Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEdina Density StudyCity of Edina Density Study Spring 2024 Prepared by Kenton Briggs, Holly Leaf, Johnny Menhennet, Greg Olberding, Jem Thompson, and Yuping Wu Students enrolled in PA 8081: Master of Urban and Regional Planning Capstone Faculty Advisor Dr. Nichola Lowe, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Prepared in Collaboration with Matthew Gabb, City of Edina The project on which this report is based was completed in collaboration with the City of Edina as part of a 2023–2024 Resilient Communities Project (RCP) partnership. RCP is a program at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) that connects University faculty and students with local government agencies in Minnesota to address strategic projects that advance local resilience, equity, and sustainability. The contents of this report represent the views of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of RCP, CURA, the Regents of the University of Minnesota, or the City of Edina. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Any reproduction, distribution, or derivative use of this work under this license must be accompanied by a full bibliographic citation for this report and the following attribution: “Produced by the Resilient Communities Project (www.rcp.umn.edu) at the University of Minnesota. Reproduced under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.” This publication may be available in alternate formats upon request. Resilient Communities Project University of Minnesota 330 HHHSPA 301—19th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Phone: (612) 625-7501 E-mail: rcp@umn.edu Web site: http://www.rcp.umn.edu The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. City of Edina Density Study Humphrey School Capstone Report The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public AffairsUniversity of Minnesota – Twin Cities Kenton Briggs Holly LeafJohnny Menhennet Greg Olberding Jem Thompson Yuping Wu PA 8081 Capstone Workshop Planning and Public Policy Instructor: Nichola Lowe, Professor Spring 2024 City of Edina 3 Table of Contents Glossary of Terms Executive Summary 4 Introduction 6 City of Edina Background 8 Is Density the Right Approach? 18 Which Approach to Density is Most Effective? 26 What Policy Actions are Needed? 40 Final Conclusions 49 Appendix A - Regression Analysis Methodology 54 Appendix B - Transportation Decision Framework 63 Appendix C - Peer Cities Analysis Methodology 72 Appendix D - Scenario Analysis Methodology 78 Glossary of Terms 101 4 The City of Edina (the City) has outlined a series of strategies in its Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while achieving economic growth, furthering social equity, and improving the well­being of the local environment. To help meet the City’s goal of 45% greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction from 2019 levels by 2030, the CAP identifies five strategies related to transportation and land use patterns, three of which are of concern to this study: TL 1: Decrease community-wide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 7% by 2030 TL 2: Double public transit commuter ridership from 3.3% to 6.6% by 2030 TL 3: Increase average population per developed acre by 4% by 2030 This study seeks to better understand the relationship between population density and transpor­ tation mode share to determine whether the projected density increases are likely to be sufficient to meet the City’s transportation goals. Three research questions were asked: Is density the right approach? Which approach to density is most effective? What policy actions are needed? Edina’s climate strategy must involve increasing density, a strategy which has proven effective for reducing VMT, especially in conjunction with other policies. However, a 4% increase in residential density will not be suffi-cient for Edina to meet its CAP goals. Edina should target density increases around specific nodes and corridors. City-wide density increases are less efficient at encourag-ing sustainable transpor-tation options like walking, rolling, transit, and biking. Recommended zoning strategies can be found on the reverse side. The City of Edina can take a range of policy actions aimed at allowing and encouraging targeted population density increases while maximizing the benefits of that densi-ty. Policy recommendations can be found below. Recommended Policy Actions Land Use Recategorize Neighborhood Nodes as Mixed­Use Centers, and Mixed­Use Centers as Community Activity Centers Achieve Thrive MSP 2040 Transportation Policy Plan density minimums in existing and future transit corridors Allow commercial uses at corner parcels on France Avenue, with at least duplexes permitted along the whole corridor Disallow new construction and/or operation of drive­thru enter­ prises. When conducting corridor­based zoning, include abutting lots on parallel streets in addition to the corridor itself Continue to support ADU development Built Form Replace maximum building coverage requirement with existing maximum impervious surface coverage requirement Supplement maximum height and density standards with mini­mum height and density standards. Reduce minimum lot size to 4,500 square feet Decrease front setback requirements Adopt a set of objective design standards Reduce height transition requirements Transportation Eliminate parking requirements; if infeasible, cap maximums at one per unit at the highest.Study and remediate barriers to active transportation access to transit stops Update the TDM Policy with objective, points­based standards Executive Summary Executive Summary 5Executive Summary Recommended Scenarios Existing Conditions “Basic”“Enhanced”“Preferred” Increases allowable density around the six “Areas of Change” as defined in Edina’s Comprehensive Plan as well as within a quarter mile of future E Line stations. The bare minimum of targeted density increases that will be required to move the needle on the Climate Action Plan goals. Builds on the previous scenario by adding softer density increases within 500 feet from the “Areas of Change” as well as within a quarter mile of a reimagined “Better Route 46”, which continues west from the Grandview neighborhood along Vernon Avenue and Lincoln Drive, terminating at the future Green Line Opus Station in Minnetonka. Adds increased allowable density within 500 feet of the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network as well as within a quarter mile of major healthcare facilities. This is the most impactful scenario for reaching Edina’s Climate Action Plan goals. Using the Urban Footprint software, we tested several scenarios to compare the effectiveness of different zoning strategies. Strategies which employed targeted density increases, around commercial areas, along transit corridors, and near regional bicycle trails consistently performed better than citywide density increases. We developed three recommended scenarios, combining the most effective strategies. Each of these scenarios builds upon the last, with the “Basic” scenario representing the bare minimum of zoning changes required to support a shift toward sustainable transportation modes in Edina. The “Preferred” scenario is the one that combines the most effective of all targeted density strategies, and will have a transformative change toward reaching Edina’s climate goals. Zoning Scenario Analysis 6 Introduction Introduction The City of Edina is a first­ring suburb in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. It is a relatively affluent suburb with primarily single­family zoning. It is also home to significant commercial, medical, and office facilities which contain jobs for a considerable number of area residents, many of whom commute from other parts of the metropolitan area. The City of Edina adopted its Climate Action Plan (CAP) in December 2021. The CAP lays out an ambitious road map to help the City combat climate change as well as achieve broader goals for environmental well­being, economic growth, and social equity. The City has committed to reduc­ ing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in line with goals set by the State of Minnesota and Henne­ pin County, as well as those set by the 2015 Paris Agreement. Edina commits to reduce GHG emis­ sions across the community to 45% below 2019 levels by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050. GHG emissions citywide reached 716,715 metric tons in 2019, which sets the Edina target for 2030 at 395,000 metric tons or below. According to the CAP, the transportation sector accounted for 41% of GHG emissions in the city in 2019. Meeting the CAP goals for GHG reduction will require dramatic changes to the City’s trans­portation network and land use patterns. The CAP is envisioned as a “living document”, involving intermittent measurements of progress and plan revisions throughout the implementation phase. The next planned revisions will occur in 2025. The City of Edina has requested this study to explore the relationship between transporta­tion, land use, and GHG emissions in the community to better understand and meet transporta­tion­related goals outlined in the CAP. This report provides an analysis of these targets and a set of recommendations related to policy and programming to help the City meet them. This report is concerned with the first three strategies for Transportation and Land Use outlined in the CAP: TL 1 – Decrease community­wide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 7% by 2030 TL 2 – Double public transit commute ridership from 3.3% to 6.6% by 2030 TL 3 – Increase average population per developed acre by 4% by 2030 The primary purpose of this study is to understand whether the CAP target for density increases, as outlined in strategy TL 3, are sufficient to meet the targets for VMT and transit commuter rider­ship (TL 1 and 2, respectively). 7 Research Questions This report seeks to answer the following questions: 1.Is increasing population density the right approach to reducing VMT and increasing transit ridership? 2.Which approach to increasing density is most effective: blanket citywide upzoning, target­ ed density increases around particular nodes and corridors, or some combination of the two? 3.What policy actions should be implemented in tandem with these approaches to further reap the benefits of increased density and bring Edina closer to meeting its CAP goals? Report Structure and Overview This report will begin with an overview of the existing and future conditions regarding the City’s land use, zoning, and transportation infrastructure. We briefly compare Edina to a group of peer cities, located both within the Twin Cities metropolitan area and nationwide. This section will pro­ vide important context for the quantitative and qualitative analyses that we perform throughout the report. Next comes a section that we have titled, “Is Density the Right Approach?” Here, we seek to val­ idate the assumption implicit in our research questions that an increase in population density will have a significant effect on VMT and transit ridership. We employ two methodologies to this end. The first is a brief literature review of existing scholarship on the relationships between land use and other factors that influence VMT and mode share. The second is a series of multivariate regression analyses that seek to quantify the strength of these relationships within the context of the Minneapolis­St. Paul metropolitan area. In conducting these regressions, we also begin to answer the question of whether a 4% density increase will be sufficient for Edina to meet its trans­portation goals. We then move into a section entitled, “Which Approach to Density is Most Effective?” This is where we seek to answer the research questions concerning citywide versus targeted density increases. Here we introduce our Zoning Scenario Analysis, wherein, using a software called Urban Footprint, we study a number of different strategies toward upzoning and increases to population density, evaluating their relative impacts on VMT, GHG emissions, and transit ridership. Using the most effective strategies, we recommend three increasingly strong potential approaches to up­ zoning. The following section concerns our policy analysis, titled “What Policy Actions are Needed?”. Here, we examine the City’s CAP, comprehensive plan, and city ordinances for gaps and shortcomings, and introduce specific recommendations for policy changes that will help Edina to reach its CAP goals. Our recommendations fall into four categories: CAP goals, land use and zoning code, built form ordinances, and transportation policy. These recommendations are designed to inform the City of Edina’s CAP review and amendment process in 2025, the City’s upcoming comprehensive planning process, as well as other programs and practices. Finally, we summarize the overall takeaways from our analyses and suggest some areas for future study. By synthesizing the results of our analyses, we come to cross­cutting conclusions that we hope will remain useful and relevant to Edina ­ and perhaps beyond ­ well into the future. Introduction 8 City of Edina Background City of Edina Background In this section, we will examine the current land use, zoning, and transportation characteristics of the City of Edina. Our recommendations are solidly rooted in the existing conditions within the City, and account for factors such as neighborhood character and infrastructural capacity. Land Use & Zoning Edina is a fully developed city, having been predominantly built out by 1970 and with only 2% of the city being categorized officially as undeveloped land. The majority of the land area is zoned exclusively for single­family residential use (Figure 2 and Table 1). As such, any significant popula­tion increases will require densification of existing residential land. According to the 2018 Compre­hensive Plan, this densification is likely to occur in targeted areas of the city where multi­family and mixed­use developments are allowed. The Comprehensive Plan states that, “approximately 93 percent of the City’s land area will be unaffected by the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update.” The 2008 Comprehensive Plan identified 6 ‘Areas of Change’ where redevelopment was anticipat­ed to occur (Figure 1). These areas of change represent much of the City’s current or future land use for commercial, mixed­use, and high­density residential. Since the 2008 plan, small area plans have been developed for each of these ‘Areas of Change’, under community guidance. Our scenar­ ios for upzoning strategy are reflective of this strategy, with several of the scenarios analyzed focus on upzoning in and around the identified ‘Areas of Change’. The ‘Areas of Change’ are as follows: •Wooddale & Valley View •GrandView •44th & France •Greater Southdale •70th & Cahill •50th & France While Edina is projected to grow modestly in population and employment (Table 2), it is important that most redevelopment in the City be concentrated predominantly as residential or mixed­use with a residential component, as Edina has a strong imbalance between jobs and housing. De­spite the overwhelming use of land in the City being dedicated to single­family homes, Edina has more jobs than its population can support. A healthy ratio of jobs to housing units is 1.4, reflecting that the median household has 1.4 income­earners. However, as can be seen in Table 2 using 2016 data (most recent year of data when the analysis was completed in 2019, and not just estimate­re­liant), the jobs:households ratio was 2.35. The implication of this is that many more employees commute into the City than commute out of it, and adding more households than jobs will result in more Edina­employed residents being able to live near job centers, reducing local and regional VMT. Given that the greatest ‘Area of Change’ by land area (Southdale) is also where the prepon­ derance of Edina employment lies, the chance to grow household totals in Edina in and around Southdale would be uniquely beneficial for local and regional mode shift, as short trips are most likely to be taken without a vehicle. 9City of Edina Background Figure 1: ‘Areas of Change’ in Edina Source: Authors, using Urban Footprint and City of Edina 2018 Comprehensive Plan 10City of Edina Background Figure 2: Future Land Use Map (residential density classified by units per acre) Source: City of Edina 11City of Edina Background Source: City of Edina 2018 Comprehensive Plan, from Metropolitan Council Table 1: Existing Land Uses in Edina Use 2005 Acres 2016 Acres Percent Total Acres (2016)2005 - 2016 Change 2005 - 2016 Percent Change Singe Family Detached 5,434 5,419 53%­15 ­0.3% Park, Recreational or Preserve 922 972 10%50 5.4% Golf Course 693 666 7%­27 ­3.9% Institutional 468 444 4%­24 ­5.1% Major Highway 401 442 4%41 10.2% Multifamily 420 433 4%13 3.1% Office 407 395 4%­12 ­2.9% Retail and Other Commercial 384 313 3%­71 ­18.5% Industrial and Utility 337 299 3%­38 ­11.3% Single Family Attached 261 372 3%11 4.2% Open Water 261 269 3%8 3.1% Undeveloped Land 211 216 2%5 2.4% Mixed­use Commercial & Other 51 1%25 Mixed­use Industrial 17 0%17 Mixed­use Residential 17 0%17 Mixed Use 2008*26 ­15 226.9%** Total 10,225 10,225 100% *The 2008 plan did not split up mixed use into multiple categories, so comparison is between combined totals of mixed use.**Change in total mixed use Table 2: Edina Population, Household, and Employment Projections 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 Population 44,046 46,073 46,070 47,425 47,941 51,804 55,000 60,000 63,600 Households 13,005 17,961 19,860 20,996 20,672 22,309 24,000 27,700 29,800 Employment 20,240 36,061 44,534 52,991 47,457 52,330 51,800 54,000 56,100 Source: City of Edina 2018 Comprehensive Plan, from Metropolitan Council estimates and revised Thrive MSP 2040 forecasts, as of January 2019 12City of Edina Background Transportation There has been a long history of transit service in Edina, and the 2020s will support the larg­ est expansion potential in the past half century or more. Transit service in Edina began with a streetcar line running along 44th Street in 1905, connecting northern Edina with Minneapolis to the northeast, and Hopkins and communities along Lake Minnetonka to the west by 19061. This right of way was abandoned when the service converted wholly to bus operation in 19542. The right of way can be observed in the figure below, and today is built upon with single­family residential, for the most part. Legacy portions of the right of way within the City of Minneapolis nearby are still in operation with the historic Como­Harriet Streetcar Line. Bus service along a second east­west corridor was also present along 50th St and Vernon Ave as recently as 2019. Prior service into Minnetonka was provided by Metro Transit with Line 46 and Line 146, which operated along a similar 50th Street­Vernon Avenue­Lincoln Drive alignment, but with an ex­ press segment along I­35W to Downtown Minneapolis, operated at commute hours. It is only in the contemporary Covid­era reality that Edina has for the first time in the past century not had a complete east­west transit route. Figure 3: 1906 map of trolley service between Edina and Hopkins Source: Minnesota Streetcar Museum Recent commuter mode share data (ACS 2018­2022 5­year estimates) indicates that single­occu­ pancy vehicles (SOV) remain the majority of Edina commuters’ mode of transportation at 70%. Edina residents who worked from home represented 22% of would­be commuters (this share is likely higher than indicated, since it includes two years prior to the pandemic). Public transit, walking, and bicycling each made up around 1% of commuter mode share. This is significantly lower than the public transit mode share of 3.3% outlined in the CAP, indicating an overall decrease in public transit commuting since the start of the COVID­19 pandemic. This pat­tern has been seen throughout the metro region, as public transit ridership has trended away from commuter peak hours and towards all­day, all­purpose trips. Moreover, future transit service in Edina ­ namely, the METRO E Line Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (ABRT) route ­ will focus on all­ day high­frequency service meant to serve a variety of trip types. It is for this reason that we are recommending a change in the CAP goal TL 2 from increasing commuter transit ridership mode share to a focus on overall public transit mode share, regardless of trip type. 13City of Edina Background Figure 4: Commuter mode share in Edina Source: Authors’ calculations using ACS 2022 5-year estimates Future Transit There are two major Metro Transit projects which will improve access to transit in Edina. The METRO E Line (Arterial BRT) project will originate at Southdale Transit Center and run north through the city via France Avenue. This will connect the city with the Chain of Lakes area, downtown Minneapolis, and the University of Minnesota. The improved transit route is part of Metro Transit’s rollout of an Arterial Bus Rapid Transit network, and will have stops at 44th/France, 47th/France, 50th/France, 54th/France, 58th/France, 62nd/France, and at the Fairview Southdale Hospital & Medical Center before terminating at Southdale Transit Center, adjacent to the eponymous mall. These stations are spaced approximately every half­mile, ensuring no more than a 5­minute walk along the corridor for access to any of the stops. This line has a scheduled opening of 2025. The second major transit infrastructure project to impact Edina is the Green Line Extension. While the route will not go through Edina, it will pass closely through neighboring suburbs to the north and west of Edina (St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie), at times passing as close as a quarter mile from the City limits. This project is anticipated to begin service in 2027, connecting the southwestern suburbs directly to Minneapolis, the University of Minne­ sota, and St. Paul. The major benefit this project will bring to Edina is the catalyst for the poten­ tial return of a full east­west transit corridor through the City, connecting through the western part of Edina to Opus Station in Minnetonka. 14City of Edina Background These transit expansions will support VMT reduction and increases in transit mode share for all trips. Smart land use planning and development decisions will be important to make best use of these transit improvements. Figure 5: Existing and Planned Transit in Edina Source: Authors created using Metro Transit data 15City of Edina Background Edina Peer City Comparison An analysis of peer cities is used to compare Edina’s standing on several attributes related to the study’s goals, among them residential density and VMT. The two objectives of this section are to identify potential correlations between attributes, as well as to identify any potential objectives and strategies in their plans that can help inform Edina’s planning. The two groups of peer cities used in this study are provided by the City of Edina. Peers were identified due to similar demographic, economic, or spatial characteristics with Edina. The first group contains fellow suburban cities within the Minneapolis­Saint Paul metropolitan area, including all of Edina’s immediate neighbors. The second group is composed of cities in other metropolitan areas within the United States which also share similar characteristics. Any plan­ ning and development work done by these cities with regard to density, VMT reduction or any other topic in this study can be helpful to inform future work in the City of Edina. Table 3: Edina’s peer cities located in the Twin Cities metropolitan area St. Louis Park Minnetonka Golden Valley Eden Prairie Plymouth Richfield Bloomington Eagan Table 4: Edina’s peer cities located nationally Littleton, CO (Denver Metro) Menlo Park, CA (Bay Area) Highland Park, IL (Chicago Metro) Lee’s Summit, MO (Kansas City Metro)Bellevue, WA (Seattle Metro)Bethesda, MD (Washington Metro) Carmel, IN (Indianapolis Metro)Newton, MA (Boston Metro)Shaker Heights, OH (Cleveland Metro) Figure 6: Population density of Edina and its peers Source: Authors calculations from 2020 US Census 16City of Edina Background Figure 7: Percentage of transit commuter mode share for Edina and its peers Source: Authors calculations from 2018-2022 ACS 5-year estimates Figure 8: Estimated residential VMT per capita for peer cities Source: Authors calculations from Urban Footprint estimates 17 As shown in Figures 6 through 8, Edina sits midway among the peer cities in population densi­ ty, transit mode share, and residential VMT per capita. One observation that can be drawn from Edina’s standing is that Edina incorporates elements of an inner ring and an outer ring suburb. The transit mode share is significantly lower than usual first ring suburbs, and its single family housing ratio is very high and more aligned with an outer ring suburb. Geographically, Edina is an inner suburb and its density is comparable to other inner ring suburbs. The peer city analysis suggests that most cities have identified transportation and passenger vehicles especially as a major source of GHG emissions, usually on par with residential energy and electricity needs as the primary emissions sources. Among the various peer cities, most make mention in some format (Comprehensive Plan, Climate Action Plan, etc.) the need to reduce emissions coming from passenger vehicles. These efforts can be generally broken into three categories: making vehicles cleaner, reducing auto mode share for transportation, and reducing the need for travel altogether. Edina’s efforts to increase density and mixed­use development are variants of the second and third strategies (increasing origins, increasing access to destinations) and many peer cities have identified similar strategies as methods to reduce VMT and emissions. Only a few of the peer cities, such as Menlo Park, have already determined specific VMT reduction targets and plans to reach these targets within a defined timeframe. Fortunately, Edina already has established goals in its CAP that directly address exactly this. Another major takeaway from the Peer City Analyses is that practically all cities are focusing their efforts on a specific area or corridor rather than a blanket upzoning within the city. Most targeted corridors are areas where major transit routes pass through making transit­oriented development (TOD) the most popular strategy for increased density. In conclusion, Edina’s efforts toward VMT reduction and strategies to increase density are fur­ ther ahead of most of its peer cities. Since most climate action plans and comprehensive plans are targeted for 2030 and beyond and have been adopted within the past decade, there are not many post­implementation evaluations from which we can analyze results. For the rest of the peer city analysis, see Appendix C. City of Edina Background Section References 1. “Como–Harriet Streetcar Line Historical Marker,” Historical Marker, February 12, 2023, https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=38850. 2. “Como­Harriet Streetcar Line,” City of Minneapolis; Como­Harriet Streetcar Line, accessed May 3, 2024, https://www2.minneapolismn.gov/resident­services/property­housing/preservation/landmarks/alphabet­ ical/como­harriet­streetcar­line­trolley/. 18 Is Density the Right Approach? Is Density the Right Appraoch? The first question we sought to answer is whether the current densification target of 4% is enough to meet the city’s VMT and transit ridership goals. This question assumes a causal rela­ tionship between population density, VMT, and transit ridership: that is, if Edina were to densify its residential population, decreased VMT and increased transit ridership would follow. So before an­swering our research question, we sought to determine whether this is even a valid assumption. Is it true that an increase in population density will reduce VMT? Does density increase transit rider­ ship? And if so, will a 4% increase be sufficient? This section aims to answer these questions. In attempting to validate the relationship between population density, VMT, and transit ridership, we found the following: • Density matters, but it is not all that matters. • We found a strong linkage between population density and VMT, but other factors such as household income and access to non­car transportation modes also play a role. • Population density only boosts transit ridership insofar as it supports improved transit ser­vice. • Destination accessibility and urban design have a considerable impact on transportation patterns. • Edina’s current target of a 4% density increase will not be sufficient to meet its transporta- tion goals. • We estimate that, using population density alone, Edina would need to densify by 18.3% to achieve a 7% reduction in VMT per capita. • Increasing population density on its own is not likely to have a significant impact on transit ridership. • High­frequency service on the METRO E Line is likely to boost transit mode share in Edina. Our methodology for this section was twofold. First, we conducted a literature review of existing academic studies on the relationship between land use and transportation outcomes. Second, we conducted two multivariate regression analyses of municipalities in the 7­county region served by the Metropolitan Council. Our analyses use a range of explanatory variables, including population density, to predict VMT and transit mode share. These analyses are discussed in detail below. Literature review The relationship between population density and VMT and transportation mode share has been studied for decades, with no broad consensus among researchers. Two factors make studying these relationships a challenge. First, defining density is complex. The same population density can be achieved in very different built environments based on the distribution of that density and the mix of land uses present in a city. Second,there exists an innumerable number of variables that influence individuals’ transportation choices that are not directly related to density. 19 Contemporary research generally recognizes that density, amongst other elements of the built environment, influences both VMT and travel behavior. A common framework for understanding the impact of these factors is often utilized: the 7 Ds. 1. Density: The amount of some variable (population, employment, businesses, etc.) per unit of geographic area. 2. Diversity: The presence and quantity of different land uses in a given geographic area. 3. Design: The layout of streets, intersections, active transportation infrastructure, and public transit networks. Other built form elements such as transit stop design, streetscaping, and building massing and setbacks may also be included in this category. 4. Destination Accessibility: How easy or difficult it is to reach destinations using various trans­ portation modes. . 5. Distance to Transit: The distance (using appropriate transportation networks) from origins or destinations to the nearest transit stop. This may also be analyzed as overall transit system density, the distance between public transit stops, or the number of public transit stops within a geographic area. 6. Demand Management: Built environment interventions that influence the cost and utility of certain modes, such as the provision or removal of car parking spaces. 7. Demographics: While demographics are not an element of the built environment, this vari­able is often controlled for when studying the built environment’s impact on travel behavior so as to eliminate confounding sociodemographic factors. A detailed meta­analysis1 of existing academic research uses the 7 Ds framework to determine how differences in the built environment influence VMT and transit use. This meta­analysis com­bines the findings from over 50 articles and reports on the effects of these variables on travel behavior, resulting in average associated impacts on VMT and transit ridership. Of the 7 Ds, Destination Accessibility and Design are especially impactful with regards to VMT. The most influential independent variables identified within this report are the average distance to downtown for residents, accessibility by car, and the density of intersections and streets within a given geographic area. Results from this analysis indicate that as the average distance to down­ town decreases, so too does VMT. This is likely due to the fact that shorter distances to downtown result in shorter average trips, and increase the likelihood of being able to access key destinations by modes other than a personal automobile. An increase in accessibility by car and intersection and street density are also associated with a decrease in VMT, likely due to the shorter average trip distances that increased connectivity provides. With regards to public transit use, Design and Distance to Transit were found to be the most influential of the 7 Ds. The variable with the great­ est impact was distance to the nearest transit stop, with lower average distances being associated with higher levels of ridership. In terms of design, a greater density of streets and intersections, as well as a higher ratio of four­ way intersections, within a geographic area was associated with higher rates of transit use. This reflects the relationship between transit riders and pedestrians, as the majority of transit users access these services by foot. Greater street and intersection density helps to improve connectivity and for pedestrians, enhancing access to transit services. Each of the built environment variables that were analyzed in this report were found to be inelas­ tic, meaning that a 1% change in any of the elements studied resulted in a less than 1% change in VMT or transit use. This means that it is unlikely that small changes to any single element will be Is Density the Right Appraoch? 20 sufficient to induce significant changes in travel behavior. The influence of density in particular is limited, with increases in density being associated with minimal changes in VMT and transit use. We believe that these findings indicate that in order for Edina to meet the city’s CAP goals, a variety of built environment elements beyond density must be addressed. Destination accessibili­ty and design in particular should be improved in any attempt to reduce VMT and increase transit ridership within the City of Edina. Findings from this report indicate that, while density has a statistically significant relationship with VMT and transit ridership, the impact is modest. Of the variables analyzed, population and job density are some of the least influential factors. Results from this study indicate that a 1% increase in population density is associated with a 0.04% reduction in VMT and a 0.07% increase in transit use, on average. Based upon these findings, the 4% increase in population density per developed acre (Edina CAP goal TL 3) will be far from adequate to result in the 7% decrease in VMT (CAP goal TL 1), or the doubling of transit ridership (CAP goal TL 2). While the findings from this analysis indicate that changes to density alone will be insufficient to achieve Edina’s CAP trans­portation goals, this report also illuminates factors that can be combined with increases in density to further reduce VMT and increase public transit ridership. It is important to note that the findings from this meta­analysis were calculated by aggregating the results from a wide variety of studies. These studies examined various geographic scales, and utilized a variety of different methodologies. While this analysis offers approximate impacts on VMT and transit use associated with differences in the built environment, actual results for spe­ cific locations may differ significantly. As such, an understanding of how increases in density will impact VMT and transit use within Edina requires a more targeted approach. We will now turn to our statistical analysis, which applies the above findings to the context of Edi­ na and the 7­county region served by the Metropolitan Council. Statistical analysis We elected to perform a statistical analysis for two reasons. The first is to validate the very premise behind our research question – that is, whether population density has a meaningful relationship to VMT and transit ridership within the specific context of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The second was to better understand the broader array of factors that influence both VMT and transit ridership. In order to make our analysis most relevant to Edina’s context, we examined these met­rics for the 7­county Twin Cities metropolitan area as served by the Metropolitan Council. Our key findings were as follows: • Population density is associated with lower VMT per capita, as is walking mode share. • Absent any other interventions, we estimate that Edina would need to increase its population density by 18.3% to meet its target of a 7% reduction in VMT. • Population density is associated with higher transit ridership only insofar as it supports in­ creased transit service. We also found relationships between VMT, transit ridership, and several other demographic and transportation­related variables. We will now provide a brief overview of our methodology, a sum­ mary of our findings, and some takeaways to be incorporated into our policy recommendations. A full methodology, results tables, and more detailed interpretations, can be found in Appendix A. Is Density the Right Appraoch? 21 Introduction to methods and reasoning A regression is a statistical model that estimates a relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables. A linear regression with one independent variable is called a bivariate regression, whereas a regression with multiple independent variables is called a multi­ variate regression. We hypothesized a relationship between the dependent variables of VMT2 and transit ridership3 as a function of several independent variables related to demographics, economics, and transporta­ tion attributes. We then undertook a series of bivariate and multivariate regressions, with VMT and transit ridership as the dependent variables, using each of the localities within the 7­county met­ ropolitan area as the observations. Our primary independent variable was population density, which we defined as the municipal population divided by acres of land zoned as either residential or mixed use. We found that this residential population density measure was more closely related to VMT and transit mode share measures than simple population density, which is skewed by non­residential uses. Another key independent variable we examined was access to transit, for which we used the proxy measure of transit stop density. This methodology does not account for frequency, speed, connectivity, or population or employment density in relation to transit stops. These subtleties are important to keep in mind when interpreting our regression results. In total, there are 181 localities (i.e., cities and townships) in the area served by the Metropolitan Council. However, we removed several observations from both analyses, for example, due to being townships rather than cities, or being outliers in one or more key variables. Throughout, we at­ tempted to balance our relatively large number of potential independent variables with our rela­ tively small sample size. VMT Below is the summary of our multivariate regression results with local VMT per capita as the de­pendent variable. Is Density the Right Appraoch? Summary Statistic Value Number of observa­tions 122 R­squared 0.3922 Adjusted R­squared 0.3433 Probability > F 0.0000 Table 5: Multivariate regression summary with local VMT per capita as dependent variable Source: Author’s calculations, various data souces [see Appendix A] 22 Overall, this model explains just over one­third of the variation in local VMT per capita. This in­ dicates that while these variables are important, there are likely a variety of other factors which influence VMT that are not accounted for in this regression. Of the variables analyzed in this model, the most important for our purposes is residential popula­ tion density. The coefficient here implies that a 1% increase in residential density is associated with a decrease in about 10.04 vehicle miles traveled per capita, which is 0.38% of current levels. At this rate, using increased population density alone, Edina would need to increase its density by 18.3% in order to meet the CAP target of a 7% reduction in VMT per capita ­ far more than the 4% density target currently set by the CAP. However, this interpretation is agnostic on the approach the City takes to achieving this increase in population density. As we will examine the next section of the report, there could be considerably different VMT outcomes depending on the spatial distribution of population density. Walking mode share was also negatively associated with VMT; for every 1% increase in walking mode share, the model predicts that local VMT will drop by 2.6 miles per capita. The two income­related variables ­ median household income, and high­income status ­ were also both statistically significant. The interplay between these variables is complex, as they control for one another while displaying seemingly contradictory results: median household income is negatively associated with VMT, while high­income cities are expected to have higher VMT. This pattern illustrates a “bell curve” shaped trend in household income: VMT is highest among cities with upper­middle incomes, while both the lowest­income and the very highest­income cities tend to have lower VMT. This is where more advanced forms of statistical analysis, such as spatial regression, may prove fruitful in better understanding these complex relationships. Is Density the Right Appraoch? Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Log of population per resi-dential acre***-1004.278 0.000 Percent of households own-ing home -1280.269 0.159 Log of local road lane miles per acre -221.0041 0.256 Log of walking mode share***-262.1106 0.010 Work-from-home mode share 2092.638 0.111 Median household income**-.0093618 0.016 Transit stop density*12750.8 0.095 Has transit (binary)48.23469 0.801 High-income (binary)***627.7592 0.007 *significant at p = 0.1 level**significant at p = 0.05 level***significant at p = 0.01 level Table 6: Multivariate regression summary with local VMT per capita as dependent variable with local VMT per capita as dependent variable Source: Author’s calculations, various data souces [see Appendix A] 23Is Density the Right Appraoch? Compared to VMT, this multivariate regression was able to explain much more of the variation in transit mode share ­ almost two­thirds of it, according to the adjusted R­squared value of 0.6319. However, this was largely driven by just one variable: transit stop density. It is worth reiterating that transit stop density is merely a proxy for access to transit. Regardless of the number of transit stops, any significant increase in transit service is likely to boost transit ridership. For example, the upcoming METRO E Line, the BRT route that will serve Edina, will have stations that are spaced further apart than the existing Route 6 ­ in other words, a lower density of transit stops. But the increased level of transit service, improved speed and reliability, and tran­ sit­oriented development around BRT stations has historically been associated with increased levels of transit ridership in the context of the Metro Transit system4. Therefore, we do not recom­mend using this coefficient to craft specific policy; rather, it underscores the close relationship between improved transit service and transit ridership. Summary Statistic Value Number of observations 133 R-squared 0.6614 Adjusted R-squared 0.6319 Probability > F 0.0000 Table 7: Multivariate regression summary with transit mode share as dependent variable Source: Author’s calculations, various data souces [see Appendix A] Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Population per residential acre*0.0008785 0.058 Local road lane miles per acre -0.0328466 0.742 Households with no vehicle**0.1647657 0.019 Walking mode share*0.1377205 0.093 Work-from-home mode share**0.0421348 0.015 Log of median household income 0.0028835 0.599 Transit stop density***0.6286264 0.000 High-frequency transit (bi-nary)**0.0099594 0.033 *significant at p = 0.1 level**significant at p = 0.05 level***significant at p = 0.01 level Table 8: Multivariate regression results with transit mode share as dependent variable Source: Author’s calculations, various data souces [see Appendix A] Transit ridership Below is the summary of our multivariate regression results with transit mode share as the dependent variable. 24Is Density the Right Appraoch? Let us now turn to residential population density. Population density is significantly correlated with transit ridership, but loses significance at the 0.05 level once controlling for transit stop den­ sity. This suggests that population density is a significant predictor of transit mode share only insofar as it supports improved transit service. We recommend a density strategy that emphasizes targeted, corridor­specific interventions that either take advantage of existing transit (i.e., Tran­sit­Oriented Development) or help to spur additional future service from Metro Transit. Three other variables were identified as having a positive relationship to transit mode share: per­ cent of households without a vehicle, percent working from home, and presence of high­frequen­cy transit. The former two help to explain the variation in transit mode share, but are not closely tied to our recommended policy interventions.. However, the third variable, presence of high­fre­ quency transit (defined as 15­minute all­day service or better), has considerable implications for policy. We find that the presence of high­frequency transit in a locality is associated with a transit mode share about 1 percentage point higher than localities without high­frequency transit. Edina currently does not have any high­frequency transit. However, with the opening of the METRO E Line in 2025, it will likely enter this exclusive club of municipalities. We expect Edina’s transit mode share to improve by at least 1 percentage point upon the opening of the E Line, even absent in­ creases in population density or further improvements to transit service. Conclusion Our literature review and regression models serve primarily to better understand the driving vari­ables behind VMT and transit ridership. We gave particular attention to population density, spe­ cifically population density on residential land. Our results are generalizable across most of the 7­county area served by the Metropolitan Council, but there are certain actionable insights with regard to Edina’s goals of reducing VMT and increasing transit ridership. We found that, controlling for factors such as income, transit service, and mode shares, popula-tion density is an important predictor of VMT, with higher population density being associated with lower VMT. Edina could likely reduce its VMT per capita by increasing density even without doing so in a strategic way or pairing it with parallel interventions. However, it is clear that a 4% increase in density will not be sufficient to meet the city’s VMT or transit ridership goals, as out­lined in the City’s CAP. In order to meet these goals, Edina must increase its population density far beyond 4%. Edina can further reap the VMT benefits of density by encouraging non-car travel modes and improving accessibility to major destinations. This might mean building housing within walking distance of major employers, improving pedestrian infrastructure, and designing safer streets. We did not find that population density was as important of a predictor of transit mode share. Rather, the level of transit service within the community is by far the most important predictor of transit mode share. Population density is largely important insofar as it supports and encour­ages increased levels of transit service. Edina is already anticipating the opening of the METRO E Line, which will provide an unprecedented level of transit service to the city. A secondary predictor is the presence of high­frequency transit, defined as 15­minute all­day service or better. We there­ fore recommend that Edina advocate for frequent E Line service and reinstated service on Metro Transit Route 46 to Opus Station in Minnetonka. However this decision is ultimately up to Metro Transit. Based upon this analysis, we can conclude that the statistical evidence favors a targeted, node- and corridor-based density strategy as compared to a blanket citywide policy. While our conclu­ sions from the regression analysis speak to the policies that a municipality may enact to reduce 25Is Density the Right Appraoch? VMT or increase transit ridership on the municipal level, it does not speak to the spatial differences within a locality that inform these metrics. Indeed, one of our key conclusions is that density works best when it is supported by other policies. What does this support look like? Our next meth­ odology, the Zoning Scenario Analysis, accounts for the different strategies that Edina may take toward increasing density within its borders to achieve more favorable VMT and transit ridership outcomes. Section References 1. Ewing, Reid, and Robert Cervero. 2010. “Travel and the Built Environment.” Journal of the American Plan­ning Association 76 (3): 265–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944361003766766. 2. “VMT” here refers to per capita VMT on local roads. The focus on VMT per capita acknowledges the real­ ity that VMT may increase with increased population. We excluded non­local classes of road due to the potential for skewing from major highways running through disproportionately small municipalities. By focusing only on local roads, we were able to make apples­to­apples comparisons between municipali­ ties and focus on the roads over which these localities exercise a meaningful level of control. 3. “Transit ridership” here refers to transit commuting mode share from the American Community Survey 2022 5­year estimates. While this is by far the most robust data source available for transit ridership, it has significant limitations as it does not account for transit usage for non­commuting trips, and does not account for the nuance of commute modes that vary temporally throughout the week or year. 4. According to Metro Transit, ridership on the METRO D Line in 2023 was about twice that of its predeces­ sor route, Route 5, in 2022. 26 Which Approach to Density is Most Effective? Which Approach is Most Effective? Considering the conclusions drawn in the previous section regarding density, our focus shifts to addressing the effectiveness of various approaches to densification. These approaches typically fall into two categories: citywide densification and targeted densification strategies. Consequent­ ly, this section aims to determine whether a blanket citywide densification strategy or a targeted corridor­based densification strategy would better serve Edina’s CAP goals. Moreover, this analysis explores a variety of targeted density strategies, including around specific transportation hubs, the ‘Areas of Change’, and essential destinations. Our analysis indicated that targeted strategies around specific nodes and corridors, especially the ‘Areas of Change’, transit corridors, active transportation networks, and healthcare facilities resulted in the best outcomes in meeting Edi­ na’s CAP goals. To evaluate the effectiveness of various densification strategies, we developed several zoning scenarios focusing on different approaches to densification. These scenarios were analyzed using Urban Footprint, a software utilized by the Metropolitan Council to model density increases. Urban Footprint enables us to assess potential changes resulting from zoning changes at the parcel lev­el. Urban Footprint enabled us to obtain projections of Residential Density in Dwelling Units per Acre (Density DU /Acre), Community­Wide Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), and Public Transit Mode Share Percentage (Transit Ridership), which aligns with the three goals outlined in Edina’s CAP. We also collected estimated Total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, given that the overarching goal of Edina’s CAP is to reduce GHG emissions by 45% by 2030 to combat climate change. To pro­vide a more meaningful comparison, we decided to analyze VMT and GHG emissions per capita instead of in total, recognizing that any increase in density would lead to an increase in population and inevitably leading to a higher total VMT and GHG emissions. In assessing the effectiveness of the zoning scenarios, we devised an Impact Score formula aimed at identifying the most effective scenarios in terms of VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/capita. The Impact Score is derived by initially calculating the percentage change from the base scenario for Density (DU/Acre), VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/capita. Subsequently, the percentage changes for VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/capita are each divided by the percentage change in Density (DU/Acre) (Figure 9). The resulting score provides an estimateof the effect on VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/capita for each percentage increase in density. These Impact Scores played a crucial role in formulating our set of three recommended zoning scenarios, each comprising the most effective zoning scenarios as determined by the Impact Score. 27 Since we are using a different methodology compared to what was utilized in Edina’s CAP, we decided to use the existing conditions rather than 2019 values as a base scenario (Scenario A) for all subsequent scenarios. Our scenarios can be broadly categorized based on their approach and targeted aspect. The B Scenarios entail different levels of citywide density increases. The C Scenarios focus on targeted density in and around the ‘Areas of Change’ as outlined in Edina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The D Scenarios target Mode Shift, which aims at transitioning au­ tomobile­based trips to sustainable transportation modes, including the use of public transit, biking, rolling, and walking. This is achieved by targeting density around existing or future public transportation routes and pedestrian/bicycle facilities. The E Scenarios concentrate on increasing density around essential destinations such as schools, employment hubs, healthcare facilities, and parks. The last set of scenarios which represent our recommended scenarios, were developed by combining the most effective of the scenarios, with effectiveness measured by the Impact Score. These scenarios have been titled ‘Basic’, ‘Enhanced’, and ‘Preferred’, with each scenario building upon the previous one, with the ‘Preferred’ scenario incorporating the most strategies and being our highest recommendation for Edina. (See Appendix D for Scenario Methodology) Throughout this analysis, we considered which scenarios would align with Edina’s goals as out­ lined in their CAP. Although we used different methodologies, precluding direct comparisons with the set targets in the CAP, we utilized the percentage change in the targets as a benchmark to evaluate our scenarios. In Edina’s CAP, the goals included a 45% reduction in GHG emissions, a 7% reduction in VMT, a 100% increase in commuter public transit ridership, and a 4% increase in density. We directly tested whether a 4% increase in density would achieve Edina’s VMT and transit ridership goals. Additionally, we assessed whether the scenarios would meet the state of Minnesota’s goal of reducing VMT by 20% per capita by 2050 as articulated in Minnesota’s Climate Action Framework.1 It is important to acknowledge several key limitations of Urban Footprint before delving into the results. Firstly, several goals outlined in Edina’s CAP did not directly correspond to the data provided by Urban Footprint. For instance, Urban Footprint does not specifically calculate Tran­sit Ridership for Commuting Trips only but instead provides Transit Ridership in terms of overall mode share for all trips. Additionally, we opted to measure density using Dwelling Units per Acre Figure 9: Impact Score Formula Source: Authors Which Approach is Most Effective? 28 (DU/Acre) rather than Population per Residential Acre. This decision was made because zoning changes would directly impact dwelling units and only indirectly affect population. Furthermore, to achieve a citywide increase in density, Urban Footprint utilizes dwelling units to increase popu­ lation rather than specifying a total population count. As previously mentioned, we are also using per capita versions of VMT and GHG emissions rather than total figures due to the population increase that would occur regardless of the policies implemented. Secondly, as previously stated, we had to utilize existing conditions today as the basis for our scenarios due to being unable to make direct comparisons with the CAP due to differing method­ologies. Thirdly, Urban Footprint does not permit the addition of additional public transit services into the scenarios. Consequently, future public transit developments such as the E Line and Green Line Extension, along with other potential public transit improvements, cannot be modeled or considered when Urban Footprint measures Transit Ridership. Therefore, any scenario results for Transit Ridership must be interpreted in light of the current public transit routes, stops, and fre­quency, without improvements to the service itself. However, it is reasonable to assume that if Ur­ban Footprint could measure increased public transit service, then Transit Ridership would likely be significantly higher. This assumption is particularly valid given that higher density is a prereq­ uisite for increased transit service by Metro Transit.2 Finally, it is worth noting that Urban Footprint may not provide a completely accurate represen­tation of real­life scenarios. Zoning classifications do not guarantee the highest possible density development is built, as this depends on property owners, developers, and decisions made by Edi­ na’s Planning Commission and City Council. Additionally, population distribution among differ­ ent zoning types is averaged, potentially leading to inaccuracies in population counts, which may impact the overall analyses. Despite these limitations, we believe that Urban Footprint is the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of different zoning changes aimed at increasing density and their impacts on VMT, Transit Ridership, and GHG emissions. Which Approach is Most Effective? 29Which Approach is Most Effective? Figure 10: Base Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Scenario A – Base Scenario Scenario A is based upon Urban Footprint’s base canvas, which reflects the existing property conditions and zoning (See Appendix D for Urban Footprint’s Base Canvas Methodology). The accuracy of the base canvas was verified through three different methods: visual comparison with Edina’s 2040 comprehensive plan, visual comparison with Google Map’s satellite imagery, and a comparison of estimated population with the 2020 Census data. This scenario serves as the foun­ dation of comparison for all other scenarios and establishes the baseline against which the im­ pact of various metrics can be assessed (Figure 10). 30 Scenario B – Citywide Density Scenario B is divided into three different scenarios: B­1, B­2, B­3. The first two scenarios involved selecting all residential parcels in Urban Footprint, calculating the average density of these par­ cels, and increasing that by a certain percentage. B­1 involves a 4% increase in density citywide, which aligns with the Density goal in Edina’s CAP. B­2 involves an 8% increase in density citywide, which is double the Density goal set by Edina’s CAP, to explore if there are any multiplier effects. Scenario B­3, at the request of Edina City Staff, focuses on increasing the average density of all R­1 parcels by 6.95%, resulting in an average net 4% increase in density citywide. Sub­scenarios: • B­1: 4% Increase in Citywide Density (DU/Acre) • B­2: 8% Increase in Citywide Density (DU/Acre) • B­3: 6.95% Increase in R­1 Density (DU/Acre) which Averages 4% Increase in Density Citywide (DU/Acre) Which Approach is Most Effective? Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%) VMT Impact Score GHG/capita change (%) GHG Im- pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Ridership Impact Score B-1 3.85%-1.98%0.52 -4.07%1.06 -2.45%-0.64 B-2 7.41%-2.73%0.37 -5.88%0.79 -2.84%-0.38 B-3 3.85%-0.86%0.22 -2.65%0.69 -1.80%-0.47 Table 9: Scenario B Results Source: Authors’ calculations with Urban Footprint 31Which Approach is Most Effective? Figure 11: ‘Areas of Change’ with 500-foot buffer Scenario C – ‘Areas of Change’ Scenario C is divided into two different scenarios: C­1 and C­2 each focusing on the identified ‘Areas of Change’ outlined in Edina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan and increasing the density in their vicinity. In C­1, upzoning occurs only within the ‘Areas of Change’. In C­2, a 500­foot buffer is established around each ‘Areas of Change’ to further increase density (Figure 11). Both scenarios aim to create vibrant, mixed­use communities where residents can live, work, and shop without reliance on cars. Additionally, surface parking is minimized, and mixed­use parking structures are concentrated to optimize land use efficiency. Within the 500­foot buffer, residential duplexes are predominantly zoned, complemented by suburban townhomes in select areas. Sub­scenarios: • C­1: ‘Areas of Change’ • C­2: ‘Areas of Change’ with a 500ft. Buffer Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%)VMT Impact Score GHG/capita change (%)GHG Im-pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Ridership Impact Score C-1 26.81%-13.89%0.52 -13.04%0.49 12.53%0.47 C-2 32.18%-16.75%0.52 -16.08%0.50 13.64%0.42 Table 10: Scenario C Results Source: Authors’ Calculations with Urban Footprint Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 32Which Approach is Most Effective? Scenario D - Mode Shift Toward Sustainable Transportation Scenario D is divided into four different scenarios D­1, D­2, D­3, and D­4, all aimed at promoting mode shift toward sustainable transportation modes to reduce VMT and GHG emissions. Both D­1 and D­2 target mode shift toward public transit by allowing dense mixed­use transit­oriented development (TOD) within 500 feet of proposed bus stops and duplexes/suburban townhomes within a quarter mile of these stops. D­1 focuses on this zoning strategy along the future E Line Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (ABRT) line (Figure 12), while D­2 extends this approach along a potential East­West transit corridor spanning W 50th St/Vernon Ave S/Lincoln Dr (Figure 14). This corridor is currently partially served by Route 46 which travels along 50th St and Vernon Ave before termi­ nating in the Grandview neighborhood. This corridor was previously served fully by Route 46 as recently as 2019 and is reimagined in D­2 to restore its previous bus routing and connecting Opus Station (Green Line Extension) in Minnetonka to 46th St Station (Blue Line) in Minneapolis. With additional connections to Orange Line, A Line, C Line, D Line, and future E Line, this route would offer Edina residents convenient transfer points for regional travel. It is worth noting that this scenario achievesan average density of 19 DU/acre along this reimagined transit corridor, meet­ing Metro Transit’s density requirement of 15 DU/acre for ABRT service.3 Conversely, D­3 targeted active transportationby increasing zoning alongside the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) (Figure 13). The RBTN was chosen as it represents a regional approach to active transpor­ tation. Finally, D­4 integrates all the scenarios, striving to encourage mode share between both transit and pedestrian/bicycling. Sub­scenarios: • D­1: E Line Corridor • D­2: E Line Corridor & East­West Corridor • D­3: Active Transportation (RBTN) • D­4: Combination of all the other D scenarios Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%) VMT Impact Score GHG/capita change (%) GHG Im- pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Ridership Impact Score D-1 28.52%-18.62%0.65 -12.30%0.43 12.60%0.44 D-2 44.01%-26.22%0.60 -19.88%0.45 15.64%0.36 D-3 22.20%-13.32%0.60 -13.45%0.61 8.45%0.38 D-4 48.29%-29.31%0.61 -24.47%0.51 16.01%0.33 Table 11: Scenario D Results Source: Authors’ calculations with Urban Footprint 33Which Approach is Most Effective? Figure 12: E Line Corridor Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 14: East-West Corridor Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 13: RBTN Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 34Which Approach is Most Effective? Scenario E - Essential Destinations Scenario E is divided into five different scenarios, all focusing on increasing density around dif­ ferent categories of essential destinations. Each scenario within this category involves increasing allowable density on all residential lots within a quarter mile radius of the associated destinations. E­1 aims to increase density around schools and educational institutions (Figure 15). E­2 targets density increases at employment hubs, both retail and office (Figure 16). E­3 focuses on increas­ ing density around healthcare facilities (Figure 17). E­4 centers on increasing density around parks (Figure 18). Finally, E­5 integrates all four categories of essential destinations, aiming to increase density around each of them. Sub­scenarios: • E­1: Public Schools • E­2: Retail & Employment Hubs • E­3: Major Healthcare Facilities • E­4: Major Parks • E­5: Combination of all the other E scenarios Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%)VMT Impact Score GHG/capita change (%)GHG Im-pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Ridership Impact Score E-1 5.08%-0.40%0.08 -2.39%0.47 -0.75%-0.15 E-2 28.17%-18.47%0.66 -21.53%0.76 3.61%0.13 E-3 22.69%-16.96%0.75 -17.32%0.76 2.48%0.11 E-4 19.99%-10.20%0.51 -14.68%0.73 -0.53%-0.03 E-5 27.18%-12.63%0.46 -19.48%0.72 -1.33%-0.05 Table 12: Scenario E Results Source: Authors’ calculations with Urban Footprint 35Which Approach is Most Effective? Figure 15: Public Schools Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 16: Retail and Employment Hubs Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 17: Major Healthcare Facilities Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 18: Parks Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 36Which Approach is Most Effective? Recommended Scenarios - ‘Basic’, ‘Enhanced’, ‘Preferred’ The Recommended Scenarios are divided into three different scenarios, ‘Basic’, ‘Enhanced’, and ‘Preferred’. These were developed by analyzing the results of all preceding scenarios using the impact score formula. Based on which scenarios had the highest impact scores, they were amal­ gamated into three different scenarios, each representing a different level of effectiveness. ‘Basic’ incorporates C­1 (‘Areas of Change’) and D­1 (E­Line Corridor) (Figure 19). The‘Enhanced’ scenario builds upon ‘Basic’ by adding a 500 foot buffer around the ‘Areas of Change’ (C­2) and the East­ West Corridor (D­2) (Figure 20). Lastly, the ‘Preferred’ scenario incorporates the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (D­3) along with the most promising of the essential destination sce­ narios, major healthcare facilities (E­3) (Figure 21). The ‘Preferred’ scenario represents our highest recommendation for Edina. These scenarios employ the methods used previously with increased density in areas of overlap (See Table 9 for Recommended Scenario Results). Recommended scenarios: • ‘Basic’: ‘Areas of Change’ (C­1) & E Line corridor (D­1) • ‘Enhanced’: ‘Areas of Change’ with 500 ft Buffer (C­2) and E Line corridor and East­West corri­ dor (D­2) • ‘Preferred’: ‘Areas of Change’ with 500 ft Buffer (C­2), E Line corridor, East­West corridor, & RBTN (D­4), and Major Healthcare Facilities (E­3) Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%) VMT Impact Score GHG/capita change (%) GHG Im- pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Ridership Impact Score Basic 32.34%-17.29%0.53 -16.37%0.51 13.35%0.41 Enhanced 42.43%-22.09%0.52 -24.41%0.58 13.34%0.31 Preferred 45.75%-25.01%0.55 -27.07%0.59 13.87%0.30 Table 13: Scenario F Results Source: Authors’ calculations with Urban Footprint 37Which Approach is Most Effective? Figure 19: ‘Basic’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 20: ‘Enhanced’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint Figure 21: ‘Preferred’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 38Which Approach is Most Effective? Discussion of Scenario Results The Zoning Scenario Analysis yields several important conclusions. Firstly, it suggests that tar-geted densification strategies are more effective than citywide approaches. This is evidenced by the low impact scores of the B scenarios, which even show a decline in transit ridership. This phenomenon could be attributed to the dispersion of density across Edina, resulting in reduced accessibility to non­automotive modes of transportation and consequently lower transit ridership. Among the targeted density strategies, scenarios focusing on mode share toward sustainable transportation demonstrate the highest impact scores, indicating their effectiveness (Figure 22). Considering the limitation of not being able to add or increase public transit service in Urban Footprint, the scores for these scenarios could potentially be much higher. Based on the Zoning Scenario Analysis, a 4% increase in citywide density, as outlined in Edina’s CAP, falls short of meeting Edina’s other goals. This is illustrated by scenario B­1, where a 4% increase in Density would result in only a 1.98% decrease in VMT/capita, a 4.07% decrease in GHG/ capita, and a 2.45% decrease in Transit Ridership. This is compared with a goal of a 7% decrease in VMT, a 45% decrease in GHG emissions, and a 100% increase in commuter public transit rider­ship. This underscores the necessity for a higher average density than what a 4% increase would achieve, alongside a more targeted approach to density increases which would be more effective. In terms of Edina’s CAP goals, the effectiveness of strategies prompts the question of what level of density would be required to achieve them. For instance, to attain the VMT reduction goal of 7%, dividing it by the VMT/capita Impact score for each recommended scenario (‘Basic’, ‘Enhanced’, and ‘Preferred’) yields a required density increase of 13.1%, 13.4%, and 12.8% respectively. This is in contrast to the estimated 18.3% increase in density that would be required to reach the VMT goal if density is not targeted, as found in the regression analysis. That means that if Edina focused on the most effective strategies, Edina would need around a 13% increase in Density to achieve their VMT reduction goal as outlined in their CAP. If Edina wanted to achieve their GHG reduction goal of 45% via density alone, it would require approximately 88.9%, 78.2%, and 76.1% increases in density for each of the respective recommended scenarios. That means Edina would need much more density to fully reach their GHG reduction target of 45%, as no scenario met that Figure 22: Impact Score by Scenario Source: Authors’ calculations from Urban Footprint 39Which Approach is Most Effective? goal. Finally, to reach the transit ridership increase of 100%, the percentages are notably higher (242.2%, 318.2%, and 329.8% for the respective recommended scenarios), although the absence of increased public transit service in the modeling suggests that the increase in density would be less significant. This is further confirmed by our regression analysis which suggests that density only impacts transit ridership insofar as it encourages increased transit service. Edina should collaborate with Metro Transit to encourage enhanced public transit service and align zoning accordingly to achieve the transit ridership goal in the CAP. Another goal Edina should be aiming for is the State of Minnesota’s goal of reducing VMT/capita by 20% by 2050. To that end, both the ‘Enhanced’ and ‘Preferred’ recommended scenarios achieve that goal. Furthermore, the zoning scenario results reveal several other notable findings. There is significant overlap between the ‘Areas of Change’, Mode Shift Toward Sustainable Transportation, and Major Healthcare Facilities density strategies, suggesting that the ‘Areas of Change’ are a solid foun- dation. Building upon it with a targeted focus on transit corridors and healthcare facilities should put Edina in a good position to achieve their CAP goals. Another result that stood out was how in most scenarios, the GHG/capita percentage decrease was several percentages higher compared to the percentage decrease in VMT/capita. This is probably due to Urban Footprint considering electricity and water usage along with VMT in calculating GHG emissions. This underscores the importance of density not only in reducing VMT but also in minimizing GHG emissions through increased efficiency in electricity and water usage. This indicates that density increases are use-ful not only in meeting the transportation goals in the CAP, but in achieving the broader GHG targets. A final finding when doing the Zoning Scenario Analysis was the lack of mixed­use devel­ opment and an overabundance of surface parking lots in Edina, even within the already defined ‘Areas of Change’. This points to a need for Edina to focus on encouraging mixed-use develop-ment areas in targeted areas along with right-sizing parking options through both removal of surface parking and consolidation of parking using parking garages, which can also have mixed­ use purposes. Section References 1. State of Minnesota, “Minnesota’s Climate Action Framework,” 2022, https://climate.state.mn.us/sites/cli­ mate­action/files/Climate%20Action%20Framework.pdf. 2. Metropolitan Council, “Density & Activity Near Transit: Local Planning Handbook,” January 2018, https://metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Files/Resources/Fact­Sheet/LAND­USE/Density­and­Activity­Near­Transit.aspx. 3. Metropolitan Council, “Density & Activity Near Transit: Local Planning Handbook,” January 2018, https:// metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Files/Resources/Fact­Sheet/LAND­USE/Density­and­Activity­Near­Transit. aspx. 40 What Policy Actions are Needed? What Policy Actions are Needed? This section seeks to supplement the linear regression analysis and the Zoning Scenario Anal­ ysis with an in­depth review of Edina’s existing programs and policies related to land use, built form, and transportation. In assessing these existing policies, we identified several gaps and deficiencies in their framework for transportation and land use. We came to several recommen­dations that are designed to further bolster the City’s efforts to meet its CAP goals. We reviewed Edina’s 2040 comprehensive plan, city ordinances, and the CAP itself. How Edinans Choose to Travel Our policy analysis and recommendations recognize that vehicle miles traveled and public tran­ sit ridership are ultimately the result of decisions made by the residents of Edina. In determining effective strategies to reduce VMT and increase public transportation use, our team developed a transportation decision making framework (Appendix B) which outlines the primary factors influencing how an individual chooses one mode of transportation over another. These deci­ sions are shaped by a complex interplay of factors, including individual preferences, cost­benefit analyses, environmental considerations, social norms, and the inertia of past habits. Drawing from this framework, we have identified two primary elements that Edina can influ­ ence so as to achieve the city’s CAP goals. First, Edina should improve the viability of sustain­ able transportation modes through land­use and built­form interventions. Specifically, the city should prioritize increasing the supply of origins and destinations within useful proximity to public and active transportation networks. This intervention would have the added benefit of reducing travel distance (and subsequently VMT) between origins and destinations. Next, Edi­ na should improve the attractiveness of sustainable modes through interventions that make the relative cost, reliability, comfort, safety, and convenience of public and active transportation competitive with travel by car. Official Recommendations Comprehensive Plan In reviewing the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Edina, emphasis was placed on identifying land use descriptors, transportation frameworks, and ordinances that are holding back the City of Edina from realizing greater potential for livable development and sustainable travel. Rec­ommendations below are made to advance equity and development within the City and make mobility more seamless and balanced amongst modes. 1. Redesignate Neighborhood Nodes to Mixed-Use Center, and redesignate Mixed-Use Centers to Community Activity Center. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3 Scenario modeling has proven unequivocally that one of the best opportunities Edina has to increase density in a transit­supportive and low­VMT manner lie in the City’s ‘Areas of Change’. Given that the majority of the ‘Areas of Change’ are along or proximate to transit, and that at least one exists in each quadrant of the City (making for easy active transporta­ tion access), we recommend increasing the densities of each ‘Area of Change’. To do so, each of the nodes at 44th Street/France Avenue, 70th Street/Cahill Road, and Valley View Road/ 41What Policy Actions are Needed? Wooddale Avenue. As it stands, these areas are designated as Neighborhood Nodes. To in­ crease the mixed­use nature of these nodes and promote increased residential density, it is our recommendation that these be redesignated as Mixed­Use Center. It is our further rec­ ommendation that the existing Mixed­Use Centers at 50th Street/France Avenue and Grand­View be redesignated as “Community Activity Center,” as they are important, highly­desired regional destinations and each has quality (and improving) transit access. These recommendations, informed by our Zoning Scenario Analysis, are also supported by our transportation decision making framework. Allowing higher density and increased mixed­use development in these locations can increase the supply of origin and destina­tion points within useful proximity to sustainable transportation options. This will encour­ age more vitality and strengthened density in line with the CAP goals. The Zoning Scenario Analysis showed that growth in mixed­uses around and within ‘Areas of Change’ was highly beneficial in progress toward CAP goals. 2. Zone every parcel along France Avenue north of Southdale to permit at least two housing units, and that corner parcels along the corridor each permit neighborhood-scale retail uses. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3, TL 3-7 France Avenue has great value, and even greater potential. Connecting major ‘Areas of Change’ along soon­to­be excellent transit, it is a logical place to encourage density and create more opportunities for living and working. Given the level of transit service and access to destinations as discussed with regard to transportation decision­making, all parcels along France Avenue should have a minimum zoned capacity of two units, though we encourage further allowable residential capacity beyond two. Additionally, each corner lot along France Avenue should permit neighborhood­scale retail. A more fleshed out neighborhood with a range of origins and destinations will encourage transit use. This consistent treatment of the street will create more of an identity for the corridor with a string of appealing nodes that will encourage more active transportation to and along France Avenue. 3. When upzoning along corridors, include all parcels that are not on the corridor but are adjacent (not across the street) to the corridor-fronting parcels, improving quality of life and adding more origins near corridor amenities. Aligned with CAP Action TL 3-3 The City at the moment has no development buffers that allow for incremental height in­ creases on parcels that are not on major corridors but lie just parallel to them. For example, development on France Avenue is limited in its potential heights and massing due to the adjacency of single­family lots on the rear of the parcels. Given the width of rights of way of streets versus widths between adjoining rear setbacks, it would be prudent to increase density not just on corridor­facing lots, but additionally on the lots to their rear that have a frontage on the parallel street to that of the corridor. This has the intended effect of not only locating twice the redevelopable acreage near transit and mixed­use corridors than can be achieved just with corridor upzoning, but there are many other positive benefits. Most importantly, the main corridors on which upzoning is to take place are often high­ er­traffic streets. Increasing the residential density near but not on these corridors means that many greater residents will have the opportunity to live on quiet streets, with the result being much less exposure to noise and air pollution. Noise and air pollution are significant 42What Policy Actions are Needed? elements in the social determinants of health, and the impact to neighborhoods would be minimized because there would not be single­family­zoned lots that back up to multifamily in any instances, creating less conflict over character and massing while reducing average exposure to environmental burdens 4. Allow increased density in the Comprehensive Plan within a quarter mile of 50th Street and Vernon Avenue, and within a quarter mile radius of E Line stops to maximize the potential for service restoration/expansion and achieve meaningful transit mode share. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 2-1, TL 2-5, TL 3-3 Metro Transit sets density thresholds by which it makes decisions on where to increase tran­sit service levels. With the potential for service restoration to connect with the Green Line Extension, it is important that Edina prepare the community with transit­supportive land use to match its designation by the Metropolitan Council as an “urban” community. According to the requirements set forth to initiate an increase in transit service (Table 14), local bus routes with high frequency must average 10 residential units per acre within a quarter­mile buffer along the route. This is the average, so densities in even closer proximity should exceed 10 units/acre if the City is to preserve lower residential densities that don’t front Vernon and Lincoln. Though 10 units per acre is the floor, Metro Transit targets densities 15­60+ units/acre in the buffer area for its frequent local bus service. Further, along corridors served by Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (E Line), the density minimum is 15 units per acre with targets of 20­60+. Our transportation decision making framework indicates that significant mode shift towards transit can be expected once density crosses this requirement threshold, driven by the in­ crease of potential trip origins and destinations near rapid transit service. This shift has the potential to create a beneficial feedback loop, with increased ridership inducing more ser­vice to be added to the community. This is borne out in our Zoning Scenario Analysis that showed transit corridors performing very successfully for additional community density, contributing to decreases in VMT/capita and increases in public transit mode share. Table 14: Thrive MSP 2040 guidelines for minimum average residential density (in dwelling units/acre), from the Transportation Policy Plan. Edina is classified as “Urban”. Right-of-Way Type Transit Type Geography Urban Center Urban Suburban Suburban Edge / Emerging Suburban Edge Fixed or Dedicated Transitway Light Rail Transit Commuter Rail Dedicated BRT half-mile radius 50 25 20 15 Highway Transitway (MnPass/HOV) Highway BRT half-mile radius 25 12 10 8 Shared Rights-of-Way Arterial BRT quarter-mile radius 15 15 15 15 Local Bus Routes on High Frequency Network quarter-mile along route 10 10 10 10 43What Policy Actions are Needed? Source: Metropolitan Council City Ordinances Our review of City ordinances focused on built form requirements, parceling, and transportation demand management (TDM) policy. We found instances where these policies are overly restric­ tive with regard to encouraging increased density and reduced VMT, as well as instances where processes and standards can be streamlined in order to minimize the costs associated with new development. 5. For new multi-unit construction, replace maximum building coverage with the existing requirement for impervious surface coverage to maximize site flexibility and development potential. Aligned with CAP Action TL 3-4 Edina should consider replacing building coverage requirements for residential zones with existing requirements regulating impervious surface coverage. This furthers the City’s work on supporting ADU development and makes small­scale multifamily feasible. This recom­ mendation replaces the limit of 30% building coverage on the lot with the existing 50% impervious surface requirement. By preserving the same limit on impervious surfaces but relaxing building coverage, there is greater developmental flexibility for new multi­unit con­ struction and sites may better be able to feasibly reach their development capacity. However, there is no adverse environmental impact, as sites would see no loss of green space relative to existing requirements, therefore ensuring no stormwater runoff contamination beyond existing conditions as well. 6. Reduce minimum lot sizes in single-family residential zones to a maximum of 4,500 square feet, to permit at least one lot subdivision on each conforming parcel. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3, TL 3-4 The current minimum lot size in Edina for R­1 parcels is 9,000 square feet. To enable con­struction of more affordable homes and increase residential density, Edina should reduce minimum lot sizes, especially in proximity to transit. Reduced lot sizes near transit allows for more households per acre, increasing the utility of transit for a greater share of residents, which is identified in our transportation decision making framework as a critical component of any effort to increase the use of sustainable modes. This action has the added benefit of of lowering the cost of housing. Smaller lot size is directly correlated with increased home­ ownership opportunities across income levels, and greater residential density will decrease per capita VMT. 7. Develop and pass a set of objective design standards to streamline and depoliticize development while reducing development soft costs to promote housing growth and affordability. Edina does not currently have identifiable objective design standards. When architects are unable to design to predetermined, objective standards, it can lead to uncertainty in the development process and can increase the time it takes to realize a project. A lack of objec­tive standards increases the probability that anti­growth advocates object to a project and lengthens development timeline while taking more staff time to administer project propos­ als. Additionally, it reduces the incidences of PUD being the primary way to develop at scale in the City. 44What Policy Actions are Needed? 8. Eliminate parking minimums, or in the case of their continuance, disallow minimums higher than one per household. Aligned with CAP Action TL 3-2 Edina should rationalize parking requirements if not outright eliminate them. Parking requirements induce demand for driving, and they raise the cost of housing and of goods. In lieu of elimination, consider common sense reform. An example is that off­street parking spaces are required at a minimum of one per unit for single­family housing units, but multifamily requires 1.25 spaces per home. Given the proximity of most current and future multifamily housing to transit, and the lower average incomes of those in multifamily, it does not make sense to require extra spaces for multifamily. The greatest effect of parking requirements is that of increased costs passed on to renters. A reduction of parking provided or required has a direct impact on transportation decision­making by reducing the convenience of driving. This decrease in the utility of trips made by car may be impactful enough to influence the comparison of transportation modes, inducing more Edina residents to opt for active transportation and public transit. 9. Within ‘Areas of Change’ and in proximity to transit, supplement maximum standards with minimum height and density standards. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3, TL 3-4 When understanding that most growth in the City will be targeted toward ‘Areas of Change’, it is important to ensure that future development takes best advantage of the value of land and the proximity benefits of transit service that reaches most of the ‘Areas of Change’. To do so, Edina should prescribe minimum height limits so that greater potential is realized from colocating more origins and destinations with each other and within close proximity to transit service. This also supports our findings that targeted density performs much better than distributed density. To make the most of targeted density, it’s imperative that land be used most effectively. 10. Decrease front setbacks in neighborhoods in the walkshed of transit service, and particularly along corridors that connect ‘Areas of Change’. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3, TL 3-7 In order to create a more activated streetfront and facilitate community­scale density, Edina should reconsider its rigid front setback requirements. In the case of walkable, transit­served neighborhoods, gentle density can be accommodated without provisioning so much of the lot to lawns. Porches fronting the street, or entries to homes directly from the sidewalk contribute to greater visual interest and street activity, while allowing for more flexible site design and making it more simple to add additional housing units without needing to build up tall. In addition, the current code allows for the minimum front setback (never less than 30 feet) to be expanded even more if other buildings on the street segment average greater setbacks. This requirement should be removed. Reduced setbacks promote greater gentle density, more street interest and vitality, an improved pedestrian experience, and greater site flexibility. 45 11. Remove the requirement to have height limits contingent on nearby zoning heights. Make clear that certain height limits are universal across land use designation, so that well-located parcels are not underdeveloped compared to potential. Otherwise, limit calculation to only apply to one parcel as a transition zone. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-3 The current transition zone between different land use and built­form types make it infeasible to easily transition in height from lot to lot. This ensures many buildings guided for higher densities in the ‘Areas of Change’ may not utilize their full zoning envelope if they are near any buffer. The requirement to not fully utilize development potential in proximity to R­1 renders the zoning designation for ‘Areas of Change’ much less useful and limits the density potential in the smartest areas of the City in which to grow. If the height calculation that takes into consideration the height of neighboring structures is not to be eliminated entirely, then it should at least reduce from 80 feet to less than 75 feet given that the minimum lot width is typically 75 feet. This would make it such that just one lot would serve as a buffer between differentially­zoned parcels. 12. Provide a streamlined permitting process for garage ADU construction/conversion. Do not require additional parking for the additional dwelling unit. Design a set of pre-approved plans for garage conversions of varying garage widths from which homeowners may select in order to speed development and reduce the associated architectural costs for conversions. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 3-1, TL 3-2, 3-7 Due to required setbacks and parking minimums, most homes in Edina have significantly more space on their properties between driveways and garage spaces than is necessary for vehicle storage. In addition, most garage space represents significant square footage potential sufficient for small­format dwellings if converted. Given the unlikelihood that driveway storage is insufficient to meet off­street parking needs and the desire to add more density to the City without compromising the built form of neighborhoods, garage conversions offer exciting potential to add households to the City in a way that is imperceptible to neighbors. This also supports the City’s leadership on ADU creation and provides a greater diversity of housing options. 13. Disallow the construction and operation of new drive-thru enterprises through the Code of Ordinances. Existing operation should not be curtailed, but new permits to operate drive-thrus or other auto-oriented uses shall not be granted and in future redevelopment, concessions should be awarded for lowering the number and size of curb cuts present on the sidewalks. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 1-1, TL 2-4, TL 3-3, TL 3-4 Drive­thru restaurant and beverage operations encourage more trips taken by auto, as they do vehicle idling. Drive­thrus have a number of detrimental impacts. Beyond the clear GHG emissions impacts from vehicle trips and vehicle idling, they take up prime land in commercial corridors and their curb cuts and asphalt expanses contribute to a hostile pedestrian environment. What Policy Actions are Needed? 46What Policy Actions are Needed? Car washes and other businesses that are intended to serve vehicles without the need for their operators to step out have the exact same detrimental environmental and land use consequences. A reduction in curb cuts and vehicle ingress/egress across the sidewalk also contributes to the improvement in pedestrian and cyclist comfort, incentivizing active travel mode shift. Climate Action Plan The Climate Action Plan needs to ensure its goals are consistent and mutually­supportive. To that aim, the next update to the CAP must match its density growth targets with 1) regional­ ly­adopted growth plans, 2) the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and 3) data­driven analysis (sup­ ported by this report) that ensures VMT and transit usage targets are achievable with increased zoned capacity. The primary recommendation (Report Recommendation #14) to the Climate Action Plan is to increase density targets to at least approximately 20%, which matches expect­ ed decadal population growth projections and if implemented correctly, would meet CAP VMT goals. For recommendations that amend or address clear Climate Action Plan goals but are not clearly under the purview of the Comprehensive Plan or the Zoning Code of Ordinances, the following additional suggestions to policy and planning are listed below: 15. Study which barriers exist in the street grid that add a significant time/distance penalty for neighborhood access to transit and/or community-serving amenities/ employment. Begin with assessing how to better connect the entire Strachauer Park neighborhood to the E Line station at France Avenue/62nd Street. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 1-2, TL 3-3 A disconnected grid creates barriers to walkability and access. There are certain discontinuous segments of streets that impede access to transit stops. Longer walks and detours that do not materially affect travel time for vehicles but introduce significant time penalties for those accessing transit harm goals to increase transit and active transportation mode share, to say nothing of the potential value of E Line (and other) investments that is left on the table. The City should adopt a plan, perhaps as an update to the Living Streets Plan, to selectively acquire properties that present significant barriers to accessing transit, and utilize those properties to construct links that make the grid more permeable. 16. Update the CAP actions addressing the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan with targets that come with specific annual commitments on expanding safe active travel infrastructure. Obligate the City of Edina to fund implementation of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan annually. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 1-1, TL 1-2 The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is a great document that seeks to make Edina a community more safe and comfortable to navigate through active travel. CAP Action TL 1­2 in particular calls for an acceleration in the pace at which recommended changes are constructed in the City. Despite that smart call, the goal, among others, does not have an attached date for construction milestones.A CAP that takes seriously its mode shift goal must prioritize realistic timelines and accountability measures that hold the City to timelines on improvements to the bicycle network that make the City more interconnected and safe. 47What Policy Actions are Needed? 17. Shift Edina’s CAP goals for transit to a goal for mode share of transit writ large, rather than just focusing on commute share, and a further action should be added in “TL 1: Decrease community wide VMT by 7% by 2030” that specifically adds a numeric target to the percentage of trips conducted by active travel that Edina would like to see. The COVID­19 pandemic radically reshaped the transportation landscape due to rapid changes to the way in which we work and commute. Public transit ridership has become much less oriented to peak travel times, and is spread not just through the day, but through the week, with weekend ridership recovering most quickly on lines with frequent service. In addition, there has been a boom in the use of e­bikes. Edina recently enacted a rebate program for residents in the amount of up to $1,200 to be applied towards the purchase of a qualified e­bike. This,and the forthcoming supplemental rebate for Minnesotans to purchase e­bikes, will increase the attractiveness of active transportation by directly reducing the costs associated with this mode. These interventions will likely lead to, significant increases in active travel .with room to expand yet further. The existence of a goal for active transportation mode share can give more weight to the acceleration of Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School, and Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan implementation. 18. Update the Travel Demand Management Policy with a points-based, evidence- driven checklist to streamline development and make clear the needed mitigations from the outset. Participation in bulk pass programs should wholly mitigate parking requirements. Aligned with CAP Actions TL 1-3, TL 1-4, TL 2-6, TL 3-2 Our analysis finds that TDM policies can be an effective tool to influence the transportation mode choice process by incentivizing sustainable transportation options, while disincentivizing single occupant vehicle trips. Current City TDM policies require a subjective analysis and approval from staff. To reduce staff requirements associated with the administration and analysis of TDM plans, and to facilitate more clear development standards, the introduction of a points­based TDM plan that covers both residential and commercial development is recommended. This policy change would enable a more streamlined tracking process, and help to ensure consistent outcomes. It would also facilitate more transparent development standards. The City should consider required participation in bulk transit pass programs through Metro Transit (Metropass, Residential Pass) as a complete offsetting mitigation strategy that would substitute the entirety of required parking. In transportation decision­making, the reduction of friction of transit use through the removal of fare payment barriers would significantly incentivize transit travel. The Policy Review section seeks to identify concrete actions through which updates to the next Comprehensive Plan, Code of Ordinances, and Climate Action Plan can be improved. Meaningfully, these recommendations are informed and supported by the transportation decision­making framework, which identifies the necessary interventions to effectively support and promote mode shift away from single­occupancy vehicles. Whereas Edina 2050 will continue to guide land use and transportation decisions, it’s the Code of Ordinances that regulates the built form of the community and should be modified to reflect best practices in the field of urban planning: namely a relaxation of stringent requirements that hinder the City’s ability to grow in vibrancy, particularly around priority growth areas. The Climate Action 48What Policy Actions are Needed? Plan is admirable in its goals, but must adapt density goals to reflect the reality that VMT reduction goals (total OR per capita) will not be met without more intense development. That aside, a growing city needs to assess GHG reduction and VMT reduction goals on per capita improvement given that fundamentally, people are not pollution and an improvement to average community performance is good not just for Edina but for the region. 49 Final Conclusions Final Conclusions In answering our three research questions, we have determined that density increases can be instrumental in achieving Edina’s climate goals, both in regards to transportation and green­ house gas emission targets more broadly. However, density alone will not be enough to effec­ tively reach the targets outlined in the Climate Action Plan. Additionally, the current density targets outlined in the CAP are insufficient under any scenario in reaching the sustainable transportation targets for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled and an increase in transit rider­ship. To maximize the effectiveness of density increases in Edina, a targeted density strategy should be employed: focusing on key commercial nodes, transit corridors, active transportation net­ works, and essential destinations such as healthcare facilities. We have outlined three recom­mended scenarios for increasing allowable density in a strategic way that will be most transfor­ mative in reaching Edina’s climate goals. The three recommended scenarios: ‘Basic’, ‘Enhanced’, and ‘Preferred’ offer progressively more impactful zoning scenarios. Figure 23: ‘Basic’ recommended scenario Source: Authors created using Urban Footprint 50 Figure 24: ‘Enhanced’ recommended scenario Source: Authors created using Urban Footprint Final Conclusions 51 Figure 25: ‘Preferred’ recommended scenario Source: Authors created using Urban Footprint Final Conclusions 52Final Conclusions Even when employed strategically, zoning changes will require support through other policy ac­ tions. We have developed a list of recommended policy actions for Edina that will help to reach the City’s climate targets alongside the adoption of our recommended zoning scenarios above. The three Climate Action Plan goals related to Transportation & Land Use that this study investi­gated should be amended during the 2025 CAP amendment process as follows: TL 1 – Amend the goal to measure VMT per capita, rather than citywide VMT. Augment existing actions with active transportation mode share goals that complement transit mode share, and tie action into delivery and funding prioritization for active transporta­tion projects. TL 2 – Amend the goal to measure transit mode share, rather than just commuter transit mode share. TL 3 – Align population density targets with result­driven analysis of growth scenarios that DO meet the VMT reduction and GHG reduction targets. A 4% residential density increase is insufficient to achieve other City­adopted goals. Specific recommendations that support the three Transportation and Land Use goals above should be incorporated into subsequent updates of the Comprehensive Plan, the Code of Ordi­nances, and the Climate Action Plan itself: Comprehensive Plan (Land Use) 1. Recategorize Neighborhood Nodes as Mixed­Use Centers, and Mixed­Use Centers as Community Activity Centers 2. Allow commercial uses at corner parcels on France Avenue, with at least duplexes permit­ ted along the whole corridor3. When conducting corridor­based zoning, include abutting lots on parallel streets in addi­ tion to the corridor itself 4. Achieve Thrive MSP 2040 Transportation Policy Plan density minimums in existing and future transit corridor Code of Ordinances (Built Form) 5. Replace maximum building coverage requirement with existing maximum impervious surface coverage requirement 6. Reduce minimum lot size to 4,500 square feet 7. Adopt a set of objective design standards 8. Eliminate parking requirements; if infeasible, cap maximums at one per unit9. Supplement maximum height and density standards with minimum height and density standards. 10. Decrease front setback requirements 11. Reduce height transition requirements 12. Continue support for ADUs, particularly garage conversions13. Prohibit new drive­thrus Climate Action Plan (Overall Goals + Transportation) 14. Align density goals across plans and in support of VMT reduction 15. Study and reduce active transportation barriers 16. Add specific yearly targets for implementation progress on active transportation projects 17. Supplement CAP with active transportation mode share goals18. Update the TDM Policy with objective, points­based standards 53 These recommendations emphasize what has already long been known in the City of Edina: that transportation, land use, and climate policy are deeply interrelated and mutually reinforc­ ing. Our ideas are merely a starting point for the many actions the City will need to take in the coming years to mitigate the effects of climate change. By aligning its goals with empirical reality, targeting density in the places with the most opportunity for positive change, and mak­ing strategic policy interventions that promote sustainable lifestyles, Edina can forge a new path toward a greener and more resilient future. Special Thanks Matthew Gabb, City of Edina Addison Lewis, City of Edina Marisa Bayer, City of Edina Andrew Scipioni, City of Edina Stephanie Hawkinson, City of Edina Bill Neuendorf, City of Edina Michael Greco, Resilient Communities Project Stina Kielsmeier-Cook, Resilient Communities Project Eric Wojchik, Metropolitan Council MacKenzie Young-Walters, Metropolitan Council David Burns, Metropolitan Council Dennis Farmer, Metropolitan Council Peter Wilfahrt, Metropolitan Council Samuel Limerick, Metropolitan Council Nichola Lowe, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Yingling Fan, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Frank Douma, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Greg Lindsey, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Angie Fertig, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Eric Lind, Center for Transportation Studies Duncan Kay, Urban Footprint 54 Appendix A - Regression Analysis Methodology Statistical Analysis In order to better understand the explanatory variables that account for VMT and transit commut­ ing mode shares, and to inform our policy recommendations, a key component of our methodolo­ gy was to conduct various regression analyses, using the Stata statistical software. These included both a simple regression of population density and VMT per capita at the municipal level, as well as multivariate regressions wherein population density and various other demographic, econom­ ic, geospatial, and transportation­related variables would be tested for their correlation with both VMT per capita and transit as a commuting mode share. The focus of this regression analysis was the Twin Cities metropolitan area, specifically the Minne­ sota counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington; that is, the sev­ en counties served by the Metropolitan Council. We chose this approach for several reasons. First, this approach maximizes the comparability between Edina and the other cities in the regression, whereas cross­regional comparisons may have been skewed by a greater quantity of confounding variables. Second, the Metropolitan Council (as well as other, broader entities such as the Minne­ sota Department of Transportation) collects and publishes standardized data on variables such as land use and employment for each of the localities in the seven­county region. Third, there are 181 total localities in this area, including 140 cities and 41 townships, giving us a relatively large sample size to draw from. Fourth, this approach allows the results of our analysis to inform planning and policy interventions within the Metropolitan Council’s service area more broadly, including cities outside of Edina and the Council itself. Because some data was only available for the cities within the Metropolitan Council area, we excluded the townships from our analysis. We excluded the communities of Landfall and Hilltop from the analysis, as these are mobile home parks with very high population density per residen­ tial acre, creating outliers that are not comparable to Edina. Finally, we excluded the small rural communities of Miesville, Coates, Nowthen, and North Oaks, due to being outliers in terms of local roadway miles ­ a key variable that is used to calculate VMT per capita. Simple Regression One goal of this regression analysis was to validate what is arguably the key assumption behind our research question: that an increase in population density is associated with a decrease in per­capita VMT. In order to test this hypothesis, we undertook a series of simple regressions with population density as the explanatory variable and VMT per capita as the dependent variable, each measured in two different ways. Our explanatory variable, population density, required both population and area data to compute. Population data was collected for the 140 localities located fully within the Metropolitan Coun­ cil service area based on the 2022 American Community Survey (5­year estimates). We used two different methods for calculating population density, and performed the regression analysis using each one. In the first, we divided the population by the total land area in each locality, to arrive at a simple population density figure. The second method attempted to control for non­residential land uses, by calculating the total area within each municipality that contains residential land use, as per the Metropolitan Council’s 2020 Land Use dataset. The population was divided by the num­ber of acres of residential land to arrive at a residential population density figure. Appendix A 55 For our dependent variable, VMT data was retrieved from the Minnesota Department of Transpor­ tation’s dataset “VMT by Route System in each City, within each County” as of 2022, which includes the average daily VMT, annual VMT, and centerline mileage in every locality in the state, disaggre­ gated by the class of road. To calculate VMT per capita, we divided the total annual VMT across all classes of road by the total population of each locality in the seven­county region. As an alter­native dependent variable, we found the VMT per capita specifically on roads classified as local roads. This variable is intended to control for the presence of major highways artificially inflating the VMT figures for certain smaller municipalities. Multivariate Regression In conducting our literature review, we determined that one goal of our report must be to go beyond a simple conception of density as determining VMT or transit ridership. For that reason, we elected to conduct a multivariate regression analysis incorporating not only population den­ sity, as outlined above, but several other factors as well. Like with the simple regression, the data for these variables were collected to the extent possible for the 140 municipalities fully within the seven­county Metropolitan Council service area. We examined the following variables: • Access to transit: We used density of transit stops as a proxy for access to transit service, which we hypothesized to be inversely related to per­capita VMT. For each municipality, we found the average number of transit stops per acre. In order to account for cross­municipality pedestrian activity, i.e., people who live in one municipality but use a transit stop located in another, we did so using a quarter­mile buffer around each municipality. This is especially important where municipal lines follow major roads, as the transit stop going in one direction might be located in a different municipality from the transit stop going in the opposite direction. In summary, we defined access to transit as the number of transit stops within 0.25 miles of a municipality divided by the area within that municipality plus a 0.25­mile buffer. • Access to vehicle: The proportion of households lacking access to a vehicle was hypothesized to be inversely related to per­capita VMT. This data was drawn from the ACS 2022 5­year esti­ mates. • Centeredness index: This is a measure of the concentration or dispersion of population with­ in a municipality. We hypothesized that more centralized population distributions would be associated with lower VMT per capita. This association could have considerable implications for land use and zoning policy. We replicated the methodology outlined “Measuring Urban Sprawl and Validating Sprawl Measures,”1 finding the standard deviation of block group densities divided by the average density of block groups for each municipality in the metropolitan area containing at least 10 block groups. • Commuting mode share: We examined the proportion of commuters traveling via single­oc­ cupancy vehicle, walking, taking transit, and working from home. This data was retrieved from the ACS 2022 5­year estimates. • Employment, employers, and wages: We hypothesized that the density of employment with­ in a locality would be associated with differences in VMT and mode share. We examined both the jobs and the establishments (i.e., employers) located within each locality, with the assump­ tion that all localities in the seven­county metropolitan area function as one labor market, and cross­municipal commuting is common. In addition, we examined the average wages for jobs within each municipality, as well as the number of workers living in each municipality. The lat­ ter metric was used to normalize the number of jobs, to create a jobs­to­workers ratio metric. Appendix A 56Appendix A This data by sector was retrieved from the Metropolitan Council’s 2022 Employment dataset. • Household income: We examined two metrics related to household income among house­ holds located within each municipality. The first is median household income per locality. The second is the proportion of households earning less than $40,000 per year. We hypothesized that the former would be positively correlated and the latter inversely correlated with per­capi­ ta VMT. This data was retrieved from the ACS 2022 5­year estimates. • Population density: Based on the results of the simple regression, we determined that the association between VMT and population density is slightly greater when defining population density as population per acre of residential land. Population density was retrieved from the ACS 2022 5­year estimates of population per locality, and residential land area was retrieved from the Metropolitan Council’s 2020 Land Use dataset. • Vehicle lane miles: Vehicle lane miles were retrieved from the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s 2022 Centerline Mileage and Lane Mileage by Route System dataset. These vehicle lane miles were disaggregated by road classification, and we also examined the analo­ gous figures with regard to road centerline miles. • Binary variables: Based on the summary statistics of the above variables, we chose to add three binary variables to the analysis: • Has transit: We found that about half of the municipalities in the 7­county metro have zero transit stops located within 0.25 miles of their boundaries, and consequently have next to zero commuters using transit. We therefore established a binary variable in which the municipalities containing active transit stops (or transit stops within 0.25 miles) received a value of 1 and all other municipalities received a value of 0. • High-income: We wanted to know if there were significant differences in VMT among municipalities with a relatively high median income. We hypothesized that the degree of median household income is less important than the general character of the city as high­ er­income or lower­income. The median among municipalities of the median household incomes within the 7­county metropolitan area was $103,906. We found that this was a rea­ sonable cutoff to consider a city to be high­income. Therefore, a municipality was assigned a value of 1 if it was above this number, or 0 if it was equal to or below.• High-frequency transit: Recognizing the limits of transit stop density as a proxy for tran­ sit access, we created a binary variable in which a city received a value of 1 if it contains a transit stop within Metro Transit’s High Frequency Network2. The municipalities included in this small group are Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Burnsville, Columbia Heights, Falcon Heights, Hilltop, Minneapolis, Richfield, Roseville, and St. Paul. We excluded Fridley, which contains one stop on Route 10 at the very northern tip of the route’s high­frequency por­ tion. As noted above, we also excluded Hilltop due to being an outlier in several fields. Methodology Data for the municipalities in the 7­county metro was collected, aggregated, normalized by pop­ulation and/or area where applicable, and collected in a CSV file. All townships and several cities were removed from the dataset, as discussed above. We then imported this CSV into Stata. We began by running pairwise correlation (pwcorr) and locally weighted regression (lowess) func­ tions between each of the independent variables and both of the dependent variables (i.e., VMT per capita on local roads and transit commuter mode share). The pwcorr function assesses the de­gree of linearity between the two variables. The lowess function generates a scatter plot with a lo­ cally weighted line of best fit, showing the shape of the relationship between the two variables. By evaluating the outputs of these functions, we determined whether to perform a transformation function to linearize the independent variable. This determination was made independently for 57Appendix A each independent variable’s relationship with each dependent variable, so, for example, we might have made the decision to logarithmize population density in relation to VMT but not in relation to transit mode share. The pwcorr and lowess functions were then performed on the transformed variables as a matter of due diligence. For the transformed and untransformed variables that exhibited a high degree of linearity with a given dependent variable, we ran a bivariate regression; however, we did not exclude any variables from our analysis solely on the basis of noncorrelation in these bivariate models. It is worth noting that our final number of observations was lower than the total number of mu­nicipalities in the 7­county metropolitan area. As discussed above, townships and certain munici­palities were removed as outliers. In addition because the logarithm of 0 is undefined, this meant that any municipality with a value of 0 for any logarithmized variable was excluded from the analysis. This was particularly important for the mode share of alternative commuting modes; for example, many localities did not have anybody walking to commute, so they were excluded once we logarithmized the walking mode share. The end result of this process was a list of transformed and untransformed variables which would be included in each multivariate regression analysis. At this point, we also elected to remove sev­ eral variables from each analysis. Most were removed due to anticipated collinearity with other variables; for example, we elected to include road lane miles per capita over road centerline miles per capita due to its somewhat higher degree of linearity and bivariate statistical significance. We also removed the centeredness index; it showed a very low level of linearity or correlation at the bivariate level, and its relatively small number of observations would have significantly decreased the sample size of the multivariate analyses. Upon arriving at our preliminary list of variables for each multivariate analysis, we underwent an it­ erative process in which we ran a multivariate regression with all remaining variables, then tested for multicollinearity using the vif function in Stata, then removed variables that appeared to be contributing to multicollinearity. Because it definitionally takes multiple variables to be multicol­linear, we chose the variables to eliminate based on their relative importance to the City’s CAP and their relevance to potential policy prescriptions. We considered this process complete, and the multivariate regression finalized, when the vif function did not return a score for any variable greater than 5, implying a low degree of multicollinearity. In the case of transit mode share as the dependent variable, we found that transit stop density was far and away the most important variable for predicting transit mode share, so we experimented with removing this variable from the regression to better understand the impact of other variables. Ultimately, however, we deter­ mined that including this variable led to the most statistically robust outcome. 58Appendix A Regression -Results Tables Line of fit and bivariate regression results Dependent Variable Independent variable Independent variable (long) lowess shape Degree of linearity R-square d P-value Coefficient Unit of coefficient percapitalocalvmt popperresacre Populationdensity (residential)log Peracre of residential land percapitalocalvmt logresdens Logofpopulation density (residential)0.5280 0.2788 0.000 -823.0011 percapitalocalvmt popdens Populationdensity (overall)log Peracre percapitalocalvmt logpopdens Logofpopulation density (overall)-0.5507 0.3032 0.000 -554.6003 percapitalocalvmt estab_dens Establishment density log Peracre percapitalocalvmt logestab Logofestablishment density -0.5066 0.2566 0.000 -488.2614 percapitalocalvmt perc_owner Homeownership linear 0.3341 0.1116 0.000 2284.272 Percent of households percapitalocalvmt localroadlanemilesperc apita Density of local roads(population)linear 0.5447 0.2968 0.000 75668.59 Lanemiles per capita percapitalocalvmt localroadlanemilespera cre Density of local roads(area)log Lanemiles per acre percapitalocalvmt loglocalroadlmpa Logoflocal road lanemilesper acre -0.4527 0.2049 0.000 -755.199 percapitalocalvmt job_dens Job density log Peracre percapitalocalvmt logjobdens Logofjobdensity -0.3656 0.1337 0.000 -257.8631 percapitalocalvmt j_w_ratio Ratio ofjobs toworkers log Ratio percapitalocalvmt logjwratio Logofratio of jobs to workers 0.0503 percapitalocalvmt perc_noveh No vehicle log Percent of households percapitalocalvmt logperc_noveh Logofpercent withno vehicle -0.1802 0.0325 0.065 -217.5806 percapitalocalvmt perc_drovealone Drivingalone linear -0.1542 0.0238 0.075 -1900.035 Percent of commuters percapitalocalvmt perc_transit Taking transit linear -0.1309 0.0171 0.132 -7330.558 Percent of commuters percapitalocalvmt perc_walked Walking log Percent of commuters percapitalocalvmt logperc_walk Logofpercent walking -0.2380 0.0567 0.008 -282.6535 percapitalocalvmt perc_wfh Working from home linear 0.2276 0.0518 0.008 2991.148 Percent of commuters Dependent Variable Independent variable Independent variable (long) lowess shape Degree of linearity R-square d P-value Coefficient Unit of coefficient percapitalocalvmt med_hh_inc Medianhousehold income linear 0.2922 0.0854 0.001 0.0079461 Dollars percapitalocalvmt hh_under_40k Households makingless than $40,000 per year linear -0.3624 0.1314 0.000 -5032.964 Percent of households percapitalocalvmt centeredness Centeredness index linear 0.0730 0.0053 0.593 177.368 Centeredness index (see methodology section) percapitalocalvmt transitstopdensity Transit stopdensity log/linear -0.1845 0.0335 0.033 -13620.64 Peracre percapitalocalvmt logtransitstopdensity Logoftransit stopdensity -0.3583 0.1284 0.002 -127.3323 percapitalocalvmt hastransit Has transit service n/a -0.0983 Binary percapitalocalvmt highfreq Has high-frequency transit n/a -0.0539 Binary percapitalocalvmt highincome High-income n/a 0.3115 0.0970 0.000 618.6602 Binary perc_transit avg_weekly_wage Average weekly wage linear 0.0790 0.366 Dollars perc_transit popdens Populationdensity (overall)linear 0.6338 0.4018 0.000 0.0050997 Peracre perc_transit popperresacre Populationdensity (residential)linear 0.5895 0.3475 0.000 0.0029127 Peracre of residential land perc_transit percapitavmt VMT -0.0746 Annual VMT per capita perc_transit percapitalocalvmt VMTon localroads linear -0.1177 0.0138 0.177 -2.15E-06 Annual VMT per capita perc_transit estab_dens Establishments linear 0.4236 0.1794 0.000 0.0001496 Peracre perc_transit job_dens Jobs linear 0.5407 0.2923 0.000 9.81E-06 Peracre perc_transit j_w_ratio Ratio ofjobs toworkers linear 0.1810 0.0327 0.037 0.0040893 Ratio perc_transit localroadlanemilesperc apita Density of local roads(population)log Lanemiles per capita perc_transit loglocalroadlmpc Logoflocal road lanemilespercapita -0.4482 0.2009 0.000 -0.0144233 perc_transit localroadlanemilespera cre Density of local roads(area)linear 0.3122 0.0975 0.000 0.4739549 Lanemiles per acre perc_transit perc_owner Homeownership linear -0.4511 0.2035 0.000 -0.0552244 Percent of households perc_transit perc_noveh No vehicle linear 0.5601 0.3137 0.000 0.5917644 Percent of households perc_transit perc_drovealone Drivingalone linear -0.5097 0.2598 0.000 -0.1119112 Percent of commuters perc_transit perc_walked Walking linear 0.4174 0.1742 0.000 0.5829106 Percent of commuters Regression - Results Tables Table 15: Line of fit and bivariate regression results 59Appendix A Dependent Variable Independent variable Independent variable (long) lowess shape Degree of linearity R-square d P-value Coefficient Unit of coefficient perc_transit perc_wfh Working from home linear 0.1220 0.0149 0.162 0.0292857 Percent of commuters perc_transit med_hh_inc Medianhousehold income log -0.2192 0.0481 0.011 -1.09E-07 Dollars perc_transit logmedhh_inc Logofmedianhousehold income -0.2530 0.064 0.003 -0.015357 perc_transit hh_under_40k Households earning under $40,000 per year linear 0.3459 0.1196 0.000 0.0876946 Percent of households perc_transit centeredness Centeredness Index none 0.1788 0.032 0.187 0.0146932 See methodology section perc_transit transitstopdensity Transit stopdensity linear 0.7504 0.563 0.000 1.011297 Peracre perc_transit hastransit Has transit service n/a 0.4219 0.1717 0.000 0.0154275 Binary perc_transit highfreq Has high-frequency transit n/a 0.5466 0.2988 0.000 0.0394626 Binary perc_transit highincome High-income n/a -0.2219 0.0492 0.010 -0.0080457 Binary Regression - Results Tables Continued Table 16:Multivariate regression results with local VMT per capita as dependent variable Number of observa­ tions 122 R­squared 0.3922 Adjusted R­squared 0.3433 Probability > F 0.0000 Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Log of population per resi-dential acre***-1004.278 0.000 Percent of households own-ing home -1280.269 0.159 Log of local road lane miles per acre -221.0041 0.256 Log of walking mode share***-262.1106 0.010 Work-from-home mode share 2092.638 0.111 Median household income**-.0093618 0.016 Transit stop density*12750.8 0.095 Has transit (binary)48.23469 0.801 High-income (binary)***627.7592 0.007 *significant at p = 0.1 level**significant at p = 0.05 level***significant at p = 0.01 level 60 Independent Variable Coefficient P-value Population per residential acre*0.0008785 0.058 Local road lane miles per acre -0.0328466 0.742 Households with no vehicle**0.1647657 0.019 Walking mode share*0.1377205 0.093 Work-from-home mode share** 0.0421348 0.015 Log of median household income 0.0028835 0.599 Transit stop density***0.6286264 0.000 High-frequency transit (bi-nary)**0.0099594 0.033 *significant at p = 0.1 level**significant at p = 0.05 level***significant at p = 0.01 level Table 17: Multivariate regression summary with transit mode share as dependent variable Appendix A Number of observa­tions 133 R­squared 0.6614 Adjusted R­squared 0.6319 Probability > F 0.0000 61Appendix A Discussion - VMT Regression Overall, this model explains just over one­third of the variation in local VMT per capita. While this certainly goes a long way toward explaining how a city might go about reducing VMT, there is quite a bit that is left unexplained, and more advanced statistical methods – for example, geospa­ tial statistics – may be necessary to better understand these processes. Most significant of the variables analyzed in this model is residential population density, which is significantly correlated with VMT at the 0.01 level. The coefficient here implies that a 1% increase in residential density is equated with a decrease in about 10.04 vehicle miles traveled per capi­ ta, which is 0.38% of current levels. At this rate, using increased population density alone, Edina would need to densify by 18.3% in order to meet the CAP target of a 7% reduction in VMT per capi­ ta. However, this interpretation is agnostic on densification strategy. Walking mode share was negatively associated with VMT; for every 1% increase in walking mode share, we predict that local VMT will drop by 2.6 miles per capita. Currently, the walking mode share in Edina is about 1.16%, or 298 persons. A 1% increase would mean about three more people commuting by walking, for a total walking mode share of 1.17%. Extrapolating further, if the walk­ ing mode share were to double to 2.32%, we would expect local VMT to decrease by about 262 miles per capita. The two income­related variables ­ median household income, and high­income status ­ were also both statistically significant. It is important to remember that these variables control for one another ­ that is, median household income is examined separately for higher­income and lower­income municipalities. High­income municipalities, of which Edina is one, are defined as having a greater­than­average median household income among cities in the metro ­ in prac­tice, above $103,906. We found that, controlling for numerous other variables, median household income is negatively correlated with local VMT: for every additional $1,000 in median household income, we expect local VMT to drop by about 9 miles per capita. However, we also expect high­ er­income municipalities to have greater VMT ­ by almost 630 miles per person. These seemingly contradictory results illustrate a “bell curve” shaped trend in household income: VMT is highest among cities with upper­middle incomes, while both the lowest­income and the very highest­in­ come cities tend to have lower VMT. This is where more advanced forms of statistical analysis, such as spatial regression, may prove fruitful in better understanding these complex relationships. Discussion - Transit Ridership Regression Compared to VMT, this multivariate regression was able to explain much more of the variation in transit mode share ­ almost two­thirds of it, according to the adjusted R­squared value of 0.6319. However, this was largely driven by just one variable: transit stop density. When controlling for all other variables, this was the only independent variable that achieved significance at the 0.01 level. The coefficient here implies that an increase in 1 transit stop per acre will increase the level of tran­sit mode share by 62.9 percentage points; in more realistic and perhaps more intuitive terms, this means that to achieve a 1 percentage point increase in transit mode share, a city could add 10.2 transit stops per square mile. In Edina’s case, this would mean about 162 transit stops throughout the city. However, it is worth reiterating that transit stop density is merely a proxy for access to transit. In reality, this estimate of 162 transit stops per 1 percentage point increase in transit mode share is likely an overestimate, as it does not account for other factors such as frequency of transit service, speed and connectivity of transit routes, or population and employment density along transit 62Appendix A routes. For example, the upcoming METRO E Line, the BRT route that will serve Edina, will have stations that are spaced further apart than the existing Route 6 ­ in other words, a lower density of transit stops. But the increased level of transit service, improved speed and reliability, and tran­sit­oriented development around BRT stations has historically been associated with increased levels of transit ridership in the context of the Metro Transit system. Therefore, we do not recom­ mend taking this coefficient as the basis for a policy recommendation; rather, it underscores the close relationship between improved transit service and transit ridership. Let us now turn to residential population density, which is not significant at the 0.05 level. Inter­estingly, this variable does have a highly significant relationship to transit mode share ­ at the 0.01 level ­ when transit stop density is removed from the regression analysis. This demonstrates that population density is a significant predictor of transit mode share insofar as it supports improved transit service. This aligns with our recommendations of targeted, corridor­specific densification that either takes advantage of transit (i.e., Transit­Oriented Development) or spurs additional fu­ture service from Metro Transit. Three other variables were identified as having statistically significant relationships to transit mode share: percent of households without a vehicle, percent working from home, and presence of high­frequency transit. Each of these had a positive relationship with transit mode share. The former two ­ households without a vehicle, and commuters working from home ­ illustrate demo­ graphic trends, but do not lend themselves well to policy recommendations. Car­free households are typically associated with lower incomes, and remote work is associated with higher incomes. However, our regression controls these variables for median household income, so their signifi­cance perhaps illustrates a certain level of self­selection, wherein people who live in areas where transit is a viable mode choice are comparatively likely to choose to live car­free or to work re­ motely. However, the third variable, presence of high­frequency transit, does lend itself to policy recom­mendations. We find that the presence of high­frequency transit in a locality is associated with a transit mode share about 1 percentage point higher than localities without high­frequency transit. Edina currently does not have any high­frequency transit. However, with the opening of the METRO E Line in 2025, it will enter this exclusive club of municipalities ­ assuming the E Line meets Metro Transit’s standards for inclusion in the High Frequency Network2. We expect Edina’s transit mode share to improve by about 1 percentage point upon the opening of the E Line, even absent increases in population density or further improvements to transit service. Section References 1. Ewing, Reid, and Shima Hamidi. “Measuring Urban Sprawl and Validating Sprawl Measures.” National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Apr. 2014, gis.cancer.gov/tools/urban­sprawl/sprawl­report­short.pdf2. High Frequency Network, n.d., https://www.metrotransit.org/high­frequency­network 63 Appendix B - Transportation Decision Framework The Transportation Decision Framework is grounded in a core concept: The car is the competition when it comes to reducing VMT and increasing public transit commute ridership. In the City of Edina, like in many American cities and towns, over a century of autocentric transportation plan­ning has positioned the private automobile as the most convenient, and often the default, op­tion for the majority of trips. This is reflected in the dominance of trips made by car within Edina, which account for 78% of commute trips. Given Edina’s goals of dramatically reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and increasing public transit commute ridership, addressing the prevalence of single­occupant vehicle (SOV) trips is paramount. To shift the balance towards more sustain­able forms of transportation—such as public transit, walking, and cycling—alternate modes must be made more convenient, travel by personal automobile must be made less convenient, or ideal­ ly, a combination of both strategies must be employed. Understanding the factors that influence an individual’s transportation mode choice is critical, as vehicle miles traveled and public transit ridership are ultimately the results of decisions made by people. These decisions are shaped by a complex interplay of factors, including individual prefer­ ences, cost­benefit analyses, environmental considerations, social norms, and the inertia of past habits. The transportation decision­making framework analysis presented here is intended to serve as a bridge between the quantitative analysis conducted in sections 5 and 6, and the recom­mended policy interventions in section 9. Specifically, this section provides an overview of various considerations that influence transportation mode choice at the individual level, and provides the City of Edina with recommended interventions to reduce VMT and increase sustainable trans­ portation mode share. These recommended interventions will be further elaborated on in subse­ quent segments of the report. The framework presented is not intended to be comprehensive, as the factors that influence mode choice, and their relative importance, will differ from individual to individual. Rather, the goal of this model is to provide insights into key factors that enable or inhibit the use of non­au­ tomotive modes, and propose recommendations that will reduce VMT and increase the share of trips made by public and active transportation within Edina. By doing so, it seeks to contribute to achieving the ambitious goals set forth in the City of Edina’s climate action plan. Consideration 1: Assessment of Mode Viability Perhaps the most straightforward consideration when it comes to transportation mode choice is simply whether a particular mode can reasonably be used to complete a given journey. This consideration must inherently take into account the origin (starting point) and destination (end point) of the trip, as well as the infrastructure and systems connecting these two points. Trip Origin For a significant number of trips, especially commute trips, an individual’s home is the origin point of the journey. The decision of where to live is influenced by a wide variety of factors, includ­ing housing price, residential preferences, and considerations relating to accessibility (distance to key destinations, employment opportunities, and transportation facilities). Appendix B 64 The location of origin points is of critical importance to transportation decision making, due to the fact that the starting point of a trip directly determines which transportation modes are viable. As such, any effort to reduce VMT and increase the mode share of public transportation in the City of Edina should prioritize increasing housing density and other common origin points in locations that provide easy access to current and future public transit and active transportation infrastruc­ ture. The future E Line Bus Rapid Transit alignment is an area that should be considered for sig­ nificant residential upzoning, so as to bring as many residents within a useful distance of this high frequency transit system as possible. Trip Destination The destination of a particular trip is also a key element that influences transportation mode choice. The list of potential destinations is infinitely large, but some common trip end points in­ clude places of employment, school, commercial establishments, and the homes of friends and family members. Similar to origin points, the location of destinations and their proximity to trans­ portation infrastructure directly influences which modes of transportation could feasibly be used to complete the trip. Infrastructure and Systems Connecting Origin and Destination The infrastructure and systems necessary to connect origins to destinations are equally important in determining the viability of any given transportation mode. Examples of transportation infra­ structure include roads, street crossings, sidewalks, bike lanes, multi­use trails, transit lines, and transit stops. For a given transportation mode to be considered viable, these systems must link the origin and destination of a trip. The influence of the presence of specific infrastructure is supported by the regression analysis conducted in section 5, where transit stop density was found to influence both total vmt and pub­lic transit mode share of cities and townships within the Metropolitan Council’s jurisdiction. The presence of high­frequency transit was also found to be statistically significant for public transit mode share, indicating that the future E Line will likely have a positive impact on public transit commute mode share in Edina once operational. At a basic level, if a given mode cannot reasonably connect an individual’s origin to their desti­nation, given the existing infrastructure, then it is highly unlikely that this mode will be chosen. What is considered ‘reasonable’ is ultimately determined by the individual, but there are time and distance standards which are generally considered reasonable for large portions of the popula­ tion. • Transit: One quarter mile from local transit service, and one half mile from high frequency transit, is typically considered a reasonable distance to make use of these systems, with rider­ ship of those beyond these thresholds dropping precipitously1. • Walking: 73% of USA adults feel that short trips (up to .5 miles and up to 10 minutes) made by walking are reasonable, and 43% feel that trips of 1 mile or more, and twenty minutes or more are reasonable2. • Biking: Trips made by cycling are generally 5 miles or less, with the majority of trips ranging from 1 to 2 miles in distance3. For automotive travel, the answer to the question of whether driving can connect origin to desti­ nation is almost always yes, due to the dominance of car oriented transportation planning in most communities. As it stands, roads connect the majority of origins and destinations, and the speed of automotive travel makes even long distance journeys reasonable. However, for sustainable transportation modes answering this question is less straightforward. Appendix B 65 In the case of public transit and active transportation, the location of origins and destinations plays a vital role in determining which modes can reasonably be used. The further the journey from origin to destination, the less viable certain modes become. Active transportation is partic­ularly limited based on trip distance, although what is considered a feasible distance will vary by individual. For both active and public transportation, the lack of adequate infrastructure (such as sidewalks, bike lanes, and transit stops) in useful proximity to an individual’s origin and destination will generally result in these modes being considered un­viable. In order to achieve the City of Edina’s goals of reducing VMT and increasing public transit com­mute ridership, more origins and destinations must be brought within useful proximity of public and active transportation infrastructure, and additional infrastructure should be planned to in­ crease sustainable transportation access to more residents and locations. Appendix B 66Appendix B Figure 26: Assessment of Mode Viability Flow Chart Source: Authors 67 Consideration 2: Comparison of Modes After determining which transportation modes can connect a given origin and destination, these options can then be compared against one another to determine which is most attractive. In this comparison, individuals may consider factors such as travel time, effort, comfort, flexibility, reli­ability, perceived safety, cost, and the directness of the route. While each of these elements may influence mode choice, the relative importance of each will vary based on factors specific to each individual (see Consideration 3). Traditional economic models are often applied to understand this comparison process. While these models have limitations they still may serve as a useful tool for understanding the cost ben­ efit analysis of transportation modes at an individual level. Financial Cost and Time Cost The cost of a transportation mode can generally be broken down into two categories: the actual financial cost (cost of a transit pass, cost of gasoline, etc.) and the time cost of the mode. Equa­ tions have been developed to help determine the total cost of various transportation modes, and then compare them against one­another (see appendix B?). These equations often assign a monetary value to an individual’s time, generally based on hourly pay rates. An assumption of these models is that individuals are utility maximizing, and will choose the transportation option that requires the least amount of resources (time and money). Relating to the core premise of this section, it is generally assumed that the ‘cost’ of modes such as transit and active transportation must be competitive, if not less than, the ‘cost’ of driving in order for widespread modal shifts to occur. To calculate the cost of transportation modes, including the value of an individual’s time, the fol­ lowing equation (or similar equations) may be applied: Trip Cost = C + Twdw+Tvdv Where: C = monetary cost Tw = walk/wait time Dw = marginal disutility of walking/waiting Tv = in­vehicle time Dv = marginal disutility of in­vehicle time Appendix B 68Appendix B An important consideration with regards to these equations is that the relative value of one’s time can vary significantly. If this value is based upon hourly wages (or annual salary), then high income individuals will place greater value on transportation modes that reduce the amount of time required to make a trip. This is particularly important in the City of Edina, where the medi­an household income is significantly higher than that of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Reliability The reliability (real or perceived) of transportation modes is an important consideration when comparing transportation options. If a user cannot reasonably assume that a particular mode will be available when and where it is needed, then the utility of this mode will ultimately suffer. Reliability is especially important for public transportation, and doubly so when the frequency of public transit is low. If a potential user is not confident that public transit will be available when it is scheduled, the propensity to use this mode will likely decrease. If Edina residents can be sure that public transit is a reliable option, then public transit use will likely increase. The future high­frequency public transit planned for the City of Edina, the E Line, will ultimately achieve this, improving the reliability of public transit for those who make use of this infrastructure. The E Line will provide shorter average wait times and the assurance that transit vehicles will be available often. Flexibility and Autonomy The ability of a transportation mode to adapt and accommodate unforeseen circumstances is another consideration that may impact an individual’s mode choice. Unforeseen needs and emergencies may require additional trips at a moment’s notice. The potential for these circum­ stances to arise may lead Edina residents to opt for transportation modes that can adapt to changing needs and conditions. While these events, by their very nature, are unpredictable, the potential of them occurring may be enough to sway mode choice to the transportation option that provides the greatest degree of flexibility and ability to operate ‘off­script’. Mode Cost Comparison Example Wage Assumptions $24.00 per hour $0.40 per minute Car Transit Bike Monetary Cost (C)$5 $3 $0 Walk/Wait/Park Time 5 minutes 20 minutes 5 minutes Travel Time 15 minutes 40 minutes 60 minutes Car Transit Bike Monetary Cost (C)$5 $3 $0 Walk/Wait/Park Time 5 x $0.40 = $2 20 x $0.40 = 16$5 x $0.40 = $2 Travel Time 15 x $0.04 = 6$0 minutes 60 * $0.40 =$24 Total $130.00 $27 $26 Trip Cost = C + Twdw+Tvdv 69Appendix B Comfort The level of comfort associated with different transportation options may also influence mode choice. For public transportation within Edina, both the experience on board the transit vehi­ cle itself, as well as the experience of accessing and waiting at a transit stop, may be consid­ ered when analyzing the comfort of the mode. For active transportation,infrastructure and the surrounding built environment within Edina directly influence the comfort of the journey. The presence of dedicated pedestrian and cycling infrastructure can help to increase comfort, with levels of comfort generally increasing with the degree of separation from automotive traffic. Safety The relative safety, real or perceived, of transportation modes is also a factor that may be consid­ ered when comparing options. The safety of active transportation modes is largely dependent upon the infrastructure available, with separation from automotive traffic being a key deter­minant. The perception that public transportation is unsafe, whether on board transit vehicles or at transit stops, may also result in lower usage by Edina residents. In order to make sustain­ able modes competitive with single occupant vehicles within Edina, significant efforts must be made to improve the safety of public transit and active transportation. In order to make sustainable modes of transportation competitive with single occupant vehi­ cles within Edina, interventions should be employed which reduce the time and cost of desired modes, and improve their overall reliability, flexibility, comfort, and perceived safety. While less politically palatable, efforts to dramatically reduce VMT must also include interventions which lessen the convenience of single occupant vehicles. Consideration 3: Weighing Personal and Social Factors Personal preferences, limitations, thresholds, and social influences are also key elements which impact the transportation mode choice process, often directly influencing the viability of modes (Consideration 1) and mode comparison (Consideration 2). Table x provides a list of personal and societal factors which may influence the transportation mode decision by Edina residents, as well as a brief description of each variable. Table x identifies how these various personal and societal factors may interact with Consideration 2 ­ Comparison of Modes elements. 70Appendix B Table 18: Personal and Societal Factors influencing Tranportation Mode Choice Personal or Societal Factor Description Personal Ability or Lim­ itations Individuals with physical disabilities or limitations may require transportation modes that offer specialized accessibility features, such as low­floor buses or ele­ vators at train stations. Personal health conditions or fitness levels can also dictate the suitability of active modes like walking or cycling. Value of Time An individual's perception of the value of their time can greatly influence the com­ parison of modes from a cost and time perspective. Individuals who place a higher value on their time may opt for faster modes, such as driving, to minimize travel time. Economic Status Economic status influences transportation choices by determining what options are financially viable. Higher­income individuals may be able to afford private ve­hicles more easily, while the initial investment required for this option may be cost prohibitive for lower­income individuals. Safety Threshold Each individual has a certain degree of risk tolerance. If the perceived safety of a particular mode exceeds this threshold then the individual will likely be hesitant to utilize that particular mode, or may simply consider it unviable. Comfort Threshold Similar to Safety Thresholds, each individual has a certain degree of discomfort or inconvenience that is considered acceptable. If a particular mode of transportation exceeds this threshold the likelihood of use will suffer. Trip Specific Require­ ments Trip­specific requirements, such as the need to transport goods or passengers can influence mode choice. Depending upon the requirements of a trip, certain modes may be insufficient to accommodate specific needs. Need for Autonomy/ Flexibility Some individuals may require higher degrees of flexibility and autonomy in their day to day life, due to a variety of potential considerations. Individuals who place a higher degree of value on autonomy and flexibility may only consider transporta­ tion modes that can accommodate these needs. Peer Influences Peer influences can shape transportation preferences, as individuals may choose similar modes to those used by friends or colleagues, whether it's carpooling, bik­ing, or using public transit. Social Stigmas Social stigmas attached to certain modes of transportation can deter their use; for example, some may avoid public transit due to negative perceptions, or others might avoid driving due to environmental concerns. 71Appendix B Table 19: Comparison of Modes and Personal and Social Factors Interaction Comparison Consideration Financial and Time Cost Financial Status Value of Personal Time Government/Employer Incentives Reliability Comfort Threshold Trip Specific Requirements Flexibility and Autonomy Trip Specific Requirements Personal need for flexibility and autonomy Knowledge of Existing Conditions Comfort Comfort thresholdStigmas Associated with Transportation Mode Safety Safety thresholdPhysical Ability Stigmas Associated with Transportation Mode Convenience Value of Personal Time Trip Specific Requirements Additional Consideration A primary assumption of our Transportation Decision Making Framework and proposed inter­ ventions is that individuals are generally rational and seek to maximize utility. In other words, it is assumed that people will ultimately choose the transportation option that has the lowest relative ‘cost’ and the highest relative benefit. Despite this concept being common in traditional econom­ ics and much of the literature on travel behavior, we view this as a key limitation of our model. The fields of behavioral psychology and behavioral economics have demonstrated that oftentimes people do not act in a fashion that would be considered ‘rational’ due to a wide variety of factors such as cognitive biases, past habits, and social influences. This understanding is crucial when designing interventions to promote sustainable transportation, as improving the viability and at­ tractiveness of sustainable transportation may not suffice to dramatically change travel behaviors. However, we believe that improving the viability and attractiveness of desired modes is a neces­ sary first step. Once active transportation and public transit is viable and competitive with travel by car, softer interventions informed by behavioral psychology and behavioral economics may be deployed to maximize the impact of our recommendations. Section References 1. Kittelson & Associates, Inc., Parsons Brinckerhoff, KFH Group, Inc., Texas A&M Transportation Institute, Arup, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board, and National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, Third Edition. National Academies Press. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board. https://nap.nationalacade­ mies.org/catalog/24766/transit­capacity­and­quality­of­service­manual­third­edition. 2. Watson, Kathleen B., Susan A. Carlson, Tiffany Humbert­Rico, Dianna D. Carroll, and Janet E. Fulton. 2015. “Walking for Transportation: What Do U.S. Adults Think Is a Reasonable Distance and Time?” Journal of Physical Activity and Health 12 (s1): S53–61. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2014­0062. 3. “National Bicycling and Walking Study.” n.d. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/case1.pdf 72 Appendix C - Peer Cities Analysis Methodology Peer City data were obtained from Urban Footprint using the various analysis modules provided. The criteria are chosen for their potential relevance to this study. For the similarity analysis, each peer city is ranked based on how close its variables are to Edin. This step was repeated for each of the criterias shown in the table below. These rankings are then averaged and aggregated into a combined ranking where a smaller value indicates that a city is more similar to Edina. Appendix C Table 20: Peer City Analysis Comparison Criteria Code Code Description A Total Population B Population Density C Single Family Housing Ratio D Travel Mode Share ­ Auto E Annual Vehicle trips per Capita F Annual Residential VMT per capita G Annual GHG Emissions by Vehicles H Travel Mode Share ­ Transit 73Appendix C Table 21: Criteria Ranking Figure 27: Total Population of each peer city Source: 2018-2022 American Community Survey Similarity Criteria Table A B C D E F G H Total Edina 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 St Louis Park 3 9 10 11 6 6 5 11 61 Minnetonka 2 13 3 5 16 13 12 2 66 Golden Valley 15 10 2 2 10 4 4 6 53 Eden Prairie 5 14 7 10 4 14 14 10 78 Plymouth 13 6 11 15 5 8 10 5 73 Richfield 8 18 4 6 12 10 7 18 83 Bloomington 17 5 9 13 3 17 15 12 91 Eagan 7 11 13 12 2 12 11 4 72 University Park, TX 14 19 5 7 18 15 13 7 98 Lee's Summit, MO 19 17 8 9 8 18 19 8 106 Bellevue, WA 20 4 17 19 11 5 8 15 99 Carmel, IN 18 12 6 3 9 16 16 9 89 Menlo Park, CA 10 2 19 17 20 9 18 14 109 Newton, MA 16 15 16 18 17 11 6 16 115 Shaker Heights, OH 12 8 15 4 7 19 17 17 99 Manhattan Beach, CA 9 20 20 16 19 7 2 3 96 Bethesda, MD 6 16 12 20 15 2 3 20 94 Littleton, CO 4 3 18 8 13 3 9 13 71 Highland Park, IL 11 7 14 14 14 20 20 19 119 74Appendix C Figure 28: Residential Single Family Housing Ratio Source: Urban Footprint Figure 29: Drive Alone Mode Share for Peer Cities Source: 2018-2022 American Community Survey 75Appendix C Source: Urban Footprint Figure 30: Average Annual Trips per Capita for Peer Cities Source: Urban Footprint Figure 31: Annual GHG Emissions of Peer Cities 76Appendix C According to Table 21, Edina is generally more similar to fellow suburban cities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area compared to cities in other regions. Among cities outside of Minnesota, Little­ ton, CO is the city that is most similar to Edina. Golden Valley, MN is the most similar in total. In terms of the charts, two results in particular stand out: Edina has a very high ratio of single fam­ily to total housing ratio as well as a very high single occupancy vehicle mode share, leading the statistics among peers in the Twin Cities. These two points are important because the former suggests that Edina is a great target for strategic increases to density. This is because communi­ ties heavily zoned for single family housing (R1) tend to have lower residential densities. The latter showcases that Edina is still very auto dependent and increased transit focus may prove useful to VMT reduction goals called for in the CAP. Among peer cities, the following have their own Cli­ mate action plan (CAP) which mentions a reduction of VMT or similar as an explicit goal: • Minnetonka, MN • Bloomington, MN • Bellevue, WA • Highland Park, IL • Carmel, IN • Menlo Park, CA Minnetonka’s CAP shows that residential electricity usage was the highest source of GHG emis­sion before dropping significantly in recent years, leaving passenger vehicles as the highest source at 44% (compared to Edina’s 41% emissions share from transportation). In the report, en­ couraging shift to a cleaner mode of transportation as well as increased support for EV are iden­ tified as “high impact” strategies to reduce travel emissions. Support for telecommuting is also mentioned as well. For the out­of­state peer cities, Bellevue is working with the Washington state government to incorporate a commute trip reduction plan (CTR) with the goal of reducing vehicle emissions. A CTR is only implemented in a handful of US states and its purpose is to encourage employers to support cleaner modes of commuting or to eliminate transportation emissions altogether with telecommuting support. The plan set the target for VMT to be reduced by 18% and drive­alone auto use to be reduced by 16.3% over 4 years. Highland Park, IL is slightly different from the cities already showcased in that its residential electricity usage remains the highest GHG source by far. The plan also mentioned that Highland Park’s emissions are generally lower than the national average. The main strategies proposed to reduce auto­based emissions are support for EV and cleaner modes such as biking and public transit. The Carmel, IN CAP incorporates 7 proposed strategies within its transportation section to re­duce emissions. At present, only 2 strategies are actively being implemented: one is a bikeshare program which seeks to encourage mode shift to biking and provide reliable infrastructure for the mode itself; the other is a focus on increasing mixed­use zoning and higher densities so that as many residents as possible are within accessible distance of destinations and are able to use cleaner modes of transportation. One interesting observation with this CAP is that public transit, such as bus and rail, are barely mentioned despite the fact that Carmel is one of the two peer cit­ ies reviewed in this study to lack the mode altogether as shown in Figure 7 of the report. 77Appendix C The Menlo Park CAP targets a VMT decrease goal of 25% by 2030 through zoning changes and improving urban infrastructure for easier bike access through a new master street plan. The CAP specifically calls for upzoning efforts to be concentrated along existing transit corridors which aligns with the findings and recommendations of this study. The table below showcases the presence of land use or density changes in the fellow metro area peer cities’ comprehensive plans: Peer City Density Changes Minnetonka Corridor Targeted (I394, Ridgedale, Crosstown) Source: 2040 comprehensive guide plan | city of Minnetonka, MN. Ac­ cessed May 3, 2024. https://www.minnetonkamn.gov/government/departments/community­development/planning­zoning/comprehen­ sive­guide­plan/2040­comprehensive­guide­plan. Plymouth Transit Corridor TargetedSource: Comprehensive plan | city of Plymouth, MN. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://www.plymouthmn.gov/departments/community­economic­develop­ ment/planning/comprehensive­plan. Eagan Both Targeted and Citywide upzoning (Metro Red Line Stations) Source: “2040 Comprehensive Guide Plan.” City of Eagan ­ Home. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://cityofeagan.com/2040plan. Golden Valley Corridor Targeted (I394, Golden Valley Rd Transit corridor) Source: “2040 Comprehensive Plan.” 2040 Comprehensive Plan | Golden Val­ ley, MN. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://goldenvalleymn.gov/191/2040­Compre­ hensive­Plan. Eden Prairie Transit corridor focused (Metro Green Line SW Expansion) Source: Aspire Eden Prairie 2040 | city of eden prairie. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://www.edenprairie.org/city­government/departments/community­devel­opment/planning/aspire­eden­prairie­2040. Richfield Corridor Targeted (Lyndale and 66th, Penn, Cedar, I494)Source: Richfield, MN. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://www.richfieldmn.gov/departments/community_development/planning_and_zoning/comprehen­ sive_plan/index.php. St. Louis Park Around specific neighborhoods, transit corridors, and employment areas. Source: Comprehensive plan 2040 | St. Louis Park, MN. Accessed May 3, 2024. https://www.stlouisparkmn.gov/our­city/comprehensive­plan. Bloomington Around Transit Corridors Source: “Forward 2040 Documents.” City of Bloomington MN, July 13, 2023. https://www.bloomingtonmn.gov/plan/forward­2040­documents. Table 22: Density Upzoning Strategies Among Peer Cities 78 Appendix D - Scenario Analysis Methodology Urban Footprint Software Overview Urban Footprint is a software application that allows urban planners to assess the impact of zon­ ing changes by creating and analyzing scenarios. This tool integrates numerous regularly updat­ ed datasets into a user­friendly map interface. At its core is the Base Canvas that is generated upon the creation of a project and reflects the existing built environment. Using the Base Canvas as a baseline, Urban Footprint can run different analyses using a set of modules to see how zon­ ing changes affect certain metrics. The current analysis modules include Emissions, Energy Use, Household Cost, Land Consumption, Risk and Resilience, Transportation, Walk and Transit Ac­ cessibility, and Water Use. For our study, we used the Base Canvas, Transportation Module, and Emissions Modules to collect data we analyzed during our Zoning Scenario Analysis. This helped to answer the question of ‘Which Approaches to Density are Most Effective?’ The following is the methodology used by Urban Footprint to calculate and create the Base Canvas, Transportation Analysis Module, and Emissions Analysis Module. Base Canvas Urban Footprint’s Base Canvas is a geospatial dataset that reflects current land use and demo­graphic information at the parcel or census block level. It serves as the foundation for future scenario development and analysis within the platform and is updated quarterly. This dataset includes various attributes like land use, demographics, and development characteristics for each parcel or census block. The Base Canvas creation process incorporates data from a variety of sources such as census data, parcel provider data, point­of­interest data, and road data. This process involves steps like standardizing geometries, translating land use codes, allocating values for attributes like dwelling units and population, and calculating intersection density. The result is a comprehensive dataset that provides essential context for urban planning and analysis within Urban Footprint1. Transportation Analysis Module Urban Footprint’s Transportation Analysis Module is a comprehensive tool for evaluating the im­pacts of land use and transportation scenarios. It generates estimates for various metrics, includ­ ing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), mode­specific trips, transportation costs, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The module utilizes the Mixed­Use Development (MXD) method, which quanti­ fies the effects of urban form, transportation, supply, and management policies on travel behav­ iors through statistical models based on the “8 Ds.” These factors include density, diversity, design, destination accessibility, distance to transit, development scale, demographics, and demand management. The MXD model assesses the impacts of scenario modifications on public transpor­ tation networks, land use, and regional development patterns. The core of the MXD method has three key components: trip generation, distribution, and mode choice modeling. These are used to estimate VMT per household and capita, mode­specific trips, GHG emissions, and household costs2. Figure 32 shows the flow between inputs and outputs for the Transportation Analysis. Appendix D 79 Emissions Analysis Module Urban Footprint’s Emissions Analysis Module provides estimates for greenhouse gas (GHG) emis­ sions linked to passenger vehicle transportation, building energy, and water use. It highlights differences in GHG emissions across various land use scenarios, influenced by travel behaviors and building programs affecting vehicle miles traveled (VMT), energy consumption, and water usage. Additionally, the module calculates criteria pollutant emissions from passenger vehicle transpor­ tation, including nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), sulfur oxides (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and volatile organic chemicals (VOC). These emissions are calculated based on average per­mile factors, offering comparative insights at the project scale rather than localized emissions impacts. The emissions estimation process considers outputs from the Trans­ portation, Energy Use, and Water Use modules, along with input assumptions regarding vehicle performance, transportation fuel emissions, and electricity and natural gas emissions.4 Figure 33 depicts the module’s analysis flow from inputs to outputs for emissions. Appendix D Figure 32: Transportation Analysis Flow3 Source: Urban Footprint3 Figure 33: Emissions Analysis Flow5 Source. Urban Footprint4 80 Impact Score The Impact Score Formula serves as a vital tool in evaluating the effectiveness of zoning scenari­ os by using the outputs of the Urban Footprint analyses. It begins by computing the percentage change from the base scenario for Density (DU/Acre), VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/cap­ ita. Subsequently, these percentage changes for VMT/capita, Transit Ridership, and GHG/capita are divided by the percentage change in Density (DU/Acre), as outlined in Figure 27. It is important to note that the percentage change in VMT/capita and GHG/capita are negative as Edina is seeking to decrease these metrics, not increase them. The resulting Impact Scores offer a rough estimate of the impact on each metric for every percentage increase in density. As an example, a one per­ cent increase in Citywide density that decreases Citywide VMT/capita of 0.5% would receive an im­ pact score of 0.50. These Impact Scores were instrumental in shaping our recommended zoning scenarios, highlighting the most effective approaches from our initial zoning scenarios. The development of the Impact Score stemmed from discussions within the team regarding scenario zoning methodology. One perspective advocated for a uniform 4% increase in density citywide to ensure compatibility across all zoning scenarios. Conversely, another viewpoint argued that different zoning approaches necessitate varying levels of densification, cautioning against artificially constraining scenario zoning to a fixed density increase. The Impact Score emerged as a solution to this discourse, enabling scenario zoning without limitations while providing a stan­ dardized tool for comparing all scenarios based on density. Appendix D Scenario Methodology Scenario A - Base Scenario Scenario A is based upon Urban Footprint’s base canvas which represents the current property conditions and zoning (See Appendix D for Urban Footprint’s Methodology). The base canvas was analyzed for accuracy through three different methods. The first method involved a visual com­parison between it and Edina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan to make sure they mostly aligned with each other. The second method involved a visual comparison between the base canvas and the satellite image of Edina as seen on Google Maps. This was used to identify various parcels that were mismarked on the base canvas. The most common mismarking was of various parcels that were marked as vacant residential but were instead parks/open spaces or lakes/ponds. The final method involved comparing the estimated population against the 2020 Census estimates and working with an advisor from Urban Footprint to account difference. The last method was espe­ cially important as the base population of Edina was estimated at around 45,000 people com­ pared to the 2020 Census which estimated around 53,000 people. Thanks to the advice of the ad­ visor, we were able to find two major issues with the base canvas which when corrected brought the total estimated population to around 51,000, which was within what we thought was a good margin of error (Figure 35). Figure 34: Impact Score Formula Source: Authors 81Appendix D Figure 35: Base Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 82Appendix D Scenario B - City Wide Density • Scenario B-1 was created to represent a 4% increase in density, aligning with the goal outlined in Edina’s CAP. To achieve this, a filter was applied to the Base Canvas, targeting all residen­ tial parcels within Edina. This process occurred in three steps representing three categories of residential types, ‘Single­family attached,’ ‘Single­family detached,’ and ‘Multifamily’ categories. Each step involved modifying the residential attributes of each respective housing type cate­ gory to reflect a 4% increase in dwelling units. This adjustment was calculated by dividing the current number of dwelling units by the gross acre (acres) to determine the current density, then multiplying it by 1.04 to signify the 4% increase. Additionally, a square footage per unit (ft2/unit) metric was necessary, which was determined by using the ‘Mean’ function in the data table to compute the average parcel area for each respective category. Following this process across all three housing type categories, the resultant scenario depicted an approximate 4% increase in density (DU/Acre). • Scenario B-2 was created similarly to B­1 to see what the doubling of Edina’s CAP Density goal would have on the respective metrics. We also wanted to see if there were any multiplier ef­ fects from having a higher density in terms of increasing the metric impact for every percent­ age increase in density. The same process was used as B­1, except that instead of multiplying the current density by 1.04, it was instead multiplied by 1.08 to signify an 8% increase in density citywide. The resultant scenario depicted an approximate 8% increase in density (DU/Acre). • Scenario B-3 was specifically developed at the request of Edina City Staff, who requested a scenario to explore the impact of densifying only R­1 zoned residential parcels to achieve a 4% increase in density (DU/acre) citywide. After experimenting with various density percentages, it was determined that a 6.95% increase in density for R­1 zoned residential parcels achieved the desired 4% overall density increase citywide. Following the methodology employed in other B scenarios, a 6.95% increase in density was applied to both the ‘Single­family attached’ and ‘Single­family detached’ categories, which reflects R­1 zoned residential parcels. The resultant scenario depicts an approximate 4% increase in citywide density focused solely on R­1­zoned residential parcels. Scenario C - ‘Areas of Change’ • Scenario C-1 was created by increasing density and diversifying zoning types in Edina’s ‘Areas of Change’ as identified in Edina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Figure 36). The first step was uploading the shape of the ‘Areas of Change’ into Urban Footprint to form an outline of the areas in question. Then parcels adjacent to major roads were upzoned with “Main Street Com­ mercial/MU High” with a density of 66.4 DU/acre. Surface parking lots were either removed or consolidated into “Parking Structure/MU” with a density of 18.0 DU/acre. Finally, parcels not on the main streets that were residential were upzoned into either “Garden Apartments” with a density of 25.6 DU/acre, “Suburban Townhome” with a density of 20.2 DU/acre, or “Duplex” with a density of 8.0 DU/acre. • Scenario C-2 was created building upon Scenario C­1 with the expansion of the ‘Areas of Change’ by a 500­foot buffer (Figure 37). Within these new buffer areas, parcels along major arterial roads were zoned “Main Street Commercial/MU Low” with a density of 48.0 DU/acre. All other single­family residential parcels were upzoned to “Duplex” with a density of 8.0 DU/acre. 83Appendix D Figure 36: Scenario C-1 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 84Appendix D Figure 37: Scenario C-2 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 85Appendix D Scenario D - Mode Shift Toward Sustainable Transportation • Scenario D-1 is centered on increasing density along the future E Line Corridor in Edina (Figure 38). This involved the creation of shapefiles for both the E Line Route and planned bus stops within Edina using ‘geojson.io’. Following the importation of the shapefiles, buffers of 500 feet and a quarter mile were generated to guide zoning decisions. Within the 500­foot buffer and along major roads like France Ave., parcels were zoned as “Main Street Commercial/MU High” with a density of 66.4 DU/acre. Residential parcels situated within the 500­foot buffer but not adjacent to main roads were rezoned as either “Garden Apartments” with a density of 25.6 DU/ acre, “Suburban Townhome” with a density of 20.2 DU/acre, or “Duplex” with a density of 8.0 DU/acre. Lastly, within the quarter mile buffer, all other single­family residential parcels were upzoned to “Duplex” zoning with a density of 8.0 DU/acre. • Scenario D-2 expands upon scenario D­1 by increasing zoning along an East­West corridor en­ compassing 50th St., Vernon Ave., and Lincoln Dr., alongside the future E Line corridor (Figure 39). This corridor corresponds to a reimagined Metro Transit Route 46, stretching from the fu­ ture Opus Station (Green Line Extension) in Minnetonka through Edina and to 46th St Station (Blue Line) in Minneapolis. This is compared to the current Metro Transit Route 46, which goes from 46th St Station (Blue Line) and terminates in the Grandview neighborhood of Edina. This reimagined Metro Transit Route 46 follows the same routing of Route 46 as it was in 2019 and passes through two existing ‘Areas of Change’. To create scenario D­2, the previous scenario, D­1, was copied over to serve as the foundation. Then shapefiles were created for a reimagined Metro Transit Route 46, including a potential route and bus stops. Buffers of 500 feet and a quarter mile were created based on the potential bus stops. Then the same zoning methodol­ ogy as used in D­1 for the E Line was employed along the East­West Corridor. Finally, a check was done to ensure that the resulting average density (DU/acre) within a quarter mile of the potentially reimagined Metro Transit Route 46 met Metro Transit’s density requirements of 15 DU/acre for ABRT service. As zoned, the scenario produced an average density of 19 DU/acre within the East­West corridor, qualifying for much improved ABRT service from Metro Transit. • Scenario D-3 focuses on densification around active transportation facilities using the Region­ al Bicycle Transportation Network as a proxy (Figure 40). The Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) was chosen as a proxy for active transportation due to it being a high­quality regional network. The scenario was implemented utilizing a shapefile containing the RBTN in Edina that was provided by Edina City Staff and uploaded to Urban Footprint. Subsequently, a buffer of 500 feet along the RBTN was created. Within this buffer, all single­family residential parcels were rezoned to “Duplex”, which has a density of 8.0 DU/acre. • Scenario D-4 combined all of the above Mode Shift Toward Sustainable Transportation scenar­ ios using the same zoning strategy (Figure 41). 86Appendix D Figure 38: Scenario D-1 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 87Appendix D Figure 39: Scenario D-2 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 88Appendix D Figure 40: Scenario D-3 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 89Appendix D Figure 41: Scenario D-4 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 90Appendix D Scenario E - Essential Destinations • Scenario E-1 was created to test the impacts of upzoning residential lots within a quarter mile of all public schools in Edina (Figure 42). Within this area, single family detached parcels were upzoned to duplexes, effectively doubling the density of these lots. The underlying concept be­ hind this scenario was to upzone around schools to increase the likelihood that students would be able to walk to school rather than being dropped off by their parents. Edina’s schools are a source of pride for the City and we wanted to leverage their strength through the enabling of more families to live in close proximity to the education and green space that Edina Public Schools offer. • Scenario E-2 was created to test the impacts of upzoning residential lots within a quarter mile of retail and employment hubs in the City (Figure 43). The identified areas were largely similar to the Areas of Change, except that this scenario expanded them further out, including exist­ ing single family detached lots. Within this area, single family detached parcels were upzoned to duplexes, effectively doubling the density of these lots. Single family attached lots were con­ verted to “Suburban Townhome” zoning, with a density of 10.2 DU/acre. Existing multifamily lots were converted to “Suburban Multifamily”, with a density of 44.3 DU/acre. • Scenario E-3 was created to test the impacts of upzoning residential lots within a quarter mile of major healthcare facilities in the City (Figure 44). These identified areas were also largely similar to the Areas of Change, but not as large an area as scenario E­2. As with the previous scenario, single family detached parcels were upzoned to duplexes, effectively doubling the density of these lots. Single family attached lots were converted to “Suburban Townhome” zoning, with a density of 10.2 DU/acre. Existing multifamily lots were converted to “Suburban Multifamily”, with a density of 44.3 DU/acre. • Scenario E-4 was created to test the impacts of upzoning residential lots within a quarter mile of large parks in the City (Figure 45). This scenario resulted in upzoning a large amount of the current single family detached lots in the City. As with the previous scenarios, single family de­ tached parcels were upzoned to duplexes, effectively doubling the density of these lots. Single family attached lots were converted to “Suburban Townhome” zoning, with a density of 10.2 DU/acre. Existing multifamily lots were converted to “Suburban Multifamily”, with a density of 44.3 DU/acre. • Scenario E-5 combined all of the above essential destination scenarios using the same zoning strategy (Figure 46). 91Appendix D Figure 42: Scenario E-1 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 92Appendix D Figure 43: Scenario E-2 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 93Appendix D Figure 44: Scenario E-3 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 94 Figure 45: Scenario E-4 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 95Appendix D Figure 46: Scenario E-5 Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 96Appendix D Recommended Scenarios • The ‘Basic’ scenario was created by integrating Scenario C­1 (‘Areas of Change’) and D­1 (E Line Corridor), which were identified as the most effective scenarios based on the Impact Score results (Figure 47). Initially, the scenario started with a copy of Scenario C­1 followed by implementing the same methodology as previously stated in Scenario D­1 to upzone around the E Line Corridor. • The ‘Enhanced’ scenario evolved from the ‘Basic’ scenario by incorporating the subsequent most effective scenarios, namely C­2 (‘Areas of Change’ with a 500­foot Buffer) and D­2 (E Line Corridor & East­West Corridor) (Figure 48). Building upon the ‘Basic’ scenario, the ‘Basic’ sce­ nario was first copied followed by implementing the same methodology as previously stated in Scenarios C­2 and D­2. Since both C­2 and D­2 were built upon the previous scenarios C­1 and D­1, themselves integrated into the ‘Basic’ scenario, only upzoning in the 500­foot Buffer and along the East­West corridor needed to occur. • The ‘Preferred’ scenario represents our highest recommendation to Edina and combines the greatest number of effective zoning scenarios. Expanding upon the ‘Enhanced’ scenario, it incorporates Scenarios D­4 (All of the Mode Shift Scenarios) and E­3 (Major Healthcare Facili­ ties) (Figure 49). To develop this scenario, the ‘Enhanced’ scenario served as the foundational template. Employing the same methodology outlined previously in Scenarios D­4 and E­4, adjustments were made. Given that D­4 encompassed all the Mode Shift scenarios and the ‘Enhanced’ scenario already integrated two of the three focuses, only upzoning around the RBTN needed to occur. 97Appendix D Figure 47: ‘Basic’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 98Appendix D Figure 48: ‘Enhanced’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 99Appendix D Figure 49: ‘Preferred’ Scenario Map Source: Authors created with Urban Footprint 100 Scenario Data Table 23 comprises all the data, including calculated Impact Scores, for all the scenarios for the zoning scenario analysis. Appendix D Scenario Density change from base (%) VMT/capita change (%) VMT Im- pact Score GHG/capita change (%) GHG Im- pact Score Transit Ridership change (%) Transit Rid- ership Im- pact Score B-1 3.85%-1.98%0.52 -4.07%1.06 -2.45%-0.64 B-2 7.41%-2.73%0.37 -5.88%0.79 -2.84%-0.38 B-3 3.85%-0.86%0.22 -2.65%0.69 -1.80%-0.47 C-1 26.81%-13.89%0.52 -13.04%0.49 12.53%0.47 C-2 32.18%-16.75%0.52 -16.08%0.50 13.64%0.42 D-1 28.52%-18.62%0.65 -12.30%0.43 12.60%0.44 D-2 44.01%-26.22%0.60 -19.88%0.45 15.64%0.36 D-3 22.20%-13.32%0.60 -13.45%0.61 8.45%0.38 D-4 48.29%-29.31%0.61 -24.47%0.51 16.01%0.33 E-1 5.08%-0.40%0.08 -2.39%0.47 -0.75%-0.15 E-2 28.17%-18.47%0.66 -21.53%0.76 3.61%0.13 E-3 22.69%-16.96%0.75 -17.32%0.76 2.48%0.11 E-4 19.99%-10.20%0.51 -14.68%0.73 -0.53%-0.03 E-5 27.18%-12.63%0.46 -19.48%0.72 -1.33%-0.05 ‘Basic’32.34%-17.29%0.53 -16.37%0.51 13.35%0.41 ‘Enhanced’42.43%-22.09%0.52 -24.41%0.58 13.34%0.31 ‘Preferred’45.75%-25.01%0.55 -27.07%0.59 13.87%0.30 Table 23: Zoning Scenario Analysis Data Source: Authors calculations with Urban Footprint Section References 1. Urban Footprint, “Base Parcel Canvas Creation,” January 17, 2024, https://help.urbanfootprint.com/methodology-documentation/base-parcel-canvas-creation.2. Urban Footprint, “Transportation Analysis,” January 12, 2024, https://help.urbanfootprint.com/methodol-ogy-documentation/transportation-analysis.3. Urban Footprint, “Transportation Analysis,” January 12, 2024, https://help.urbanfootprint.com/methodol-ogy-documentation/transportation-analysis.4. Urban Footprint, “Emissions Analysis,” March 5, 2020, https://help.urbanfootprint.com/methodolo-gy-documentation/emissions-analysis.5. Urban Footprint, “Emissions Analysis,” March 5, 2020, https://help.urbanfootprint.com/methodolo-gy-documentation/emissions-analysis. 101 Glossary of Terms Abbreviations • ADU: Accessory dwelling unit • ABRT: Arterial bus rapid transit • BRT: Bus rapid transit • CAP: Climate Action Plan • GHG: Greenhouse gas • Log: Logarithm • SOV: Single­occupancy vehicle • TDM: Travel demand management • TOD: Transit­oriented development • VMT: Vehicle miles traveled Glossary of Terms • ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit): An ADU is a self­contained residential unit with its own living room, kitchen, and bathroom on the same parcel of land as a single­family dwelling. An ADU can be located within, attached to or detached from the main residence. • Accessibility: With regard to transportation, accessibility refers to the ease or convenience with which a person can use that form of transportation. Components of accessibility include distance, quality of infrastructure, and accommodations for people with mobility needs. • Active transportation: Travel made by walking, rolling, cycling, or otherwise outside of a motorized vehicle. • Adjusted R-squared: A form of the R­squared statistic used in multivariate regressions, which adjusts the R­squared value based on the number of independent variables that are used in the analysis. This is done because, mathematically, adding more independent variables will always lead to a higher R­squared value, regardless of if the added independent variables are effective in explaining the dependent variables. • Amendment: A formal, substantive change made to a document such as a comprehensive plan or CAP. • ‘Area of Change’: Geographic zones defined in Edina’s comprehensive plan, which are expect­ ed and encouraged to experience increases in density. • Arterial bus rapid transit (ABRT): A form of bus rapid transit wherein the buses run on mixed­traffic streets, instead of in dedicated lanes. • Binary: In statistical analysis, this refers to a variable where there are only two possibilities, usu­ ally denoted as 0 or 1, or true or false. • Bivariate: See “Regression” Glossary of Terms 102 • Building massing: See “Massing” • Built environment: Man­made structures, features, and facilities viewed collectively as an en­ vironment in which people live, work, and play. • Bus rapid transit (BRT): A form of rapid transit that uses buses instead of trains. Typically, BRT routes have state­of­the­art stations spaced further apart than typical bus routes, plus other interventions designed to make the buses faster and more reliable. Oftentimes this includes dedicated lanes. A BRT route that does not have a dedicated lane is known as ABRT (Arterial Bus Rapid Transit). • CAP (Climate Action Plan): Plan adopted by the City of Edina in 2021 that sets targets for met­ rics such as greenhouse gas emissions, as well as a roadmap to achieving those targets. • Causation: In statistical analysis, the quality of an independent variable directly affecting the value of a dependent variable. • Citywide density: This refers to interventions that increase the level of population density in all parts of the city, as opposed to targeting specific nodes and corridors. • Coefficient: In statistical analysis, a coefficient is a number that describes the relationship be­ tween two variables, such as the slope or y­intercept of a line of best fit. • Commercial: A land use that includes retail and business activities such as stores, restaurants, and offices. • Commute: The trip that a person makes between their home and their place of employment or education. • Comprehensive plan: A plan formally adopted by a city that outlines the changes they intend to make to zoning codes, built form ordinances, and other policies. • Connectivity: In transportation planning, the quality of two or more places or transportation routes being connected together. • Correlation: In statistical analysis, the quality of lower values for one variable being distinctly associated with lower or higher values for a second variable. • Corridor: A transportation route connecting two or more places, such as a road, a railroad line, or a walking path. • Demographics: Statistics that describe the population and people of a given area. • Density: A measure of the quantity of people or things within a unit of geographic area. See also: “Population density” • Dependent variable: In statistical analysis, a variable that depends on another variable. • Developed acre: An acre of land which has been developed in some way, i.e., includes a build­ ing or other manmade structure. • Driving mode share: The share of people who commute to their place of employment or edu­ cation using a personal vehicle. Often divided into “driving alone” and “carpooling.” • Dwelling unit: A house, apartment, or condominium in which a person may reside. • Greenhouse gas: Any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gas­ ses include, but are not limited to, water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), ozone (O3), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perflu­ orocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). • Green Line Extension: Also known as the Southwest Light Rail, or Southwest LRT, this is a light rail line running between Minneapolis and Eden Prairie that is currently under construction Glossary of Terms 103 and expected to open in 2027. • E Line: See “METRO E Line” • Emissions: The release of a substance (usually a gas when referring to the subject of climate change) into the atmosphere. • Explanatory variable: See “Independent variable” • Frequency: The length of time between consecutive buses or trains along a particular route. • Function: A mathematical relationship in which a value for one variable is associated with ex­ actly one value for another variable. • Independent variable: In statistical analysis, a variable which does not depend on any other variable. • Infrastructure: The system of public works in a given place, such as roads, bridges, and utility lines. • Intervention: An action taken by a government to change a process or outcome. • Land use: Land use refers to the total of arrangements, activities and inputs undertaken in a certain land cover type (a set of human actions). The term land use is also used in the sense of the social and economic purposes for which land is managed (e.g., grazing, timber extraction and conservation). • Linear regression: See “Regression” • Locality: See: “Municipality” • Local road: A road that is operated by a municipality or locality. • Log: See: “Logarithm” • Logarithm: The exponent that indicates the power to which a base number is raised to pro­ duce a given number. In statistical analysis, a logarithmic function is often used to turn a non­linear line into a linear line. • Massing: The size, shape, and bulkiness of a particular building or block. • Methodology: A process or set of rules used to arrive at a conclusion. • METRO E Line: An ABRT line running between Edina and Minneapolis that is scheduled to open in 2025. • Metropolitan area: A region consisting of a city or cities and its surrounding suburbs. • Metropolitan Council: A governmental body that controls land use, transit, wastewater man­ agement, and other policy areas in seven counties in the Minneapolis­St. Paul metropolitan area. • Metro Transit: The transit agency serving much of the Minneapolis­St. Paul metropolitan area, and a subsidiary of the Metropolitan Council. • Multi-family: A residential building that contains more than one unit, such as an apartment building, a condominium building, or a duplex. • Multivariate: See: “Regression” • Municipality: The smallest form of government: a village, town, township, or city. • Mixed-use: A zoning designation that allows buildings that include multiple uses, usually resi­ dential as well as commercial or industrial. • Mode: A form of transportation such as a personal vehicle, public transportation, or active transportation. Glossary of Terms 104 • Mode Share: The proportion of trips taken by a certain mode of transportation. • Mode Shift: The process of shifting a proportion of total trips taken in a personal vehicle to other modes. • Net Zero Emissions: Refers to a community, business, institution, or building for which, on an annual basis, all greenhouse gas emissions resulting from operations are offset by carbon­free energy production. • Node: A point in a transportation network where multiple corridors come together. • Observation: In statistical analysis, a single data point. • Outlier: In statistical analysis, an observation that contains a value significantly above or below that of the other data points. Outliers are often excluded from statistical analyses. • Paris Agreement: 2015 international agreement signed by 195 countries that sets targets for climate change mitigation. • Pedestrian: A person walking or rolling as a form of transportation. • Peer city: A city that has similar qualities to the city in question (in this case Edina). • Population Density: The number of people residing in a given unit of land area. • P-value: In statistical analysis, a number from 0 to 1 indicating the probability that a given re­ sult is not random. • Qualitative analysis: Analysis involving numbers, statistics, and mathematics. • Quantitative analysis: Analysis involving words, ideas, and subjective experiences. • Regression: A type of statistical analysis that analyzes the relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables. • Residential: A land use that includes homes where people can live. • R-squared: In statistical analysis, a statistic that measures the extent to which a regression analysis explains the variation in the relationship between two variables. 0 means that the re­ gression analysis explains none of the variation, and 1 means that the regression explains all of the variation, i.e., one can draw a straight line between two variables. • Sample size: The number of observations in a regression analysis. • Setback: The distance between a building and the public right­of­way (i.e., a sidewalk or street), often required by law. • Significant: See “Statistical significance” • Single-occupancy vehicle (SOV): A motorized vehicle, such as a car, which contains only one person. • Statistical significance: In statistical analysis, a result is considered statistically significant if the p­value, i.e., the chance of it being random, is less than a certain threshold, usually 0.05. • Streetscaping: Aspects of street or road design that impact the subjective experience of pe­ destrians, cyclists, drivers, and other users. • Target: A goal that a city intends to achieve for a given metric. • Targeted density: A strategy to increasing density that prioritizes development along or near particular nodes and corridors, rather than citywide (i.e., everywhere all at once). • TDM (Transportation Demand Management): the process by which expected vehicle traffic is planned for and mitigated to reduce traffic impact of new development and incentivize mode shift Glossary of Terms 105 • Transit: Also known as public transportation, a form of transportation, usually run by the gov­ ernment, which transports people in shared vehicles at a subsidized cost. Includes buses, trains, trams, and subways. • Transit mode share: The share of people who commute to their place of employment or edu­ cation using transit, as opposed to driving, walking, cycling, or working from home. • Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): Development of housing, retail, and other uses that is centered around a transit station. • Transportation mode: See “mode” • Trend: The trend of a quantity measures its change over a time period, with a positive trend value indicating growth in the quantity, and a negative value indicating a decrease. It is de­ fined as the ratio of the change in the quantity over the time period, divided by the initial value of the quantity, and is usually expressed either as a percentage or a fraction. • Trip: An instance of a person traveling between two places. • Trip type: The primary reason or purpose of a trip. This could include commuting, shopping, running errands, or visiting friends or family. • Upzoning: The process of amending a zoning code such that greater density and/or a wider variety of land uses is permitted. • Variable: In statistical analysis, a quality or quantity that tends to change from observation to observation. • Variation: The extent to which the value of a given variable changes from observation to ob­ servation. • VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled): The total amount of miles traveled by all vehicles in the City, typically calculated as an annual sum. • Walking mode share: The share of people who commute by walking to their place of employ­ ment or education. • Zoning: The act or process of partitioning a city, town, or borough into zones reserved for dif­ ferent purposes (such as residence or business). Glossary of Terms RCP.UMN.EDU 330 HHHSPA, 301 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455 | 612-625-1551 The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. This publication/material is available in alternative formats upon request. Direct requests to cura@umn.edu or 612-625-1551. Printed on recycled and recyclable paper with at least 10 percent postconsumer waste material.