HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-19 TPC Packet
Meeting location:
Edina City Hall
Community Room
4801 W. 50th St.
Edina, MN
Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
Thursday, December 19, 2024
6:00 PM Accessibility Support:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification,
an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Meeting Agenda
4. Approval of Meeting Minutes
4.1. Minutes
5. Community Comment
6. Reports/Recommendations
6.1. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review Draft Report
6.2. Advisory Communication: Parking
6.3. 2024 Work Plan Updates
7. Chair and Member Comments
8. Staff Comments
8.1. Presidents A/B Roadway Reconstruction Project Update
9. Adjournment
Page 1 of 29
BOARD & COMMISSION
ITEM REPORT
Date: December 19, 2024 Item Activity: Action
Meeting: Transportation Commission
Agenda Number: 4.1
Prepared By: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner
Item Type: Minutes Department: Engineering
Item Title: Minutes
Action Requested:
Approve the minutes of the November 21, 2024 regular meeting.
Information/Background:
See attached draft minutes.
Supporting Documentation:
1. Draft Minutes, Nov. 21, 2024
Page 2 of 29
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Transportation Commission
City Hall Community Room
November 21, 2024
1. Call to Order
Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Answering roll call: Commissioners Bildsten, Brown, Olson, Plumb-Smith, Rubenstein, Wright, Lewis
Absent: Commissioners McCarthy, Rosen, Lassig
Staff present: Transportation Planner Andrew Scipioni
3. Approval of Meeting Agenda
Motion was made by Chair Lewis and seconded by Commissioner Wright to amend the agenda to
include add Item 6.1 Advisory Communication: Presidents A/B Multi-Modal Facilities. All voted aye.
Motion carried.
Motion was made by Commissioner Brown and seconded by Commissioner Rubenstein to approve the
amended agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried.
4. Approval of Meeting Minutes
Motion was made by Commissioner Bildsten and seconded by Commissioner Brown to approve the
October 24, 2024 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried.
5. Community Comment
None.
6. Reports/Recommendations
6.1. Advisory Communication: Presidents A/B Multi-Modal Facilities
The Commission reviewed a draft advisory communication related to the Presidents A/B roadway
reconstruction project.
Motion was made by Chair Lewis and seconded by Commissioner Rubenstein to approve the
advisory communication. All voted aye. Motion carried.
6.2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review Draft Report
The Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report.
6.3. Traffic Safety Infrastructure Research Draft Report
The Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report.
Page 3 of 29
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Motion was made by Commissioner Plumb-Smith and seconded by Commissioner Rubenstein to
approve the report. All voted aye. Motion carried.
6.4. Traffic Safety Report of October 29, 2024
The Commission reviewed and commented on the report.
6.5. 2024 Work Plan Updates
1. Traffic Safety Infrastructure Research and Recommendations – Commission approved final
report.
2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan – Commission reviewed and commented on the draft report.
3. Parking – Received draft advisory communication from Planning Commission, will review at
December meeting.
4. 20th Anniversary Proclamation – Completed.
7. Chair and Member Comments – Received.
8. Staff Comments – Received.
8.1. Proposed 2025 Regular Meeting Dates
Staff presented the proposed regular meeting dates for 2025.
Motion was made by Chair Lewis and seconded by Commissioner Wright to move the March 2025
regular meeting date from the 20th to the 27th. All voted aye. Motion carried.
9. Adjournment
Motion was made by Commissioner Rubenstein and seconded by Commissioner Bildsten to adjourn
the November 21, 2024 regular meeting at 8:05 p.m. All voted aye. Motion carried.
Page 4 of 29
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE
J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance %
Meetings 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
SEAT NAME
1 Wright, Grant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 91%
2 Rubenstein, Tricia 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 82%
3 Bildsten, Roger 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 91%
4 Lewis, Andy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 91%
5 Rosen, Adam 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 67%
6 Brown, Chris 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 73%
7 Olson, Bethany 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 82%
8 McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 73%
9 Plumb-Smith, Jill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 82%
10 Lassig, Augie (s) 1 1 2 67%
Page 5 of 29
BOARD & COMMISSION
ITEM REPORT
Date: December 19, 2024 Item Activity: Action
Meeting: Transportation Commission
Agenda Number: 6.1
Prepared By: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner
Item Type: Report and Recommendation Department: Engineering
Item Title: Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review Draft Report
Action Requested:
Approve the draft report.
Information/Background:
See attached draft report.
Supporting Documentation:
1. Advisory Communication: Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review
Page 6 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Date: December 12, 2024
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Transportation Commission
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Review
Approved Work
Plan Item:
x Yes
No
Council Charge:
X 1: Study & Report
2: Review & Comment
3: Review & Recommend
4: Review & Decide
Items not on the approved work plan: Council action is rarely taken mid-year for items not on the current approved work
plan. Action is only taken if Council chooses to discuss the Advisory Communication at the Council meeting and provides
specific direction through a Council vote. Commissions are encouraged to submit new initiative proposals through the
annual work plan process.
Report Conclusions
The Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan (the Plan) is out of date and does not adequately reflect either
current or foreseeable conditions.
The Plan has not been updated as specified on page 142 of the Plan.
Slow execution of the Plan has resulted in Edina falling behind on the Plan commitments and lagging
similar communities in the Metro and nationally (example: People for Bikes City Rating 2024).
The city has shown a lack of commitment to executing the Plan at all levels — Council, staff,
commission(s).
The Plan needs to be updated and/or replaced. The ETC has learned that Safe Streets for All and/or
SEMAP may replace the Plan, but we’ve been told no clear path or timing. Until this is clarified we could
fall further behind in improving the pedestrian/bike experience in Edina.
Whether the Plan is updated or replaced, we will need to instill deeper institutional commitment and
address the related funding and educational challenges.
The city has imposed “shared use path” solutions in some situations where separate and buffered options
might be more appropriate for pedestrians and bikes and consistent with PBMP but less convenient for
automobile/truck traffic. Guidelines are needed for making and implementing these decisions on a fair
and equitable basis for the entire community.
Page 7 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Background:
In 2018, the Edina Transportation Commission developed a Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan as a tool to guide
the efforts of residents, elected officials, and staff to develop a safer and inviting comprehensive bicycle and
pedestrian network. The goals of the Plan are to increase the number of Edina residents, workers and visitors
who walk or bike for transportation, health, fitness and recreation. The Plan was developed with active
participation from the Edina community with guidance and consultation from city staff. A vigorous engagement
process brought voice and ideas of over one thousand Edina residents. The Plan is intended to serve as guidance
for the city's next investments through 2030. Edina partnered with two industry experts Community Design
Group and SEH at a total cost of $75,026 between 2017 and 2018 (funded by PACS) to complete this Plan. The
Plan was approved by council on 2/21/18.
Assessment:
Since the Pan was implemented, Edina has constructed a total of 11.2 miles, or 8.7% of the total Plan. This is
below the goal of a 5% yearly increase in the total mileage of striped or separated bike facilities. Edina is
completing their proposed sidewalk projects at 85% and constructed an additional 2.64 miles. However, Edina is
only completing 23% (.53 miles of 2.3 proposed) of the recommended bikeways and 46% of the recommended
shared use paths (.41 miles of .89 proposed).
At the halfway point through this comprehensive plan, the city is only 8.7% complete in delivering its vision.
Edina ranks 34th in the state of Minnesota for the quality of bike network with a score of 22, indicating
a lack of safe bikeways or gaps in the network. This compares to Minneapolis at 71, St. Paul at 61, St. Louis Park
at 55, Maple Grove at 50, Woodbury at 47, Eden Prairie at 45 and Minnetonka at 28. Edina is trailing similar
communities in their adoption of bike friendly infrastructure.
In this document, we will review the goals of the 2018 Plan and our progress towards those goals, outline the
various reasons why our goals are not being met, and outline societal changes since 2018 that could impact the
effectiveness of the Plan.
Page 8 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 9 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Twin Loops Progress
Why the Twin Loops? The Twin Loops were designed as a hub and spoke model focused on connecting
residents to parks and schools. The inner loop is focused on schools and the outer loop is focused on parks. The
Bike & Pedestrian Master Plan recommended 50 segments of enhancements (14 inner loop, 36 outer loop). The
enhancements were meant to coincide with scheduled road reconstruction and add an 8’ - 10’ shared use
pathway which would replace existing sidewalks, bike buffer stripes and or bicycle boulevards.
The vision for the Twin Loops was ambitious, aiming to transform the city's connectivity and accessibility for
pedestrians and cyclists. By aligning enhancements with road reconstruction schedules, the Plan sought to
efficiently upgrade infrastructure, creating a cohesive network that would seamlessly integrate with the urban
landscape. As the city began implementing the enhancements, it became evident that not all proposed changes
were welcomed by residents, particularly in certain neighborhoods. Two recent examples of Council approved
plans being overturned are 58th Street Reconstruction and Concord B&C Avenue Reconstruction. Understanding
and addressing the concerns of residents is crucial in assessing the viability and acceptance of the Master Plan's
initiatives.
58th Street Roadway Reconstruction 2020– case review
In January 2020, the West 58th Street Roadway Reconstruction project faced significant opposition from the
neighborhood, echoing similar resistance seen in the Concord B&C project. Although a plan had been approved
on July 16, 2019, the proposal encountered considerable pushback during a public hearing on December 9, 2019,
which saw attendance from seven community members. Additionally, 48 respondents participated in an
evaluation of alternative schemes via the Better Together platform.
The primary concern centered around the proposed 8-foot-wide path, which many residents felt was excessively
large, unsightly, and not in harmony with the neighborhood's character. There were also worries about the
potential removal of trees and the challenges posed by the steep hill in the area, which residents noted could
make biking, especially for children, unsafe.
Several community members voiced their concerns through various channels. One resident pointed out the
hazards of a shared-use path, particularly due to the obstructed sightlines caused by the hills. Another resident
deemed the 8-foot path unnecessary and visually unappealing for the neighborhood. Others preferred a single
path to minimize the impact on trees, while some residents strongly opposed the idea of an 8-foot path, arguing
that it did not belong in a residential area with modest homes and shallow yards. They suggested that the city
consider alternative routes for bikers that would better serve the community’s needs.
Some community members expressed discomfort with bikes sharing sidewalks with pedestrians, emphasizing the
need for a better-defined connection to Pamela Park. Similarly, others echoed the sentiment that an 8-foot
sidewalk was too wide and unnecessary. Overall, the feedback from the community highlighted a strong
Page 10 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
preference for a more modest and considerate approach to the roadway reconstruction that would preserve the
neighborhood's character and address safety concerns.
Concord Avenue B&C 2024– case review
The community's decision not to move forward with the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan for Concord Avenue
is influenced by several factors, as expressed in a petition from residents and discussions at a City Council
meeting. Here's a narrative summarizing the key points:
Residents of Concord Avenue have raised significant concerns regarding the proposed 8-foot shared-use path as
part of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. Their concerns included;
Traffic and Usage Concerns:
Lack of Traffic: Residents highlight that there is not enough pedestrian or cyclist traffic to justify such a
large path. They claim that Concord Avenue is not a busy street and is essentially a dead-end, which
limits the need for such infrastructure.
Minimal Bicycle Use: There is a belief that few people bike on Concord, and the path's proximity to
schools does not warrant its construction, as the neighborhood is not close enough to educational
institutions to necessitate increased pedestrian infrastructure.
Alternative Routes: Many believe that residents and visitors will continue to use other designated
roads, such as Valley View, Cornelia, and Wooddale, for biking, negating the need for a new path on
Concord.
Aesthetic and Safety Concerns:
Neighborhood Aesthetics: The path is seen as out of place in a quiet residential area, contrasting with
areas like parks or streams where such paths are common. It is believed to not fit aesthetically with the
neighborhood's character.
Safety Issues: Residents express concerns about potential safety hazards, including increased cyclist
speeds due to the slopes on Concord and the presence of 14 intersections. There are also worries about
non-compliance with fire codes and shared-use path standards, and safety risks related to new retaining
walls.
Environmental and Financial Impact:
Impact on Trees and Property Values: The construction of the path could harm mature trees,
reducing property values and privacy. The creation of retaining walls could further impact the natural
landscape.
Financial Burden: The costs associated with the path, including maintenance and assessments, are
viewed as an unnecessary financial burden on residents. The path is perceived as a waste of taxpayer
money, with many believing it does not provide enough benefit to justify these expenses.
Page 11 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Lack of Resident Involvement:
Insufficient Resident Input: There is a sentiment that the 2018 Master Plan did not adequately
incorporate input from Concord Avenue residents. This lack of consultation has led to skepticism about
the necessity and benefit of the proposed path.
Doubt About Demand: Residents question the demand for the path, arguing that it does not address a
critical need for safety or connectivity in their quiet corner of Edina.
Council Meeting Insights:
During a City Council meeting, Councilman James Pierce expressed reservations about the 8-foot path, stating
that it is more than what is needed and emphasizing safety concerns related to shared-use pathways. He
suggested that cyclists should be directed to use the street instead, as he finds the presence of cyclists on
pathways unsettling, particularly when they approach quickly.
Mayor Hovland echoed these sentiments, stating a preference for keeping young children on sidewalks rather
than shared-use pathways, which he views as dangerous. He acknowledged the community's efforts to voice their
concerns, indicating that the neighborhood has successfully made its case against the path.
Alternative Proposal:
If a pedestrian facility is deemed necessary, residents suggest constructing a 5-foot elevated sidewalk directly
adjacent to the roadway, similar to the one on Wooddale Avenue. This alternative aimed to minimize negative
impacts by avoiding boulevard incursion, preserving mature trees, and reducing maintenance and financial
burdens.
In conclusion, the residents' strong opposition to the 8-foot shared-use path, coupled with aesthetic, safety,
environmental, and financial concerns, led the community to push back against the current Pedestrian and Bicycle
Master Plan for Concord Avenue. Their advocacy for a more modest solution reflects a desire to preserve the
neighborhood's character while failing to address any broader community benefits.
Why 8’-10’ Shared-Use Paths?
The Edina Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan recommends 8' - 10' shared-use paths to balance safety, accessibility,
and practicality. These widths provide adequate space for both pedestrians and cyclists, reducing conflicts and
enhancing safety for all users. The design accommodates two-way traffic and allows sufficient room for passing,
which is crucial in promoting a more active transportation network. Additionally, these dimensions align with
industry standards and best practices, ensuring that the infrastructure can handle current and future usage
demands while fostering a more inclusive and inviting environment for residents of all ages and abilities (pp. 28-
29, 31).
The Plan considered several factors when determining the type of shared-use paths, emphasizing the importance
of creating a network that is safe, accessible, and user-friendly for both pedestrians and cyclists. Safety was a
primary concern, ensuring that both pedestrians and cyclists can use the paths without conflicts by providing
Page 12 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
enough space for comfortable and safe passing. Accessibility was also a significant consideration, aiming to make
the paths usable for people of all ages and abilities, including those with disabilities. The paths needed to
accommodate two-way traffic and various types of users, including walkers, runners, and cyclists. Durability and
maintenance were also considered, selecting materials and designs that would be durable and require manageable
maintenance. Additionally, the connectivity of the paths was essential, ensuring they connected key destinations
and integrated seamlessly with existing infrastructure.
Citizen input played a significant role in these decisions. The Plan was developed with active participation from
the Edina community. A vigorous engagement process was conducted, involving over one thousand residents
who provided their voices and ideas. This input was gathered through public meetings, surveys, and workshops,
ensuring that the final recommendations reflected the community's needs and preferences (pp. 10, 24-25, 28-29,
31). By incorporating these considerations and citizen input, the Plan aimed to create a comprehensive and well-
rounded bicycle and pedestrian network that serves the entire community effectively.
Revisiting Shared-Use Paths
The 2018 Edina Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan outlines a variety of bike and pedestrian facilities designed to
create a comprehensive and interconnected network, enhancing safety, accessibility, and convenience for both
pedestrians and cyclists. Here is a summary of the different types of facilities recommended in the Plan.
Sidewalks
Applicability: Pedestrian network
Sidewalks are paved concrete or asphalt paths designed for pedestrian use. A well-connected sidewalk network is
the foundation of pedestrian accessibility, with the quality of connections between sidewalks (across roadways)
determining the overall usefulness of the walkways provided. High quality sidewalks provide level and unbroken
surfaces, ADA-compliant curb ramps, and comfortable separation from motor vehicle traffic. Trees and plantings,
and additional facilities like benches, waste receptacles, and public art provide additional user comfort and
interest.
Shared-Use Paths
Applicability: Pedestrian and bicycle networks
A shared-use path (SUP, often also known as trail) provides a shared space for people walking and biking that is
separate from motor vehicle traffic. Shared-use paths work better when they include fewer intersections with
motorized traffic.
Shared-use paths are often provided along busier roadways when on-street bicycle facilities are not feasible, and
at locations along streams and railroads, and through parks. SUPs provide increased separation from motor
vehicle traffic and are also used at parks and natural assets to provide more scenic routes. Striping of shared-use
paths helps to clarify passing lanes and identify separate lanes for people walking or biking in high use areas.
Page 13 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Neighborhood Slow Streets
Applicability: Bicycle network
Neighborhood Slow Streets (also sometimes known as Neighborhood Greenways or Bike Boulevards) are
residential streets that are lightly modified to calm motor-vehicle traffic and prioritize bicycle travel. They can
include some or several types of traffic-calming elements: bump-outs, traffic circles, speed tables, or others.
Neighborhood Slow Streets make walking and biking easier and safer by reducing motor-vehicle speeds and by
improving safety for users of all modes. Route signage, pavement markings, and stop sign orientation can help
highlight the street as a bikeway.
Bicycle lanes
Applicability: Bicycle network
Bicycle lanes designate a portion of the roadway for preferential use by bicycle riders. Lanes are defined by
striping, pavement markings and signage. Bike lanes separate bicyclist and motorist travel flows and increase
bicycle rider and driver comfort.
Three types of bicycle lane facilities are recommended for consideration in Edina:
Separated / protected bicycle lane
Separated / protected bike lanes are on-street facilities that offer a designated space for bicycles and that
are separated from motor-vehicle travel lanes by a buffer distance and by vertical elements like bollards,
planters, or concrete walls.
This type of facility offers the highest level of traffic separation and user comfort and invites greater use
of bicycling by a wider range of the population. This is the type of facility that is generally recommended
for Edina’s on-street bicycle network.
Buffered bicycle lane
Buffered bike lanes are on-street facilities that offer a designated space for bicycles and that are separated
from motor-vehicle travel lanes by a buffer distance.
When provided next to on-street parking, they sometimes also include a buffer space between the
bicycle lane and parked cars.
This is the minimum type of facility that is required in order to create conditions that attract members of
the “interested but concerned” population into biking.
Page 14 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Conventional bicycle lane
Conventional bicycle lanes are on-street facilities that offer a designated space for bicycles and that are
adjacent to motor-vehicle travel lanes.
Each facility type has its advantages and disadvantages, reflecting the balance between safety, cost, space
requirements, and usability for different types of users. The Plan's goal is to create a network that effectively
serves the diverse needs of Edina's residents, workers, and visitors, fostering a more active and connected
community. The Plan’s effectiveness is directly tied to implementing facilities in conjunction with street
reconstruction. Every instance of street reconstruction that does not implement the recommended bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure specified in the Plan is a lost opportunity for the next 25 years. (street reconstruction
occurs approximately every 25 years)
Conclusion/Recommendations
The Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan (the Plan) is out of date and does not adequately reflect either
current or foreseeable conditions.
The Plan has not been updated as specified on page 142 of the Plan.
Slow execution of the Plan has resulted in Edina falling behind on the Plan commitments and lagging
similar communities in the Metro and nationally (example: People for Bikes City Rating 2024).
The city has shown a lack of commitment to executing the Plan at all levels — Council, staff,
commission(s).
The Plan needs to be updated and/or replaced. The ETC has learned that Safe Streets for All and/or
SEMAP may replace the Plan, but we’ve been told no clear path or timing. Until this is clarified we could
fall further behind in improving the pedestrian/bike experience in Edina.
Whether the Plan is updated or replaced, we will need to instill deeper institutional commitment and
address the related funding and educational challenges.
The city has imposed “shared use path” solutions in some situations where separate and buffered options
might be more appropriate for pedestrians and bikes and consistent with PBMP but less convenient for
automobile/truck traffic. Guidelines are needed for making and implementing these decisions on a fair
and equitable basis for the entire community.
Appendix:
Map of Existing Bikeways
Map of Existing Sidewalks
Map of Existing Shared-Use Paths
Map of Proposed Bikeways
Map of Proposed Sidewalks
Map of Proposed Shared-Use Paths
Page 15 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 16 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 17 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 18 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 19 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 20 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Page 21 of 29
BOARD & COMMISSION
ITEM REPORT
Date: December 19, 2024 Item Activity: Discussion
Meeting: Transportation Commission
Agenda Number: 6.2
Prepared By: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner
Item Type: Report and Recommendation Department: Engineering
Item Title: Advisory Communication: Parking
Action Requested:
Review and comment on the Planning Commission's advisory communication on parking.
Information/Background:
See attached advisory communication.
Supporting Documentation:
1. Advisory Communication: Parking
Page 22 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Date:
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Planning Commission
Subject: 2024 Work Plan Initiative #4 - Parking
Approved Work
Plan Item:
X Yes
No
Council Charge:
1: Study & Report
2: Review & Comment
3: Review & Recommend
4: Review & Decide
X
Action Requested:
The Planning Commission is asking the Council to review the results of its 2024 Parking inquiry, and
recommend that the commissions identified in the project roadmap include this work in their development
of future work plans.
Situation:
It has been widely reported that the United States has over 1 billion parking spaces and more square
footage of space dedicated to parking each car than to housing each person. Many cities have begun to
recognize parking as a constraint to the realization of vital transportation and land use objectives; crowding
out active transportation facilities and green space, and increasing the cost of development.
Background:
Edina’s vision for the future is documented in various approved planning documents. A review of the
Comprehensive Plan, the Climate Action Plan, and the Living Streets Plan reveals specific goals for reducing
Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT), establishment of bike/ped facilities, supporting transit, enhancing green
space, and increasing affordable housing. Given our car-based development history and current land use
profile, Edina needs parking facilities to function. Given our transportation, climate, and land use goals,
however, the amount of space dedicated to parking needs to be carefully considered and balanced against
other priorities.
In 2021 the Council approved a new offstreet parking ordinance, updating code established in the 1970s.
Although the 2021 update was a meaningful step forward, it seems likely that further refinements may be
available that could help realize Edina’s vision for the future. And since offstreet parking is part of a parking
“ecosystem”—offstreet parking influences onstreet parking, and vice versa—it is appropriate to evaluate
parking interdependencies.
Page 23 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
In 2024 the Planning Commission, in collaboration with ETC and EEC, was asked to lead an evaluation of
the “future of parking in Edina to identify parking initiatives to pursue in the next 10- 15 years, in what
order, and what commissions/resources should be assigned to each.”
Assessment:
Our review of Edina vision documents revealed nine themes that are influenced by the parking ecosystem in
our city:
1. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
2. Reduce VMT
3. Accelerate development of bike/ped facilities
4. Increase EV adoption
5. Increase tree planting
6. Reduce impermeable surfaces
7. Increase density
8. Increase transit ridership
9. Support affordable housing, especially near transit
Related to these themes, we have identified four parking-related projects that could help Edina realize its
vision:
1. Audit parking inventory
a. By commercial node
b. Identify offstreet and onstreet capacity and usage
c. Quantify surplus or shortage
d. Include bike/e-bike parking
e. Recommend policy options to increase efficient land use
2. Update offstreet parking ordinance
a. Informed by inventory
b. Strategically reduce or eliminate offstreet parking minimums (could be overlay)
c. Evaluate opportunities to reduce commercial minimums given environmental
changes (especially Office)
d. Evaluate affordable housing incentives
e. Update incentives near transit (scale of incentives, definition of “near”)
f. Evaluate incentives and trade-offs for active transportation facilities, green space
g. Evaluate regulation and incentives for shared parking by adjacent properties (public-
private or private-private)
h. Evaluate opportunities to reduce minimums where there is available public parking
nearby (could be dynamic regulation)
i. Update EV parking standards (state guidance on Commercial/MF expected in 2026)
j. Update bike/e-bike parking standards
k. Update surface parking standards (position on lot, shielding, pedestrian flow,
landscaping)
Page 24 of 29
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
3. Create onstreet parking plan with specific, measurable goals
a. Informed by inventory
b. Replace onstreet parking with bike/ped facilities, street trees/green spaces, transit
access, and other productive uses (especially where district parking is available like
50/France)
c. Evaluate one-side no parking on select streets in R zones to create bike facilities
d. Evaluate strategic use of one-way traffic to create space for bike facilities and
preserve parking
e. Evaluate drop-off zones for rideshare
f. Establish bike/e-bike parking standards in commercial nodes
g. Evaluate new parking pricing models, including Parking Benefit Districts (manage
demand, create revenue for bike/ped facilities, reduce emissions)
4. Create district parking plan
a. Informed by inventory
b. By commercial node
c. Enable reduction of onstreet capacity; create more space for bike/ped facilities
d. Avoid development of new offstreet capacity
Recommendations:
Year Project Commission(s)
2026 Audit parking inventory Planning, Transportation
2027 Create district parking plan Planning
2028 Update offstreet parking ordinance Planning
2028 Create onstreet parking plan Transportation, Energy & Environment
Implementation
2033 Audit parking inventory Planning, Transportation
2034 Update offstreet parking ordinance Planning
2034 Update onstreet parking plan Transportation, Energy & Environment
Implementation
Page 25 of 29
BOARD & COMMISSION
ITEM REPORT
Date: December 19, 2024 Item Activity: Information
Meeting: Transportation Commission
Agenda Number: 6.3
Prepared By: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner
Item Type: Report and Recommendation Department: Engineering
Item Title: 2024 Work Plan Updates
Action Requested:
None.
Information/Background:
Commissioners will provide updates on the status of 2024 Work Plan initiatives (unless an item is
elsewhere on the current agenda). See attached work plan progress report.
Supporting Documentation:
1. 2024 Work Plan Progress Report
Page 26 of 29
Page 27 of 29
Page 28 of 29
BOARD & COMMISSION
ITEM REPORT
Date: December 19, 2024 Item Activity: Information
Meeting: Transportation Commission
Agenda Number: 8.1
Prepared By: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner
Item Type: Other Department: Engineering
Item Title: Presidents A/B Roadway Reconstruction Project Update
Action Requested:
None.
Information/Background:
Staff will provide an update on the status of the Presidents A/B roadway reconstruction project.
Supporting Documentation:
None
Page 29 of 29