Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-05-17 Meeting Packet. AGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM May 17, 2012 6:00 P.M. L CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Regular Meeting of April 19, 2012 V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Transportation Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. • Vi. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS ✓A. Traffic Safety Committee Report of May 2, 2012 L,� Proposed Enhanced Crosswalk for Tracy Avenue Project C. Updates I. Student Member ii. -*Bike Edina Task Force - April 12, 2012 Minutes iii. ✓Grandview Small Area Study iv. '-'L ving Streets Working Group v. ,Transportation Options Working Group VII. /ORR SPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. AIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. TLC Bike Boulevard Update B. Gallagher Drive & Three Rivers Trail Agenda / Edina Transportation Commission May 17, 2012 Page 2 X. ADJOURNMENT 40 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 952-927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting. Tuesday May 15 Transportation Options Working Group 5:00 PM PUBLIC WORKS & PARK MAINT. FACILITY Tuesday June 19 Transportation Options Working Group 5:00 PM SHERWOOD ROOM, SENIOR CENTER Thursday June 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Tuesday July 17 Transportation Options Working Group 5:00 PM SHERWOOD ROOM, SENIOR CENTER Thursday July 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tuesday Aug 16 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Aug 21 Transportation Options Working Group 5:00 PM SHERWOOD ROOM, SENIOR CENTER Tuesday Sept 18 Transportation Options Working Group 5:00 PM SHERWOOD ROOM, SENIOR CENTER Thursday Sept 20 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROO* G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012Agendas\20120315 Agenda.docx MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS April 19, 2012 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Iyer, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, Schweiger, Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Thompson approving the revised meeting agenda — moving item 1A. Election of Chair and Vice Chair to after Approval of Minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16. 2012 Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member Braden to approve the minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 15.2012 Motion was made by member Thompson and seconded by member LaForce to approve the minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. ELECTION OF CHAIR lember Thompson thanked outgoing chair Janovy for serving as the chair and nominated member Nelson. Member elson accepted the nomination. There being no other nomination, member LaForce motioned to close the nomination and approve member Nelson as the chair and the motion was seconded by member Bass. All voted aye. Motion carried. Chair Nelson thanked outgoing chair Janovy for her service and opened up for election of vice -chair. Member Janovy nominated member Bass and this was seconded by member Thompson. Member Bass accepted the nomination. There being no other nomination, member Laforce motioned to close the nomination and approve member Bass as the vice chair and the motion was seconded by member Thompson. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. Andrew Kasid, 5401 Wooddale Avenue, a 42 year resident, said he has seen the TLC Bike Blvd plan and requested consideration of parking needs of neighbors and pedestrian safety. He asked that some parking be maintained on 54th between Wooddale and Kellogg. He said they've had issues with drivers not stopping at the intersection at 54`h and Wooddale and have had police patrol from time to time and if parking is eliminated it would be a traffic concern for monitoring. Eileen Supple, 7332 West Shore Drive, said she is speaking as a resident and a member of the Edina Community Lutheran Church. (A letter was distributed to the ETC from the church.) She said they are excited about the bike path because they have a lot of bikers in the congregation, including a pastor who is a commuting cyclist but they are concerned with losing on -street parking that they have relied on for 64 years. She said they have avoided adding parking and does not want to add more surface that would cause run-off into the creek. She encouraged the ETC to look at share the road between France and Wooddale or to some other point to allow on -street parking. r_1 LA REPORT/RECOMMENDATIONS AIL. C Bike Boulevard Project Presentation Mr. Houle said Mr. Mike Anderson, traffic engineer, with Alliant Engineering will be giving the presentation and explaining staff's recommendation, and that Mr. Steve Clark with TLC is also in attendance and available to answer questions. Mr. Houle said an informational meeting was held on April 12. (A plan set was distributed to the ETC.) Mr. Anderson said the project limits have change since the February 16 meeting. He said the new Phase I project limits include Wooddale Avenue, 54th Street, Valley View Road and a southern portion of Wooddale Avenue connecting to W. 70th Street. The route will connect to bike facility on 44th Street, 70th Street and future bikeway that city of Minneapolis has planned for Zenith Avenue. Phase II was originally part of this grant but was eliminated due to construction cost and Phase I was extended down Wooddale Avenue over the pedestrian bridge and connect to 70th Street via Southdale Road and Cornelia Drive. The tentative schedule include City Council public hearing on May 15, submittal to State Aid early May with construction starting end of August and completion end of September. Mr. Anderson said the objective of the project is to provide on -street bicycle facility that will encourage increased bicycling and improve safety for cyclists and, while the goal is to have dedicated lanes for roadway with vehicles of 2000 or more, the challenge is meeting the specific design standards for the mostly State Aid roads governed by MnDOT and also adhering to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). He said no variance is required from MnDOT; however, two Requests to Experiment are required from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Road treatments are as follow: 54th Street from France Avenue to Zenith Avenue: recommendation is a share the road designated by a bike boulevard pavement message, share the lane roadway signs, and two landscaped traffic circles and a recommendation to remove 0 h stop signs at Beard and Drew Avenues. 54th Street from Minnehaha Blvd to France Avenue: recommendation is designated bike lanes with on -street parking on the south side and no parking on the north side; however, staff is considering a variance to have parking on Sunday mornings only. A variance would be needed because there is only 16 ft. of space and 19 ft. is required for parking. Removal of stop signs at Minnehaha Blvd is recommended and this is currently being studied. 54th from Wooddale Avenue to Minnehaha Blvd: this area is narrower and the recommendation is dedicated bike lanes with removal of on -street parking on both sides. Wooddale Avenue from Valley View Road to 50th Street: recommendation is advisory lane and an FHWA Request to Experiment because they would be using a dashed line instead of a solid line. Southern connection - Wooddale Avenue to 70th Street: the route is Wooddale Avenue over the pedestrian bridge to Southdale Road to 68th Street to Cornelia Drive to 70th Street. Cyclists would be guided by marked signs only. Member La Force asked if the existing bridge would remain in place. Mr. Houle said staff is working with MnDOT to replace the pedestrian bridge over TH62 in the near future, including the ramps, but in the meantime there is a u -channel to assist with getting bikes up and down the bridge. Member Iyer said in this area it is a missed opportunity to combine with Safe Routes to School to connect to Cornelia Elementary. Mr. Houle said the project ends here because of limited funds and that he is working with Alliant on a design plan for when additional funding becomes available. Member lanovy said this is a good solution given the available funding and a plan to finish in the 2nd phase. Valley View Road from Wooddale Avenue to 62"d Street: g share the road and a 4 ft. wide green Tainted sharrow because of the volume of traffic. The painted sharrow requires an FHWA Request to Experiment. Valley View Road from 62nd Street to TH62: removal of center turn lane and dedicated bike lane. The project terminates •here. The traffic signal at France Avenue and 54th will have bike detection and marking where bikes are to stop and the signal light will change automatically. Route Marking — Wayfinding: destination signs and route markers will be installed behind the curb along the corridor. Member Janovy said they will need to have a discussion on wayfinding signs before they are established. Discussion Member Janovy asked about the kind of paint that will be used and she also asked if there is data to support that the turn lane is needed? In reference to the paint, Mr. Anderson said it is about cost. He said they will be looking for a paint that is durable but will not be looking at high end paint because it is experimental. Regarding the center left turn lane, he said Engineering staff did a study this past December and it was determined that it was needed. Member Braden asked if the different section treatments will be intuitive for cyclists/drivers. Mr. Anderson said they are trying to be as consistent as possible and the treatments are similar to the ones in city of Minneapolis. Member Laforce does not think they are intuitive. Member Thompson said an educational component should be included to minimize confusion. He said this is similar to roundabouts where drivers were against them but have since learned how to use them. He said it is a good compromise. Member Whited said she had an incident this evening with one of her bus drivers and a cyclist who was going from one treatment to another and her bus driver did not see him. She asked how do you educate everyone. Member Janovy said she likes what has been done and that it will take a lot of education for drivers to know that they are to yield to cyclists and pedestrians. Mr. Clark said Edina and Mr. Anderson have done a good job. He said there were some challenges and they have looked at best practices. As a funder, he asked if they are Wfaking conditions better or more confusing and he said they are making it better. He said he has advocated for removal the entire center lane but if there is a significant amount of turning then it should stay in place. He encouraged support of the project. Member Bass said it is not perfect for cyclist/drivers but it moves the City forward until they can achieve the ultimate goal. She said it should be clear that children under certain age should not ride in the streets. Member Thompson motioned to accept the proiect as presented with one caveat to consider the variance allowing parking on 54th Street between Minnehaha Blvd and Halifax Avenue on Sunday mornings only. The motion was seconded by member Bass. All voted ave. Motion carried. Gallagher Drive Roadway and Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Improvements Presentation Mr. Houle said a petition was sent in by adjoining property owners two years ago requesting resurfacing of Gallagher Drive. He said this project will be done jointly with the Three Rivers Park District to include their on -street bike trail. Mr. Toby Muse, project manager with SEH presented the plan. Mr. Muse said the project boundary is Parklawn Avenue to France Avenue and that it is budgeted in the 2011-15 Capital Improvement Plan. He said the road is 42 ft. with concrete curb and gutter, 5 ft. sidewalks, no parking, ten commercial driveway entrances, no pedestrian crossings, no roadway lighting and five Metro Transit bus stops. He said the plan is to do a mill and overlay, narrow the road to 28 ft. (requires a variance) to include a 9 ft. boulevard, a 10 ft. bike trail, no on - street parking, relocating one bus stop and marked pedestrian crossings. Total project cost is $472,000 and funding will be mostly State Aid ($346,000), Three Rivers Trail ($120,000) and the balance from the City's utility fund. An open house was held on March 27 and a public hearing is scheduled for May 15 with construction beginning early September and Ending mid-November. 3 Discussion Onsite meetings took place with Metro Transit to determine proper placement of bus stops and meetings with the Owners of Cedars of Edina regarding proper placement of pedestrian crossings because their pool, tennis courts and other facilities are across the street in another complex and this was also taken into consideration with the bus stop relocation. Staff was asked if bike parking was discussed and Mr. Muse said no. Mr. Houle they can include bike parking. Member Iyer said the meeting was attended by six Parklawn residents but the project is on Gallagher. He asked if a sample size is considered to determine moving forward. Mr. Houle said all impacted residents are generally invited to the informational meeting but staff does not look for a sample size to move forward. Streetlighting was asked about. Ms. Kelly Grissman with Three Rivers District said they do not light any of their regional trails; however, the local agency can provide lighting if they so desire. Member Janovy would like consideration for lighting, similar to the Promenade. Mr. Houle said because this is only a mill and overlay they cannot add lighting but they can install conduits for future lighting. Member Janovy asked if there will be a striped center line because at their last BETF meeting some members talked about having on -street bike lanes. Mr. Houle said the straight-away would not be striped but the curve would be striped. He said the trend is not to stripe lower volume roadways. No trees will not be impacted by project. Member Janovy motioned approval of the plan as presented with 1)the transit stops to be connected to the trail as described by Mr. Muse; 2)bike parkina be included; and Unstallation of conduit for future streetlight. The motion was seconded by member LaForce. All voted ave. Motion carried. rare OrLaLIOn v LIUM VVOfKIn L7rOu — CIeuxion oT L.o-cnalr ember Janovy said the bylaws require that this working group be chaired by a member of the ETC and member Whited has agreed to be the chair. Member Janovy nominated member Whited as chair and the nomination was seconded by member LaForce. Member LaForce motioned to close the nomination and it was seconded by member Bass. All voted ave. Motion carried. Chair Whited nominated Elin Schold-Davis as the co-chair and the nomination was seconded by member Janovy. All voted ave. Motion carried. Updates Student Member None. Bike Edina Task Force — Minutes of March 8, 2012 Member Janovy said a bike rodeo is scheduled for this Saturday, April 21, 10 a.m. to noon, at Cornelia School, and there is new feature on the website, BikeEdina.org with new articles every couple of weeks. Member Whited enquired about expansion of bike lanes on W. 58th Street as noted in the minutes. Mr. Houle will follow with an answer at the next meeting. Grandview Small Area Studv Chair Nelson said the City Council unanimously approved the framework on April 17. He said he is not sure how they will be moving forward but eventually it will come back to the ETC. Amrirance Avenue Pedestrian Crossings Improvements Update IlMr. Houle said they are designing the pedestrian crossings that were approved by City Council. He said the City Council discussed the need to have an urban landscape architect and WSB did a search of the area, including Wisconsin, and LHB, Inc. seem to be a good fit. He said because of the size of the project it would be difficult to attract a national firm. He requested feedback from the ETC regarding the landscape architect and also stakeholders meetings which he would Oke to schedule in conjunction with the ETC meetings. Member Janovy asked if landscaping is included in WSB's contract and Mr. Houle said yes. She said the City Council wants a strong urban design but they did not say what they were looking for and she does not know what this company can do. She said further that it makes her uncomfortable when a contract goes to individuals involved with the City. Mr. Houle asked if they would like to set up a working group for this project. Member Janovy said she likes the idea of the entire ETC being involved in the stakeholders meetings and also like a couple being part of the design group. Member Braden volunteered to be part of the design group. Living Streets Working Group Update Member Thompson, chair of the working group gave a presentation on Living Streets from its inception in Edina to where it is today. He said discussions started in early 2011, and in May, the City Council adopted a resolution supporting it. A working group was created that has met twice (Dec 8 and Mar 30) and on February 15 they held a policy development workshop. He said Living Streets creates a vision for the future that includes safe walking, education, aesthetics, green sustainability, solutions to traffic concerns, etc. Continuing, he said Barr Engineering was selected to conduct policy review, identify stakeholders, etc. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Whited asked how to share articles with the group. She was told to email them to Mr. Houle for distribution. She volunteered to help with developing an education program for the public for the Bike Blvd project. Sember Iyer said he would like to be part of the Safe Routes to School working group. Member Braden noted that the ETC has done a lot in the past year. Member Janovy said the BETF would love to have volunteers to help with education and this will probably be the same for Living Streets. She said Edina is part of Bloomington Health's Safe Routes to School and they've just had their first meeting and could use more representation from citizens and ETC and suggested possibly setting up a working group. To echo what member Braden said, she said the Council has been very engaged. Chair Nelson said they had joint working session on Tuesday with the City Council to review the ETC's priorities for the year. Member Thompson echoed what member Braden said. Member Bass thanked staff for their persistence in pursuing the France Avenue scope change. She said it is a huge win for residents. She thanked outgoing chair Janovy for her service and welcomed new chair Nelson. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Houle thanked the Mayor, City Manager, and member Janovy for their involvement with the France Avenue scope change. A group photo has been requested, probably to be posted to the website, and there is a release form for everyone to INgn. A copy of the final bylaws was handed out. 5 ADJOURNMENT .Member La Force motioned to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 p.m. and the motion was seconded by member Janovy. ATTACHMENT Attendance Spreadsheet • • c 2 d o s 0 O F- 0 V 3 D C Z l0 ami o 3 C aa) f6 ami 0 N Y o c L m a)ID m C f0 a 0 NN U) (n i L O U) w Y 16. jIS Z N Q LL T :' T T ., 't V MU') 't LO co co Lf) , T 0 N T 0 (V T 0 N T 0 N T 0 CV T 0 N T 0 N C: 0 'o T O N T O N 0 o W r N N N N N N N N N N LU > cB N N c co ,� c O:3 U E N cm ::'::'::': t :::':::: (O c Q Z N �, N N a 0 C O O U N N Cn > ai C 0)fn N tZ p Z cn .;` rLo i c`a >' m NU 0 �> m M m LL fv — coo � —i 5 Z fes..) U) F— > Q d a� a E CD E :3 4j in = ?z c w LU z t o a 0 m .t.• = O c E dCD L � a) co fa � 'C e a0+ c C a) 0 n U H a� a E a) E ui m S a) a) a E m E a) 0 a d E c 0 N 2 (D H N m v O c 'C c O N E C � N CL CDN E l0 C O +' o. .o M aD R R Efi m o m r d w 4) d c E mu 3 c d � c a fA E Z 2 d o s 0 O F- 0 V 3 D C Z l0 ami o 3 C aa) f6 ami 0 N Y o c L m a)ID m C f0 a E o d y v 0• m N C w ` > O t o Yc�iasa � y� REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission Agenda Item Item No: IV.A From: Byron Theis Traffic Safety Coordinator ® Action Discussion Information Date: May 17, 2012 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of May 2, 2012. • ACTION REQUESTED: Review and recommend Traffic Safety Committee Report of Wednesday May 2, 2012, be forwarded to City Council for approval. • BACKGROUND: It is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the meeting regarding any of the attached issues. An overview of the comments from the Edina Transportation Commission will be included in the staff report provided to Council for their June 5, 2012 meeting. Staff would like to direct your attention to Section A.2, which is a proposed Temporary Speed Table policy. ATTACHMENTS: Traffic Safety Review for May 2, 2012. G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffic Safety Committee\Staff Review Summaries\12 TSAC & Min\05-02-12.doc 0 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, May 2, 2012 The Committee review of traffic safety matters occurred on May 2, 2012. The Committee is comprised of staff members including the City Engineer, Assistant City Planner, Police Traffic Supervisor, and Traffic Safety Coordinator. From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were also informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the May 17, 2012, Edina Transportation Commission and then the June 5, 2012 City Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval of request: 1. Request for parking restrictions on 53`d Street West. This request is from a resident who lives in the area. The resident feels • that parking on both sides of the street is causing a traffic hazard. Requestor has stated that traffic cannot travel safely when there are parked cars on both sides. The request is for no parking to be placed on the north side of the road. Four residents have called to request no parking on this section of 53`d Street West over a period of one month. 53`d Street West is a City street that is measured at 30 feet wide. There are no traffic counts for this section of roadway and there is one recorded traffic crash with property damage from 2001 to 2010 (2010). The policy on parking restrictions states that parking restrictions should be considered when the street is too narrow to allow safe passage of vehicles if parking is permitted. A street width of 30 feet would not allow two-way traffic with parked vehicles on both sides. After review by staff, it was decided that parking should be restricted on the north side to allow better sight distance for vehicles coming from Grandview Lane to make a left turn onto 53`d Street West. Staff recommends the approval of parking restrictions on the north side of 53rd Street West from Vernon Avenue to the end of 53rd Street • West. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 1 of 6 May 2, 2012 • 2. Request for approval of the Temporary Speed Table Policy. See attached policy. • Staff developed this policy for placement of temporary speed tables to provide a temporary traffic calming method for local streets that are experiencing an increase in the 85th percentile speed of 5 to 10 MPH due to adjacent road construction. In the June 21, 2011 City Council meeting, City Council approved the use of the temporary speed table on Sunnyside Road east of Townes Road. Traffic counts taken after placement reported an 85th percentile speed of 27.6 MPH on Sunnyside Road east of Curve Road. A previous 85th percentile speed of 35.0 MPH was recorded in the Northeast Edina Traffic Study (2006). Staff recommends approval of the Temporary Speed Table Policy. 3. Request for removal of the Speed Limit Policy. The ETC has previously adopted this request because the City's Speed Limit Policy is outdated. See attached ETC advisory communication and supporting document. Minnesota State Statute statute; therefore, staff Speed Limit Policy. The speed limit for the City is governed by 169.14 and our current policy does not match the is also recommending elimination of the City's Staff will be reviewing all of the City's traffic safety policies to see if there are others that do not match State Statute. Staff s intention is to place on the new City website information on speed limit with web link to State Statute. Staff recommends removal of the City Speed Limits Policy. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 6 May 2, 2012 0 SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request: 1. Request for an all -way stop sign at the intersection of York Avenue and 56th Street West. The requestor lives at the intersection of York Avenue and 56th Street West. The requestor has stated that vehicles are speeding through the intersection, which is causing a traffic hazard. The requestor has also stated that there have been a number of accidents at the intersection. The requestor has claimed the reason is due to the lack of an all -way stop sign at the intersection. York Avenue and 56th Street West are classified as local city streets. There are no recent counts near the intersection. There are no recorded accidents at the intersection from 2001 to 2010. The closest accident was approximately 230 feet east of the intersection in 2005 (property damage). York Avenue has stop signs on both the north and south lanes. The City of Edina policy regarding an all -way stop sign requires at least . 300 vehicles entering the intersection per hour for any eight hours at the intersection. Stop signs are not installed in an attempt to control speed or volume of vehicles. 10 Traffic counts were conducted in the area. Vehicle volumes entering the intersection from each leg were added to determine the total volume for the hour. The highest volume recorded for one hour was 121 vehicles entering the intersection. This is below the required 300 vehicles per hour to meet the policy. Staff recommends the denial of request for an all -way stop sign at the intersection of 56th Street West and York Avenue due to lack of warrants. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 6 May 2, 2012 0 SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. 1. Request for additional signs and lighting for the pedestrian signals at the intersection of 51St Street West and Halifax Avenue. The requestor lives near the intersection of 51St Street West and Halifax Avenue. Requestor feels that the sightlines of the intersection and the height of the lights are not adequate. After discussion, requestor would like additional flashing lights lower on the posts of the pedestrian lights. 51St Street West is classified as a State -Aid road with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 6,678 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 28.2 MPH. There has only been one recorded crash involving a pedestrian (2007, with possible injury) and a total of six accidents from 2001 to 2010. After review of relevant information, staff is recommending that the request be delayed until more information can be gathered. Information from the France Avenue pedestrian crossing upgrades may be used if appropriate, along with research regarding types of lights and placement • of lights, will be looked at by staff. 2. Request for signal lights at the intersection of West Shore Drive and 66th Street West. This request comes from a resident on Parnell Drive. The resident has stated that it is hard to make a left turn out of West Shore Drive in the morning. The requestor feels that placing a signal light at the intersection would allow traffic to get out on West Shore Drive. West Shore Drive is classified as a city street with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 785 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 30.5 MPH south of 66th Street West; and an ADT of 413 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 26.5 MPH north of 66th Street West. 66th Street West is classified as a State Aid route with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 5,821 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 35.6 MPH west of West Shore Drive; and an ADT of 6,198 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 36.7 MPH east of West Shore Drive. The placement of signal lights is determined by the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The requirements is a minimum of 60 • vehicles per hour in one direction on the minor street. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 4 of 6 May 2, 2012 After discussion, it was concluded that more study in the area was needed because a signal light would have an impact greater than the intersection itself. More traffic counters will be placed in the surrounding area to monitor the traffic, along with other observations. SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. Request for speeds to be monitored in the area of Division Street and Oxford Avenue. Requestor lives on the street and has stated that vehicles are going, "too fast" in the area. Division Street is a City Street with an average daily Traffic (ADT) of 650 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 32.0 MPH west of Oxford Avenue. Resident was informed of the results of the traffic count. Speed information was sent to the Edina Police Department. 2. Request for speed bumps on 55th Street West near France Avenue. Requestor lives on the street and feels that traffic has increased their volume and speed. Requestor was sent the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, and traffic counts were conducted in the area. 55th Street West is classified as a city street with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 196 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 24.2 MPH east of Drew Avenue. A count also taken east of France was shown to have an ADT of 238 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 26.6 MPH. Resident was informed of the results of the counts and a speed information report was sent to the Edina Police Department. 3. Request for information about "Slow" signs used in Edina. Resident was informed that use of slow signs is for residents with disabilities only. 4. Call from a resident requesting the intersection of France Avenue and Crosstown to be looked at for resigning. Referred to Hennepin County. 5. Call from a resident concerning the timing of the signal at 65th and France. Referred to Hennepin County. 6. Call from resident requesting traffic counts in the area of Morningside Road and France Avenue. Requestor was informed that the most recent count for Morningside Road had an Average Daily Traffic of 1,126 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 30.2 MPH. • 7. Call from a resident requesting information about the counts conducted on 55th Street West in item 2 above. Resident was given counts from area. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 5 of 6 May 2, 2012 8. Call from a resident requesting a sign to inform drivers the location of the parking lot of the Wooddale church. Resident lives in the area and stated that vehicles are getting lost trying to find the parking lot for the church. Request was forwarded to Wooddale Church. 9. Call from two residents requesting parking restrictions on 53rd Street West. Residents were informed of the current traffic safety request. 10. Call from a resident who was concerned about the "No parking on road tubes" sign near her property. Resident was advised the purpose of not parking on the road tubes when a traffic count is being conducted. 11. Call from a resident regarding a previous request for striping in the area of Normandale road and 70th Street West. Resident was informed of the City Councils final decision to approve the striping. 12. Call from a resident requesting traffic counts at the intersection of Drew Avenue and Fuller Street. Resident was given the most recent counts in the area. The northern leg (Drew Avenue) of the intersection has an Average Daily Traffic of 268 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 22.6 MPH. The eastern leg (Fuller Street) has an Average Daily Traffic of 0 194 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 24.5 MPH. The southern leg has an ADT of 117 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 23.3 MPH. The western leg has an ADT of 280 vehicles with and 85th percentile speed of 21.4 MPH. n Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 6 of 6 May 2, 2012 1] w9% , TEMPORARY SPEED y .0 TABLE .� C P POLICY IdF.B City of Edina PURPOSE: The purpose of a Temporary Speed Table is to provide a temporary traffic calming method for local streets that are experiencing and increase in speed of traffic due to road construction. PROCESS: • Contact the Traffic Safety Coordinator. • The Traffic Safety Coordinator will gather the pertinent facts to help define the problem and seek a solution. • The Traffic Safety Committee will review the facts and determine the placement is warranted. • The Traffic Safety Coordinator will share staff preliminary recommendation with you. If you disagree with the recommendation and have more information to give, staff will take this into account prior to making our final recommendation. If you disagree with our final recommendation, you may also address the Edina Transportation Commission after this request is presented to them. POLICY: 1. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) shall be followed. 2. Traffic analysis, engineering, and property use facts and data shall be reviewed when considering placement of a temporary speed table. 3. Speed tables will only be placed on non -municipal State Aid roadways that are adjacent to road construction projects. They shall remain for the duration of road construction project. 4. Traffic speeds must show a significant increase in the 85th % speed of 5 to 10 MPH in order to warrant the installation of temporary speed tables. 5. The street that the temporary speed table is placed on should not have any unusual features which might affect safe road operations. The street should also have good vertical sight distance, horizontal distance, and drainage. • 6. T amount of The priority for installation shall be on a first requested basis. A S 0 Plan View 1 � Je, of ► I It Cross Section i 3�1 r� DATE: March 16, 2012 SUBJECT: City of Edina Speed Limits Traffic Policy ATTACHMENTS: • City Council minutes regarding speed limits • MnDOT Study and Report on Speed Limits Executive Summary • City of Edina Speed Limits Traffic Policy • House Research MN Speed Limits memo • MS 160.263 Bicycle Lanes and Ways The City Council has authority to establish 25 mph speed limits on streets within its jurisdiction on which it has established bike lanes by ordinance or resolution. Bike lanes and a 25 mph speed limit have been established on W. 58`h (Xerxes to France) and W. 70' (France to Hwy 100). The Tracy Avenue project (Vernon to Benton) was recently 1191 approved with bike lanes and a 25 mph speed limit. R � 0 The City Council has also established reduced speeds in school zones. The City's speed limit policy states that speed limits "can only be modified by the Commissioner of Transportation on the basis of engineering and traffic investigation that indicates enhanced safety.... Only a school zone and bridge can be regulated below 30 mph if justification exists." In 2006 the Council discussed speed limits and passed the following motion: "The City of Edinas current City Speed Limits Traffic policy shall be maintained with the basic minimum speed limit of 30 MPH. The City of Edina shall not consider lowering the speed limit of a residential street unless documented safety issues exist and a traffic speed study has been conducted by Mn/DOT indicating the speed should be lowered; or the statewide urban, local, residential speed limit is lowered from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. The updated policy shall be the basis for the City's speed limits traffic policy." At this time, the Council also passed a resolution in support of lowering the statewide residential speed limit to 25 mph. See minutes attached. 0 In 2008 the Council passed a resolution calling for legislation to study the feasibility of a 25 mph speed limit metro -wide. Legislation was enacted and a study completed. The study report can be read at http://www.dot.state,mn.us/speed/pdf/Speed%20Li m it% 2OTask%2OForce%2OFi nal%2ORepor jpd_f. The report recommended some changes to the State speed limit statutes, but did not recommend lowering the default speed limit in urban districts to 25 mph. See attached Executive Summary. The Comprehensive Plan includes a policy statement on speed Limits: "Support state legislation to decrease statutory urban speeds from 30 to 25 mph' (p. 7-42). Currently, there is no state legislation to decrease the speed limit in an urban district. r_1, rill Statements in the City's speed limit policy appear to conflict with State statutes regarding speed limits. These statements are highlighted in the attached policy. While the policy does not need to allow the City to exercise all of the authority provided to it by statutes, the policy should accurately communicate that authority. The attached House Research memo explains MN speed limit laws. The Council has demonstrated that it is interested in exercising its authority to reduce speeds on streets on which bike lanes have been established and in school zones. As the policy making body for the City, the Council can adopt a speed limits policy that supports these actions. Adopt a speed limits policy that: Allows the City Council to reduce speed limits as provided by law; Accurately communicates the authority the City has to reduce speed limits; and Supports Living Streets goals. Iz�lTj[r C+cl PREPARED BY: Jennifer Janovy REVIEWED BY: Tom LaForce REQUEST: Please distribute to the City Council with attachments for discussion and action at the April 3, 2012 regular meeting. 0 0 HOUSE RESEARCH Short Subjects Matt Burress Updated: August 2010 Minnesota Speed Limits Minnesota's traffic laws include regulation of speeding. State law sets speed limits on state highways and local roads, establishes penalties, and authorizes the Department of Transportation (MnDOT), and in some case local governments, to change the limit. See Minn. Stat. § 169.14. Basic requirements Speed limits set in statute are default maximums, but under some circumstances and speed limits MnDOT and local government can modify them. The statutory speed limits are: 30 m.p.h. for city streets and town roads in an "urban district," which is any segment of a city street or town road that is built up with structures less than 100 feet apart for a minimum distance of a quarter -mile; 65 or 70 m.p.h. for interstates (depending on whether it is, respectively, within or outside an urbanized area of at least 50,000); 65 m.p.h. on divided highways with controlled access; 10 m.p.h. for alleys, mobile home parks, and campgrounds; and a default of 55 m.p.h. on other roads. Minn. Stat. §§ 169.011, subd. 90; 169.14, subd. 2; 327.27, subd. 2. Under a 2009 change, the speed limit was increased by 10 m.p.h. when passing on two-lane highways with a posted limit of at least 55 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 2a. A 40-m.p.h. minimum speed limit applies on interstates. State law also requires that "no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions." Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 1. This condition can place an additional obligation on a motorist to lower the speed of travel, particularly if there are dangerous conditions like snow or the presence of a pedestrian. Adjusted limits in MnDOT has the authority to establish speed zones in which the speed limit is speed zones higher or lower than the default limits set in law; such limits go into effect once signs are posted. Speed zones are established after MnDOT conducts an engineering and traffic investigation that analyzes factors like roadway design, physical characteristics, traffic volume, crash history, and observed speeds. MnDOT's policy is that the limit should normally be set near the 85`x' percentile (the speed at or below which 85 percent of vehicles are traveling). Restricted local Cities, counties, and towns have limited power over setting speed limits, even on authority their own streets and highways. If requested by a local road authority, MnDOT must perform an engineering and traffic study of the road. However, MnDOT— not the local authority—determines the safe and reasonable speed limit as well as whether to establish a speed zone. This general rule has a few exceptions. ► if MnDOT has established a speed zone for a city street or town road in an urban district that is at least a quarter -mile long, the city or town can lower the speed limit to 30 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. 5b. ► In a rural residential district, a local road authority may reduce the speed limit to 35 m.p.h. A "rural residential district" is a segment of a city street or town road with houses spaced less than 300 feet apart for a minimum distance of a quarter -mile. Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 69a. ► On a residential roadway, a local road authority may reduce the speed limit to 25 m.p.h. A "residential roadway" is a city street or town road whose total length is up to a half -mile. Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 64. ► no more than 10 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 55 m.p.h. zone; or ► no more than 5 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 60 m.p.h. zone. The prohibition on recording violations does not apply when the speed limit is 65 or 70 m.p.h.; if the speeding violation occurred in a commercial motor vehicle; or if the driver holds a commercial driver's license (class A, B, or C). Minn. Stat. § 171.12, subd. 6. The Research Department of the Minnesota House of Representatives is a nonpartisan office providing legislative, legal, and information services to the entire House: House Research Department 1 600 State Office Building I St. Paul, MN 55155 1651-296-6753 1 www.house.mn/hrd/hrd.htm other roadways;= includng:(1) park roads (at not less than 15 m.p.h., or more than 20 m.p.h. below the surrounding limit); (2) on streets, that have a designated bicycle lane (at riot less;thai� 25 xri.p.h); (3) in alleys; and (4) in mobile home parks. Minn. Stat. §§ 160.263, subd. 4; 169.14, subds. 5c and 5e; 327.27, subd. 2a. Both MnDOT and local road authorities can set speed limits within highway work zones, which are effective while workers are present, and MnDOT can set temporary construction zone limits along long-term construction projects. Penalties for Speeding is generally a petty misdemeanor punishable by a base fine normally speeding violations ranging from $40 to $150 and no prison sentence. The amount of the fine is doubled if the violation (1) occurs in a work zone or school zone, (2) involves speeds of 20 m.p.h. or more above the posted limit, or (3) occurs when passing a parked emergency vehicle with flashing lights. In addition, a $75 court surcharge is imposed for speeding convictions and there can be a law library fee. If a speeding violation is committed in a manner that endangers persons or property, it can be charged as a misdemeanor with maximum penalties of a $1,000 fine, 90 days' imprisonment, or both. Minn. Stat. § 169.89, subd. 1. A driver's license will be revoked for at least six months for driving over 100 m.p.h. Minn. Stat. § 169.14, subd. la. Minnesota does not use a point system, which assigns points to traffic violations and removes driving privileges if too many points accumulate. However, multiple speeding or other traffic violations within a year can lead to loss of a license. Minn. Stat. §§ 169.89; 171.17. Speeding violations A law first enacted in 1986 known as the "Dimler amendment" governs which on a driver's record speeding violations are recorded on a motorist's driving record maintained by the Department of Public Safety and accessed by insurance companies (but records are still kept by the courts). Speeding violations are not placed on the driving record if the driver traveled: ► no more than 10 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 55 m.p.h. zone; or ► no more than 5 m.p.h. above the speed limit in a 60 m.p.h. zone. The prohibition on recording violations does not apply when the speed limit is 65 or 70 m.p.h.; if the speeding violation occurred in a commercial motor vehicle; or if the driver holds a commercial driver's license (class A, B, or C). Minn. Stat. § 171.12, subd. 6. The Research Department of the Minnesota House of Representatives is a nonpartisan office providing legislative, legal, and information services to the entire House: House Research Department 1 600 State Office Building I St. Paul, MN 55155 1651-296-6753 1 www.house.mn/hrd/hrd.htm • Excerpts from City Council Minutes Re: Speed Limits June 6, 2006 City Council RESOLUTION NO. 2006-64 APPROVING THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION LOWERING THE STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY SPEED LIMIT TO 25 MPH; AND APPROVING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE 25 MPH RESIDENTIAL SPEED LIMIT Assistant Engineer Lillehaug said the Transportation Commission at their March 16, 2006, meeting, asked staff to review the City's Speed Limit Policy and prepare a report for consideration of a 25 MPH Speed Limit Policy for residential areas. On April 20, 2006, staff recommended that the current Speed Limit Policy of 30 MPH be maintained unless documented safety issues exist and a speed study had been conducted by Mn/DOT or the statewide limit was lowered to 25 MPH. On May 18, 2006, the Transportation Commissioners voted to recommend to the Council adoption of a resolution recommending a 25 MPH speed limit policy in residential areas. Staff evaluated the current policy, including safety, cost, implementation strategy and enforcement. Mr. Lillehaug stated that safety was the most important factor. He said the more consistent something was the safer it was. Mr. Lillehaug added changing the approximately 1 100 speed limit signs on residential streets would be expensive and no funds have been designated for this purpose. Mr. Lillehaug noted that a number of requests have been received to lower the speed limit. Streets classified as collector or arterial could not be posted lower than 30 MPH. Some roads were state aid roads where the City receives funding for maintenance of the roads. Reclassifying the roads could affect the City's budget. Staff recommended rather than adopting a 25 MPH Speed Limit Policy, they recommended a City resolution calling for a statewide lowering of the urban, residential speed limit on local roadways from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. He said if the state to lowered the speed limit statewide, more cities would implement the 25 MPH speeds making more consistent speeds statewide. Jean White, a member of the Transportation Commission summarized the discussion on this issue at the May Transportation Commission meeting. Member Hulbert questioned whether this issue could be used by the Transportation Commission as an addition to their tool box to aid traffic calming. She further suggested not making a decision until information was received from other cities about their speed policies. Mr. Hughes said in summary, a motion could be adopted that would refer the issue back to the Transportation Commission because they did not have a full complement of members when the vote was taken and recommend their focus being on other cities who have implemented a 25 MPH residential speed limit and what criteria they used for their decision. He indicated another scenario would be to keep the issue at the Council level and direct staff to find information from other cities and bring that information directly back to the Council. Following a Council discussion, Member Swenson made a motion approving the following resolution as follows: • RESOLUTION NO. 2006-64 RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR STATEWIDE LOCAL, RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY 25 MPH SPEED LIMIT WHEREAS, drivers traveling at high speeds are less aware of their surroundings and have less time to notice and react to pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, relatively small increases in vehicle speed can greatly increase the chances that a pedestrian will die in a vehicle—to-pedestrian crash; and WHEREAS, experts on street design say that 20 to 25 miles per hour is the maximum safe speed for residential streets; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina supports ensuring speed limits maximize safety for all roadway users including drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHERAS, the City of Edina supports goals that do not unfairly raise the expectations of our citizens with regard to the relative safety of the streets; and WHEREAS, passage would result in a uniform statewide speed limit that would create consistency with regard to the way similar streets are posted and speeds are enforced in our communities. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Edina does hereby strongly support a statewide lowering of the speed limit from 30 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour on local, residential roadways. Passed and adopted this 6th day of June,. 2006. Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Hulbert Motion carried. Member Masica made a motion approving staffs recommendation regarding the 25 MPH residential speed limit as follows: "The City of Edina's current City Speed Limits Traffic policy shall be maintained with the basic minimum speed limit of 30 MPH. The City of Edina shall not consider lowering the speed limit of a residential street unless documented safety issues exist and a traffic speed study has been conducted by Mn/DOT indicating the speed should be lowered; or the statewide urban, local, residential speed limit is lowered from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. The updated policy shall be the basis for the City's speed limits traffic policy." Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Hulbert Motion carried. 2 March 3, 2008 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-27 CALLING FOR LEGISLATION STUDYING THE FEASIBILITY OF 25 MPH SPEED LIMIT METRO -WIDE ADOPTED Following discussion, motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Masica to adopt Resolution No.2008-27 calling for legislation studying .the feasibility of 25 MPH speed limit metro -wide. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Housh, Hovland Motion carried. July 21, 2009 *RESOLUTION NO. 2009-66 ADOPTED – SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL REPORT AND SIGNAGE PLAN Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to adopt Resolution No. 2009-66 adopting Edina schools speed zone study and signage plan. Motion carried on rollcall vote – five ayes. October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION NOS. 2010-94 AND 2010-95 ADOPTED – RESTRICTING PARKING AND REVISING SPEED LIMIT ALONG WEST 58TH STREET FROM FRANCE TO XERXES The Council discussed the challenges of configuring parking restrictions and on -street bike lanes and considered whether a "walkable zone" with lowered speed limits, should be created around this and other parks to assure pedestrian and bicycle safety. It was indicated that high "walkability" scores for residential properties also increased value. Mr. Houle reviewed the widths of bike trails that shared roadways and explained the intent was to lower speed in areas of on -street bike lanes on this MSA roadway. The Council considered whether action should be postponed to allow time to research creating a "walkable zone" or if these actions should be taken so it could be determined whether they were effective. Members Bennett and Brindle requested that a joint work session with staff and the ETC should be held to discuss the option of a "walkable zone" to increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2010- 94, relating to parking restrictions on West 58" Street from France Avenue to Xerxes Avenue and No. 2010-95, reducing the speed limit on West 58' Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. December 21, 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-128 ADOPTED — RESOLUTION NO 2010-95 FOR WEST 58TH STREET BIKEWAY CORRECTED Motion made by Member Housh and seconded by Member Bennett to adopt Resolution No. 2010-128, designating West 58th Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue as bicycle route and designating a 25 mph speed limit. 3 • I * February 6, 2012 Adopt Resolution 2012-24 correcting Resolution No. 2010-58 — designating bicycle lanes on West 58`h Street between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue and designating a 25 mph speed limit. December 20, 201 1 Adopt Resolution No 201 1-133 West 70`h Street speed limit. rd 17J El CITY SPEED LIMITS SPEED LIMIT TRAFFIC POLICY 30 City of Edina PURPOSE: A speed limit sign is a regulatory device informing motorists of the legal speed limit imposed on the roadway. In the United States, studies indicate drivers ignore speed limits and drive at a speed they consider reasonable, comfortable and convenient. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 169.14, speed restrictions are established by State Statute'' d can oniv be.rnodified b� the investigation that indicates enhanced safety;; The entire City of Edina is classified an urban district and the basic speed limit is 30 MPH. `04VA' justification exists; Certain arterial roads and freeways within Edina have been zoned greater than 30 MPH by the Commissioner. PROCESS: Your traffic safety concern or request will be formalized by the staff member you have contacted. That person will work with you and gather the pertinent facts and help clearly define the problem and seek a solution. Those facts will be reviewed by the City Engineer, the Police Chief, and the Assistant City Manager. That group will make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the matter. The staff safety review recommendation will be shared with you. If you disagree with the recommendation or can bring forth additional information and/or facts that are persuasive as related to the City warrants/policies for the requested issue, you can appear at the second Council meeting of the month and present your viewpoint. We suggest you alert any interested parties to attend the meeting with you. In all cases the City Council is the final authority on traffic safety matters. Any subsequent review of the same or similar request is at the discretion of the City Council. POLICY: 1. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) shall be followed. 2. Traffic investigation and engineering in accordance with established engineering practices shall occur prior to consideration on requesting a speed limit change. 3. Absent supporting facts, the basic statutory speed limit shall not be altered. 11 CITY SPEED LIMITS (Continued) 4. The City of Edina cannot legislate speed limits below 30 MPH, 5. 6. The City of Edina can pursue engineering, education and enforcement efforts to reduce the speed of vehicles on City streets. • I[] El 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2011 160.263 160.263 BICYCLE LANES AND WAYS. Subdivision 1. [Repealed, 1987 c 255 s 15] Subd. 2. Powers of political subdivisions. The governing body of any political subdivision may by ordinance or resolution: (1) designate any roadway or shoulder or portion thereof under its jurisdiction as a bicycle lane or bicycle route; (2) designate any sidewalk or portion thereof under its jurisdiction as a bicycle path provided that the designation does not destroy a pedestrian way or pedestrian access; (3) develop and designate bicycle paths; (4) designate as bikeways all bicycle lanes, bicycle routes, and bicycle paths. Subd. 3. Designation. (a) A governing body designating a bikeway under this section may: (1) designate the type and character of vehicles or other modes of travel which may be operated on a bikeway, provided that the operation of such vehicle or other mode of travel is not inconsistent with the safe use and enjoyment of the bikeway by bicycle traffic; (2) establish priority of right-of-way on the bicycle lane or bicycle path and otherwise regulate the use of bikeways as it deems necessary; and (3) paint lines or construct curbs or establish other physical separations to exclude the use of the bikeways by vehicles other than those specifically permitted to operate thereon. (b) The designating governing body may, after public hearing, prohibit through traffic on any highway or portion thereof designated as a bicycle lane or bicycle route, except that through traffic may not be prohibited on a trunk highway. The designating governing body shall erect and maintain official signs giving notice of the regulations and priorities established under this subdivision and shall mark all bikeways with appropriate signs. Marking and signing of bikeways by the designating governing body shall be in conformance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. History: 1976 c 199 s 15; 1987 c 255 s 3,4 Copyright © 2011 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. • � 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report documents a series of recommendations developed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for speed limits on local roads. The report also describes the process Mn/DOT utilized to reach these recommendations. This process benefited from the participation of several local government engineers in a Task Force convened by Mn/DOT. Mn/DOT has conducted the speed limit study and prepared this report to meet the requirements of Laws of Minnesota 2008, Chapter 287, Section 119, STUDY AND REPORT ON SPEED LIMITS. The input of all of the Task Force members was valuable and informative and helped to form a consensus for the group's recommendations. Implementation of speed limit statutes involves an overlap of two principles: • Definitions: what type of roadway the motorist is driving on, and • Speed Limits: what the appropriate speed is for that roadway. The direction from the Legislature to Mn/DOT acknowledged these two principles. Mn/DOT was specifically tasked to study and report on the following topics: • Are the definitions of urban district, rural residential district and residential roadway appropriate? • Is 30 MPH in urban districts appropriate? • Are there locations where 25 MPH is appropriate? • Is 30 MPH in rural residential districts appropriate? • Is 55 MPH in rural residential districts within a city appropriate? • Are there rural residential district locations within cities where 30 MPH is appropriate? In response to these questions, Mn/DOT has developed proposed changes to the text of the statutes (2008 Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 169, TRAFFIC REGULATIONS). The full versions of those changes appear elsewhere in this report. The remainder of this section presents overviews and highlights of the major recommendations developed by Mn/DOT. Recommendations on Definitions Urban District The current definition of Urban District was found to be acceptable; however some agencies interpret the term "streets" to include highways and others do not. The Task Force concluded all similar types of roadways regardless of ownership should uniformly apply the Urban District criteria. Consequently, the Task Force recommends that highways should be specified to clarify the matter. Rural Residential District In the current statute text, this definition only applies for township roads; it does not apply within cities or for county roads. The definition is confusing and outdated. It does not reflect certain types of modern, large -lot, subdivision designs along roadways (in cities and townships) or well- managed access roadways through commercial or residential areas. The recommended change Page i • 0 � 0 deletes the exclusive township reference and allows this definition to be applied regardless of jurisdiction. A Rural Residential District could be located in either a township or city, along a roadway owned by any jurisdiction. The proposed changes also clarify the residence spacing measurements for this definition and recognize the specific development conditions which meet the Rural Residential District criteria. Residential Roadway The current language for this definition reads, in part, "'residential roadway' means a street or portion of a street that is less than one-half mile in length ...." This wording lacks clarity and does not match the intended application. The recommended language has been clarified as to conditions for its appropriate application and includes only short (less than one-half mile) lengths of roadways and not short portions of a long stretch of roadway. Recommendations on Speed Limits 30 MPH in an Urban District speed limit. One key factor is the citizen -level support for the clanger Another: important,factor is the increasedpedestriati survival rates at lower. speeds in the event of,yehicle-pedestrian crashes. speed limit would be expected tb umose. a significant burderi on some_communities. compliance with lh6. existing 30 MPH statutory speed limt..Though the topic could be revisited. Page ii • in the future if'addirionalxesources ;can be devoted to improved enfotcement of and education; regarding the existng`speed limit.! 30 MPH in a Rural Residential District 155 MPH in a Rural Residential District within a City These are related points. Strictly speaking, the term "Rural Residential District within a city" is a misnomer, as by current Minnesota Statute definition a "Rural Residential District" can only occur in a township. It was understood that what was meant by the question is the following: "For areas within a city that would be defined as Rural Residential District if in a township, is 55 MPH the appropriate speed limit?" The Task Force members were unanimous; 55 is not an appropriate speed limit for a rural residential area within a city. Mn/DOT recommends that, in tandem with the revised definition for Rural Residential Districts, a new speed limit should be set for this category of roadway. To determine the correct statutory speed for these roadways, several representative speed studies have been conducted on Rural Residential District roads. As a result of these studies, it was determined that 35 MPH is the reasonable speed limit on these roads. The Rural Residential District definition and its accompanying speed limit are proposed to be consistent for all road authorities. L� 0 Page iii • c: REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: May 17, 2012 Subject: Proposed Enhance Crosswalk for Tracy Avenue Project Agenda Item No.: VI.B. ACTION: ® Recommendation/Motion ® Discussion ❑ Information Recommendation/Motion: Review and comment regarding the proposed enhanced crosswalk design for Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue intersection, see attached memo. Info/Background: During the presentation and review of the Tracy Avenue project by the ETC, it was noted that the ETC would like to see additional consideration be made to the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue as it relates to pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Staff requested that our consultant for the project, WSB prepare a proposal indicating the proposed crosswalk. The City's Pedestrian Crosswalks Traffic Policy is silent to the type of pavement markings to be used for crosswalks in the City, see attached policy. It is staff's intention to review this policy and incorporate a crosswalk policy that enhances crosswalks that are adjacent to schools as suggested by Commission Member Janovy at a recent City Council workshop. Attachments: • Memo dated May 3, 2012: Enhanced Crosswalks at School Crossing • ETC Advisory of February 29, 2012 • Pedestrian Crosswalks Traffic Policy G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2012 R&R\20120517\20120517 Item VI B Proposed Enhanced Crosswalk for Tracy Avenue Project.docx • • r: WSB - &Associates, Inc. Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction Memorandum 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 To: Wayne Houle, City Engineer, City of Edina From: Andrew Plowman, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: May 3, 2012 Re: Enhanced Crosswalks at School Crossing (Tracy Avenue/Benton Avenue Intersection) Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Project Edina, MN WSB Project Number 01686-25 This memo summarizes our recommendation for enhanced crosswalk markings at the Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue intersection, near the Countryside Elementary School. We were asked to analyze and recommend crosswalk markings that were more conspicuous for drivers, than the typical brick pattern used throughout much of the City. The goal was to use the duratherm (or equal) product which would require minimal maintenance and have a longer lifespan than epoxy or poly preform pavement markings. After consulting with Randy Johnson from Decorative Pavement Marking, our recommendation is to place the custom — alternating, herringbone green and white brick pattern as seen below: Figure l: Rendering Looking Northbound along Tracy Avenue across Benton Avenue (East Leg) Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer Ct\Users\WHoule\AppDataUL al\Micrmft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\DYNBNG6.M1emo_EnbmmdSOW Crosswalks.d— Enhanced Crosswalk Memo Page 2 0 Backiround The standard crosswalk marking on new construction projects in the City has been a 6' wide, brick pattern, duratherm marking, as seen in the following photo: Figure 1: 70tH Street and (Arneilit Aeuue t i osswalk Some of the early markings in the City included a transverse 4" white, epoxy stripe. The white stripe would often wear off after only a few years, so it was decided to leave the transverse stripe off with recent reconstruction projects. The crosswalk is very visible to pedestrians but does not radiate for drivers as much as a common zebra crosswalk would, for example. I spoke with Randy Johnson about the markings. He said that a few items influence how the crosswalk illuminates. 1. Width of the crosswalk 2. The absence of a transverse stripe 3. That the depth of the duratherm print is 1/8" below the level of the pavement when first placed, and as the pavement wears the duratherm actually brightens as it becomes equal with the surface. Solution Randy recommended a treatment that was placed on a project in Becker, MN. http://www.decopavement.net/wp-content/uploads/2412/04BeckerSafe-Route-to-School.pdf It was an alternating pattern of a white brick pattern (similar to the City of Edina standard) and a safety green, herringbone pattern (also seen in the rendering in Figure 1). This immediately came to Randy's mind when I mentioned the placement near an elementary school, because this application was part of a Safe Route to School program. The marking was placed at a mid -block crossing at the Becker Middle School. The following are reasons we believe the marking will be highly visible and create a safe crosswalk . environment: C:\Users\WHouleWppData\Local\Mcrosoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Fi1es\Conten1.Oudook\DYNBNG6NNemo_Enhanced School Crosswalks.d— is • Enhanced Crosswalk Memo Page 3 1. The crosswalk is 10' wide, as opposed to the normal 6' wide. The additional 4' provides a larger refuge and adds to the visibility from a driver's perspective. 2. 4" black followed by 12" white transverse stripes are added along each side of the crosswalk. I was skeptical of these stripes given the problems encountered with the epoxy stripes that quickly wore off with the early City markings. The difference is these will be thermoplastic, which is much more durable compared to epoxy. Randy claims that the black will help the white "pop out" to the driver, while also providing protection to the white stripe. A snow plow will hit the black stripe first and impact that stripe while providing protection to the white stripe. Randy referenced a project at Highway 10 and 25 in Big Lake, where the black was adjacent to the white and the white didn't suffer any damage. I haven't personally witnessed this myself as of yet. 3. The green color is a lime colored green, similar to safety vests. This will aid in alerting drivers to slow down and pay attention to the crosswalk. 4. This pattern is similar to the zebra crosswalk, as the white pattern mimics the white blocks that are part of the zebra crosswalk. Implementation We plan to incorporate this recommended alternative into the Tracy Avenue reconstruction plan. They would be located at the two crosswalks near the Countryside Elementary School. C\Users\WHoule\AppDataU.ocel\Microsoli\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\ContmtOodook\DYNBNG6J\Memo_Enhanced School Cmsswalks.d— • 0 SITUATION: Per City ordinance 1509.03 the ETC reviews "neighborhood street capital investment projects for adherence to adopted City policies and planning documents." The ETC conducted this review at our February 16, 2012 regular meeting and offers the following analysis and recommendations. BACKGROUND: The ETC was presented speed, volume, and accident data for Tracy Avenue and speed and volume data for Benton Avenue at our December 15, 2011 regular meeting.* The ETC discussed the February 6, 2012 feasibility study and appendices at our February 16, 2012 regular meeting. About 10 residents were present at this meeting; six residents provided comments. Discussion took approximately 2.5 hours. Discussion focused on the roadway section between Vernon and Benton (bike lanes, parking, widening, sidewalk, curb extensions, and crosswalks) and the Tracy and Benton intersection (safety, operations, roundabout option, realignment option, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities). *This data is not provided in the study or appendices. ASSESSMENT: Members were polled for their opinions on the following: • Do you support* bike lanes as proposed? — 9 Yes, 0 No • Do you support parking as proposed? — 6 Yes, 3 No • Do you support parking as proposed, but with fewer spaces? — 5 Yes, 4 No • Do you support removing parking and widening bike lanes to 6'? —2 Yes, 7 No** • Do you support reducing the speed limit to 25 mph with the addition of bike lanes? — 2 Yes, 7 No • Do you support seeking a variance to reduce the travel lane width to 10'? — 8 Yes, 1 No The ETC discussed the merit of the roundabout in considerable detail. ETC consensus was that, while the roundabout may be superior in design to the current alignment, the intersection has a history of operating safely and therefore does not warrant the proposed improvement. The following motions were made and carried: • The ETC recommends approval of the roadway section as proposed. — 7 aye, 2 nay • The ETC recommends leaving the Tracy and Benton intersection as it currently is. — 8 aye, 1 nay The following additional points were noted: • The ETC recommends additional consideration of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and safety at the Tracy and Benton intersection (whether roundabout, realignment, or offset). • The ETC recommends that the concerns of the property owner at 5700 Benton be addressed in final design if roundabout or realignment option is chosen. *Based on an assessment of adherence to adopted City policies and planning documents. **Parking observation data was not provided to the ETC. ROUTING: Prepared by: Jennifer Janovy Reviewed by: Katherine Bass, Nathan Franzen, Paul Nelson To: Wayne Houle • Action Requested: Please distribute to the Council for March 6 regular meeting. 0 • o e V's PEDESTRIAN cc .�0 CROSSWALKS _ � TRAFFIC POLICY City of Edina PURPOSE: Both pedestrians and motorists in the State of Minnesota have rights and responsibilities on the roadway. Pedestrians must obey signals and yield to motorists if not crossing at an intersection or a crosswalk. Conversely, motorists are required to yield to pedestrians at crosswalks and when crossing at intersections. In other parts of the country, this law works well and pedestrians are protected. In Minnesota, the rights of pedestrians are not as respected by motorists. This fact creates the potential for accidents and injury with the improper placement of crosswalks. Excessive use of signs and pavement markings can substantially reduce the effectiveness of such devices. A consistent application of this policy will serve both the motorist and pedestrian within the City. PROCESS: Your traffic safety concern or request will be formalized by the staff member you have contacted. That person will work with you and gather the pertinent facts and help clearly define the problem and seek a solution. Those facts will be reviewed by the Traffic Safety Committee That group will make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the matter. The staff safety review recommendation will be shared with you. If you disagree with the recommendation or can bring forth additional information and/or facts that are persuasive as related to the City warrants/policies for the requested issue, you can appear at the second Council meeting of the month and present your viewpoint. We suggest you alert any interested parties to attend the meeting with you. In all cases the City Council is the final authority on traffic safety matters. Any subsequent review of the same or similar request is at the discretion of the City Council. POLICY: 1. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) shall be followed. 2. Relevant speed, volumes, accident records, pedestrian counts, sight obstructions and demographic analysis shall be reviewed when considering pedestrian crosswalk installations. 3. Absent engineering data, that clearly indicates the need for a pedestrian crosswalk, intersections will remain unmarked. 4. Pedestrian crosswalks unusually hazardous or pedestrian movement. Revised 5-20-03 by City Council shall be placed only at locations that are at locations not readily apparent as having 0 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS (Continued) 5. Pedestrian crosswalks shall only be placed in an area that has in excess of 20 pedestrians crossing for a minimum of two hours during any eight-hour period. 6. Marking of pedestrian crosswalks shall be established by analyzing the "Vehicle Gap Time". The "Vehicle Gap Time" is the total number of gaps between vehicular traffic (that are equal to or exceed the required pedestrian crossing time of three feet per second) recorded during the average five minute period in the Peak Hour. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be marked and signed using the following criteria: a. More than five Gaps — Pavement markings and signage only. b. Four to five Gaps — Add activated pedestal mounted flasher. Add overhead mounted flasher if roadway is over 40 feet wide. c. Less than three Gaps — Add activated overhead mounted flasher. The activated pedestal and overhead mounted flasher shall be designed per City Engineer Standards. 7. Pedestrian crosswalks shall not be located on arterial roads or roads • with a speed limit greater than 30 MPH unless in conjunction with signalization. 8. Pedestrian crosswalks shall only be placed at intersections. 10 9. Any of the following conditions may warrant pedestrian crosswalks: a. Those locations adjacent to and along established pedestrian routes to and from a school. b. Locations adjacent to community centers, libraries, and other high use public facilities. C. Locations adjacent to public parks. d. Locations where accident records, sight obstructions and/or pedestrian volume (see No. 5) warrants the installation. e. Locations where significant numbers of handicapped persons cross a street. f. Locations where significant numbers of senior citizens cross a street. Revised 5-20-03 by City Council 2 • Bike Edina Task Force: News & Meeting Outcomes April 12, 2012 Purpose: The Bike Edina Task Force (BETF) meets to serve citizens and partner with City staff and elected officials to promote bicycle improvements in Edina for education, encouragement, infrastructure, enforcement, and ongoing assessment. We support implementation of the approved City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan that serves all levels of bicyclists, connects key destinations including safe routes to schools, and integrates with the Twin Cities' regional bike network. Our vision is a progressive bicycle -friendly community where citizens can integrate cycling into their daily lives. Time & Location: BETF monthly on the 2nd Thursday of each month at 8 p.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room at Edina City Hall. For questions contact Peter Kelley, Chair. Guests are 40 welcome. Distribution: BETF, guests, City Manager, City Engineer, Edina Police BETF Liaison Sgt. Timothy Olson, SHIP contact Robyn Wiesman, and Mayor & City Council. Also Dianne Plunkett Latham to post for the Edina Energy and Environment Commission. • Present: Alex Johnson, Peter Kelley, Tom Randall, Larry Olson, Brad Schaeppi, Kirk Johnson, Marty Mathis, Don Eyberg • Absent: Alice Hulbert, Carl Gulbronson, Ellen Jones, Sally Dunn, Rob Erickson, Jennifer Janovy, Carl Follstad • Guests: Kristopher Wilson • Recorded by: Kirk Johnson & Peter Kelley 1. Bike Rodeo: April 21st. Saturday, 10 a.m. to noon: Skills course for kids. Edina Bike Police Patrol is attending. They will be bringing the speed read-out sign. Hoigaard's will be attending (helmet checks, light bike maintenance). Still waiting to hear about Freewheel. Also, do.town will attend with a table. Promotion of the event include Edina Magazine, Sun Current. Also Highlands and Cornelia newsletters. Larry Olson (who is the event organizer) brought flyers. Volunteers are requested to arrive there around 9 a.m. Hoping for sunny weather this year! 2. Edina Dialog: April 19th Edina High School Tom Randall is manning a BETF information table. Tom will host the table and include flyers for the Bike Rodeo, wallet cards, maps, and other items. Peter will provide tom hardcopy of the City of Edina Bicycle Transportation Plan. Tom will create a sign-up sheet for people interested in bicycle news. It was suggested that the group do abetter job managing and using that type of information—via our blog or Facebook page, perhaps. 3. Public School Presentation. June 4th, 11:30 to 12:30 (Creek Valley). BETF has been asked to do a presentation on bike safety. Peter Kelley asked for volunteers. Kirk Johnson will obtain some materials from the League of American Bicyclists to assist. Ideas: Reach out to Nick Mason from the Bike Alliance of MN (Kirk Johnson will do). Don Eyberg suggested involving police department representative; Kirk will ask Sgt. Olson. (Sgt Olson has already responded with some suggestions for the training) 4. Reviewed Gallagher Section of Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail. City Engineer, Wayne Houle requested BETF feedback on the upcoming redevelopment of Gallagher Drive. Specifically whether there should be advisory bike lanes on travel lanes. There will be an off road trail adjacent to the street, but the group felt that on -street road marking would also be helpful. Comments included similarity to Richfield solution near its off-road trail, possible traffic -calming influence, offering additional space for potentially busy trail use times, and markings that may assist bicycle travelers that choose to use the main road. 5. Blog: Peter Kelley passed around the signup sheet with the topics. Goal is to have at least two per month. Send your article/photo to Peter. Aiming to get to one per week. Peter Kelley will work with someone to improve the use of the logo. Peter will use categories to assign to each post. Kirk agree to take ownership of the Partners page for the time being, but suggested responsibility be rotated periodically. Website is : http://bikeedina.org/ 6. Facebook page(s): Discussed opportunity to improve administrative access to enable better use and sharing. Figure out how to "like" it. Peter will follow up with Andrew who initially set up the page 7. Infrastructure: a. Bike Blvd(54TH-Wooddale-Valleyview): Peter Kelley shared the latest plan. ETC is reviewing April 191h. City Council will consider at second May meeting. The City has been notified that MnDOT officials will allow advisory bike lanes. Roads involved will be ready as part of the new seal -coating project. The group identified many positive features and is excited about the project. Plan to guide cyclists to pedestrian bridge over Hwy 62 raised issue of the state of the trail south of Wooddale—it is quite narrow and the asphalt is in poor repair. b. Bicycle Parking: Brad Schaeppi gave an update. Soon to have a final approval and then a timeline will be developed. Still aiming for this summer, approximately 50 racks to be installed in various city locations. • c. Bicycle Striping: Cahill, 70th, Antrim, Valley View — still planned but nothing new 8. Tour de Edina: Marty Mathis attended the previous meeting. Offered input for route to improve it. The date will be in October. 9. Southwest LRT meeting: Don Eyberg attended first meeting of advisory group. Individual cities will be responsible for planning stations within their boundaries (there are none planned within Edina city limits). Group briefly discussed being proactive in identifying bike routes from Edina to the closest stations. • 0 0 L Edina Transportation Commission Roll -Call Sign -in Sheet May 17, 2012 Last Name First Name Signature Bass Katherine Braden Ann Franzen Nathan Iyer Su rya Janov ✓ Jennifer LaForce'� Tom Nelson Z Paul Schwei er'� Steven Thompson Michael Whited ✓ Courtney