The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-06-21 Meeting PacketAGENDA Regular Meeting of the Edina Transportation Commission 6:00 PM, Thursday, June 21, 2007 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Council Chambers I. Call to Order II. Public Comment III. Old Business No old business – May meeting was cancelled IV. New Business a. Southdale Medical Facility - 6525/6545 France Avenue* b. Draft Gateway AUAR Traffic Study* c. New Commission Member – Paul Mooty V. Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of April 19, 2007* VI. Planning Commission Update (Commissioner Brown) VII. Open Discussion VIII. Staff Liaison Comments (Sullivan) a. Current Sidewalk Plan i. City of Edina Transportation Plan* ii. City of Edina Transportation Commission Plan* b. Safe Routes to School Funding c. Northeast Edina Transportation Study Update* d. Transportation Comprehensive Plan Update e. W. 70th Street/Cornelia Area Study Update f. W. 70th Construction from France to York Avenue IX. Adjournment * Note: Attachment included. During "Public Hearings," the Chair will ask for public comment after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to speak on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your comments are relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: • Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less. The Chair will modify presentation times, as deemed necessary. • Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit comments to the matter under consideration. • In order to maintain a comfortable environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. During "Public Comments," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about something not on the agenda. Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less and cannot speak to an issue for which a public hearing was previously held and closed or a matter scheduled for a future hearing. Individuals should not expect the [Board or Commission] to respond to their comments. Instead, the [Board or Commission] might direct the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Page 1 of 2 Item IV. a. Edina Transportation Commission G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\TRANSPORTATION DIV\Transportation Commission\Agendas & RR's\2007 R&R\20070621_6525 France Traffic Impact Study.doc REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Transportation Commissioners Agenda Item No.: IV. a. From: Jack Sullivan, PE ACTION: Assistant City Engineer Recommendation/Motion Date: June 21, 2007 Discussion Subject: Transportation Impact Analysis 6525/6545 France Avenue Southdale Medical Center Addition Information Recommendation: Review the attached transportation impact analysis submitted by URS Corporation dated June 6, 2007 and a review memo dated June 14, 2007 from WSB and Associates. If so desired by the Transportation Commission, adopt a motion recommending that traffic generated from the proposed addition to the Southdale Medical Center does not adversely affect the adjacent transportation system. Staff recommends that URS address the comments from the June 14th WSB memo prior to the Transportation Commission Meeting. Info/Background: Staff received a proposal for a 22,833 sq ft addition of the Southdale Medical Health Center. The addition would be located on the west side of the building near the southern edge. Southdale Medical Health Center consists of two adjoined buildings 6525 and 6545 France Avenue with a parking ramp attached on the east side. The site is bordered by 65Th Street to the north, Drew Avenue to the east, 66th Street to the south and France Avenue on the west. The existing building has 225,190 sq ft of medical office. URS Corporation has submitted a transportation impact analysis for the proposed addition. Staff has also contracted with WSB and Associates, Inc. to review the submittal package. All documents are attached for your review and comment. The following is an excerpt from the May 19, 2005 Transportation Finding of Fact requirement for Traffic Studies (comments for this development are indicated in bold): Page 2 of 2 Item IV. a. Edina Transportation Commission G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\TRANSPORTATION DIV\Transportation Commission\Agendas & RR's\2007 R&R\20070621_6525 France Traffic Impact Study.doc The Transportation Commission shall consider the following four effects in the evaluation of traffic studies that are warranted by certain zoning, land-use, conditional use permits and final development plan applications prior to the application being submitted to the Planning Commission and Council for consideration: i) Does the development significantly affect the operation and congestion of the adjacent roadways or intersections and/or result in a traffic hazard? According to the Traffic Impact Study, no adverse impact to surrounding roadways or intersections shall occur from this Development. ii) Does the development significantly affect pedestrian safety? Since the majority of the site remains the same there is almost no change in pedestrian movements and safety from the current site configuration. iii) Does the development provide opportunities for enhanced transit usage, vanpooling or car-pooling? A Travel Demand Management plan was submitted with the Development’s application. WSB and City Staff request that the operator of the facility and the developer show additional measures to enhance transit usage. iv) Does the development provide feasible opportunities to address an existing traffic issue or safety problem? The proposed development does not address existing traffic issues along the encompassing streets. Since no significant traffic increases are calculated from the Development no improvements are required. The proposed use(s) of the site are allowed in the zoning for this area. From a Traffic Engineer perspective, and based on the transportation impact analysis, this project will not adversely affect the roads and intersections surround the site. Page 1 of 1 Item IV. a. Edina Transportation Commission G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\TRANSPORTATION DIV\Transportation Commission\Agendas & RR's\2007 R&R\20070621_AUAR Study.doc REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Transportation Commissioners Agenda Item No.: IV. b. From: Jack Sullivan, PE ACTION: Assistant City Engineer Recommendation/Motion Date: June 21, 2007 Discussion Subject: Gateway Study Area AUAR Information Recommendation: Review the attached excerpt of the draft AUAR submitted by WSB & Associates dated June 2007. If so desired by the Transportation Commission, adopt a motion recommending that the DRAFT AUAR document be released for public review and comment. Info/Background: The City of Edina has prepared a Draft Alternative Areawide Review (AUAR) for the Gateway Study Area located within 135 acres in southeastern Edina. The Draft AUAUR analyzes four scenarios for redevelopment in an area currently developed located between TH 100, Minnesota Drive, France Avenue and 76th Street. WSB & Associates is preparing the AUAR document for the City. The information provided in the package is an excerpt of the Traffic Section of the document. The full document contains analysis of other aspects such as storm water, sanitary sewer and water usage. This document will be used reviewed by a variety of public agencies including Met Council, MNDOT and various other regulatory agencies. MINUTES OF THE Edina Transportation Commission Thursday, April 19, 2007 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Les Wanninger, Warren Plante, Marie Thorpe, Jean White, Marc Usem, Geof Workinger, Hilah Almog, Steve Brown MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Wayne Houle, Jack Sullivan, Sharon Allison I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Wanninger. II. Public Comment None III. Old Business a. Transportation Impact Analysis The following recommendations were made during discussion: o Making font color combination and size of traffic reports readable o Allowing sufficient time for the ETC to review traffic reports o Requiring the developer to submit the traffic study before the development application; A motion was made by Usem to accept the Transportation Impact Analysis and Review Policy with the following change to page 4 of 5, 4th paragraph from the bottom: “The Transportation Impact Analysis must be submitted before the development application.” The motion was seconded by White. All ayes. Motion carried. IV. New Business a. Metro Transit Bus Route Update – John Dillery Mr. Dillery said a study of the Sector 5 (Edina) area was done to determine why people use transit. He said the 494/France area has high density employment which is different from residential density. He said in the suburbs park and rides are important so the people will have a place to gather. b. 7311 France Avenue – Edina Retail, formally “The District” Sullivan said a revised plan and traffic study were submitted for the above location. He said unlike the old plan that included residential and retail development, the new plan includes restaurant and retail space and the new traffic study is similar to the one that was approved in 2005. The traffic study was reviewed by the City’s traffic consultant, Chuck Rickart of WSB and his comments and responses from the Cypress Equities traffic consultant are summarized as follows: 2 1. Parking spaces – clarification is needed on the number of spaces because two different figures were given (448 and 518), both of which exceeds the City’s requirement. 2. Do a general comparison of the previous study to the current study. 3. What data was used in determining the one percent growth rate and did they consider other developments in the area? The developers’ traffic consultant said historical data on France Avenue was used and redevelopment of Super Target and the Westin were taken into consideration. 4. Traffic Forecast – AM/PM peak hour traffic generation will be higher in this new plan even though the previous plan included more development. A comparison of the previous and current daily traffic generation should be done. 5. Traffic Forecast – what is the trip distribution for the two intersections beyond the two intersections that were studied and where does the traffic go? The developers’ traffic consultant said those trips are based on current traffic patterns. Is the AM/PM peak distribution the same? Yes, but Rickart said he is not completely convinced that they will not see some shifting, however, their response is reasonable. 6. Requested that they summarize the queue lengths in a table for easier reading and this was done. 7. There are no significant queue length issues, except for the westbound approach to France Avenue and Gallagher Drive. 8. How are they going to address the above issue? They planned on restriping, however, the plans did not have enough details to show if they had enough room for restriping. 9. Two trucks turning at the same time would result in one of them going up onto the median. The developers’ traffic consultant said that they could delineate turning lanes but this would still result in one going up onto the median. This still needs to be addressed further. Rickart does not believe that the development will have a significant impact on the adjacent streets. Ed Terhaar, traffic consultant with Wenck Associates for Cypress Equities, said he has a draft drawing showing how the lanes could work on Gallagher that he will be forwarding to staff and the Planning Commission. In reference to the trucks turning and going up onto the median, he said they are talking about semi-trucks and it is highly unlikely that two of them will be turning at the same time from the opposite direction; however, the remedy would be to move the median back and this would need to be coordinated with Hennepin County. 3 Sullivan said both staff and WSB have recommended approval of the traffic study with the stipulation that approval is received from Hennepin County for the changes needed. The following are conditions and further requirements of the developer that staff have recommended for the development approval: 1. A plan layout for geometric and lane configuration revision as mentioned in the Traffic Impact Study for the France Avenue Gallagher Drive intersection shall be provided for review. 2. Turn movements of tractor trailer trucks making left turns onto France Avenue from Gallagher Drive impact the raised concrete medians on France Avenue. Further study should be giving to eliminating this occurrence. The Traffic Impact Study suggested paint stripes to direct the large trucks. Any work on France Avenue must be coordinated and approved by Hennepin County. 3. All costs for required roadway and traffic signal improvements to the France Avenue and Gallagher Drive intersection shall be borne by the developer. Plante motioned to approve the traffic study as recommended by staff and the City’s traffic consultant. Motion was seconded by Thorpe. 7 ayes, 1 nay (Brown). Motion carried. V. Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of March 15, 2007 Thorpe motioned to approve the minutes of March 15, 2007 and it was seconded by Usem. All voted ayes. b. Special Meeting of March 19, 2007 Thorpe motioned to approve the minutes of March 19, 2007 and it was seconded by Plante. All voted ayes. VI. Planning Commission Update (Commissioner Brown) Brown asked what type of information the ETC would like him to share with them. He said their major focus has been the Comp. Plan. He said they’re making every effort to get feedback from the community and several listening sessions were held. Overall, the process is going well, he said. VII. Open Discussion None. VIII. Staff Liaison Comments (Sullivan) a. Safe Routes to School application was approved (one of 23 out of 111 applicants). b. City Extra – Email Notifications Service is a new service that residents can sign up for to receive information on roadway reconstruction, W. 70th St. traffic study, etc. c. Mass Transit article?? d. Valley View turn lanes (restriping and crosswalk at Chapel Lane) will be brought to the ETC again in one month. 4 e. Transportation Comprehensive Plan Update – process is moving forward; currently waiting on the landuse portion to begin generating a model. Timeframe is one to two months. f. I-494 / 169 Improvements – the last city, City of Bloomington, has signed the Municipal Consent. g. W. 70th Study Update – the first SAC meeting was held on April 12 and residents are always welcomed in a listening capacity. Wanninger said the next meeting will be May; however, some data will not be ready for the May meeting. He asked if they should meet anyway and focus on educational things such policies relating to crosswalks, stop signs, etc. He said CPC and Southdale were offered as meeting places. Sullivan said he met with SRF today to finalize the information that will be posted to the web. h. Comprehensive Bike Plan – in the process of selecting a consulting firm to develop the Bike Plan. i. Handouts from March 15, Edina Transportation History Overview – a series of maps and other historical information were distributed, including an 1848 plat map, a 1949 landuse map, future growth map, etc. Other discussion: Wanninger said the ETC should adopt a walking/pedestrian plan as part of the Comp Plan. Brown said he believes Park & Rec is taking this into consideration as they update their bike trails. Houle explained that the trails and sidewalks portion of the Comp Plan will be updated as part of the Transportation Plan. Wanninger said about one year ago, there wasn’t sufficient funding for the Sidewalk Plan and he suggested that they recommend a way to fund the Sidewalk Plan. This will be discussed further in June or July. Usem asked about the origination/destination study for W. 70th and Sullivan explained that it is being done as a result of comments regarding whether or not the traffic were local or cut-thru. He said they decided to do the study because it will help to better define some of the issues that were raised. The scope of the study has not been finalized; however, some of the options are a stop survey of a sample of drivers, a workplace study, etc. Workinger asked if they are on schedule with the Syncho Model and what are they likely to see as a by-product of the system. Rickart said the two components being worked on are the forecasting model and the southeast area traffic model. He said forecasting model will be forecasted trips based on the Met Council’s model of the twincities area and this portion is land use based. He said they cannot move forward until the consultant has completed the land use study. The next component, the southeast area traffic model is completed, except that they are still collecting traffic counts from 80 intersections with approximately 75% completion so far. The balance of the traffic count should be completed by the middle of May to early June. Rickart said they’ll be able to use the model as different areas redevelop to see how the redevelopment will affect traffic. Meeting adjourned. X/c. /4. v . 1/R._ WSB Infrastructure • Engineering Planning so Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South & Associates, Inc. Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum To: Jack Sullivan, PE, Assistant City Engineer Wayne Houle, PE, Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Edina From: Chuck Rickart, PE, PTOE Transportation Engineer WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: June 14, 2007 Re: Southdale Medical Center Addition Traffic Impact Study Review City of Edina WSB Project No. 1686-02 As you requested, we have reviewed the Traffic Impact Study prepared by URS Corporation for the proposed Southdale Medical Center addition located east of France Avenue between 65 th Street and 66th Street in the City of Edina. Based on the review of the Traffic Impact Study, the following question / comments are made: 1. In general, the figures in the report are very difficult to read. The figures should be larger, and the text and information should be labeled in black or another color. 2. Although the City outlined the "major" intersections that should be analyzed as part of the study, the access driveways into the site from 65th Street, 66th Street, and Drew Avenue should also be analyzed to determine the impact on site circulation, as well as impacts to the adjacent street system. 3. The intersection Level of Service and 95th percentile queue length calculations shown in Table 1 and Table 3 should also include the existing storage lengths available for each specific movement, specifically the left- and right-turn lanes. This will help identify any issues with queue lengths backing up outside of turn lanes, as well as into any site driveways (see Comment No. 2) adjacent to the intersections. 4. Traffic generation assumed the use of the ITE Trip Generation manual. Although this is an acceptable methodology with an existing facility having the same type of use, a more accurate estimate would be based on the existing use. At a minimum, a discussion of existing trip generation from the site should be included. GAEngineerineGeneral \F Streets \6525 6545 France Avenue (Southdale Medical Building)\Traffic Info \MEMO-jsullivau-061307.doc Mr. Jack Sullivan, PE Mr. Wayne Houle, PE City of Edina June 14, 2007 Page 2 of 2 5. On page 6, the traffic distribution bullet points indicate that traffic would be destined to and from 1-494. It is assumed this should be TH 62. 6. The traffic distribution percentages used were based on a previous study completed in 2000. The trip distribution shows a high percentage of the traffic movement to TH 62 (Crosstown). A comparison to the existing facilities traffic distribution should be made to verify this percentage. 7. The traffic distribution in and out of the site driveways should be documented. 8. Although the Level of Services will not significantly change with the proposed addition, it is very important to document that the additional traffic will not have significant impacts specifically backing up from the major intersections to site driveways impacting queue storage lengths. 9. The transit and pedestrian / bicycle facilities discussions show the existing facilities available in the area. However, additional information should be provided on what is currently being promoted at the existing facility and/or what will be provided to the tenants and customers to promote transit and pedestrian / bicycle transportation in the future. Based on these comments and my general review of the site configuration and traffic impacts, the proposed development should not have any significant impacts on the major intersections adjacent to the proposed expansion. However, additional information on the operation and configuration of the site access driveways and their impacts on the street system should be documented. If you have any questions, please contact me at 612-360-1283 or crickart@wsbeng.com. Twill be available at the Transportation Commission Meeting on June 21, 2007 to discuss these comments in detail. SM GriEngineeringiGenerallF Streeis16525 6545 France Avenue (Southdale Medical Building)ITraffic InfolMEMO-jsullivan-06130Zdoc Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 To: Jack Sullivan, P.E., City of Edina File: From: John Crawford, P.E., PTOE Erik Seiberlich, AICP Date: June 6, 2007 Subject: Proposed Southdale Medical Center Addition Traffic Impact Study A traffic impact study was prepared in January 2000 for the proposed Northco Southdale Medical Center development in Edina, Minnesota. The proposed development was approved and the building has been built. Recently, Northco Real Estate Services, 5353 Wayzata Blvd, Suite 650, Minneapolis, MN 55416, 952.820.1650, has proposed an addition to the building which consists ofjust less than 25,000 square feet of medical office space. The purpose of this memorandum is to present the results of the analysis of the four adjacent intersections under existing and future conditions with the variable being the increase in traffic due to the addition at the Southdale Medical Center. The four study intersections and their geometry and traffic control are identified as follows: • France Avenue and 65' Street — This is a traffic signal controlled intersection that provides protected left turns for northbound and southbound traffic. The south leg provides three through lanes and exclusive left and channelized right turn lanes. The north leg has an exclusive left turn lane, two through lanes and a shared through/tight turn lane. The west approach provides an exclusive left turn lane and a shared through/right turn lane, while the east approach provides a channelized right turn lane and a shared through/left turn lane. • France Avenue and 66th Street — This is a traffic signal controlled intersection that provides protected left turns for all approaches. The south leg provides two through lanes and exclusive left and channelized right turn lanes. The north leg has an exclusive left turn lane, two through lanes and a shared through/right turn lane. The west approach provides an exclusive left turn lane, a through lane and a shared through/channelized right turn lane. The east approach provides two left turn lanes, two through lanes and an exclusive channelized right turn lane which was a bus only lane upstream. • Drew Avenue and 65 th Street — This is a four-way stop controlled intersection. The south leg provides an exclusive left turn lane and shared through/right turn lane, and the north leg has a shared left turn/through lane and an exclusive right turn lane. The east and west approaches provide a shared left turn/through/right turn lane. • Drew Avenue and 66 th Street — This is a traffic signal controlled intersection, which has protected left turns for the eastbound and westbound movements. The south leg is one-way in the southbound direction, and does not have traffic entering the intersection. The north approach provides an exclusive left turn lane and a shared through/right turn lane. The west leg provides exclusive left and right turn lanes and two through lanes. The east approach provides an exclusive left turn lane and two through lanes. The rightmost lane is a bus only lane which is also used by right turning vehicles. Figure 1 shows the development site and the local roadway network, including the study intersections. Figure 1. Development Site and Study Intersections Figure 2 shows traffic control at the intersections and the site accesses, speed limits, ADTs and other notable information. 2 !20O5 AE, LLC 200$ GOT. Mc Figure 2. Roadway Network Information Turning movements were counted during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours at the 65th Street and Drew Avenue intersection on Monday, June 4th , 2007. Peak hour volumes for the other three intersections were counted earlier this spring, and obtained from WSB Engineering. The a.m. (7:00 — 8:00) and p.m. (4:00 — 5:00) peak hour volumes will be used for the existing scenario. For the build scenario, trips were generated for the 25,000 sf addition and assigned to turning movements across the study area based on distribution percentages used in the previous study. These trips were then added to the existing movements and analyzed as the build scenario. The existing traffic volumes for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours are shown in Figures 2 and 3. 3 51 218 151 16 43 138 72 23 131 202 48 147 277 84 46 2137 692 125 59 58 8 Drew Avenue and 65th Street Existing A.M 47 100 5 152 1082 95 714 273 France Avenue and 65th Street Existing A.M 52 436 147 635 62 298 197 39 364 73 brew Avenue and 66th Street Existing A.M 207 977 281 722 10 48 1444 2202 729 38 594 97 France Avenue and 66th Street Existing A.M 19 334 72 425 210 320 750 220 103 29 I 3 I 71 88 315 109 118 11 128 72 45 322 521 112 87 54 255 69 132 2813 837 907 34 740 133 France Avenue and 65th Street Existing P.M 33 953 84 1070 358 146 200 12 brew Avenue and 65th Street Existing P.M 59 26 11 96 3418 2142 51 900 701 148 31 874 813 30 368 84 31 253 brew Avenue and 66th Street Existing P.M W A 6,1 V.n .n nn 0 65 France Avenue and 246 504 354 66th Street 309 779 85 Existing P.M 224 897 '6 591 I 250 806 153 279 1238 Figure 2. Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 3. Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 4 Proposed Addition 1,000 SF 24.6 AM Peak Hour (6:45 - 7:45) Trip Out Rate 2.48 21% 36.2 891 PM Peak Hour (4:15 - 5:15) Ell Daily Trips Out Total Rate Trips TOTAL Intersection analysis was completed using Synchro and SimTraffic software simulations. Synchro was used to identify movement delay while SimTraffic was run to identify 95th percentile queues. Table 1 shows the existing condition analysis results for the intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS) which ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. Table 1. Existing Intersection Level of Service and 95th Percentile Queue Length EXISTING CONDITIONS EASTBOUND Intersection Left Through Right France Avenue and 65th Street WESTBOUND Left Through Right Movement NORTHBOUND Left Through Right SOUTHBOUND INT Left Through Right Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) o 0 b 0 0 A 0 a A D B B C 40 52 52 44 44 *10 90 14 e10 48 10 10 22 120 220 220* 100* 100 *50 90 130 200 200 160 170* France Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) .. a Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 1 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) E 0 0 E 0 A E a A E B s c 60 52 52 56 52 <10 56 16 e10 60 12 12 30 100 110 120k 180 360 *50 *50 90 *50 150 100 130* - cl. Ore Avenue and 65th Street * Level of Service (LOS) a' Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) s s B A A A A A A A A A s 12 12 12 *10 *10 <10 *10 el0 *10 el0 *10 el0 10 100* 100* 100* 60* 60 . 60* 50 50 50 . 50* 50 50 Ore Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) E A A E a D s 8 B 56 10 *10 58 10 10 50 16 16 16 120 *50 *50 90 130 120* 130 60 60* France Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) D C C E E A o 8 A E 8 B C 40 32 32 74 74 f10 38 10 e10 60 16 16 22 120 250 250* 310. 310 190 60 110 *50 160 130 130* Prance Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) S- Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 1 11 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) t E B 8 Li A E C A E s s o 84 76 76 54 42 10 62 30 *10 66 16 16 36 120 220 250* 150 280 110 170 210 *50 300 110 180 - ,V. Drew Avenue and 65th Street c. Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft) B a B B B B A A A s s A B 12 12 12 10 10 10 *10 el0 e10 12 12 ,10 10 90* 90* 90* 70 . 70. 70* 60 50 50 . 90 80 60* Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) 0 c A E a 8 E B a C 50 58 14 14 26 70 260 . . . . *50 140 140 120* 270 130 130* - ' " ''' '•' ' ' - — -sneree lane graspe roug e roug , rareug rig Although there are certain movements that operate at LOS E and even F, the traffic signals are coordinated in order to operate to maintain the best overall intersection operation. Therefore, a movement with a low volume might have a lower level of service while the high volume movements operate at a more acceptable level. Overall, all the intersections presently operate at an acceptable LOS during both peak hours. The trip generation estimate is shown in Table 2. The rates were taken from the ITE's Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, 2005. The land use type used is 'Medical-Dental Office Building'. Table 2. Trip Generation ' .Southdale Health Center Trip Generation' Note: 'Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers. 5 ID 2005 AD, LLO 200$ GDT Inc The trip distribution percentages used to assign trips to 65 th and 66th Streets and France and Drew Avenues were taken from the previous study. Pass-by and diverted trip types were not used as this type of land use is the likely primary trip purpose. The major origins/destinations and percentages are shown below and illustrated in Figure 4: • 36% to/from the east on 1-494 • 38% to/from the west on 1-494 • 7% to/from the west on 66th Street • 7% to/from the south on France Avenue • 4% to/from the north on France Avenue • 8% to/from other places at a lesser extent Figure 4. Trip Distribution Percentages The trips generated by the proposed addition were then disseminated across the roadway network and assigned to specific turning movements in the four study intersections. Figures 5 and 6 show the turning movement volumes for the build scenario during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Both the surface and structured parking areas are being modified as part of this addition. Some spaces previously identified as employee, leased or patient parking, are being switched to one of the other uses. This switch will result in different driving patterns by particular users in the study intersections. However, since the user is being switched, and the total number and location of the spaces are not, it is assumed that any change in the overall distribution will be minor. 6 52 438 151 641 19 336 74 429 927 34 741 152 75 11 112 1119 95 I 716 I 308 51 France Avenue and 139 218 151 65th Street 48 211 16 Build A.M. 24 2.4% - percent from proposed addition 125 59 58 8 147 Drew Avenue and 43 277 84 65th Street 72 138 46 Build A.M. 23 50 100 I 5 155 0.4% - percent from proposed addition 695 2189 732 38 595 99 301 64 France Avenue and 66th Street Build A.M. 212 753 198 321 39 220 0.6% - percent from proposed addition 104 29 3 72 78 brew Avenue and 208 369 281 66th Street 725 981 10 Build A.M. 48 1454 0.7% - percent from proposed addition 2215 Includes u-turns Figure 6. Build Scenario P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 88 France Avenue and 364 315 109 65th Street 112 564 118 Build P.M. 88 33 I 963 I 85 1081 2.6% - percent from proposed addition 899 57 I 591 I 251 65 France Avenue and 256 505 355 66th Street 313 798 85 Build P.M. 229 153 807 280 3442 1240 0.7% - percent from proposed addition 358 146 I 200 I 12 54 brew Avenue and 11 263 69 65th Street 72 128 140 Build P.M. 45 2.8% - percent from proposed addition 374 86 I 31 I 257 34 brew Avenue and 52 878 814 66th Street 703 903 30 Build P.M. 148 2155 0.6% - percent from proposed addition 861 2887 Includes u-turns Figure 5. Build Scenario A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 7 When comparing existing volumes to future volumes, it is important to see that trips generated by the proposed addition will account for no more than 3% of the total intersection volume for any of the intersections in either peak hour. The volume contributions to the intersections on 66 th Street are expected to be less than one percent, a nearly negligible amount. Intersection analysis for the build conditions was completed in the same manner as it was for the existing conditions. Analyses results are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Build Scenario Intersection Level of Service and 95th Percentile Queue Length BUILD CONDITIONS Intersection Left France Avenue and 65th Street EASTBOUND Through Right WESTBOUND Left Through Movement Right Left NORTHBOUND Through Right SOUTHBOUND INT Left Through Right Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) b b o 13 A b 8 A D B 8 c 42 52 52 46 46 e10 40 16 e10 48 10 10 22 90 190 190. 100* 100 *50 90 110 *50 210 230 150* France Avenue and 66th Street '3 X i 0 a. Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) E 0 13 E 13 A E e A E B B c 60 52 52 56 52 <10 56 16 *10 60 12 12 30 100 110 120" 170 340 *50 *50 90 .50 130 90 130* Drew Avenue and 65th Street * a Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) B 8 8 A A A A A A A A A B 12 1Z 12 *10 40 *10 <10 e10 *10 e10 <10 .10 10 110* 110* 110* 70. 70* 70* 50 50 50. 60* 60 60 Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) E A A E 8 s o s e s 56 e10 e10 58 10 10 50 16 16 16 . 140 .50 .50 70 150 150* 120 50 50" - France Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (Lec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) D c c E E A o a A E B et c 40 32 32 74 74 e10 38 10 <10 62 16 16 22 120 270 270* 370* 370 200 60 120 70 170 150 150* - France Avenue and 66th Street X .. I. Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) F E E 0 b A E C A E B 8 D 84 76 76 54 42 e10 62 30 <10 66 16 16 36 80 200 250* 100 210 210 230 140 <50 310 290 230" - Drew Avenue and 65th Street * o. Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) B e a B B a A A A 13 8 A B 12 12 12 .10 10 10 e10 e10 *10 12 12 e10 10 100" 100* 100* 70* 70" 70. 60 60 60" 70 70 60* - Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) 0 c A E B e E e 8 c 52 22 e10 62 14 14 58 14 14 26 100 270 *50 170 130 150* 220 110 110" - * shared kne group (left/through, left/throlgh/right, through/right) When compared to Table 1, the existing condition analysis results, the build analyses show that there will be little change in operation, delay and queue length from the existing to build scenarios. In addition to the slight percentage increase of trips to the intersection resulting from the addition, the analysis results identify that any change in operation between the no build and build scenarios is rather insignificant. Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Transit System Map Revised Dec. 2006 Southdale Transit Center Lsit.oulos: 6, 114, 152, 515, 538, 534, 576, 631 rairview Southclak 1-lospital As part of this traffic impact study, nearby bus routes and bicycle facilities are identified as requested in the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Policy. Figure 7, from Metro Transit, shows that several bus routes serve the area in the vicinity of the proposed addition to the Southdale Medical Center, Figure 7. Nearby Metro Transit Routes 9 e 10 Fi City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure 8. City of Edina Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Pedestrian/ Bicycle Facilities I() Figure 8, is from the City of Edina Transportation Plan. It identifies pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area. The area near the proposed addition is served by some of these facilities. =3.n ••n — 41=.5orao — irlryPs+,,ary — S.D.1 - I ate toile MUNICIPAL STATE AID SIDEWALK STUDY CITY OF EDINA Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Study February 14, 2003 (Revised January 27, 2004) PURPOSE: HISTORY: This report analyzes the adopted City of Edina Pedestrian / Bicycle Facilities, the existing Municipal State Aid (MSA) Sidewalk System, the missing MSA sidewalk segments, and proposed construction of the missing sidewalk segments. The City of Edina currently has over 32 miles of MSA and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) sidewalks. Many of the sidewalks and pathways in the City were constructed with adjacent developments and are missing critical sidewalk segments. The Edina City Council requested staff to analyze the missing segments along the MSA and CSAH roadways. The Comprehensive Sidewalk / Pathway Plan was updated in 1999 as part of the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan update, see plan below. This plan includes all existing sidewalks along with proposed MSA/CSAH sidewalks and also proposed local roadway sidewalks. Sgt Oft)117 City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure 10 Ce March 1999 \CJt V . Pedestrian! Bicycle Facilities City of Edina Missing Municipal State Aid Sidewalks EXIsting 'Horniness Sldewak Proposed State-Ald Sidewalk Brisling Concrete Sidewalk MurecipN State Aid Street Existing ParK Pavia/ LL sm. WE J.tuary, 2004 „ ‘t. Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Study February 14, 2003 (Revised January 27, 2004) Page 2 PROPOSED MSA SIDEWALKS: The proposed sidewalks provide safe pedestrian travel along roadways that cannot accommodate the mixing of pedestrian and vehicular movements. The proposed sidewalk system will add approximately 12 miles of sidewalks to the existing system. Many of these segments will require extensive boulevard work to construct the sidewalk or pathway; these sidewalks will also transverse many residential boulevards. The map below indicates the existing system and proposed MSA/CSAH sidewalks. Figure 2: MISSING MUNICIPAL SIDEWALK SEGMENTS T;pt of Ildowelhe OP Prognm me 01,4E r lethg I b mhou SUesalc art la g Coietet SlIeta k 21MS 2116 edg og Fak Panto/ Prqxred stre-ausilewat ttalStale AU Steel 2:00 Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Study February 14, 2003 (Revised January 27, 2004) Page 3 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE: A portion of the proposed sidewalk system can be constructed with programmed roadway projects as listed in the adopted 2004-2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), see Figure 3 below. The City's adopted Sidewalk Financing Policy requires initiation of sidewalks to be resident petition driven. However, the City Council may want staff to plan construction on some of the MSA/CSAH segments prior to receiving petitions. Ism p 11 I .111111 WhW (-44p ) J I 41121 1 .2f r 11111 LI I STV MIM 1110 = 1.4 City of Edina Proposed Municipal State Aid Sidewalks Programmed in Capital Improvement Program WE E Eiglieeillg Dept .131 !ant, 2004 Figure 3: PROGRAMMED MSA SIDEWALKS Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Study February 14, 2003 (Revised January 27, 2004) Page 4 COSTS & FEASIBLITY: 2004-2008 MSA FUNDING: Staff has prepared a draft CIP for the non-programmed segments of the MSA/CSAH sidewalk system; see attached CIP. Average costs to construct all of the proposed MSA sidewalks is approximately $928,000 per year for the next six years; with the current level of MSA funding this is not feasible. The current CIP appropriates $110,000 to $ 50,000 a year for MSA sidewalks. 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 BEGINNING BALANCE 2,835,540 1,559,540 986,540 980,540 1,057,540 YEAR EXPENDITURE 2,276,000 1,573,000 1,006,000 923,000 1,100,000 ENDING BALANCE 559,540 (13,460) (19,460) 57,540 (42,460) MSA FUNDING WITH PROPOSED SIDEWALKS: 2004 2005 2006 2007* 2008 BEGINNING BALANCE 2,835,540 1,364,540 496,540 1,005,540 (367,460) YEAR EXPENDITURE 2,471,000 1,868,000 1,491,000 2,373,000 2,965,000 ENDING BALANCE 364,540 (503,460) (994,460) (1,367,460) (3,332,460) *This includes the potential Federal funding under the Transportation Enhancement Program. This program is competitive and is administered by the Metropolitan Council. MEMORANDUM Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 To: Jack Sullivan, P.E., City of Edina File: From: John Crawford, P.E., PTOE Erik Seiberlich, AICP Date: June 20, 2007 Subject: Response to Comments Regarding the Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Southdale Medical Center Addition Thank you for returning questions and comments in regard to the review of the traffic impact study dated June 6, 2007. The following are the actions taken in response to the memo of June 14, 2007: 1. All revised figures can be found at the end of this document. 2. With five accesses to the site from three different roadways, the 92 trips estimated to be generated during the p.m. peak hour are expected to be spread out. Using the access distribution percentages, now shown in Figure 4, p.m. peak hour turning movements into and out of the site generated by the proposed addition are identified below: • West Access on 65th Street — 6 in / 15 out • East Access on 65th Street — 6 in / 15 out • Access on Drew Avenue —7 in / 20 out • West Access on 66th Street — 3 in • East Access on 66th Street — 3 in /17 out 3. Storage lengths are included in Tables 1 and 3 in the revised graphics section at the end of this memorandum. The 95th percentile queue is defined to be the queue length that has only a 5- percent probability of being exceeded during the analysis time period. It is a useful parameter for determining the appropriate length of turn pockets, but it is not typical of what an average driver would experience. Driver experiences would be better characterized by the mean queue length. When compared to the storage bay lengths, some of the 95th percentile queue lengths narrowly exceed the storage bay lengths in the existing condition. There is little change in the length of the queues from the existing to build condition. Discussion of the through movement 95 th percentile queue lengths can be found in the response to comment 8. 4. Part III.a of the City of Edina's draft Transportation Impact Analysis Initiation and Review Policy, dated May 21, 2007, states: "The trip rates in the most current edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation should be used in determining the amount of traffic a particular development will generate." This is the industry standard for traffic impact studies of this type. 5. The first two bullet points should read TH-62 in place of 1-494. 6. In lieu of an extensive origin-destination or license plate study that would require a large amount of time and resources for the distribution of 90 trips in the p.m. peak hour, distribution percentages used were based on the previous study. This is a very common and accepted practice when updating traffic studies or when studying the impact of an expansion or redevelopment as is this case. 7. The distribution percentages for the driveways are now shown on revised Table 4, which follows this memorandum. 8. As shown with the inclusion of turn bay storage lengths in Tables 1 and 3, there are a few locations where the queue could extend past the storage bay length 5% of the time in the peak hours. There is also the question as to the length of the queue for the shared left turn/through movement on westbound 65th Street at France Avenue. During the p.m. peak hour, this movement presently has a 95th percentile queue of 310 feet, which extends past the intersection shared by the westernmost access to the Medical Center site. Simulation results indicated that in the build condition the 95 th percentile queue would be 370 feet. This approach was modeled as having a shared left turn/through lane and a channelized right turn lane, matching the existing striping at the intersection. One way that this existing condition might be solved is to restripe this approach and provide exclusive left and through lanes with a channelized right turn lane. This approach has been observed operating that way indicating that there is ample room should this solution be used. When the intersection is modeled with the westbound approach providing exclusive left turn and through lanes, the 95th percentile queue decrease in length so that it ends west of the access to the medical center. 9. The facility currently provides a bike rack on site and the facility is located on a Metro Transit bus line. According to the property manager, some staff members working at the building ride their bicycle to work and use transit. There is a concierge in the lobby that assists patients in getting shuttles, paratransit or taxis if necessary, and helps them to vehicles. Many of the patients also arrive by Metro Transit and use shuttles provided by senior residences or other care facilities. 2 W. 65Th Street Proposed Addition br ew Av e n ue S. W. 66" Street Figure 1. Development Site and Study Intersections Figure 2. Roadway Network Information 1.11811oNax....4a • ..4111006.105 glew414--44 AADT = 17,100 NW Mk *Do- 35 MPH • 2171- 0 2005 AE. LLC 0 2005 GDT Inc 4 3418 51 France Avenue and 131 218 151 65th Street 48 202 16 Existing A.M 23 147 Drew Avenue and 43 277 84 65th Street 72 138 46 Existing A.M 23 2137 692 62 France Avenue and ' 210 298 197 66th Street 320 750 39 Existing A.M 220 73 Drew Avenue and 207 364 281 66th Street 722 977 10 Existing A.M 48 1444 1082 95 I 714 I 273 52 436 147 635 125 59 I 58 I 8 47 I 100 I 5 152 729 38 I 594 I 97 19 I 334 I 72 425 2202 103 29 I 3 I 71 907 34 I 740 I 133 88 France Avenue and 322 315 109 65th Street 112 521 118 Existing P.M 87 358 146 I 200 I 12 54 Drew Avenue and 11 255 69 65th Street 72 128 132 Existing P.M 45 33 953 84 59 26 11 2813 837 1070 96 897 368 56 I 591 I 250 84 I 31 I 253 65 France Avenue and 246 504 354 66th Street 309 779 85 Existing P.M 224 153 I 806 I 279 1238 31 Drew Avenue and 51 874 813 66th Street 701 900 30 Existing P.M 148 2142 Figure 2. Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 3. Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Table 1. Existing Intersection Level of Service and 95th Percentile Queue Length EXISTING CONDITIONS EASTBOUND Intersection Left Through Right France Avenue and 65th Street Left WESTBOUND Movement Through Right NORTHBOUND Left Through Right SOUTHBOUND INT Left Through Right Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length D 0 0 D 0 A 0 B A o a a C 40 52 52 44 44 <10 40 14 .10 48 10 10 22 120 220 220" 100" 100 +50 90 130 <50 200 160 170" - 100 - - 75 250 - 70 175 - - France Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentik Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length E D 0 E D A E B A E B B C 60 52 52 56 52 010 56 16 010 60 12 12 30 100 110 120" 180 380 <50 <50 90 <50 150 100 130" - 175 - 150 350 - - 325 - 325 275 - - - a. Drew Avenue and 65th Street * Level of Service (LOS) ¢ Control Delay per Vehicle (sic) 95th Pvcenti le Queuing Length (f t.) Turn Lane Storage Length B B B A A A A A A A A A B 12 12 12 010 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 .10 <10 <10 10 100" 100" 100" 60" 60" 60" 50 50 50" 500 50 50 - - 250 Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length E A A E B B 0 B B B 56 010 <10 58 10 10 50 16 16 16 120 <50 <50 90 130 120" 130 60 60* 250 275 250 275 - - France Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lone Storage Length 0 C C E E A D B A E B B C 40 32 32 74 74 <10 38 10 <10 60 16 16 22 120 250 250" 310" 310 190 60 110 050 180 130 130" 100 - 75 250 - 70 175 - France Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (fr.) Turn Lane Storage Length F E E 0 0 A E C A E B B 0 84 76 76 54 42 <10 62 30 <10 66 16 16 36 120 220 250" 150 280 110 170 210 <50 300 110 180 175 - 150 350 .. - 325 - 325 275 - - Drew Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length B B B B B B A A A B B A B 12 12 12 10 10 10 <10 010 .10 12 12 <10 10 900 90" 90* 70" 70* 70" 60 50 50* 90 80 80" - - 250 - - Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) 0 C A E B a B B B C 50 22 <10 62 14 14 58 14 14 26 70 260 <50 140 140 120" 270 130 130" - Turn Lane Storage Length 250 . 275 250 , . 275 - - Shored ne group e t t roug , e t t roug rig t, t roug rig t 6 67 3.72 891 36.21 21°4 2.48 61 61 AM Peak Hour (6:45 - 7:45) Trips Out Total 1111 48 PM Peak Hour (4:15 - 5;15) baily Rate Trips 891 TOTAL 13 Proposed Addition In 27% Trip Out Rate 73% Trips Out Total 92 25 67 92 Trip Out Rate Table 2. Trip Generation Southdale Health Center Trip Generation/ Note: 1Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers. 7 Figure 4. Trip Distribution Percentages 78% W. 65th Street 45% ra nc e Av en 30%44. 25% W. 66th Street 87 '7% 0 2005 AE, LLC 0 2005 GOT, Inc 2887 33 1 963 I 85 1081 358 200 12 146 861 75 I 26 1 11 112 ---AIncludes u-turns 2155 3442 0.6% - percent from proposed addition 0.7% - percent from proposed addition 899 57 I 591 I 251 374 86 1 31 1 257 52 151 438 641 2215 1454 0.6% - percent from proposed addition 0.7% - percent from proposed addition 51 France Avenue and 139 218 151 65th Street 48 211 16 Build AA. 24 2189 2.4% - percent from proposed addition 64 France Avenue and 212 301 198 66th Street 321 753 39 Build A.M. 220 147 Drew Avenue and 43 277 84 65th Street 72 138 46 Build AA. 23 0.4% - percent from proposed addition 78 Drew Avenue and 208 369 281 66th Street 725 981 10 Build AA. 48 Includes u-turns 695 19 I 336 I 74 429 1119 95 I 716 308 732 38 I 595 I 99 125 59 I 58 1 8 5011001 5 155 104 29 I 3 I 72 927 34 I 741 I 152 88 France Avenue and 364 315 109 65th Street 112 564 118 Build P.M. 88 2.6% - percent from proposed addition 54 Drew Avenue and 11 263 69 65th Street 72 128 140 Build P.M. 45 2.8% - percent from proposed addition 65 France Avenue and 256 505 355 66th Street 313 798 85 Build P.M. 229 34 Drew Avenue and 52 878 814 66th Street 703 903 30 Build P.M. 148 153 807 280 1240 Figure 5. Build Scenario A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 6. Build Scenario P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Table 3. Build Scenario Intersection Level of Service and 95th Percentile Queue Length BUILD CONDITIONS EASTBOUND Intersection Left Through Right France Avenue and 65th Street Movement WESTBOUND Left Through Right NORTHBOUND Left Through Right SOUTHBOUND INT Loft Through Right Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length D 0 0 0 0 A D 8 A 0 8 B C 42 52 52 46 46 <10 40 16 <10 48 10 10 22 90 190 190* 100" 100 .50 90 110 .50 210 230 150* 100 - - 75 250 70 175 - France Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft) Turn Lane Storage Length E 0 0 E 0 A E B A E B a C 60 52 52 56 52 .10 56 16 <10 60 12 12 30 100 110 120" 170 340 .50 <50 90 .50 130 90 130" 175 - 150 350 - - 325 - 325 275 - - brew Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length a B a A A A A A A A A A B 12 11 12 .10 <10 <10 .10 <10 .10 .10 .10 <10 10 110" 110* 110" 70* 700 70" 50 50 500 60" 60 60 - 250 - - Drew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length E A A E B B 0 B B e 56 .10 <10 58 10 10 50 16 16 16 140 .50 <50 70 150 150" 120 50 50* ' - 250 275 250 - 275 - France Avenue and 65th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length b C C E E A b 8 A E 8 8 C 40 32 32 74 74 <10 38 10 .10 62 16 16 22 120 270 270" 370* 370 ZOO 60 120 70 170 150 150* - 100 - 75 250 - 70 175 - France Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) 2 Turn Lone Storage Length F E E D b A E C A E 8 8 D 84 76 76 54 42 .10 62 30 .10 66 16 16 36 80 200 250* 100 210 210 230 140 <50 310 290 230* 175 - 150 350 - - 325 - 325 275 - - - & brew Avenue and 65th Street * Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft.) Turn Lane Storage Length 8 B a B 8 8 A A A B Et A 8 12 12 12 10 ' 10 10 .10 <10 <10 12 12 <10 10 100" 100" 100" 70" 70^ 70" 60 60 60" 70 70 60" - - - 250 - - brew Avenue and 66th Street Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) 95th Percentile Queuing Length (ft) 0 C A E a B a B c 52 22 a15 62 14 14 58 14 14 26 100 270 <50 170 130 150" 220 110 110* - Turn Lane Storage Length 250 - 275 250 275 - - shared lane group (left/through, left/through/right, through/right) Wood jgok° Lake 4I") Best Buy HQ 0 Bus Route: 6,114, 152, 515, 538, 539, 578, 631 wisasamwataalit..... Parklawn 70th St i= 1••n 3enton v. OM Me 00 • 61--1 '4 iwo 77th +- 538 MN Scho I o Susi ss 78th 1410 A -o Dewey 7E- Hill 74th Figure 7. Nearby Metro Transit Routes Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Transit System Map Revised Dec. 2006 City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure 10 SR, No. 016.1117 Pedestrian! Bicycle Facilities Figu re 8. City of Edi na P ed es t ri an and B i cyc l e F ac i li ti es PRELIMINARY DRAFT GATEWAY STUDY AREA - TRAFFIC STUDY ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW EDINA, MN JUNE 2007 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 5-3: Figure 6-1: Figure 6-2: Figure 6-3: Figure 6-4: Figure 21-1: Figure 21-2: Figure 21-3: Figure 21-4: Figure 21-5: Figure 21-6: Figure 21-7: Figure 21-8: Figure 21-9: Figure 21-10: Figure 21-11: Figure 21-12: Figure 29-1: Aerial Photo Location Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Key Intersections Existing 2007 Vehicular Turning Movements Existing 2007 Vehicular Turning Movements Trip Distribution Scenario 1 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 1 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 2 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 2 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 3 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 3 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 4 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Scenario 4 2014 Vehicular Turning Movements Adjacent Developments City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 1 The following is an excerpt from the preliminary draft AUAR for review by the City of Edina Transportation Commission. 1. PROJECT TITLE: Gateway Study Area Alternative Urban Areawide Review ("Gateway Study Area AUAR") 2. PROPOSER Environmental Quality Board (EQB) guidance indicates no response is necessary 3. RGU City of Edina Mr. Cary Teague Planning Director 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 E-mail: cteague(&,ci.edina.mn.us 4. REASON FOR EAW PREPARATION EQB guidance indicates no response is necessary 5. PROJECT LOCATION County: Hennepin City/Township: Edina T28N R24W S 1/4 SECTION 31 County map showing the Gateway Study Area: Figure 5-1: Location Map U.S. Geological Survey Map: Figure 5-2: USGS Location Map Map clearly depicting the boundaries of the AUAR and any subdistricts used in the AUAR analysis. Figure 5-3: Aerial Location Map 6. DESCRIPTION a. Provide an AUAR summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. The City of Edina has prepared a Draft AUAR for the Gateway Study Area located within 135 acres in southeastern Edina. The Draft AUAR analyzes four scenarios for redevelopment in an area currently developed located between TH100, Minnesota Drive, France Avenue and 76th Street. b. Give a description of the following elements for each major development scenario: - anticipated types and (intensity (density) of residential and commercial/warehouse/light industrial development throughout the AUAR area; - infrastructure planned to serve development (roads, sewers, water, stormwater system, etc.) City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 2 - information about the anticipated staging of various developments, to the extent known, and of the infrastructure, and how the infrastructure staging will influence the development schedule. The Draft Gateway Study Area AUAR is being prepared as a result of a developer, Gateway Development, Edina LLC (herein referred to as the "Developer") purchasing a series of parcels in two different locations within the Gateway Study Area with the intent to perform redevelopment. These parcels are referred to in this document as Pentagon Towers and Pentagon Quads sites and are shown in Figure 5-3. In response to the developer's request to redevelop these parcels, the City of Edina decided to review the potential for greater redevelopment activity within the commercial and industrial area along West 77th Street adjacent to these recently acquired parcels. A. Description of Study Area The Gateway Study Area is approximately 135 acres. The site is bounded by Minnesota Trunk Highway 100 on the west; France Avenue (CSAH 17) on the east; 76th Street West and Fred Richards Golf Course on the north; and the City's border with Bloomington on the south. The area is shown on Figures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3. The existing cover types are urban development, with minimal green space in the form of maintained lawns along roadway boulevards and parking lot edges. The majority of parcels are occupied by office and industrial business applications. Some wetlands and drainage basins exist within the Fred Richards Golf Course to the north and there is a pond along Edina's border with Bloomington to the south. The existing cover types are described in Item 10. The Gateway Study Area currently contains a mixture of light industrial, commercial, and office properties. There is a total of 1,871,000 gross square feet of light industrial, commercial and office space. Access to the Gateway Study area from TH100 is available at the northwest boundary via an interchange at 77th Street West. Similarly, access from 1-494 is available approximately a quarter mile to the southeast of the Gateway Study Area via an interchange at France Avenue. A summary of the existing and proposed conditions are shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2. B. Description of Redevelopment Scenarios This AUAR analyzes four redevelopment scenarios. As required by Minnesota Rules 4410.3610, Scenario 1 analyzes development as permitted under the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) dated 1999. Scenario 2 analyzes development as proposed by the developer within its acquired properties and the remaining two scenarios look at maximum density options for commercial or residential development. Scenario 1 — Comprehensive Plan (Figure 6-1) Scenario 1 represents the land uses and densities allowed under the City's Comprehensive Plan (1999). Under this scenario, a combination of office, commercial, and industrial land uses would be utilized in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, resulting in up to 1,593,000 gross square feet of office space and 1,296,000 gross square feet of combined commercial and light industrial City of Edi,,a Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 3 redevelopment, for a total redevelopment potential of 2,889,000 gross square feet. Under this plan scenario, no residential development would be proposed. This represents approximately 1,018,000 sf additional development than exists within the study area in the existing conditions. Scenario 2 — Master Plan Scenario (Figure 6-2) Scenario 2 represents incorporating a "master plan" scenario brought forth by a developer proposing to redevelop three existing commercial properties within the Gateway Study Area currently owned and operated under the Pentagon Park development name. The Pentagon Towers and Quads area proposed for redevelopment by the developer are shown on Figure 5-3. This scenario includes the reconstruction of office and retail space, a 150-room hotel, 820 multi- family housing units, and associated parking structures. Potential redevelopment in the study area includes 3,284,000 sf commercial, office, and light industrial, 883,000 sf residential, and 80,000 sf hotel for a total of 4,247,000 sf of redevelopment. This scenario would require an amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan, or would require that the Comprehensive Plan update scheduled for completion in 2008 reflect these proposed land uses. This represents approximately 2,376,000 sf additional development than exists within the study area in the existing conditions and 1,347,000 sf additional development than anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. Scenario 3 — Maximum Commercial Build Scenario (Figure 6-3) Scenario 3 represents a maximum commercial build scenario where all redevelopment would be in the form of new commercial, office and industrial construction, totaling approximately 4,604,000 gross square feet of redevelopment. This scenario would require an amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan, or would require that the Comprehensive Plan update scheduled for completion in 2008 reflect these proposed land uses. This represents approximately 2,739,000 sf additional development than exists within the study area in the existing conditions and 1,704,000 sf additional development than anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. Scenario 4— Maximum Residential Scenario (Figure 6-4) Scenario 4 represents a maximum residential land use, which would convert the Pentagon Quads and Pentagon Park East office sites to multi-family apartments and condominiums, while converting the Pentagon Park Towers site to a combination of commercial office and multi- family housing. This scenario would result in approximately 1,500 multi-family residential units and represent 1,550,000 sf of residential development. The remaining area could redevelop into 2,437,000 sf of commercial, office, and industrial redevelopment. The total potential redevelopment for this scenario results in 3,987,000 sf for the entire study area. Like Scenario 2, this scenario would require an amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan, or would require that the Comprehensive Plan update scheduled for completion in 2008 reflect these proposed land uses. This represents approximately 2,116,000 sf additional development than exists within the study area in the existing conditions and an additional 1,087,000 sf of development than anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 4 Table 6-1. Summary of Development Scenarios* Sc e n a r io Office Space Office Space, Warehousing, & Light Industrial Retail & Commercial (Mixed Use) Housing & Residential (Mixed Use) Hotel To ta l A c r e s De v e lo p ed F, Gr o s s Sq ua r e Fe e t (in m il l i o ns ) w a.) s., Gr o s s Sq ua r e F e e t (in m il l i o n s ) Ac r e s Gr o s s Sq ua r e F e e t (in m il l i o n s) Un it s Gr o s s Sq uar e F e e t (in m il l i o n s ) Ro o m s Gr o s s Sq uar e F e e t (in m il l i o n s) 1 122.68 70.95 1.546 49.59 1.296 2.14 0.047 - - - 2 122.68 31.84 1.862 49.59 1.296 41.258 0.126 820 0.883 150 0.080 3 122.68 70.95 3.261 49.59 1.296 2.14 0.047 - - - - 4 122.68 31.84 1.094 49.59 1.296 41.25" 0.047 1500 1.550 - - * Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads, right-of-way, parks, or utility easements in the Gateway Area. a Acreage includes mixed use development with commercial, retail, and office space applications. Acreage includes mixed use development with office space applications. Table 6-2: Comparison of Development Scenarios with Existint Conditions Existing Conditions Scenario 1: Comprehensive Plan Scenario 2: Master Plan Scenario 3: Maximum Commercial Scenario 4: Maximum Residential Office 1,871,000 1,546,000 1,862,000 3,261,000 1,094,000 Commercial / Retail/Hotel 47,000 206,000 47,000 47,000 Office & Light Industrial Mix 1,296,000 1,296,000 1,296,000 1,296,000 Residential - - 883,000 - 1,550,000 TOTAL: 1,871,000 2,889,000 4,247,000 4,604,000 3,987,000 B. Description of Surrounding Areas The Gateway Study Area is located in southeastern Edina and is bordered by the City of Bloomington to the south. Based on historical aerial photos, the area was utilized for cultivated agriculture purposes through the early 1960's. At that time, the construction of Interstate 494 to the south and Trunk Highway 100 to the west ushered in suburban growth, resulting in the rapid commercial, office, and industrial development of the area. By the mid 1970's the entire Gateway Area and its surroundings had developed into some form of commercial, office, or industrial land use. To the north of the Gateway Area are single family and multi-family residential uses, as well as the Fred Richards Golf Course. Lake Edina is within one-quarter mile of the northwest comer of City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 5 the Gateway Area. To the east, south, and west of the Gateway Area are mixed-use commercial and industrial parcels. Nine Mile Creek is located just west of TH100. Further details of the types of existing land use can be seen in the City's Land Use Plan as shown on Figure 5-4. There are no areas of biological, historical, or cultural significance located within or adjacent to the Gateway Area. Development Phasing For the Pentagon Towers and Pentagon Quad parcels that are currently proposed for redevelopment by the developer, construction is anticipated to begin in 2008 and last for a minimum of five years into 2013 and beyond, depending on commercial office space and residential housing demand. The remaining portions of the Gateway Study Area are not known by the City to have any redevelopment planned, and therefore, the development phasing for these parcels is unknown. 21. TRAFFIC. Parking spaces added Not Necessary for AUAR . Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) NA . Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence See Appendix A Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. A. Method of Analysis The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2000). The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations for roadway segments, intersections, and freeway ramps by using roadway geometry, traffic control, and traffic volumes. The HCM analysis typically provides results in the form of a letter grade from A to F, otherwise called level of service (LOS). The letter is meant give a qualitative estimate of the operational efficiency or effectiveness. The system is set up similar to a report card, with A representing high quality operations and F representing poor operations. At LOS A, motorists experience very little delay or interference. On a roadway or intersection with LOS F conditions, motorists would experience extreme delay or severe congestion. Although LOS A conditions represent the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersections to such high standards exceeds the benefit to the user. Therefore, the city of Edina has an overall goal to provide its residents with conditions at LOS D or better. Operations at LOS E are acceptable for individual movements. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 6 The analysis techniques defined in the HCM is different for roadways and intersections. Roadway segment analysis focuses on the average daily volume to capacity ratio, while intersection analysis focuses on delay caused by the peak hour critical movements. It is therefore possible to have an efficient intersection located along a poorly operating roadway segment, or a poorly operating intersection along an otherwise free-flowing arterial. For purposes of this study, the roadway segment analysis was conducted at a planning level. The analysis consists of comparing the average daily flow rates on a roadway segment to the LOS breakdown of ADT volumes for that facility type, as displayed on Table 21-1. Table 21-1. Roadway Segment Level of Service Measures Roadway Capacity (vehicles per day) Uncongested (LOS A, B, or C) Approaching Congestion (LOS D) Congested (LOS E or F) Two-Lane with Turn Lanes <15,100 15,100-17,000 17,000< Four-Lane <20,200 20,200-22,800 22,800< Four-Lane with Turn Lanes <31,800 31,800-35,800 35,800< Six-Lane with Turn Lanes <47,700 47,700-53,700 53,700< Source: Derived from Highway Capacity Manual (2000) For intersections, LOS is primarily a function of a.m. and p.m. peak hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration, and traffic control. The intersection analysis was completed using average control delay as defined by the HCM. LOS for signalized intersections is shown on Table 21-2. Table 21-2. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Measures Level of Service Delay (sec/veil) A <10 B 10-20 C 20-35 D 35-55 E 55-80 F 80< Source: Tables 16-2, Highway Capacity Manual (2000) City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 7 The HCM divides the freeway system into three different classifications for analysis; basic freeway segments, freeway weaving segments, and ramps and ramp junctions. For purposes of this study, the ability to get vehicles on and off of the interstate system is a priority and therefore analysis included weaving segments and ramps that interact with the freeway. Level of service for weave and ramp analysis is defined in terms of density or the passenger car per mile per lane (pc/mi/ln). Weaving segments are formed when an on-ramp is closely followed by an off-ramp and the two are joined by an auxiliary lane. The HCM defines this length at less than 2,500 feet. Weaving segments require intense lane-changing maneuvers as drivers must access lanes appropriate to their desired exit points. The HCM defines three major categories of weaving configurations: Type A, Type B, and Type C. • Type A - Weaving vehicles in both directions must make one lane change to successfully complete a weaving maneuver. • Type B - Weaving vehicles in one direction may complete a weaving maneuver without making a lane change, whereas other vehicles in the weaving segment must make one lane change to successfully complete a weaving maneuver. • Type C - Weaving vehicles in one direction may complete a weaving maneuver without making a lane change, whereas other vehicles in the weaving segment must make two or more lane changes to successfully complete a weaving maneuver. Level of service measures for freeway weaving are defined in Table 21-3. When a ramp does not meet the definition to be considered a weaving segment, ramp merge and diverge influence areas are evaluated separately. A merge occurs at on on-ramp when vehicles attempt to find gaps on the freeway. A diverge occurs at off-ramps when vehicles attempt to exit the freeway. Studies have shown that the influence areas for a merge and diverge sections extend 1,500 feet downstream or upstream of the ramp. Level of service measures for freeway ramps are defined in Table 21-4. The weave and ramp analysis will flag areas where mitigation is needed. However, the disadvantage of this type of analysis is that it does not take into account the effects of delay at other interchanges or bottlenecks within the interstate network. To complete this type of analysis, a simulation model of the interstate system would be required. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 8 Table 21-3. Freeway Weaving Level of Service Measures Level of Service Density (pc/mi/in) A <10 B 10-20 C 20-28 D 28-35 E >35 F 43< Source: Tables 24-2, Highway Capacity Manual (2000) Table 21-4. Ramp Junction Level of Service Measures Level of Service Density (nc/mi/ln) A <10 B 10-20 C 20-28 D 28-35 E >35 F Demand exceeds capacity Source: Tables 25-4, Highway Capacity Manual (2000) B. Existing Conditions In order to evaluate the existing conditions, key roadway segments and intersections were selected that are expected to provide the primary access to the regional roadway system when the area develops. This section documents the geometry, traffic volumes, and functional class at these locations, and uses these traffic characteristics to estimate their existing traffic operations. (1) Key Roadways The following eight roadways were selected as the key roadway segments for the development site: • Bush Lake Road between American Boulevard and West 78th Street City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 9 • Edina Industrial Boulevard from West 78th Street to Metro Avenue • Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 77th Street from Metro Avenue to Computer Avenue • West 77th Street from Computer Avenue to Parklawn Avenue • Minnesota Drive from West 77th Street to France Avenue • Parklawn Avenue/West 76th Street from West 77th Street to France Avenue • France Avenue from West 76th Street to Minnesota Drive • France Avenue from Minnesota Drive to Westbound Interstate 494 Exit Ramp The transportation characteristics for the roadways are displayed in Table 21-3. The existing roadway segment is documented, along with the existing functional classification. Also displayed are average annual daily traffic (AADT) volumes were obtained from Year 2005 Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps. Table 21-3. Characteristics of Key Roadways Segment Location Functional Classification Facility Type 2005 AADT Bush Lake Road American Boulevard and West 78th Street A Minor Arterial - Reliever Two-Lane with Turn Lanes 12,400 Edina Industrial Boulevard West 78th Street to Metro Boulevard A Minor Arterial - Reliever Four-Lane 9,000 Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 77th Street Metro Boulevard to Computer Avenue A Minor Arterial - Reliever Four-Lane with Turn Lanes 9,900 West 77th Street Computer Avenue to Parklawn Avenue A Minor Arterial - Reliever Four-Lane with Center Turn Lane 12,500 Parklawn Avenue/West 76th Street West 77th Street to France Avenue A Minor Arterial - Reliever Four-Lane 9,100 Minnesota Drive West 77th Street to France Avenue B Minor Collector Four-Lane with Turn Lanes 5,800 France Avenue West 76th Street to Minnesota Drive A Minor Arterial - Reliever Seven-Lane with Turn Lanes 28,700 •France Avenue Minnesota Drive to Westbound Interstate 494 Exit Ramp A Minor Arterial - Reliever Six-Lane with Turn Lanes 28,700 Source: 2005 Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps and 1999 Edina Comprehensive Plan (2) Key Intersections City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 10 The following fifteen intersections, displayed on Figure 21-1 in Appendix A, were selected because they provide primary access to the regional roadway system from the development site: • France Avenue / West 76th Street • Edina Industrial Blvd / West 78th Street • Edina Industrial Blvd / Metro Boulevard • Southbound TH 100 / West 77th Street • Northbound TH 100/ West 77th Street • Commercial Access / West 77th Street • Computer Avenue / West 77th Street • Parklawn Avenue / West 77th Street • West 77th Street / Minnesota Drive • France Avenue / Minnesota Drive • Westbound 1494 / Bush Lake Road • Eastbound 1494 / Bush Lake Road • American Boulevard / Bush Lake Road • France Avenue / West 78th Street / Westbound 1-494 Off Ramp • France Avenue / Eastbound 1-494 Off Ramp The vast majority of traffic exiting and entering the project area would have to use at least one of these intersections. The a.m. and p.m. peak hour turn movements, lane geometry, and traffic control are displayed on Figure 21-2 and 21-3 in Appendix A. Turning movements were taken in January-May of 2007. All analyzed intersections are controlled by traffic signals. For purposed of analysis, traffic signal timing was obtained from Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, and the City of Edina. (3) Freeway Weaving and Ramp Junctions The following weave and ramp junctions were selected for analysis: • 1-494 Eastbound - Diverge to Bush Lake Road Exit - Weave between Bush Lake Road and TH 100 - Diverge to France Avenue - Merge from France Avenue • 1-494 Westbound - Diverge to France Avenue - Merge from France Avenue - Weave between TH 100 and Bush Lake Road • TH 100 Northbound - Weave between 1-494 and West 77th Street - Weave between West 77th Street and West 70th Street • TH 100 Southbound - Weave between West 70th Street and West 77th Street - Weave between West 77th Street and 1-494 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 11 Traffic volumes obtained from Mn/DOT on 1-494 and TH 100 and their ramps were taken in April 2007. (4) Existing Land Use The existing land use consists mostly of office and office/warehouse uses. A more detailed description of the existing Gateway Area can be found in Section 6A. Currently about 1,902,000 square feet of building space is available within the study area, of which about 223,500 square feet of office space is unoccupied. Building areas were measures off of aerial photographs. The amount of unoccupied space was provided by Wayzata Properties. The estimated trip generation is calculated in Table 21-6. The Pentagon Development areas are described in more detail in Section 5 and on Figure 5-3. As shown, the study area is currently generating about 17,300 vehicle trips per day (vpd). When the office space is fully occupied, the Gateway Area has the potential to generate 19,700 vpd. The area between the Gateway Area and 1-494 has the potential to generate an additional 24,100 vpd. A vehicle trip only includes a vehicle that is entering or exiting the site. So a person who travels to work within the site would generate two trips; one when they go to work and one when they leave work. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 12 Table 21-6. Existing Trip Generation Development Size Occupancy Time of Day Trip Rate Trip Generation Total In = Out Vo Trips V Trips Pentagon Tower 142,876 sq ft 69.3% Daily 11.01 1,090 50 545 50 545 AM Pealc Hour 1.55 153 88 135 12 18 PM Peak Hour 1.49 147 17 25 83 122 Pentagon Quads 355,054 sq ft 60.0% Daily 11.01 2,347 50 1,174 50 1,173 AM Peak Hour 1.55 330 88 290 12 40 PM Peak Hour 1.49 318 17 54 83 264 Pentagon East 136,611 sq ft 91.2% Daily 11.01 1,371 50 686 50 685 AM Peak Hour 1.55 193 88 170 12 23 PM Peak Hour 1.49 186 17 32 83 154 Pentagon Tower SE 25,620 sq ft 0.0% Daily 11.01 0 50 0 50 0 AM Peak Hour 1.55 0 88 0 12 0 PM Peak Hour 1.49 0 17 0 83 0 Other Office 992,700 sq ft 100.0% Daily 11.01 10,930 50 5,465 50 5,465 AM Peak Hour 1.55 1,539 88 1,354 12 185 PM Peak Hour 1.49 1,479 17 251 83 1,228 Other Office / Warehousing 207,000 sq ft 100.0% Daily 4.96 1,027 50 514 50 513 AM Peak Hour 0.57 118 59 70 41 48 PM Peak Hour 0.61 126 8 10 92 116 Other Mini Storage 45,000 sq ft 100.0% Daily 2.5 113 50 57 50 56 AM Peak Hour 0.28 13 48 6 52 7 PM Peak Hour 0.29 13 53 7 47 6 Total Daily 16,878 8,441 8,437 AM Peak Hour 2,346 2,025 321 PM Peak Hour 2,269 379 1,890 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) and WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 13 (5) Existing Operations Analysis Traffic operations were evaluated for the existing key roadway segments and intersections listed above. This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of how traffic is operating today. The existing roadway segment traffic operations are displayed on Table 21-7. For purposes of this study, segments are classified as either uncongested, approaching congestion, or congested based on the estimated LOS. As shown on the table, none of the existing roadways are congested. Table 21-7. Existing (2005) Roadway Segment Level of Congestion Segment Location 2005 AADT 2005 LOS Bush Lake Road American Boulevard and West 78th Street 12,400 Uncongested Edina Industrial Boulevard West 78th Street to Metro Boulevard 9,000 Uncongested Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 77th Street Metro Boulevard to Computer Avenue 9,900 Uncongested West 77th Street Computer Avenue to Parklawn Avenue 12,500 Uncongested Parklawn Avenue/West 76th Street West 77th Street to France Avenue 9,100 Uncongested Minnesota Drive West 77th Street to France Avenue 5,800 Uncongested France Avenue West 76th Street to Minnesota Drive 28,700 Uncongested France Avenue Minnesota Drive to Westbound Interstate 494 Exit Ramp 28,700 Uncongested Source: Year 2005 Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps and WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-1 The existing intersection operations were evaluated using Synchro and SimTraffic for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour. The results of this analysis are illustrated in Table 21-8. During the p.m. peak hour, Edina Ind Blvd/Metro Blvd and France Ave/Minnesota Dr are deficient at LOS E. At both intersections, vehicles are trying to access the interstate system and queue lengths are deficient. On France Avenue, vehicles are queuing between intersections. Existing freeway operations were evaluated using worksheets from the HCM. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 21-9. Analysis worksheets are available upon request. The entrance ramp from France Avenue onto westbound 1-494 is deficient operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. Other ramps are not deficient; however, many of the ramps are operating at LOS D during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 14 Table 21-8. Existing (2007) Intersection Level of Service Intersection Traffic Control 2007 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes France Ave / W 76th St Traffic Signal C 30.9 NBL at LOS E with delay at 75.6 sec/veh C 32.2 Edina Ind Blvd / W 78th St Traffic Signal C 27.8 C 29.7 Edina Ind Blvd / Metro Blvd Traffic Signal B 11.5 71.3 SBL and EBL at LOS F with delay over 100 sec/veh SB TH 100 / W 77th St Traffic Signal C 26.3 D 48.2 EBT at LOS F with delay at 92.1 sec/veh NB TH 100 / W 77th St Traffic Signal C 22.1 D 50.6 EBL at LOS F with delay at 84.3 sec/veh Commercial Access / W 77th St Traffic Signal A 5.0 C 26.6 Computer Ave / W 77th Traffic Signal C 20.6 C 23.4 Parklawn Ave / W 77th St Traffic Signal 20,9 C 32.4 W 77th St / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal 11.7 C 29.5 France Ave / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal C 25.2 67.6 WBL at LOS F with delay over 100 sec/veh WB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 16,5 B 11,2 EB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 14.6 C 22.2 American Blvd / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 13.5 A 9.6 France Ave / W 78th St-WB 1-494 Off Ram. Traffic Signal C 24.7 NBL at LOS E with delay at 64.4 sec/veh D 44.0 EBL at LOS F with delay at 112.5 sec/veh France Ave / EB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal C 21.3 B 17.7 Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-2 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 15 Table 21-9. Existing (2007) Freeway Level of Service Merge or Ramp Junction Location 2007 A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour LOS Density LOS Density 1 1- 49 4 E a s tbo u nd Diverge to Bush Lake Road Exit B 17.0 B 12.0 Weave between Bush Lake Road and TH 100 D 32.6 C 24.2 Diverge to France Avenue C 26.0 B 18.0 Merge from France Avenue D 32.0 D 31.0 1- 49 4 W e s tbo un d Diverge to France Avenue D 30.0 D 29.0 Merge from France Avenue D 31.0 F 36.0 Weave between TH 100 and Bush Lake Road D 29.0 D 34.6 TH 1 0 0 No r thb o un d Weave between 1-494 and West 77th Street C 22.7 C 21.6 Weave between West 77th Street and West 70th Street B 19.2 D 29.3 TH 1 0 0 So u thb o u n d Weave between West 70th Street and West 77th Street B 11.2 B 15.9 Weave between West 77th Street and 1-494 B 10.4 C 21.2 Source: Year 2007 Mn/DOT Traffic Counts and WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-3 and Table 21-4 C. Impacts of Development Scenarios (1) Future Traffic Forecasts The purpose of this section is to identify the traffic impacts associated with the future development within the project area. Four potential land use scenarios were evaluated. More detailed descriptions of these scenarios can be viewed in Section 6A and on Figures 6- 1 to 6-4. Trips for each of the scenarios were generated and distributed on the regional system and analyze for years 2014 and 2030. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 16 (a) Trip Generation In order to estimate the traffic generated by the site, land use assumption were applied to rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) as illustrated in Tables 21-10 to 21-13. All of the proposed scenarios replace existing office space. Trips generated from the existing buildings were shown previously in Table 21-6. These trips were removed from the network before applying the new land uses. It should be noted only the portion of space that is currently occupied was taken into consideration. Scenario 1 consists of office and office/warehouse land uses. This scenario is taken from the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan. The plan will generate about 24,000 vpd. The net increase equates to 7,100 vpd with about 900 trips during each of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Scenario 2 adds residential, retail, and a hotel, increasing the production to 35,600 vpd. However, the proposed retail will be developed to serve the residential. To account for trips traveling from the residential to the retail, internal trips were taken into account. Using estimates from the manual, about 2,200 trips were considered internal and removed from the net. The net increase in vehicle trips is 16,500 vpd or 1,700 during each of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Scenario 3 produces the largest number of trips, at about 42,900 trips per day due to the large amount of office space. The net increase is 26,000 vpd or about 3,500 trips during each of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Scenario 4 includes office, office/warehousing, and residential uses creating 29,900 trips per day. For reasons described above under Scenario 2, about 160 internal trips were removed. The net increase in vehicle trips is 9,800 vpd or 700 and 800 trips during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, respectively. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 17 Table 21-10. Estimated Trip Generation — Scenario 1 Land Use ITE Land Use Size Time of Day Trip Generation Trip Rate In Out Total , ° Trips °A1 Trips Office 710 Daily 11.01 17,540 50 8,770 50 8,770 1,593,100 sq ft AM Peak Hour 1.55 2,469 88 2,173 12 296 PM Peak Hour 1.49 2,374 17 404 83 1,970 Office and Warehousing 150 1,296,100 sq ft Daily 4.96 6,429 50 3,215 50 3,214 AM Peak Hour 0.57 739 59 436 41 303 PM Peak Hour 0.61 791 8 63 92 728 Total Daily 23,969 11,985 11,984 AM Peak Hour 3,208 2,609 599 PM Peak Hour 3,165 467 2,698 Net Increase in Trips Daily 7,091 3,544 3,547 AM Peak Hour 862 584 278 PM Peak Hour 896 88 808 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) and WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 18 Table 21-11. Estimated Trip Generation - Scenario 2 Land Use ITE Land Use Size Time of Day Trip , Rate Trip Generation Total In Out % Trips % Trips Office 710 1,908,100 sq ft Daily 11.01 21,008 50 10,504 50 10,504 AM Peak Hour 1.55 2,958 88 2,603 12 355 PM Peak Hour 1.49 2,843 17 483 83 2,360 Office and Warehousing 150 1,296,100 sq ft Daily 4.96 6,429 50 3,215 50 3,214 AM Peak Hour 0.57 739 59 436 41 303 PM Peak Hour 0.61 791 8 63 92 728 Retail 814 80,000 sq ft Daily 44.32 3,546 50 1,773 50 1,773 AM Peak Hour 6.84 547 48 263 52 284 PM Peak Hour 5.02 402 56 225 44 177 Hotel 310 150 rooms Daily 8.17 1,226 50 613 50 613 AM Peak Hour 0.52 78 55 43 45 35 PM Peak Hour 0.61 92 58 53 42 39 Condominium / Townhome 230 205 units Daily 5.86 1,201 50 601 50 600 AM Peak Hour 0.44 90 18 16 82 74 PM Peak Hour 0.52 107 64 68 36 39 Senior Adult Housing - Attached 252 615 units Daily 3.48 2,140 50 1,070 50 1,070 AM Peak Hour 0.06 37 50 19 50 18 PM Peak Hour 0.11 68 53 36 47 32 Total Daily 35,550 17,776 17,774 AM Peak Hour 4,449 3,380 1,069 PM Peak Hour 4,303 928 3,375 Internal Trips Daily -2,195 -1,097 -1,098 AM Peak Hour -419 -201 -218 PM Peak Hour -311 -173 -138 Net Increase in Daily 16,477 8,238 8,239 Trips AM Peak Hour 1,684 1,154 530 PM Peak Hour 1,723 376 1,347 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) and WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 19 Table 21-12. Estimated Trip Generation — Scenario 3 Land Use ITE Land Use Size Time of Day Trip Rate Trip Generation Total In Out % Trips % Trips Office 710 3,308,100 sq ft Daily 11.01 36,422 50 18,211 50 18,211 AM Peak Hour 1.55 5,128 88 4,513 12 615 PM Peak Hour 1.49 4,929 17 838 83 4,091 Office and Warehous ing 150 1,296,100 sq ft Daily 4.96 6,429 50 3,215 50 3,214 AM Peak Hour 0.57 739 59 436 41 303 PM Peak Hour 0.61 791 8 63 92 728 Total Daily 42,851 21,426 21,425 AM Peak Hour 5,867 4,949 918 PM Peak Hour 5,720 901 4,819 Net Increase in Trips Daily 25,973 12,985 12,988 AM Peak Hour 3,521 2,924 597 PM Peak Hour 3,451 522 2,929 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) and WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 20 Table 21-13. Estimated Trip Generation — Scenario 4 Land Use ITE Land Use Size Time of Day Trip Rate Trip Generation Total In Out % Trips % Trips Office 710 1,140,100 sq ft Daily 11.01 12,553 50 6,277 50 6,276 AM Peak Hour 1.55 1,767 88 1,555 12 212 PM Peak Hour 1.49 1,699 17 289 83 1,410 Office and Warehousing 150 1,296,100 sq ft Daily 4.96 6,429 50 3,215 50 3,214 AM Peak Hour 0.57 739 59 436 41 303 PM Peak Hour 0.61 791 8 63 92 728 Condominium / Townhome 230 1,125 units Daily 5.86 6,593 50 3,297 50 3,296 AM Peak Hour 0.44 495 18 89 82 406 PM Peak Hour 0.52 585 64 374 36 211 Senior Adult Housing - Attached 252 375 units Daily 3.48 1,305 50 653 50 652 AM Peak Hour 0.06 23 50 12 50 11 PM Peak Hour 0.11 41 53 22 47 19 Total Daily 26,880 13,442 13,438 AM Peak Hour 3,024 2,092 932 PM Peak Hour 3,116 748 2,368 Internal Trips Daily -158 -79 -79 AM Peak Hour -11 -3 -8 PM Peak Hour -13 -8 -5 Net Increase in Daily 9,844 4,922 4,922 Trips AM Peak Hour 667 64 603 PM Peak Hour 834 361 473 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition) and WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edi,,a Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 21 (b) Trip Distribution Figure 21-4 in Appendix A shows the distribution of site-generated trips that would be expected to access the major roadways in the network. The distribution was developed using the 2000 Metropolitan Travel Demand Model and existing turning movement counts. Trip distribution is separated directionally and also by the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. This method takes into account differing travel patterns during different times of the day, likely due to congestion. (c) Trip Assignment Turning movements were estimated by applying the approach direction distribution percentages to the site-generated traffic. In addition to the site-generated traffic, an annualized growth rate of one percent was added to thru traffic on France Avenue and West 77th Street. Using the 2000 Metropolitan Travel Demand Model, it was estimated that ten percent of traffic on these roadways is through traffic. Additionally, trips were also added for nearby developments that have been approved by the cities of Edina and Bloomington and are not yet completed or occupied. More details about these developments are discussed in Section 29 and displayed on Figure 29-1. Lastly, turning movements for the year 2025 condition were modified to account for Mn/DOT's future plans for 1-494 and TH 100. Turning movements for year 2014 for all four scenarios are displayed in Figures 21-5 to 21-12 in Appendix A. (d) Forecast Traffic Operations The future traffic operations consisted of two parts. The first was an evaluation of the impact of the development on the key roadways and intersections notes above. The other analysis documents the developmental impacts to the surrounding interstate system. (i) Future Roadway Operations A summary of the expected traffic operations for the seven key roadway segments is displayed on Table 21-14 for year 2030. As noted previously, the LOS DIE boundary was used as the index of congestion for the city of Edina. All roadway segments remain above congested levels. (ii) Intersection Operations A summary of the expected traffic operations on the fifteen key intersections is displayed on Table 21-15 to 21-18. All scenarios will have operational deficiencies in years 2014 and 2030. Deficiencies include operations on France Avenue, the TH 100 interchange, and accesses to the Gateway Area. The majority of these locations do not have right or left turn lanes or the existing turn lanes do not have adequate capacity to handle the forecast traffic volumes. This is consistent with the 1999 Edina Comprehensive Plan which shows future storage space deficiencies at the TH 100 at West 77th Street. Since The following roadway deficiencies were noted: For Scenario 1 and 4: City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 22 • France Avenue at West 76th Street - inadequate capacity to handle the forecast through volumes. • France Avenue at West 78th Street/WB 1-494 Ramp - eastbound right turn lane • has a queue greater than the storage bay length, therefore blocking through lanes. • Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 78th Street at East Bush Lake Road — eastbound approach has inadequate capacity; all vehicles can not clear intersection in one cycle length. • Metro Boulevard at Edina Industrial Boulevard — southbound approach has inadequate capacity; all vehicles can not clear intersection in one cycle length. Eastbound left turning vehicles blocks the through lane traffic, currently no designated turn lane. • Northbound TH 100 ramps at West 77th Street — westbound right turn lane has inadequate capacity, queue of vehicles backs through two intersections. For Scenario 2, the deficiencies noted above and the following additional deficiencies were noted: • Computer Avenue at West 77th St — northbound left turning traffic queue blocks through lanes. • Minnesota Street at West 77th Street — southbound left turning vehicles create queue blocking previous intersection. For Scenario 3, all the previous deficiencies plus the following additional deficiencies were noted: • West 77th Street between Metro Boulevard and Parklawn Avenue - not enough through lanes to operate at an acceptable level of service. • TH 100 bridge on West 77th Street — inadequate lanes to handle left turning traffic from/to the freeway ramps. • Computer Avenue at West 77th Street — northbound left turning traffic queue blocks through lanes. • Minnesota Street at West 77th Street — southbound left turning vehicles create queue blocking previous intersection. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 23 Table 21-14. Future (2030) Roadway Segment Level of Congestion Segment 2030 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Location , AADT Congestion AADT Congestion AADT Congestion AADT Congestion Bush Lake Road American Boulevard and West 78th Street 13,300 Uncongested 13,800 Uncongested 15,100 Approaching Congestion 13,400 Uncongested Edina Industrial Boulevard West 78th Street to Metro Boulevard 11,300 Uncongested 13,200 Uncongested 15,600 Uncongested 11,500 Uncongested Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 77th Street Metro Boulevard to Computer Avenue 13,500 Uncongested 16,500 Uncongested 20,300 Uncongested 13,900 Uncongested West 77th Street Computer Avenue to Parklavvn Avenue 17,100 Uncongested 20,700 Uncongested 25,700 Uncongested 17,500 Uncongested Parklavvn Avenue/West 76th Street West 77th Street to France Avenue 11,200 Uncongested 13,000 Uncongested 15,200 Uncongested 11,400 Uncongested Minnesota Drive West 77th Street to France Avenue 8,100 Uncongested 10,000 Uncongested 12,400 Uncongested 8,300 Uncongested France Avenue West 76th Street to Minnesota Drive 29,600 Uncongested 30,300 Uncongested 31,200 Uncongested 29,600 Uncongested France Avenue Minnesota Drive to Westbound Interstate 494 Exit Ramp 30,300 Uncongested 31,500 Uncongested 33,200 Uncongested 30,400 Uncongested Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-1. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 24 Table 21-15. Future (2014) A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Intersection Traffic' Control 2014 A.M. Peak Hour No Build Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay , Notes LOS Delay , Notes France Ave / W 76thSt Traffic - Signal C 30.8 SBL, EBL, NBL, & WBLatLOS E C 34.4 NBL at LOS F D 39.5 NBL at LOS F E 67.1 NBL at LOS F C 31.9 NBL at LOS F Edina Ind Blvd / W 78th St Traffic Signal C 30.5 NBL at LOS E C 29.1 NBL at LOS E F 91.4 F +100 C 30.7 NBL at LOS F Edina Ind Blvd / Metro Blvd Traffic Signal B 11.3 B 18.4 F +100 F +100 B 12.0 SB TH 100/ W 77th St Traffic Signal C 28.7 D 49.2 F +100 F +100 C 29.2 NB TH 100 / W 77th St Traffic Signal B 19.5 D 52.2 EBT & EBR at LOS F E 75.1 EB Approach LOS F E 76.6 EB Approach LOS F C 33.1 Commercial Access / W 77th St Traffic Signal A 6.3 A 8.6 B 12.9 A 9.6 A 8.4 Computer Ave / W 77th Traffic Sign al C 20.5 C 21.0 C 26.7 C 20.6 C 23.3 Parklawn Ave / W 77th St Traffic Signal C 21.8 C 24.2 WBT & SBL at LOS E C 31.3 WBT & SBL at LOS E F +100 C 24.6 W 77th St / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal B 13.6 A 9.3 A 9.2 A 8.2 B 11.5 France Ave / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal D 39.0 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOS E NBL at LOS F C 32.4 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOS E NBL at LOS F D 47.7 SBL, SBT at LOSE NBL,WBL & SBL at LOS F D 42.1 C 34.9 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOS E NBL at LOS F WE 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 15.8 B 15.3 F +100 F +100 B 15 EB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 15 B 14.8 C 33.5 NBT at LOS E D 53.6 NBT at LOS F B 15 American Blvd / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 12.6 B 12.2 C 28.1 SBL at LOS E E 60.6 NBT at LOS F B 11.9 NBT at LOS F France Ave / W 78th St-WB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal D 43.2 EB Approach & WB ApProach LOS F C 26.7 EBL LOS F D 40.0 EBL, WBL, WBT, & NBL LOS F E 74.7 EB Approach & WE Approach LOS F C 34.2 EBL at LOS F France Ave / EB I-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal D 36.8 EBL at LOS E C 28.3 EBL LOS F C 34.1 EBL LOS F C 33.4 EBL LOS F C 32.1 EBL LOS E Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-2 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 25 Table 21-16. Future 2014 P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service intersection 2014 P.M. Peak Boar Traffic No Build Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Control LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes France Ave / W 76th St Traffic Signal F 186.5 F +100 F +100 F +100 F +100 Edina Ind Blvd / W 78th St Traffic Signal C 32.9 EBL, EBT, & WBL at LOS E D 38.0 EBL at LOS F D 42.9 E 77.2 EBL, WBR,NBL, & NBT at LOS F D 44.2 EBL at LOS F Edina Ind Blvd / Metro Blvd Traffic Signal 108.5 F +100 F +100 F +100 F +100 SB TH 100 / Traffic D 54.0 EBR & EBT LOS F F 80.7 E 59.0 EBT at LOS F F. +100 E 68.9 EBT at LOS F NB TH 100 / W 77th St Traffic Signal E 60.0 EBL at LOS F E 75.6 NB Approach & EB Approach LOS F F +100 F +100 E 64.1 EB Approach LOS F Commercial Access / W 77th St Traffic Signal D 38.2 NBL, NBT, SBR, & EBL at LOS F D 43.3 NB Approach & SB Approach LOS F D 35.0 EBL NBL at LOS , E D 50.3 D 35.5 EBL, NBL, & NBT at LOS F Computer Ave / W 77th Traffic Signal 84.2 F +100 +100 F +100 E 60.3 WBT, WBR„ & NBL at LOS F Parklawn Ave / W 77th St Traffic Signal C 34.7 F +100 F +100 F +100 C 28.6 SBT at LOS F W 77th St / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal D 37.0 SBL at LOS E F +100 E 67.6 SBL & SBT at LOS F E 74.5 SBT & SBL at LOS F C 27.1 France Ave / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal F 247.0 F +100 F +100 F +100 F +100 WB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 11.3 B 11.8 B 12.1 D 52.1 WBR & NET at LOS F B 11.5 EB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 18.2 B 18.7 B 18.3 B 18.4 B 18.3 American Blvd / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal A 9.9 A 9.8 A 9.6 A 9.6 A 9.7 France Ave / W 78th St-WB I-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal D 53.6 EBL & SBT LOS F E 64.8 EBL & SBT LOS F D 53.9 EBL & SBT at LOS F D 50.9 EBL & SBT at LOS F E 55.7 EBL & SBT LOS F France Ave / EB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal B 18.9 C 21.6 B 19.4 B 19.0 B 19.3 Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-2 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 26 Table 21-17. Future 2030 A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service • Intersection 2030 A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Scenario 1 Scenario2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Control LOS Delay , Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes France Ave / W 76th St Traffic Signal C 34.4 NBL at LOS F D 37.5 NBL at LOS F E 55.1 NBL at LOS F C 31.9 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOS E NBL at LOS F . Edina Ind Blvd / W 78th St Traffic Signal C 29.1 NBL at LOS E F +100 F +100 C 28.9 Edina Ind Blvd / Metro Blvd Traffic Signal B 18.4 F +100 F +100 B 10.9 SB TH 100 / W 77thSt Traffic Signal D 49.2 F +100 F +100 EB Approach at LOS F D 37.2 EBT & WBL at LOS F NB TB 100 / W 77th St Traffic Signal D 52.2 EBT & EBR at LOS F E 79.9 EB Approach at LOS F F 81.7 EB Approach at LOS F D 39.0 EBTat LOS F Commercial Access / W 77th St Traffic Signal A 8.6 B 11.3 A 9.1 A 7.9 Computer Ave / W 77th Traffic Signal C 21.0 C 26.3 B 19.8 C ' 23.3 Parklawn Ave / W 77th St Traffic Signal C 24.2 WBT & SBL at LOS E C 30.8 WET & SBL . at LOS E F +100 WET & SBL at LOS E C 23. 0 SBL & WET at LOS F W 77th St / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal A 9.3 A 9.3 A 7.6 B 11.5 France Ave / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal C 32.4 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOSE NBL at LOS F C 34.1 SBL, ESL, & WBL at LOSE NBL at LOS F D 39.7 EBL, SBL, 84 WBL at LOSE NBL at LOS F C 34.1 SBL, EBL, & WBL at LOSE NBL at LOS F WE 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 15.3 F +100 F +100 B 14.9 EB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 14.8 F 96.2 F +100 B 14.9 American Blvd / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 12.2 F +100 F +100 B 12 SBL at LOS E France Ave / W 78th St-WB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal C 7 26..2 EBL LOS F C 32 EBL & WBL at LOS F F +100 EB & WB Approach at LOS F C 31.5 NBL & WBL at LOS E EBL at LOS F France Ave / EB I-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal C 28.3 EBL LOS F C _ 31.9 EBL at LOS F C 28.4 EBL at LOS F C 33.1 EBL at LOSE Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-2 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 27 Table 21-18. Future (2030) P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Intersection 2030 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario' 3 Scenario 4 . Control LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes LOS Delay Notes France Ave / W 76th St Traffic Signal F +100 F +100 EB Approach, , WBL & SBT at LOS F F +100 F +100 Edina Ind Blvd / W 78th St Traffic Signal D 43.2 EB Approach at LOS F D 48.0 EBL at LOS F F 82.7 D 51.6 EB Approach at LOS F Edina Ind Blvd / Metro Blvd Traffic Signal F +100 F +100 F +100 F +100 SETH 100/ W 77th St Traffic Signal E 59.2 EB Approach at LOS F E 56.7 EBT & EBR LOS F F +100 E 72.0 EBT & EBR LOS F NB TH 100/ W 77th St Traffic Signal E 66.7 EBL, EBT, & NBL at LOS F F +100 EBL & WBT at LOSE F +100 E 66.3 EB Approach at LOS F Commercial Access / W 77th St Traffic Signal D 41.6 EBL & NBT at LOS F C 33.5 EBL, NBT, & WBT at LOS E D 49.5 NBL, SBL, & EBL at LOS F C 33.6 NB Approach & EBL at LOS F Computer Ave / W 77th Traffic Signal F +100 F +100 F +100 E 61.6 WBT & NBL at LOS F Parldawn Ave / W 77thSt Traffic Signal F +100 F +100 F +100 C 29.3 W 77th St / Minnesota Dr Traffic Signal E 62.5 SBL at LOS F E 67.2 SR- Approach at LOS F E 72.8 SBL at LOS F C 25.2 France Ave / Mihnesota Dr Traffic Signal F +100 F +100 F +100 F +100 WE 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 11.0 B 11.5 E 56.3 NET & WBR at LOS F B 16.1 EB 1494 / E Bush Lake Traffic Signal B 18.0 B 18 B 18.1 B 19 American Blvd / E Bush Lake Traffic Si Signal A 8.9 A 9.5 A 9.5 B 10 France Ave / W 78th St-WB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal D 54.6 EBL & SBT at LOS F D 54.2 EBL & SBT at LOS F E 56.8 EBL & SBT at LOS F D 52.3 EBL & SBT at LOS F France Ave / EB 1-494 Off Ramp Traffic Signal B 18.8 B 19.4 C 20.0 B 19.1 Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-2 City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 28 (iii) Regional Interstate System Currently, the surrounding interstate system experiences significant delay during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For this reason, it is important to estimate the additional traffic that is anticipated due to increased development within the project Gateway Area. Existing traffic counts were obtained from Mn/DOT for April 2007 for interstate mainlines and ramps. The development traffic estimates for the four development scenarios were added to these counts. The results are illustrated on Tables 21-19 and 21-20. The gray shading indicates an interstate ramp. As shown, Scenario 3 would have the largest impact to the 1-494 and TH 100. Percentage of growth on sections of 1-494 would increase traffic volumes by a maximum of ten percent during the a.m. peak hour and 12 percent during the p.m. peak hour. Northbound TH 100 increases by 30 percent during the a.m. peak hour and 15 percent during the p.m. peak hour just north of the W 77th Street interchange. The other scenarios have little impact on the 1-494 with most location having less than a one percent increase. The most growth is on TH 100 just north of the W 77th Street interchange and its ramps. Weave and ramp junction analysis is displayed in Table 21-21. Projections for 1-494 mainline were developed using growth rates from Year 2017 1-494 CORSIM forecasts provided by Mn/DOT. Two conditions were analyzed: a 2014 No Build Condition and 2014 Scenario 3. The 2014 No Build includes the projected increase in traffic volumes to be used for comparison. Scenario 3 was chosen for evaluation because it represents the worst case condition since it generates the highest volume of trips. As shown in the table, the following locations are anticipated to be deficient by 2014: • 1-494 Eastbound - Merge from France Avenue • 1-494 Westbound - Merge from France Avenue - Weave between TH 100 and Bush Lake Road • TH 100 Northbound - Weave between 1-494 and West 77th Street - Weave between West 77th Street and West 70th Street • TH 100 Southbound - Weave between West 77th Street and 1-494 When the traffic was added from Scenario 3, the density of traffic increased slightly. However, the same weave segments and ramp junctions remained deficient. Therefore, the deficiencies noted are due to the increase in mainline volumes, rather than the increase in development traffic at the ramps. Scenarios 1, 2, and 4 would be expected to have less impact than Scenario 3. The weave and ramp junction analysis worksheets are available on request. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 29 Table 21-19. A.M. Peak Hour Freeway Growth from Development Freeway Segment Existing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 2007 Dev Trips % Growth Dev Trips % Growth Dev Trips % Growth Dev Tri % Growth .1. c" .1. West of E Bush Lake Rd 5183 142 2.7% 144 2.8% 510 9.8% 12 0.2% Exit Ramp to, E Bush Lake Rd 888 62 7.0% 88 9.9% 222 25.0% 5 0.6% Between E Bush Lake Rd Ramps 4295 80 1.9% 56 1.3% 288 6.7% 7 0.2% Entrance Ramp from E Bush Lake Rd 645 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% East of E Bush Lake Rd 4940 80 1.6% 56 1.1% 288 5.8% 7 0.1% West of France Ave 6973 50 0.7% 15 0.2% 180 2.6% 8 0.1% Obi Ddt Ramp to France Ave 1259 49 3.9% 12 1.0% 176 14.0% 4 0.3% Between France Avenue Ramps 5714 1 0.0% .) 0.1% 4 0.1% 4 0.1% Entrance Ramp from SB France Ave 267 4 1.5% 15 5.6% 19 7.1% 19 7.1% Between France Avenue Ramps 5981 5 0.1% 18 0.3% 23 0.4% 23 0.4% Entrance Ramp from NB France Ave 307 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% of France Ave ,East 6295 5 0.1% 18 0.3% 23 0.4% 23 0.4% We s tbo u nd 1 East of France Ave 6706 91 1.4% 129 1.9% 325 4.8% 7 0.1% Exit Ramp to France Ave 1109 49 4.4% 70 6.3% 176 15.9% 4 0.4% Between France Avenue Ramps 5625 42 0.7% 59 1.0% 149 2.6% 3 0.1% Entrance Ramp from NB France Ave 383 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0,0% 0 0.0% Between France Avenue Ramps 6008 42 0.7% 59 1.0% 149 2.5% .) 0.0% Entrance from SB France Ave 244 6 2.5% 20 8.2°4 24 9.8% 25 10.2% East of Bush Lake Rd 5769 1 0.0% 3 0.1% 3 0.1% 3 0.1% Exit Ramp to,E Bush Lake Rd 576 o 0.0% o 0.0% o 0.0% 0 0.0% West of E Bush Lake Rd 5193 1 0.0% 3 0.1% 3 0.1% 3 0.1% ° Z E-. -ts o ...,,z le; South of W 77th St Ramps ' 2868 87 3.0%" 123 43% 310 10.8% 7 0.2% Exit Ramp toW 77th St 237 87 36.7% 123 51.9% 310 130.8% 7 3.0% Between W 77th St Ramps 2631 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Entranee Ramp from W 77th St 301 11 3.7% 37 12.3% 45 15.0% 46 15.3% North of W 77th St Ramps . 2932 11 0.4% 37 1.3% 45 1.5% 46 1.6% I So u thb o un d l North of W 77th St Ramps 2529 224 8.9% 316 12.5% 797 31.5% 19 0.8% E,dt Ramp from W 77th St 1255 224 17.8% 316 25.2% 797 63.5% 19 1.5% Between W 77th St Ramps 1274 o 0.0% o 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Entrance Ramp to W 77th St 217 2 0.9% 7 3.2% 8 3.7% 8 3.7% South of W 77th St Ramps 1491 2 0.1% 7 0.5% 8 0.5% 8 0.5% Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 30 Table 21-20. P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Growth from Development Freeway Segment Existing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 , Scenario 4 West of E Bush Lake Rd 2007 4205 Dev nips 142 % Growth 3.4°A, Dev Trips 144 % Growth 3.4% Dev Trips 510 % Growth 12.1% Dev Trips 12 % Growth 0.3% Exit Ramp to E Bush Lake Rd 743 62 8.3% 88 11.8% 222 29.9% 5 0.7% Between E Bush Lake Rd Ramps 3462 80 2.3% 56 1.6% 288 8.3% 7 0.2% Entrance Ramp from E Bush Lake Rd 614 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% East of E Bush Lake Rd 4076 80 2.0% 56 1.4% 288 7.1% 7 0.2% West of France Ave 5653 50 0.9% 15 0.3% 180 3.2% 8 0.1% 1- 49 4 Ea s t& Exit Ramp to France Ave 896 49 5.5% 12 1.3% 176 19.6% 4 0.4% Between France Avenue Ramps 4757 1 0.0% 3 0.1% 4 0.1% 4 0.1% Entrance Ramp from SB France Ave 797 4 0.5% 15 1.9% 19 2.4% 19 2.4% Between France Avenue Ramps 5554 . 5 0.1% 18 0.3% 23 0.4% 23 0.4% Entrance Ranip from NB France Ave 496 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 , 0.0% East of France Ave 6064 5 0.1% 18 0.3% 23 0.4% 23 0.4% . , East of France Ave 6373 6 0.1% 17 0.3% 24 0.4% 17 0.3% Exit Ramp to France Ave 857 4 0.5% 12 1.4% 17 2.0% 12 1.4% Between France Avenue Ramps 5631 2 0.0% 5 0.1% 7 0.1% 5 0.1% Entrance Ramp fromNB France Ave 624 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0, 0.0% Between France Avenue Ramps 6255 2 0.0% 5 0.1% 7 0.1% 5 0.1% Entrance from SB France Ave 774 39 5.0% 60 7.8% 161 20.8% 3 0.4% East of Bush Lake Rd 6975 19 0.3% 30 0.4% 80 1.1% 2 0.0% Exit Ramp to E Bush Lake Rd 502 0 , 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% West of E Bush Lake Rd 6473 19 0.3% 30 0.5% 86 1.2% 2 0.0% South of W 77th St Ramps 7723 4 0.1% 11 0.4% 15 0.6% 11 0.4% Exit Ramp to'W 77th St 79 4 5.1% 11 13.9% 15 19.0% 11 13.9% 0.0% Between W 77th St Ramps 2644 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Entrance Ramp from W 77th St 1181 135 11.4% 208 17.6% 562 47.6% 12 1.0% North of W 77th St Ramps 3825 135 3.5% 208 5.4% 562 14.7% 12 0.3% So u thb o un d North of W 77th St Ramps 2974 , 20 0.7% 57 1.9% 78 2.6% 54 1.8% Exit Ramp from W 77th St 668 20 3.0% 57 8.5% 78 11.7% 54 8.1% Between W 77th St Ramps 2306 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Entrance Ramp to W 77th St 433 53 12.2% 82 18.9% 221 51.0% 5 1.2% South of W 77th St Ramps 2739 53 1.9%_ 82 3.0% 221 8.1% 5 0.2% Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 31 Table 21-21. Future (2014) Freeway Level of Service Merge or Ramp Junction Location 2014 No Build 2014 Scenario 3 A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour LOS Density LOS Density LOS Density LOS Density 1- 49 4 E a stbo u nd Diverge to Bush Lake Road Exit B 19.0 B 16.0 C 22.0 B 19.0 Weave between Bush Lake Road and TH 100 D 32.6 D 28.2 D 34.4 D 30.0 Diverge to France Avenue D 30.0 C 21.0 D 32.0 C 23.0 Merge from France Avenue F 37.0 F 38.0 F 37.0 F 38.0 1- 49 4 W e s tbo u n d Diverge to France Avenue D 33.0 D 30.0 D 34.0 D 30.0 Merge from France Avenue E 35.0 F 41.0 F 36.0 F 43.0 Weave between TH 100 and Bush Lake Road D 33.2 E 39.8 D 33.3 E 40.3 TH 1 0 0 No rthb o u n d Weave between 1-494 and West 77th Street , 35.0 E 37.3 E 39.8 E 37.5 Weave between West 77th Street and West 70th Street C 21.6 F 36.4 C 22.3 F 45.1 TH 1 0 0 So u thbo u n d Weave between West 70th Street and West 77th Street B 11.3 D 30.3 D 30.5 D 33.9 Weave between West 77th Street and 1-494 D 32.4 E 40.7 D 32.6 F 44.5 Source: Year 2017 1-494 CORSIM Forecast Volumes Provided by Mn/DOT and WSB & Associates, Inc. Note: Based upon criteria shown in Table 21-3 and Table 21-4 D. Mitigation Measures for Roadway Improvements Based upon the analysis, deficiencies exist for all scenarios near the TH 100/West 77th Street Interchange and on France Avenue. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review - Traffic Study June 2007 Page 32 (1) Scenarios 1 and 4 The following mitigative strategies are needed for Scenario 1 and 4 to accommodate both 2014 and 2030 traffic projections: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: France Avenue / West 76th Street Extend the four-lane southbound lanes on France Avenue thru intersection France Avenue / West 78th Street Eastbound dual right turn lanes on West 78th Street Edina Industrial Boulevard / West 78' Street Eastbound dual left turn lanes on West 78th Street Edina Industrial Boulevard / Metro Boulevard Add southbound right turn lane on Metro Boulevard Add 300 foot eastbound left turn lane on Edina Industrial Boulevard Northbound Trunk Highway 100 / West 77th Street Add 150 foot northbound right turn lane on Frontage Road Westbound dual right turn lanes on West 77th Street Pentagon Square Access / West 77th Street Develop internal site plan to accommodate queuing (2) Scenario 2 Scenario 2 will require all the improvements listed above in addition to the following: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: (3) Scenario 3 Minnesota Drive / France Avenue Dual westbound left turn lanes on Minnesota Drive Eastbound dual left turn lanes on Minnesota Drive Northbound Trunk Highway 100/ West 77th Street Add 150 fogt eastbound right turn lane on West 77th Street Computer Avenue / West 77th Street Northbound dual left turn lanes on Computer Avenue Minnesota Drive / West 77th Street Southbound dual left turn lanes on West 77th Street City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 33 Scenario 3 will require all the above improvements listed under Scenarios 1, 2, and 4 in addition to the following: Intersection: Improvement: Intersection: Improvement: Interchange: Improvement: Minnesota Drive / France Avenue Eastbound dual right turn lanes on Minnesota Drive France Avenue / West 78th Street Westbound dual right turn lanes on West 78th Street TH 100 / West 77th Street Six-lane section from Metro Boulevard to Computer Avenue Dual left turn turns at both TH 100 Ramps (Hence an eight-lane bridge) City of Edina Droll Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 34 29. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form). This area of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is generally fully developed. Cumulative impacts will generally be driven by either individual parcel redevelopment or area-wide redevelopment. To analyze cumulative impacts for the Gateway Study Area, information from both the City of Edina and the City of Bloomington was obtained related to known or anticipated development projects within or near the TH100 and 1-494 area. Table 29-1 summarizes the known redevelopment plans in the area and Figure 29-1 shows the location of these projects. Within the City of Edina, there are four areas that have approved redevelopment plans. These include the Cypress Development, the Target site, the Westin site, and York Place Development. These redevelopments will create an additional net increase of 84,750 square feet of retail and office space and add a hotel and 165 units of condominiums/apartments. To the south of the Gateway Study Area, a number of parcels are undergoing redevelopment within the City of Bloomington. These projects will redevelop into a number of office, commercial, retail, restaurants, hotel, and parking facilities. These redevelopment projects outlined on Table 29-1 and shown on Figure 29-1 have been considered in the traffic analysis as part of this AUAR as a background condition. While there are no other known specific projects, additional redevelopment activities in the vicinity of the Gateway Study Area, mainly to the west, south, and east, can reasonably be expected. This area of the Twin Cities experienced significant growth during the 1960's, and as buildings become older, their functions become obsolete in a changing socioeconomic environment. As businesses continue to improve their facilities to meet customer demands, older buildings become less attractive options for purchase or rental of office space. As such, these buildings are removed and replaced with newer buildings. As the general population of the City of Edina continues to age, there will be an increasing need for senior housing, especially in mixed-use developments where acquisition of personal goods and services do not require driving. The City of Edina is a first ring suburb and the general redevelopment in infill in the City is anticipated. The City of Edina is currently developed and as such, minimal impact on wildlife resources is expected as part of any cumulative impacts. There will be storm water management regulations on most of any redevelopment that was not required when areas were developed in the 1960's and as such, improved storm water treatment can be anticipated. Upgrades to existing City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 35 municipal sewer and water infrastructure will likely be needed with redevelopment in the infill area, but would need to analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Improvements to the transportation infrastructure are likely to also be needed to accommodate the growing commuting population in the area. Mn/DOT has long-term plans to reconstruct 1-494 and TH100 interchange. Depending on the redevelopment size, the need to acquire zoning variances or rezoning, and the adjacent infrastructure facilities, additional study may be necessary to address future impacts as a result of these future redevelopment that is unknown at this time. Table 29-1 summarizes the current development proposals either under consideration or under construction within the City of Bloomington and the City of Edina in the area surrounding the Gateway Study Area. The locations of these developments are shown on Figure 29-1. Table 29-1. Current Adjacent Development Pro osals City Development Summary ofImpacts Bloomingto 11 Duke-Weeks Realty Limited Partnership Phase 1 Completed, Phase 2 to add 332,000 ft2 of office space by 2008. Phase 3 and Phase 4 have not received approval Walser Real Estate II, LLC Proposed Development Approved for 207,500 ft2 of office space and 86,000 ft2 of retail. Recently expanded to surface parking lot for car dealer inventory. United Properties Addition of 200,000 ft2 of medial office space approved for expansion by 2008. Ryan Companies US, Inc. Approved 750,000 112 of office space. 240,000 ft2 has been constructed. Resubmittal for Phase 2 and Phase 3 anticipate a reduced total of 697,000 ft2 Mortenson Development, Inc. 256 room hotel and adjoining restaurant currently under construction Normandale Investments, LLC 122 space parking ramp to meet demand for existing offices Edina Cypress Properties Redevelopment of 40,000 ft2 of a movie theater to 86,000 ft2 of retail development Target Approved increase of retail space from 154,000 ft2 to 196,500 ft2 by 2008. Westin Approved construction of an 18 story building with 79 condominiums, a 225 room hotel, and 7,000 ft2 restaurant York Place Development Approved construction of 49,000 ft2 of retail space and 86 senior apartments. Replaces 52,750 ft2 of office space. City of Edina Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review — Traffic Study June 2007 Page 36 3_ Ao n a l. mx tl . Ma y Figure 5-3 Aerial Location Map Gateway AUAR Legend 11:3 Gateway AUAR Study Area Pentagon Quads Pentagon Tower A. A 0 500 1,000 w Feet WSB & Associates, Inc. • • WSB POD-1 I POD-2 *GSF = Gross Square Feet PCD-3 0 500 1,000 w imn === Feet A& ,g• I' I__ r i LA a 20.84 Ac 2.14 kc ^ Ars -. z 544,700 GS!' Non Res 6.59 Ac 46,600 --""---?'' 27.03 Ac : -I 43,600 G SF t 8.00 Ac 589,000 GSF Non-Res -I, Non-Res 1, i NI, 174,200 GSF ••• ‘ Non-Res a a. 12.08 Ac 77TH ST W 17.25 Ac ,000 GSF 28.75 Ac 375,700 GSF Non-Res on-Res 751,00 GAF Non-Res \ Minnesota Drive .--..........-mirr-- • ,. i ,n _., 4_4. -- - • • 1 w . - . ID I. 4 V • B12.0 MIN TON OF EDINA - Figure 6-1 Legend Gateway AUAR 1 Gateway AUAR Scenario 1: [1 PID Comprehensive Plan W WSB Legend Gateway AUAR rAWAI PID Figure 6-2 Gateway AUAR Scenario 2: Master Plan POD-1 PCD-3 POD-2 PSR-4 *GSF = Gross Square Feet 0 500 1,000 lommi Feet a: _ • 143,j . t 'a, Akira i r 4x•%t.-R-0101 •- • •J, a • -,1 -11110 ..). .7 • ak__ oirmioNolr 'grow e ,1•'#ur - ... eeTaar 7,6TH ST. CITY OF EDINA Minnesota Drive 1kt DLO MIN TON a 1410 ta• '4%0'1: • \ r-r1.111k..10) A,* • a • •11:`' 41, Ar'• 2.14 A AIL . 46,600 GSF1, 8.00 Ac '*174,200 GSF \t1 on-Res 12.08 Ac 1,115,000 GSF Non- Incl. 150 Room H 27.03 Ac 213,000 GSF Non-Res 883,000 GSF Residential (820 Units) _ 77.1171.5 28.75 Ac 751,400 GSF Non-Res 20.84 Ac 544,700 GSF Non-Re 6.59 Ac 3,600 GS Non-Res 17.25 Ac. 76,700 GSF Non- ------- 'iTtRICAN J. I • := 4Ai 1.1 a tre. 71V-V1 I ' , . - Figure 6-3 Gateway AUAR Scenario 3 0 500 1,000 n iim=== Feet Legend =I Gateway AUAR POD-1 I j PCD-2 PID Mil POD-2 PCD-3 • GSF = Gross Square Feet Fi le : K O 1 68 6- 04 \ GI S 1M a p s \ Sc e n An o 3 r n x d, J u n 0 1 20 0 7 1 .10 1 4 P M • P.' '-- n -••• a :r :t: • ii..„., t '' , !••:'.' ".. ..5.!•41' J4°'''''' li " if ' ' " ••••V 1.1.. • • 1.141114:01111, ' • • • . I '• • • - rum , "' _ • , ••1n11 .476TH ST.WILIE4,.. 2.14 A- 41111. , AL' J 6,600 - SF 8.00 Ac la, 174,200 GSF Non-Res 12.08 Ac 2,000 GSE s 28.75 Ac on-Res 751,400 GSF Non-Res 1 , "4141*;:4"*„; • et, ... 1 I ,•••• 20.84 Ac k-. ''‘.2 - ;i111111. , c;.:•:?.S. f r. '&4 d 27.03 Ac 776,000 GSF Non-Res ,nr • O." A 'oelb;R",• P' • ''4741601110--- _ - E38,1:Idw. : t .• • _ - — • n •4.4*."..*VIrger...;;;'., • . ! • -L 2 . tZ O'ktrpoor'' Z ' _ ar. fr s' 8TH ST W ''''175',41•4100112114%, - — • f....r.,,• AO, ••n• 1 Iills I • W.-401iips • <4t,`• • ,- 2.14 Ac 8.00 Ac 174,200 GSF Non-Res 12.08 Ac 260,000 GSF Non-Res 1O000 GSF Residential 1 (300 Units) le.... ,...• ' leo.. ."" woip, •.c...:11' r 27.03 Ac 140,000 GSF Non-Res 1,240,000 GSF Residential (1,200 Units) 77TH ST IN - - - - 28.75 Ac 751,400 GSF Non-Res OF EDINA BLZo ®MIN TO 4 11.fr;l1r4- U01111, 4 ' = • '..."1 •F It , ..L.P.41.i;. ' .III' rif:" . , IIA,... .. 0 ,, fitiortstitt - . -•" 4 A 414irc 6TH ST. POD-1 PCD-3 Gateway AUAR 0 500 1,000 POD-2 PSR-4 I Fe etw *GSF = Gross Square Feet WSB Figure 6-4 Gateway AUAR Scenario 4 Legend I I MDD-5 PID 0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet irucify •.. • T... *Is •,. -.. • '.. ' ••••'. • r. '' -,821U .... — . T ve n '2 ' .......- me— -1 6: , , - - 887." "- • • , —1.48111. .n."''''. ,..!..!-.1.1- ie ' ii.--: 1. - . AI 1, • .. • 1 n .. . , 1 .,. .. li ..• ... — , ••''' .1 • •f.. 11. • . ,-PqL ii•V•sr . '''''..• . . , . Edina 13loornirigto FI 880188644NGIMMapaTi021-1_Key Intersectio nanud, Jun 08, 2007 10_53.37AM Figure 21-1 Key Intersections Gateway AUAR Legend Key Intersection LIII Gateway AUAR Study Area A WSB & Associates, Inc. ' • la • 1,.4 1111141 - .11IN P1111111:11 r , i Th 111111 th-sew g "LA • :7 .7 j1p lit tt An—esotaZriiiva, Date Prin(ed: 5/31/2007 WS8 Filename , K:\01686-04\Cad\Plan\fig-21-3.dgn • It4 ille_. , i ::,--"r c $ ',,,. .• //".• *L' (S al, ED (D r ri 1r% t Ivr 11111 (11) 0 g g 0 H -i > c E z 73, b-.., -0 0 .,.0 E m 0 5. 0 > Z M .T1 X M = 6 -< g 0 z x -i (n I— M 0 z 0 I— mc S.414 * 0 1 ,-. op z- cn Fa (D ,r'' $ I' .4! • , -Pi i n 11 - ' f • iil 4 , liCt ,.. et" „- • i ,v ' ' - '4P 'ilwayw- (1) ill 0 .- , . 4114 .e: ., . Johnson Avenue aft..1-1, •••11 414 1 1 - • e . rj Pir lli, ••••n •4 , 1 'S .., - 1.n lo 0 ' Ab, #+— 33 ) 0 ( -. 1 , . i '. 7( 34) t 11Parklawn , • 111r• (1) 0 0 (0) lir • 4 0 (1) —4- Sh 4 03 , 0 o- 03 ..............n •n C4 ' 0 n 1,, 1 -r- 54 ( 1)431 2. az...4 I— 23 (121) . , +— 235 (546) z D -1 • 0 1 Avenue N II - ., tg . - .... Si Ir. 1. .• , I. t 4f,404 I ' CO , 4=• . 18 ( 2) --1-. lig. 116, „., ,, 0 35 (35) —I 0 . •tiliir# A g c44 6 * 20 (70) —4- i ' a IP! . ..,1 a) .. CA1 V 01 It w •Ith CD CD %. ' , ....,, Ili • ... 4,647 co a) .1:. CO co Co 41 ; 'w 4— 581 (1130) ..1 , .,..4 ....i I' 44',42 1 ...........r3 5 0) . • , L 4 C66 S6 ••••1 E ; i I 6 i 5 , cp ., ogrupiirari = 1 q‘ - 0 11 51-) • 1 4 1 11 (1) C • o CO ' oo CO Ka -I. 03 .1h• Oa Cli 1 to 4b. -.1. .-. (10 -4 -a ,4,. ' ' CO -1. •Pi.' t344,1/246"; 11,-,I,L,.:";:(...,.*31 , Crl 03 -100._( 4 43) 617 (1475) ii::*1:11-1r: A A A t_. VII 1414 (1862 - ' . 241 (122) , 1101(795) go) ii,: , , t--1546 - 1080) 1 r 1 32 ( 48) , Jib P , • I . h ' - , v ° France Avenue ,, lA VII 1 VIII 'Me —1- ifitli14. ifr .., ' ;7:4 " 0 192 ( 58) 241 ( 47) —1- list ' f —I 1101(949) —I, 508 lit 04 ) 56 (A) F ,... a 1 , , . ......,,,,,..,, 1114-2,1. ,44 ' i, • ' €11 284 (183) 7-4",4 , ..1.1160 NI" ,,,,, ,..).., ,4,‘ lir €8,.... io ,................ i ., .,..,,,,, .. .........._... ca Kt 41. 1 _. 1 ik. _I t.+3 04 -4 ...g.i.,-.....a .., 0 9 , m'Ci3 •••1 CA r . ,,......,..t. L„,..,__ (7) •••11 01 d it 6:0 k n , ' --'`;1_ ., ..... Iii, . st2 ,t 0 i 4 ,-,/ .n ,, _, -r .,t ,i) ;,,r,._. k 4 4 „ 4' :g/.. . . iii.''.• It i " *a u ' 's a p p os s v v Fie KA01686-041GIS \ Maps \Fig 21-4_TripDistribution.mxd, June 10, 2007 3:14:39 PM -ft— 71(422) 4— 764(453) 94(103) co el " 7. t— 416 (137) 4— 751 (4685) I 41110 33 ( 13) ,. I ipag.t^illr Z.11),::.4.31*,:.1.0. alosauel4jr,..1.—• ' 127 ( 539)-1- 1442 (1047)-4 181 ( 116)-4- 153(918) III 4i44 fr= 31: (71 3, iIrJ iai P 111 (352) 591 (910) 9 ( 35) —4- Figure 21-5 Scenario 1 (2014) Vehicular Turn Movements Gateway AUAR Edina Industrial Boulevard tss * tsp., * •10,- WO: * . 4-‘7' 4, ▪ ti o 2 i•-•.2 IrMINNESOTA Iott.i._ •°" Illw" 11." sit* la Pr Aulr I_. • At 410 i . ff /OR (34,/ to"./ 08) . ) TP g63 emu 145 (335) 121 ( 17).a 1346 (1057)-9 200( 31)-4- Ii II l " II /OF I. • All*,6101211Nrittratill' MOIONglintrtget.., -4.11.1rAter,, I • t "Trrog, 1 ',ilk Mf. .4 ID '141"16 I P Alnirc4116, 78th Street 32( 5) A ÷— 90 ( 42) 4— 504(1255) 0 :411Bri: West 77th Street I. I VnIa • . ilo (Isl. s '*P I *75( IA *It / 0 kliti 011V,", • IlailtrrlY tar*" - Strtift01 ; _ lit N LO NW CO CO N Ni-CO WSB &Associates, Inc. LEGEND AM (PM) PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENTS LANE GEOMETRY TRAFFIC CONTROL 4-- xx txx) xx (xx) xx 000 r."." AM (PM) PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENTS LANE GEOMETRY TRAFFIC CONTROL Figure 21-7 Scenario 2 (2014) Vehicular Turn Movements Gateway AUAR WSB & Associates, Inc. 7.1c r , At.— 174(1016) s 4— 379 ( 761) •+— 196( 63) 76 (469) 846 (510) 94 (103) a...hes 0 CI co ,'kewrahlva. 4114 32( 5) -r— 249 ( 72) 0 4— 842(1158) 121 ( 17)-1:1- West 77th Street 1149 (1462)-9 4,1 0 395( 91)-4- I I 1 I 4411. '7101p1 *1114" U 1 %el x 1413 exert It.AF4ee SOL "1 Fil.girtlfarlr 1 +1 1.11111 H e# • 11i r A I 11 j .: 117 4I *V I i'ia-11-4 O NV; rrp, .7_, frr.." ; Wig , I 110,Iii rtVig• r.ett ft 111 mrcluiliariorilftsto -4•ACIA. -rat" 411r.v..,, VAF " Edina Industrial Boulevard 111( 352) --÷ 691 (1054) —n lir ,.. • C'1 WW e4 to Nr oco ..........,..A 127( 539)-1- 1537 (1203)—f 341 ( 146)-4- LEGEND AM (PM) PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENTS LANE GEOMETRY TRAFFIC CONTROL 0 48( 83)-0- 2754(1384)-4 218( 72)—# .ASSI 11-r I 6‘ ro-crt-ci CS 9 1 19 I I 1 ,1 11 eV. tio # '440- 0 f c) 127( 539)__- 2409 (1316)—+ 261 ( 127)-4 188 (1381) 1— 497 (1124) ÷— 115( 31) 1,P7 T. 0 el T. 0 CO r•O' Fat? 411k 1••• NT NT tr•n 141 ••N Co N N 4 111 thilt&ESOTA 100 121 ( 17)—A- 2373 (1478)—n 44 297 ( 53)-4- , t's CT) ii. ....,........# 1 .1 j) c - • - < 78 (609) I— 868 (678) 94(103) 32( 5) 0 1— 779 (1967) #— 169( 53) West 77th Street 4111kreslosiN*AIIMPIO. 1101,1,. 41finfrOkoi„ &-J • c " 0 tI -_,T 01411 1.01110 17 ANL?. INTERSTATE Edina Industrial Boulevard LEGEND WSB & Associates, Inc n 01, Figure 21-9 Scenario 3 (2014) Vehicular Turn Movements Gateway AUAR 44 7.4AZAVitri !'-wm.r.041.1rs),5c-A -1;4g 1`,"•-:11.'!"!1: - 4,43.1iL Legend . af, -‘ 14.* tig kirL Awa,,a-gyftwmaiwo ifikstc\ '111 L-M Ditk.' Li-4"MT k?. Normandale Investments, LLC Parking Ramp • t - • ...'"dt • Duke-Weeks Realty Limited Partnership Cypress Properties Ryan Companies US, Inc Walser Real Estate II, LLC Mortenson Development, Inc United Properties Westin Edina Galleria Target Expansion York Place 4 Figure 29-1 L _ Gateway AUAR Study Area Adjacent Developments Map 0 500 1,000 Feet Gateway AUAR WSB & Associates, Inc. vr. '. : 111! . -. 4.1., ' •-• ... Ot 11% 1 r1016+.1.114), • - I g' ' 1 ,,' .. • • '1- _ -1111 ' ir4101%*r. .. A :. , . • • "t:. . IL:- , .." .1 4- ,..-_,__*...,:- . • r . 12......' . , . • 1'X 1 , 1 31,:lk. ''' **` 11 - 4.• 4( .'. ., .'- .. 0 ' ..• 4. ''' ''' ' I t' ' ' v' - '. ' '. 4 '0 ,1 • - , • ' IP; • 1.1. 1171 0 7 • .. ... . - '.- i - ' 1 n m,,i4 ,„,„ ,A . I It n I ''' ...Pi.- ''' . • ' ,c, . i ,T,..iir • *.I.,"1?" WO . LEGEND s 1 -4 SCENARIO MITIGATED LANE GEOMETRY ill; KEY INTERSECTION I : . 11 d' 44 .• ' - ' - . I AllA . .....4. tr ..,t f. • - ' . gek,* ,..... . , 'I Vii, 7gil. -• _ • •-•-•.Litt . ___ 01414114!""r14.7,71,,,,,L. • •-1,,,-,',...ritt; -TP/b fiC r:.• ) .. • . NO -- - ---- -- 1 -- t ? tj - ft ..: . w , ,,, I i ... ' ' ` k_ • .. . 114 • - .! , . ' ,i, , ' .•%44.._.,,*: ' .4f, _ . • •.•,.. $6., ...i. . .4 , i.' ,,„ it .. ‘ ad- . • 4.. - .. n T 1' • - • . . . -- - . a4 Oa ".11 , - AVikt . . .. - '6, I _ • .• ,, ... 7 • •., , I • - t •ti Ilall • • - ' ..O. ' ....:_. • • 6 am. .*--- .....4. .... .:.-- Li d .., •". IP 1,.. .....0 *...4 -..., - MI& ' - - .ir . , .4. 4.' Vo I , 4, ••,.. '. - • I ,e . • ,, -, P. . i-- ty.4._*'• ' * ' d'ir , ..... 1. 4... •••-"r^ n , a ParAllA 4 )11 11-11011,Zik -....,. ' 1 i ill 111 .. ' . ..• 4"; . , 19)1X -• lf _ .1.1' - - . 1 ' -e . I Akio,- i I . '''4.' "Ede; . . ,3teri.g.11- .- ,-.T., ' • ..n 1 , API ii, Ok i t, .1-1 11 '414. •'' dustrial Boulevard ' -,„2/1/- •-"..4. .., _ 4° 0 I ir r ,E ly, .. :ell 4 : tar arvit4r,' • • I I ip•.fr-,..--ait 04. • • . .- . - .. - • * -v4'4", to iv,. era x -- .... -0 tail l'€;7, ' S -4 ,t) ill% 1 Ai Sn 2 ...a...A,- .. ' _r. ' 410 )7. .... ' t-.• 'I, . . . _ ' • a, 1% -- nn 41.' -V* ' , ' ' a ,. , . IIIr _ ; S'3 100 - S -P = ---1 i 5- • . I . •-$_,, 2-31 3 i•- '.1tv , . , 4 • IF 1. ' ..t. , L... i . . ' • 4441' -4 ; 4140 at.„._ . "t •• I a le' '''''' .. I . • ' ' ", .,s A + ' 1'1;4 • it ? i ...is . 741/ro.,. vste • . . . J....A.-A., est 77t1410_ .,... •94 - . 11 , - - v. 4r...*- . . f t. , .3 , *** .. .„ • 3 _ _ - _ - - ; .•••n PC ... li . -..-1111 1 I'. ' ' -' 03 . , plf,F•rt 00.7.•,&54,,,ia- • I ' r`-' .•' ".• OPP-07 °Rs ' • n I' Jor 11-24.:1:.7.71. '7n ...... 6 11111E:LI 1,, • ' • 141+64 ' ' ii...'1 , 4 r••• ii 4.4 i n ..4 .4.', -4.• 41- ir West 76th Street . . , t If L, . Tr , 4., f '7 ,. • , ... ).. Oa: . I. • ,.. • < u.. ' " • .1 •••,, • ,,,;‘,.: , .... .... 4.- , 44,:. - 4 • ''*"%a -,.s. . ...-- • . , n-• .r. 1 tt .- .., .: r ... 4 .•,. _,_-.. n --- • --17 , , I . ._ ' A10011k ' 1, .4.+Ia-NolIV. 2 q VINVINI, ;:it'lliF . I. * • •tr. Arillappimir , ,,, 111 ....' n _.. _ • Nr-.., „,, 7.A., - IF '11! ..01.• i • . Al .11 ,-.0- ; .no - ••••. 2:-3 - ,., 8 il " 1-.r.r4. - •70.1.-.1°..p, .. ,....n, , t .4nn ••r• 'J ,,, • . le- 4 'It1-,',,,'''' . f Ir. S 2-3 tr ... "t1/241tvah-A. , --- Minnesota Drive 71. LE ,.. . 4 • ,::,.-,..r...sa. 4 • • I - ' . I 1 . • ...'.?_. .• ,4 ,., i . ,a.: - ' ' • ' ,41.-- , ...., .., , ... „I...111Z , 11 . . • , ...' ': ; . 7 ,..._, -,w*,..tfliest 7: ''''r41"Pliiit, . ' .... ' ' ,a,r • Tatquois,, _ ' , ' t" • treet Itt,V.VVii• "1'4'4'114 • in* •,,i' - '' ' '74'A • .14.1Ftx. ,A . e . . • , SP, iik: Ike,- ,•,,, * ... .. ••• so , „ ...! •C _11/4‘ • . . ' ,. ..„ 14. . '' .. .. n :1'. •‘..-4 'y *obt, . -, T ' -, --. " -rr' , 1 II • 1 •-,j1, ilk. 4 - • 'Ittiv 4,44-.4*. 714p, -...,,,, . ..... ,-,0 - 14. • -1 ...,, . . , . . lor. . 110 .610 ' • .10_ • - " i- I ... T ' '' • • lip n 1 . .,. 1 p,„. .,..., 1 . . -t 1 • .....- .... ,., 1 , - 1- t4,- ,t,,:, . T..% 1., 1 ' - . • 0 4'11“ ' . . - . ••,':,-.- West . .1 . 4r47 '1 k .16_ _ _ - ''' 1....... j, .• -1 c :. . f • l_F) I 1 . 1,, ., ..: -I _ 01 1 78th Street '''''''`- a A vt. ' 2 ,44., k- - ... .0_1: 4- 1111*-ear. ' " - •f.' AIM 2 . . 1 . Tr • ' :AL": . , . f n , 4S 1 ---4 --gC - . , ...• i. •,' I .+1,.. : I; r i 1. t, - 14 '; - 'It ....dr ' . ,:i,., . kill 1" ...• • .. . ..1 11; _ 7 , g, , - I ,- - - - . . g ., 4...". •-,... , • 4,,, . ' - .;•1 • .. • , ' 5,' ' - o1 : ' ik --...,t1 •1° • .,., •4 .:r... . -110,010,- ii._ ' A . . ' - . , \ 4: 4'. , Zlq, '. ' ak: ' I - ..., .04. . t, ' - ' ''' • 4' • . .6'.. =A* - .74,. , A • '•• ' _....2.6.• .'".; ' 'M ; 1. 1 , 1 ' - .- ;AY1,144-404,40M411"0.::.„ ,..., • .8.4.-, ,:: lar •••-.111. ........ ' • I 1 ... : • t A. 'rier_ -iI4n ; 1 Ig..., , 't: - 410" , ar -. :-,4:41; '4'..-"' • 1. I ' L t l' ' 14:, .., . , 1." . r ... str4;,„, . .,. . - , , • 11--" . .. - :: IL il *V • -4.,.,.., _, ,,,,, _th . . .. , - .f't 1 4:4,.4 ,c,... . ' 4, . ''•• i. !. - , villePtil' diiki ': ' ' l • . n •• ,......, 3.11.11"; 1 s • 7-- ,-••• • • , t XL 1 ,•,, I' . . , • - , ,;,"dri ,. , ; uk ;...$ .11' n _ ., . . . . . . -1-, ) .. • •L , ,•. 1 ..,...14 ,I.,Jr4-4t- , P N e za 1 Figure 21-13 A Traffic Mitigation Plan WSB 4, s 1.1 Gateway AUAR & Associates, Inc. CITY OF EDINA TRANSPORTATION PLAN PREPARED BY: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 (612) 475-0010 March 1999 SRF No. 0983117 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. POLICY FRAMEWORK 3 III. COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS AND GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS 7 IV. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE ROADWAY NEEDS 12 V. ROADWAY SYSTEM PLAN 19 VI. TRANSIT AND TDM PLAN 31 VII. PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE AND GOODS MOVEMENT 39 VIII. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 41 APPENDICES Appendix A Capital Improvements Program Appendix B Travel Forecasting Process Appendix C Access Control guidelines Appendix D Functional Classification Criteria LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1 Location in Metropolitan Area 8 Figure 2 Land Use Plan 9 Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes 14 Figure 4 Integrated Corridor Traffic Management Project Area 17 Figure 5 Traffic Forecast 18 Figure 6 Functional Classification 20 Figure 7 Recommended Roadway Improvements 29 Figure 8 Traffic Signals 30 Figure 9 Transit Facilities 33 Figure 10 Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities 40 Figure 11 Potential Highway Jurisdiction Revisions 43 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Historic Population, Households, Employment: 1990-1997 10 Table 2 Communities with Highest Increases in Employment 11 Table 3 Forecast Population, Households, Employment: 1997-2020 11 Table 4 Summary of Spacing Criteria 21 Table 5 Comparison of Mileage by Functional Classification 25 Table 6 Potential County to City Jurisdictional Transfers 42 11 I. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The City of Edina is located in south-central Hennepin County, southwest of downtown Minneapolis, in the first ring of suburban municipalities. It is located entirely within the I-494/1-694 beltway, and covers approximately 16 square miles. Several regional highways provide Edina with a high degree of accessibility to the metropolitan area and to outstate Minnesota. These include TH 100 and TH 62, principal arterials that have an interchange in the central section of the City. Two other principal arterials significantly affecting the City are TH 169, located approximately at the western boundary of Edina, and 1-494, which lies immediately south of the City. While the edge of urbanization has long since passed through Edina, the City is expected to continue its pattern of sustained growth into the next century. In addition to growth- related transportation challenges, Edina will need to address issues related to: accommodating infill and redevelopment opportunities, problems associated with through-traffic, and addressing the transportation needs of those needing or choosing other transportation modes. The transportation plan has two purposes: • To fulfill the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 473.859 (subdivision 3) requiring a public facilities plan section within a comprehensive plan to be submitted for Metropolitan Council approval. • To assist the City to make correct decisions transportation-related decisions today by anticipating the character, magnitude and timing of future transportation demand. The City has developed a land use forecast for the year 2020. This land use projection was used to forecast travel demand on existing and future streets and roads and resulted in the definition of future needs. The transportation plan will allow the City to appropriately guide land use patterns and to take the necessary steps •to acquire or preserve the right-of-way needed for future transportation facilities. City of Edina Transportation Plan 1 March 1999 APPROACH The transportation plan demonstrates how the City of Edina will provide for an integrated transportation system that will serve the needs of its residents, support the City's development plans, and complement the metropolitan transportation system that lies within its boundaries. To accomplish these objectives, the transportation plan addresses the following questions: • Define the relationship to the proposed local transportation system to the density and distribution of future land uses and the anticipated metropolitan transportation system. • Develop a functional hierarchy of streets and roads and define their access to the regional system to ensure that they support the existing and anticipated development of the area; serve both short trips and trips to adjacent communities; and complement and support the metropolitan highway system. • Establish a system improvement and completion program that ensures that higher priority projects are constructed first; maintains a consistent and coherent roadway system during the roadway system development process; and provides for adequate funding for all needed improvements. • Identify what transit services and travel demand management strategies are appropriate for implementation in Edina in order to increase the number and proportion of people who use transit or share rides, and reduce the peak level of demand on the entire transportation system. • Identify the strategies and policies that need to be implemented to properly integrate the trail system (pedestrian, bicycle, etc.) with the proposed roadway system, to ensure the provision of trails in a sequence consistent with the development of the roadway system, and to create a rational network of sidewalks. Because this analysis deals not only with streets and highways, trails, transit, traffic management and other topics, the results will constitute a transportation plan. The plan will serve as the transportation element of the Edina Comprehensive Plan. City of Edina Transportation Plan 2 March 1999 II. POLICY FRAMEWORK The Edina Transportation Plan was developed taking into consideration the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan (December 1997) and the proposed Hennepin County Transportation Plan (draft November 1998). REGIONAL AND COUNTY FRAMEWORK The Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan identifies a policy framework within which the Edina Transportation Plan was developed. The key policy directions of the Metropolitan Council plan are to: 1. Reduce travel demand; 2. Increase transportation capacity through better system management; 3. Replace and improve the existing highway system; 4. Improve the transit system; and 5. Expand highway capacity in selected areas. The Plan is also generally consistent with the proposed Hennepin County Transportation Plan (draft, November 1998). Elements of the Hennepin County plan include: • Multi-modal planning • Permits and reviews • Functional classification • Environmental requirements • Access management • System improvements • System jurisdiction Areas where the Edina transportation plan and Hennepin County Transportation Plan differ, namely roadway jurisdiction, classification and access management, will need to be resolved as part of plan implementation. CITY OF EDINA TRANSPORTATION POLICIES The City of Edina Transportation Plan is based on general policy areas. These policies relate to the different components of the transportation system. Roadway Design 1. Design roadway facilities constructed in conjunction with new developments according to the intended function. 2. Upgrade existing roadways when warranted by demonstrated volume, safety or functional needs, taking into consideration environmental limitations. City of Edina Transportation Plan 3 March 1999 3. Emphasize improvements to management, maintenance and utilization of the existing street and highway system. 4. Design residential street systems to discourage through traffic and to be compatible with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle and walking, including traffic calming measures on local streets and, in some cases, collector streets. 5. Use adequate transitions and buffers including but not limited to earth berms, walls, landscaping and distance to mitigate the undesirable impact of high volume roadways. 6. Promote use of sound mitigating features for residential development adjacent to high volume roadways, and make property owners and land developers responsible for noise attenuation at new developments near high volume roadways. Roadway Function and Access 7. Provide logical street networks to connect residential areas to the regional highway system and local activity centers. 8. Adequately control access points to the regional roadway system (including minor arterials) in terms of driveway openings and side street intersections. 9. Provide access to the local street system (including collector and local streets) in a manner that balances the need to safely and efficiently operate the street system with the need for access to land. 10. Encourage intra-area trips on minor arterials rather than the principal arterial system, and promote serving regional trips on the metropolitan highway system. 11. Separate, to the extent possible, conflicting uses on the public street system in order to minimize safety problems. Give special attention to pedestrian and bicycle routes. 12. Provide access to redeveloping sites using current functional classification and standards rather than the existing access at the sites. Roadway Maintenance and Operation 13. Cooperate with other agencies having jurisdiction over streets and highways in Edina to assure good roadway conditions and operating efficiency. 14. Continue the implementation of the 1-494 frontage road system and Integrated Corridor Traffic Management system through ongoing coordination with Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, and the cities of Richfield and Bloomington. 15. Maintain roads by repairing weather-related and other damage. City of Edina Transportation Plan 4 March 1999 16. Use economic and environmentally sound management techniques for snow and ice removal. 17. Replace substandard bridges and bridges that present safety or traffic problems. Transit/TDM 18. Participate in the 1-494 Commission to encourage all forms of travel demand management in order to reduce vehicle miles of travel, reduce petroleum consumption, and improve air quality. 19. Review all major new developments in light of the potential for ridesharing including bus accessibility, preferential parking for carpools/vanpools, and mixed-use development. 20. Support HOV bypasses and other preferential treatments for transit and high occupancy vehicles on streets and highways. 21. Include transit planning in the construction or upgrading of streets and highways. 22. Pursue development of a demonstration project to provide a circulator system within the Southdale/Centennial Lakes major activity center. Parking 23. Review new developments for adequacy of parking based upon need, the potential for joint use of parking facilities and opportunities to encourage ridesharing. 24. Continue to limit on-street parking in and near congested commercial areas. Pedestrian/Bicycle 25. Provide accessibility to pedestrians and bicycles at major activity centers, including necessary storage facilities. 26. Create pedestrian and bicycle interconnections among major generators, with continuity across major roadways and other barriers. 27. Provide sidewalks and safe crossing in high pedestrian danger areas, including high- traffic streets, commercial areas, areas with transit access and in high density residential locations. City of Edina Transportation Plan 5 March 1999 28. Provide adequate signage along all bike paths including areas of conflict with pedestrians and automobile traffic. Goods Movement 29. Serve major truck users and intermodal facilities with good minor arterial access to the metropolitan highway system. Funding and Jurisdiction 30. Pursue and support regional or multi-community funding sources for improvements that provide regional or multi-community benefit 31. Support of research efforts into more efficient and cost-effective management, maintenance and replacement of street surfaces 32. Support governmental jurisdiction over roadways that reflect the role of the roadway in the overall transportation system 33. Develop and support legislation permitting a transportation utility City of Edina Transportation Plan 6 March 1999 III. COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS AND GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS The City of Edina is located in south-central Hennepin County in Minnesota (see Figure 1). The city is a first-ring suburb encompassing approximately 16 square miles. The Cities of Street Louis Park and Hopkins are to the north, Minneapolis and Richfield lie to the east, Bloomington is to the south and Eden Prairie, Hopkins and Minnetonka are lie to the west. The entire City of Edina is located well within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) defined by the Metropolitan Council. The purpose of the MUSA is to define the areas within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area that are eligible for "urban services", specifically sewers, municipal water systems and particular types of transportation systems. This boundary line is defined and maintained by the Metropolitan Council to assist in the orderly development of the metropolitan area. LAND USE The planned land use in Edina is depicted in Figure 2. The land use plan defines areas where the City will encourage specific types of land uses to be developed. The general categories of land uses defined by the City are residential, office, commercial, mixed use, industrial, and public and parks. The Land Use Plan is a tool that the City uses to "guide" future development so that it is consistent with current and future land uses in the City. Existing Land Use Existing land use patterns within Edina are influenced by several factors, including: • pre-World War II urban development in the northeast portion of the City, • post-war automobile-oriented development patterns in areas served by the trunk highway system, and • infill development of the former gravel mining area in the southeast corner of the City. Residential development has occurred in all areas of the City. Single family developments, with pockets of medium or high density occur throughout most of the city. The Southdale/York Avenue area is the location of most of the higher density residential development in the City. City of Edina Transportation Plan 7 March 1999 Figure 1 March 1999 SRF No. 0983117 1 . City of Edina Transportation Plan if .11 CI ,-51 MINNE Location in Metropolitan Area ANDOVER I/AM TAKE LITTLE CANADA ST. LOUIS PA SHO VIEW BROOKLYN ROSEVILLE ST. PAUL ANOKA \I WASHING HENNEPIN [—RAMSEY 1:57 i CARVER er.„..n .' L -L_ DAKOTA :"...2/ SCOTT m COON RAPIDS BLAINE CIRCLE 4.o BROOKLYN ANOKA 0 LAKES _ CLNILRVILI .35E I Mate Bear NORTH OAKS S E {VIII IL BEM 6 RDEN HILLS TELT P COL (MOM! HEIGHTS SILO INA LORETA) VADNAIS HE II a CRYSTA 'N HENNE1 IN rAlA ORONO IINNETONKA IRE LAKE MAPLEWOO, MINNETONKA SPRING BEACH PARK I)/ IN/ EN DEEPHA TONKA BAY GREENW MDR Sr -.RE WOOL) _ SUNFISH LAKE El El DE EDEN P S ERIE 111.0 CHASKA INVER GROVE HEI DAK TA SH,IKOPEE CHANHA RICHFIELD 494 JACKSON SCOTT Scale 1 2 5 MILES r",7.11.1C11 GOLDEN ALLEY BURNSVILLE Land Use Plan City of Edina Transportation Plan r 1 ° ..‘.p : Figure 2 March 1999 Office development in Edina is concentrated primarily south of W. 70th street, between Cahill road and TH 100, with pockets along TH 169 and W 77th Street. Major concentrations of commercial activity occur at the France Avenue/West 50th Street intersection, the TH 100/Vernon Avenue area, and the Southdale regional shopping center area south of West 66th Street, and east of France Avenue. The major institutional land use is Fairview-Southdale Medical Center area, located at TH 62 and France Avenue. SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS Table 1 illustrates the historic growth of Edina since 1970. Between 1970 and 1990 the City experienced an increase in the number of households from 13,000 to nearly 20,000, an annual growth of 2.1 percent as the city's remaining major tracts of single family housing developed. Population has not increased at the same rate as households, due to lower household sizes in general, and an increasing amount of apartment-style housing units in the city. In the past seven years, growth has been 0.7 percent, a rate only about one-third of the previous two decades experience. Employment growth was extremely strong between 1970 and 1990, when employment approximately doubled from 22,000 to 44,500 jobs in the city. This strong pattern has continued in the 1990's with over 8,000 additional jobs added (a 2.5 percent per year increase). This job increase has led to a change in the commuting nature of Edina. In 1970, the city had two persons for every job and by 1997 the ratio had decreased to less than one person for every job. In other words, Edina has clearly become a net importer of commuters. TABLE 1 HISTORIC POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS, EMPLOYMENT: 1970-1997 Average Annual Growth 1970 1980 1990 1997 1970- 1990-1997 1990 Population 44,046 46,073 46,070 47,113 0.2% 0.3% Households 13,002 17,961 19,860 20,866 2.1% 0.7% Employment 22,060 36,061 44,534 52,819 3.6% 2.5% Average Household Size 3.39 2.57 2.32 2.26 Ratio of People 2.00 1.28 1.03 0.89 To Jobs Source: Metropolitan Council City of Edina Transportation Plan 10 March 1999 Averaqe Annual Growth 1997 2000 2010 2020 1997-2020 47,113 47,500 48,500 49,000 0.2% 20,866 21,000 21,300 21,500 0.1% 52,819 56,000 58,500 60,000 0.6% 2.26 2.26 2.28 2.28 0.89 0.85 0.83 0.82 Population Households Employment Average Household Size Ratio of People to Jobs The strong growth of employment in Edina since 1990 is among the highest in Hennepin County. As shown in Table 2, only four communities in the county exceeded Edina in terms of employment growth. TABLE 2 COMMUNITIES WITH HIGHEST INCREASES IN EMPLOYMENT HENNEPIN COUNTY Employment Community 1990 1997 Change Bloomington 75,837 90,853 15,016 Minneapolis 278,438 288,836 10,398 Minnetonka 35,536 45,283 9,747 Plymouth 38,103 46,994 8,891 Edina 44,534 52,819 8,285 Eden Prairie 36,095 44,319 8,224 Maple Grove 7,750 13,816 6,066 Source: Metropolitan Council Edina, with the exception of some infill and redevelopment opportunities, is a fully developed community. As shown in table 3, both household and job formation are expected to be less than one percent per year. TABLE 3 FORECAST POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS, EMPLOYMENT: 1997-2020 Source: Metropolitan Council City of Edina Transportation Plan 11 March 1999 IV. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE ROADWAY NEEDS Determining future roadway needs is based on both an analysis of existing roadway needs and an understanding of how traffic demand will grow in the future. A good indicator of existing need is traffic congestion. Identifying future need requires an understanding of how the city is expected to grow. The preceding section outlined both the future land use pattern and the expected distribution of population and employment. Forecasts of traffic based on these socioeconomic forecasts were made for the existing roadway system including improvements that are already programmed. This allows the detection of problems that would develop if no further system improvements were made. This section identifies both existing and future roadway system needs. EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM As with all municipalities, jurisdiction over the roadway system is shared among three levels of government: the state, the county and the city. The Minnesota Depat tment of Transportation (Mn/DOT), maintains the interstate and trunk highway system on behalf of the state; Hennepin County maintains the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) and County Road systems. The remaining streets and roadways are the responsibility of the City. State Highways The City is served by three principal arterials on the state highway system. These highways also serve as the Metropolitan Highway System: • TH 62 runs east-west through the center of Edina. Near the City of Edina, TH 62 connects with 1-494 (approximately two miles west of the City), TH 169 (at the western boundary of the City), TH 100 (in the eastern portion of the City) and I-35W (approximately one mile east of the City). The highway is an important east-west connector of suburban areas within I-494/694 ring road and serves to relieve traffic demand on 1-494. Interchanges in Edina include TH 169, Gleason Road., Tracy Avenue, TH 100, Valley View Road, France Avenue, and Xerxes Avenue. • TH 169 runs north-south along or near the City's boundary with Eden Prairie, Minnetonka and Hopkins. This route is an important access route to the western suburbs within the 1-494/694 ring road. Access points in Edina are at West 7th Street South/Lincoln Drive, Londonberry Road, TH 62, Valley View Road and partial access at West 78th Street. The I-4947TH 169 interchange is located at the southwest corner of the City. City of Edina Transportation Plan 12 March 1999 • TH 100 is also a north-south principal arterial serving suburb-to-suburb movements. Access points in Edina include W. 77th Street/Edina Industrial Blvd., W. 70th Street, TH 62, Benton Avenue, and 50th Street/Eden Avenue. The I-494/TH 100 interchange lies in Bloomington, just south of the city limits. County Highways Five roadways on the Hennepin County system serve Edina: • County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 17, France Avenue, which runs north-south the entire length of the city and serves the Southdale area. • CSAH 20, Blake Road./Interlachen Blvd., which includes the portion of Blake Road north of Interlachen Boulevard and the portion of Interlachen Boulevard between Blake Road and Vernon Avenue. • CSAH 31, which runs north-south generally at or near the eastern boundary of the City, following York Avenue except for transitions to and from Xerxes Avenue at 1-494 and at TH 62. • CSAH 53, West 66th Street, which runs east-west from France Avenue into Richfield • CSAH 158, which follows Gleason Road from TH 62 to Vernon Avenue, then Vernon Avenue to its intersection with TH 100. The remainder of the roadway system in the City falls under local jurisdiction. Traffic volumes at selected locations on the Edina street system are shown in Figure 3. These values are obtained from traffic counts made by the Minnesota Depaitment of Transportation (Mn/DOT), Hennepin County and the City of Edina. EXISTING TRAFFIC PROBLEMS Metropolitan Highway System Congestion Peak period congestion occurs on nearly all of the Metropolitan Highway System as highlighted in Figure 3. In addition to mainline congestion, queuing from the ramp meters provides a source of localized congestion on the city street system as discussed below. City of Edina Transportation Plan 13 March 1999 Co I (I'QV WTENIADREN EU% 820,0 CITY OF OlfIS PARK 275 IS 101 120 - 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 r _10000 in 0 "'V '0 -- MINNESOTA _; / 6500 81000 2*.cn J _ ,,.. 158000 D_I____--- ---.., DOTE atoomoroti _______------- __-- - INTERSTATE 494 1 mile 0 25 5 scale Source: City of Edina 1997 MSAS Counts City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure 3 March 1999 Existing Traffic Volumes SRF No. 0983117 1 5 1 Congested Roadways CfTY OF HOPKINS %() II 15 7500 0 6-- 2- N°P :S? 8100 1`- 8 540° W 50-111 1 •1 8 A 2250 cRoss, I — 7700 'wow*. 95000 27 111 BRAEMAR 8, ho: g ,0 14400 5200 --10 2 -N o -- io400DaY°F81"WW°N -1 INTERSTATE 494 850 0-T.115T 19100 ss000 _ Ii '4400"\ 19 DEWEY' HIL HO °D 42 8 (17 •-s(-01 EDINA WM 135 t- 00 1 000 350 ir) n ,.. 0 04 9000 '' 8 11000 W.69TH ST. 55 o 9600 8 67 12500 - --vc;:i 700 8011 8 CM Y 0F R I CH RO. D (2400 \- W. 76TH ST. 10500 W. 77TH ST. Cb Local Street System Congestion Several areas of congestion can be found on the arterial system in Edina: Freeway interchange queues — Peak period queuing occurs at most freeway on ramps. In particular, the older freeway interchanges with TH 62 at Xerxes and France Avenue have inadequate bridge width and storage capacity to accommodate vehicles waiting at the queue. Similar problems exist along TH 100 at West 70th Street and West 77th Street. The France Avenue interchange at TH 62 is currently being upgraded. Through traffic on local streets — Several residential areas experience, or perceive that they experience, large amounts of through traffic. These neighborhoods include: Parkwood Knolls (traffic avoiding the TH 169/Bren Road interchange), the Tracy Avenue/Valley View Road area, and White Oaks/Country Club area. West 50th Street/France Avenue intersection — This intersection, in the middle of a popular older commercial area, is affected by high pedestrian traffic levels as well as high vehicular traffic volumes. TH 62/France Avenue Interchange/Southdale Area — The flow of traffic on France Avenue south of TH 62 is compounded by traffic accessing major medical, office and retail traffic generators along France Avenue. West 70th Street, east of TH 100, is generally a two-lane road carrying approximately 18,000 vehicles per day, exceeding the capacity of the roadway. West 77th Street and Edina Industrial Boulevard interchange with TH 100 — This interchange experiences congestion related to freeway access and local traffic. Other roadway segments in Edina are currently congested as shown in Figure 3. PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS A variety of roadway projects are either currently under construction, programmed for completion in the next few years, or are proceeding through the planning process. From the standpoint of identification of future need, roadways that are programmed or under construction are considered part of the existing system because they will be in place by the year 2020, which is the horizon year for this plan. Capacity improvements on the Metropolitan Highway System include: 0 Completion of capacity expansion on 1-494 from TH 77 to 1-394. The segment from TH 100 to TH 212 is programmed for completion in 2003, with the remainder to be finished by 2020. This segment is to be constructed as a demonstration of a managed corridor designed to promote HOV and transit use. For the purpose of preparing travel forecasts for the transportation plan, the entire segment of 1-494 is assumed as City of Edina Transportation Plan 15 March 1999 a managed HOV corridor. However, Mn/DOT and the Metropolitan Council have not made a final decision on whether the expansion will be HOV lanes or a managed corridor. • Completion of capacity expansion on I-35W from 46th Avenue So. to 1-494, which is scheduled in 2003. This expansion involves an HOV lane addition plus modifications to the 1-35W/TH 62 interchange. • An HOV ramp meter bypass is scheduled for the southbound to eastbound ramp at TH 169/TH 62 interchange in 1999. The regional Transportation Policy Plan classifies TH 100, TH 62 and TH 169 in the "improvement" level of investment priority. This classification means that while no expansion of these highways is currently planned, improvements to those facilities may be made that would improve traffic flow. A total of $53 million in preservation and improvement is planned (but not programmed) for TH 62 between 1-494 and 1-35W through the year 2020. Both I-35W and 1-494 were subjects of environmental impacts statements completed in the early 1990s. The improvements being constructed on those roadways are the result of a staged construction due to funding limitations. Hennepin County does not have any projects in Edina included in its 1999-2003 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Improvements in the France Avenue/TH 62 area were included in previous CIPs and are under construction. The City of Edina has 33 projects included in its 1999-2003 Capital Improvement Program. The most significant roadway project is the completion of the 78th Street/Braemar Frontage Road that is the last link in a continuous frontage road along 1-494 and TH 169 from TH 100 to TH 62. In addition, signal projects are included at the following intersections: Computer Avenue/77th, Edinborough Way/76th, Gleason/West 78th Street, Parklawn/77th, and Vernon Avenue/Gleason Road. Appendix A includes a complete listing of the $12.9 municipal state aid system improvements programmed through the year 2003. The Integrated Corridor Traffic Management System is an eight-mile long corridor between 34th Avenue South (near the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport) and West Bush Lake Road along 1-494. A series of improvements to selected east-west roadways has created a continuous frontage road system along 1-494 through Edina, Bloomington and Richfield. Traffic signalization along the corridor is interconnected with the ramp metering system on 1-494 to create a "smart" reliever arterials system to reduce the effects of congestion on the freeway. Elements include motorist information and signal timing adjustments to reduce ramp meter delay and to improve traffic operation. The system is now operational and expansion of the system is being considered. The project is a joint venture among Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, City of Edina Transportation Plan 16 March 1999 Bloomington, Richfield and Edina. Each contributes to the ongoing coordination and operation of the project. FIGURE 4 INTEGRATED CORRIDOR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROJECT AREA 4"... DIN* 3 I . Mb 111 1 RICHFIELD I I Mb 111 . 1 IhA Si • 1 MU St 31 W SIWS W MY SS I II SI 1 IC. St W SO. 1 't ./............ I BLOONSINOTON ems.' Source: ICTM Primary project routes are marked in black while secondary routes are shaded. Dashed lines are proposed routes. 2020 TRAFFIC FORECASTS Traffic forecasts were made to determine the adequacy of the street and highway system to accommodate the development that is expected to be in place in the future. Forecasts were made for the year 2020. Initial forecasts were prepared assuming no changes in the Edina transportation system other than those already programmed. Following the initial forecasts, necessary roadway improvements were assumed and a final forecast was made for 2020. All planned improvements to the metropolitan highway system were assumed. The improvements most likely to affect traffic in Edina are the expansion of 1-494 between TH 77 and TH 212, and the expansion of 1-35W from 1-494 to West 46th Street. Both will add necessary capacity to the regional highway system, reducing the amount of regional traffic on the local roadway system. The travel forecast is shown in Figure 5. The forecasting process is described in Appendix B. City of Edina Transportation Plan 17 March 1999 SRF No. 0983117 I • LI ,rivr AVE. Y5000 °') o — CI, OF 1.10015 PARK CfTY OF HOPKINS •""t. °EINEM L RD I 3000 V.601-H Sr. 000 0 ( 0 I - Vuel lake 5 CD 104000 1'600 NO suossro,,VN HIGHWAY 62 0, 1:‘ 0 9 000 !H H 5700 ), 21500 8 § 20 9800 cy° / 12500 P `s1 oovAti .0# —( . 11 ill 10500 (9) 78 125 43(3° \ 7 I3RAEMAR 80 (S) k 8 4` c.1 __21for) ,gs r ,[ ii- 4.. III W. 76TH 15 St W. t7TH SE •-• , "ff 0 \,,3 L....,_____..).MINNESOTA DR. „.-- CC's:3 . A . v. 720011000 A-:". II CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 4, r, EDINA IND 1 50o t - . 41.'16- 15500 ---- 8000 ----- 142000 c4,YoF at ,NTERSTAIE 494 155000 Li 0 1150 Congested Roadways ea* .• 63 0 12 INTERLACHENKV% 'CD 8 0 vT• titw 712, 2700 32 0 .25 .5 1 mile —1-1 scale [ W. 94TH SI 62 13000 csj , 15500 INTERSTATE 494 City of Edina Transportation Plan Forecast 2020 Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 5 March 1999 V. ROADWAY SYSTEM PLAN The proposed roadway system is consistent with the anticipated density and distribution of land uses in the City in the year 2020. The purpose of this section is to present this plan, to identify the individual projects required to bring about this plan, and to establish priorities for these projects. GUIDING PLANNING PRINCIPLES The City of Edina Transportation Plan has been developed using the following guidelines and planning principles: 1. The functional classification of the roadway system in Edina should confoim to the criteria and characteristics summarized in Appendix D. 2. The plan should reflect vehicular travel demand in 2020. 3. Compatibility should be maintained between the roadway system in Edina and county and regional roadway systems. 4. In developing the plan, roadway segments and intersections that cannot accommodate the anticipated vehicular travel demand should be identified. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM The purpose of a functional classification system is the creation of a hierarchy of roads that collects and distributes traffic from neighborhoods to the metropolitan highway system in as efficient a manner as possible given the topography and other physical constraints of the area. Places of high demand, such as employment or commercial centers, should be served by roadways higher in the hierarchy. Neighborhoods and places of low demand should have roadways of lower classification. It is in this way that the land use plan is integrated into the transportation plan. Figure 6 shows the proposed functional classification of roadways in Edina. The functional classification criteria presented in Appendix D were followed during the preparation of this plan. An important consideration in developing a functional classification system is adherence to the spacing criteria established by the Metropolitan Council (Table 4). The City of Edina is considered part of the fully developed area. The 1-494 area and Southdale areas are considered regional business concentrations for this proposal. City of Edina Transportation Plan 19 March 1999 City of Edina Transportation Plan .4y Figure 6 March 1999 Functional Classification SRF No. 0983117 Principal Arterial W Minor Arterial - Reliever 'A Minor Arterial - Augmenter '13" Minor Arterial Collector crir oF BLOOMINGTON INTERSTATE 494 fI1$T. 0 .25 .5 1 mile I-1-1 scale I TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF SPACING CRITERIA Metro Centers/ Spacing (Miles) Regional Fully Functional Business Developed Developing Rural Classification Concentrations Areas Areas Areas Principal Arterial 2-3 3 — 6 6-12 Minor Arterial 1/4 _ 1/2 1 — 2 As needed Collector 1/4 - 1/2 1/4 - 3/4 1/2 — 1 As needed It should also be recognized that in a fully developed area it may not always be possible to mesh the existing access and land uses along a roadway with the way in which a roadway is used. A street system developed 25 or more years ago may now be used in a manner different than that envisioned when the roadway was constructed. In that case, the functional classification of a road must be considered along with safety concerns and the practicality of travel behavior. The City of Edina functional classification system includes the following categories: 1. Principal Arterials 2. Minor Arterials a. "A" Minor Arterials b. "B" Minor Arterials 3. Collector Streets 4. Local Streets Principal Arterials Principal arterials are the highest roadway classification and are considered part of the metropolitan highway system. These roads are intended to connect the central business districts of the two central cities with each other and with other regional business concentrations in the metropolitan area. These roads also connect the Twin Cities with important locations outside the metropolitan area. Principal arterials are generally constructed as limited access freeways in the developed area, but may also be constructed as multiple lane divided highways. The City of Edina is served by four principal arterials: City of Edina Transportation Plan 21 March 1999 • TH 62 • TH 100 • TH 169 • 1-494 Interchanges between TH 62 and TH 169, TH 62 and TH 100, TH 169 and 1-494, and TH 100 and 1-494 are all located in or near the City of Edina. "A" Minor Arterials Minor arterials are also designed to emphasize mobility over land access, serving to connect cities with adjacent communities and the metropolitan highway system. Major business concentrations and other important traffic generators are located on minor arterials. In the developing area, one to two mile spacing is considered sufficient. The Metropolitan Council has identified minor arterials that are of regional importance because they relieve, expand, or complement the principal arterial system. These roads have been labeled "A" minor arterials and have been categorized into four types: • Relievers — Minor arterials that provide direct relief for metropolitan highway traffic; • Expanders — Routes that provide a way to make connections between developing areas outside the 1-494, 1-694 interstate ring; • Connectors — Roads that would provide good, safe connections to and among town centers in the transitional and rural areas in the area; and, • Augmenters — Roadways that augment principal arterials within the interstate ring or beltway. Connectivity among the "A" minor arterials and the principal arterials allows the minor arterial network to function in a manner similar to the grid system it emulates. As indicated earlier, the "A" minor arterial system is designated to serve long distance trips and to concentrate traffic traveling within the City. Volumes are expected to be highest on these roads and for this reason each of the routes identified is expected to ultimately be built as a four-lane divided roadway. The City of Edina is served by four "A" minor reliever arterials as currently classified by the Metropolitan Council: • CSAH 17 (France Avenue), which connects to 1-494 and TH 62, and relieves TH 100 • 76th/77th/78th Streets frontage road system from East Bush Lake Road to the east as far as TH 77, which connects to TH 100 in Edina and runs relieves 1-494 • 66th Street, which connects to France Avenue, TH 100 and, in Richfield, I-35W • CSAH 158 (Gleason Road/Vernon Avenue), which connects to TH 62 and TH 100 City of Edina Transportation Plan 22 March 1999 The adopted Metropolitan Functional Classification System map does not include the following segments as "A" minor arterials. However, the City of Edina proposes that they be added to the system as "A" minor reliever segments for the reasons described: Roadway Segment Reasons for Designation • Valley View Road France Avenue to TH 62 Continuity of 66th Street "A" Minor reliever designation to TH 62 • West 78th Street East Bush Lake Road to Continuation of 76th/77th/78th frontage Washington Avenue Road system along future frontage road, connecting to existing "A" minor arterial Valley View Road in Eden Prairie. • Washington South of Valley View Serves to relieve TH 169, especially Avenue Road around 1-494 interchange. • West Bush Lake South of West 78th Street Complements West Bush Lake Road Road and serves to relieve TH 169/1-494 interchange. Although West Bush Lake Road is in Bloomington it, and the other proposed designations for roads in Bloomington north of 1-494, affects the ability of the Edina roadway system to perform effectively. These proposed designations would need to be included by Bloomington in its transportation plan. Edina is served by one "A" minor augmenter: 50th Street, between TH 100 and the City of Minneapolis. The draft Hennepin County Transportation Plan includes the Gleason Road/Vernon Avenue (CSAH 158) roadway segment as a "B" minor arterial. However, the City of Edina concurs with the Metropolitan Council's designation of the road. Vernon Avenue receives a significant amount of non-local traffic from the Minnetonka/Eden Prairie areas related to commuters avoiding the congested principal arterials and metered ramps in the area. "B" Minor Arterials The Metropolitan Council defines considers all minor arterials other than "A" minor arterials as "B" minor arterials. These roadways also serve a citywide function. Medium to long distance trips use the "B" minor arterial system. When combined with the "A" minor arterial system, most places in the City are within 1/2 to one mile of such a roadway. "B" minor arterials can be appropriate at spacings of 1/4 mile in regional business concentrations such as the Southdale/France Avenue corridor. City of Edina Transportation Plan 23 March 1999 Ideally, these routes would be constructed either as four-lane undivided roads (or as three-lane roadways where there is insufficient right-of-way) when the system is complete. However, the design of the roadways should be a function of the volume rather than the function of the roads. The topography of western Edina, coupled with its fully developed status makes it difficult to identify routes that would naturally serve as "B" minor arterials. Nevertheless, it is important to create a sense of roadway hierarchy in the community. While a roadway may carry traffic volumes more consistent with a collector designation, if it is used by a high number of vehicles passing through the area of the community, it functions as a "B" minor arterial. Roadway segments designated as "B" minor arterials in this plan include: • Blake Road, from the City of Hopkins to Interlachen Blvd. • Interlachen Blvd., from Blake Road to Vernon Avenue • Lincoln Drive, from TH 169 to Vernon Avenue • Tracy Avenue/Valley View Road, from Olinger Blvd. To Gleason Road • Gleason Road, from TH 62 to Valley View Road • Braemar Blvd., from TH 169 to Gleason Road • Dewey Hill Road, from Gleason Road to Cahill Road • Cahill Road, from West 78th Street to West 70th Street • West 69th Street, from France Avenue to Xerxes Avenue • West 70th Street, from Cahill Road to France Avenue • York Avenue, from 1-494 to TH 62 • Valley View Road, from TH 100 to TH 62 • Valley View Road from West 66th Street to West 69th Street • Wooddale Avenue, from West 50th Street to Valley View Road Hennepin County identifies CSAH 20 (Blake Road/Interlachen Blvd.) as a major collector. While this roadway is residential and a two-lane roadway, it serves an inter- community transportation role and carries trips through the residential area as well as to the area. These are characteristics of a minor arterial. Similarly, the County identifies York Avenue as a major collector. The City concurs with the designation north of TH 62, but considers York Avenue a minor arterial south of TH 62. York Avenue, in addition to being a high-volume roadway serving the Southdale regional business concentration, serves as a connection from Bloomington through Edina and into Minneapolis including an interchange at TH 62. City of Edina Transportation Plan 24 March 1999 Collectors Collectors are designed to serve shorter trips that occur entirely within the City and to provide access from neighborhoods to the arterial system. These roads supplement the arterial system in the sense that they emphasize mobility over land access, but they are expected, because of their locations, to carry less traffic than arterial roads. Collectors collect and distribute traffic from neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas to/from the major collector and minor arterial system. Local streets should be designed to connect to collectors and not to arterials. These streets are generally built as two-lane roadways. Estimated Mileage by Classification The ultimate roadway system is based upon the functional classification presented above. It reflects full development of the City according to the land use plan and socioeconomic forecasts presented earlier. Communities should have an appropriate balance among the different types of functional classification. Table 5 compares the relative size of the different functional classes in Edina with the regional average. The current classification of roadways in the city has a significantly lower percentage of arterial roadway miles than the region as a whole, with lower minor arterial mileage. The revised classification scheme reduces that imbalance. TABLE 5 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MILEAGE DISTRIBUTION Classification Existing Classification Proposed Classification (1) Regional Average (2) Principal Arterial 5% 5% 6% Minor Arterial 5% 13% 14% Collector 16% 10% 9% Local 74% 77% 71% (1) SRF Consulting Group, Inc. estimate. (2) Source: Mn/DOT Transportation Information System. ROADWAY PLAN Edina is a fully developed community. Very few opportunities exist to construct new roadways, unless done as part of a redevelopment. This roadway plan identifies the major emphases the City should pursue as part of its planning: City of Edina Transportation Plan 25 March 1999 Expanded Integrated Corridor Traffic Management (ICTM) The partners in the ICTM project are considering the long-term potential to expand the system beyond its current size. Expansion of the system north along TH 100 and TH 169 has been discussed. ICTM has the potential to reduce delays at ramp meters in Edina and to guide non-freeway traffic more efficiently along the reliever arterials. The City should participate in the study of this expansion. Monitor "A" Minor Arterial System Efficiency Similar to the ICTM system, a well-coordinated minor arterial system signal system promotes the flow of traffic along the "A" minor arterials through the city. This reduces the likelihood for through traffic to divert to local streets as well as enhances the operating efficiency of the transportation system. The City should periodically monitor the progression of traffic through signals on key travel corridors (such as Vernon Avenue and France Avenue) to ensure it is operating efficiently. Improve Storage Capacity at Metered Freeway Ramps Older freeway interchange designs in developed areas often have insufficient storage capacity to accommodate vehicles queued for ramp meters. As a result, traffic spills back onto the adjacent roadway system causing delay for the arterial through traffic. Solutions may include adding turning lanes for traffic destined for the freeway or other geometric improvements. The following interchanges in Edina should be reviewed for potential improvements to improve interchange storage capacity: • TH 62 at Xerxes Avenue • TH 100 at West 70th Street • TH 100 at West 77th Street Improvements are programmed at the TH 62/France Avenue and TH 100/West 77th Street interchanges. The City should work with Hennepin County and Mn/DOT to promote the use of the TH 62/Valley View Road and TH 62/France Avenue ramps as part of an interconnected system. This would help balance demand for freeway access/egress and the need for arterial capacity in the heavily developed Southdale area. The segment of West 65th Street between Valley View Road and France Avenue should be constructed as a three-lane roadway as currently planned by the City. Bus or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) meter bypasses can reduce the vehicle queue length while providing an incentive for people to use alternatives to the single-occupant automobile. Existing and proposed HOV meter bypasses are discussed in the transit chapter. Additional Traffic Signals City of Edina Transportation Plan 26 March 1999 Operational refinement of the street system will take place on an ongoing basis. New traffic signals can be built at intersections where specific warrants are met. Figure 8 shows the existing and currently proposed traffic signals in Edina. Additional signals should be considered on a site-by-site basis. Traffic Calming A variety of physical means (such as speed humps) exist to reduce the speed of traffic in neighborhoods. These traffic calming devices can be effective but should only be used where appropriate. Traffic calming can be appropriate on lower-volume local and collector streets where excessive speeds pose a safety problem. It should not be employed solely as a means to discourage through-traffic in a neighborhood. Through traffic can best discouraged by having an arterial system that is spaced and operated so that it is more attractive to through traffic than local or collector streets. FUTURE CONGESTION Figure 5 shows roadways where congestion is expected to exist in 2020. The City of Edina is limited in its ability to eliminate congestion for two main reasons: • Its location in proximity to several congested principal arterials will result in traffic on reliever arterials or other roadways that is a function of regional growth rather than development in the City • The City is nearly fully developed and topographically constrained. Little land exists for major roadway expansion or realignment to significantly affect traffic congestion. Site-specific improvements are possible, however. The level of congestion of the future metropolitan highway system depends in large measure on both the capacity improvements undertaken and the availability of a local arterial system to complement and relieve the regional system. Future congestion levels also depend upon the amount of development occurring in adjacent communities and beyond. Improvements proposed for municipal roadways are under direct control of the City and will receive highest priority in the City's Transportation Improvement Program. For roadways on the County system, the City will cooperate with Hennepin County and encourage the improvement of county roads in accordance with this plan. This plan has not assumed any additional roadway capacity on the metropolitan highway system other than those projects that are already included in the regional Transportation Policy Plan. City of Edina Transportation Plan 27 March 1999 SRI, No. 0983117 Recommended Roadway Improvements City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure 7 March 1999 1 mile 0 .25 .5 scale = Proposed Signal = Interchange Storage Capacity MALONEY AVE 0 0 0 fHL W.62 OS cao4 VALLEVt —( WROTE ST. LF-) .69TH ST. HE MAW 844, HI RD. or W. 713TH ST. EDINA IND. W. 77TH S INTERSTATE 494 CRY OF BLOCONSTON _ INTERSTATE 494 ST.LOLAS PARK CRY OF COY OF HOPKINS - A- C3 0 ( 0 NC/ INTERLACHEN n_ O CITY OF MCCOONGTON Figure 8 March 1999 City of Edina Transportation Plan SRF No. 0983117 Existing & Proposed Signal Locations CITY OF ST. LOUIS MAX CITY Of HOPKINS 93 se LEGEND _CR s. AY 62_ I A ( W. 70TI4 ST. [ 1 tj e, ,1-c) 0 0 cs( _r_ iwRiAE_ABLv% MALONEY AVE ff ° r, CITY OF BLOCIANOTON INTERSTATE 494 0 .25 .5 1 mile scale BENTON AVE. LH W. 76TH ST. MINNESOTA DR. - CITY OF BLOO/ANGTON _ INTERSTATE 494 a City of Edina — Existing Signal Lights 0 Multi-Jurisdiction Existing Signal Lights °Hennepin County Existing Signal Lights 0 State of Minnesota Existing Signal Lights • Hennepin County Proposed Signal Lights /City of Edina Proposed Signal Lights 'plate of Minnesota Proposed Signal Lights Multi-Jurisdiction Proposed Signal Lights VI. TRANSIT AND TDM PLAN POLICY FRAMEWORK The Metropolitan Council's 1996 Transit Redesign serves as a regional policy framework for the promoting of transit throughout the Twin Cities. The study identified four transit market areas, delineated by the following criteria: • Population density • Employment concentration and job density • Travel desire, travel volumes and patterns • Transit dependent segments of population The City of Edina falls into three of the four areas. Area I is classified by high density employment and population. The other three areas having lower densities in both. Area I is typical of downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul, and is the only area type not found in the City of Edina: Area II is classified as having a population density of 9-14.9 persons per acre. This area is also near high transit dependency areas. This is typical of north and east portions of Edina. Area III is defined as having a population density of 5-8.9 persons per acre. It also is characterized by having 10-49 jobs per acre and 3,000 or more jobs nearby. It could also be near an area that is a major travel destination. This more dense employment is typical of the France Avenue corridor. Area IV is defined as having a population density of 5 persons per acre or less. Services appropriate for Area II are a primary emphasis on large bus/regular route service. This should be complemented with Metro Mobility paratransit service. Neighborhood circulators are possible in some areas and should tie in with the regular routes. Routes should be run up to 20 hours per day, 7 days a week, about every 15 to 30 minutes. Route spacing should be 'A to 1 mile with 6 to 10 stops per mile. Area III suggested service type is very similar to Area II. The biggest differences are to have both large and small buses, frequency every 30-60 minutes, and service provided up to 18 hours per day. Area IV services are geared more toward rural or outer suburban service, but there are areas in southwest Edina that meet the criteria for Area IV. The primary emphasis is on small bus or dial-a-ride service. Park-and-ride lots are a prime focus in these areas. The service times are peak periods only during the work-week. City of Edina Transportation Plan 30 March 1999 The Metropolitan Council's 1996 Transportation Policy defines four transit zones: Core Zone — This zone which is similar to Area I, is characteristic of a downtown or other high concentration of housing and employment. Inner Urban/Suburban Zone — This zone is similar to Area II in the Transit Redesign Study. Outer Suburban Zone — This zone has characteristics similar to Area IV in population densities. It does not however focus on dial-a-ride services. Rural Zone — This is the zone that concentrates on dial-a-ride services, and rideshare programs. The population is very spread out and continual transit service would not be effective. The City of Edina falls into two of these zones. The north and east sides of the city fall into the inner urban/suburban zone. Those are the older areas of Edina where population is denser. The southwest comer of Edina is classified as outer suburban. The characteristics of those neighborhoods are larger lots and more park-and-open space. Concentrated transit services are less likely to be effective in this area of Edina. EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES The City of Edina is currently served by five different transit service providers (see Figure 9): • Metro Transit — The region's largest transit provider operates several routes in Edina. Branches of local routes 4, 6, 18 and 28 serve various parts of the city with between one and four buses per hour in the peak and generally two buses per hour in the midday. Some potential exists to use these buses for reverse commuting. In particular, the Route 28K serves the Pentagon Park business area and Edina Industrial Area. Route 15 (the 66th Street crosstown), begins at Southdale and operates with a frequency of 15 minutes peak, 30 minutes off-peak. Route 68, which serves the Opportunity Workshop in Minnetonka, stops at Southdale. Express routes 35B, 35H, 35J, 35K, 44E and 87 also serve Edina, including some reverse commuting opportunities. Finally, Route 52B, serving the University of Minnesota campus, begins at Southdale. City of Edina Transportation Plan 31 March 1999 Transit Facilities SRF No. 0983117 City of Edina Transportation Plan r 4(41 G3.111)14) r II ID Figure 9 March 1999 LEGEND I u ° 0 % INTERLACI1EN 131.VCi, C3. a * 1 M.LONE9 AVE / 1 a ( 0 g V ( o Bus Routes T Bus Stops B Bus Bench s Bus Shelter p Park-Ride Lot Future HOV Meter Bypass HOV Meter Bypass Proposed Transitway Local/Limited Route Local/Limited Route: no stops Express Route Express Route: Limited Service Express Route: No Stop CRY OF HOPKINS CITY OF a St LOUIS PARK 0. J. BRA_E900 .672 *VI 1. QB •D- CLA 41. 87 CITY OF 91-0C4.9NOTON -- CITY OF SL INTERSTA 11 494 INTERSTATE 494 .25 .5 1 mile scale Southwest Metro — Route 682 (formerly 54S) provides a connection from the Eden Prairie area to Southdale and on into downtown Minneapolis. Its schedule accommodates reverse transit needs. The Southwest Metro "Telebus", a dial-a-ride service operating in Eden Prairie, Chaska, and Chanhassen also makes stops at Southdale. • BE Line — The two BE line routes operate as crosstown routes between the Mall of America and Southdale areas, serving Bloomington and Edina businesses and residents. Direct transfers can be made from the BE line to fourteen different routes. The BE Line is operated provided by Laidlaw Transit Service. In 1997 the route carried 247,000 passengers on an annual budget of $620,000. Service operates Monday through Saturday from approximately 6:30 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. • Minnesota Valley Transit — Route 31F makes three runs in each peak period, connecting Apple Valley and Burnsville to the 1-494 area including the Pentagon Park business area and Edina Industrial Area. • Metro Mobility — This demand responsive service for persons who have a mobility impairment meets the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because of its high levels of all-day regular route transit service, Edina receives Metro Mobility service from 4 a.m. to 2 a.m.. HOV Ramp Meter Bypasses Figure 9 shows the location of existing HOV and bus bypasses. In addition, buses are permitted to use the shoulder on 1-494 from TH 5 to East Bush Lake Road. Southdale Transit Hub The Southdale Mall, located at France and 66th Street, is a major transit hub in the Twin Cities and is located within the City of Edina. Eleven bus routes arrive and/or depart from Southdale, with transit service seven days a week. Southdale also serves as a park-and-ride facility. Park-and-Ride Lots The City of Edina currently has two park-and-ride facilities. Southdale has 100 parking spaces dedicated for park-and-ride, with a 95 percent use of these spaces. Another park- and-ride lot is located at Colonial Church near the TH 62 and Tracy Avenue interchange. The Colonial Church lot has a capacity of only 12 spaces for park-and-ride, and is not typically more than 50 percent full. City of Edina Transportation Plan 33 March 1999 Travel Demand Management The metropolitan area's transportation policies seek significant changes in travel behavior to more effectively manage existing transportation facilities. By modifying demand for travel, congestion and the need for facility (roadway) expansion can be lessened. Travel Demand Management (TDM) refers to a variety of strategies and actions for reducing single-occupant vehicle travel, increasing vehicle-occupancy rates, and reducing vehicle miles of travel. Edina is a participant in one of the longest-operating transportation management organizations (TMO) in the metropolitan area, the 1-494 Corridor Commission. The purpose of the commission is to coordinate planning, funding and implementation of transportation and land use strategies in order to address the growing traffic congestion in the 1-494. Other commission members include Bloomington, Edina, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Richfield, Plymouth and Maple Grove. In 1997 the 1-494 Corridor Commission began implementing a strategy titled the "New Approach", which focuses activities on major areas that include identifying and advocating for improvements that encourage commuters to share rides to and from work, and those that improve the "people-moving capacity" along 1-494. The 1-494 travel demand management program is programmed to receive approximately $465,000 in federal Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds through the year 2003. In addition to participating in the 1-494 Corridor Commission, Edina businesses and residents have access to ridesharing matching and other programs offered by Metro Commuter Services. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Service Improvements The City should work with Metro Transit, Southwest Metro, Minnesota Valley Transit and the Metropolitan Council (as funder of the BE line) to ensure that additional transit service is provided when capacity is exceeded on existing routes. Although most of the City is well-served by public transit, many residential areas in the western portion of the city do not have transit available within walking distance. The City should explore the potential of providing small-vehicle demand responsive service from those areas to Southdale, where connections could be made with other regional transit services. Southeast Edina Transitway City of Edina Transportation Plan 34 March 1999 In 1997 the city of Edina completed a feasibility study to determine the potential for an internally-circulating transit system in southeast Edina. The system would include a dedicated north-south transitway that would run between France Avenue and York Avenue (see Figure 9). The northern terminus would be in the vicinity of Southdale Mall or the Fairview-Southdale Medical Center. The southern teuninus would be the Edinborough complex. A second option being considered is the purchase of five "trolley" buses that would operate along the corridor. Service could operate either at lunch and dinner hours, or all day at 10-minute headways. Either plan would be useful in connecting places of business in the area. The corridor would also be constructed to be pedestrian-friendly. When the transit line is not in service, the corridor could be used as a recreational facility for walking or biking. Future Park-and-Ride Metro Transit has expressed interest in locating a new park-and-ride facility in Edina along TH 100 at Benton Avenue or 50th Street. The lot would make Route 87 a more attractive travel option for Edina residents. The City should work with Metro Transit on meeting park-ride needs. However, the potential for additional traffic congestion at interchanges due to park-ride should be weighed against the benefit of having the service. The greatest park-and-ride needs in Edina are likely to be found in the western 1/3rd of the city, where a low percentage of households has good walk-access to transit. These households may be better served by express service along the TH 169 corridor. HOV Ramp Meter Bypasses The City should pursue constructing ramp meter bypasses for HOV and transit vehicles at all of the remaining interchanges on TH 169 and TH 100, if right-of-way is available. The advantages of HOV meter bypasses are that they provide an incentive for persons to use buses or carpools, they reduces operating delays for buses, and they can alleviate some of the congestion at freeway interchanges due to ramp metering. HOV meter bypasses are to be constructed on 1-494 as part of that roadway's expansion. City of Edina Transportation Plan 35 March 1999 Travel Demand Management The 1-494 Corridor Commission advocates several TDM and transit-related strategies, including: Transit/Facility-Oriented • Bus stations or super-shelters (within 1-2 miles of 1-494; easy ingress/egress) • Park-and-ride lots along the 1-494 corridor • HOV access lanes • Bus-only shoulder lanes along 1-494 • Transfer stations (where appropriate) along 1-494 corridor • Signage indicating diamond lanes/shoulder lanes along 1-494 • Signage indicating park-and-ride lots along 1-494 • HOV ramp meter bypasses • Signalization control (pre-emption) • Opticon systems (pre-emption) TDM-Oriented • Preferred parking at employer locations along 1-494 • Van and carpool ride-matching services at the subregional level • Circulator services through major developments and business park locations • Shuttle services between area park-and-ride and major employment sites • Employer-based incentives to ridesharing • Guaranteed Ride Home programs — at the subregional level • Services linking corridor transit hubs • Employer subsidies for carpoolers, vanpoolers, transit riders • TDM requirements for developers in 1-494 corridor • "Transit-friendly" ingress/egress in major employment sites • Reserved 1-494 corridor right-of-way for future HOV lanes/ramps • Smaller parking ratio per square footage — new development • Required TDM Program implementation for employer expansion projects Commuter Rail In January 1999 the Minnesota Department of Transportation completed Phase II of its Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Study. One of the proposed lines extends from Northfield to downtown Minneapolis and includes service on the Canadian Pacific Railroad line through central Edina. Eden Avenue was considered as a preliminary location for a station. City of Edina Transportation Plan 36 March 1999 The portion of this line commuter rail in Edina is proposed for Stage Three of implementation and would not likely be operational before 2015. Additional study would be necessary to finalize station locations. This could also include restructuring of transit routes. City of Edina Transportation Plan 37 March 1999 VII. PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE AND GOODS MOVEMENT PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Figure 10 shows the extensive sidewalk and pathway facilities available in Edina. Sidewalks are commonplace not only in the older sections of the city, but pedestrian facilities exist throughout much of the City. Policies 24-27 described in Chapter One support the continued development of pedestrian facilities. Separating bicycle/pedestrian use from traffic enhances the livability and safety of an area. Providing pedestrian- oriented environments near transit facilities provides better access and promotes transit use. Several corridors in the Hennepin Parks Trail System also serve the City as shown in Figure 10. GOODS MOVEMENT No major trucking operations exist within the City of Edina. Edina has one rail line, a branch of the Canadian Pacific with low utilization. All industrial areas in Edina (see Figure 2) are located with adequate access to the metropolitan highway system. This reduces the impact of truck traffic on local roadways and minimizes the potential for disruption of neighborhoods. One area of local concern is that truck movements from and within industrial areas in Hopkins may impact the local street system in Edina. This issue should be addressed through a joint effort among the cities and industries. Truck traffic from industrial, industrial/warehousing and commercial land uses can be adequately accommodated through following sound means: • Locating truck-intensive land uses with good proximity to the metropolitan highway system and with good access to the minor arterial system. • Using acceptable design standards on arterials, which will ensure adequate turning radius and pavement depth for trucks • Signing and marking to minimize truck traffic through neighborhoods City of Edina Transportation Plan 38 March 1999 VALLeT t_ ) (— 2 W.70TH ST. Figure 10 March 1999 SRF No. 0983 17 IL MALONEY AVE CITY OF140PIONS TT- as. • 1L 0 0 INTERLACHEN SA- 1 — E-xiogig C e Sidewalk xisting — Bituminous Sidewalk — Existing Park Pathway Proposed State-Aid Sidewalk Proposed — School-Business Sidewalk — raorr,,!away Corridors on Hennepin County System o - — __)‘A BENTON AVE--. ) Ar)s j. - 'IW:55TFIS V7LE), D S- Mud lake ROSSTOWN HIGHWAY 62 --1 -1 o oEp/Ey811,1. / NJ kr-1 W 70 —1-1 1..„1 ( BRAEMAR NNESOTA IV IOTA ST. BRYON BLOOMINGTON CRY OF BLOOMINGTON INTERSTATE 494 0 .25 .5 scale 1 mile ele INTERSLITE 494 Pedestrian! Bicycle Facilities City of Edina Transportation Plan VIII. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Previous sections have examined future travel and have recommended a Plan that is responsive to these considerations. This section concentrates on examining the steps necessary to implement the transportation plan. It discusses a general strategy for moving from 1999 to the future in accomplishing the plan. TRANSPORTATION PLAN ADOPTION By adopting the transportation plan, the City Council will establish the guidelines by which decisions regarding transportation facilities will be made in Edina. It should be revised as necessary to respond to changing conditions and needs. The City should periodically review the assumptions under which the plan was developed, including estimates of future development, population trends, changing financial resources, energy considerations, and citizen and governmental input, and update the plan accordingly. The plan should be circulated widely so that residents and the business community are aware of the opportunities and limitations that the plan provides, thus enabling all interested parties to plan with full knowledge. INITIATE JURISDICTIONAL REALIGNMENT PROCESS In general, it is good policy that Hennepin County and the State (Mn/DOT) assume responsibility for the arterial system, and that the City assume responsibility for the collector and local street systems. This is, to a large extent, the situation in Edina. At present, there are no roadways in the City under state jurisdiction that are under consideration for tumback to Hennepin County or the City of Edina. The draft Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (November, 1998) identifies three roadway segments that are candidates for tumback to the to the City of Edina. These roadways are shown in Table 6 and Figure 11. City of Edina Transportation Plan 40 March 1999 Roadway Segment Limits Reasons for Transfer CSAH 20 (Blake Road./ Interlachen Blvd.) CSAH 31 (York Avenue) CSAH 158 (Vernon Avenue) No. City Limits to Vernon Avenue So. City Limits to 50th Street) TH 62 to TH 100 Lower volume, classified as collector Non-continuity, proximity to France Avenue) Classified as B-minor arterial, but collector street function) TABLE 6 POTENTIAL COUNTY TO CITY JURISDICTIONAL TRANSFERS Source: Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (Draft, November, 1998) As shown in Figure 11, the City does not concur with the transfer of the following roadways: These roadways should remain under county jurisdiction for the following reasons: • CSAH 31, York Avenue (south of TH 62) — This road also serves an intra-community function, connecting Bloomington with TH 62 as an alternate for and therefore is appropriate for county jurisdiction. Based on travel forecast estimates, 26 percent of the traffic on the roadway has neither origin nor destination in Edina, while 12 percent begins and ends in Edina. • CSAH 158, Vernon Avenue — This road, an "A" minor reliever arterial on the regional system, serves an intra-community function and therefore is appropriate for county jurisdiction. Based on travel forecast estimates, 45 percent of the traffic on the roadway has neither origin nor destination in Edina, while only seven percent begins and ends in Edina. Transfer of CSAH 20 (Blake Road/Interlachen Boulevard) and the portion of CSAH 31 north of TH 62 may be logical given roadway use and access. However, if the City of Edina were to accept any of these roadways for transfer, the City should ensure that the roads are brought up to appropriate design and maintenance standards prior to accepting transfer. PROTECT ACCESS The City of Edina, through its ordinances, has authority to approve developments contiguous to city streets. It is the City's responsibility to ensure that the needs of property owners for access to the transportation system are balanced with the overall public's needs for mobility. City of Edina Transportation Plan 41 March 1999 Potential Highway Jurisdictional Revisions , City of Edina Transportation Plan r i64( Figure 11 March 1999 POTENTIAL HIGHWAY JURISDICTION REVISIONS PER HENNEPIN COUNTY COUNTY > CITY (S) NOT ENDORSED BY CITY OF EDINA SRF No. 0983117 Source: City of Edina The City must work with Hennepin County for access modifications to roadways under county jurisdiction. Hennepin County has included access guidelines included in its Transportation System Plan, which are shown in Appendix C. Access control guidelines are used to preserve the public investment in the roadway system while making available to developers the teHns under which plan preparation can occur. They balance the public interest (mobility) with the interests of property owners (access). Arterials should be oriented toward mobility rather than access, while local streets provide high levels of access. Collectors should serve a balance between access and mobility. Appropriate access control preserves the capacity on arterial streets, reducing the need for traffic to divert to local streets. Access management improve safety by reducing the potential conflicting movements between vehicles on the roadway. In instances of site redevelopment, the City should enforce access control consistent with these guidelines. The City's existing ordinance on curb cut placement limits the placement and number of accesses to local and collector roadways under City jurisdiction. In general: • No driveway on a local street is to be within 50 feet of a street intersection • When properties adjoin two streets the access should be to the lower volume street • Driveways should not intersect with arterials ESTABLISH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS An overall strategy of improvement, tempered by fiscal constraints, begins with an analysis of key intersection capacity improvement projects, safety improvements and the protection of access by establishing strict standards and by designating necessary right- of-way. Identifying future needs for facility rights-of-way followed by timely "set-aside" programs will, in the long run, save the community much in the way of financial resources. Roadway improvements should also be geared toward providing for transit needs, particularly in the area of meeting turning radii, traffic signals and adequate roadway structure. It should be pointed out that non-motorized travel needs also must be carefully considered. SOURCES OF FUNDING Roadways under city jurisdiction are maintained, preserved, constructed and re- constructed by the City's Department of Public Works. Funding for these activities, including the administrative costs of operating the department, are obtained from a variety of sources including ad valorem taxes, special assessments, development fees and tax increment financing. A major concern of the City is the availability of sufficient funds for maintenance and construction activities. If funds are unavailable, needed projects may be delayed or terminated and maintenance of existing facilities may fall short of acceptable standards. The following discussion explains the existing sources of funding and potential new sources of revenue. City of Edina Transportation Plan 43 March 1999 Federal Surface Transportation Program Funds STP is a categorical funding program created under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and continued under the current federal funding process (TEA-21). The Metropolitan Council, through its Transportation Advisory Board, solicits projects (generally on an annual basis) through a competitive process using a set of evaluation criteria. Generally, "A" minor arterial projects and enhancement projects such as pedestrian/bikeways are funded through this program. Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) CMAQ is a categorical funding program created under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and continued under the current federal funding process (TEA-21). These funds are directed to projects that contribute to meeting national air quality Standards and generally include projects such as transit, non- motorized transportation and travel demand management. The Metropolitan Council, through its Transportation Advisory Board, solicits projects (generally on an annual basis) through a competitive process using a set of evaluation criteria. State Aid An extremely important source of revenue to the City is state-aid. A network of city streets called Municipal State-Aid Streets (M.S.A.S.) is eligible for funding assistance with revenue from the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund. This fund acts as a distribution or tax clearance fund, and tax income received into the fund is transferred to various transportation- related funds for expenditure. The fund receives revenue from two principal sources: 1) gasoline taxes, and 2) vehicle registration taxes. These two sources are permanently dedicated to this fund. Ninety-five percent of the net proceeds of the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund are distributed annually according to a constitutionally mandated formula: 62 percent to the Trunk Highway Fund, 29 percent to the County State-Aid Highway Fund, and 9 percent to the Municipal State-Aid Street Fund. Assessments Property that benefits from a roadway scheduled for improvement may be assessed for a portion of the cost of construction. The basis for the assessment is the increase in property values attributable to the project, which can be difficult to determine. For this reason, assessments represent a limited source of revenue. Nevertheless, this is an important source of revenue for the City. Livable Communities Grants The Metropolitan Council has funds available for projects designed to enhance the livability of communities. Transportation-related projects in this category involve City of Edina Transportation Plan 44 March 1999 pedestrian facilities, traffic calming and land use or other improvements oriented to transit. Communities must opt to participate in the Livable Communities Program. Ad Valorem Taxes If 20 percent of the cost of a city project can be assessed to the adjacent property owners, the remaining cost of the project can be added to the ad valorem or property taxes of the remaining property owners in the City. Ad valorem taxes for street improvements are excluded from the state mandated levy limits. Tax Increment Financing Establishing a tax increment financing (TIF) district is a method of funding infrastructure improvements that are needed immediately using the additional tax revenue to be generated in future years by a specific development. Municipal bonds are issued against this future revenue which is dedicated for a period of years to the repayment of the bonds or to other improvements within the TIE` project area. When used appropriately, a TIF can accelerate economic development in an area by insuring that the needed infrastructure is in place without requiring support from the usual funding. This method of financing has already been used successfully in the City of Edina and is expected to be used again in selected areas in the future. Potential Sources of Revenue Revenues available from current sources of funding are not always sufficient to meet highway maintenance and construction needs. In order to reduce the potential shortfall of revenue, other sources of funding need to be considered. Two options include impact fees and road access charges. Impact Fees — Impact fees are assessed to individual developers as property is improved. An attempt is made to determine what impact the additional traffic will have on roadways both near the development and away from it. The cost associated with improving the roadway system sufficiently to handle the additional traffic is assessed to the developer. This type of funding mechanism can be implemented under existing law. Road Access Charge — A road access charge would be assessed all new development based on the trip generation rate of the new development but without documenting specific impacts. Revenues from this funding source would be used to construct or improve arterial and collector streets in the jurisdiction collecting the tax. New legislation would be required for this type of funding mechanism to be implemented. Cities are in a position to assess these fees because of their zoning and development authority. Transportation Utility Billing — Under the concept of a municipal transportation utility, all properties would be subject to a periodic fee (i.e., monthly, quarterly), based upon the number of vehicle-trips generated by the type of property. This revenue would then be City of Edina Transportation Plan 45 March 1999 used for transportation improvements that produce community-wide benefits including the reconstruction of existing roads and preventive maintenance to reduce deterioration. Such a fund would be especially useful for the maintenance of collector streets which are under the city's jurisdiction, particularly when it is difficult to show enough direct benefit to adjacent property owners to be able to charge an assessment. The periodic nature of the utility billing would also provide a stable source of income to support a regular maintenance program for the entire street system. Such a utility would be administered by individual cities, with each city deciding on their own fee structure. At the present time, this sort of revenue source is not permitted by the state, but efforts are underway to persuade the State Legislature to pass legislation allowing the cities to obtain revenue in this way. City of Edina Transportation Plan 46 March 1999 APPENDICES City of Edina Transportation Plan March 1999 APPENDIX A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM City of Edina Transportation Plan March 1999 STATE-AID ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION COSTS LINE YEAR - STREETS TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION COST 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1 1999 77th Street: Parklawn to Hwy 100 Reconstruct $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 2 1999 78TH Street: Gleason Rd to Soo Line RR Reconstruct $ 650,000 S 650,000 3 1999 78th Street: Braemar Frontage Road New Construction $ 1,380,000 S 1.380,000 4 2000 Benton Avenue: Hansen Rd to Hwy 100 Mill and Overlay $ 34,000 $ 34,000 5 2000 Dewey Hill Road: Gleason to Cahill Mill and Overlay S 51,000 S 51.000 6 2000 Gleason Road: Dewey Hill Road to W. 78th Street Mill and Overlay S 41,000 $ 41,000 7 2000 Valley View Road: Hwy 100 to Wooddale Mill and Overlay $ 60,000 S 60,000 8 2000 Valley View Road: Wooddale to 65th Reconstruct $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 9 2001 Valley Lane: Tracy to 66th Mill and Overlay $ 43,000 S 43,000 10 2001 Vernon Ave: Lincoln Dr. to Gleason Road Mill and Overlay $ 78,000 $ 78,000 11 2001 West 50th Street: Hwy 100 to France Ave. Mill and Overlay $ 80,000 $ 80,000 12 2002 44th Avenue: Hwy 100 to France Reconstruct S 845,000 $ 845,000 13 2002 Brookside: Interlachen to RR tracks Mill and Overlay S 38,000 $ 38,000 14 2002 Wooddale Avenue: Valley View Road to Tower Ave Reconstruct $ 535,000 S 535,000 15 2003 Tracy Avenue: Vernon to TH62 Concrete Rehab $ 242,000 $ 242,001 16 2003 Valley View Road: Tracy to Gleason Mill and Overlay $ 72,000 $ 72,00( 17 2003 West 70th Street: Hwy 100 to France Concrete Rehab $ 283,000 $ 283,00( 18 2003 Wooddale Avenue: Tower Ave to 50th Mill and Overlay $ 54,000 $ 54,001 19 1999 Computer Avenue & 77th Signals $ 130,000 S 130,000 20 1999 Edinborough Way & 76th Signals $ 130,000 $ 130,000 21 2001 Gleason & West 78th Street Signals $ 130,000 S 130,000 22 1999 Parklawn & 77th Signals $ 130,000 $ 130,000 23 2000 Vernon & Gleason Signals $ 130,000 $ 130,000 24 1999 West 77th Street & TH 100 Signals / Rehab $ 804,000 $ 804,000 25 1999 TH62 & France Avenue Signals! Rehab $ 369,000 S 369,000 TOTAL STATE AID CONSTRUCTION COST $ 4,723,000 $ 1,316,000 $ 201,000 $ 1,418,000 $ 651,00C C1P1.xls Page 1 3:51 PM4/21/2004 APPENDIX B TRAVEL FORECASTING PROCESS City of Edina Transportation Plan March 1999 APPENDIX B TRAVEL FORECASTING PROCESS FORECASTING PROCESS Figure B-1 illustrates the analysis process used to identify deficiencies in the Transportation Plan given the level of development anticipated by 2020. The process generally involves using the Metropolitan Council's regional travel forecasting model with refined geographic zones and a greater level of detail in the roadway system within the regional model. Major steps in the process are described below: • Development and Roadway System: Population, household and employment estimates are developed for each transportation zone (TAZ) for the travel forecast model (see Table B-1). Highway network attributes such as location, speed and capacity are determined. The regional network was modified to include all of the arterials and many collector streets in Edina. Figure B-2 shows the refined TAZ system. Edina TAZs are consistent with Metropolitan Council boundaries. • Trip Generation: Estimates of person-trips by purpose are made using the demographic and highway system information. • Trip Distribution: The zone-to-zone movement of each trip purpose is determined based on travel time between zones, trip purpose and the amount of trip activity in a zone. • Mode Choice: The mode of travel (drive alone, carpool or transit) is determined for each trip. • Refinement to Edina Sub-Zones: The trip table was refined to split the regional TAZ- level trips to the refined zones based on socioeconomic data for the refined zones. • Temporal Distribution: The trips are split, by purpose, among six time periods (such as a.m. peak hour or p.m. peak hour). • Highway Assignment: Highway trips for each of the six periods is routed from zone- to-zone along the roadway system using an equilibrium assignment process. This process reflects congested conditions at appropriate times of the day for any given portion of the highway system. The assignments are summed for a daily traffic volume. • Calibration to Existing Counts: An estimate of 1997 trips was assigned to the existing network to calibrate to the existing traffic counts. B-1 • Identification of Future Conditions and Deficiencies: A future network including planned and programmed facilities was developed from the calibrated network and the 2020 trips were assigned. The resulting forecasts are shown in Figure 5. B-2 Existing Development and Roadway System Future Development ( and Roadway System I. Trip Generation Trip Distribution Mode Choice Refinement to Edina Sub-zones 4, Temporal Distribution Highway Assignment Analysis Calibration to Existing Traffic Counts 4 Identification of Future Conditions and Deficiencies Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. SRF No. 0983117 City of Edina Transportation Plan .1/ )1i Figure B-1 March 1999 I Travel Forecasting Process SRF No. 0983117 City of Edina Transportation Plan Figure B-2 March 1999 Traffic Analysis Zones TABLE B-1 DEMOGRAPHIC ASSUMPTIONS TAZ Population 1997 2020 Households 1997 2020 Employment 1997 2020 327 (1) 268 270 111 110 280 386 512 766 765 575 575 3,974 3,603 513 2,903 2,905 2,000 2,000 3,127 3,191 514 38 130 33 65 6,019 7,156 515 1,642 1,650 993 995 6,210 6,690 516 2,386 2,405 1,013 1,015 192 232 517 (1) 670 675 447 445 3,219 3,716 518 3,393 3,575 1,589 1,670 4,506 4,637 519 1,792 1,805 691 690 3,857 4,658 520 2,849 2,870 1,175 1,175 695 839 521 2,980 3,050 1,214 1,235 1,200 1,433 522 2,763 2,780 957 955 849 1,011 523 (1) 1,642 1,655 600 600 266 322 524 4,887 4,885 2,200 2,200 635 767 525 1,653 2,170 748 940 1,813 2,105 526 1,398 1,485 526 555 79 95 527 (1) 1,925 2,520 863 1,080 18 206 528 2,493 2,510 1,159 1,160 1,271 1,536 529 1,809 1,900 633 660 68 82 530 485 490 154 155 318 386 531 1,739 1,750 577 575 26 31 532 3,222 3,245 1,148 1,150 80 95 533 101 100 54 55 11,532 13,700 534 (1) 607 733 535 (1) - 948 1,145 536 3,216 3,320 1,370 1,405 141 170 537 (1) 87 85 34 35 311 376 542 6 5 2 578 700 544 (1) TOTALS 47,113 49,000 20,866 21,500 52,819 60,000 Notes: (1) Includes only portion of TAZ in Edina APPENDIX C SAMPLE ACCESS CONTROL GUIDELINES City of Edina Transportation Plan March 1999 General Comments: 1. This table is intended to guide access to new development and redeveloped sites. It should be considered along with county guidelines where appropriate. 2. Areas marked "Not Permitted" indicate that: a) direct access to private residential uses should be prohibited on major collectors and arterials, and b) when direct access is requested for higher intensity land uses ( individual commercial/multi-family residential, multiple commercial) and the intersecting streets are of different functional classifications, access should be granted from the street with the lower functional classification. 3. The "Minimum Driveway Distance From Intersecting Street" guidelines refer to full access driveways. Driveways may be located within these minimum distances but must be approved by the city engineer and should be limited to right turns into and out of the property. 4. Access will not be permitted onto streets within right turn lanes or taper areas. 5. The City of Edina reserves the right to review and adjust these guidelines on a case-by-case basis. Departure from the guidelines may be approved by the city engineer. Notes: (a) Maximum curb cut width is 24 feet unless specific site plan (Internal Design and Access Review) is approved by City Engineer. (b) Private Residential includes single-family, two-family, townhome, quadraminium, and manor home dwellings. (c) Apply specific design criteria. (d) Driveways onto arterials and major collectors should be prohibited if possible. If driveways cannot be prohibited, the number of driveways onto arterials and major collectors should be minimized. (e) If the nearest intersecting street is a signalized minor collector, driveways may be located less than 125 feet from the corner, but access should be limited to right turns into and out of the property. (f) If the nearest intersecting street is a signalized major collector, driveways may be located less than 220 feet from the corner, but access should be limited to right turns into and out of the property. (g) If the nearest intersecting street is a signalized minor arterial, driveways may be located less than 660 feet (low density) or 1,320 feet (high density) from the corner, but access should be limited to right turns into and out of the property. (h) Assumes a speed of 40 mph. (i) Assumes a speed of 45 mph. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. — 3/2/1999 City of Edina — Driveway Access Spacing Guidelines Page 2 Access Spacing Criteria on County Roadway Facilities Requesting Access to County Roadways Type of Access Minor Arterial Roadways Undivided Minor Arterial Roadways Divided Collector Streets Greeter Than 7,500 ADT • Less Than 7,500 ADT • Greater Than 7,500 ADT' Less Than 7.500 ADT • Mon-Public. Low Volume (<1.000 ADT) • Residual Driveways • tow inp Generating Cornmercal Full Movement Access O' ' •474 0 0 1/13 Mlle (08011) Partial Access (rights, lefts) 0 0 1/8 Mlle (880 II) 1/8 Mile (680 ft) 1/18 Mlle (330 ft) Local Public Streets • Local Raldentlai Sada • Local Muer Coacios Skala Full Movement Access 1/4 Nile (1,320 A) 1/4 Mile (1,32011) 114 Mile (1,320 ft) 1/4 Mile (1,320 ft) 1/8 Mile (880 ft) Partial Access (rights, lefts) file°11# ‘ Vlt;i's 1/8 Mile (860 It) 1/8 Me (66011) Ot°1111951. Non-Public -High Volume (. 1,000 ADT) • Shopping Calor enemas • Lugs apt Cactuses • Large Indultam Industrial Park Entrances Full Movement Access 1/4 Mlle (1,320 II) 1/4 Mile (1.320(t) 1/4 Mlle (1,32011) 1/4 Mlle (1,320 ft) 118 Mile (880 ft) Partial Access (rights, lefts) tie"P' ti144°S11° 1/8 Mlle (8606) 118 Mile (6806) Arterial and Malor Collector Roadways • Pnnclpal Arl.rial. (stAle highway.) ii Max Mends and Motor Collector Roads Full Movement Access 1/4 Mlle (1,3206) 1/4 Mlle (1,320 ft) 1/4 Mile (1,320 ft) 1/4 Mile (1,32011) 1/4 Mlle (1.320(I) Partial Access (rights, lefts) V:t;° 6014°19i1 Full Access Mowed Full Access Allowed trl Er: Urban Access Spacing ( 'defines (Urban Conditions as defined by Met Council Blueprint) 0 - Access via alternative facility required, - Further valiance considered under hardship conditions Notes: 1) Measurements for spacing are taken to nest access (driveway or street) on the same roadway side for divided minor arterials 2) Measurements for spacing are taken to next access on either side of road for undivided minor alienist! 3) ExIsUng medians will not be broken (even If the above guidelines would suggest full access Is allowed) 4) Other criteria are also reviewed such as sight distance, speeds, traffic volumes and other elemints (vehicle types, land use activity, etc ) Variances to the above table may bo granted whore sufficient justification is provided and the spacing minimums shown In Exhibit 7-7 are met. Source: Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (Review Draft, November 1998) Access Spacing Variances (Urban Conditions ) Access Spacing Criteria on County Roadway Facilities Requesting Access to County Roadways Type of Access Minor Arterial Roadways Undivided Minor Arterial Roadways Divided Collector Streets Greater Than 7,500 ADT • Less Than 7,500 ADT • Greater Than 7,500 ADT • Less Than 7,500 ADT • Non-Public - Low Volume (< 1,000 ADT) • Residental Driveways • Low Trip Generating Commercial Full Movement Access 1/16 Mile (330 ft) 1/16 Mile (330 ft) 1/16 Mlle (330 ft) Partial Access (rights, lefts) CO , 1/16 Mite (330 ft) 1/16 Mile (330 ft) 1/16 Mile (330 ft) Local Public Streets • Local Residential Streets • Local Minor Collector Streets Full Movement Access 1/8 Mile (660 ft) 1/8 Mile (660 ft) 1/8 Mile (660 ft) 1/8 Mlle (660 ft) 1/8 Mile (660 ft) Partial Access (rights, lefts) CO CO \ '1/4 1/16 Mile (330 ft) 1/16 Mile (330 ft) flefoi Non-Public - High Volume (> 1,000 ADT) • Shopping Center entrances • Large Apt. Complexes • Large Industries. Industrial Park Entrance Full Movement Access .. . .. . .. .i. Partial Access (rights, lefts) 0,. 1541. • 1'0‘ ;SO $ • Arterial and Major Collector Roadways • Principal Arterials (state highways) • Mmot Medals and Major Collector Ready, Full Movement Access • Ilk" Partial Access (rights, lefts) l‘ , s' 051 \ ;+•\ S' . ; .NAti,:.. ''..‘ -.,: 1.f 4 .. . ' ' . '.' .Lit'ff . . , *..r, ' . It i L4 * ; i - Access via alternative facility required - Further variance considered under hardship conditions Source: Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (Review Draft, November 1998) Table 5. Access Classification System and Spacing Guidelines FUNCTIONAL CLASS MEDIAN TREATMENT LAND USE TYPICAL POSTED SPEED SUGGESTED ROADWAY SPACING (MILES) FULL MEDIAN SPACING BETWEEN CONNECTIONS (2) MAXIMUM CONNECTION POINTS PER MILE (3) _ FR PA MA CO OPENING SPACING (MILES) (1) PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL (FREEWAY) FULL • RURAL 70 var (gr) var (gr) Val* (gr) Val* (gr) NP NP 1 URBAN 60 3-6 (gr) 3-6 (gr) 1-2 (gr) NP NP NP 2 URBAN CORE 55 2-3 (gr) 2-3 (gr) . 1-2 (gr) NP NP NP 4 PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL (OTHER) FULL RURAL 65 var var 4-12 2-6 I 1320 8 URBAN >45 3-6 (gr) 3-6 (gr) 1-2 1/2-1 1/2 1320 a URBAN CORE <45 2-3 (r) 2-3 (gr) 1/2- I I/4- 3/4 1/4 440 24 NONE RURAL 55 var var 8-24 4-12 1 860 12 — URBAN :45 3-6 (gr) 3-6 (gr) 1-2 1/2 • 2 1/2 860 12 URBAN CORE <45 2.3 (gr) var 1-2 1/2-2 1/4 440 24 MINOR ARTERIAL FULL RURAL 55 var var var 2-4 1/2 820 12 URBAN z40 3-6 (gr) 3-6 1-2 1/2-1 1/2 490 20 URBAN CORE <40 2-3 (0 2-3 1/2 1/4 1/4 275 32 NONE RURAL 55 var var var 2 -4 1/2 820 12 _URBAN z 40 3-6 (r) 3-6 1-2 1/2-1 1/2 490 20 URBAN CORE <40 2-3 (r) 2-3 1/2 1/4 1/4 350 24 COLLECTOR FULL URBAN 140 NP 3-6 1-2 1/2-I 1/4 435 16 URBAN CORE <40 NP 2-3 1/2 1/4- 3/4 1/8 275 32 ' NONE RURAL 55 var var var 2-4 1/2 585. 12 URBAN 140 NP 3-6 1-2 1/2-1 1/4 435 16 URBAN CORE <40 NP 2-3 1/2 1/4- 3/4 1/8 310 32 gr - designates grade separated intersections var - varies (dependent on density of development) NA - Not applicable (values would be redundant) NP- Not permitted (1) If route has no median control, the spacing refers to the minimum distance between traffic signals (2) Distances are based upon spacing between connections (major roads, local public streets, and private driveways). (3) Connections are counted by adding each public and private approach as they occur along the roadway (for example: a full intersection Is counted as two connections while a right-in right-out driveway is counted as one) Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation APPENDIX D METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FUNCTION CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA City of Edina Transportation Plan March 1999 APPENDIX D FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Part of the process of developing a thoroughfare plan is determining the function of the components of the system. Functional classification involves determining what role each roadway should perform. Functional classification ensures that non-transportation factors, such as land use and development, are taken into account in the planning and design of streets and highways. The Metropolitan Council has defined four classes of roadways: 1. Principal arterials • Interstate freeways • Other principal arterials 2. Minor arterials • "A" minor arterials • "B" minor arterials 3. Collector streets 4. Local streets Principal arterials include all interstate freeways and those other roadways which provide for the longest trips. The emphasis is on mobility rather than land access. In the developing area, spacing will vary from three to four miles. The Metropolitan Council defines the metropolitan highway system as made up of the principal arterials in the region. The minor arterial system serves medium to short trips and provides access to the principal arterials. They interconnect concentrations of commercial or industrial land uses and connect cities and towns of the region to each other and to similar places outside the region. The emphasis is still on mobility rather than land access. In fully developed areas, spacing ranges from 1/2 mile to one mile. In developing areas, one to two mile spacing is adequate. The Metropolitan Council has defined a subsystem of regional minor arterials designated "A" minor arterials. These are the more important minor arterials from a regional perspective. The region is committed to direct federal funding to the "A" minor arterials. Minor arterials that are not designated "A" minor arterials are considered "B" minor arterials and typically are locally controlled. D-1 Collector streets provide connection between neighborhoods and from neighborhoods to minor business concentrations. Mobility and land access are equally important. Collectors serve short trips and are spaced 1/2 to 1 mile apart in developing areas. Local streets are those that remain, serving the shortest trips and providing access to adjacent property. They are spaced as necessary. The Metropolitan Council's functional classification system designation has been adopted for use in the City's roadway system. PLANNING PRINCIPLES The assignment of roadways into categories by function is based upon the following sets of principles: Principal/Intermediate Arterials Principal and intermediate arterials are generally under the jurisdiction of state and regional agencies. The interstate system, which was developed at the national level, is fully complete in the vicinity of Edina. Improvements such as interchange and lane additions require the approval of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), and the Metropolitan Council. Minor Arterial Streets 1. Arterial streets are major determinants of land-use patterns. That is to say, the locations of arterials will influence, to a great extent, what the land-use patterns will look like. 2. The spacing of arterials should reflect the density of trip ends in the area. The spacing will vary from one-half mile between arterials to as much as two miles in very sparsely-populated areas. 3. Whenever possible, arterials should be laid out in a grid pattern. At the same time, however, the arterial pattern should be sensitive to prevailing environmental concerns and constraints to create parcels of land that are easily platted, and to create intersections where adjacent legs are at right angles to each other. 4. Arterials should provide continuity, because the primary function of an arterial is to provide for the through movement of traffic. 5. Each link in the arterial system should be designed to perform its specific function within the total transportation system. In other words, the design should match the anticipated load. 6. Arterials should respect the integrity and stability of neighborhoods. D-2 Hourly General Maximum Cross -Section Lane Capacity Two—Way ADT (1) Two-lane Urban 550/lane Three-lane Urban 600/lane Four-lane Undivided Arterial 650/lane Four-lane Divided Arterial 850/lane Six-lane Divided Arterial 850/lane Four-lane Expressway 1,100/lane Six-lane Expressway 1,100/lane Four-lane Unmetered Freeway 1,900/lane Six-lane Unmetered Freeway 1,900/lane Four-lane Metered Freeway 2,200/lane Six-lane Metered Freeway 2,200/lane 8,000 10,000 14,000 18,000 15,000 25,000 30,000 41,000 45,000 60,000 35,000 60,000 48,000 88,000 65,000 90,000 97,500 135,000 75,000 105,000 115,000 160,000 7. Arterials should be fully integrated with existing and planned mass transit systems. 8. Roadway widths are a function of traffic demand not classifications. A roadway is not built to four lanes because it is an arterial, but it is built to that width to accommodate the volume of traffic it is expected to carry (see Table D-1). The length of trips that are served is more a determining factor for roadway classification. Collector Streets The following are principles for laying out subdivision streets, including collectors. In . this case, the primary function of such streets will be to provide access. A secondary function may include through movement of intra-community travel. 1. Collectors must provide adequate access to abutting parcels. 2. Collectors should be designed to minimize through traffic. That is, the layout of collectors should not promote diversion of traffic from arterials. TABLE D-1 TYPICAL ROADWAY CAPACITIES (1) Capacity can vary greatly depending on access control, cross-street volumes, and peaking characteristics. These values reflect potential capacity and not desirable range of operation. 3. The intersections of collectors with arterials should not detract from the efficiency of those arterials. In order to prevent inefficiencies, it is recommended that the spacing between collectors be at least one-quarter mile and in multiples of one quarter mile. D-3 This will permit a minimum 30 mph operation on the arterial should signalization be required. 4. The design of collectors should reflect the function of providing access. 5. The design of collectors should discourage excessive speeds. 6. Collectors should peimit the efficient use of land for laying out plats. 7. Collectors should be laid out in order to be compatible with the topography and environmental constraints of the area. 8. The design of the collector system should be compatible with the municipal utility plans for the area. 9. Collector streets should not be used for on-site circulation purposes. 10. The intersections of major collectors with arterials will likely be signalized. Major collectors should not intersect minor arterials at less than one quarter mile spacing. Intersections of major collectors with principal or intermediate arterials should generally be no less than at one half mile intervals. 11. The intersection of two major collectors may be controlled by traffic signals or all way stops. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL GUIDELINES The Metropolitan Council has issued its own guidelines in the determination of functional classification. These are published in Appendix F of the Metropolitan Council Transportation Development Guide/Policy Plan and are reproduced in Figure D-1 through Figure D-6. D-4 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Criterion Principal Arterial Freeway Other Principal Arterial Urban Rural Urban Rural Place Connections Interconnect the metro centers and regional business concentrations, important transportation terminals and large institutional facilities within the MUSA (see Figure F-1). Connect the MUSA with urban areas and major cities in Minnesota and other states, Interconnect the metro centers and regional business concentrations with important transportation terminals and large institutional facilities within the MUSA. Connect the MUSA with major cities in Minnesota and other states. Spacing Fully developed area: 2-3 miles Developing area: 3-6 miles Maintain at least 40 mph average speed during peak-traffic periods, Permanent Rural and Agricultural Areas : 612 miles (radial only). Retain ability to meet urban speed objective if and when area urbanizes, Fully developed area: 2-3 miles Developing area: 3-6 miles Maintain at least 40 mph average speed during peak-traffic periods. Permanent Rural and Agricultural Areas: 6-12 miles (radial only) Retain ability to meet urban speed objective if and when area urbanizes. Management System Connections and Access Spacing* To other interstate freeways, other principal arterials and selected minor arterials. Connections between principal arterials should be of a design type which does not require vehicles to stop. Access at distances of 1-2 miles. To other interstate freeways, principal arterials, selected minor arterials and major collectors. Access at distances of 2-6 miles. To interstate freeways, other principal arterials, selected minor arterials and selected collectors. Connections - between principal arterials should be of a design type which does not require vehicles to stop. Intersections should be limited to one-half mile with 1-2 miles desired. To interstate freeways, other principal arterials, selected minor arterials and selected major collectors. Intersections should be limited to several miles. Trip-Making Service Trips greater than 8 miles with at least 5 continuous miles on principal arterials. Express transit trips. Emphasis is placed on mobility rather than land access. No direct land access should be allowed, Emphasis is placed on mobility rather than land access. No direct land access should be allowed, Trips greater than 8 miles with at least 5 continuous miles on principal arterials. Express transit trips. Greater emphasis is placed on mobility than on land access. Little or no direct land access within the urban area. Greater emphasis is placed on mobility than on land access. Little or no direct land access. Mobility vs. Land Access* ource: Metropolitan Councd Transportation Policy Plan, 1997: Table F-1 * The key objective is stated under "Management" heading in this table. ][FIGURil Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Characteristics Principal Arterial Freeway Other Principal Arterial Urban Rural Urban Rural System Mileage Suggested limits for interstate and other principal arterials at 5- I 0 percent of system. Suggested limits for interstate and other principal arterials at 2-4 percent of system. See 'Freeway." See "Freeway." Percent of Travel - VMT Suggested limits for interstate and other principal arterials at 40- 65 percent of system. Suggested limits for interstate and other principal arterials at 30- 55 percent of system. See "Freeway." See "Freeway." Intersections Grade separated. Grade separated. Grade separated desirable. At a minimum, high-capacity controlled at- grade intersections, Grade separated desirable. At a minimum, high capacity controlled at- grade intersections. Parking None. None. None. None. Large Trucks No restrictions. No restrictions. No restrictions. No restrictions. Management Tools Ramp metering, Preferential treatment for transit, Interchange spacing, Interchange spacing. Ramp metering, preferential treatment for transit, access control, median barriers, traffic signal progression, staging of reconstruction, intersection spacing. Interchange spacing, access control, intersections spacing. Vehicles Carried 25,000 - 200,000 5,000 - 50,000 5,000- 100,000 2,500 -25,000 Posted Speed Limit 45-55 mph 55-65 mph 40-50 mph Legal limit Right-of-Way 300 feet 300 feet 100-300 feet 100-300 feet Transit Accommodations Priority access and movement for transit in peak periods where needed, None Priority access and movement for transit in peak periods where possible and needed None Source: Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, 1997; Table F-1 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria FIGURE D-2 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Criterion Minor Arterial (' A" or "B") Urban Rural Place Connections Provide supplementary connections to metro centers and regional business concentrations within the MUSA. Provide interconnection of major traffic generators within the metro centers and regional business concentrations, Connect the MUSA with cities and towns in Minnesota outside the Twin Cities region. Interconnect rural growth centers inside the Twin Cities region and comparable places near the Twin Cities region. : Spacing Metro centers and regional business concentrations: 1/4 -3/4 inile Fully developed area: 1h miles Developing area: 1-2 miles Permanent Rural and Agricultural Areas: As needed, in conjunction with the major collectors, to provide adequate interconnection of places identified in "Place Connections" criterion. System Connections To most interstate freeways and other principal arterials, other minor arterials and collectors and some local streets, To most interstate freeways and other principal arterials, other minor arterials and collectors and some local streets. Trip-Making Service Medium to short trips (2-6 miles depending on development density) at moderate speeds. Longer trips accessing the principal arterial network. Local and limited-stop transit trips. Management Maintain the following minimum average speed during peak-traffic periods: Metro centers and regional business concentrations: 15 mph Fully developed area: 20 mph Developing area: 30 mph Retain ability to meet urban speed objective if and when area urbanizes. Mobility vs. Land Access* Emphasis on mobility rather than on land access. Direct land access within the MUSA restricted to concentrations of commercial/industrial land uses. Emphasis on mobility rather than on land access. Source: Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, 1997; Table F-1 * The key objective is stated under "Management" heading in this table. Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria 1[ FIGURE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Characteristics Minor Arterial ("A" or "B") Urban Rural System Mileage Suggested limits for principal arterials and minor arterials at 15-25 percent of system. Suggested limits for principal arterials and minor arterials at 6-12 percealbf system. Percent of Vehicle Miles Traveled Suggested limits for principal arterials and minor arterials at 65-80 percent of system. Suggested limits for principal arterials and minor arterials at 45-75 percent of system. Intersections Traffic signals and cross street stops. Cross street stops. Parking Restricted as necessary. Restricted as necessary. Large Trucks Restricted as necessary. Restricted as necessary. Management Tools Traffic signal progression and spacing, land access management/control, preferential treatment for transit. Land access management/control. Vehicles Carried 5,000-30,000 1,000-10,000 Posted Speed Limit 35-45 mph Legal limit Right-of-Way 60-150 feet 60-150 feet Transit Accommodations Preferential treatment where needed. None. Source: Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, 1997; Table F-1 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria I[ FIGUR4E1 Th FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Criterion Collector Local Urban Rural Urban Rural Place Connections Interconnect neighborhoods and minor business concentrations within the MUSA. Provide supplementary interconnection of major generators within the metro centers and regional business concentrations. Provide supplementary interconnection among rural growth centers inside the Twin Cities region and comparable places near the Twin Cities region. Interconnect blocks within residential neighborhoods and land parcels within commercial/ industrial developments. Spacing Metro centers and regional business concentrations: I/8-1/2 mile Fully developed area: 'A - 3A mile Developing area: 1/2-1 mile Permanent Rural and Agricultural Areas : As needed in conjunction with minor arterials, to provide adequate interconnection of places identified in "Place Connections" criterion. In addition, minor collectors should be designated at an average spacing of not less than 4 miles. As needed to access and uses. As needed to access land uses. System Connections and Access Spacing* Sometimes to interstate freeways and other principal arterials. To minor arterials, other collectors and local streets. To minor arterials, other collectors and local streets. To a few minor arterials. To collectors and other local streets, To a few minor arterials. To collectors and local roads. Trip-Making Service Short trips (1-4 miles depending on development density) at low to moderate speeds. Longer trips accessing the arterial network. Local transit trips. Equal emphasis on mobility and land access. Direct land access predominantly to development concentrations. Short trips (under 2 miles) at low speeds. Longer trips accessing the collector or collector and arterial network. Emphasis on land access, not on mobility. Direct land access predominantly to residential land uses, Emphasis on land access not on mobility. Direct land access predominantly to agricultural land uses. Mobility vs. Land Access* Source: Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, 1997; Table F-1 * The key objective is stated under "Management" heading in this table. Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria 1[ FIGURE FIGURE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CRITERIA FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION Criterion Collector Local Urban Rural Urban Rural System Mileage Suggested federal limitations: 5- 10 percent Suggested federal limitations: 20- 25 percent Suggested federal limitations: 65- 80 percent Suggested federal limitations: 63- 75 percent Percent of Travel-VMT Suggested federal limitations: 5- 10 percent Four-way stops and some traffic signals. Suggested federal limitations: 20- 35 percent Local street traffic should be required to stop. Suggested federal limitations: 10- 30 percent As required. Suggested federal limitations: 5- 20 percent As required. Intersections Parking Restricted as necessary. Unrestricted. Permitted as necessary. Permitted as necessary. Large Trucks Restricted as necessary. Number of lanes, traffic signal timing. land access management. 1,000-15,000 Restricted as necessary. Land access management. 250-2,500 Permitted as necessary. Intersection control, cul-de-sacs, diverters. I exc than 1.000 Permitted as necessary. As necessary. Less than L000 Management Tools Vehicles Carried Daily Posted Speed Limit 30-40 mph 60-100 feet 35-45 mph - 60-100 feet Maximum 30 mph 50-80 feet Maximum 30 mph 50-80 feet Right-of-Way Transit Accommodations buses. Cross-sections and geometries designed for use by regular-route None. Normally uses as bus routes only in non-residential areas. None. Source: Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, 1997; Table F-1 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Criteria FIGURE D-6 CITY OF EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY April 2005 -Edina Transportation Commission recommended the FINAL DRAFT on January 6, 2005 for City Council consideration. -Edina City Council action taken on April 5, 2005 — Approved. CITY OF EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY April 2005 Contributors: Mayor & City Council Mayor James Hovland Council Member Scot Housh Council Member Alice Hulbert Council Member Linda Masica Council Member Ann Swenson Transportation Commission Joni Kelly Bennett Dean Dovolis Warren Plante Fred Richards (Chair) Marie Thorpe Les Wanninger Jean White Steven L. Lillehaug, RE., P.T.O.E., Traffic Engineer/Assistant Engineer Wayne D. Houle, RE., Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Edina Engineering City of Edina Transportation Policy i April 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Sheet Table of Contents ii INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Purpose 1 Vision 1 II. POLICY FRAMEWORK 1 Introduction 1 City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy 6 III. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 6 Transportation Commission Policy Adoption 6 Action Plan 7 Sources of Funding 8 Plan Acceptance Requirements and Costs 8 IV. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS ("NTMP") 8 Introduction 8 Process and Schedule 9 NTMP Process 10 Criteria for Screening 13 Scoring for Ranking 14 Removal of Traffic Management Devices/Measures 15 Traffic Management Devices/Measures — City of Edina Approved Options 16 Benefited Area (Assessed Area) 17 APPENDICES Appendix A — Definitions Appendix B — Traffic Management Devices / Measures Appendix C — Application Request for Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan Appendix D — Acknowledgments and References Appendix E — Functional Classification Road Map City of Edina Transportation Policy ii April 2005 I. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Sustaining, improving and operating a sound street and transportation system are integral parts of the long-term vision of the City. Congestion on the regional roadway system and the failure of that system to accommodate the continued growth in traffic volumes has both created and exacerbated traffic volumes, speed and congestion on local streets. These conditions adversely affect the quality of life of the City's residents and the activities of the businesses located in the City. The Edina City Council in December 2003 established the Transportation Commission to address these issues and to work to improve the local transportation system, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Vision 20/20. PURPOSE The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) was established to advise the Council on matters relating to the operation of the local street system with respect to traffic volumes, congestion, and functional classification, but not maintenance activities, of the City; to review and comment on plans to enhance mass transit opportunities in the City; to evaluate methods for traffic calming and other speed and volume mitigation measures and to recommend their implementation where appropriate; and to review the findings of the Local Traffic Task Force (2002-2003) and offer recommendations for implementation of those findings. VISION Edina will maintain a transportation system that will accommodate the efficient movement of people and goods throughout the City while fostering safe and livable neighborhoods and business areas connected by aesthetically beautiful, pedestrian and bicycle friendly streets and pathways. II. POLICY FRAMEWORK INTRODUCTION The Edina Transportation Commission Policy ("Policy") was developed as a supplement to the City of Edina Transportation Plan (March 1999). The purpose of the Policy is to guide the ETC in the identification and evaluation of traffic and transportation issues in the community and prioritize projects and improvements to the transportation system. The Policy is created to encourage public input and decisions that will be based upon objective and subjective factors. City of Edina Transportation Policy 1 April 2005 CITY OF EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY The City of Edina Transportation Commission Policy implements the' purposes and objectives of the ETC as provided in Section 1225 of the City Code (Transportation Commission). Except with respect to maintenance issues, the Policy also incorporates the policies of the Transportation Plan as follows: Roadway Design 1. Design roadway facilities constructed in conjunction with new developments according to the intended function. 2. Upgrade existing roadways when warranted by demonstrated volume, safety or functional needs, taking into consideration environmental limitations. 3. Emphasize improvements to management, maintenance and utilization of the existing street and highway system. 4. Design residential street systems to discourage through traffic and to be compatible with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle and walking, including traffic calming measures on local streets and, in some cases, collector streets. 5. Use adequate transitions and buffers including, but not limited to, earth berms, walls, landscaping and distance to mitigate the undesirable impact of high volume roadways. 6. Promote use of sound mitigating features for residential development adjacent to high volume roadways, and make property owners and land developers responsible for noise attenuation at new developments near high volume roadways. Roadway Function and Access 1. Provide logical street networks to connect residential areas to the regional highway system and local activity centers. 2. Adequately control access points to the regional roadway system (including minor arterials) in terms of driveway openings and side street intersections. 3. Provide access to the local street system (including collector and local streets) in a manner that balances the need to safely and efficiently operate the street system with the need for access to land. 4. Encourage intra-area trips on minor arterials rather than the principal arterial system, and promote serving regional trips on the metropolitan highway system. 5. Separate, to the extent possible, conflicting uses on the public street system in order to minimize safety problems. Give special attention to pedestrian and bicycle routes. City of Edina Transportation Policy 2 April 2005 6. Provide access to redeveloping sites using current functional classification and standards rather than the existing access at the sites. Roadway Maintenance and Operation 1. Cooperate with other agencies having jurisdiction over streets and highways in Edina to assure good roadway conditions and operating efficiency. 2. Continue the implementation of the 1-494 frontage road system and Integrated Corridor Traffic Management system through ongoing coordination with Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, and the cities of Richfield and Bloomington. 3. Maintain roads by repairing weather-related and other damage. 4. Use economic and environmentally sound management techniques for snow and ice removal. 5. Replace substandard bridges and bridges that present safety or traffic problems. Transit/TDM 1. Participate in the 1-494 Commission to encourage all forms of travel demand management in order to reduce vehicle miles of travel, reduce petroleum consumption, and improve air quality. 2. Review all major new developments in light of the potential for ridesharing including bus accessibility, preferential parking for carpools/vanpools, and mixed-use development. 3. Support HOV bypasses and other preferential treatments for transit and high occupancy vehicles on streets and highways. 4. Include transit planning in the construction or upgrading of streets and highways. 5. Pursue development of a demonstration project to provide a circulator system within the Greater Southdale Area. Parking 1. Review new developments for adequacy of parking based upon need, the potential for joint use of parking facilities and opportunities to encourage ridesharing. 2. Continue to limit on-street parking in and near congested commercial areas. City of Edina Transportation Policy 3 April 2005 Pedestrian/Bicycle 1. Provide accessibility to pedestrians and bicycles at major activity centers, including necessary storage facilities. 2. Create pedestrian and bicycle interconnections among major generators, with continuity across major roadways and other barriers. 3. Provide sidewalks and safe crossing in high pedestrian danger areas, including high- traffic streets, commercial areas, areas with transit access, and in high-density residential locations. 4. Provide adequate signage along all bike paths including areas of conflict with pedestrians and automobile traffic. Goods Movement 1. Serve major truck users and intermodal facilities with good minor arterial access to the metropolitan highway system. Funding and Jurisdiction 1. Pursue and support regional or multi-community funding sources for improvements that provide regional or multi-community benefit. 2. Support research efforts into more efficient and cost-effective management, maintenance and replacement of street surfaces. 3. Support governmental jurisdiction over roadways that reflect the role of the roadway in the overall transportation system. 4. Develop and support legislation permitting a transportation utility. In addition to the policies contained in the Transportation Plan, the Edina Transportation Commission has adopted the following policies: Roadway Design 1. Design collector and arterial roadway corridors to be compatible with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle and pedestrian. 2. Encourage beautification of local corridors, where appropriate, with amenities such as boulevard trees, decorative street lighting, and monuments. City of Edina Transportation Policy 4 April 2005 Roadway Function and Access 3. Review and update regional and local functional street classification and coordinate with adjacent cities and Hennepin County. Establish subcategory classifications and criteria for local streets if warranted. Revise local roadway classifications when warranted. 4. Review and monitor citywide traffic volumes, congestion, existing traffic calming devices and measures, accident history, vehicle violation history, speed limits and enforcement. 5. Educate public on vehicle operations including public relations campaigns that focus on individual responsibilities to each other rather than individual rights. 6. Review and recommend traffic calming policies and consider traffic calming implementation where requested by residents. 7. Implement measures to reduce non-local, cut-through traffic in cooperation with County and State efforts by developing a local traffic calming policy to mitigate the effects of cut-through traffic. Identify the origin and destination of cut-through traffic. 8. When requested by the Planning Commission, review landuse that may impact traffic implementations. Continue to monitor adjacent community redevelopment and other activity that potentially impacts the City of Edina. Transit/TDM 9. Encourage the legislature to both increase and establish a dedicated source for funding for efficient mass transit. Review and recommend policies necessitating a Transportation Demand Management and/or a mass transit component with all types of development. Parking 10. Find a location for an additional Park and Ride facility to be established in close proximity to major mass transit routes. 11. Work with appropriate commissions such as Planning and Zoning to review City Code, Section 850.08 Parking and Circulation to identify parking based upon needs. 12. Evaluate present City parking facilities. Where appropriate, amend Section 850 to provide Transportation Demand Management and transit users some spaces in City- owned ramps. Pedestrian/Bicycle City of Edina Transportation Policy 5 April 2005 13. Review and recommend construction of pedestrian and bike paths throughout Edina cooperatively with the Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. 14. Promote safe walking, bicycling and driving. Promote vehicle driver respect for bicycles and pedestrians along with bicyclists and pedestrian observance of signs and use of designated paths for travel. 15. Support inclusion of pedestrian and bicycle access planning when upgrading roadways, bridges and redevelopment projects. Ill PLAN IMPLEMENTATION This section generally describes the steps necessary to implement the provisions of the Policy and discusses a general strategy for carrying out the Policy provisions. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY ADOPTION By adopting the Transportation Commission Policy, the City Council establishes the guidelines by which decisions regarding transportation facilities are made in Edina. It should be revised as necessary to respond to changing conditions and needs, both locally and regionally. The Policy should be circulated widely so the residents and the business community are aware of the opportunities and limitations that the Policy provides, thus enabling all interested parties to voice their concerns and issues with full knowledge of the process. ACTION PLAN Short Term (Immediate): • Review and approve Transportation Commission Policy: o Review and identify problems and causes of Edina traffic issues (determine what is fact versus perception). o Review volume and speed criteria. o Present Draft Policy to Council. o Open public comment period. o Recommend to Council for approval. • Review Local Traffic Task Force Findings and Recommendations as it reflects the adoptive policies and procedures. Rank the six Local Traffic Task Force identified traffic "issue areas" and review and recommend action for them as Neighborhood Traffic Management Projects to the City Council. • Review and approve a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP). City of Edina Transportation Policy 6 April 2005 • Publicize transportation issues to be studied by ETC. • Establish a means for public communication for transportation issues including, as appropriate: o City of Edina Website o About Town o Edina Community Channel 16 o Edina Sun Current Newspaper o Local Schools o E-mails to Neighborhood Associations o Utility Bill o City Hall's Electronic Billboard • Create a citizen's guide to transportation issues Long Term (Continually): • Review and recommend Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans. • Review and update local roadway functional classification. • Hold yearly public open house for transportation issues. • Review and update Transportation Commission Policy annually. • Review and make recommendations for collector and arterial roadway planned improvements. SOURCES OF FUNDING The following sources of funding are explained in more detail in the Transportation Plan. Existing Sources of Revenue: • Federal Surface Transportation Program Funds • Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) • State Aid • Special Assessments • Livable Communities Grants • Ad Valorem Taxes • Tax Increment Financing Potential Sources of Revenue: • Impact Fees • Road Access Charges • Transportation Utility City of Edina Transportation Policy 7 April 2005 PLAN ACCEPTANCE REQUIREMENTS AND COSTS Plan acceptance requirements include educating residents in the Benefited Area about the possibility that they may be asked to fund the installation and maintenance of NTMP Projects through additional taxes and/or special assessments. A typical project includes all costs accrued for the improvement including all costs to perform the preliminary studies and data collection, temporary test installations, final studies, final design and actual construction costs. All costs associated with a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan study and project will be assessed to the Benefited Area if the Council approves the project for final implementation. IV.NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS ("NTMP") INTRODUCTION Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) studies are intended to respond to requests to deal with speeding and excessive volumes of traffic on streets in residential neighborhoods and on multiple streets in one or more neighborhoods, yet are intended to be sensitive to areas where, due to the implementation of calming measures, there may be a potential for diversion of traffic onto other streets and/or into other neighborhoods. These plans are required to respond to traffic problems that are symptomatic of wider problems, such as congestion or lack of capacity on the arterial system. NTMP studies include local, collector and arterial street studies and neighborhood area studies. While solutions will be considered for collector and arterial streets, only a limited number of management devices or measures will be allowed on collectors and arterials due to State design standards and funding requirements (see Appendix B). Studies will be conducted by the City Engineering Department with the involvement of other City departments and upon the approval of the ETC and the City Council. Studies will be scheduled based on available resources. Priority for studies will be based upon factors that include, but are not limited to, the following: • Previous efforts, requests and studies in the area • Intensity and extent of the problems • Degree of conflict between traffic conditions and land uses • Availability of data • Regional improvement projects scheduled or planned • Feasibility of solutions City of Edina Transportation Policy 8 April 2005 PROCESS AND SCHEDULE This section generally details the process and schedule for Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans (See Table 1). Table 1. Nei hborhood Traffic Manaciement Plans Schedule Step Item Period (Typical) General Traffic Management Information Open House Late September Step 1 Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan Applications Due 2nd Monday in February Step 2 Initial Screening, Scoring and Ranking of Applications Before data collection March/April/May Step 3 • Petition-to-study prepared and circulated by City staff • Presentation to ETC for recommendation and to Council for approval to order plan development May/June Step 4 Plan Development • Review and comment by Fire, Police, Public Works and Engineering, Transit and School (transportation) agencies • Public Open House • Survey-to-test circulated and evaluated by City staff • Trial Project Plan prepared June Step 5a Presentation to ETC for recommendation June Step 5b • Council approval of trial projects • Schedule temporary installations, removals and after data collection (minimum period of 2 weeks after installation) July Step 5c • Temporary installations July/August Step 6 • After data collection (trial projects) • Review and comment by Fire, Police, Public Works, Transit, and School (transportation) agencies • Prepare evaluation summaries September Step 7a Mail Surveys October Step 7b • Summarize returned surveys • Open House November Step 8a Recommendations to ETC, Public comment December Step 8b Recommendations to Council, Improvement Hearing, Preliminary Assessment Hearing, Order Project January Step 9a Survey and Design February / March Step 9b Final approval of plans by Council, Set bid schedule April Step 9c Letting, Assessment Hearing May Step 9d Construction June / July Step 10 After data collection July / August Step 11 Follow-up Evaluation Within 3 to 5 yrs City of Edina Transportation Policy 9 April 2005 NTMP PROCESS: Step 1. Study Request (Application) A Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) study application can be filed by any individual, a business or by a neighborhood organization. Applications to consider a NTMP study must be in writing and are due by 4:30 p.m. on the second Monday in February of each year. (See Appendix C for an NTMP application form). Step 2. Preliminary Review and Priority Ranking In response to each NTMP study application filed, City staff gathers and reviews preliminary data including data related to volume, speed, accidents and other pertinent safety information. City staff also applies the criteria for screening and ranking to prioritize studies for trial and evaluation of a NTMP. The Engineering Department ranks the studies based on the methodology outlined under "Scoring for Ranking" as defined herein, and prioritizes the trial studies for ETC review. The number of trial studies depends on equipment and personnel availability. Some trial studies may be deferred if not feasible due to conflicting construction, development in the area, county or state restrictions or other concerns. Applications are subject to review by the Engineering Department for possible solutions other than a NTMP study. If preliminary review indicates an immediate hazard to the public exists, the City may choose to address the described matter separately from the NTMP process. The City also notifies the ETC of the status of all ranked studies and asks for comments. The City notifies all study requestors of the status of their request after the completion of the Step 2 process. A selected study is considered in the annual priority-ranking step for up to 3 years. If, after 3 years, a study has not received a high enough priority to proceed, it is no longer eligible for consideration. This time limitation ensures that the study request has not become obsolete because of changing traffic conditions and/or new residents in the area. The study requestor is notified when the 3-year limit expires. A new request may thereafter be made to re-enter the study in the NTMP process. Step 1 is then repeated to obtain current information. Step 3. Petition-to-Study • A petition-to-study shall be circulated within the defined study area (Benefited Area — see page 17 and Appendix A-1) for all studies selected to proceed to Step 3. The Transportation Commission establishes the Benefited Area, based on information obtained in the Preliminary Review stage of the process (Step 2). At a minimum, this area City of Edina Transportation Policy 10 April 2005 is generally defined as those households and businesses fronting on the affected segments of the Benefited Area. The petition-to-study defines the issue and surveys the Benefited Area to determine if the residents within the Benefited Area agree with the issue that has been requested to be addressed. City staff prepares the petition, describing the issue and the procedures to be followed if a study is undertaken. The City then circulates the petition-to-study. Each household is entitled to one signature. Property owners not living in the Benefited Area are not included in the petition-to-study process. In order to proceed further, a minimum of 51% of all petitions-to-study must be returned with 65% of those returned indicating agreement to study the identified issue. Qualifying petitions-to-study and the underlying NTMP applications are thereafter presented to the ETC and the City Council. The ETC must recommend and the City Council must order the plan development for the study to move to Step 4. Step 4. Plan Development Based on approval from the Council, the NTMP study is commenced. The NTMP is initially reviewed by the City's Fire, Police, Public Works, Planning and Engineering Departments, and by transportation agencies, including transit agencies, and the school district. The ETC then provides notice to the Impacted Area (as defined herein) and holds a public meeting for the Impacted Area and the general public to inform residents of the proposed project, to describe the NTMP process, and to gather additional information about the study issue and related concerns within the Impacted Area. Plan development consists of the following: (a) Assessment of study issues and concerns (b) Identification of project goals and objectives (c) Identification of evaluation criteria (d) Establishment of threshold criteria (on project-by-project basis) (e) Development of alternative plans/solutions Steps 4(a) and (b) are accomplished through public meetings, neighborhood association meetings, and ETC meetings. Steps (c) through (e) are determined by City staff and the ETC. Additionally, City staff prepares a survey-to-test describing the proposed project and calling for a temporary test installation. Staff then circulates by U.S. Mail the survey-to-test within the Impacted Area. Each household and business within the Impacted Area is entitled to file one survey response. The survey responses are evaluated by City staff. Possible criteria, solutions and their impacts are proposed based on the citizen responses and sound engineering principles and are evaluated by the ETC, City staff and other affected agencies. Based upon that evaluation, a trial installation plan is prepared. City of Edina Transportation Policy 11 April 2005 Step 5. Test Installation The proposed NTMP test installation plan is presented to the ETC and the City Council. If recommended by the ETC and approved by Council, the test will be installed for a trial period of between 3 and 12 months. If the City Traffic Engineer finds that an unforeseen hazard is created by the test installation, the test installation may be modified or removed. Step 6. Project Evaluation Following the test period, the City evaluates the performance of the test NTMP in terms of the previously defined study issues and objectives. The evaluation includes the subject street and other streets affected by the project, and is based on before-and-after speeds and volumes, impacts on emergency vehicles or commercial uses, and other evaluation criteria determined during Step 4. If, in the evaluation, measurable improvements are not met to the satisfaction of the ETC and City staff, the NTMP may be modified and additional testing conducted. The test results are thereafter reviewed with the ETC, Impacted Area, and relevant City staff, and the information is distributed during the survey stage. The City will not proceed to Step 7 if the test results show the NTMP may be unsafe or otherwise violates the Policy or other relevant City policies or regulations. Step 7. Survey To forward the project to the stage where permanent implementation is approved (Step 8), a survey from households, businesses and non-resident property owners within the Impacted Area is obtained through a mail survey administered by the City. The ETC then holds an open house for the Impacted Area to update residents about the proposed project. Step 8. City Council Action Based on the project evaluation and survey, City staff members prepare a feasibility report and recommendations for the ETC and City Council. The report outlines the process followed, includes the project findings, states the reasons for the recommendations and includes a preliminary assessment roll. The feasibility report and preliminary assessment roll will be presented for a recommendation by the ETC before final action by the City Council. If the feasibility report is adopted and the preliminary assessment roll is approved by the City Council, the project is ordered. If the feasibility report and preliminary assessment roll are not adopted by the Council, the plans and specifications will not be ordered and the project will be terminated. The project will thereafter be removed from the list and the Benefited Area is not allowed to reapply for a same or similar study for five years. City of Edina Transportation Policy 12 April 2005 Step 9. Design, Final Assessment Roll and Construction Final design and construction supervision are administered by the City and are generally completed within 12 months after final approval and assessment by the City Council. City staff prepares and recommends the final assessment roll as required under authority granted by Minnesota Statute Chapter 429 Step 10. Monitoring City staff shall monitor the NTMP and gather data, including volume, speed and accident information for use in its follow-up evaluation. Step 11. Follow-up Evaluation Within the 3 to 5 year period following construction of an NTMP project, the City shall conduct a follow-up evaluation to determine if the project's goals and objectives continue to be met. This evaluation may entail traffic studies of volumes, speeds and accidents, as well as public opinion surveys. The follow-up evaluation will be conducted by City staff and presented to the ETC. CRITERIA FOR SCREENING Each NTMP study application is initially reviewed and screened for general qualification for this process. The following prescribes the general criteria used by staff to determine the eligibility for a NTMP study: 1. Roadway Classifications • Eligible: All Edina streets under the Public Works Department jurisdiction. • Not Eligible: All roadways within Edina designated as County, State, or Federal Highways. 2. Minimum Distance of the traffic calming device from the following (all must apply for eligibility): • Traffic Signals (except neckdowns) 300 ft. • Stop Signs (except neckdowns) 300 ft. • Other Traffic Calming Devices or Measures 300 ft. • Driveway/Alleys 20 ft. • Horizontal or Vertical Curves affecting sight lines 200 ft. • Railroad Crossing 300 ft. • Dead End 400 ft. 3. Access: City of Edina Transportation Policy 13 April 2005 • No dead-end created without adequate turn around on public roadway right- of-way roadway. 4. Not-Critical Emergency Route: • To be reviewed and approved by the City Fire Chief. All four eligibility requirements must be met for scoring and consideration. SCORING FOR RANKING The following criteria defines the scoring for ranking that is used to prioritize a requested NTMP study application as described in Step 2 of the NTMP process: 1. Sidewalk adjacent to the benefited area (0 to100 points): • None + 100 • All of 1 side + 50 • All of 2 sides + 0 2. Public school yard, play lot, playground development adjacent to benefited area (0 to 200 points): • None + 0 • All of 1 side + 100 • All of 2 sides + 200 3. Residential development adjacent to benefited area (0 to 100 points): • None + 0 • All of 1 side + 50 • All of 2 sides + 100 4. Number of reported correctable crashes based on last 5 years of available data (0 to 200 points): • 20 per crash; maximum of 200 points 5. Average residential density adjacent to benefited area (0 to 50 points): • 50 points maximum • (0 dwelling units per adjacent 100 un. ft. = 0 points • 5+ dwelling units per adjacent 100 lin. ft. = 50 points) 6. Average Daily Traffic Volumes - ADT (0 to 200 points): City of Edina Transportation Policy 14 April 2005 • ADT divided by 10; maximum 200 points • For intersection, street segments or multiple streets, use higher volume street 7. Percent over speed limit - ADT (0 to 200 points): • Percent over speed limit times 2.5 (times 100); maximum 200 points (80% over limit) • For intersection, street segments or multiple streets, use street with higher speeds Scoring is based on the criteria pertaining to the Benefited Area. Correctable crashes are determined by the Engineering Department. REMOVAL OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICES/MEASURES The City of Edina's Traffic Calming program is intended to avoid the costly installation and later costly removal of traffic calming devices and measures. On occasion, however, it may be determined to be desirable to terminate the NTMP.. If the removal is City initiated due to safety/crash issues, the removal will be at City expense. If the removal is at the request of the Benefited Area, the removal will be charged to the property owners in the defined Benefited Area. The following procedure will be used for removals initiated by the Benefited Area: 1. Petition requesting removal is submitted to the City Traffic Engineer. 2. A survey, including estimated cost for removal and data collected previously for the NTMP, is mailed to each property owner in the Benefited Area. 3. Surveys are summarized 30 days after mailing. Staff makes recommendation to the ETC. 4. ETC forwards a recommendation to the Council. If the recommendation is for removal, improvement and assessment hearings are scheduled by the Council with notice to the Benefited Area. 5. Final approval of plans by Council. Set bid schedule. 6. Letting, final assessment and construction. 7. A new NTMP will not be considered for five years following the removal of a NTMP in the Benefited Area. City of Edina Transportation Policy 15 April 2005 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICES/MEASURES — CITY OF EDINA APPROVED OPTIONS This section lists traffic management devices and measures that are approved for use in the City of Edina. Appendix B contains a detailed description and overview of each item. Speed Reduction Traffic Calming Measures: • Speed Hump • Speed Table • Raised Crosswalk • Raised Intersection • Textured Pavements • Center Island Narrowings • Gateway Treatments • Neckdowns • Choker • Chicane • Realigned Intersections • Traffic Circle • Roundabout Volume Reduction Traffic Calming Measures: • Diagonal Road Closure • Partial Street Closure • Cul-de-sac • Median Barriers • Forced Turn Islands Education and Enforcement: 40- Targeted Police Enforcement • Radar Speed Display Units 4" Neighborhood Traffic Safety Campaigns Regulatory Measures: • Stop Sign • Turn Restrictions • One Way Streets • Traffic Signals ("Rest on Red" and "Rest on Green") • Pavement Striping (Centerline, Edge and Transverse) City of Edina Transportation Policy 16 April 2005 BENEFITED AREA (ASSESSED AREA) This section generally defines the Benefited Area of the traffic management devices and measures for use in determining the assessment area. The following prescribes the typical Benefited Area, but may be adjusted by the ETC on a project-by-project basis. Speed Hump, Speed Table, Raised Intersection, Raised Crosswalk, Textured Pavement, Center Island Narrowings, Neckdowns, Gateway Treatments, Choker, Chicane, Traffic Circle: • Benefited Area extends 300 feet from the device along the street affected by the device, or to the nearest stop sign or traffic signal, whichever is less. Diagonal Road Closure, Round-a-bout: • Benefited Area extends to the next intersection on each leg of the intersection. Partial Street Closure, Realigned Intersection, Forced Turn Island, Median Barrier: • Benefited Area extends to the next intersection on the leg of the intersection partially closed, realigned or restricted. Cul-De-Sac: • Benefited Area extends from the point of closure to the next intersection on the leg that is closed. City of Edina Transportation Policy 17 April 2005 APPENDICES APPENDIX A - DEFINITIONS APPENDIX B - TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICES / MEASURES APPENDIX C - APPLICATION REQUEST FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX D - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND REFERENCES APPENDIX E - FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROAD MAP City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 APPENDIX A - DEFINITIONS City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 Definitions Benefited Area — The properties expected to receive the majority of the positive impacts from the proposed traffic calming strategy and which are subject to assessment for the cost of installation or removal of a NTMP improvements. (Assessed Area) Center Island Narrowings — An island or barrier in the center of a street that serves to segregate traffic. (Midblock medians, median slowpoints, median chokers, central islands.) Chicane — Mainline deviations to deter the path of travel so that the street is not a straight line (by the installation of offset curb extensions). (Deviations, serpentines, reversing curves, twists.) Choker — Physical street narrowing to expand sidewalks and landscaped areas; possibly adding medians, on street parking, etc. (Pinch points, lane narrowing, midblock narrowings, midblock yield points, constrictions.) Circulator Service — A means provided within a major activity center, (such as a regional business concentration, a metro center or community) for movement from place to place within the center; such a system may be entirely pedestrian or may use transit. Collector Street — Roadways that are designated to "collect" traffic from neighborhood streets and get that traffic to arterial streets. Collector streets are described in the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan. Corridor Studies — Typically, highway corridor studies focus on a segment of a particular travel corridor or travel shed. Land use, access issues, capacity, level of service, geometries and safety concerns are studied; alternatives analyzed; and recommendations made. Corridor studies are usually prepared with the participation and cooperation of the affected communities and governmental agencies. Recommendations for improvements are often incorporated into the local comprehensive plans of the participating cities and continue to be used by implementing agencies as improvements in the corridor are made. Cul-de-sac — Physical street closure resulting in a dead end (no outlet) constructed with a circular turn-around area. Cut-through Traffic — Traffic that intrudes into a residential subdivision to avoid congestion or other problem from an arterial or other high level street. Diagonal Road Closures — A barrier placed diagonally across a four-legged intersection, interrupting traffic flow across the intersection. This type of barrier may be used to create a maze-like effect in a neighborhood. (Diagonal diverter.) City of Edina Transportation Policy A- I April 2005 Feasibility Report — A report analyzing the recommended type of construction, the estimated construction cost, estimated engineering cost and the estimated assessment. Forced Turn Islands — Small traffic islands installed at intersections to channel turning movements. (Forced turn barriers, diverters.) Functional Classification (of Roadways) — In accordance with the City of Edina Transportation Plan (March 1999), the City has adopted the Metropolitan Council's functional classification system designation and guidelines for use in the City's roadway system. Functional classification involves determining what role each roadway should perform and ensures that certain transportation and non-transportation factors are taken into account in the planning and design of roadways. A complete description of the functional classification system criteria is found in Appendix D of the Transportation Plan (March 1999). The following criteria lists typical vehicle volumes carried on roadways: Principal Arterials: 15,000 to 200,000 vehicles per day Minor Arterials: 5,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day Collector Streets: 1,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day Local Streets: Less than 1,000 vehicles per day Gateway Treatment — Treatment to a street that includes a sign, banner, landscaping or other structure that helps to communicate a sense of neighborhood identity. Guide Signs — A sign that shows route designations, destinations, directions, distances, services, points of interest, or other geographical, recreational, or cultural information. Impacted Area - Area for a project that is defined as those residences and businesses along local residential streets that are positively or negatively impacted by excessive through traffic volumes and speeding, or that may be positively or negatively impacted by proposed traffic calming. Infrastructure — Fixed facilities, such as roadways or railroad tracks; permanent structures. Level of Service (as related to highways) — The different operating conditions that occur on a lane or roadway when accommodating various traffic volumes. It is a qualitative measure of the effect of traffic flow factors, such as speed and travel time, interruption, freedom to maneuver, driver comfort and convenience, and indirectly, safety and operating costs. It is expressed as levels of service "A" through "F." Level "A" is a condition of free traffic flow where there is little or no restriction in speed or maneuverability caused by presence of other vehicles. Level "F" is forced-flow operation at low speed with many stoppages, the highway acting as a storage area. Local Street — A roadway that connects blocks within neighborhoods. City of Edina Transportation Policy A-2 April 2005 Local Traffic — Traffic that originates from or is destined to a location within a neighborhood or area. Major Street — The street normally carrying the higher volume of vehicular traffic (vs. Minor Street). Median Barriers — Raised island or barrier in the center of the street that serves to segregate traffic. Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) — The portion of the metropolitan area identified in the Regional Blueprint where development and redevelopment is to occur and in which urban facilities and services are to be provided. The purpose of the MUSA is to define the areas within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area that are eligible for "urban services", specifically sewers, municipal water systems and particular types of transportation systems. This boundary line is defined and maintained by the Metropolitan Council to assist in the orderly development of the metropolitan area. All of Edina is within the MUSA area. "A" Minor Arterials — Roadways within the metropolitan area that are more regionally significant than others. These roadways are classified into the following groups: a) Relievers — Minor arterials that provide direct relief for traffic on major metropolitan highways. These roads include the closest routes parallel to the principal arterials within the core, urban reserve and urban staging areas. These roadways are proposed to accommodate medium-length trips (less than eight miles) as well as to provide relief to congested principal arterials. Improvements focus on providing additional capacity for through traffic. b) Expanders — Routes that provide a way to make connections between developing areas outside the interstate ring or beltway. These routes are located circumferentially beyond the area reasonably served by the beltway. These roadways are proposed to serve medium to long suburb-to-suburb trips. Improvements focus on preserving or obtaining right-of-way. c) Connectors — This subgroup of "A" minor arterials are those roads that would provide good, safe connections among town centers in the urban reserve, urban staging and rural areas within and near the seven counties. Improvements focus on safety and load-carrying capacity. d) Augmenters — The fourth group of "A" minor arterials are those roads that augment principal arterials within the interstate ring or beltway. The principal arterial network in this area is in place. However, the network of principal arterials serving the area is not in all cases sufficient relative to the density of development that the network serves. In these situations, these key minor arterials serve many long-range trips. Improvements focus on providing additional capacity for through traffic. City of Edina Transportation Policy A-3 April 2005 Minor Street — The street normally carrying the lower volume of vehicular traffic (vs. Major Street). Municipal State Aid (MSA) Route — A designated City roadway that receives state funds as allocated from the State gas tax for maintenance and construction. Approximately 20 percent of the City roadways are designated as MSA routes. State of Minnesota rules and standards, in addition to local jurisdiction guidelines, apply to these roadways. Neckdowns — Physical curb reduction of road width at intersections. Similar to lane narrowing but used at intersection(s). Widening of street corners at intersections to discourage cut-through traffic, to improve pedestrian access and to help define neighborhoods. (Nubs, bulb-outs, knuckles, intersection narrowings, corner bulges, safe crosses.) Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) — Formalized process where residents, commissioners and City staff evaluate the various requirements, benefits and tradeoffs of traffic calming projects within neighborhoods. The overall objectives for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan are to improve neighborhood livability by mitigating the impact of vehicular traffic on residential neighborhoods; to promote safe and pleasant conditions for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and residents on neighborhood streets; to encourage citizen involvement and effort in neighborhood traffic management activities; to make efficient use of City resources by prioritizing traffic management requests; and to support the Comprehensive Plan policy that livability and safety of established residential neighborhoods be protected in transportation operations. Non-Local Traffic — Traffic that does not originate from or is not destined to a location within a neighborhood or area. Off-Peak Period — Time of day outside the peak period (see peak period). Partial Street Closure — Physical blockage of one direction of traffic on a two-way street. The open lane of traffic is signed "One way", and traffic from the blocked lane is not allowed to go around the barrier through the open lane. (Half closure.) Peak Hour — The hour during the peak period when travel demand is highest. Typically, peak hours are found to be from 7 to 8 a.m. and from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. Peak Period — Typically, the time between 6:30 and 9:00 a.m. and between 3:30 and 6 p.m. on a weekday, when traffic is usually heavy. Person Trip — A one-way journey between two points by one person in a vehicle. Photo-radar Speed Enforcement — An automated camera system used to enforce speed limits. It includes the camera, an attached radar "gun" and a display that shows the speed of each passing vehicle. When a speeding vehicle is detected, the photo radar system City of Edina Transportation Policy A-4 April 2005 takes a picture of the driver and the license plate. The registered owner of the vehicle then receives a ticket in the mail. This enforcement method is not legal in Minnesota. Photo-Red Light Enforcement — Implementation of a photo red light, an automated camera and computer system can be mounted on a traffic signal pole at an intersection for red light enforcement. Photo red light takes pictures of any vehicles that run a red light, records the time elapsed since the light turned red and the vehicle entered the intersection, and issues a ticket. The photo red light systems are typically installed at key intersections that have a high number of accidents. This enforcement method is not legal in Minnesota. Platoon — A group of vehicles or pedestrians traveling together as a group, either voluntarily or involuntarily because of traffic signal controls, geometrics, or other factors. Principal Arterials — The high capacity highways that make up the metropolitan highway system, including all interstate freeways. Radar Speed Display Units — Driver feedback signs that use radar to provide motorists with an instant message, displayed on a reader board, telling them how fast they are driving. Raised Crosswalk — A speed table designed as a pedestrian crossing, generally used at mid-block locations. (Raised crossings, sidewalk extensions.) Raised Intersection — A raised plateau where roads intersect. The plateau is generally 4" above the surrounding street. (Raised junctions, intersection humps, plateaus.) Realigned Intersections — Physical realignment of intersection typically used to promote better through movements for a major roadway (vs. a minor roadway). (Modified intersections.) Regional Blueprint — The Metropolitan Council plan that sets a general direction for future development patterns in the metropolitan area and establishes guidelines for making decisions about major regional facilities that are needed to support the commercial, industrial and residential development of the area. It establishes urban and rural areas and certain development policies for different geographic policy areas. Regulatory Signs — A sign that gives notice to road users of traffic laws or regulations. Right-of-Way (Assignment) — The permitting of vehicles and/or pedestrians to proceed in a lawful manner in preference to other vehicles or pedestrians by the display of sign or signal indications. Roadway striping — Highlighting various areas of the road to increase the driver's awareness of certain conditions (e.g., edge of road striping to create a narrowing/slowing effect while defining space for cyclists). City of Edina Transportation Policy A-5 April 2005 Roundabout — Raised circular areas (similar to medians) placed at intersections. Drivers travel in a counterclockwise direction around the circle. Modern roundabouts are "yield upon entry", meaning that cars in the circle have the right of way and cars entering the circle must wait to do so until the path is clear. When a roundabout is placed in an intersection, vehicles may not travel in a straight line. (Rotaries.) Signal Preemption — Usually referred to in this plan as a technology that triggers the green go-ahead on meters or signal lights to allow emergency vehicles (and sometimes transit vehicles) to move more quickly through signalized intersections. Speed— Speed is defined based on the following classifications: a) Advisory Speed — A recommended speed for all vehicles operating on a section of highway and based on the highway design, operating characteristics, and conditions. b) Design Speed — A selected speed used to determine the various geometric design features of a roadway. c) 85th-Percentile Speed — The speed at or below which 85 percent of the motorized vehicles travel. d) Posted Speed — The speed limit determined by law and shown on Speed Limit signs. e) Statutory Speed — A speed limit established by legislative action that typically is applicable for highways with specified design, functional, jurisdictional and/or location characteristic and is not necessarily shown on Speed Limit signs. Speed Hump —Wave-shaped paved humps in the street. The height of the speed hump determines how fast it may be navigated without causing discomfort to the driver or damage to the vehicle. Discomfort increases as speed over the hump increases. Typically speed humps are placed in a series rather than singularly. (Road humps, undulations.) Speed Limit — The maximum (or minimum) speed applicable to a section of highway or roadway as established by law. Speed Table — Trapezoidal shaped speed humps in the street, similar to speed humps. (Trapezoidal humps, speed platforms.) Speed Zone — A section of highway with a speed limit that is established by law but which may be different from a legislatively specified statutory speed limit. Street Closure — Street closed to motor vehicles using planters, bollards, or barriers, etc. City of Edina Transportation Policy A-6 April 2005 Targeted Police Enforcement — Specific monitoring of speeding and other violations by police due to observed, frequent law disobedience. Textured Pavements — A change in pavement texture (e.g., asphalt road to brick crossing) that helps to make drivers aware of a change in the driving environment. Traffic Calming — A combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non- motorized street users. Traffic calming involves changes in street alignment, installation of barriers, and other physical measures to reduce traffic speeds and cut-through volumes in the interest of street safety, livability and other public purposes. Traffic calming measures are intended to be self-enforcing. Traffic calming measures rely on the laws of physics rather than human psychology to slow down traffic. Traffic Circle — Circular, raised island placed within the middle of intersections, requiring vehicles to divert around them, potentially forcing drivers to slow down as they traverse around the circle. (Intersection islands, similar to roundabouts.) Traffic Signal Control Systems — The degree of traffic management of an arterial is grouped and defined as follows: a) Fixed Time — The traffic signals on an arterial are controlled locally through a time clock system. In general, the progression of a through band (the amount of green time available along an arterial at a given speed) along the arterial in the peak direction is determined by past experience and is not a function of immediate traffic demand. b) Semi-actuated — The traffic signals along the arterial are designed to maximize the green time on the major route in the major direction. Timing and through band are based upon historical records. Use of green time on the minor leg dependent upon real-time demand and maximized based upon total intersection delay. c) Interconnection — A traffic signal system in which data collected at individual signals is shared with a central processor or controller. Adjustments in traffic signal control can be made based upon incoming data as opposed to historical data. d) Optimization — The process in which a traffic signal or system is modified to maximize the amount of vehicles passing through the intersection for all approaches or on the major road in the peak direction. e) Real-time Adaptive Control — An advanced traffic control system that incorporates current technologies in communications, data analysis, and traffic City of Edina Transportation Policy A-7 April 2005 monitoring to provide real-time traffic control of arterials, corridors or roadway networks. Transportation Comprehensive Plan — Assists the City in making correct transportation-related decisions today by anticipating the character, magnitude and timing of future transportation demand. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) — Programs and methods to reduce effective demand. In the broadest sense, any activity or facility that reduces vehicle trips would fall within this classification. The highest priority in the region is given to reducing single-occupant vehicle trips in the peak periods. Techniques that might be utilized are carpooling, vanpooling, transit, alternative work hours, transportation management organizations, and land development or ordinances that discourage vehicle trips and encourage walk, bike, rideshare and transit trips. Transportation Policy Plan - This document is one chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide, as provided for in Minnesota Stat. 473, Sections 145 and 146. Section 145 states: "The Metropolitan Council shall prepare and adopt...a comprehensive development guide for the metropolitan area." Vehicle Trip — A one-way journey made by an auto, truck or bus to convey people or goods. Volume-to-capacity Ratio (v/c) — The hourly number of vehicles expected to use a roadway in the busiest hour, divided by the number of moving vehicles the roadway can safely accommodate in an hour. Warning Signs — A sign that gives notice to road users of a situation that might not be readily apparent. City of Edina Transportation Policy A-8 April 2005 APPENDIX B - TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICES/MEASURES City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 TRAFFIC MANAGMENT DEVICES/MEASURES (Not in priority order) PAGE NO. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICE/MEASURE SPEED REDUCTION TRAFFIC REDUCTION FUEL CONSUMPTION AIR/NOISE POLLUTION COST EMERGENCY SERVICES TEST VS. PERMANENT OTHER B-4 Speed Hump Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-5 Speed Table Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-6 Raised Crosswalk Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-7 Raised Intersection Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium to High Possible Increased Response Time Permanent Installation Only Possible Drainage Problem B-8 Textured Pavement Possible No Effect No Change Minimal Effect Low to Medium Minimal Impact Permanent Installation Only Increased Maintenance B-9 Center Island Narrowings Possible Possible No Effect No Effect Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible B-10 Neckdowns Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium to High Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible B-11 Gateway Treatment Possible Possible No Change Small Decrease Medium to High Minimal Impact Permanent Installation Only Increased Maintenance B-12 Choker Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible B-13 Chicane Probable Possible Slight Increase Slight Increase Medium to High Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-14 Realigned Intersection Varies Varies Small Decrease Small Decrease High Varies Permanent Installation Only City of EdinaTransportation Policy B-1 April 2005 TRAFFIC MANAGMENT DEVICES/MEASURES (Not in priority order) PAGE NO. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICE/MEASURE SPEED REDUCTION TRAFFIC REDUCTION FUEL CONSUMPTION AIR/NOISE POLLUTION COST EMERGENCY SERVICES TEST VS. PERMANENT OTHER B-15 Traffic Circle Possible Possible Slight Increase Small Increase Medium Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-16 Roundabout Probable Possible No Effect Slight Increase Medium to High Possible Increased Response Time Permanent Installation Only Increased Maintenance B-17 Diagonal Road Closures Probable Probable Small Increase Small Increase Low to Medium Varies Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-18 Partial Street Closure Possible Probable Small Increase Small Increase Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-19 Cul-de-sac Probable Yes Small Increase Small Increase High Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-20 Median Barriers Small Possiblity Possible No Effect No Effect Varies Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible B-21 Forced Turn Islands Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low to Medium Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not used on Collector and Arterial Streets B-22 Targeted Police Enforcement Depends on Amount Possible No Effect No Effect High No Effect Temporary B-23 Radar Speed Units Probable No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent B-24 Neighborhood Traffic Safety Campaigns Possible No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent B-25 Stop Sign Varies (may increase) Varies Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Temporary or Permanent City of EdinaTransportation Policy B-2 April 2005 TRAFFIC MANAGMENT DEVICES/MEASURES (Not in priority order) PAGE NO. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICE/MEASURE SPEED REDUCTION TRAFFIC REDUCTION FUEL CONSUMPTION AIR/NOISE POLLUTION COST EMERGENCY SERVICES TEST VS. PERMANENT OTHER B-26 Turn Restrictions Varies Yes Small Increase No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent B-27 One-Way Streets No Possible Small Decrease Small Decrease Low Varies Temporary or Permanent B-28 Traffic Signal (Rest on Red" and "Rest on Green") Possible Varies Varies Varies High No Effect Temporary or Permanent B-29 Pavement Striping Possible No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Permanent Installation Only City of EdinaTransportation Policy B-3 April 2005 Description: • Rounded raised areas of pavement typically 12 to 14 feet in length. • Often placed in a series (typically spaced 300 to 600 feet apart). • Sometimes called road humps or undulations. Applications: • Residential, local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Midblock placement, not at an intersection. • Not on grades greater than 5 percent. • Work well with neckdowns. Design/Installation Issues: • Typically 12 to 14 feet in length; other lengths (10, 22, and 30 feet). • Speed hump shapes include parabolic, circular, and sinusoidal. • Hump heights range between 3 and 4 inches with trend toward 3 - 3 1/2 inches maximum. • Difficult to construct precisely; may need to specify a construction tolerance (e.g. ± 1/8 inch) on height. • Often have signage (advance warning sign before first hump in series and warning sign or object marker at hump). • Typically have pavement markings (zigzag, shark's tooth, chevron, zebra). • Taper edge near curb to allow gap for drainage. • Some have speed advisories. • Bicyclists prefer that it not cover or cross a bike lane. Advantages: • Effective speed control/reduction at the installation. • May reduce traffic volumes. • Does not impact parking. • Works well with curb extensions. Disadvantages: • May increase noise (breaking and acceleration). • May impact drainage. • Not appropriate for grades greater than 5 percent. • May shift traffic to parallel streets. • Tend to reduce air quality and increase energy consumption. • May increase speeds between humps. • May cause bus passengers discomfort. • Not appropriate on some horizontal/vertical curves. • Requires signage that may be considered unsightly. Speed Hump Definition: Speed humps are wave-shaped paved humps in the street. The height of the speed hump determines how fast it may be navigated without causing discomfort to the driver or damage to the vehicle. Discomfort increases as speed over the hump increases. Typically speed humps are placed in a series rather than singularly. (Road humps, undulations.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial Streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-4 April 2005 Advantages: • Effective speed control/reduction at the installation. • Designed to be aesthetically pleasing. • May reduce traffic volumes. • Typically does not impact parking. • Typically preferred by fire department over speed hump. Disadvantages: • May increase noise (breaking and acceleration). • May impact drainage. • Not appropriate for grades greater than 5 percent. • May shift traffic to parallel streets. • May increase speeds between tables. • May cause bus passengers discomfort. • Not appropriate on some curves. Description: • Long raised speed humps with a flat section in the middle and ramps on the ends; sometimes constructed with brick or other textured materials on the flat section. Applications: • Residential, local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Typically long enough for the entire wheelbase of a passenger car to rest on top. • Midblock placement or at an intersection. • Not on grades greater than 5 percent. • Work well with neckdowns. Design/Installation Issues: • Typically 22 feet in the direction of travel with 6 foot ramps on each end and a 10 foot flat section in the middle; other lengths (32 and 48 feet). • Most common height is between 3 and 4 inches (as high as 6 inches). • Ramps are typically 6 feet long (up to 10 feet long) and are either parabolic or linear. Speed Table Definition: Trapezoidal shaped speed humps in the street, similar to regular speed humps. (Trapezoidal humps, speed platforms.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial Streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-5 April 2005 Advantages: • Effective speed control/reduction at the installation. • Effective pedestrian amenity. • May be designed to be aesthetically pleasing. • May reduce traffic volumes. • Increases pedestrian visibility and likelihood that driver yields to pedestrian. Disadvantages: • May increase noise (breaking and acceleration). • May impact drainage. • Not appropriate for grades greater than 5 percent. • May shift traffic to parallel streets. • May cause bus passengers discomfort. • Not appropriate on some curves. Description: • Speed Table with flat area to accommodate pedestrian traffic. Applications: • Local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Midblock placement or at an intersection. • Not on grades greater than 5 percent. • Works well in combination with curb extensions and curb radius reductions. Design/Installation Issues: • Typically 22 feet in the direction of travel with 6 foot ramps on each end and a 10 foot flat section in the middle; other lengths (32 and 48 feet) reported in U.S. practice. • Most common height is between 3 and 4 inches (as high as 6 inches). • Ramps are typically 6 feet long (up to 10 feet long) and are either parabolic or linear. Raised Crosswalk Definition: A speed table designed as a pedestrian crossing, generally used at mid-block locations. (Raised crossings, sidewalk extensions.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Permanent Installation Only Not Used on Collector and Arterial Streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-6 April 2005 Description: • Flat raised areas covering entire intersections, with ramps on all approaches and often with brick or other textured materials on the flat section and ramps. Applications: • Local streets. • Allowed on collector and arterial streets at all-way stop controlled intersection only. • Works well with curb extensions and textured crosswalks. • Often part of an area wide traffic calming scheme involving both intersecting streets. Design/Installation Issues: • Storm drainage modifications may be necessary. • Typically rise to sidewalk level. • May require bollards to define edge of roadway • Installations typically have gentle 1:40 slopes on ramps. • Not typically used in densely developed urban areas where loss of parking would be unacceptable. Advantages: • Reduction in through movement speeds at intersection. • No effect on access. • Makes entire intersections more pedestrian-friendly. • Designed to be aesthetically pleasing. Disadvantages: • May slow emergency vehicles to approximately 15 miles per hour. • May impact drainage. Raised Intersection Definition: A raised plateau where roads intersect. The plateau is generally 4 inches above the surrounding street. (Raised junctions, intersection humps, plateaus.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium to High Possible Increased Response Time Permanent Installation Only Possible Drainage Problem City of Edina Transportation Policy B-7 April 2005 Textured Pavement Definition: A change in pavement texture (e.g., asphalt road to brick crossing) that helps to make drivers aware of a change in the driving environment. Description: • An area within in the roadway set off from the typical pavement (e.g. bituminous and concrete) by using cobble stones, stamped concrete, etc. Applications: • Used as community enhancement and/or as a gateway treatment. • Works well with raised crosswalk and intersection applications. Design/Installation Issues: • In some cases, not preferred by bicyclists due to rough surface. Advantages: • Designed to be aesthetically pleasing. • May be used to define pedestrian crossing. • May reduce speeds. Disadvantages: • Increased Maintenance. • May increase noise. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible No Effect No Change Minimal Effect Low to Medium Minimal Impact Permanent Installation Only City of Edina Transportation Policy B-8 April 2005 Description: • Raised islands located along the centerline of a street that narrow the travel lanes at that location. Applications: • Are often nicely landscaped to provide visual amenity and neighborhood identity. • Can help pedestrianize streets by providing a mid- point refuge for pedestrians crossings. • Sometimes used on wide streets to narrow travel lanes. • Works well when combined with crosswalks. Design/Installation Issues: • Bicyclists prefer not to have the travel way narrowed into path of motor vehicles. • Islands need to be wide enough to allow signs to mark them. • Driving lanes in each direction should be 12 feet plus gutter width. • Driveways, alleys, and snowplow operations should be considered. • Should not be used where on-street parking needs are extensive. I=3 Advantages: • Reduces pedestrian crossing width. • Provides a refuge for pedestrians and cyclists. • Provides barrier between lanes of traffic. • May produce a limited reduction in vehicle speeds. • May visually enhance the street through landscaping. • May prevent passing of turning vehicles. • Preferred by fire department/emergency response agencies to most other traffic calming measures. • May reduce traffic volumes. • Self-enforcing. Disadvantages: • May reduce parking and driveway access. • May reduce separation for bicycles and pedestrians. • May limit visibility of pedestrian crossings. • May reduce driver sightlines if over- landscaped. • Increased maintenance. Center Island Narrowings Definition: An island or barrier in the center of a street that serves to segregate traffic. (Midblock medians, median slowpoints, median chokers, central islands.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible No Effect No Effect Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible Increased Maintenance City of Edina Transportation Policy B-9 April 2005 Description: • Realignment of curb, reducing street width at intersections. Applications: • Residential, local streets. • Should not be used in locations where turn lanes or through lanes would be lost. • County typically does not allow neckdowns directly adjacent to county roads. • Can be used in multiple applications or on a single segment of roadway. Design/Installation Issues: • Must result in a minimum intersection opening and radii to accommodate turning movements. • Drainage issues may be significant. • Vertical delineators or object markers are often used to make visible to snowplow operators. Advantages: • May be aesthetically pleasing if landscaped. • Reduces pedestrian crossing distance. • May reduce speeds and traffic volumes. • Self-enforcing. • May improve sight lines. Disadvantages: • Unfriendly to cyclists unless designed to accommodate them. • Landscaping may cause sight line problems. • Increased maintenance if landscaped. • May impact drainage. • May impact bicycle accommodations. • May impact parking. • May require signage that may be considered unsightly. Neckdowns Definition: Physical curb reduction of road width at intersections. Similar to lane narrowing but used at intersection(s). Widening of street corners at intersections to discourage cut-through traffic, to improve pedestrian access and to help define neighborhoods. (Nubs, bulb-outs, knuckles, intersection narrowings, corner bulges, safe crosses.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium to High Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible City of Edina Transportation Policy B-10 April 2005 Advantages: • Positive indication of a change in environment from arterial/collector roadways to residential street. • May reduce entry speed. • Helps give neighborhood a sense of identity. • Allows neighborhood creativity and participation in design. Disadvantages: • Increased maintenance. • Determination and agreement of maintenance responsibility. Gateway Treatment Definition: Treatment to a street that includes a sign, banner, landscaping or other structure that helps to communicate a sense of neighborhood identity. Description: • Monument or landscaping used to denote an entrance into a neighborhood. Applications: • Used at entrances to residential neighborhoods typically adjacent to collector or arterial roadways. Design/Installation Issues: • Determination and agreement for responsibility of maintenance. • Drainage issues may be significant. • Must maintain proper intersection sight lines. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible No Change Small Decrease Medium to High Minimal Impact Permanent Installation Only Increased Maintenance City of Edina Transportation Policy B-11 April 2005 Description: • Curb extensions at midblock that narrow a street by widening the boulevard or sidewalk area. Applications: • Works well with pedestrian crossings. • Works well with speed humps, speed tables, raised intersections, textured pavement, and raised median islands. • Some applications use an island, which allows drainage and bicyclists to continue between the choker and the original curb line. Design/Installation Issues: • Bicyclists prefer not to have the travelway narrowed into the path of motor vehicles. • Typically designed to narrow road to 22 feet for two- way traffic with 1:10 tapers at the ends. • Adequate drainage is a key consideration. • Provides opportunity for landscaping. • Vertical delineators, bollards or object markers are often used to make visible to snowplow operators. • Effective when used in a series. • Avoid narrowings of two way traffic to single lanes. • Avoid use in locations where at the crest of a hill and on some curves. • Parking must be restricted at the choker. 10:9 ln gzia Advantages: • Reduces pedestrian crossing width and increases visibility of pedestrian. • May reduce speed and traffic volume • Self-enforcing. • Preferred by many fire department/ emergency response agencies to most other traffic calming measures. Disadvantages: • May impact parking and driveway access. • Unfriendly to bicyclists unless designed to accommodate them. • May impact drainage. Choker Definition: Physical street narrowing to expand sidewalks and landscaped areas; possibly adding medians, on street parking, etc. (Pinch points, lane narrowing, midblock narrowings, midblock yield points, constrictions.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible Small Increase Small Increase Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible May Impact Drainage City of Edina Transportation Policy B-12 April 2005 Description: • A series of narrowings or curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other forming S-shaped curves. Applications: • Residential, local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Appropriate for nnidblock locations only. • Most effective with equivalent volumes on both approaches. • Typically, is a series of at least three curb extensions. • Can use on-street parking to create chicane. • Very effective method of changing the initial impression of the street. If designed correctly, drivers will not be able to see through. Appears as a road closure yet allows through movement. Design/Installation Issues: • Unless well designed, chicanes may still permit speeding by drivers cutting straight paths across the center line. • Recommend shifts in alignment of at least one lane width, deflection angles of at least 45 degrees, and center islands to prevent drivers from taking a straight "racing line" through the feature. Advantages: • Provides opportunity for landscaping. • Pedestrians have reduced crossing distance. • Imposes minimal inconveniences to local traffic. • Accepted by public as speed control device. • May reduce speed and traffic volumes. • Self-enforcing. • Emergency response typically prefer two- lane chicanes to speed humps. Disadvantages: • Can impact parking and driveway access. • Street sweeping may need to be done manually. • May impact drainage. • Typically, not appropriate for intersections. • Not appropriate on some curves. • May cause problems during winter. • Increased maintenance. • May create head-on conflicts on narrow streets. Chicane Definition: Mainline deviations to deter the path of travel so that the street is not a straight line (by the installation of offset curb extensions). (Deviations, serpentines, reversing curves, twists.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible Slight Increase Slight Increase Medium to High Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-13 April 2005 Description: • Revised street geometrics of an existing intersection that typically improves and decreases the traffic delay for the main through movement (vs. the less important road). Applications: • Typically used to correct and provide a non-stop condition for the legs of an existing intersection with the larger traffic volume. • Used to help define driver's right-of-way. Design/Installation Issues: • Drainage may be an issue. • May require mitigation signage due to substandard curvature of roadway. Advantages: • Provides a more fluent through movement for the major roadway. • Improves driver expectation by providing a more typical intersection. • May better define driver's right-of-way. • May reduce traffic volume. Disadvantages: • May impact parking and driveway access. • May impact drainage. • May be perceived as an inconvenience by some neighbors. • May require additional right-of-way acquisition. Realigned Intersection Definition: Physical realignment of intersection typically used to promote better through movements for a major roadway (vs. a minor roadway). (Modified intersections.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Varies Varies Small Decrease Small Decrease High Varies Permanent Installation Only City of Edina Transportation Policy B-14 April 2005 Description: • Raised islands, placed in intersections, around which traffic circulates (this is not a roundabout). • Motorists yield to motorists already in the intersection. • Require drivers to slow to a speed that allows them to comfortably maneuver around them. Applications: • Intersections of local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • One lane each direction entering intersection. Design/Installation Issues: • Typically circular in shape, though not always. • Often controlled by YIELD signs on all approaches, but many different signage approaches are used. • Key design features are the offset distance (distance between projection of street curb and center island), lane width for circling the circle, the circle diameter, height of mountable outer ring for large vehicles such as school buses and trash trucks, and potential for pedestrian path-vehicle path conflicts. • Usually landscaped in center islands. Quality of landscaping and its maintenance are key issues. • Landscaping needs to be designed to allow adequate sight distance. • Not typically used at intersections with high volume of large trucks and buses turning left. Advantages: • No effect on access. • May reduce speed and traffic volumes. • Effective in reducing intersection collisions. • Self-enforcing. Disadvantages: • Can result in bicycle/auto conflicts at intersections because of narrowed travel lane. • May require parking restrictions at intersection. • Left turns may be confusing. • Care must be taken to avoid routing vehicles through unmarked crosswalks on side-street approach. • Increased maintenance. I L Traffic Circle Definition: Circular, raised island placed within the middle of intersections, requiring vehicles to divert around them, potentially forcing drivers to slow down as they traverse around the circle. (Intersection islands, similar to roundabouts.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible Slight Increase Small Increase Medium Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-15 April 2005 Advantages: • Reduces speed at intersection approach • Longer speed reduction influence zone. • May reduce traffic volumes. • Effective in reducing intersection collisions. • Self-enforcing. • Provides space for landscaping. • Provides a good environment for bicycles. • Provides equal access to intersections for all drivers. • Cheaper to maintain than a traffic signal. Disadvantages: • Requires a larger amount of right-of-way than a typical intersection. • May require additional lighting and signing. • Initial safety issues as drivers adjust. • Increased maintenance responsibilities. One-way operation at 15- 20 mph Yield at Entry Circular Roadway Splitter Island Truck Apron WW1 nn •• Roundabout Definition: Raised circular areas (similar to medians) placed at intersections. Drivers travel in a counterclockwise direction around the circle. Modern roundabouts are "yield upon entry", meaning that cars in the circle have the right of way and cars entering the circle must wait to do so until the path is clear. When a roundabout is placed in an intersection, vehicles may not travel in a straight line. (Rotaries.) Description: • Circular intersections with specific design and traffic control features including yield control of all entering traffic, channelized approaches, and appropriate geometric curvature to ensure travel speeds within the roundabout are less than 30 mph. Applications: • Intersections of local, collector and arterial streets. • Used to improve the operation of an intersection. • Sometimes used as community enhancement as a gateway treatment. • Used in high crash areas where the crash type is inclined to be corrected by the use of a roundabout. Design/Installation Issues: • Adequate speed reduction. • Design vehicle consideration. • Pedestrian crossings located at least one vehicle length upstream from crossing and only across legs. • Circulating vehicles have the right-of-way. • All vehicles circulate in a counter-clockwise direction and pass to the right of the central island. • Incorporate splitter islands to separate traffic, to deflect entering traffic, and to provide opportunity for pedestrians to cross in two stages. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Possible No Effect Slight Increase Medium to High Possible Increased Response Time Permanent Installation Only Increased Maintenance City of Edina Transportation Policy B-16 April 2005 Description: • Barriers placed diagonally across an intersection, blocking the through movement. Applications: • Used only on local roadways. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Closures are typically applied only after other measures have failed or have been determined to be inappropriate. • Often used in sets to make travel through neighborhoods more circuitous - typically staggered internally in a neighborhood, which leaves through movement possible but less attractive than alternative (external) routes. • Closures have been used as a crime prevention tool. Design/Installation Issues: • Provisions are available to make diverters passable for pedestrians and bicyclists. • There may be legal issues associated with closing a public street. • Barriers may consist of landscaped islands, walls, gates, side-by-side bollards, or any other obstruction that leave an opening smaller than the width of a passenger car. • Diverter width and curvature is dependent upon the intersection roadway widths. Advantages: • Typically reduces traffic volumes. • Reduces speeds at the closure area. • Bicycles /pedestrians may not be restricted. Disadvantages: • May divert significant traffic volumes to parallel local streets. • No significant effect on vehicle speeds beyond the closed block. • Increased emergency response in most cases. • Interrupts street network connectivity. • May impact drainage. • May impact parking. • Tends to increase travel distance. • May increase maintenance. Diagonal Road Closure Definition: A barrier placed diagonally across a four-legged intersection, interrupting traffic flow across the intersection. This type of barrier may be used to create a maze-like effect in a neighborhood. (Diagonal diverter.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Probable Small Increase Small Increase Low to Medium Varies Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-17 April 2005 UZI; Advantages: • Typically reduces traffic volumes (mostly in one direction and possibly in the other). • Reduces speeds at the closure area. • Allows two-way traffic in the remainder of the street. • Shorter pedestrian crossing distance. Disadvantages: • May divert significant traffic volumes to parallel local streets. • No significant effect on vehicle speeds beyond the closed block. • Interrupts street network connectivity. • Enforcement issues (compliance may not be 100%) • Increased maintenance if landscaped. • Emergency vehicles may be minimally affected (they have to drive around partial closure with care). • Reduces access to residents. Description: • Barriers that block travel in one direction for a short distance on otherwise two-way streets (when two half-closures are placed across from one another at an intersection, the result is a semi-diverter). Applications: • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Closures are typically applied only after other measures have failed or been determined to be inappropriate. • Often used in sets to make travel through neighborhoods more circuitous - typically staggered internally in a neighborhood, which leaves through movement possible but less attractive than alternative (external) routes. • Closures have been used as a crime prevention tool. • Intended to reduce the through traffic in one direction without the negative access issues of one-way streets. Design/Installation Issues: • Partial closure must extend to centerline of the affected street. • A minimum opening of 14 feet must be maintained. • Provisions are available to make diverters passable for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Barriers may consist of landscaped islands. Partial Street Closure Definition: Physical blockage of one direction of traffic on a two-way street. The open lane of traffic is signed One way", and traffic from the blocked lane is not allowed to go around the barrier through the open lane. (Half closure.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Probable Small Increase Small Increase Medium Minimal Impact Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-18 April 2005 Description: • A street with no outlet that eliminates cut-through traffic. Applications: • Used only on local streets. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Cannot be used on truck routes, bus routes, snow emergency routes, through streets, or any other major roadway. Design/Installation Issues: • Must be a minimum of 120 feet of right-of-way (diameter) to accommodate the minimum turn-around radius of 40 feet. • Obtain approval of police, fire and emergency medical services. Advantages: • Eliminates through traffic. • Reduces speed of the remaining vehicles. • Improves safety for all the street users. • Pedestrian and bike access maintained. Disadvantages: • Reduces emergency vehicle access. • Reduces access to properties for residents. • May be perceived as an inconvenience by some neighbors and an unwarranted restriction by the general public. • May increase trip lengths. • May increase volumes on other streets. • May require additional right-of-way acquisition. Cul-de-sac Definition: Physical street closure resulting in a dead end (no outlet) constructed with a circular turn-around area. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable Yes Small Increase Small Increase High Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-19 April 2005 Description: • Raised islands in the centerline of a street that continues through an intersection that blocks the left turn movement from all intersection approaches and the through movement at the cross street. Applications: • Median closures are typically applied only after other measures have failed or been determined to be inappropriate. • Intended to reduce the through traffic in one direction without the negative access issues of one-way streets. Design/Installation Issues: • A minimum opening of 14 feet must be maintained. • Provisions are available to make diverters passable for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Barriers may consist of landscaped islands. Advantages: • Typically reduces traffic volumes (mostly in one direction and possibly in the other). • Reduces speeds at the median area. • Allows two-way traffic in the remainder of the street. • Shorter pedestrian crossing distance. Disadvantages: • May divert significant traffic volumes to parallel local streets. • No significant effect on vehicle speeds beyond the closed block. • Interrupts street network connectivity. • Enforcement issues (compliance may not be 100%) • Increased maintenance if landscaped. • Emergency vehicles may be minimally affected. • Reduces access to residents. Median Barriers Definition: Raised island or barrier in the center of the street that serves to segregate traffic. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Small Possibility Possible No Effect No Effect Varies Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible City of Edina Transportation Policy B-20 April 2005 Advantages: • Typically reduces traffic volumes. • May reduce speeds at island area. Disadvantages: • May divert significant traffic volumes to parallel streets. • Emergency vehicles may be minimally affected (they have to drive around island with care). • May interrupt street network connectivity. • May increase travel distance. Description: • Raised island barriers placed at intersections, typically blocking the through movement. Applications: • Used only on local roadways. • Not allowed on collector and arterial streets. • Physical barrier used to divert traffic to help prevent the temptation of drivers from making an illegal turning or through movement. • Intended to reduce traffic volume or to prevent a turning movement due to safety constraints. • Used for access management. Design/Installation Issues: • Island width and curvature is dependent upon the intersection roadway widths. • Must design corner radii to accommodate vehicle turning movements (e.g. Trucks and buses). Forced Turn Islands Definition: Small traffic islands installed at intersections to channel turning movements. (Forced turn barriers, diverters.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Possible Small Increase Small Increase Low to Medium Possible Increased Response Time Test Installation Possible Not Used on Collector and Arterial streets City of Edina Transportation Policy B-21 April 2005 Advantages: • Good temporary public relations tool. • Serves to inform puOblic that traffic law violations are undesirable behavior for which there are consequences. • Easy to implement. • Can result in area-wide positive impacts. Disadvantages: • Effect is not permanent. • Enforcement is an expensive tool. Description: • Use of local police to enforce traffic laws appropriate to traffic problems identified in a neighborhood. Applications: • Should only be used when specific problems are outlined or documented. • Can be used in conjunction with speed wagon applications. Design/Installation Issues: • No design needed in a physical sense. • Due to staff time constraints, every effort should be made to clearly identify the problem (e.g. speeding, driving in the parking lane, running stop signs, etc.) • The problem should be narrowed down to the occurrence day, time, specific location, or vehicle type. • Follow-ups indicating the impact of enforcement are needed to determine the effectiveness. Targeted Police Enforcement Definition: Specific monitoring of speeding and other violations by police due to observed, frequent law disobedience. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Depends on Amount Possible No Effect No Effect High No Effect Temporary City of Edina Transportation Policy B-22 April 2005 Description: • Tool to help raise driver awareness. • Displays speeds of passing vehicles on a reader board • Used in areas with frequent speeding • Stationary Radar Signs direct a motorist's attention to the posted speed limit and displays the speed of the driver's vehicle on a large message board. • Purpose is to remind drivers that they are speeding to help encourage compliance. Applications: • The Police Department may use it as a "speed checkpoint" and have an officer present to issue citations to violators. • Portable Radar Sign on a dolly enables residents to borrow and place on their street • Stationary Radar Signs are used in locations that do not qualify for other physical measures, such as speed humps. Design/Installation Issues: • Needs power to function. Stationary Radar Signs Radar Dolly Advantages: • Heightens driver awareness of the speed limit and the speed they are traveling. Disadvantages: • May provide only short-term effectiveness. • Vandalism may be an issue. Radar Speed Trailer Radar Speed Display Units Definition: Driver feedback signs that use radar to provide motorists with an instant message, displayed on a reader board, telling them how fast they are driving. (Permanent Radar Signs.) Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Probable No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent City of Edina Transportation Policy B-23 April 2005 Neighborhood Traffic Safety Campaigns Definition: Educational campaign used to appeal for compliance with traffic laws. Advantages: • Low cost. • May reduce speeds. • Residents may feel better after the experience despite lack of noticeable results. Disadvantages: • Effects may be short term. RESPECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD 111 DRIVE RESPONSIBLY DRIVE 25 mph Description: • Neighborhood traffic safety campaigns that typically consist of personalized letters or general flyers that are distributed to all residents of a neighborhood that cite statistics on speeding within the neighborhood and appeal for compliance with traffic laws. Applications: • Used in local residential neighborhoods. Design/Installation Issues: • Target all residents of an entire neighborhood (not certain individuals). Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent City of Edina Transportation Policy B-24 April 2005 Advantages: • Relatively inexpensive installation cost. • Effectively defines driver's right-of-way. • Reduces speed at the intersection. Disadvantages: • When not warranted and used improperly, they typically cause negative traffic safety impacts (non-compliance with the signs and increased accidents). • May result in increased mid-block speeding. • Full compliance with stop control is rare. Stop Sign Definition: A regulatory sign that gives notice to road users that traffic is required to stop. Used to assign right-of-way at an intersection. Recommended for installation only when specific warrants are met in accordance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). Stop signs are generally not installed to divert traffic or reduce speeding. Description: • An octagonal sign with a white legend and border on red background used to require traffic to stop. Applications: • Used at an intersection of a less important road with main road where application of the normal right-of- way rule would not be expected to provide a reasonably safe operation. • Used at a street entering a through highway or street. • Used at an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area. • Used when abnormal conditions exist such as very high speeds, restricted view or crash records indicate a need for stop control. Design/Installation Issues: • Stop signs should not be used for speed control. • Stop signs should be installed in manner that minimizes the numbers of vehicles having to stop. • In most cases, the street carrying the lowest volume should be stopped. A stop sign should not be installed on the major street unless justified by a traffic engineering study. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Varies (may increase) Varies Small Increase Small Increase Low Possible Increased Response Time Temporary or Permanent Must meet MMUTCD warrants City of Edina Transportation Policy B-25 April 2005 Turn Restrictions Definition: The use of regulatory signs to restrict turning movements entirely or partially (e.g. restrictions for certain time periods during peak traffic periods). Description: • Prohibition of turns typically regulated by signs placed where they will most be easily seen by road users who might be intending to turn. Applications: • Used to restrict right, left and U- turns at intersections to work in conjunction with medians, signal systems, etc. • Used during certain time periods (peak traffic hours) to help maintain safety of certain driving situations. Design/Installation Issues: • Most effective when applied to peak traffic hours. • Consideration should be given to install physical barriers (active devices) to aid in the enforcement of the regulatory sign (passive device). Advantages: • Low installation cost. • May increase safety. Disadvantages: • High violation rates without constant enforcement or physical barriers. • May inconvenience residents. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Varies Yes Small Increase No Effect Low No Effect Temporary or Permanent City of Edina Transportation Policy B-26 April 2005 Description: • One-way signs used to indicate streets upon which vehicular traffic is allowed to travel in one direction only. Applications: • Used to restrict through traffic in isolated applications or in combinations that create maze-like routes through a neighborhood. • Used to increase street capacity and traffic flow. Design/Installation Issues: • Combine one-way streets in ways that force turns every block or two to avoid speeding or cut-through problems. O NE WAY Ess* Advantages: • May increase roadway capacity. • May reduce traffic volumes. Disadvantages: • May inconvenience residents. • May increase speeds. • Enforcement issues. • May increase volumes on other streets. One-Way Streets Definition: Streets that are designated for use by traffic in one direction only. Typically controlled by the use of "One- Way" regulatory signs. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other No Possible Small Decrease Small Decrease Low Varies Temporary or Permanent City of Edina Transportation Policy B-27 April 2005 Description: • "Rest on Red" is an application of a signal system where all approaches to an intersection face red lights. If advance loops detect an approaching vehicle moving at or below the desired speed and no • other vehicle is being served at the cross street, the signal turns green. If speeding is detected, the green phase is not triggered until the vehicle comes to rest at the stop line. • "Rest on Green" is an application of a signal system where approaches along a main street will have a green light. If the traffic on the main street is moving at or below the desired speed and no one is waiting on the side street, the light will remain green on the main street. The signal will switch to red if speeding is detected. Applications: • An application of a signal system used to control speed. Design/Installation Issues: • Should not be used on roadways with high levels of traffic due to operational concerns. • May be used at non-peak times at some intersections. Advantages: • Punishes or rewards based on compliance with speed limits. • Somewhat self-enforcing. Disadvantages: • May affect intersection operation if used at intersections with high levels of traffic. Traffic Signal ("Rest on Red" and "Rest on Green") Definition: Semi-actuated traffic signals that are programmed to rest on green or red for the different legs of the intersection. Typically, signals are dependent upon traffic demand and maximized based upon total intersection delay with the rest on red given to the leg with the lower approach volume. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible Varies Varies Varies High No Effect Temporary or Permanent Other Agency Approval City of Edina Transportation Policy B-28 April 2005 Pavement Striping Definition: Paint or thermoplastic street markings commonly placed for delineation that provides guidance and information to the road user. Description: • Centerline, edgeline and transverse markings on the street used to provide guidance and information to the driver. Applications: • Used to supplement other traffic control devices. • Used to effectively convey regulations, guidance or warning. • Centerlines and edgeline use may have the effect of visually narrowing the roadway. • Used to create bicycle lanes. • Patterns of transverse markings placed across travel paths used to help slow traffic at intersections and at horizontal curve locations. Design/Installation Issues: • The materials used for markings should provide the specified color throughout their useful life. • Consideration should be given to selecting materials that will minimize tripping or loss of traction for pedestrians and bicyclists. Advantages: • Provide important information while allowing minimal diversion of driver attention from the roadway. • Perception of narrowing the roadway may modestly reduce speeds. Disadvantages: • Visibility of markings can be limited by snow, debris and water. • Marking durability is limited. Evaluation Considerations Speed Reduction Traffic Reduction Fuel Consumption Air/Noise Pollution Cost Emergency Services Test vs. Permanent Other Possible No Effect No Effect No Effect Low No Effect Permanent Installation Only City of Edina Transportation Policy B-29 April 2005 APPENDIX C - APPLICATION REQUEST FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 Engineering Department 4801 West 50m Street Edina, Minnesota 55424-1394 (952) 826-0371 www.cityofedina.com CITY OF EDINA • Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan Application Form Contact Name: Address: 1Day/Message Phone: Today's Date: 1E-mail Address: Please indicate traffic issues that concern residents in your neighborhood: CI Speeding IA Traffic Volumes 0 Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety El Accidents E Other: Suggested Traffic Calming Measures (See Appendix B of the Transportation Commission Policy, please rank, No. 1 is most favored): Proposed Location from: to (street name) (street name) on (street name) We, the undersigned, as residents, hereby request the evaluation of the traffic management device listed above. We understand we may be assessed for the cost for the device. Please list all addresses in the potentially benefited area. One signature per household or business. Date Name (please print) Address Signature Page of Please return the completed application form to the Engineering Department at the address noted above. 1. The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you of your rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This application when submitted will become public information. There is no consequence for refusing to supply this information. Edina NTMP Application Form- April 2005 APPENDIX D - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND REFERENCES City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 Acknowledgments and References Mayor and City Council: Mayor James Hovland Council Member Scot Housh Council Member Alice Hulbert Council Member Linda Masica Council Member Ann Swenson Edina Transportation Commission: Joni Kelly Bennett Dean Dovolis Warren Plante Fred Richards (Chair) Marie Thorpe Les Wanninger Jean White Technical and Advisory: City of Edina Engineering Department City of Edina Public Works Department City of Edina Planning Department City of Edina Police Department City of Edina Fire Department City of Edina Local Traffic Task Force Cities' Websites: • City of Albuquerque Neighborhood Traffic Management Program http://www.cabq.gov/streets/policies.html • City of Boulder Planning and Public Works http://wwvv3.ci.boulder.co.us/pwplan/ • City of Las Vegas Traffic Engineering Division http://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/public_works/ • City of Bellevue Transportation Department http://vvwvv.ci.bellevue.wa.us/page.asp?view=1056 • City of Bloomington Traffic Calming Policy and Procedure Manual http://www.ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhalVcommiss/ttac/calming/calming.htm • City of Colorado Springs Traffic Engineering Management http://vvww.springsgov.com/Page.asp?NavID=1397 • City of Austin Transportation Division http://vvww.ci.austin.tx.us/roadworks/default.htm • City of Vancouver Engineering Services http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/engsvcs/ City of Edina Transportation Policy D-1 April 2005 • City of Gresham's Neighborhood Traffic Control Program http://www.ite.org/traffic/documents/Gresham.pdf • City of Portland Office of Transportation http://www.trans.ci.portland.or.us/Trafficcalming/how/how.htm • City of Berkley Office of Transportation http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/transportation/ • Seattle Department of Transportation http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/ntcpreports.htm • City of Savage Traffic Safety Committee http://www.ci.savage.mn.us/traffic_safety.html • City of Tempe Traffic Management Program http://www.tempe.gov/traffic/trafmgnt.htm • City of Asheville Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy http://www.ci.asheville.nc.us/engineer/Trafficpolicy.pdf • City of Honolulu Transportation Services http://www.co.honolulu.hi.us/dts/index.htm • City of Rochester, New York Neighborhood Traffic Calming Programs http://www.ci.rochester.ny.us/streetcalm/index.htm Websites: • Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Traffic Calming http://www.ite.org/traffic/index.html • US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration - Traffic Calming http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/tcalm/ • www.Traffic Calming.org http://www.trafficcalming.org/ • LessTraffic.com http://www.lesstraffic.com/Programs/SR/SR.htm • US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration - Roundabouts http://wwvv.tfhrc.gov/safety/00068.pdf • Victoria Transportation Policy Institute http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/ • Minnesota Safety Council — Crosswalk Safety http://www.mnsafetycouncil.org/crosswalk/ • Bucknell University — Traffic Calming Measures http://www.students.bucknell.edu/projects/trafficcalming/Measures.html • Minnesota Department of Transportation — Pedestrian Plan http://vvww.dot.state.mn.us/modes/pedplan.html • 3 E's of Traffic Calming http://www.3etrafficcalmingcorn/ • US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration — Safety Research http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/safety.htm City of Edina Transportation Policy D-2 April 2005 Publications and Manuals: I) Ewing, Reid H. Traffic Calming State of the Practice. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers 1999. 2) City of Edina Transportation Plan. Edina, Minnesota, 1999. 3) City of Edina Local Traffic Task Force Findings and Recommendations. Edina, Minnesota. 2003. 4) Collier County Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. Collier County, Florida. 5) Reardon, Linda. Traffic Calming — Creatively Mitigating Traffic Speeds and Volumes. CE News. November 2001. 6) Traffic Calming, City of Minneapolis Department of Public Works Transportation Division. Minneapolis, Minnesota. 1997 7) Canadian Guide to Neighborhood Traffic Calming Transportation Association of Canada — Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers. December 1998 8) Saffel, Amy J. Effective Traffic Calming Applications and Implementations. Minnesota Local Road Research Board. St. Paul, Minnesota, October 1998 9) Monahan, Bill. Getting People to Police Themselves. APWA Reporter. July 2004 10) Transportation Policy Plan. Metropolitan Council, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, Minnesota. December 1996 City of Edina Transportation Policy D-3 April 2005 APPENDIX E -FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROAD MAP City of Edina Transportation Policy April 2005 Appendix E 1110 ,:1 In 11- VI. iNgt • ma.11014 w "'110711110 mg I blviti‘41ffr All' ill iliPAN. a MEN iP IOW 11111111111110 NI lp um MEE -1 i -1111111 i p 1g I mmill wit/ellipaup,1011 • 4 1 k*idirliti 614 1 1 IIIIIII g Functional Classification •n •••n Principal Arterial "A" Minor Arterial-Reliever "A" Minor Arterial-Augmenter •n • "B" Minor Arterial Collector E-1 Engineering Dept March, 2005 Jack Sullivan From: Wayne Houle Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 9:01 PM To: Council Member Bennett Cc: Gordon Hughes; Heather Worthington; Jack Sullivan; Mayor Hovland; Council Member Housh; Council Member Masica; Council Member Swenson; 'Iwanning@umn.edu' Subject: Update on North East Edina Transportation Study Council Member Bennett: Gordon Hughes asked me to email you with the status of the implementation of the above study. The improvements along West 50th Street - lengthening of the east-bound right turn lane at Halifax Avenue and West 50th Street along with the widening of the northerly curb line at France Avenue and West 50th Street will be submitted to MNDOT - State Aid within the next week. Once MNDOT approves this we will then let this project. It will be combined with our annual MSA Mill and Overlay projects, which include the ring roads of 50th and France. SRF will be completing the detail design of the north-south striping along France Avenue within the next couple of weeks. Once this is completed staff along with Les Wanninger will be meeting with the City of Minneapolis and Hennepin County to acquire their final approvals for the restriping of France Avenue. The restriping will include West 44th Street and France Avenue; however, staff still needs to put together a proposed parking plan for the area. SRF is still working on Interlachen Boulevard and Vernon Avenue intersection and should have this ready by mid-summer. Staff will also be laying out some potential configurations of the crosswalk at Kjoten Park and West 44th Street (however, we still need to let Concord Avenue, complete the sidewalk feasibilities and noise wall feasibilities prior to analyzing this project). Local roadway improvements will start with the Country Club Utility and Roadway project. The revised feasibility study will be presented to the City Council in September / October with construction anticipated to start spring of 2008. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this update. Thank you. Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Direct 952-826-0443 Fax 952-826-0389 whoule@ci.edina.mn.us www.cityofedina.com 1 Dear Edina Transportation Commission, We are students of Edina High School and are taking an AP Government and Politics class. For our end of the year project we researched the issue surrounding W. 70th St. in Edina and some of the different proposals for its future. After considering all sides of the issue and interviewing stakeholders, we decided that we believe the construction of Arneson Parkway is the best option available. Edina prides itself in the neighborhood feel it provides for its families and that should be preserved. We talked to Mr. Harold Babb who has lived on 70th St. for over forty years and is active in the campaign to preserve 70th as a neighborhood street. When he moved in, the traffic was so light that his children could play in the street. That is unheard of now because of the amount and speed of traffic on the road all day. If a street such as the proposed Arneson Parkway was constructed, families would feel safe and comfortable on 7O St. once again. Children would be able to walk to the park and to school safely at any time of day. Also, in this age of environmental awareness, it would be great to encourage biking by adding a bike lane to a street such as 70th. Constructing a truck lane only encourages more driving and less walking and biking. If we want to retain our values as a safe and friendly community, something must be done about the situation on 70th St. The answer is not a truck lane that encourages more traffic — the answer is a parkway that makes Edina beam with pride. Respectfully, Il64) Kate Byom and Jennifer Stoeger „. a Jr. Trcnintrer The likiksia schools spend about $(.l50,CC'.0 for trans- portation each year. Well over half of this is discre- tionary in the sense that State funds are not available to reimburse far transportation less than one mile from the normal school. This discretionary busing is done for safety rea- 1 sons in many cases and program reasons in many oth- ers (extra-curricular and activity). The table below is a rough breakout of our transportation expenditures. iicimoorsnble transyrortazion Non- reimbursabie transport-a ti on Stti.dcat activity Capital Field L7ips. 'Total pupils in the system. Some pv.pilti are not bused; some are in two categories. feel this is one area where we can reduce our sper,iaing substantially without harm to programs or reduction to any offerings. There are also many rea- sons other than hndgh why we should do this, energy utilizatioit. gasoline/fuel oil availabi;ity (they are closely interrelated), and the exercise of viralkinz a few blocks rather than habitually riding everywhere. Children often ride two or three blocks to school because a bus is available — not because of safety. I recognize there ',All be several problems with this, and we must consider the effects before we act.. Safety of children must be protected, and we must continue to make our many excellent after-school programs easily available. This will require detailed study of actual incremental costs by the school admin- istration and close cooperation with Village officials. I propose a joint committee of board members, Village officials, and school ,,,-Acirninistrators to study this and make recommendations at an early date. This committee should make every effort to get substantial citizen involvement, input, feedback, and discussion. There are problems in doing this and reasons why it will be tough. That is true of all our efforts at budget reductions. fiowever, it can be done if we take the at- titude that we will find creative and acceptable solu- tions to the problems and objections that arise. The talent is here to do the job. 3 ' Li 11 Li Li 0 Li Li 1.;' ' ta 0.;.;0° 1-1