there. However, I believe the traffic problem perceived by this small, but tenacious group of Country Club residents is inextricable from the push for policy approval at this time. That being said, I would like to move on to express my two main objections to this traffic policy. The first of these objections pertains to the Plan Development portion of the Policy. In my personal experience it always works best in any circumstance to be as inclusive as possible. To disenfranchise interested individuals because they do not live within a 1 block radius of a proposed project is absurd. I can stand on any street corner in Edina, count cars and declare it a traffic problem. However to do so would be to suggest that one street or another operates in a vacuum. It is only by studying how one borough of Edina affects another and hearing the voices of all citizens that a conclusion can truly be reached. I am reminded of an article that recently ran in the Star Tribune on tax burden and debt. Jenny Wahl a Carleton College economist was quoted as saying, "There will be winners and losers, think carefully about where you want those burdens to fall, rather than pretending nobody's bearing them." I believe this is applicable here as well. This policy as it currently stands allows for the declared burdens of one to become the burdens of another, without offering that other a voice. I have to stop and ask myself, who benefits from exclusion? For the life of me, I can not come to a positive conclusion when I ask this question? My second objection speaks largely to the speed with which this measure is being pushed through. We should perhaps rename this policy "The Something is Better than Nothing Policy". Science says one must define one's terms. This policy while defining some terms to death does a poor job of defining others. Terms such as "Impacted Area" and "Discretionary" leave me crying out for further explanation. I would like those terms defined upfront, not later when I find out that because I am not an impacted individual I have no impact on a situation that affects me as a citizen. I have no doubt that all of you on the traffic commission have spent a great deal of time and energy on what has been produced thus far. So take more time. Obtain consistency of definition. Educate yourselves further with practical knowledge. Because until you have witnessed, I mean physically witness through controlled demonstrations how specific traffic management devices impact emergency services I do not understand how you can deem yourselves educated on the topic of traffic calming and management. "If my own family in a burning house and it is going to take the fire trucks 3 more minutes to get here will I be happy?" Unless you can answer "yes" then I think we need to take more time on the front end of this policy establishment. Currently I have a venue where I can air concerns regarding traffic issue — the City Council. My understanding of this commission and its mission is that it is to assist in public process as it relates to traffic. If this policy is approved, then this commission has only succeeded only in further disenfranchising the members of this community Additional Comments: 1. I would like to expand for a minute upon my opening comments and the conversation I heard in the park last spring. The gentlemen I overheard and eventually spoke with specifically referred to Marie Thorpe as the individual spearheading the "campaign" to close roads in Country Club. I was disgusted to find her sitting on this commission. She has been carrying the torch for road closure for years now and the fact that not a single individual on the commission sees this as a conflict of interest is incomprehensible. You should all be embarrassed by this display of impropriety. 2. Your inability to properly publicize the Transportation Policy Draft discussion to the residents of Edina flies squarely in the face of some of the reasons why this commission was established. Yet, despite your ineptitude no provision was made to expand the public comment period. From: Adam Harrington [adam.harrington@metc.state.mn.us] Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 9:57 AM To: Jmawhite@aol.com Cc: Arlene McCarthy; Connie Kozlak; Jim Uttley Subject: Re: Edina Transportation Public Comment Hi Jean, Thanks for inviting Metro Transit comment on the City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy (TCP). Both Met Council and Metro Transit staff have reviewed this supplimental policy to the Edina Transportation Comprehensive Plan and City Comp Plan (which Met Council approved in 1999). Overall, the Transportation Commissions Policy Plan provides good support for several transit elements and mostly focuses on traffic and transportation elements. Regarding traffic calming, please consider the impact of management devices on streets where buses operate. While most would be implemented on neighborhood streets that do not have bus service, there may be cases where there is bus service. Appendix D refers to the Metropolitan Council's 1996 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) and should be updated. The Council's 1996 TPP was updated in 2001 and again revised and recently adopted by Met Council on December 15, 2004. The new Met Council 2030 TPP can be found at http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/transportation/TPP/2004/summary.htm There are several elements that merit review and incorporation to the cities policy from a transit and transportation perspective. Chapter 3: Policies and Strategies Chapter 4: 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Chapter 5: Regional Transportation Financial Plan The 2030 TPP hard copy report will be published within the next couple of months. Copies will be available from the Council's Data Center at 651-602-1140. Thank you, Adam Harrington Manager, Route & System Planning Metro Transit 560 6th Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411 >» <Jmawhite@aol.com> 12/14/04 10:14AM >» Adam, Thanks for getting back to me regarding the Sun Current and getting information out regarding bus route changes in and around the city of Edina. I invite you as a representative of Metro Transit to submit comments on the City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy. The city is taking comments through December 30. To view the draft of this document, visit the city's website, www.cityofedina.com, scroll to the link found at the bottom of the page. Highlights of the draft policy include more attention given to efficient mass transit, park and ride lots and more. Thanks for your time, Adam. Jean White, member Edina Transportation Commission From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 11:17 AM To: 'Jkj966@aol.com'; Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Cc: Steve Lillehaug; Sharon Allison Subject: RE: draft ETC Policy public comment Good morning Jennifer. Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Although I will not comment on every point you made, I would like to point out that it appears you spent a considerable effort compiling information regarding the derivation of the DRAFT Policy and points throughout the past year where you feel staff is misleading to one extent or another. First, I have never tried to mislead anyone where the information in the DRAFT policy was derived partly or wholly from nor tried to mislead anyone on any other Edina matter. Yes, we referenced Bloomington's policy as well as many, many others (as acknowledged in Appendix D). Another point I will continue to echo: Traffic control measures that divert traffic are included in the DRAFT policy (and, yes, I definitely support including them as a potential tool). The majority of substantial policies throughout America include these exact tools (contrary to what you claim, only a few minority exclude). It is my opinion that there may be an appropriate application of one of these volume mitigating tools in Edina and to exclude would be very short sighted as a professional engineer. Does this mean one of these measures will be implemented in an area that you elude to - possibly not or possibly, but only upon after completion of a traffic study, scrutinized and recommended by staff, public involvement, recommended by the ETC, public hearing process and approved by the Council - regardless of any one neighborhood group's or individual's intentions and desires. You and others continue to reiterate the need to increase the size of the benefited areas and impacted areas - its been well stated and heard by your Transportation Commission and Council. I've given my recommendation which is a minimum and allows for expanding these areas on a case by case scenario. No two areas in Edina are the same and it is my opinion that impacted areas may need to be adjusted based on a proper evaluation of the area and the potential impact to the area. If you are able to quantify this in a more logical manner, please give a suggestion rather than telling me what we currently have is wrong and too exclusive, narrow, inherently unfair, etc. Give me an example of another community that does this in a different manner. If I saw a more logical way to define this without having to spend the taxpayers money to send notifications to the entire City in every instance, I would recommend it. Meeting the Council objectives: the draft policy does not give a specific step by step methodology for addressing some of the other transportation issues such as mass transit. The ETC will be working with staff, consultants, etc. regarding these issues on a short and long term basis but does not require (in my opinion) a step by step procedure to do so. I've only been with the City of Edina for a short time (almost a year) and it is my strong opinion that this policy is extremely important and needed to avoid the paths that the City has went down in the past and has been extremely scrutinized for. I take pride in my work, will continue to put transportation safety issues at the forefront, and am not here to mislead anyone in this City. I'm willing to meet with you anytime to further discuss any of your issues or recommendations with the DRAFT policy or any other Edina infrastructure matter. Thank you. Steve Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jkj966@ao1.com [mailto:Jkj966@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:55 AM To: Steve Lillehaug; Wayne Houle; Gordon Hughes Subject: draft ETC Policy public comment Below and attached is public comment for the ETC and City Council regarding the draft ETC Policy. I will send a paper copy with referenced enclosures also. Thanks. Jennifer Janovy 12/27/04 To: Edina Transportation Commission Gordon Hughes CC: Edina City Council Re: ETC draft Policy Public Comment Dear Mr. Hughes and Members of the Edina Transportation Commission: The 12/16/04 article in the Edina Sun Current, Traffic Talks, includes statements attributed to Commission members and City staff that require some clarification. Issue 1: Creation of the Policy "The draft Transportation Commission Policy garnered attention in recent weeks after Commissioner Joni Bennett spoke out against the policy she and six other appointed residents comprising the Edina Transportation Commission spent the past year creating." "They started with nothing," [Gordon Hughes] said. "They now have a very strong policy that provides the framework it was intended to provide." What Is Misleading: Assertion that the Commission spent the past year creating the draft ETC Policy. Assertion the ETC started with "nothing." Clarification: Material in the draft Policy originated with City staff. A large part of the Policy was taken directly from other publications, specifically the Edina Transportation Plan (1999) and Bloomington's traffic management policy, as shown below. The following points in the ETC draft Policy come from the Edina Transportation Plan (1999): Roadway Design: Points 1-4, 6-7 Roadway Function and Access: Points 2-7 Roadway Maintenance & Operation: Points 1-5 Transit/TDM: Points 1-5 Parking: Points 1-2 Pedestrian/Bicycle: Points 1-4 Goods Movement: Point 1 Funding and Jurisdiction: Points 1-4 The ETC was given a copy of the Edina Transportation Plan (1999) on April 22, 2004 and went through it in a single meeting. At the following meeting (May 27, 2004) the ETC received the first draft of their Policy, which incorporated portions of the 1999 Plan. The following points in the ETC draft Policy come from Bloomington's traffic management policy: Process and Schedule, Table 1: All or part of Steps 1-4, Step 5b, Step 6, Steps 8-10 Criteria for Screening: All Scoring for Ranking: Points 1-5 Removal of Traffic Calming Methods: All Benefited Area (Assessed Area): Benefited areas for speed hump, speed table, center island narrowing, choker, and chicane. Benefited area for partial street closure. Benefited area for cul-de- sac. Bloomington's transportation policy was not presented to the ETC prior to portions of it appearing in the draft ETC Policy. Because much of the draft Policy comes directly from other sources and because it was presented to the ETC by City staff, it is misleading to state the ETC created the Policy or started with nothing. Regarding the timeline for creating the Policy, the ETC began meeting on January 20, 2004 and received the first draft of the Policy on May 27, 2004—a span of FOUR months, not a year as stated in the article. I question how in this length of time they could have studied the issues sufficiently to come up with a Policy on their own or knowledgably edit the Policy handed to them. "They started with nothing," [Gordon Hughes) said. "They now strong policy that provides the framework it was intended to What Is Misleading: Suggestion that the draft ETC Policy objectives laid out for the ETC by the City Council. Clarification: The draft ETC Policy largely overlooks issues the ETC was formed to address, such as mass transit, while including objectives beyond the Commission's scope of responsibilities. For these reasons the draft Policy falls short of fulfilling the Council's intentions. have a very provide." meets the Issue 2: Street Closure "The group of Edinans—and some non-residents—who use the local streets as commuter routes—who attended the meeting had to be reminded by Commission Chairman Fred Richards that there is no such proposal from the Country Club District or any other neighborhood to close off streets at this time." "Lillehaug said misinformation has led people to believe that there is some type of imminent threat that streets will be closed." What Is Misleading: Suggestion that concern over street closures is the result of misinformation. Failure to disclose that that some in the Country Club District continue to advocate for street closures in their neighborhood. Failure to disclose Commissioner Marie Thorpe's past and possibly current advocacy of street closures in the Country Club District. Clarification: In many conversations with others about issues related to the draft ETC Policy I have never said, nor have I ever heard said, there is a current proposal with the City to close off streets in the Country Club neighborhood. Instead, discussion has focused on the following facts: Significant changes to streets in Country Club are still being discussed in the neighborhood, as evidenced by the article "Traffic Primer," by Country Club resident Rob Webb, which appeared this fall on the Country Club District web site. The article discusses making Browndale Ave. outbound only at W. 50th St. and W. 44th St.; Wooddale Ave. inbound only at W. 44th St.; and closing Sunnyside Rd. between Grimes and Arden Aves. Commissioner Marie Thorpe, as past chairperson of the Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues, has been an outspoken supporter of traffic calming measures, including street closures, in her neighborhood. In 2001, this group developed a plan with the assistance of City staff and taxpayer-funded consultants that included closing off Sunnyside between Grimes and Arden Avenues and adding one-way portals to Browndale and Wooddale (see attachment). According to an August 29, 2001 article in the Edina Sun Current, "A majority of the 10-member committee also believed it [proposal to close Sunnyside between Grimes and Arden and add one-way portals into/out of the neighborhood] was the least restrictive alternative to neighborhood traffic, Committee Chairperson Marie Thorpe said." It is interesting to note that in 2001 the City committed resources to studying the perceived problem in the Country Club neighborhood even though a November 2000 Traffic Safety Staff Review indicated no problems with excessive speed or volume in Country Club. 9 Regarding the issue of addressing cut-through traffic in Country Club, staff concluded, "under our present policies we have done all we can do." The draft ETC Policy, by including the option of street closure for volume control, provides the change in City policy needed for residents of Country Club to petition the City to implement street closures, as proposed in 2000/2001 and advocated in the recent Country Club District web site article. The participation of Ms. Thorpe on the ETC adds to the concern; as a Commissioner, she has supported the draft Policy, aspects of which clear the way for the City to spend time and money revisiting the proposal to close off access to her neighborhood that she advocated. This is a conflict of interest that must be addressed. Issue 3: Area of Notification "Lillehaug said the provision is a minimum area of notification. He said that if the city were to reach a point where it had to notify property owners, it would not be difficult to expand the area. 'This is another example of some thing you see in other cities' plans,' Lillehaug said. 'This policy is meant to be a framework. It is not set in stone and does not bind us to its language.'" What Is Misleading: The City will fairly expand the notification area; therefore, the minimum notification area in the draft Policy is acceptable. Clarification: Because the area of notification is too narrow, exceptions will become the rule. One project may get broad notification, while another gets narrow notification. This is inherently unfair. If a minimum notification standard cannot be fairly adhered to in most situations, the area needs to be expanded and criteria for diverging from the standard must be clearly defined and publicly stated. It is my belief that the ETC should suspend work on the draft Policy and take some time to review their process. Requests for information that would indicate a need or lack of need for a neighborhood traffic management approach should be honored and this information carefully analyzed. Staff should review manpower needs associated with a neighborhood traffic management plan and provide a cost-benefit analysis for residents to review. Steve Lillehaug conceded at the December 7, 2004 joint meeting that the manpower needs associated with implementing the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan had not been analyzed. All available traffic safety data should also be reviewed. If the ETC goes forward with a neighborhood traffic management policy at this time, it should not include the option of traffic calming for volume control. Communities with similar traffic management plans have wisely not included these options because they are known to shift traffic onto other local streets. If traffic calming for volume control were not included in the Policy, I believe much support for the Policy among certain Country Club residents would dwindle, as it seems it is just this aspect of the Policy these residents support. Finally, the City should take care to not represent citizens' concerns as resulting from misinformation when, clearly, there is significant documentation and history to support these concerns. Sincerely, Jennifer Janovy 952-920-4373 jkj966@aol.com Enclosures: 12/16/04 Edina Sun Current article, "Traffic Talks" Rob Webb article, "Traffic Primer," Country Club District web site Country Club District Committee on Traffic Issues, July 5, 2001 August 29, 2001 Sun Current article Traffic Safety Staff Review, November 2000 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: if I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. if I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. if I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. if I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. if I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. if I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". if I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. if I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, -2") Print Name: ryz,q,,,,44)4 /v7 -Az./(7,0 Address: g-?e• 6 //1//vz-7-e 7-Az 575-.2.4 December 27, 2004 Edina Transportation Committee Edina City Council Wayne Houle, Edina City Engineer Gordon Hughes, Edina City Manager 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 To all members of the Edina City Council and the employees of the City of Edina: With all due respect and consideration for all Edina taxpayers, the discussions of traffic controls through any neighborhood in Edina should be open and non-exclusive to all adjacent impact neighborhoods. As a home owner in a neighborhood adjacent to the Country Club neighborhood, I am concerned that I am not being included in the discussions now in progress. All Edina neighborhoods use all streets on and around the France and 44th Street area. Thus, there is a great need to be fair in judgements regarding these issues. If at any time traffic becomes unbalanced there will be a decline of homeowners' interest in keeping their property upgraded, clean and well kept. The problem of neglect will eventually pull down values in the Country Club neighborhood. We will all lose our caring attitudes. The people who live on 44th Street have always put-up with considerable traffic. I am sure many homeowners of the Country Club neighborhood use this street everyday. How about a share and share alike approach. Sincerely, Martha J. Rivard 4386 Thielen Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55436 December 27, 2004 Edina Transportations Committee Edina City Council Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Persons: I am an Edina resident, having lived on 44th Street and Browndale Avenue for nearly thirty years. I drive in and out of this neighborhood every day and have never perceived any traffic problems within the Country Club area. I was opposed to the rerouting plan when it came up three years ago, and I am still opposed to it. I am also against the newly proposed draft Transportation Policy, which greatly reduces the ability of people affected by any projected changes to give input and argue reasonably for the other side. For example: the previously proposed street changes (closing Sunnyside between Arden and Grimes; making Browndale Bridge a one-way westbound exit only, making Browndale one way to 44thth street and Wooddate an inbound entrance only) would have reduced traffic volume by merely a few hundred vehicles per day per street, while the traffic on 44th street would have nearly doubled. This is the assessment of Edina's own consultants! As a resident of 44th street, I vehemently opposed these changes, not only for their inconvenience to me and my neighbors, but because I could see them adversely affecting our property values. It appears that there are a few residents of our area who want to 'calm' the traffic on their own streets and, in so doing, 'privatize' the neighborhood. This I believe is foolish and shortsighted. Again I say that in the nearly thirty years I've lived here I have never perceived any traffic problems. Enacting a policy that permits street changes to be made in such an arbitrary and prejudicial manner does not serve the Council, the Committee, the Engineering Department or the citizens of Edina. AP, Si 46 t • 44th street E. . M Judi' LaVercombe N 55424 To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 °A, threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. ic a wl_ op p 0-q 1?) al05,14 0,i, 1 er- itn-urmfii ,;cces--slt At_ 5fre.13 rk.c. SincereVIcv4111 C'l (A-1° f-at isfij:kl(1)Ct I INcedcialt et--fr qi1(1 6vi'dbilia±VV42 urtrqs eufr S Lon vS teLiz cd- $7,41( Print Name: Address: L13 Ap liVo00(doLl2,_ LouLt Port irKA) cs/4z4 --os4A 111/101/1&AALIL e out/wk.. •---e%t Did /tie2 Y- ge-el-evz- i /,r2A7k) -71E6 c( t To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 % threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, Print Name: Address: e_litA--11--z_ 1-13gD cijc ) , 9 000, t 1A)4Q-12_12_,LLe_ 4}ze-a) / cul Print Name. M ARY F Address: Li 3 9 3 171lciLi Mg) To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. V I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". I want at least a 70 °A threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not -- just residents of a single neighborhood. Sincerely, 61/142- Marie L. Stenglei December 28, 2004 Marie L Stenglein 4505 W 44th Street Edina MN 55424 The Edina En ineering Department 4801 West 50 Street Edina. MN 55424 I have been living in Edina for four happy years. However, in this short time I find that I must express my opposition for the second time to Transportation changes that may increase the traffic in my neighborhood. • I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. • I am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume control. • I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. • I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. • I want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. • I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonable self- define as "Impacted". • I want at least a 70% threshold of support/oppositon for any project to be advanced or defeated. • I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. I believe that many of our traffic concerns will be helped with the upgrade of Highway 100 north of Excelsior Blvd. The city should be doing everything it can to see that the State starts working on this upgrade. Sincerely, To: The Edina Transportations Committee And The Edina City Council And Edina Engineering Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To all persons: • I am opposed to the current draft Transportation policy. am opposed to traffic calming measures for traffic volume con.trol. • I am opposed to all traffic calming methods that increase emergency response times. • I am opposed to limiting citizen's access to residential streets. want the definition of an "Impacted Area" to include those negatively affected by limitation of access. • I want the "Impacted Area" radius increased for all purposes, including notification and public hearings, to include ALL residents who reasonably self-define as "Impacted". • I want at least a 70 °A, threshold of support/opposition for any project to be advanced or defeated. I want a policy that considers and serves the residents of the entire community, not just residents of a single neighborhood. _....4._ Sincerely t. 6t Print Name: L. ,sts ble_ g i-k-n-S' Address:'`.64-4/ S-- "'"5-ei ? e A-- A-L-9 s. si-, La ,...4; P.0--.16, yfr,...,s .sstA 1£' s--z, --- \Jrt. 1;e_. IU5i IF, 1 00 .d -9L10+9Z1741993 ii31AX3383M1)31N33 Old Zt:ZO 03M V00-6Z-030 December 20, 2004 Dear Mr. Houle, We are writing to you regarding the proposed traffic changes in the Country Club area of Edina. As residents of White Oaks we are extremely concerned that this plan will adversely, if not dangerously, impact our neighborhood. We would like to take this opportunity to remind you that Townes Road, an alternative path off 50th St., has a blind curve without sidewalks. This plan will NOT make our community safer it will merely shift the traffic burden to the surrounding streets. We strongly urge you not to implement any street closures. Sincerely, Chei-il 11--vkA, 4-- 4-11 4? rZ "9 gA(dacvd 641411,u_ Lb** 7-i747164 ar? –5-n1 5'.(K) 4/70 / zfr k ektk a 1-Zit— -thok 1/7(7c R_69. / 7 J__ (Q 41 2 C7 --e 4/tA, 70 7 7ta)----4-- / if c /414 /Pie3 CreA, ( (4(L Message Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:21 AM To: 'kewolf@landolakes.com' Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission Policy draft Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:15 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission Policy draft Original Message From: Wolf, Keith [mailto:KEWolf@landolakes.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 5:07 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Transportation Commission Policy draft In response to the proposed Transportation Commission Policy draft, I would like to submit the attached letter in support of the proposed policy. If you encounter any difficulty in accessing this word document, please call me at 952-922-6278 (home) or 651-481-2222 (office). Thanks, Keith Wolf file://G:Unfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/30/2004 December 29, 2004 Edina Transportation Commission: As a civic-minded resident of Edina, I have been following the Transportation Commissions (TC) progress in the formulation of a coherent policy this past year. I would like to express my support for passage and implementation of the proposed policy, but would also like to provide some input/comments for consideration by the TC. As a first-ring suburb, Edina neighborhoods are susceptible to commuter traffic from south Minneapolis and suburbs further from the downtown Minneapolis business core. However, the city of Edina is not under any moral/ethical/legal obligation to allow its "neighborhoods" to be transgressed as a short-cut for non-residents. The proposed policy provides a process and tool-kit from which a portion of this non-resident traffic can be "filtered" yet still enable reasonable access for residents. Although Edina has initiated limited traffic-calming measures in the past, the proposed policy provides a "fact-based" framework from which future decisions can proceed in an orderly and publicly transparent manner. Without a formalized policy, traffic-related decisions may continue to be primarily subjective in nature, initiated by a few self- appointed decision-makers, and not be subject to public input and scrutiny. The proposed policy drafted by resident commissioners representing all parts of the city, with city staff involvement and council oversight is sound. For the most part, this policy is comparable to policies of other cities that are accessible in the public domain. Neighborhood vs. Neighborhood? NOT! Some opponents to the proposed policy have attempted to inaccurately characterize it as pitting "neighborhood against neighborhood". This is simply a ploy to divert attention from the issues with the intent to suppress passage of a sound, well thought-out city policy. I take exception to this divisive positioning and contend the supporters of the policy (myself included) are not against any single neighborhood; but rather support the grass roots initiative, involvement and decision-making of every single neighborhood (not just our own) as set forth in the proposed policy. For example: My children have attended/will attend Golden Years Montessori School and also utilize Weber Park for baseball/soccer in NE Edina. As a non-resident to this neighborhood, I am sensitive to the additional traffic that public venues (i.e. school, park) can have on a neighborhood. Consequently, Jam supportive if its residents petition and work with city staff to implement any traffic-calming measures that would efficiently channel traffic and enhance the livability of their neighborhood. lam willing to sacrifice additional travel time each day for the greater good of their neighborhood and the City as a whole. I genuinely believe local residents should be given a decision-making priority for their neighborhood over drivers. Therefore, Ido not believe I should be allowed to "weigh-in" on the decision if these residents choose to petition the city, particularly if they are going to be assessed its cost. lam confident that city staff and council oversight will provide the necessary "checks and balances" to ensure reasonable, yet effective traffic-calming measures are implemented. Many non-local residential opponents to the proposed policy (as drivers) contend they should participate in the decision-making process but not be subject to a financial assessment. This mind-set defies any sense of rationality. If allowed to do so, petitioning neighborhoods may be forced to accept less effective traffic-calming devices possibly at a greater cost, none of which would be borne by these drivers. More simply, local residents should be given a decision-making priority for their neighborhood over drivers. Note: Non-local is defined by the policy as traffic that does not originate from or is not destined to a location within a neighborhood. Benefit and Impact Areas The proposed policy defines the terms "benefit area" and "impact area". While both "areas" will be empowered to "weigh-in" (i.e. notified, surveyed) in the decision-making process, only the "benefited area" will be subject to a financial assessment. Structuring the process in this manner is an arbitrary class distinction, which is simply not democratic. It is noteworthy to mention most city transportation policies (i.e. Bloomington) do not make the distinction between Benefit and Impact Areas. If the city intends to assess specific property holders for specific traffic-calming measures, only those assessed should be empowered to weigh-in. All residents empowered in the decision-making process (as defined by Benefit and Impact Areas) should be subject to a financial assessment or none at all. More simply, there should not be a distinction between "benefit area" and "impact area". Volume Reduction Traffic-Calming Measures A major point of contention with opponents to the proposed policy stems from the inclusion of volume reduction traffic calming measures (i.e. Diagonal road and partial street closures). Volume reduction traffic calming measures are commonly included in other city transportation policies (i.e. Bloomington) and widely used in SW Minneapolis (throughout the Southwest High School neighborhood) and St. Louis Park (Lynn Avenue in Minnekahda Vista). These measures have proven to be extremely effective tools in mitigating traffic problems. It is noteworthy to mention that the diagonal road diverters in SW Minneapolis have been in place for many years. These traffic-calming diverters have proven to be so effective and embraced by residents that many were replaced (new concrete, without any changes) in November, 2004. The exclusion of volume reduction traffic-calming measures from the policy would hamstring city engineers in addressing and resolving traffic problems in certain situations (akin to a mechanic fixing a car w/o wrenches, the job would simply not get done correctly). The inclusion of these measures enables city engineers to customize traffic calming solutions for each specific situation. In most cases, a single volume reduction measure may be just one component in a more comprehensive plan, but the key to resolving the problem. I would also suggest that the final policy include a quantifiable traffic count goal for traffic-calmed streets. A 2000 St. Louis Park traffic engineering study established a guideline of "600 vehicles per day, a very typical daily traffic volume for a local neighborhood roadway". In closing, I would like to express my support for the proposed policy. I would like to express my appreciation for the resources and effort expended by city staff and commissioners on this worthy initiative designed to enhance the livability of our neighborhoods and community. I am also appreciative for the public openness of the monthly TC meetings this past year, as well as the opportunity to verbally comment and/or submit written comment during the formation of the policy. Sincerely, Keith Wolf Edina resident 4600 Wooddale Ave. Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Lillehaug Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:20 AM To: thmiller@mninter.nef Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: RE: Transportation Commission draft policy suggestions Thank you for your comments regarding traffic issues in Edina and the DRAFT Transportation Commission Policy. They will be forwarded to the Transportation Commission and Council for consideration. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E., P.T.O.E. Edina Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Engineering Department 952-826-0445 slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424-1394 www.cityofedina.com (fax) 952-826-0389 Original Message From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:13 AM To: Sharon Allison Cc: Steve Lillehaug Subject: FW: Transportation Commission draft policy suggestions Original Message From: Howard Miller [mailto:hmiller@mninter.net] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 5:00 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: hmiller@mninter.net; Kay Miller Subject: Transportation Commission draft policy suggestions Hi, Folks! I write to express concern about some traffic management policies under consideration by the city leaders, and to suggest possible changes. In short, I worry that people in adjacent neighborhoods can, through the city study process, impose traffic experiments that will restrict my access to my city, and - if I understand proposed city policty, I will have little recourse to influence that experiment. I'd like to get that fixed, if the case. Context - My name is Howard Miller. I have had the pleasure to live at 4022 West 44 Street since 1984; my wife Michala and I raised our children in Edina; sent them to our public schools, helped support and coach them in youth sports - it has been a very positive experience in great part. Every now and again, something comes up that really threatens local quality of life. Traffic issues loom very highly on that list for many of us in the Morningside neighborhood, as with our neighbors to the south file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffic\Transportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/30/2004 Page 2 of 2 in Edina, and our friends in St. Louis Park and Mpls too. These concerns are articulated well in the Edina Traffic Commission research available on web site. However, anything that restricts flows further will - of necessity - add to overall congestion. St Louis Park and Minneapolis have both tried some calming measures, shifting flow our way to some degree, while creating an obnoxious experience. I never ever patronize shops on 50th east of Wuollet's any more due to their changes. I chased round and around trying to find turns that got me to minneapolis soccer fields, since they cut off so many direct streets. Wasted gas, saw more of the city than needed. Some neighbors to my south are fond of a plan that would restrict or block access on Sunnyside west at Grimes, cutting traffic flow and shifting it to Woodale. The problem with that is, I live on the corner of 44 and Grimes - i go down that way, because it is my local street, part of my home city. I picked up plenty of children in country club on my way to managing or coaching soccer teams over the last 20 years - my neighbor down Grimes a bit does the same now for other sports, now as he has 2 still in school here. I teach at MSU Mankato, which requires me to drive south. My wife administers public community programs for Bloomington, requiring her to commute south as well. I don't blame the folks to the south (or north, east and west!) for wanting less through traffic - but restricting flow isn't going to help. It makes things worse. So I ask for 2 things: 1- Don't use flow restrictions - "calming" type to shift stuff around town. Instead, improve flow via improved capacity, and public transit coverage 2- Make sure that the process is fully open to public scrutiny, comment, and influence; not just those who request some traffic experiment - any citizen affected should be able to seek redress, particularly those adjacent to an area seeking traffic modification. With these, and other improvements, we may keep our quality of life high, we are less likely to waste a bunch of money forcing the open policy issue through formal legal means, and we maintain positive relations among all the friendly neighborhoods in our city. Cordially, Howard Miller hmiller@mninternet 4022 West 44 Street Edina Mn 55424 952-927-7716 file://GAInfrastructure\Streets\traffiffransportation Commission\Correspondance\2004 C... 12/30/2004 ALTERNATE A IV. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN STEPS: 3. Petition-to-Study If a study is ranked high enough to proceed, a petition-to-study must be circulated within a defined study area. City staff establishes the petition-to-study area (benefited area), based on information obtained in the preliminary review. This area is generally defined as those households and businesses fronting on the affected segments of the study area (see Benefited Area — Assessed Area on page 18). stedy-afea-(impacted-afea); The purpose of the petition-to-study is to determine the level of agreement among the study benefited area's residents regarding the problem they want to address. The petition-to-study only defines the issue and surveys the benefited area whom will be assessed all costs of the improvement. It is used only to determine if the residents within the benefited area agree with the issue that has been requested to be addressed. City staff prepares the petition, describing the problem and the procedures to be followed if a study is undertaken. The City then circulates the petition. Each household is entitled to one signature. Property owners not living in the study area are not included in the petition-to-study process. To proceed, a minimum of 25% of all surveys must be returned with a simple majority indicating agreement with the identified issue. The applications and petitions-to-study are presented to the ETC and the City Council. The City Council must order the plan development for the study to move forward to step 4. 4. Plan Development Based on direction from the Council, the NTMP study moves forward. The NTMP is reviewed by the City's Fire, Police, Public Works and Engineering Departments, and by transportation agencies including transit and schools. The ETC then holds a public meeting for the neighborhood and general public to inform residents of the proposed project, to describe the NTMP process, and to gather additional information about the traffic problems and related neighborhood needs. Plan development consists of the following steps: • Assessment of problems and needs • Identification of project goals and objectives • Determination of the benefited area and impacted area • Identification of evaluation criteria • Establishment of threshold criteria (on project-by-project basis) • Development of alternative plans/solutions The first two steps are accomplished through public meetings, neighborhood association meetings, and ETC meetings. Additionally, City staff prepares a survey-to-test describing the proposed project and calling for a temporary test installation. Staff then circulates the survey-to-test within the defined area4 impacted area ) that includes all neighborhood residents and businesses. requirements,i“esked. Each household and business is entitled to one survey. The survey is evaluated and City staff members prepare a trial installation plan. The City proposes solutions based on the citizen responses and sound engineering principles. Possible criteria, solutions and their impacts are evaluated by the ETC, City staff and other affected agencies. 5. Test Installation The NTMP is presented to the ETC and the City Council. If recommended by the ETC and approved by Council, the test will be installed for between 3 and 12 months. If the City Traffic Engineer finds that an unforeseen hazard is created by the test, the test installation may be revised or removed. 6. Project Evaluation Following the test period, the City evaluates how well the test has performed in terms of the previously defined problems and objectives. The evaluation includes the subject street and streets affected by the project, and is based on before-and-after speeds and volumes, impacts on emergency vehicles or commercial uses, and other evaluation criteria determined during step 4. If, in the evaluation, desired improvements in quality of life are not met to the satisfaction of the ETC and City staff, the traffic plan may be modified and additional testing conducted. The final test results are reviewed with the ETC, area residents, and relevant City staff, and the information is distributed during the survey stage. The City will not forward a project to the next step if the test results show it may be unsafe or it violates NTMP policy or other City policies or regulations. 7. Survey To forward the project to the stage where permanent implementation is approved (step 8), a survey from households, businesses and non-resident property owners within a-defined suwear-ea-( the impacted area ) is obtained through a mail survey administered by the City. The ETC then holds an open house for the neighborhood to update residents about the proposed project. ALTERNATE B IV. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN STEPS: 3. Petition-to-Study If a study is ranked high enough to proceed, a petition-to-study must be circulated within a defined study area. City staff establishes the petitien-te-study-area-E benefited area-); and impacted areas, based on information obtained in the preliminary review. This benefited area is generally defined as those households and businesses fronting on the affected segments of the study area see Benefited Area -- Assessed Area on page 18). In-the-ease-ef-a-isingle The impacted area is generally defined as and includes the benefited area and residents within 500-ft of the benefited area. If significant diversions to other residential streets are reasonably expected, those streets' residents are included in the study area (impacted area). The purpose of the petition-to-study is to determine the level of agreement among the study area's residents regarding the problem they want to address. The petition-to-study only defines the issue and surveys the benefited area (whom will be assessed all costs of the improvement) as well as the impacted area. It is used only to determine if the residents within the study area agree with the issue that has been requested to be addressed. City staff prepares the petition, describing the problem and the procedures to be followed if a study is undertaken. The City then circulates the petition. Each household is entitled to one signature. Property owners not living in the study area are not included in the petition-to-study process. The applications and petitions-to-study are presented to the ETC and the City Council. The City Council must order the plan development for the study to move forward to step 4. 4. Plan Development Based on direction from the Council, the NTMP study moves forward. The NTMP is reviewed by the City's Fire, Police, Public Works and Engineering Departments, and by transportation agencies including transit and schools. The ETC then holds a public meeting for the neighborhood and general public to inform residents of the proposed project, to describe the NTMP process, and to gather additional information about the traffic problems and related neighborhood needs. Plan development consists of the following steps: • Assessment of problems and needs • Identification of project goals and objectives • Determination of the benefited area and impacted area • Identification of evaluation criteria • Establishment of threshold criteria (on project-by-project basis) • Development of alternative plans/solutions The first two steps are accomplished thro. ugh public meetings, neighborhood association meetings, and ETC meetings. Additionally, City staff prepares a survey-to-test describing the proposed project and calling for a temporary test installation. Staff then circulates the survey-to-test within the defined study area (impacted area). refteirementsrif -desired: Each household and business is entitled to one survey. The survey is evaluated and City staff members prepare a trial installation plan. The City proposes solutions based on the citizen responses and sound engineering principles. Possible criteria, solutions and their impacts are evaluated by the ETC, City staff and other affected agencies. 5. Test Installation The NTMP is presented to the ETC and the City Council. If recommended by the ETC and approved by Council, the test will be installed for between 3 and 12 months. If the City Traffic Engineer finds that an unforeseen hazard is created by the test, the test installation may be revised or removed. 6. Project Evaluation Following the test period, the City evaluates how well the test has performed in terms of the previously defined problems and objectives. The evaluation includes the subject street and streets affected by the project, and is based on before-and-after speeds and volumes, impacts on emergency vehicles or commercial uses, and other evaluation criteria determined during step 4. If, in the evaluation, desired improvements in quality of life are not met to the satisfaction of the ETC and City staff, the traffic plan may be modified and additional testing conducted. The final test results are reviewed with the ETC, area residents, and relevant City staff, and the information is distributed during the survey stage. The City will not forward a project to the next step if the test results show it may be unsafe or it violates NTMP policy or other City policies or regulations. 7. Survey To forward the project to the stage where permanent implementation is approved (step 8), a survey from households, businesses and non-resident property owners within a4lefined sufve5E-area-( the impacted area ) is obtained through a mail survey administered by the City. The ETC then holds an open house for the neighborhood to update residents about the proposed project. MINUTES OF THE Regular Meeting of the Edina Transportation Commission Thursday, November 18, 2004 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Community Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Marie Thorpe, Jean White, Warren Plante, Joni Kelly Bennett, Les Wanninger MEMBERS ABSENT: Dean Dovolis, Fred Richards STAFF PRESENT: Wayne Houle, Steve Lillehaug, Sharon Allison I. Call to Order Acting Chair Wanninger called the meeting to order. II. New Business Bennett inquired about building renovations at 50th & France Avenue in the southwest corner. Houle said the Planning Dept. has not received plans for this area. Discussion ensued about how to fix the traffic problems in that area. Some ideas were to use the building renovation as an opportunity, though this is not the normal course of action to fix traffic issues; develop a partnership with the city of Minneapolis (there was a partnership some years ago that did not pan out); calibrate semaphores (three government agencies are responsible for semaphores); remove some parking spaces to create left turn lanes (parking is limited on the Minneapolis side, while Edina has parking ramp). The difference in adjacent land use to the Minneapolis side was noted, with one side being residential while the other is commercial. The consensus is that they need to find alternatives or solutions to the traffic problems that plague 50th & France. Working with the Southwest Neighborhood Association was suggested. Bennett said a resident has expressed frustrations with the project at Wooddale and Valley View Road because of the potential closure of the intersections of Oaklawn Ave., W. 62nd St. and Brookview Ave. and not being notified. Houle said the intersections are unsafe primarily for pedestrians and the city has not yet reached a decision about how best to rectify the situation. Consultants are still gathering information for a recommendation to the Council in December or January. Adjacent residents were notified and surveyed about the potential changes based on those most likely to be affected. Bennett also inquired about plans for redevelopment at the corner of Wooddale and Valley View. Houle said there are no definite plans that he's aware of, but the Planning Dept. would know more. Ill. Old Business a. Traffic Control Device Policies and Procedures 1 Lillehaug discussed the traffic safety issues that staff receives complaints about on a daily basis from residents. The issues surround regulatory signing, warning signs, guide signs, pedestrian crosswalks, pedestrian/bicyclist, and traffic speed and volume. A part-time staff receives complaints, analyzes the situation and makes recommendation to the complainant. Boyd Tate was recently hired to fill this position. The Traffic Safety Advisory Board, made up of city staff (Engineering, Police, Planning and Public Works) reviews staff recommendations and in-turn makes recommendations to the Council on course of action. Lillehaug said some issues are deferred to the Police or Engineering Dept and some will now be deferred to the ETC. Some issues that the ETC can anticipate handling is finding traffic calming alternatives in lieu of requested stop signs that are not warranted, etc. Lillehaug reviewed stop sign policy, which includes the purpose of stop signs (all traffic policies are listed on the web). The policy was developed using the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTDC), which was developed from national guidelines and in authority with Minnesota statutes. Lillehaug said the purpose of stop signs is to assign right of way at intersection, not to slow traffic speed like most people believe. Bennett asked about the basket weave method. Lillehaug said if laid out properly it could be effective. He also reviewed the myths of stop signs. b. Sidewalk and Funding Policy and Master Plan Lillehaug reviewed the current Capital Improvement funds available compared to what is needed to fill in the missing segments of State Aid sidewalks. State Aid segments completed this summer are Wooddale Ave., and W. 51st & Halifax Ave.; W. 70th St. is scheduled for completion in 2005; W. 58th St. between Concord Ave. and Wooddale Ave., Blake Rd. from Parkwood Rd. to Interlachen Blvd., and Valley View Rd. from McCauley Tr. to Braemar Blvd are scheduled for 2005-06. Lillehaug said for safety reasons, boulevard style sidewalks are preferred over the curb style sidewalks because there is space between the street and the sidewalk. Wanninger stated that the school district is transporting students who live within the walking distance because there are no sidewalks so this may be a good time to revisit with them about installing sidewalks. Bennett said there are several issues to consider: the district is operating at a deficit, start times are staggered so students will leave and return home in the dark and crosswalks would be needed. A copy of Lillehaug's presentations is available upon request. c. Systematic Development of Informed Consent (Management Training) Houle gave an overview of the basic principles of a management training seminar he and Lillehaug attended regarding building informed consent. The seminar, titled Citizen Participation: Building a Systematic Development of Informed Consent (SDIC), was developed and presented by the Institute for Participatory Management and Planning (IPMP). The emphasis is on getting project approval by building informed consent amongst stakeholders. A copy of Houle's handout is available upon request. d. Edina Traffic Task Force Report Staff reviewed the six problem areas identified by the Edina Traffic Task Force in its 1999 report to the Council and the issues surrounding each area. The areas are as follow: 2 • Northeast: W. 50th St. & France Ave., north to the city limits and France Ave. over to TH 100; • Northwest: Parkwood Knolls Area; Artic Way/Tamarac Ave Area; and LincolnNernon Dr Area; • Edina High School & Valley View Middle School Area; • Community Center Area: Southview Ln and Concord Ave; • W. 70' Street: from TH 100 to France Ave. and the residential neighborhoods south of 70th St.; • France Avenue: the area between Crosstown and TH 494 bounded by France Ave. and York Ave.; Staff was directed to develop a plan using the draft policy to rectify the issues identified by the Task Force. Wanninger said this a test to see if the draft policy, as is, can address any of the issues. A copy of the presentation is available upon request. e. Legislative Policies, January 2005 Draft Handout (copy available upon request). Schedule of Upcoming Meetings December 7th, 5:30-7:00 p.m.: Joint Council/ETC in the Community Room December 9th, 6:00-8:00 p.m.: Open House in the Council Chambers January 6th, 6:00-8:00 p.m.: ETC consideration of public comments Lillehaug said the press release announcing the comment period did not appear in the Edina Sun as scheduled. Bennett said she is dismayed that the information has not been made available to the public already. IV. Approval of Minutes from October 28th Correction on page 2: last paragraph, delete repeated paragraph, sentence beginning with "Thorpe said..." and ending with "She said neighborhood versus..." Correction on page 4: 4th paragraph, delete "Bennett concerned..." and insert "Bennett is concerned that the method of publicity would not reach all residents." Correction on page 5: delete 1st paragraph (repeated from page 4); 7th paragraph, delete "...instead of assessing property owners." A motion was made by Plante to approve the minutes with the corrections as stated above. Seconded by Thorpe. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. 3 MINUTES OF THE Open-House Meeting (Public Comment) of the Edina Transportation Commission Thursday, December 9, 2004 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Richards, Marie Thorpe, Jean White, Warren Plante, Joni Kelly Bennett, Les Wanninger, Dean Dovolis MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Wayne Houle, Steve Lillehaug, Sharon Allison Chair Richards called the meeting to order and thanked the residents for attending. Commissioners and staff were introduced. Chair Richards explained that the Transportation Commissioners were appointed by the Council to address six issue areas and they developed a draft policy as a framework for dealing with the issue areas and other such areas in Edina. He said the Commission is advisory in nature and the Council will make all final decisions. Chair Richards explained that the purpose of tonight's meeting is for the residents to voice their concerns as they relate to traffic/transportation issues and the draft policy. Chair Richards said the Commission will meet again on January 6th to finalize the draft policy for Council's approval. Residents can continue to give feedback in writing until December 30th. Lillehaug gave an overview of the draft policy, including the background; purpose, vision; action plans: short and long term; sources of funding; process and schedule; criteria for screening, etc. Lillehaug said approximately 70 emails and other correspondences have been received to date. Public Comments Jennifer Bunkers, 4209 Scott Terrace • Plan Development — be inclusive as possible; disenfranchisement based on one block radius; burden shifting from one to another; • Speed at which plan is being pushed through; terms such as impacted area not defined. Mary Porter, 5120 Halifax Avenue • Too much traffic; cut thru traffic is necessary to get from point A to point B; 1 • 50th & France at Halifax — intersection is blocked though posted signs state not to block intersection; can only turn left onto France — why? Change timing of semaphores to prevent backups; • Applauded Commission for taking on the task. Ken Bolinger, 3924 12th Ave. So, Minneapolis • Travels through Edina for work; if Crosstown becomes a toll road he would use Edina's local streets; • Discrimination because he contributes to gas tax funds; • Violations are due to lack of police presence; sees police presence in Edina. Jacy Bergstrand, 4386 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park • Policy would limit voices of people; • Neighborhood by neighborhood decision-making tears apart fabric of community; • Sidewalks in Country Club installed only after his daughter was hit; • Crosswalk requested but was not approved. Julia Berqstrand, 4386 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park • Work together to make streets safe. Lau rifle Ford, 3936 W. 44th Street • Good suggestions in policy, with the exception of closing streets with one block notification area, arbitrary decision-making; • Have learned to live with busyness of her street; • Enforce the laws instead of closing streets. , r-YZ tz-cl CA_ e t Mary Rogers, 4215W. 42" Street • Have learned to live with her busy streets without sidewalks; • Use policy to unite the community, including Minneapolis and St. Louis Park; • Do not pit neighborhoods against each other. Wendy Simpson, 4229 W. 44th Street • A policy that excludes residents' opinions will be detrimental; • St. Louis Park's residents are her neighbors and she will speak on their behalf; • Crosswalks are needed; • Do not divert trpffic., , Molly Kapsner, 4221 Country Club Road • Spent one year on Country Club Traffic Committee, looked at what would happen if certain streets were cut off; should have looked at the region instead of neighborhood; • Concerned with the 300 ft. minimum distance; inform surrounding arteries; Jonathan Gross, 4208 Grimes Avenue • Concerned about the negative definition of cut thru traffic; • Did illustration of how he's impacted by cut thru traffic but this is necessary being a city dweller; also used map to show all the areas where traffic cannot currently travel thru due to various reasons; • Limited definition of studied area; • Methods listed for traffic calming is actually restructuring the roads. 2 Tim Rudnicki, 4224 Lynn Avenue • Commended Commissioners for work done, but more is needed; • Does not harmonize existing city codes, land use, air quality, etc. • Referring to "the properties" instead of to people reflects a disconnect; • Shifting traffic creates burden for one and ease for others; • Use police to reduce speeding; • Process has been a failure because not publicized properly. Brian Fogelberg, 4632 Bruce Avenue • Good framework; good first step; • Remediation/changes is included in policy; • Neighborhoods north and south of 44th is for or against the plan; • Draft policy creates an excellent forum; • Impacted area should be looked at since many people are speaking about it. Dolores Dege, 4012 Kipling Avenue • Objects to limited area for impacted study; • Objects to 'anyone requesting a study'; • Reduce traffic at 50th & France by opening Bridge Avenue • More education, polite drivers and enforcements; Mary Carte, 4208 Branson Street • Has put into writing what is general practice already; • Look at other areas in the city and do not allow a neighborhood to hijack the process. Diana Cooper, 4005 Natchez Avenue • Greatest concern is 50th & Wooddale: not safe for children biking, drivers goes through the red and yellow light every day even with police in the area; • 42nd and 44tn are very busy and should be looked at closely; • Lives on a high traffic street, many school buses; • Concerned that driving her children to activities or school is seen as cut thru traffic; • Country Club is getting surveyed while Morningside is not. Hosmer Brown, 7104 West Shore Drive • Do not stop the residents from commenting because they may have some good ideas; • Need to move people quickly and safely, look at other options such as mass transit; • Some areas already intense with traffic so try to limit land use that would exacerbate the problem such as building high rises. • Appreciate what the Commission is doing. Brady Halverson, 4211 W. 44th Street • Good start; • Traffic volume vs. velocity; calming is needed; strike argument against volume and residents will buy-in; • People are always going to cut thru; Country Club area is appealing because there are several ways to get thru. • Moving volume from one neighborhood to the next is the major issue. Penelope, 5000 Summit Avenue • Keep in mind Interlachen and 50th; a left turn signal onto eastbound 50th would be helpful; 3 • Cut thru traffic increasing on Interlachen as drivers tries to avoid Hwy. 100 when going to Hopkins. Allen Beard, 61st & Wooddale • Traffic getting worse and worse; • Lots of speeding and police is never around; • Drivers failing to stop at stop sign at Wooddale and Valley View; • New sidewalk made a difference, but still speeding. Robb Webb, 4516 Drexel Avenue • Likes that the policy puts neighborhoods as focus; • Everyone wants to give input but traffic is mathematical; requires a traffic engineer to figure out how to get traffic back on the arterials; • Create threshold that defines a problem objectively. What is an appropriate amount of volume? Need to collect and analyze data to state objectively that there is a problem; need to determine an appropriate amount of volume on street; • Concept of living in the city near other cities so must deal with traffic; • Concerned about voting instead of analyzing traffic data; Bright Dornblaser, 4630 Drexel Avenue • Very clear and necessary for Edina to work on this issue; • Put emphasis on collectors streets first instead of neighborhoods streets; • Emphasis on calming devices vs. volume; • Supports what has been done thus far. Art Heim, Highland Neighborhood • Moving traffic on 50th going east is a big concern, maybe no left turn at Halifax; • Minneapolis uses directional arrows to discourage turning on certain streets; • Roundabouts are accident prone; Traffic problems are not going away, getting worse. David Farmer, 4612 Casco Avenue • Created a toolbox to solve traffic issues — good first step; • Quantifiable traffic numbers identifies problems such as speeding; • Lacking in the definition of impacted area; • Inconvenienced — try to quantify what this will mean; • Great framework overall. r Mark Johnson, 5007 Arden Avenue • Disappointed because he found out about meeting on the local news; • Continue to hold forums, but not in the media. Roberta Castellano, 4854 France Avenue • France Avenue is a bottleneck at certain times of the days; • Drivers use alternative routes because of bottleneck; • Problem will continue as population increases; • All drivers here tonight; we are someone else's perceived nuisance; • All seems to tolerate amount of traffic but speeding seems to be an issue; • Impacted area — be more inclusive. 4 Lee Marks, 4602 Arden Avenue • Streets were designed 100 years ago and are no longer adequate; • Changes will not happen overnight; • Disappointed in residents' behavior in meetings such as Morningside and Country Club pitting against each other; references made to process being a failure, us vs. them, an eye for an eye attitude; • Policy takes the emotion out of the process; it is fact based; includes all the options; working within confines of available tools; • Appears to be objective, takes out subjectivity. Tom Steel, 5057 Ewing, Minneapolis • Not understanding or ignoring traffic signs is a law enforcement issue; increasing fines will get their attention; • People living closest to impacted area should have more say than someone living say a mile away; • Language of property vs. people: the changes stays with the property long after the people are gone; • Notification of meeting: medium used seems to be quite effective based on attendance tonight. Chris O'Brien, 4627 Drexel Avenue • Have friends in many areas that are having problems; • Freeways are getting worse; 2 lane highways causes people to cut thru local streets to avoid congestion; • Speed/volume are both problems, not separate. Ellen Burke, 4246 Grimes Avenue • Read letter on behalf of her daughter, Julia Silvis • Definition of cut thru traffic is too flimsy and subjective; improve efficiency of legitimate traffic; • Include as many opportunities for public disclosure and debate; • Serve the needs of the entire city rather than those of one (vocal) neighborhood. Chair Richards thanked the residents for participating and told them that their comments will be taken into consideration. He assured them that citizens' input is very important, however, this does not mean that their input will always be adhered to. He said it is obvious they need to revisit the definition of impacted area and he emphasized that the Commission is not proposing street closures — this is listed as one of the options available. Residents were reminded to continue to submit written comments until December 30th. The next Transportation Commission meeting is scheduled for January 6th. Regular meetings are held the 4th Thursday of each month, 6:00-8:00 p.m. in the Community Room and are open to the public. Meeting adjourned. 5 MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION HELD AT CITY HALL ON DECEMBER 7, 2004 AT 5:30 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Housh, Hovland, Masica, and Mayor Maetzold. Member Kelly was absent. Attending the meeting on behalf of the Transportation Commission were: Commissioners: Bennett, Dovolis, Plante, Thorpe, Wanninger, White, and Chair Richards. Mayor Maetzold thanked members of the Transportation Commission for attending the joint session with the Council. He turned the meeting over to Transportation Chair Richards for presentation of the Draft Transportation Commission Policy. Chair Richards briefly reported the accomplishments of the Transportation Commission since last January. He stated the Commission had learned a great deal about traffic management and the result of their joint learning was the proposed Draft Transportation Commission Policy. Mr. Richards thanked the Engineering staff and all of the Commission members for their dedication and hard work. Assistant Engineer Lillehaug briefly reviewed the proposed Transportation Commission Policy. After listening to the presentation. Council members asked questions including: decision making over what to include in policy, available staff time to spend on traffic issues, process in developing the policy, and the suggested process t follow after the open house and comment period. The Council heard from each of the Commission members. It was suggested that a minority report be prepared and submitted in early January if any Commissioner felt it necessary. Mayor Maetzold thanked the Commission for their work on behalf of the Council, stating the Council looked forward to having the final policy submitted in the near future. There being no further business on the Agenda, the Mayor adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. City Clerk