Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-09-28 Meeting Packet
Agenda Tran sportation Com m ission City Of Edina, Minnesota Council Chambers Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:00 PM I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of August 17, 2017 V.Community Comment During "Community Comment," t he Board/Commission will invite resi dent s to share r elevant i ssues or concerns. Individuals must l i mi t t heir comments to three mi nutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same i ssue in t he int erest of time and topic. Gener al ly speaking, i tems that ar e elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Indi vi dual s should not expect the Chai r or Boar d/Commission Member s to respond to t heir comment s tonight. Instead, the Board/Commi ssion might refer the mat ter to st a% for consi derat i on at a future meeting. VI.Reports/Recommendations A.Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report: Draft Recommendations B.Pedestrian and Bicy cle Ma ster Plan C.Grandview Green (Lid) Project: Katie Clark Sieben D.2018 Neighborhood a nd MSA Street Reconstruction Draft Engineering Studies E.2018 Transportation Commission Work Plan F.T ra8c Safety Report of September 6, 2017 VII.Correspondence And Petitions VIII.Chair And Member Comments IX.Sta ; Comments A.Comprehensive Pla n Update: Transportation "T ool Kit" X.Calendar Of Events A.Schedule of Meeting a nd E v ent Dates as of September 28, 2017 XI.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortabl e bei ng part of the publi c proc ess . If you need as s is tanc e i n the way of heari ng am pli >c ation, an interpreter, large-print doc um ents or s om ethi ng els e, pleas e c al l 952-927-8861 72 ho urs in advance of the m eeting. Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: Minutes F rom:S haro n Allis on, Engineering S pec ialis t Item Activity: Subject:Approval of Minutes - R egular Meeting of Augus t 17, 2017 Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve the meeting minutes of the regular E dina T ransportation C ommission of August 17, 2017. I N TR O D U C TI O N : AT TAC HME N T S : Description Minutes : ETC, Augus t 17, 2017 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: 1 Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Transportation Commission Community Room August 17, 2017, 6:00 p.m. I. Call To Order Chair LaForce called the meeting to order. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were commissioners Brown, Iyer, Kane, LaForce, Miranda, Olson, and Ruthruff. Absent: Commissioners Ahler, Koester, Olk and Richman. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Chair LaForce to add new item VI.A. Comprehensive Plan Update to the agenda. The motion was seconded by commissioner Miranda. All voted aye. Motion passed. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion was made by commissioner Olson and seconded by commissioner Miranda approving the July 20, 2017, minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. Community Comments None. VI. Reports/Recommendations A. Comprehensive Plan Update Ms. Susan Lee, from the Planning Commission, updated the ETC on the Comprehensive Plan Task Force’s work. Ms. Lee said they’ve started the first of three small area plan discussion (44th & France Small Area Plan) and member Miranda is part of the team. Member Miranda and planner Nolan gave an update on the second community meeting that took place this week. They said approximately 90 were in attendance; three prototypes were shown and debated; some expressed concerns about height; but overall, most seemed happy with the plans. Continuing, Ms. Lee said the three small area plans are to be completed for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan and the second one, 70th & Cahill, was beginning soon. She said that for their September meeting the ETC would receive a toolkit that would help them as they review the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and, in January, they’ll begin meeting with the task force. B. 2018 Neighborhood and MSA Street Reconstruction Projects Planner Nolan asked for feedback on the 2018 Neighborhood and MSA Street Reconstruction projects. W. 62nd Street Planner Nolan explained that the layout was revised since the ETC packet was sent out. He said the consultant recommended not closing the intersections at W. 62nd Street/Valley View Road/Oaklawn Avenue because it would not solve safety issues and it increased traffic going north into the neighborhood. They suggested adding a median at the intersection to prevent drivers from Valley View Road from turning on to W. 62nd Street to Oaklawn Avenue during peak hours. Another recommendation was to install a traffic signal at Valley View Road and Wooddale Avenue to prevent backups and cut thru traffic during peak hours. The cost would be approximately $300,000 and staff was starting to look for funding sources. If approved, the traffic signal would be done separately from the W. 62nd Street project. Another revision was installing the trail on the south side because of impacts on the north side (trees/poles) and adding a crosswalk. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: 2 The plan did not show a sidewalk between Brookview and Oaklawn Avenues and planner Nolan explained that there wasn’t sufficient right-of-way; he said an easement would be needed from a property owner and that he would recommend pursuing an easement to be able to add the sidewalk. The plan showed the trail going south on Brookview Avenue and planner Nolan said he would look at adding conflict markings for bikers who are continuing on W. 62nd Street pass Brookview Avenue. Bredesen Park A Planner Nolan was asked about guidelines for curb and gutter spot replacement as noted on the plans. He believed the guideline to be full replacement at 50% repair, plus utility repairs. He was also asked about the life expectancy of the pieces not replaced and aesthetics. Planner Nolan said he would check with staff and follow up. Member Olson said his neighborhood had spot replacement and some residents weren’t happy with it; he said there should always be full replacement or at least offer residents the option of being assessed for full replacement (curb and gutter are paid from the storm utility fund). Bredesen Park E No comment. Concord A/G Planner Nolan was asked about the sidewalk on W. 60th Street and he said it was on the sidewalk facilities map and being installed because of traffic counts and connection to schools. Country Club C and Normandale Park D No comment. C. Traffic Safety Report of August 2, 2017 Motion was made by member Olson and seconded by member Miranda to forward the August 2, 2017, TSC report to Council. All voted aye. Motion passed. D. Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund Equity Scoring Criteria Member Iyer explained that this process was introduced by Ms. Katherine Bass near the end of her term on the ETC and he brought it up to see if there was any interest in pursuing it. He explained that staff’s criteria for projects in priority were neighborhood reconstruction projects, state aid projects, Active Routes to School projects, the sidewalk plan, costs, money left over in the PACS fund, grants; and petition. He said it is a practical list that goes with costs but it creates patchwork. He said the scoring criteria were originally introduced for the PACS fund but he would like to apply it to all projects. Planner Nolan said citywide, there was a Race and Equity Task Force and this would fit with their work plan or, the ETC could consider adding it to its work plan for 2018. Planner said staff was reviewing their criteria and decision-making and as a result, W. 58th Street reconstruction and sidewalk was moved up on the reconstruction schedule. Additionally, he said in September, the engineering department will have a MN GreenCorp member for one year who will work on a developing a matrix for implementing Living Streets and this could inform the scoring criteria. After discussion, the consensus was to add this to the ETC’s work plan list. E. 2018 Transportation Commission Work Plan The following topics were suggested for the work plan: A. Integration between the Transportation and the Planning Commissions. B. Bike vs. Car Education Campaign. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: 3 C. Review of and recommendation for a revised Traffic Study process. D. Transportation to high school. E. Advocate/proponent – lobbying for state level bike laws. F. Transportation solution for density issues. G. How to integrate with regional transportation. H. Transportation Equity Policy. I. Storage for “dormant” autonomous cars. J. Facilities to charge electric vehicles. K. Promote/enable students biking to school. L. Does transportation impact Edina’s support for ADUs? M. Autonomous deliveries. N. Position on shared car services. Using the criteria of meaningful, attainable, and fits the ETC scope of responsibilities, the following were selected for the 2018 work plan: 1. Transportation solution within and between high density nodes. 2. Define/implement equity criteria for PACS Fund and integrate with City’s Race and Equity Task Force. 3. Integrate Edina’s transportation initiatives with neighboring communities’ initiatives. 4. Analysis/recommendation for high school traffic on neighborhoods. VII. Correspondence And Petitions None. VIII. Chair and Member Comments A. ETC Participation at 2017 Open Streets on 50th Member Miranda suggested a challenge game about Edina that would include taking photos of different sidewalks, pedestrian bridges, bike racks, trails, etc., and asking residents to identity their locations. Planner Nolan said Open Streets is scheduled for Sept. 24, 1-5 p.m. Member Brown expressed appreciation for staff’s and the ETC’s work because of a four car vehicle accident recently that resulted in two deaths in front of his office. Member Ruthruff asked if the City had ever considered taking out some of the buildings at 50th & France to install a roundabout for traffic management (he said this came to mind as he sat waiting behind a driver who was waiting to make a left turn). Planner Nolan said no, but a consultant is looking at the intersection and is considering a ‘no left turn’ sign during peak hours. Member Olson thanked staff for the infrastructure tour last week. IX. Staff Comments • Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan – the consultant is compiling public input until the end of August; they had a pop up meeting at the Centennial Lakes Farmers Market today, and one is scheduled for Jerry’s on Friday, and Bredesen Park on Saturday; they are working on scheduling listening sessions. • Passenger Rail – approximately 180 attended the first community meeting; the consultant is compiling data; the online survey is open until tomorrow and approximately 500 completed a survey so far; they met with agency staff from St. Louis Park, Bloomington and Hennepin County (MNDOT and Met Council declined because of the gag rule) and this is not on their radar but they’d like to be kept informed; meeting with businesses are being planned; an existing infrastructure condition report was just submitted and would be shared later on. The next community meeting is Sept 7 and the format will be a little different than the first open house. • 2017 projects are progressing on schedule; the Oaklawn Avenue sidewalk will begin within the next couple weeks; the trail on Parklawn Avenue will be paved soon. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: 4 • W. 66th Street & York Avenue – most of the work is completed. • Highway 169 is estimated to reopen on Sept 25; both north and south bound Bren Road ramps will close soon for two weeks. • New website – please peruse and offer comments or suggestions. • Manager Neal recently presented the new budget to Council and it included the traffic safety coordinator as a fulltime position and $100,000 for the bus circulator project. • September’s ETC meeting was scheduled for the 28th in the Mayor’s Conference Room. X. Calendar of Events A. Schedule of Meeting and Events as of August 17, 2017 For information purposes - no discussion. XI. Adjournment at 8:30 p.m. J F M A M J J A S O N D SM # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 NAME (Date) Ahler, Mindy 1 1 1 1 4 75% Bass, Katherine 1 1 2 100% Boettge, Emily 1 1 2 100% Brown, Andy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% Iyer, Surya 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 75% LaForce, Tom 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% Janovy, Jennifer 1 1 2 100% Kane, Bocar 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 100% Miranda, Lou 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% Olson, Larry 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88% Richman, Lori 1 1 1 1 1 5 88% Ruthruff, Erik 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 100% Koester, David (student) 1 1 1 1 4 50% Olk, Megan (student) 1 1 1 3 38% TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Mark K Nolan, Transportation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:P as s enger R ail C ommunity Engagement R eport: Draft R ec o mmendatio ns Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve recommendations of P assenger Rail C ommunity E ngagement Report and forward to C ity Council. I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he attached report, prepared by K imley-Horn, contains draft recommendations regarding the future of P assenger R ail in E dina (as directed by City C ouncil). T he C ommission is being asked to send its recommendations regarding the same to C ity C ouncil for its O ct 17 meeting for their consideration. S taff from K imley-H orn will be on-hand to present their recommendations. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Draft Pas s enger Rail Community Engagement Report: Main Document Draft Pas s enger Rail Community Engagement Report: Appendices A and B Draft Pas s enger Rail Community Engagement Report: Appendix C Part 1 Draft Pas s enger Rail Community Engagement Report: Appendix C Part 2 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 21, 2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | i Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | ii Revision History Revision Number Date Description 0 9/21/2017 Draft to Edina Transportation Commission Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | iii Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Background and Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 Study Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Study Background .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2.1 History of the Dan Patch Corridor ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2.2 Current Interest in Passenger Rail in Edina ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.0 Planning Context ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Planning Study and Document Review ..................................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.1 Demographic Data ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Changes Since 2001 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Station Area Comparison ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.0 Policy Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.1 “Gag Rule”....................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 Public Input .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Summary of Public Feedback ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 5.1.1 Benefits ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 5.1.2 Challenges ................................................................................................................................................................................. 10 5.1.3 Information Needs.................................................................................................................................................................. 10 5.1.4 Additional Information – Property Values ........................................................................................................................ 11 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Appendices Appendix A – Planning Study and Review Memo Appendix B – Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis Appendix C – Public Input Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 1 Executive Summary Kimley-Horn was hired to conduct a public engagement process within the City of Edina to answer the following questions: l Should the City of Edina request elimination of the “gag rule” (Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85)? l Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? Based on high-level review of the corridor and feedback from the public, Kimley-Horn recommends the following: l No, the City of Edina should not request elimination of the gag rule at this time. £High level evaluation and previous studies of the Grandview area indicate it could be served well by some type of transit service in the future, but currently it falls in the bottom1/3 in household, population, and employment densities when compared to existing and planned transit station areas in the Twin Cities. £Adjacent residents and businesses have expressed strong opposition to passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. This strong opposition is not uncommon for a rail project; but there was also not a strong faction of vocal supporters. Especially with the legislative challenges of the gag rule, strong champions are essential. £This opposition is likely to remain in the future, unless a stronger case can be made for transit. This requires new development and land uses changes that will take several years to realize. £Eliminating the gag rule cannot be done by Edina alone, and must involve other cities along the corridor. At this time, adjacent cities are focused on other investments and do not view passenger rail in the Dan Patch corridor as a priority. £While conditions are not yet fully ripe for a higher transit investment in the Dan Patch Corridor at this time, if the city continues to invest in new types of development and higher densities in the Dan Patch corridor, it may be worth evaluating in the future as an option alongside other transit corridors. l No, the City should not dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina in the Dan Patch Corridor at this time. £Throughout this process, the public has tied both questions specifically to the Dan Patch Corridor. Therefore, for the reasons listed above, at this time the city should not dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in the Dan Patch Corridor. £There are overall indicators that suggest Edina could support additional transit options, such as unique demographic and community patterns. Previous engagement efforts in the city, as captured in the Vision Edina document, have indicated the community’s desire for enhanced transit. £The city should invest time and resources into looking at other corridors as possible transit corridors. This may also include consideration of other modes of transit in addition to passenger rail. The city should also invest in diversifying land uses and building up specific nodes to further support expanded transit options. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 2 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 3 1.0 Background and Purpose 1.1 Study Purpose The purpose of this study is to provide a recommendation to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regarding the future of passenger rail service in Edina, specifically answer these two questions: l Should the City of Edina request elimination of the “gag rule” (Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85)? l Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? Kimley-Horn has recommended answers to these questions based on a public engagement process, planning study and document review, and existing conditions and policy analysis. This report serves as our recommendation to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC). The ETC will then make a recommendation to the Edina City Council. 1.2 Study Background 1.2.1 History of the Dan Patch Corridor The Dan Patch Electric Railroad began service from Minneapolis to Northfield, MN in 1910 and was in operation until 1942. The Dan Patch line ran along what is now the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP Rail) railroad, which in Edina runs north-south over four miles through the entire city, just west of Highway 100. Currently, freight trains on this portion of the CP Rail line are operated by the Twin Cities and Western (TC&W) Railroad. Approximately two trains run through Edina on CP Rail per day—one in the morning and one the evening. In 1999 the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) identified the Dan Patch as a commuter rail corridor, connecting Lakeville to the Minneapolis central business district. The corridor was included in the Metropolitan Council’s Transit 2020 Master Plan in 2001. It was prioritized third of the three planned commuter rail lines at the time. In 2001 Dakota County studied the feasibility of commuter rail on the Dan Patch line between Northfield and Minneapolis. The report concluded that while the implementation of passenger rail transit service in the Dan Patch corridor is physically possible, the real and perceived adverse impacts and high costs made corridor improvements impractical at that time. In 2002, the MN legislature adopted the Dan Patch “gag rule” (Laws of Minnesota 2002, chapter 393, section 85), which prohibits the Met Council, MnDOT, and regional rail authorities from taking any action or spending any money for study, planning, preliminary engineering, final design or construction of the Dan Patch commuter rail line. The 2010 (and draft 2015) Statewide Rail Plan identifies the Dan Patch corridor for intercity passenger rail within 20 years. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 4 1.2.2 Current Interest in Passenger Rail in Edina Some residents and City officials have continued to express interest in the possibility of passenger rail in Edina. The subject of rail service in Edina was not part of any City Council, City department or Board/Commission work plan, so in April of 2016 City Council directed the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) to review and recommend whether the City of Edina should assume a position in favor of the addition of passenger rail to the community. Specifically, the City Council directed the ETC to include findings on the following key questions: l Should the City of Edina support further study of the possibility of passenger rail service in Edina? l Should the City of Edina request elimination of the “gag rule” (Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85)? l Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? “Passenger rail” as defined in this process includes all modes that travel on rail tracks. This can include intercity rail, commuter rail, light rail, or streetcar. Each of these have distinct differences in total system length, frequency of service, distance between stations, and cost. * Vehicle propulsion technology can be diesel, electric, or diesel multiple unit (DMU) In October of 2016, the ETC recommended to City Council that the City support further study of the possibility of passenger rail service in Edina (effectively answering “yes” to the first question above). Recommended answers to the second and third questions were to be the outcomes of this Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report. City Council approved these recommendations (and conducting this study) in November of 2016. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 5 2.0 Planning Context 2.1 Planning Study and Document Review The interconnected nature of the regional transit system demands an awareness of the multitude of initiatives that are ongoing in the Twin Cities region and in Minnesota. A Planning Study and Document Review memo (Appendix A) was prepared in July 2017 and reviewed the following documents: l Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001) l City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework (2015) l Transportation Chapter of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan (2008) l Metropolitan Council 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (2015) l Metropolitan Council Regional Transitway Guidelines (2012) l GrandView District Development Framework (2012) l MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015 draft) This review illustrated three key messages related to passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. First, it is technically feasible to implement passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001), the Transportation Chapter of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan (2008), and the MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) all suggest that the Dan Patch Corridor has the potential to carry passenger rail. Second, there was significant resistance to using this corridor for commuter rail in the late 1990s and early 2000s, which led to the adoption of the “gag rule.” This community opposition was discussed in the Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001) and is reflected in the excerpt from Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85 . Finally, more recent plans and policy documents indicate that there is interest in more transit options in Edina. The MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) referred to public support for passenger rail generally in Minnesota and specifically between Minneapolis and Northfield by way of the MN&S subdivision, which travels through Edina. The City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework also expressed public support, especially among younger residents, for the integration of diverse transportation options. The GrandView District Development Framework (2012) also expresses public support for increased transit options and specifically mentions the desire to preserve the CP Rail corridor for possible public transit and non-motorized movement/connection in the District. 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1 Demographic Data The City of Edina has some unique demographic characteristics compared to peer cities: ·People who live and also work within the city of Edina total about 24% of the working population, leaving about 76% of people who commute to other places.2 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 6 ·Over 47,000 workers are employed by the more than 6,800 businesses in Edina, with a vast majority of these workers commuting into the city from elsewhere.1 The daily population of Edina increases by over 18,000 people during a workday (+36%)2 ·Edina has a high population of seniors compared to other cities and the state—21% of population is 65 or older (38% of those are living alone).3 Aging populations have different needs—lower income, different housing, access to healthcare—and are often more dependent on transit. 3.2 Changes Since 2001 The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study is often referenced in current discussions of passenger rail service in the Dan Patch Corridor. Below is a summary of demographic and system changes since that study was completed in 2001, that are important to consider in the discussion of passenger rail. l The total population of Edina is estimated at around 51,000. Population changed only by about one percent between 2000 and 2010 (47,425 to 47,941), but increased by another seven percent between 2010 and today.4 l The opportunity to connect to other transit lines is a consideration in the success of a new transit line. Fixed transit did not exist in the Twin Cities region in 2001. Since then, Blue Line LRT from Minneapolis to the Mall of America, Green Line LRT between Minneapolis and St. Paul, and Northstar Commuter Rail between Minneapolis and Elk River have been implemented. Investment has been made in advancing extensions of the existing Blue Line (“Bottineau” – service to northwest suburbs) and Green Line (“Southwest” – service to southwest suburbs). l The existing freight rail traffic in the Dan Patch Corridor remains about the same as it did in 2001 (about 1-2 trains per day). Some freight improvements/track improvements have been made recently which may lead to increased freight traffic, though specific railroad plans are not known. The 2001 study found commuter rail in this corridor to be feasible but impractical due to real and perceived impacts, and cost of implementation. With updated information and the benefit of new technologies, different results may be possible with updated information. It is also important to note that feasibility of different modes in this corridor (LRT, high speed rail, streetcar, etc.) have not been studied. 3.3 Station Area Comparison The success of transit in any given corridor is based on the travel demand between origins and destinations along the corridor. The travel demand is driven in part by the density of use along the corridor, especially at station areas. Because the Dan Patch Corridor has not been studied to a level of sufficient detail, service type and station locations are not determined. A comparison was conducted for the land use within one mile of stations at current and planned transit corridors in the Twin Cities region, and a station at Grandview in the city of Edina. Grandview was chosen because it is identified in approved city planning documents as a potential future location for a transit station. The comparison includes population density, household density, and employment density. Based on the metrics of household, population, and employment density 5 for the 46 other station areas evaluated, the example station area at Grandview performs as follows: ·Households – 20 station areas (43%) have less or similar household density to the Grandview station area 1 Vision Edina: Community Profile and Benchmark Analysis (2014)https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1627 2 http://www.city-data.com/city/Edina-Minnesota.html 3 https://www.seniorcare.com/directory/mn/edina/ 4 U.S. Census 2000 and 2010 and 2016 Population Estimates 5 Current data based on U.S. Census 2010, projections based on Metropolitan Council forecasts Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 7 ·Population – The Grandview area currently has about 5 people per acre with the density forecasted to decrease to 4.7 people per acre in 2040. 18 station areas (39%) have less or similar population density to the Grandview station area. This number falls to 13 (28%) in the year 2040. Four people per acre is a good minimum benchmark for some level of increased investment in higher frequency transit. ·Employment – The Grandview area has about 1.6 employees per acre. 12 station areas (26%) have less or similar employment density to the Grandview station area. In 2040, this decreases to 4 station areas (9%). The Grandview area, as a representative example of a potential station area, falls within approximately the bottom 1/3 of the station areas studied. Household density is the strongest, while employment density faces some challenges. However, there is enough household, employment, and population density to warrant a deeper look at future conditions for transit. Furthermore, some of the discussion around the Grandview District and Grandview Green concept may result in higher densities than what is included in current published plans.The success of a station at Grandview also is highly dependent on other factors such as end points, type and frequency of service, number of stations, and connection to other transit service. Technical evaluation of this corridor is based on previous studies, as well as collection of data at a very high level. For specific data on the stations evaluated, see Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis in Appendix B. 4.0 Policy Analysis 4.1 “Gag Rule” In 2002, the Minnesota Legislature adopted legislation that prohibits the Metropolitan Council, MnDOT, and regional railroad authorities from expending any money for study, planning, preliminary engineering, final design, or construction for the Dan Patch commuter rail line (Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85). The legislation defines Dan Patch as “the commuter rail line between Northfield and Minneapolis identified in the Metropolitan Council’s Transit 2020 Master Plan.” This is nicknamed the “Gag Rule.” The Gag Rule is unique—we are not aware of this type of legislation prohibiting study of a specific corridor anywhere else in the United States. Typically, the next step in a transit planning process would be to look at a range of alternatives, which would include a broader look at different corridors and modes. Prohibiting study of a certain corridor limits the study of a broader range of alternatives and leaves this corridor out of a regional conversation. It should be noted that the Gag Rule specifically references a commuter rail line. It could be argued that other modes could be studied. However, prohibited agencies seem to have interpreted this more broadly, assuming study of any service type in the Dan Patch corridor is restricted. Removal of the Gag Rule would not guarantee that anything would be implemented in this corridor, or even that it’s the best place for transit investment—only that more detailed study can be conducted. There are a lot of questions that cannot be answered without the ability to study the line further. This level of study is cost prohibitive for one city (or even multiple cities) to fund. Funding for such a study is administered through larger agencies, such as the regional railroad authorities, Metropolitan Council or MnDOT, and carried out in coordination with the affected cities. The larger agencies are currently prohibited from studying this corridor. Any lobbying efforts to lift the gag rule would need strong champions, and not just in Edina. Partnership with other cities along the line is essential, and service in the Dan Patch Corridor is not a priority for other cities right now. Implementation of the Green Line Extension is the priority for St. Louis Park and Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority. Bloomington is indifferent to the possibility of passenger rail at this time. In the past, Northfield has Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 8 expressed some interest in connecting to the metro via this line, but little is known about the appetite of other cities along the line. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 9 5.0 Public Input The City of Edina in its Request for Proposals (RFP) indicated “public engagement is the primary component of this effort.” When laying out the goals for the engagement process, Kimley-Horn and city staff agreed to a goal of at least 500 to 1,000 “touches” on this project. In this case, a “touch” was defined as a survey response, attendance at a public meeting (people who signed in), a written comment (comment sheet or email), attendance at a stakeholder meeting, and/or specific phone calls to discuss the study. This process met the goal, with over 900 touches. Summaries of all public input can be found in Appendix C. Activity Number of Touches Method of Notification Online survey responses 515 City Facebook page, neighborhood NextDoor pages (city-wide), mention at community conversation #1 Attendance at Community Conversation #1 183 Press release, city Facebook page, postings to neighborhood NextDoor pages city- wide, fliers posted at businesses in the corridorAttendance at Community Conversation #2 97 Comment sheets 104 Available at community conversations Comments submitted by email or U.S. mail 40 City contact information available on project fact sheet and website Phone conversations and/or attendance at stakeholder or business meetings 10 Invitation calls to Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, MnDOT, Metropolitan Council Postcards sent to XX businesses in the corridor, follow-up emails sent to XX businesses for which email contacts were available Total Touches 949 5.1 Summary of Public Feedback Through the combination of opportunities listed above, participants identified the benefits, challenges, and questions surrounding the potential for passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. Overall, feedback was predominantly negative towards passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. About 70% of comments opposed any study of passenger rail service in this corridor, while about 25% suggested it was worth taking a further look. About 5% did not state a preference and requested more information. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 10 5.1.1 Benefits Attendees at the first Community Conversation and via the online survey were asked What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? The most common responses are listed below, ordered by number of responses (i.e. benefit identified the most times is at the top of the list): l Better connect the region l Access to downtown Minneapolis l Transportation options l Reduce traffic on roadways l Economic development around stations l Convenience/easy access l Environmental benefits/sustainability l Easier commute l Attractive to young/potential new residents l Increase overall use for entire metro system l Support increase in population and employment Comments from other sources were similar in nature to these responses. It is also important to note that about 45% of the online survey respondents (about 230 people) indicated there would be no benefit, weren’t sure, or didn’t answer the question. 5.1.2 Challenges Attendees at the first Community Conversation and via the online survey were asked What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? The most common responses are listed below, ordered by number of responses (i.e. challenge identified the most times is at the top of the list): l Decrease in property values l Neighborhood impacts (character, traffic, access) l Increased noise and vibration l High cost, low benefit (especially to Edina vs. other cities) l Cost/funding sources to build and maintain l Safety concerns l Increased crime l Not a significant improvement over current bus/rapid bus system l Lack of ridership l Fear of change l Lack of support (local and legislative) 5.1.3 Information Needs Attendees at the first Community Conversation and via the online survey were asked What is important for the city to know as information is gathered on existing conditions/policy around passenger rail?The most common responses are listed below, ordered by number of responses. l Effects on home values l Impacts to neighborhoods—noise, traffic, parking, safety Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 11 l What other transit options might be (location and mode) l Clear benefits to residents of Edina vs. other cities l How it will be used/how many will be served l Where stations and parking would be located l Railroad plans l Costs, including operation and maintenance l Good metrics on existing transit lines l Status of Green Line Extension l Overall timeline/steps for implementing a passenger rail project Many of the questions above would be addressed in subsequent phases of a transit study, like an alternatives development process and environmental impact analysis. The experience of other transitways in the region has been approximately 20 to 30 years from planning to revenue service. If further study of commuter rail was desired in the Dan Patch Corridor, removal of the “gag rule” would be required. It would be reasonable to expect at least an 8- to 10-year duration to revenue service, since there has been prior planning done in the corridor: l Pre-Project Development Study and Development of Locally Preferred Alternative: 2 years l Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Documentation: 3 years l Final Design: 2 years l Construction and Testing: 2 years 5.1.4 Additional Information – Property Values The fear that passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor would negatively affect residential property values was an overwhelming concern heard from participants. Based on a map review of the corridor, there are roughly 200 residential properties adjacent to the line. Documented research consistently reports that homes within a half-mile to one mile of a transit station see an increase in home values over time. Supporting research that specifically references the Twin Cities region includes: l American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and the National Association of Realtors (NAR)6 - 2013 £Studied transit lines in Boston, Chicago, Phoenix, San Francisco, and Twin Cities £Property values of houses located near transportation with high-frequency service performed 41.6 percent better than similar properties in a region £Sales prices within areas within a half mile of a fixed transit line saw lower declines in recession l Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors (MAAR)7 – 2016 £Value of homes in neighborhoods near Blue Line stations in Minneapolis are higher than homes in neighborhoods that are not £Similar dynamic expected along Green Line Extension §Exception - Kenwood neighborhood, where the price effect is expected to be minimal due to low turnover rates of homes §St. Louis Park and Hopkins home values expected to perform quite well §Minnetonka and Eden Prairie values expected to perform in the middle 6 https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2013/03/how-mass-transit-influences-good-way-twin-cities-real-estate-values 7 http://www.startribune.com/access-to-transit-helping-boost-home-values-in-some-parts-of-the-twin-cities/377115681/ Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 12 There is some evidence from other markets that different market segments may perform differently in terms of effects on home values. For instance, a 1992 study of residential properties near Atlanta, Georgia rapid transit stations 8 saw an increase in home values for low income neighborhoods, but a decrease in some high-income neighborhoods. A Swedish study9 also indicated a greater benefit to lower income homes than higher income homes near commuter rail stations. While there is extensive research on property values around transit stations, there is limited study of homes along a rail line between stations. The Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001)did address negative effects to property values, but the results were inconclusive. The following is excerpted from pages 94-95 of the study, regarding properties between stations: Between stations, along line-haul segments of track, as much as a 20 percent decrease in residential property value was found for residences within 400 feet of MBTA's Fitchburg line, which shares tracks with active freight service (Armstrong 1994). In a study of the CalTrain commuter rail system, it was concluded that the negative externalities associated with being extremely close to an at-grade rail transit line were not necessarily capitalized into home values, where homes within 300 meters (325 feet) of the CalTrain track sold at a discount of $51,000 in 1990 (Landis et al. 1994). According to Landis, "... the CalTrain system did not generate property value benefits similar to those of the BART system because CalTrain offered limited accessibility benefits. Compared to CalTrain, BART had a superior level of transit service and greater parking capacity. In addition, the negative impact observed in areas close to the station was believed to have been caused by the high noise levels generated by the CalTrain service. CalTrain was described as being much louder than the BART system. The CalTrain trackbed is minimally separated from adjacent uses, and given that the CalTrain train cars are not specifically designed for quiet operation, this is not a surprising finding." According to Armstrong, "The fact that both freight rail service and commuter rail service operate upon the Fitchburg line... makes it difficult, if not impossible, to accurately differentiate between the two separate sources of proximity impacts. Therefore, the findings concerning the effects of commuter rail generated proximity impacts, independent of freight rail proximity impacts, are inconclusive." The referenced studies are the only ones that discuss decreases in property values for residences located between stations. All other studies cite either no impact or a positive impact. Based on limited research, a decrease in property values along a passenger rail line is possible, but impacts to property in general are also dependent on the overall design of the line and other overall factors like mode and type of service, land use and zoning policies, connection to other transit modes, accommodations for parking, and managing noise levels. 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations Based on high-level review of the corridor and feedback from the public, Kimley-Horn recommends the following: l No, the City of Edina should not request elimination of the gag rule at this time. £High level evaluation and previous studies of the Grandview area indicate it could be served well by some type of transit service in the future, but currently it falls in the bottom1/3 in household, population, and employment densities when compared to existing and planned transit station areas in the Twin Cities. 8 Impacts of Rail on Transit Property Values,http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/bestpractice083.pdf 9 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692316300151 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | 13 £Adjacent residents and businesses have expressed strong opposition to passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. This strong opposition is not uncommon for a rail project; but there was also not a strong faction of vocal supporters. Especially with the legislative challenges of the gag rule, strong champions are essential. £This opposition is likely to remain in the future, unless a stronger case can be made for transit. This requires new development and land uses changes that will take several years to realize. £Eliminating the gag rule cannot be done by Edina alone, and must involve other cities along the corridor. At this time, adjacent cities are focused on other investments and do not view passenger rail in the Dan Patch corridor as a priority. £While conditions are not yet fully ripe for a higher transit investment in the Dan Patch Corridor at this time, if the city continues to invest in new types of development and higher densities in the Dan Patch corridor, it may be worth evaluating in the future as an option alongside other transit corridors. l No, the City should not dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina in the Dan Patch Corridor at this time. £Throughout this process, the public has tied both questions specifically to the Dan Patch Corridor. Therefore, for the reasons listed above, at this time the city should not dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in the Dan Patch Corridor. £There are overall indicators that suggest Edina could support additional transit options, such as unique demographic and community patterns. Previous engagement efforts in the city, as captured in the Vision Edina document, have indicated the community’s desire for enhanced transit. £The city should invest time and resources into looking at other corridors as possible transit corridors. This may also include consideration of other modes of transit in addition to passenger rail. The city should also invest in diversifying land uses and building up specific nodes to further support expanded transit options. It is our opinion that the Dan Patch “gag rule,” or any such prohibitive rule, is an impediment to truly objective regional transit planning. However, revoking such a rule would take a tremendous amount of time and effort, and based on the status of this corridor in Edina today and the lack of any strong support faction at this time (including essential partners in other cities), it is our opinion that the City of Edina’s time and resources are better served on other planning efforts. This includes study of other potential transit corridors, and implementing city policies to better support transit options for Edina residents and workers. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | A Appendix A Planning Study and Document Review (July 2017) Passenger Rail Community Engagement Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |i Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Overview .............................................................................................................. 1 Purpose of the Planning Study and Document Review ...................................................................................................................... 1 Document Review ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study ....................................................................................................................... 1 City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Transportation Chapter of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan .................................................................................................................. 3 Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85 ............................................................................................................................. 3 Metropolitan Council 2040 Transportation Policy Plan ..................................................................................................................... 4 Metropolitan Council Regional Transitway Guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 4 GrandView District Development Framework .................................................................................................................................... 5 MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update, 2015 DRAFT............................................................................................................................ 6 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 | 1 Introduction Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Overview The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) and City of Edina have initiated a study to determine community interest in passenger rail service on the Dan Patch/CP Rail line through the city of Edina. The Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report will answer two questions: l Should the City request elimination of the “gag rule”? l Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? This reporting process is driven by engagement with the residents, businesses, and decision-makers of Edina. The ETC has examined and documented the strengths and weaknesses of passenger rail service in Edina, including thoughtful consideration of the pros and cons that are driven by the city and those influenced by external factors. Purpose of the Planning Study and Document Review The interconnected nature of the regional transit system demands an awareness of the multitude of initiatives that are ongoing in the Twin Cities region and in Minnesota. This memo highlights key information from related studies and plans that are relevant to the development of the Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report. Document Review Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study Overview In the early 2000s, Dakota County initiated a study to examine the feasibility of commuter rail within the Dan Patch Corridor. The proposed corridor was a 44-mile commuter rail route that started in Minneapolis and moved west for approximately 5 miles to St. Louis Park, where it turned south and proceeded for approximately 40 miles to a terminus at Northfield Yard in Northfield. The Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study was undertaken to further examine the feasibility and design of a commuter rail system that built on recommendations from the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT)Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Feasibility Study. The Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study provided a more detailed exploration of commuter rail dynamics within the corridor and its relation to other modes and corridor land use patterns. The final study was released in December 2001. Impact to the Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report The Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study found that while reintroducing passenger rail transit service in the existing railroad corridor is technically feasible (the corridor carried passenger traffic from 1910 to 1942), corridor communities have concerns regarding the livability of neighborhoods and recreational facilities adjacent to the rail line should passenger service be implemented. Further studies would be needed to evaluate and address community concerns raised through the study. Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |2 Technical Findings l Service assumptions indicated that 14 trains1 per day, running in morning and afternoon weekday peak periods, would carry 7,500 trips per day on the 44-mile line l Existing railroad right-of-way is adequate to accommodate both planned freight and proposed passenger service (14 trains per day) on a single track, which is consistent with the existing condition l The line would require complete rebuilding, for an estimated capital cost of $441 million (in year 2010 dollars). With environmental contingency included, the cost would increase to $461 million. l Before fare revenue is deducted, operating and maintaining the service would cost an estimated $11.7 million annually (in year 2010 dollars). l Assuming federal funds cover 50 percent of the capital cost, the annual non-federal cost to construct, operate, and maintain commuter rail service over 20 years, starting in 2010, is estimated at $22.5 million to $23.4 million (in year 2010 dollars). This assumes the total capital cost is spread out equally over the 20-year period and added to the annual net operating and maintenance cost. Public Participation Findings Over 2,300 people attended 24 different city council, county board, neighborhood, and community organization meetings and public open houses. Of the approximately 600 people who attended the five open houses and commented on the project, approximately 70 percent opposed and approximately 30 percent supported the implementation of commuter rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. Recommendations Although implementing passenger rail transit service in the Dan Patch Corridor is physically possible, the real and perceived adverse impacts to adjoining land uses and the cost of improving the right-of-way and operating the system made corridor improvements impractical at the time of this study. MnDOT, the Metropolitan Council, and the cities and counties within the Dan Patch Corridor should first explore and promote other transit and transportation improvements. Recommendations from this study include exploring and promoting other transit opportunities, evaluating other commuter rail lines such as the Northstar Line, keeping the public informed, and investigating the possibility of purchasing the line from CP Rail and Twin Cities & Western (the owner of the river bridge) for commuter rail use. City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework Overview Vision Edina is a long-term strategic framework designed to help the community understand and guide important decision-making that will impact Edina’s future. This framework lays out the key issues identified by the community in eight strategic focus areas: l Residential Development Mix l Transportation Options l Commercial Development Mix l Live and Work l Educational Focus l Population Mix 1 One train is defined as four to five passenger cars and a locomotive Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |3 l Environmental Stewardship l Regional Leadership These focus areas, and the issues and actions that accompany them, represent emerging priority areas that can guide future changes in the city. Impact to the Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report There is no mention of passenger rail or commuter rail in this document. The Transportation Options focus area suggests that the community overall is highly supportive of increased diversity and integration of transportation and local access options. One of the strategic actions within this focus area is to work to expand transit options to Edina and ensure that Edina residents do not become further isolated from the regional transit system. Transportation Chapter of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan Overview The Transportation Chapter of the 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan was prepared under the guidance of the ETC. The chapter is meant to provide guidance to city staff and elected officials regarding the planning and implementation of effective transportation facilities and systems over the planning horizon. It provides residents and businesses background on transportation issues and insight on the City’s decision-making on transportation issues. It also communicates the City of Edina’s perspectives and intentions regarding transportation planning issues. Impact to the Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report The Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the Dan Patch Corridor as a possible commuter rail corridor by the Metropolitan Council. However, the development of this corridor for commuter rail is beyond the time horizon of this plan (2030). Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85 Overview This law prohibits certain actions related to the Dan Patch commuter rail line, as identified in the Metropolitan Council’s Transit 2020 Master Plan. Informally, this law is known as the Dan Patch gag rule because it prohibits the Metropolitan Council, the Commissioner of Transportation (MnDOT), and regional rail authorities from studying commuter rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. Impact to the Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 85 explain that the Metropolitan Council and the Commissioner of Transportation must not take any action or spend any money for study, planning, preliminary engineering, final design, or construction for the Dan Patch commuter rail line. The Metropolitan Council and the Commissioner of Transportation must remove all references, other than references for historical purposes, to the Dan Patch commuter rail line from any future revisions to the transportation development guide, regional transit master plan, state transportation plan, and commuter rail system plan. Subdivision 4 states that no regional rail authority may expend any money for study, planning, preliminary engineering, final design, or construction for the Dan Patch commuter rail line. Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |4 Metropolitan Council 2040 Transportation Policy Plan Overview Adopted in January of 2015, the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is one of the major systems plans under the region’s development framework document Thrive MSP 2040. While Thrive MSP 2040 sets a vision for what the region should be in the next 30 years, the system plans lay out the detail for achieving this vision. Each of the system plans—transportation, water resources, and regional parks—establishes policies and develops strategies to move the region towards this vision by 2040. Impact to the Edina Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report The TPP explains that MnDOT has primary responsibility for planning intercity passenger rail in Minnesota. Beyond that, the Metropolitan Council participates on advisory committees to ensure that any new or upgraded rail service is consistent with other regional plans. While there is no mention of passenger rail in Edina specifically, there are two strategies in this document related to increased investment in passenger rail based on demand: l Goal C. Access to Destinations £Strategy C18. The Council, MnDOT, regional railroad authorities, and railroad companies will pursue short- and long-term improvements to accommodate future freight and passenger rail demand. l Goal D. Competitive Economy £Strategy D2. The Council will coordinate with other agencies planning and pursuing transportation investments that strengthen connections to other regions in Minnesota and the Upper Midwest, the nation, and world including intercity bus and passenger rail, highway corridors, air service, and freight infrastructure. The Transportation Policy Plan also discusses commuter rail. Commuter rail is an express transit service that primarily connects downtown employment centers to distant population centers. Commuter rail typically operates on existing freight railroad tracks to reduce infrastructure costs. The Northstar Line is the only existing commuter rail line in the transitway system and is not considered part of the METRO system of all-day, frequent transitway service. Definition of Commuter Rail: A passenger railroad that carries riders within a metropolitan area, between urban areas and suburban and exurban locations. Commuter rail lines usually operate on freight rails or dedicated tracks with few stations and multiple departure times primarily in mornings and evenings. Stops are typically five miles or more apart and route lengths can extend more than 20 miles. Metropolitan Council Regional Transitway Guidelines Overview The Regional Transitway Guidelines, completed by the Metropolitan Council in February 2012, established a set of “best practices” to support the development and operation of transitways in a consistent, equitable, and efficient manner throughout the metro area. As a Metropolitan Council document, the guidelines are meant to apply whenever investments in a transitway corridor are being studied, planned, or made in the region. The guidelines provide parameters for decisions related to the planning, designing, building, and operating of four transitway types: (1) commuter rail, (2) light rail transit, (3) highway bus rapid transit (BRT), and (4) arterial BRT. Dedicated busways, express bus with transit advantages, and streetcar are not addressed in the guidelines. Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |5 Impact to the Edina Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report The document includes information and guidelines for commuter rail but does not offer the same for intercity passenger rail. There is some mention, however, of the need to coordinate commuter rail schedules with other services that share the same right-of-way, including Amtrak or other passenger rail modes. The guidelines also mention that commuter rail runningways will often make use of existing freight and intercity passenger rail runningways, which may direct commuter rail planning and design. The guidelines in this document should be used to examine and differentiate between the alternatives being considered for passenger rail. The service operation transitway guidelines provide a list of criteria, such as service definition and network design, route structure, transit services coordination, and travel time, to consider collectively when making service operation decisions. As final options are identified, guidelines for station spacing and siting, such as minimum daily boarding forecasts, average station spacing for the line, and minimum spacing between two stations, can be used to further define the best available option(s). Guidelines for transit type runningways, such as rail track type and grade separation, also help to differentiate between the viability of routes. Elements of passenger rail runningway operations and maintenance to be addressed during planning and design include but are not limited to: integrated freight-commuter rail operations, safety, security, communications and central control, system compatibility, contingency planning, and periodic repairs and replacement. GrandView District Development Framework Overview The GrandView District Development Framework is part of a small area planning process required by Edina’s Comprehensive Plan for areas designated as Potential Areas of Change. The process was led by a group of community residents, business owners, and property owners and led the Edina City Council to adopt seven guiding principles for the redevelopment of the GrandView District. The framework lays out a wide variety of potential improvements to land use, the public realm, transportation, and sustainability, along with an implementation timeline. Impact to the Edina Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report The CP Rail corridor is referred to multiple times throughout the document. One of the goals under the transportation section of this framework is to, “Preserve the CP Rail corridor for future, possible public transit, and non-motorized movement/connection in the District.” Specifically, the framework suggests the development of an at-grade bike path alongside the CP Rail right-of-way from Eden Avenue to Brookside Avenue. The future land use plan proposes a broader mix of land uses around the area between Vernon Avenue South, Eden Avenue, Highway 100, and the CP Rail corridor. This sort of development would likely increase density in the area, which could have a positive impact on the feasibility of passenger rail. One of the seven guiding principles for the framework is also related to transit, though not to the rail corridor specifically. The sixth guiding principle is as follows: “Improve movement within and access to the District for people of all ages by facilitating multiple modes of transportation, and preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor.” This suggests that some residents, business owners, and property owners in this area may be open to passenger rail in the corridor. Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |6 MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update, 2015 DRAFT Overview This document is the 2015 update to the Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan, first developed in 2010, and is referred to as the 2015 Minnesota State Rail Plan. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 174.03 subdivision 1b, the purpose of the State Rail Plan is to guide the future of both freight and passenger (intercity) rail systems and rail services in the state. The development of the plan was jointly undertaken by MnDOT’s Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations (OFCVO) and Passenger Rail Office. The plan follows the six-chapter structure required by the Federal Railroad Administration for state rail plans. The 2015 Minnesota State Rail Plan builds upon the technical analyses and findings of the 2010 State Rail Plan, incorporates information on changes between 2010 and 2015, and reflects the most current state of the system and stakeholder comments. Impact to the Edina Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report While there is no specific mention of Edina, this report provides strong support for increased investment in passenger rail in general. Minnesota has a vision to develop a passenger rail system that results in improved travel options, costs, and speeds for Minnesota and interstate travelers. Population and economic growth forecasts show a need for a statewide transportation network made up of multiple modes of travel. As a part of the 2010 Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan, a needs analysis was conducted for all potential passenger rail corridors in Minnesota. Connections from the Twin Cities to St. Cloud; Fargo, ND; Northfield; Albert Lea; Des Moines, IA; Mankato; and Eau Claire, WI are all identified as Phase I or Phase II projects, which means they are desirable projects that are within a 0- to 20-year implementation horizon. A passenger rail line that extends from the Twin Cities to Northfield would pass through the City of Edina by way of the CP MN&S subdivision. Currently, public support appears to be greatest for service to Northfield, continuing eventually to Des Moines, IA and Kansas City, MO. Many open house respondents expressed support for passenger rail development in Minnesota and the Upper Midwest. Although questions and comments about passenger rail were usually specific to the city in which the open house was hosted, some citizens were also interested in statewide passenger rail development. Some respondents were opposed to any passenger rail development, citing capital cost and land impacts as major deterrents. The demand forecasts only considered travel between the Twin Cities and key outlying markets that were identified as possible intercity rail origins and destinations as part of Phase I and Phase II projects. Most demand was estimated using standard demographic data such as population and employment. However, special generators, such as casinos, medical centers, universities, and tourism markers, have unique demand characteristics and were also considered. Table 1 depicts the demand for rail service between the Twin Cities and major origins and destinations along corridors that are feasible and desirable to implement within a 20-year timeline. Planning Study and Document Review July 2017 |7 Table 1: 2012 and 2040 Annual Passenger Demand and 2040 Rail Demand From/To the Twin Cities (Phase I and Phase II Corridors)2 City Total Annual Demand (To/From Twin Cities; 2005) Total Annual Demand (To/From Twin Cities; 2040) Rail Demand (To/From Twin Cities; 2040) Rail Share (To/From Twin Cities; 2040) St. Cloud, MN 11,115,313 13,730,016 1,107,005 8.1% Eau Claire, WI 5,820,841 6,813,058 268,812 3.9% Mankato, MN 3,781,513 4,160,051 234,864 5.6% Northfield, MN 1,685,353 2,139,927 117,746 5.5% Willmar, MN 1,587,159 1,543,243 53,561 3.5% Fargo, ND 3,931,143 3,978,633 37,032 0.9% Des Moines, IA 2,927,518 3,025,124 18,729 0.6% Sioux Falls, SD 1,680,987 1,504,088 17,987 1.2% Marshall, MN 622,150 551,251 9,502 1.7% Sioux City, IA 599,627 628,263 1,907 0.3% Summary This document review illustrated three key messages related to passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. First, it is technically feasible to implement passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001), the Transportation Chapter of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan (2008), and the MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) all suggest that the Dan Patch Corridor has the potential to carry passenger rail. Second, there was significant resistance to using this corridor for commuter rail in the late 1990s and early 2000s, which led to the adoption of the gag rule. This community opposition was discussed in the Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001) and is reflected in the excerpt from Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85 . Finally, more recent plans and policy documents indicate that there is interest in more transit options in Edina. The MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) referred to public support for passenger rail generally in Minnesota and specifically between Minneapolis and Northfield by way of the MN&S subdivision, which travels through Edina. The City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework also expressed public support, especially among younger residents, for the integration of diverse transportation options. The GrandView District Development Framework (2012) also expresses public support for increased transit options and specifically mentions the desire to preserve the CP Rail corridor for possible transit use in the future. 2 Source: 2015 Minnesota State Rail Plan, page 2-43, Table 2.4. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | B Appendix B Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis (August 2017) Passenger Rail Community Engagement Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 10, 2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |i Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |ii Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Overview ............................................................................................ 1 Purpose of the Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis.................................................................................................. 1 Existing Conditions and Peer Comparison......................................................................................................................... 1 Process and Implementation Timeline ............................................................................................................................. 6 Stakeholder Input ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 List of Tables Table 1: Passenger Rail Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 1 Table 2: Household Density .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Table 3: Population Density.............................................................................................................................................. 3 Table 4: Employment Density ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis July 2017 | 1 Introduction Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Overview The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) and City of Edina have initiated a study to determine community interest in passenger rail service on the Dan Patch/CP Rail line through the city of Edina. The Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report will answer two questions: l Should the City request elimination of the “gag rule”? l Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? This reporting process is driven by engagement with the residents, businesses, and decision-makers of Edina. The ETC will examine and document the strengths and weaknesses of passenger rail service in Edina, including thoughtful consideration of the pros and cons that are driven by the city and those influenced by external factors. Purpose of the Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis The success of transit locally is based on the existing travel market and land use surrounding stations. A shared regional vision for transit amongst numerous neighboring cities and agency partners is necessary to bring projects to fruition. This memo summarizes the current conditions and policy relevant to the development of passenger rail in Edina. Existing Conditions and Peer Comparison Transit service within the Dan Patch Corridor could take a variety of forms. Service types range from intercity rail with daily service, to commuter rail with peak period-focused service, to light rail with frequent all day service. Table 1: Passenger Rail Characteristics Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |2 * Vehicle population technology can be diesel, electric, or diesel multiple unit (DMU) The success of transit in any given corridor is based on the travel demand between origins and destinations along the corridor. The travel demand is driven in part by the density of use along the corridor, especially at station areas. A quarter mile walk is often used as a comfortable distance for walk access to a transit stop/station. Bike and drive access can extend the reach of stations beyond three miles. Because the Dan Patch Corridor is in very early stages of consideration, service type and station locations are not determined. A comparison was conducted for the land use within one mile of stations at current and planned transit corridors in the Twin Cities region, and a station at Grandview in the city of Edina. The comparison includes population density, household density, and employment density. Household density (Table 2) varies from over 7 households per acre to about 1 household per 20 acres at current and planned station areas in the current and planned corridors in the Twin Cities region. The Grandview area has about 2 households per acre. Table 2: Household Density Transitway1 Station Area Households/Acre Dan Patch Corridor Grandview 1.98 Blue Line 38th Street Station 5.05 Blue Line 46th Street Station 3.82 Blue Line 50th Street Minnehaha Park Station 3.38 Blue Line Airport Terminal 1 Lindbergh Station 0.07 Blue Line Airport Terminal 2 Humphrey Station 0.05 Blue Line American Blvd 34th Ave Station 0.26 Blue Line Bloomington Central Station 0.35 Blue Line Cedar-Riverside Station 7.32 Blue Line Fort Snelling Station 0.71 Blue Line Franklin Avenue Station 6.49 Blue Line Lake Street Midtown Station 4.85 Blue Line VA Medical Center Station 2.06 Blue Line Extension 63rd Avenue Station 2.96 Blue Line Extension 85th Avenue Station 1.65 Blue Line Extension 93rd Avenue Station 0.90 Blue Line Extension Bass Lake Road Station 2.26 Blue Line Extension Brooklyn Boulevard Station 1.74 Blue Line Extension Golden Valley Road Station 2.54 Blue Line Extension Oak Grove Station 0.27 Blue Line Extension Penn Avenue Station 3.19 Blue Line Extension Plymouth Avenue Station 2.53 Blue Line Extension Robbinsdale Station 2.99 Blue Line Extension Van White Boulevard Station 3.79 Green Line Extension Bassett Creek Valley Station 6.49 Green Line Extension Beltline Blvd Station 3.77 Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |3 Transitway1 Station Area Households/Acre Green Line Extension Blake Road Station 2.75 Green Line Extension Bryn Mawr Station 2.89 Green Line Extension City West Station 1.22 Green Line Extension Downtown Hopkins Station 2.88 Green Line Extension Eden Prairie Town Center Station 1.91 Green Line Extension Golden Triangle Station 0.48 Green Line Extension Louisiana Avenue Station 3.02 Green Line Extension Opus Station 1.85 Green Line Extension Royalston Ave / Farmers Market Station 6.60 Green Line Extension Shady Oak Station 2.50 Green Line Extension SouthWest Station 2.10 Green Line Extension West 21st Street Station 2.83 Green Line Extension West Lake Street Station 2.98 Green Line Extension Wooddale Avenue Station 3.73 Northstar Anoka Station 1.77 Northstar Big Lake Station 0.34 Northstar Coon Rapids - Riverdale Station 1.60 Northstar Elk River Station 0.25 Northstar Fridley Station 2.05 Northstar Ramsey Station 0.34 Northstar/Blue Line/Blue Line Ext/Green Line Ext Target Field Station 6.11 1 Green Line was not included because traveling between two downtowns rather than a radial route was not considered a valid comparison. Population density (Table 3) varies from over 26 people per acre to about 1 person per 6 acres at current and planned station areas in the current and planned corridors in the Twin Cities region. The Grandview area currently has about 5 people per acre with the density forecasted to decrease to 4.7 people per acre in 2040. Four people per acre is a good minimum benchmark for some level of increased investment in higher frequency transit. Table 3: Population Density Transitway1 Station Area Year 2010 Persons/Acre Year 2040 Persons/Acre Dan Patch Corridor Grandview 5.02 4.70 Blue Line 38th Street Station 11.27 12.70 Blue Line 46th Street Station 8.43 11.88 Blue Line 50th Street Minnehaha Park Station 7.20 10.12 Blue Line Airport Terminal 1 Lindbergh Station 0.03 0.02 Blue Line Airport Terminal 2 Humphrey Station 0.03 0.27 Blue Line American Blvd 34th Ave Station 0.27 2.34 Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |4 Transitway1 Station Area Year 2010 Persons/Acre Year 2040 Persons/Acre Blue Line Bloomington Central Station 0.52 2.65 Blue Line Cedar-Riverside Station 17.60 26.37 Blue Line Fort Snelling Station 1.34 2.34 Blue Line Franklin Avenue Station 17.60 23.09 Blue Line Lake Street Midtown Station 13.33 15.36 Blue Line VA Medical Center Station 4.00 5.77 Blue Line Extension 63rd Avenue Station 7.44 8.61 Blue Line Extension 85th Avenue Station 4.79 4.92 Blue Line Extension 93rd Avenue Station 2.41 3.99 Blue Line Extension Bass Lake Road Station 5.50 6.37 Blue Line Extension Brooklyn Boulevard Station 4.66 4.66 Blue Line Extension Golden Valley Road Station 6.89 6.83 Blue Line Extension Oak Grove Station 0.60 4.61 Blue Line Extension Penn Avenue Station 8.13 8.08 Blue Line Extension Plymouth Avenue Station 6.94 6.63 Blue Line Extension Robbinsdale Station 6.91 7.09 Blue Line Extension Van White Boulevard Station 9.16 14.43 Green Line Extension Bassett Creek Valley Station 11.49 16.47 Green Line Extension Beltline Blvd Station 7.06 10.04 Green Line Extension Blake Road Station 6.06 7.95 Green Line Extension Bryn Mawr Station 5.65 8.84 Green Line Extension City West Station 2.05 4.23 Green Line Extension Downtown Hopkins Station 6.34 7.98 Green Line Extension Eden Prairie Town Center Station 3.10 8.16 Green Line Extension Golden Triangle Station 1.05 4.07 Green Line Extension Louisiana Avenue Station 6.45 8.15 Green Line Extension Opus Station 3.40 5.05 Green Line Extension Royalston Ave / Farmers Market Station 10.65 23.70 Green Line Extension Shady Oak Station 5.48 6.65 Green Line Extension SouthWest Station 3.92 9.13 Green Line Extension West 21st Street Station 6.28 8.98 Green Line Extension West Lake Street Station 6.19 8.69 Green Line Extension Wooddale Avenue Station 6.97 9.48 Northstar Anoka Station 3.64 4.44 Northstar Big Lake Station 1.00 5.31 Northstar Coon Rapids - Riverdale Station 4.57 5.41 Northstar Elk River Station 0.69 1.98 Northstar Fridley Station 4.71 24.52 Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |5 Transitway1 Station Area Year 2010 Persons/Acre Year 2040 Persons/Acre Northstar Ramsey Station 1.03 N/A Northstar Target Field Station 9.95 N/A 1 Green Line was not included because traveling between two downtowns rather than a radial route was not considered a valid comparison. Employment density (Table 4) varies from over 39 employees per acre to about 0.75 employees per acres at current and planned station areas in the current and planned corridors in the Twin Cities region. The Grandview area has about 1.6 employees per acre. Table 4: Employment Density Transitway1 Station Area Year 2010 Employees/Acre Year 2040 Employees/Acre Dan Patch Corridor Grandview 1.64 1.68 Blue Line 38th Street Station 2.03 2.18 Blue Line 46th Street Station 1.32 1.27 Blue Line 50th Street Minnehaha Park Station 1.68 2.58 Blue Line Airport Terminal 1 Lindbergh Station 2.65 7.98 Blue Line Airport Terminal 2 Humphrey Station 2.09 7.43 Blue Line American Blvd 34th Ave Station 5.03 15.37 Blue Line Bloomington Central Station 6.54 19.14 Blue Line Cedar-Riverside Station 27.42 39.79 Blue Line Fort Snelling Station 1.67 4.68 Blue Line Franklin Avenue Station 15.26 21.89 Blue Line Lake Street Midtown Station 5.91 7.53 Blue Line VA Medical Center Station 1.48 3.32 Blue Line Extension 63rd Avenue Station 1.49 1.72 Blue Line Extension 85th Avenue Station 2.54 3.37 Blue Line Extension 93rd Avenue Station 1.70 4.89 Blue Line Extension Bass Lake Road Station 1.53 2.04 Blue Line Extension Brooklyn Boulevard Station 3.07 3.72 Blue Line Extension Golden Valley Road Station 3.42 3.83 Blue Line Extension Oak Grove Station 0.79 6.98 Blue Line Extension Penn Avenue Station 2.94 3.86 Blue Line Extension Plymouth Avenue Station 2.96 3.59 Blue Line Extension Robbinsdale Station 1.28 1.99 Blue Line Extension Van White Boulevard Station 10.37 15.1 Green Line Extension Bassett Creek Valley Station 7.20 13.82 Green Line Extension Beltline Blvd Station 3.94 6.88 Green Line Extension Blake Road Station 3.62 5.04 Green Line Extension Bryn Mawr Station 3.01 3.56 Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |6 Transitway1 Station Area Year 2010 Employees/Acre Year 2040 Employees/Acre Green Line Extension City West Station 9.85 16.05 Green Line Extension Downtown Hopkins Station 4.83 6.15 Green Line Extension Eden Prairie Town Center Station 6.02 9.33 Green Line Extension Golden Triangle Station 7.15 12.20 Green Line Extension Louisiana Avenue Station 6.05 8.29 Green Line Extension Opus Station 9.74 15.60 Green Line Extension Royalston Ave / Farmers Market Station 50.40 73.04 Green Line Extension Shady Oak Station 4.61 6.42 Green Line Extension SouthWest Station 4.83 8.19 Green Line Extension West 21st Street Station 3.39 2.93 Green Line Extension West Lake Street Station 2.43 4.01 Green Line Extension Wooddale Avenue Station 7.36 10.44 Northstar Anoka Station 3.97 4.17 Northstar Big Lake Station 0.17 4.16 Northstar Coon Rapids - Riverdale Station 3.17 4.41 Northstar Elk River Station 0.52 0.77 Northstar Fridley Station 2.26 80.95 Northstar Ramsey Station 0.67 N/A Northstar Target Field Station 56.37 N/A 1 Green Line was not included because traveling between two downtowns rather than a radial route was not considered a valid comparison. Comparison Summary Based on the metrics of household, population, and employment density for the 46 other station areas evaluated, the example station area at Grandview performs as follows: ·Households – 20 station areas (43%) have less or similar household density to the Grandview station area ·Population – The Grandview area currently has about 5 people per acre with the density forecasted to decrease to 4.7 people per a cre in 2040. 18 station areas (39%) have less or simil ar population density to the Grandview station area. This number falls to 13 (28%) in the year 2040. Four people per acre is a good minimum benchmark for some level of increased investment in higher frequency transit. ·Employment – The Grandview area has about 1.6 employees per acre. 12 station areas (26%) have less or similar employment density to the Grandview station area. In 2040, this decreases to 4 station areas (9%). Based on these metrics, the Grandview station area falls within approximately the bottom 1/3 of the stations studied. Household density is the strongest, while employment density faces some challenges. While these are common metrics, the success of a station at Grandview also is highly dependent on other factors such as end points, type and frequency of service, number of stations, connection to other transit service, etc. Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |7 Process and Implementation Timeline The timeline for implementation of passenger service in the Dan Path Corridor is based on a couple of the transitways that have been implemented in the Twin Cities region. Our experience in the region has been approximately 20-30 years from planning to revenue service. Given that some initial planning has been completed previously, it is reasonable to expect an 8 to 10 year duration to revenue service following removal of the “gag rule.” The removal of the legislation prohibiting study of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail would be the critical first step followed by four planning and engineering steps of varying duration: l Pre-Project Development Study and Development of Locally Preferred Alternative: 2 years l Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Documentation: 3 years l Final Design: 2 years l Construction and Testing: 2 years Stakeholder Input A meeting with local jurisdictional stakeholders was held on Thursday, August 10, 2017. Those in attendance included Mark Nolan, City of Edina; Kirk Roberts, City of Bloomington; Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park; and Joe Gladke, Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority. Staff from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Metropolitan Council were also invited, but declined the invitation. Brian Smalkoski from Kimley-Horn and Associates facilitated the meeting. The discussion focused on two primary questions: l Since implementation of the “gag rule” in 2002, what have you heard about this corridor? (publicly and politically) l Within your organization, is there an openness to further study of passenger rail in the Dan Patch corridor? St. Louis Park noted that they have been focused on Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension). Since the Freight Rail Relocation study there has been an active group called “Safety in the Park.” With this Edina study folks have expressed some concern and there have been additional questions, but nothing really before that. City staff are looking for information to pass back to the community and they have noted interested in a trail corridor as there are limited north- south options with the current design of the city. Bloomington noted some interest since Edina started this study, but it doesn’t have a position regarding the Dan Patch Corridor. There is a resolution that was passed back around the time of the legislation that also prohibits further study while supporting other transit initiatives. Regarding intercity rail, Bloomington noted that there are negative externalities without the benefit of service. It was also noted that the city is already busy with other transit projects including: Mall of America, 169, 77, and Blue Line. Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 |8 Hennepin County noted that their hands are full and this project would be on the back burner. The recent focus has been getting the tax increase passed to fulfill the current transit vision. Questions during the discussion included: l Any increase in freight traffic? (Still one train per day) l Impetus for study? (Grandview transportation study brought the issue to the forefront) l What if the City Council does not take the recommendation? (That is a possibility) l Any conversations with the railroad? (During the Grandview study there was a conversation. The railroad noted that they have no plans for passenger service in the corridor). Stakeholders would like to be kept apprised of study progress, but will remain neutral in the discussions of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor. Passenger Rail Community Engagement Draft Final Report September 2017 | C Appendix C Public Input Community Conversation #1 Summary and Comment Sheets Community Conversation #1 Display Boards Community Conversation #2 Summary and Comment Sheets Community Conversation #2 Presentation Online Survey Results 8/17/2017 | 1 Community Conversation #1 – Summary Summary On Tuesday, July 25, 2017, approximately 175-200 people attended the first community conversation for the Edina Passenger Rail Engagement Study. Attendees were invited to view informational display boards about the study, participate in a “Question Wall” exercise, and discuss additional questions at conversation tables. Comment sheets were also available. This document summarizes feedback by general themes. Full versions of all comments received will be available as an appendix to the final project report. Overall Feedback Generally, most attendees at Community Conversation #1 were negative towards the idea of a light rail or commuter train on the Dan Patch Corridor. A majority of these comments addressed concerns about the decline of home and property value along the corridor and increased safety concerns in neighborhoods if passenger rail were to be implemented in this corridor. The following summarizes comments from the 67 comment sheets received at the meeting: ·No further study of passenger rail/keep gag rule: 60% ·Yes to further study of passenger rail: 24% ·No preference stated, questions/more info requested: 16% The following summarizes these comments as well as the notes placed on the question wall. Comments About Passenger Rail ·Positives o Sustainable option, planning for future o Environmental benefits (reduce car use, less pollution) o Another transportation option (for employees and older residents noted specifically) o Help reduce traffic on current highway system o Economic benefit to the City of Edina – create hubs for development o Attractive to young/potential residents o Connects to other cities o Increase overall use for entire system o Create longer-term residents in Edina (“age in place”) o Support increase in population and employment ·Negatives/concerns o Decrease in property values o High cost, low benefit o Noise and vibration 8/17/2017 | 2 o Traffic congestion at neighborhood level o Proximity to homes/safety issues o Pedestrian safety and grade crossing issues o Increased crime o Benefits neighbor cities (Northfield, mostly) more than Edina o Stations not in convenient locations o Not a significant improvement over current bus/rapid bus system o Lack of ridership Questions/Important for City to Know ·Housing, properties, and neighborhoods o Density o Property values o Noise o Direct impacts/potential property takes o Increased traffic o Parking demands around stations ·Canadian Pacific’s plans for rail, increased freight traffic ·Safety along rail line o Speed of a potential rail line (current freight goes very slow) o Grade crossings o Emergency vehicle access to surrounding neighborhoods o Nearby parks and recreation areas ·Benefits directly for Edina residents, versus benefits for surrounding areas (Northfield, Savage, etc.) ·Consider other options o Bike/walk trail instead of transit o Transit route along major highways o Rapid bus lines instead of passenger rail o Consider Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) rail technology ·Overall timeline/steps for implementing a passenger rail project ·Existing conditions o Current usage of bus routes/light rail in twin cities area o Rider projections for future usage – what is demand? ·Station locations ·Status of Green Line Extension, usage data from other train lines in Metro area E d i n a M N .g o v /p a s s e n g e r -r a i l -r e p o r t Í ¬«¼§ Ñ ª»® ª ·» © H e l p t h e E d i n a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n d e t e r m i n e h o w t h e C i t y o f E d i n a s h o u l d o r s h o u l d n o t p r o c e e d w i t h f u t u r e p a s s e n g e r r a i l p l a n n i n g i n t h e D a n P a t c h C o r r i d o r N o f u t u r e s t u d i e s o n p a s s e n g e r r a i l a r e c u r r e n t l y p l a n n e d E d i n a M N .g o v /p a s s e n g e r -r a i l -r e p o r t A n s w e r t w o q u e s t i o n s : S h o u l d t h e C i t y o f E d i n a r e q u e s t e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e g a g r u l e ? S h o u l d t h e C i t y d e d i c a t e r e s o u r c e s t o d e v e l o p i n g a p l a n t o e n c o u r a g e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p a s s e n g e r r a i l s e r v i c e i n E d i n a ? A n s w e r s b a s e d o n : C o m m u n i t y i n p u t T w o C o m m u n i t y C o n v e r s a t i o n s a n d o n l i n e s u r v e y s O t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r a n d c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g s A n a l y s i s o f e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d p o l i c i e s L a n d u s e , p o p u l a t i o n , e m p l o y m e n t a n d c a s e s t u d y c o m p a r i s o n s Í ¬«¼§ Ù ±¿´ I n 2 0 0 2 , t h e M i n n e s o t a L e g i s l a t u r e a d o p t e d a “g a g r u l e ” t h a t p r o h i b i t s t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n C o u n c i l , M n D O T , a n d r e g i o n a l r a i l r o a d a u t h o r i t i e s f r o m e x p e n d i n g a n y m o n e y f o r s t u d y , d e s i g n , o r c o n s t r u c t i o n f o r t h e D a n P a t c h c o m m u t e r r a i l l i n e (L a w s o f M i n n e s o t a 2 0 0 2 , C h a p t e r 3 9 3 , S e c t i o n 8 5 ) É Ø ß Ì × Í Ì Ø Û Ù ß Ù Î Ë Ô Û á E d i n a M N .g o v /p a s s e n g e r -r a i l -r e p o r t T h e D a n P a t c h C o r r i d o r i s : o f M i n n e s o t a H i g h w a y 1 0 0 H i s t o r y : Ø ·¬±® § ±º ¬¸» Ü ¿² Ð ¿¬½¸ Ý ±®®·¼±® D A N P A T C H C O R R I D O R P a s s e n g e r r a i l s e r v i c e i n o p e r a t i o n r a i l c o r r i d o r C o r r i d o r i n c l u d e d i n 2 0 2 0 T r a n s i t M a s t e r P l a n F e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y f o u n d t h a t i m p l e m e n t i n g c o m m u t e r r a i l i s p o s s i b l e , b u t i m p r a c t i c a l M i n n e s o t a L e g i s l a t u r e a d o p t e d "g a g r u l e " I n c l u d e d a s P h a s e 1 i n t e r c i t y r a i l p r o j e c t i n M N S t a t e R a i l P l a n W i t h t h e p r o g r e s s o f o t h e r m e t r o a r e a t r a n s i t l i n e s , t h e C i t y d o e s n 't w a n t t o p r e c l u d e i t s e l f f r o m f u t u r e o p p o r t u n i t i e s 1 9 1 0 -1 9 4 2 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 1 5 W h y N o w ? EdinaMN.gov/passenger-rail-report a Anoka Arden Hills Blaine Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park CentervilleChamplin Circle Pines Columbia Heights Coon Rapids Crystal Dayton Eden Prairie Falcon Heights Fridley Gem Lake Golden Valley Hopkins Little Canada Maplewood Minneapolis Minnetonka Mounds View New Brighton New Hope North Oaks Plymouth Richfield Robbinsdale Roseville Saint Louis Park Shakopee Shoreview Spring Lake Park Vadnais Heights Wayzata Burnsville Apple Valley Rosemount Eagan Inver Grove Heights Mendota Heights Sunfish Lake West Saint Paul South Saint Paul Savage Bloomington Saint Paul Maple Grove EDINA Legend Existing Northstar Line (Commuter Rail) METRO Blue Line (LRT) METRO Green Line (LRT) METRO Red Line (BRT) A Line (BRT) Rail Tracks in Dan Patch Corridor Planned Transitways in Advanced Design or Under Construction METRO Blue Line Extension (LRT) METRO Green Line Extension (LRT) METRO Gold Line (BRT) METRO Orange Line (BRT) Rapid Bus Lines Source: Transitway Alignments and Planned Transitway Alignments (Metro Transit, 3 June 2016) [0 2 41Miles λ¹·±²¿´ Ì®¿²·¬ ͧ¬»³ E d i n a M N .g o v /p a s s e n g e r -r a i l -r e p o r t Ð ¿»²¹»® Î ¿·´ M o d e P e a k P e r i o d F r e q u e n c y T y p i c a l S y s t e m L e n g t h C a p i t a l C o s t P e r M i l e A v e r a g e S t a t i o n S p a c i n gTracks S h a r e d w i t h F r e i g h t ? × ²¬»®½·¬§ Î ¿·´ö D a i l y s e r v i c e 5 0 -5 0 0 m i l e s $$ 2 0 m i l e s o r l o n g e rYes Ý ±³³«¬»® Î ¿·´ö E v e r y 3 0 + m i n u t e s 2 0 -5 0 m i l e s $$$ 7 m i l e s o r l o n g e r Y e s Ô ·¹¸¬ Î ¿·´ö E v e r y 1 0 m i n u t e s 1 0 -2 0 m i l e s $$$$$ 1 m i l e P o s s i b l e Í ¬®»»¬½¿® E v e r y 7 -1 5 m i n u t e s 1 -5 m i l e s $$$ - $$$$ 1 /8 t o 1 /4 m i l e N o P a s s e n g e r r a i l i n c l u d e s a l l t r a n s i t m o d e s t h a t t r a v e l o n r a i l t r a c k s : * V e h i c l e p r o p u l s i o n t e c h n o l o g y c a n b e d i e s e l , e l e c t r i c , o r d i e s e l m u l t i p l e u n i t (D M U ) E d i n a M N .g o v /p a s s e n g e r -r a i l -r e p o r t E d i n a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g t o d e v e l o p r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s A g e n d a : R e v i e w r e s u l t s o f e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d p o l i c y a n a l y s i s R e v i e w i n i t i a l r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s Ý Ñ Ó Ó Ë Ò × Ì Ç Ý Ñ Ò Ê Û Î Í ß Ì × Ñ Ò ý î Í ß Ê Û Ì Ø Û Ü ß Ì Û æ S e p t e m b e r 7 , 2 0 1 7 Ò »¨¬ Í ¬»° R e v i e w o f e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d p o l i c y a n a l y s i s Ö Ë Ô Ç ú ß Ë Ù Ë Í Ì Í Û Ð Ì Û Ó Þ Û Î E d i n a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n m a k e s i t s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o C i t y C o u n c i l Ñ Ý Ì Ñ Þ Û Î 9/12/2017 | 1 Community Conversation #2 – Summary Summary On Thursday, September 7, 2017, approximately 100 people attended the second community conversation for the Edina Passenger Rail Engagement Study. A presentation was given at two different times, followed by questions from the audience. Comment sheets were also available. This document summarizes feedback by general themes. Full versions of all comments received will be available as an appendix to the final project report. Overall Feedback Generally, most attendees at Community Conversation #2 were negative towards the idea of a light rail or commuter train on the Dan Patch Corridor. Attendees were especially passionate about the potential decline of property values along the corridor and impacts to neighborhoods. Several statements were made that indicated the gag rule was important to them when deciding to purchase a house along the rail line. The following summarizes comments from the 45 comment sheets received at the meeting: ·No further study of passenger rail/keep gag rule: 86% ·Yes to further study of passenger rail or undecided: 14% The following summarizes these comments. Summary of Comment Sheets ·Opposed o We don’t want it – where would it go and how often would it run? o Maintain the gag rule, it exists for a reason o Cost too high o Impacts too many homes o No real benefit to Edina o This process does not belong at the city level o The public has been clear, we do not want this, listen and stop wasting our money o Against Edina developing mass transit at current densities o Additional studies are not viable without other cities signing on o Instead of using passenger rail to protect from increased freight traffic, Edina and other city/state agencies should explore alternatives for mitigation the risk of additional rail traffic (using legal means to force carriers to implement safety changes at their own cost) o Rail would be dangerous, crossings are not secured o Light rail is already accessible to Edina by bus o Other rail lines are in huge debt, this won’t be different o Concerns about safety, noise, property values, traffic o Current bus service is sufficient ·Undecided/Supportive o Climate change – reducing car traffic by developing rail is important o Youth should be engaged in the conversation o Perhaps the gag rule should be lifted, depending what the end goal would be 8/17/2017 | 2 o Favor further studies – population is aging, young people use mass transit, we older residents need it to commute to downtown sites. o Studying this does not hurt people and provides information to decision-makers o As a younger city resident and homeowner it makes the city more attractive to have fixed rail o We must be future-oriented ·Other/Questions o Many people provided their email addresses and had no idea about the meeting o Property values are affected during the study, not just a decision is made to go forward o Other studies of bus transportation should be considered o Rail transportation should be along Hwy 100 or 169, in the meantime we need bus stop locations along the Crosstown highway o The City Council never should have authorized a study on this without doing a survey o Studies on property values are only around stations, why no data on property values along the tracks? o How many households are on or near the line and would be impacted? o How many accidents on current Minneapolis lines? o How much crime? o How many trains will run? o This appears to be a pre-determined issue by city officials o Further input needed from residents, not just homeowners along rail line o Don’t study commuter rail but perhaps bike, pedestrian, trolley, other access to light rail Community Conversation #2 September 7, 2017 Study Purpose •Answer two questions: •Should the City of Edina request elimination of the gag rule? •Should the City dedicate resources to developing a plan to encourage the development of passenger rail service in Edina? •What is the gag rule? •In 2002, the Minnesota Legislature adopted a “gag rule” that prohibits the Metropolitan Council, MnDOT, and regional railroad authorities from expending any money for study, planning, preliminary engineering, final design, or construction for the Dan Patch commuter rail line (Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85) History of the Dan Patch Corridor •The Dan Patch Corridor is: •A railway connecting Minneapolis and Northfield •Located north-south through Edina just west of Minnesota Highway 100 •Currently owned by Canadian Pacific Railway Planning Study and Document Review •Passenger rail in Dan Patch corridor is technicallyfeasible •The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001) •Edina Comprehensive Plan (2008) •MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) •Past resistance/“gag rule” •The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study (2001) •Laws of Minnesota 2002, Chapter 393, Section 85 (“Gag Rule”) •Recently more interest in transit options in Edina •GrandView District Development Framework (2012) •MnDOT Statewide Rail Plan Update (2015) •City of Edina Strategic Vision and Framework Public and Stakeholder Input •Community Conversation #1 (67 written comments) •Online Survey (516 responses) •Agency Stakeholder Meeting •Business Stakeholder Meeting Community Conversation #1 •Benefits noted by participants: •Better connect the region •Sustainable option, planning for future •Environmental benefits •Transportation options •Reduce traffic on current highway system •Economic benefits •Attractive to young/potential new residents •Increase overall use for entire system •Support increase in population and employment Online Survey •Benefits noted by respondents: •Better connect the region •Access to downtown Minneapolis •Transportation options •Reduce traffic on roadways •Economic development around stations •Convenience/easy access •Environmental benefits •Easier commute •159 said no benefits, or not sure •72 did not answer Community Conversation #1 •Challenges noted by participants: •Decrease in property values •High cost, low benefit •Noise and vibration •Traffic congestion (neighborhood) •Safety issues •Increased crime •Benefits other cities more than Edina •Stations not in convenient locations •Not a significant improvement over current bus/rapid bus system •Lack of ridership Online Survey (516 responses) •Challenges noted by respondents: •Decrease in property values •Neighborhood impacts (character, traffic, access) •Increased noise/vibration •Cost/funding •Safety concerns •Increased crime •Fear of change •Cost of maintenance •Lack of support (local and legislative) •12 did not answer, or said no challenges or not sure Community Conversation #1 •Participants noted it’s important for the city to know more about: •Housing, properties, and neighborhoods •Canadian Pacific’s plans for rail, increased freight traffic •Benefits directly for Edina residents, vs. benefits forsurrounding areas •Other transit options •Overall timeline/steps for implementing a passenger railproject •Station locations •Status of Green Line Extension, usage data from othertrain lines in Metro area Online Survey •Respondents noted it’s important for the city to know more about: •Impact on home values •Safety implications •Impacts – noise, traffic, parking •How it will be used/how many will be served •Costs, including operation and maintenance •Other routes/options •Good metrics on existing transit lines •Impact of self-driving cars and ride-sharing services on transit •Process of negotiating with railroad Comment Summary •Comment Sheets (67 responses) •No further study of passenger rail/keep gag rule – 60% •Yes to further study of passenger rail – 24% •No preference stated, questions/more info requested – 16% •Online Survey (515 responses) •Would use passenger rail in there was service in Edina – 47% •Would not use passenger rail if there was service in Edina - 53% Agency Stakeholder Meeting •August 12, 2017 – Staff from St. Louis Park, Bloomington, Hennepin County •MnDOT and Met Council also invited •Other projects on priority list – focused on other things •Interested and want to stay informed Existing Conditions (within 1 mile) •Existing and planned station areas compared to Grandview area •Household density •Population density •Employment density •Why Grandview? •Approved city planning documentsidentify as future location oftransit station Edina’s GrandView District Household Density 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 G r a n d v i e w 3 8 t h S t r e e t 4 6 t h S t r e e t 5 0 t h S t r e e t M i n n e h a h a P a r k A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 1 L i n d b e r g h A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 2 H u m p h r e y A m e r i c a n B l v d 3 4 t h A v e B l o o m i n g t o n C e n t r a l C e d a r -R i v e r s i d e F o r t S n e l l i n g F r a n k l i n A v e n u e L a k e S t r e e t M i d t o w n V A M e d i c a l C e n t e r 6 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n 8 5 t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n 9 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n B a s s L a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n G o l d e n V a l l e y R o a d S t a t i o n O a k G r o v e S t a t i o n P e n n A v e n u e S t a t i o n P l y m o u t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n R o b b i n s d a l e S t a t i o n V a n W h i t e B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n B a s s e t t C r e e k V a l l e y S t a t i o n B e l t l i n e B l v d S t a t i o n B l a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r y n M a w r S t a t i o n C i t y W e s t S t a t i o n D o w n t o w n H o p k i n s S t a t i o n E d e n P r a i r i e T o w n C e n t e r … G o l d e n T r i a n g l e S t a t i o n L o u i s i a n a A v e n u e S t a t i o n O p u s S t a t i o n R o y a l s t o n A v e / F a r m e r s … S h a d y O a k S t a t i o n S o u t h W e s t S t a t i o n W e s t 2 1 s t S t r e e t S t a t i o n W e s t L a k e S t r e e t S t a t i o n W o o d d a l e A v e n u e S t a t i o n A n o k a S t a t i o n B i g L a k e S t a t i o n C o o n R a p i d s - R i v e r d a l e … E l k R i v e r S t a t i o n F r i d l e y S t a t i o n R a m s e y S t a t i o n T a r g e t F i e l d S t a t i o n Dan Patch Blue Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext Northstar Grandview area = 2 households/acre 43% of station areas evaluated have same or less household density as the Grandview area US Census data, 2010 Population Density 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 G r a n d v i e w 3 8 t h S t r e e t S t a t i o n 4 6 t h S t r e e t S t a t i o n 5 0 t h S t r e e t M i n n e h a h a P a r k … A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 1 … A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 2 … A m e r i c a n B l v d 3 4 t h A v e … B l o o m i n g t o n C e n t r a l S t a t i o n C e d a r -R i v e r s i d e S t a t i o n F o r t S n e l l i n g S t a t i o n F r a n k l i n A v e n u e S t a t i o n L a k e S t r e e t M i d t o w n S t a t i o n V A M e d i c a l C e n t e r S t a t i o n 6 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n 8 5 t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n 9 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n B a s s L a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n G o l d e n V a l l e y R o a d S t a t i o n O a k G r o v e S t a t i o n P e n n A v e n u e S t a t i o n P l y m o u t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n R o b b i n s d a l e S t a t i o n V a n W h i t e B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n B a s s e t t C r e e k V a l l e y S t a t i o n B e l t l i n e B l v d S t a t i o n B l a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r y n M a w r S t a t i o n C i t y W e s t S t a t i o n D o w n t o w n H o p k i n s S t a t i o n E d e n P r a i r i e T o w n C e n t e r … G o l d e n T r i a n g l e S t a t i o n L o u i s i a n a A v e n u e S t a t i o n O p u s S t a t i o n R o y a l s t o n A v e / F a r m e r s … S h a d y O a k S t a t i o n S o u t h W e s t S t a t i o n W e s t 2 1 s t S t r e e t S t a t i o n W e s t L a k e S t r e e t S t a t i o n W o o d d a l e A v e n u e S t a t i o n A n o k a S t a t i o n B i g L a k e S t a t i o n C o o n R a p i d s - R i v e r d a l e … E l k R i v e r S t a t i o n F r i d l e y S t a t i o n R a m s e y S t a t i o n T a r g e t F i e l d S t a t i o n Dan Patch Corridor Blue Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext Northstar Grandview area = 5 people/acre 39% of station areas evaluated have same or less population density as the Grandview area US Census data, 2010 Employment Density 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 G r a n d v i e w 3 8 t h S t r e e t S t a t i o n 4 6 t h S t r e e t S t a t i o n 5 0 t h S t r e e t M i n n e h a h a P a r k … A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 1 … A i r p o r t T e r m i n a l 2 … A m e r i c a n B l v d 3 4 t h A v e … B l o o m i n g t o n C e n t r a l S t a t i o n C e d a r -R i v e r s i d e S t a t i o n F o r t S n e l l i n g S t a t i o n F r a n k l i n A v e n u e S t a t i o n L a k e S t r e e t M i d t o w n S t a t i o n V A M e d i c a l C e n t e r S t a t i o n 6 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n 8 5 t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n 9 3 r d A v e n u e S t a t i o n B a s s L a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n G o l d e n V a l l e y R o a d S t a t i o n O a k G r o v e S t a t i o n P e n n A v e n u e S t a t i o n P l y m o u t h A v e n u e S t a t i o n R o b b i n s d a l e S t a t i o n V a n W h i t e B o u l e v a r d S t a t i o n B a s s e t t C r e e k V a l l e y S t a t i o n B e l t l i n e B l v d S t a t i o n B l a k e R o a d S t a t i o n B r y n M a w r S t a t i o n C i t y W e s t S t a t i o n D o w n t o w n H o p k i n s S t a t i o n E d e n P r a i r i e T o w n C e n t e r … G o l d e n T r i a n g l e S t a t i o n L o u i s i a n a A v e n u e S t a t i o n O p u s S t a t i o n R o y a l s t o n A v e / F a r m e r s … S h a d y O a k S t a t i o n S o u t h W e s t S t a t i o n W e s t 2 1 s t S t r e e t S t a t i o n W e s t L a k e S t r e e t S t a t i o n W o o d d a l e A v e n u e S t a t i o n A n o k a S t a t i o n B i g L a k e S t a t i o n C o o n R a p i d s - R i v e r d a l e … E l k R i v e r S t a t i o n F r i d l e y S t a t i o n R a m s e y S t a t i o n T a r g e t F i e l d S t a t i o n Dan Patch Corridor Blue Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext Northstar Grandview area = 1.6 employees/acre 26% of station areas evaluated have same or less employment density as the Grandview area US Census data, 2010 Effects on Home Values •American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and the NationalAssociation of Realtors (NAR) - 20131 •Property values of houses located near transportation with high-frequency serviceperformed 41.6 percent better than similar properties in a region •Sales prices within areas within a half mile of a fixed transit line saw lower declines inrecession •Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors (MAAR) – 2016 •Value of homes in neighborhoods near Blue Line stations in Minneapolis arehigherthan homes in neighborhoods that are not •Similar dynamic expected along Green Line Extension •Exception - Kenwood neighborhood,where the price effect is expected to be minimal dueto low turnover rates of homes •St. Louis Park and Hopkins home values expected to perform well •Minnetonka and Eden Prairie home values expected to fall in the middle 1 2013 study included Boston, Phoenix, Chicago, San Francisco, and Twin Cities Effects on Home Values •Some evidence of differences in market segments •Residential properties near Atlanta, Georgia rapid transit stations saw increase in low income neighborhoods but decrease in high-income neighborhoods. (Nelson, 1992) •Greater benefit to lower income homes than higher income homes near commuter rail stations (Bohman/Nilsson, 2016) •Value also influenced by: •Transit mode/type of service •Land use and zoning policies •Proximity to other modes of transportation •Connections to other transit lines Process and Implementation Timeline •From idea to construction – can be 20-30 years •With an identified project and initial funding: •Pre-project development study and development of locally preferred alternative: 2 years •Preliminary engineering and environmental documentation: 3 years •Final design: 2 years •Construction and testing: 2 years Next Steps •September 28th: Transportation Commission develops recommendations at its regular meeting •October 17th: Transportation Commission makes its recommendation to City Council 9/1/2017 | 1 Online Survey Results Summary Summary An online survey was posted to the project website for approximately 4 weeks in July/August 2017. There were 515 responses. This document summarizes feedback by general themes. Full versions of all comments are attached. Summary of Question Responses The following lists represent a simplified version of the comments received, generally in priority order (i.e. the item at the top of the list had the most mentions in survey responses). Question 1: What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? l Better connect the region l Access to downtown Minneapolis l Transportation options l Reduce traffic on roadways l Economic development around stations l Convenience/easy access l Environmental benefits l Easier commute l 159 said no benefits, or not sure l 72 did not answer Question 2: What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? l Decrease in property values l Neighborhood impacts (character, traffic, access) l Increased noise/vibration l Cost/funding l Safety concerns l Increased crime l Fear of change l Cost of maintenance l Lack of support (local and legislative) l 12 did not answer, or said none or not sure Question 3: What questions do you have about passenger rail? Note: This is a representative list of the most common types of questions. l Why is this even being considered when it was previously off the table? l Why is the City exploring this instead of trying to promote bus use? l Where would the passenger rail go? How is it necessary given the Southwest LRT? l Why do we need it? l In what way would it benefit Edina? l How can we make this improvement faster? 8/17/2017 | 2 l Why can't the Dan Patch Line be turned into a bike path? l Why would we add something so disruptive to our city? Who is in favor of this and why? l How much will it cost and who will pay for it? l Why is this being discussed without any reference to other options? l Can this line be electrified down the road? l What communities will it serve? l How will safety issues be addressed? l How many people will be projected to use it? l What is the cost/benefit ratio? What is the cost per passenger mile? l What are current bus usage figures for Edina? l How many homes are immediately impacted? Will my property value go down? l How often would it run? l Would there be adequate public parking? l Would Edina allow actual walkable and transit-focused development to be built around stations? l Where would there be a station in Edina? l Will it prevent or reduce freight trains? l How handicapped accessible it will be; how available to seniors? l What is the perceived economic benefit to Edina? l How much would a ticket cost? l How will it relate to or impact auto traffic? How many trips would be diverted? l Why the fixation with rail when Uber today and autonomous cars tomorrow? l What problem is being solved? Concern about potential for increased freight on the line? If yes, what are all the ways that could be addressed? Question 4: What existing transit services in the region (bus or rail) do you use? Question 5: Do you envision yourself or someone you know using passenger rail if there was service in Edina? l 43% of respondents said yes, they envision themselves or someone they know using passenger rail l 57% of respondents said no, they do not envision themselves or someone they know using passenger rail 8/17/2017 | 3 Question 6: What is important for the City to know as information is gathered about existing conditions and policy around passenger rail? l Impact on home values l Safety implications l Impacts – noise, traffic, parking l How it will be used/how many will be served l Costs, including operation and maintenance l Other routes/options l Good metrics on existing transit lines l Impact of self-driving cars and ride-sharing services on transit l Process of negotiating with railroad Question 7: On a scale of 1 to 5, how much did you know about this topic prior to taking this survey? This question was redacted because the scale values were not initially provided. Question 8: What is your address? (optional, 292 responses) All but about 5 percent of respondents provided an address or location within the city of Edina, and those were predominantly located within a mile of the Dan Patch Corridor. Question 9: What is your age? (optional, 479 responses) l Under 18 (0.2%) l 18-24 (1.7%) l 25-34 (9.6%) l 35-44 (19.4%) l 45-54 (26.7%) l 55-64 (23%) l 65 and over (19%) What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) More downsides than benefits for this potential solution for increasing public transportation. 1. A passenger rail would provide transit options to get downtown. Downtown has changed significantly over the past 20 years. It's bustling and now it's hard to find parking. Traffic is horrible. 2. A passenger rail would be an incredible opportunity for Edina, most cities on a train line have higher home values in other parts of the country. Insignificantly increased access to Southwest passenger line Reduced pollution from cars. None. Way to expensive none to residents of Edina It would keep our community and state connected and keep us current with the rest of the world NONE I don't see a lot of benefits for passenger rail. The southwest passage is close enough. No reason to spend the dollars to have to lines. None - this would not be a good thing for the Edina neighborhoods that the railroad tracks run through. No real benefit for Edina ZERO benefits. This is absurd that the city of Edina is even entertaining the idea of allowing this. None. I see only negative things for the neighborhoods and Edina. none None. There is no need for passenger rail in Edina! Less car traffic Easy access to Minneapolis Why am I being asked this question -- should not part of the $30,000 being spent on this research to come up with a recommendation identify the pros & cons? Streamlined service to downtown Minneapolis and Northfield, relieving traffic and road congestion and encouraging development along the corridor. I honestly can't think of any. Economic benefit along the corridor. Increase in transportation options as traffic continues to grow in the region without road capacity increases from MNDOT/legislature More noise, pollution and wasted taxpayer's money There are none don't know none Connections to the growing rail transit network to the growing community of Edina. There is NO BENEFITS, ONLY an ADDITIONAL NUISANCE in Edina What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) There a feasibly benefits for some of he population, but the detriments to other people outweigh the positives. Better transit. Easier access to Downtown. Lower carbon footprint. Going south to Northfield. Another option for Edina residents could get downtown via rail. Only if there were convenient stops and schedules, but that would also pose a challenge of frequency Reduced travel time, skipping traffic, environmental, monetary. I see few benefits to passenger rail along the Dan Patch. There are none - not a need relieve traffic congestion on both 169 and I35 going over the river, and enhance redevelopment in Edina, St.LouisPark, and Savage. Quieter neighborhoods (no train whistles at crossings, no clickety-clack tracks. reduce vehicle emissions Easier, cheaper, and faster transport There are no benefits in using the Dan Patch Corridor for passenger rail. If any passenger rail type transportation system is considered, it should be in line with the existing roads/freeways. Then the existing bus transit station could also be used for the rail system rather than duplicating efforts. People tend to use their cars now even though they may be near existing light rail or busing. This means that tax payers are already subsiding the existing light rail. For the region, potentially less congestion on the roads, less carbon emissions, and another option for travel. None that I can think of. None. None. People should bike or car pool. This would be a waste of money. We should put this money towards low income housing. Providing mass transit to areas that are currently underserved 1) transportation of people, perhaps efficiently 2) less cars on the highways Can't think of any. Reduced traffic Reduction in drunk driving Increased economic activity along the corridor Improved public transportaton It will increase the ability to live carless in Minneapolis and better connect the region. Easier commute for some Not sure Mass transit is the future. Might help some people commute to work Negligible for Edina residents. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) None. A complete waste of taxpayer money. Commuting to work and visiting nearby cities. Our family would like to only have 1 car and we are always considering moving out of Edina because it seems necessary to have 2 cars to live here. This would help us. Little or none none Reduced vehicle emissions in the corridor, fewer single-occupant vehicles clogging up Highways 100 & 169 (and to a lesser extent France Avenue). The potential establishment of train stations at Normandale Lakes, 70th Street, and Excelsior Blvd/SWLRT I don't see a single one - Providing regional transportation options to those who can't afford a car, choose not to, or can't drive due to physical disability - Providing expanded, all-day access to jobs (most important), education, recreation, and shopping opportunities along likely station areas - Expanding a transportation mode that is less damaging to the global and local environment than single-occupancy vehicles - Allowing for more people (particularly those who can't afford cars) to live near station areas that are otherwise blocked (through zoning, backed by concerns of traffic and parking). This is especially important for affluent cities like Edina. - Marginally reducing the need for expanding local roads and state highways - Marginally improving overall regional traffic safety Great commuter link between Downtown, Edina, and other suburbs, with connection to SWLRT. I'm more likely to visit Edina if I can get there by transit easily from Downtown. Less people on the roads. Safer traveling. Suburbs beyond edina would benefit I am not a fan. I think it will add noise and congestion. For me, none, as I live directly across the street from the Dan Patch line! Commutes to downtown similar to the Northstar line for those of us that already all drive downtown everyday. Could also be more efficient then the current bus routes. More convenient access to the cities if it was used by the light rail system. Reduce traffic, improve ease of access to downtown, increase property values none It is an important connection between the south metro. Connecting Edina to other metro areas - esp via quick access. Right now we are a suburb left out of the light rail system. Nothing I do not see any as the disruption to our community would far outweigh any benefits Alternative to traffic congestion, better for the environment, good for equity and economic development. It is very possible that there are none. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Alternatives to commuting/driving downtown, expansion of our existing transit network, a way to give commuter rail a second chance in the MSP area after half-assed Northstar Reduction in traffic. Reduced commute times will help hold and increase Edina property values. Introduce more transit options, especially older residents and younger generations who are trending away from multi car families. Create development zones around stations. The Cahill industrial park is a great opportunity to create a new mixed use, residential, retail, hospitality neighborhood ( yes, it will take many many years, but will likely quadruple the tax base) keep edina a forward thinking, progressive and attractive community. Traffic is one of the greatest treats to Edina and the regions desirability A quicker less stressful easier commute to work. Access to Minneapolis and southern suburbs! Feature that makes Edina more attractive and connected to business and residents. Easier passage to downtown Minneapolis. Benefits to the environment. Potentially people would be less inclined to drive while intoxicated with additional transit options. Less road traffic and pollution. Traffic decongestion, ease of transit would encourage employers and residential builders to build near the rail, would bring the metro one step closer to great transit are rather than collection of disparate suburbias Convenient and easy access to passenger rail Can think of few vs. the negatives Reduce car congestion, connection to the rest of the rail system so could use for daily work commute, being able to age in place when no longer want to drive Easy commute to downtown Lighter traffic Easier, faster access to Downtown during rush hour. Chance to redesign the area around Davanni's / Holiday / Liquor Store area. NONE good to get people off the roads and onto public transport It wil employ a lot of people If any, they would be severely outweighed by the negatives. Why does Edina need this? I see no need for a commuter train for Edina residents. Show us facts that exemplify a need for this from our tax paying residents. Reduced congestion on 35w for Commuting south of the river; increased access to jobs at the MOA and airport To move more people I see no need for this. People love their cars and have the income to drive. Decreased auto traffic on Highway 100 What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Not needing to use a car ease in commuting and travel throughout area Another means of transportation in Edina, particularly connecting to downtown. expand opportunities for public transportation; decrease load /number vehicles on roads Decreased automobile traffic congestion. Not having to drive downtown, which requires negotiation sometimes awful traffic, paying steep parking fees, and generally causing high blood pressure. Increase in use of public transportation reduces road congestion as well as being more fuel efficient. I see little for most Edinans. It would be a lot of money to send the small percentage of people who work downtown and who are also close enough to walk to the rail. If driving to the rail where will they park? Going to a ball game? Possibly the one thing to draw people. But again, where to park? less congestion on our roads, ability to rely less on having a car, less pollution from traffic jams, denser development on less land, cheaper than having a car Maybe it will alleviate traffic to downtown work locations and sporting events? In general public transportation is a more environmentally friendly way to move people around than cars. Better to move people through Edina on LTR than highways. Potential for less traffic on 100/169 but I would like to see a detailed analysis of whether it would really reduce car traffic. The existing line may not be along a path people would actually use. Too numerous to mention: decreased traffic, transportation options/flexibility for those who don't have cars, decreased pollution, accessibility for all... Not sure Overall traffic congestion in the metro reduced I don't see any benefit to residents of Edina. transportation option, reduced use of fossil fuel, easy connections across town, fewer emmissions, reuse of existing RR tracks Makes the liberals feel good. They love the trais none None that are not better provided by buses. I genuinely don't see any. None as I see it. more noise traffic on rails, danger to kids Depends on where it would go. Supplement other means of transportation. maybe some convenience for a very limited number of people in Edina What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Ease of transit. Less traffic on roads Great connection to downtown minneapolis More public transportation options Better foot transportation around Edina. Very limited compared to cost. Benefit is mostly to businesses, if they want it, they should pay for it (since none of these projects are ever close to break-even and need huge on going subsidies). Decreased traffic congestion on major highways such as 100 and 62 ? The line is nearly in the center of the city so one who wants to use the line can without driving a long way. Less driving on freeways. To ease traffic congestion on Edina highways. Not sure of any yet There are many potential benefits from a new rail line and they all outweigh any possible challenges or negatives that the residents of Edina may have. Mass transportation is the life blood of densely populated urban areas and as the Twin Cities and its suburbs move into the 21st century we need to have a transit system in place to keep up with increasing urbanization and growing population densities. Mass transit, as with many public works projects and services is not, nor should be, a way to make the city, state, or any government entity money. Mass transit also does not necessarily have to be self-sustaining in terms of cost vs. fees collected. Mass transit is ultimately a subsidized good that we as a society have seen fit to put in place to help people maneuver and adapt to increasingly congested urban environments. We can continue to widen highways, roads, and bridges state wide but ultimately studies have shown that expanding roadways does very little to alleviate traffic, not to mention the long-term care costs of traditional roads for motorvehicles. We need more rail systems (not just light rail in the cities but a high-speed network state wide) if we are to remain competitive in an increasingly competitive economy. By investing in ways for the public to move about more freely, regardless of access to a car or other transport, we will ultimately be providing a means for all people to improve their station in life. If we want to see our local economies grow we need to find ways for people of all income levels to move about freely. Any attempt to put in place NIMBY policies or to some how prove the ineffectiveness of mass transit is to ignore the hundreds if not thousands of cities world wide who depend on such services. The Twin Cities is at an interesting crossroads and we need this if we do not wish to become stagnant and create greater burdens on our already aged roadway infrastructure system. Those who are against this are purely self-interested, have no vision, and are probably just scared of change and rather discriminate against non-existent dangers they imagine than support metro wide growth. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Decrease in motor vehicle congestion. Easier access to communities north and south of the river. Millennials favor public transit. Don't know of any benefits, except perhaps to businesses. Decreased travel time. Energy efficiency, and less overall traffic in the corridor Greater access to public transportation, of course. Increased demand for housing in Edina. Moving people 10 years or 20 or 50 years from now. I would love to be able to take public transportation directly and easily into Minneapolis. The lack of good public transportation is surprising in this area. I'd much rather take a train to work than drive. Little Reduce carbon emission, traffic congestion & fossil fuel consumption. Improve mobility to those who don't drive. I don't see any benefit. It was decided long ago that this was not feasible and why Edina is bringing it up again is beyond me. Nothing. This will be a tax burden on the city and state. This will cause lots of problems at stops and cause unneeded traffic though edina. It would provide a closer station access to the other more major commuter rail systems already in existence. I don't see any major benefits from passenger rail on the Dan Patch line. I do not think there would be enough passengers to justify the costs and community impact problems. I think increasing bus traffic is a much better solution to reduce road congestion The benefit could mean that getting downtown would be easier. It would be for the specific goal of commuting from Edina to Downtown Minneapolis or St Paul. It will be of specific use for people working at either location and who do not have to additional stops to make on the way home (e.g. grocery shopping at larger outlets or picking up kids). For family with kids in day-care the potential benefit is minimal More transportation options. Less traffic. Access to light rail system to get downtown, reduced higway traffic, increased home values due to public transport availability, less reliance on cars, could take to downtown events & airport so reduce parking fees Ease for residents to get to Minneapolis. I really don't see any benefit reducing car traffic in our neighborhoods, easy access to downtown, easier to walk around Edina, better for the environment Commuter transportation to downtown. Lowering environmental impact and reducing car traffic. Moving people into the area for restaurants and shopping. Better long-term transportation access and modern city living. Helps with traffic flow; makes easy access to downtown, and if I understand it correctly easy access to north field for college students. I think it will also help Edina to stay vibrant with easy access public transportation. I suggest that you compare this opportunity to Washington DC when they added the subway and the community of Georgetown said no because they didn't want "undesirables " in their community. Today Georgetown area has traffic gridlock because of no easy access to public transportation bringing more public transportation to edina What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Better options for getting into Minneapolis. Not just M-F express busses. Could spur growth of all kinds along the corridor. Fewer cars on Highway 100 less dependency on personal vehicles and dependent roadways Increased traffic through Edina- I'd probably prefer more carpool lanes before rail service. Improved access to other parts of the metro, reduced vehicle congestion, reduced emissions, fewer vehicles on the road, less reliance on cars. access to other areas without using cars Transportation options!! It's about time we start looking at this. All you have to do is visit a city with good transit to know the benefits - think Boston. NONE. The city has no business or positive experience in traffic control. Stop this project! Looks good for political career of some. We need better options for safe public transportation in Edina to both downtown areas, the airport, MOA and other areas. More cars off the riad none that I can identify at this time. Getting downtown easily Nothing By participating in a study of passenger rail and assuming a positive outcome, the City of Edina would have some authority in the management of the line vs opting out and leaving complete control to the owners of the railroad. No benefit to Edina....we are not a dense urban city. Do not know. less traffic, access for people without car to the city None at this time. How could 30,000 be spent looking into ''tis project when a gag order is in place Edina won't be left out of the rail transportation web It may be a faster way downtown than SLOW busses As an Edina resident, I'm not sure I will see the benefits. I believe the benefits will be reaped by citizens further out on the line. NONE Access to the southwest light rail extension Increased property values. Less traffic on Hwy 100. Greater accessibility to downtown. In a residential area I don't see any benefits to passenger rail. It's loud, it's dangerous, it will reduce home values in the vicinity. Facilitate commuting between Bloomington, Edina, Minneapolis, St. Paul and beyond via rail, reducing commute time, adding convenience, and reducing road congestion. Mass transit Less cars on road/commuting alternatives What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) None - it will continue to cost more than it adds to the pockets of the taxpayers. Taxpayers will lose more money every year it is under construction and in operation. Not driving so much. Not driving in bad traffic or bad weather none The tracks are In my front yard (brookside terrace) and I see no benefits. Passenger rail will be several runs a day Vs 2 or 3 at the most right now per day/night. More money in the pockets of politically connected contractors. More access to public transport for people who live/work in the area No need. No benefit increased mobility without auto congestion; corridor exists so no need to build/add new lanes; less pollution from cars None to residents of edina because there is no place to build a station Less traffic Low cost and efficient transportation alternatives to car/truck. Existing infrastructure and rights of way already in place. A way to link Edina to other mass transit Fewer cars; walking to get to rail stop my husband works in north field (and we live in edina), so would be a wonderful transit option and would relieve traffic on 35W. Less congestion on HWY 100 a. reduction in commuter traffic b. increase in access for residents to city and other suburbs c. reduction in carbon footprint Easier commuting to work, save money on gas and parking downtown, time to read/think/work on the train, more environmentally friendly As we age, we need better ways to get around than driving. If Dan patch connects with the light rail system, we in Edina can get all around the metro area without having to drive. Less traffic, easy access in & out of Edina Hard to tell. It might be a little fast than the bus service and have a nicer station At this point I'm unaware of any for our community. None for Edina Reduce traffic, ease of commute. Control of heavy train traffic Increased business opportunities, more people taking public transportation means fewer cars on the road, more environmentally friendly. Reduced traffic, decreased carbon issions, transit oriented development What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) None that I can think of Less auto travel and pollution Lower cost, more efficient mover of people. Convient transportation connecting to light rail(hopefully) in Hopkins/St Louis Park. Also reduce traffic congestion in Edina Reduce traffic congestion on other roads, does not share the road with other cars etc, is clean and quiet, is a quick way to get downtown, can connect with other lines. Build infrastructure for the future, help ease road congestion, help reduce our reliance on single occupancy vehicles Vroom vroom None. It will bring the riff raff. It would remove cars and congestion in the area and open Edina to new businesses and social opportunities. 1. Transportation through the use of existing tracks. 2. Safer than all of the accidents that occur on the other Twin City light rail lines. You tell me-- will it reduce congestion on nearby freeways?? Now, in Aug. 2017, comgestion on local fwys is horrible. Better non-auto connections to other areas in the metro I do not have enough information to ask. College transport, transfer to Mpls, Lighten highway traffic None that I can see to the residents of Edina but disruption & more tax payers dollars to support this project I think it would be an excellent option to train to work as opposed to driving. Improved public transportation for minneapolis and the western suburbs also a good location for a bike trail on the out side edges. Energy saving. Reduce traffic on all freeways. Based on the evidence from other cities in the US similar communities have found it is not cost effective to build and ridership suffers. There are no long term benefits. None. We do not need this in our community. fast, safe, low cost transportation with a low carbon foot print, keeps cars off the road, good option for those who can't drive There are none Creating a link to Southwest light rail. I know people in Edina who work in the further-west suburbs who have no option but to drive there. Another advantage would be to reduce single car traffic. Less traffic, less pollution Access to public transportation would be nearby. Reduce need for further road expansion due to future commuter traffic. Connect wider range of metro communities. Pollution and energy reduction. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) 1. Reduce traffic on freeways (particularly between Edina and mpls downtown) 2. Reduce commute times (Edina to mpls dwntwn) 3. Easier access to mpls downtown for Edina citizens to attend events, dine and shop Far quicker connections to minneapolis. Will bring jobs to the state, workers to/from Edina to other parts of the metro. Reduced transportation carbon footprint if it leads to reduced auto use. Enhanced commutes: Reduce the stresses of driving with an opportunity to read, work, listen to music, rest, etc. Increase property values of homeowners living within reasonable walking distance of rail line. Reduce living costs: Potential ability to forego multiple-vehicle ownership will reduce fuel, insurance and service costs for residents using the rail. Mass transit Traffic isn't subject to the same congestion as surrounding highways. Who would pay for it? Edina does not have the funds for it. The city keeps raising the city levy (taxes) to pay for the basic existing expenses. Very little within our city. Easy connections to other rails and access to downtown etc through easy and convenient mass transit. Less demands on roads to easy congestion I can't think of any potential benefits. Very few benefits in our community other then few people that live along it and wish to commute down town. The numbers of people along line that do that , are small Mpls St. Paul has many areas of work we are not a centralized metro area. Lines to down town hub are of limited value at best 1) Less congestion, 2) cleaner air, 3) future with less cars. None at this point. I have no reason to go to Northfield. I don't know exactly where "trains" would pick up passengers and where it would drop them off in the Twin cities. I don't know the costs. Reduced emissions from commuters. More options for low-income families. Improve commute times, dec cars on road Fewer cars on roads, saves infrastructure - road maintenance & repair and reduces traffic congestion and fuel usage. Great alternative to buses which are inefficient. Provides cost effective transportation - no need to pay for parking or Uber if spending a night out. My son would use it to get to University. Cannot imagine a single benefit Close to home. Less travel. Community line Provide convient and efficient transportation and help relieve highway congestion. Easier commute to work & downtown MPLS for events. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) The city desperately needs more mass transit options! Environmental concerns very few - too little population density better for the environment and people commuting up from the south none for Edina! Transportation for people. Could cut down on traffic. Help people save money on gas. Hopefully, service to downtown Minneapolis Can't see any Additional transportation into the Twin Cities for outlying areas but also for Edina residents. Nothing Zerp all the obvious benefits of mass transit--fewer cars on the highways, less traffic congestion, lessened need for parking, cheap/easy daily transit. environmentally sound lessen traffic, lessen wear on freeways. none One could go downtown without driving to a ball game none leaving your car at home, for those of us who work DT-- great for all to not have to fight for a parking spot DT for different events Few Stress-free transportation, less road congestion, less air pollution and carbon footprint Easy way to get to airport from Edina Neighborhoods. Way to alleviate traffic tie ups. Clean alternative to cars. Fewer cars commuting is better for the environment. Increased mobility for those who don't drive. More families may choose to have fewer cars, which could be an economic benefit to them. Increased tourism $ into edina. Lessen traffic throughout the neighborhoods, easier to get around the city for those without cars, generally cheaper than gas and no wear and tear on your car so it lasts longer, greener option than 2+ cars per household, limits noise due to motor vehicles, increased ability to get downtown or further south in the metro. easier access to downtown Not sure Easier access to light rail than going to the Mall of America Depends on where/whether it stops in edina and what it connects to. If there are stops, in Cahill and Grandview, for example, there is the opportunity for TOD (which not everyone thinks is a benefit). Rail may attract some riders that would not ride bus. May give RR way to make money off the line rather than increase freight. Project may include mitigating at grade crossings, improving safety and reducing freight train whistles. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Access to downtown Minneapolis (I think?) for commuters and concomitant reduction in highway usage/congestion. It is my understanding that the commuter rail is the only way to add safety constraints to proposed aggressive usage of the rail line by its property owners - anything to keep the usage to a minimum is good for nearby property values and safety of the community as a whole. Ease car traffic to and from downtown I see no benefits. The drawbacks far outweigh any purported benefit. making Edina more 'transpotation' desireable, reducing traffic, emmisions, wear & tear on roads For residents who do not have transportation. Easier travel to and fro Northfield for Carleton and St. Olaf students, employees, alumni, and other people. easy access to downtown(?) or Northfield save money, save gas, save time, reduce traffic, reduce air pollution, reduce multiple vehicles per residence Higher crime rate Another mode of transportation in an increasingly dense and congested area Ease traffic by allowing better public transportation. Additional transit options. NA less traffic congestion I do not see the need or benefit of light rail None that I can see. A very high cost asset with high operating costs that won't serve all that many people I don't see any Lower traffic on the crosstown & hwy 100 Rail access from Edina and points south to Downtown Mpls and light-rail system. Rapid connectivity to downtown. Currently bus service is available but limited. I think it's beneficial to the people of Edina, to give an alternative to motor vehicles. Community mobility and commerce among the people and firms located in the corridor. More public transportation available Will it be more direct than the bus? It currently takes so long to get down down with all the stops of bus #6 that it's not easy to take the bus not huge but some commuters could benefit (many have off rail things to do on the way home such as pick up our kids) I DO NOT WANT THIS PASSENGER RAIL IN EDINA Reduced traffic on 100 and 169. Reduced CO2 emissions. We are moving into the 21st century. This should have been done long ago. It is about time Minneapolis realized it is a major metropolitan area competing with cities like Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta (all with light rail systems). What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Mass transit could ease highway congestion Easier transportation Safer Transportation Cheaper Transportation Public transportation must be increased throughout Minnesota, not just through the light rail. A commuter train that comes through Edina would be a major advancement. None in Edina None to Edina. It will reduce property values and add noise. transportation None Less use of cars! I could get from Edina to downtown Minneapolis without a car!!! Increased options for getting downtown and to the U of M from Edina, and if enough people use it, it may also reduce traffic on the highways. Increase use and accessibility of public transit in Edina, in particular to light rail. None... noise, invasive to properties, noisy none Not sure. We have not utilized the rail systems in Minnesota. 1. chance to help the climate crisis (less pollution, less use of natural resources like gas) 2. alternative transport option 3. more choice for disabled. 4. less traffic congestion Faster commute to downtown Minneapolis. Reduced traffic. Reduced environmental impact. No more kids smoking dope under city bridges. Without any data on passenger volume it is hard to think about a benefit. Quick, easy and safe method to reach downtown Mpls none that I can see. Reduce pollution by giving residents options for connecting to other areas of the cities. If connected to light rail lines, it would improve accessibility to and from other communities. convenient transportation for suburbs into city. less highway traffic. Decrease commuter traffic and associated emissions, fossil fuel use; not have to drive downtown for work What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) workers living outside Edina won't be bringing even more cars to the overcrowded France Ave. corridor. Option for commuters to downtown. Better accessibility Traffic reduction. .environmental. ..convenience None to Edina. Not a lot of traffic between here and Northfield and driving isn't difficult I'm not sure there are any- doesn't seem to be a route that anyone would need .... zip Connectivity to areas outside our city with out the reliance of autos. taking cars off the road at this point do not see any. none soaking the taxpayers is not a good idea easier commuting to downtown areas. lessening pressure on hiways due to slight reduction in traffic. control of the number of trains and frequency of trains coming through Edina each day. Attracting new residents, adding new residential and commercial ventures. Reduction of traffic on area roads; ease of commuting to & from downtown Minneapolis. Not one Zero I honestly cannot think of any. These projects are disastrously expensive and ridership is always low. The rail projects are not self sustaining and cost taxpayers dearly. Additionally, and more importantly, there would be absolutely too much disruption and destruction to homes and businesses along the tracks. Please don't do this. I don't know but unlikely to benefit a residential area. Decreased automobile traffic Access to downtown without use of car Less traffic congestion on Hwy 169 and 35W. Economic development in communities along the line. one more transportation option by which people can reach downtown Minneapolis Alternative crossing of the MN river and western connection to the other transit options. Virtually none. As evidenced by the failed Northstar rail line, The capital and ongoing operating costs far outweigh any benefits. I see no benefit to Edina residents in general - and I see potentially great harm to my property value as I live on Brookside Ave. Public transport into the city. The future of the american cities will be led by those who consider clean energy or mass transit. Not only will our citizens benefit directly, but we will be positioned (once again) as leaders in urban development. Not to mention economic benefits of connecting Edina via mass transit to Minneapolis/Northfeild. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) Easier access to the Cities, relieve congestion during rush hour times. Enhanced ability for residents in our community to access public transportation through the heart of our residential community. The benefits are many: alternative to cars, we cannot build our way out of congestion, 44% per cent of those eligible to drive do not have licenses and don't want them but want alternatives and they prefer trains to busses; housing and businesses build next to rail, new rail like DMU's are quiet., passenger rail is on existing rail not new, we as a metro area would attract more businesses and jobs because they look at transit as a factor in their decision, will be considered visionary. Less cars, less traffic congestion, less pollution, fewer accidents, safer travel Increased transit options, reduction of highway congestion, redevelopment opportunities Improved transportation to Minneapolis and reduction in traffic. 2) Increased property values 3) Business development near stations 4) Improved walkability and health in going to stations 5) convenience to semi-distant locations 6) economic growth for community 7) better for environment and carbon reduction through reduced use of cars for trips to city None for Edina residents that I can think of. It will benefit the people in Northfield that work downtown. It may benefit those that live near a station in Edina. It would please the government employees and a small number of citizens because that is their way of feeling that they are solving a problem. a better commute to downtown Mpls (better in less driving, smaller environmental footprint, ability to read or work during the trip) Higher cost to tax payers NONE for the average citizen in OUR city. An excellent transportation option from Edina to downtown (and back.) Transit business node in Edina (Grandview.) It would make some people feel good that Edina has a passenger train. Rail trains are very trendy now, and some would think its very cool to have our own passenger rail. I imagine our mayor would be very excited about this. Better access to light rail and other transit options in the Twin Cities. Fewer cars on the road. Faster commutes. Not sure Economic development. Reduction of traffic. Cost efficient transportation versus light rail. None to the immediate neighborhood Easier commutes, less road congestion, increased community I am not aware of any benefits Greater connectivity to the entire metro area from Northfield to Minneapolis. There aren't enough to outweigh the tremendous costs of the rail. Less vehicles on highways with less congestion None! It is completely unnecessary. Lessen prime time traffic. Possibly reduce road travel accident rate. no value What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) There are no identifiable benefits for the people of Edina and significant detriments to the families that live near the proposed line. None to anyone in Edina There are no benefits. The Dan Patch Corridor is not appropriate for passenger rail. None. Too expensive and a waste of money. Do not waste our money pursuing this matter further. You as elected officials have a vested intrest to protect our propery values in Edina. Easy commute to downtown, less air pollution from car exhaust. Very few. It would make Edina look like it had better transit on a map. Convenience! Get to work easily, get downtown easily, less reliant on my car None that I see. Access and ease on traffic congestion I don't see any potential benefits at this time. I do not believe there are benefits of a passenger rail for Edina residents. more transportation options, better movement through the city Accessibility for all to work places, post-secondary education and shopping. -Decrease in automobile traffic on hwy's and interstates. -Opportunities for development along the corridor which provides increase in services, employment and tax base enhancements. - reduction in air pollution 1. Relieve some of the congestion on the few arteries that cross the Minnesota River 2. Offer a potential rail connection to south of the river communities to connect to the Twin Cities light rail system Economic development along the rail, acceptable commute times across the river and reduced congestion on 35W Transportation to and from work, shopping and easy access in and out of the city, less congestion on our highways. Passenger rail will provide another mode of transportation for those that need to cross the river. Provides another river crossing and opportunity not to use a car. It would open decrease the amount of time, energy and resources spent on traveling into work areas. Rail is a cheap transportation that is incredibly underutilized in the US. It is also much better for the environment then the highway system. Reduction of traffic our highway system when crossing the Mn. River. connecting to the growing south metro. To assist south metro residents a viable link to minneapolis Reduction in traffic congestion, air quality improvement, economic development/redevelopment, tax base enhancement Potentially expand transportation options in SW metro Direct route to future Southwest Regional Light Rail None for my family None. Bad idea What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) alternate to driving downtown There are no benefits to passenger rail on the Dan Patch. There isn't sufficient density along the line to support passenger rail currently and, in the decades required to establish that density, the costs far out weigh benefits. BRT and increased bus street service is a much better option to consider. Not to mention the potential that transportation innovations such as ride shares and autonomous vehicles offer as more efficient and effective alternatives. Disruption of neighborhoods, increased danger to citizens. Very little benefit, if any. Prohibitive cost precludes taking this idiotic idea any further. People from the southern suburbs being able to travel to the city without driving cars and polluting None that I can think of Connecting to SWLRT, ability to connect to Mayo clinic none Alternate type of transportation, however if you look at how few commuters are using the Northstar passenger trains, the lesson is not build it and they will come. None that come to my mind. Less need for car, easier access to Minneapolis for work and entertainment. Ease of transport for others into Edina for use of our businesses or for employment. More mass transit options are great for the environment and for the vitality of the suburbs and of downtown. Commuters would have more options for getting to work. New businesses could spring up near stations. Property values within walking distance of stations could soar. I grew up on Long Island and know the many values of being walking distance from a train station. It's making wonderful use of a resource that's already there. Enhancements to rail crossings and tracks None that I can think of Route for people that do not work in Edina to reach Edina for work. Possibly route for Edina residents to connect with other routes into downtown, but that seems less likely. I do not see Edina residents riding to go to Northfield. Decreased commuter automobile traffic. Mass transit for residents in Edina No benefit to neighbors and neighborhoods that the line runs through Less use of cars and more use of mass transit for commuting. An easy way to access downtown Minneapolis, get to the airport, MOA, maybe even Rochester for appointments at the Mayo Clinic. Not sure. It could move more people, but will it be used by enough by Edina residents to justify the cost and inconvenience of building the corridor. It's a corridor which mean it's wider than the existing line Less traffic on highway 100 None - I would rather pay and uber to get downtown or take the bus system that works. What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) That freight traffic would not increase. Otherwise, without a stop in edina for the community to use, none. A walkable transit station that could connect with the Wooddale stop of the SW LRT. NONE I don't feel the benefits would outweigh the challenges. I am against the passenger train. I don't see any There are no benefits to Edina homeowners. Establishing alternative transit between downtown Minneapolis and areas to the south, potentially even as far as the edge of the southern metro counties near Northfield, MN. Removes some auto traffic from the roadways which should enhance some longevity to that system. maybe get a few people out of their cars on to a train to go downtown. NONE Decent commuting. Edina has not done anything for those of us who commute daily to downtown for work. With one express bus option having the best parking option in the back parking lot of the liquor store at Vernon Ave (the liquor store awning also providing the only relief from the elements) and the other 'express' bus option having at least 1/2 dozen stops between the park & ride lot at Southdale and the highway! With Crosstown consistently at 'red' every day for both rush hours the city should be doing more to offer non-highway options. very small compared to costs Limited benefits. I do not forsee Edina residents using the service often. It will be easy to go to EP or SLP if they need light rail. Transportation to light rail for a limited few. Zero To make easy commutes free of the hassle of clogged freeways. None. The project is not needed. The city should not have wasted $30,000 to study the issue. Property values will go down. The rebuilds in those areas will stop. You have 600 new homes built and the tax base that those homes created is more than the operating budgets of Coon Rapids. There are none to OUR community that can be reasonably considered. Corporate railroad with freight, and commuter traffic that pass THROUGH edina, not from or to edina, would have no positive economic impact for edina. No clear, factual benefits have yet been presented. An additional commute option in the highway 100 corridor. Redevelopment catalyst for Grandview and 70th/Cahill. An alternative transportation mode besides driving which could help control congestion on major arteries in the area. Easy, more affordable and safe access to downtown, airport, etc. I also believe property value would increase with improved mass transit availability. None to me What are the potential benefits of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (501 responses) A windfall for the owner of the DP line. A windfall for the government bureaucrats overseeing the project and a windfall for the manufacturer of the commuter rail rolling stock. Access to Passenger Rail for Edina residents Not many. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Too many neighborhoods will be negatively impacted for this. People who have homes that back up to the rails are going to be mad that there is increased rail traffic. Decreased access to neighborhoods south east Vernon due to railroad crossings at Garden, Eden Ave near Our Lady of Grace. Congestion near Methodist hospital. The Corridor adjoins many residential properties in the city. Depending on rail frequency, passenger rail on the Corridor may be severely disruptive to neighboring homeowners. It is hard to imagine how the city could have a useful passenger rail on the Corridor without severely disrupting the residential character of adjacent areas in Edina. Noise, downward home values, traffic Acquiring the property to expand the line from private property owners. The idea of converting the Dan Patch line begs one to wonder who is getting paid off for this. A commuter train would decimate property values, create life-threatening situations for children, seniors and all living creatures, and blasphemy the concept and integrity of "Edina". Cost Devaluation of adjoining properties Traffic issues and increase , increase in noise, crime increase, disrupts the nature and personality of Edina, loss in home value which has historically been a smart investment Safety concerns with the path going by houses and parks. Increased traffic, noise, expense, and increase in crime. This would create a serious safety issue at the intersection of Hansen Road and W. 56th St.. It would negatively impact Edina neighborhoods as well as Garden Park due to a significant increase in noise and reduced safety. The tracks border more than half of the park and are situated very close to many Edina homes. Rail traffic crossing intersections, noise, danger to road and pedestrian traffic Erosion of home values near the corridor and the ripple affect of home value erosion. Lower priced home brings lower income home owners and rentals. Noise pollution as well. Decrease in property values , too much noise, crime increases This would be very detrimental to our community. Increased noise and train traffic, house values going down, increased crime. This is not something that residents of Edina want or need! Having negative effects on our neighborhoods. Loss of property and home value, noise, bringing in people to Edina that have no need to be here. Destruction of scenic view and value. Increase of accidents and crime. Please No!!! Crime. Disruption to established neighborhoods. Noise. Huge expense. Neighboring cities do not want. Study done/money spent despite this being fought 15 years ago. Increased crime, Loud noise, Decrease in property values What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Homeowners affected along the route, impact to Garden Park which has had a Park building built there & which was just reshingled in the past couple of weeks which also just this spring had an electronic scoreboard installed which last year had permanent dugouts built, could bring more crime into the area (know this since I worked (HealthPartners corporate) along the blue line & our work parking lot was where at least two employees' motorcycles were stolen & where at least two employees were forced to give over their work laptops at knife point at 3 PM going to their cars in the parking lot) Likely cost and legislative approvals/complications. Also getting neighbors to support. Getting people on the train. Do you invision creating rail parking lots in Edina? I doubt that people will walk more than a block or two to catch a train, especially in Winter. Once they're on, where would be go? I studied the map and don't see anything worth the effort to go to. Maybe re- route the train down France Ave? That would be useful. Uninformed citizens It serves no purpose other than to waste taxpayer money Noise, safety concerns, traffic concerns, property values will go down. Children and loose dogs are sometimes on the tracks. Disturbs the residential area. Property value will decrease. Noise will increase. Access to the train isn't that accessible anyways. Danger at crossing. We just moved into Edina and live along the rail. I wouldn't move to this area if it were a rail ine don't know increase noise and traffic, increased safety concerns, cost Reaching more dense locations within Edina such as the Southdale area from the Dan patch Corridor with it being a bit to the west. Commercial trains are already a nuisance, no to mention all the planes that fly over Edina at low altitude at all time day and night. NO MORE NOISY NUISANCE IN EDINA Limited locations that would accommodate parking for riders due to the primarily residential areas that the rail line goes through. Increased traffic congestion in residential neighborhoods due to additional rail traffic. Additional safety risks to residents. Limited use of passenger rail as ride share services become more and more prevalent. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) For properties along the corridor: - Increased noise, both in volume and in frequency - Increased shaking/rattling (for example, homes in S. Mpls. along 50th literally shake when buses come to bus stops or hit the curb, which happens multiple times a day). This is both disruptive and has the potential for dangerous effects. - Increased traffic, both car and pedestrian. In our neighborhood along he existing line, there is nowhere for cars to park if there was a train stop placed nearby--unless green space or private property was claimed, which would be an ugly transition. - Increased traffic can also have a negative effect on safety and crime. - In Edina near the rail line, we already are disturbed by the train's ridiculously loud and long horn at various hours of the day and night. Increasing this disturbance would not only affect quality of life, but also property values. - We used to live on the San Francisco Peninsula, which is served by two lines, BART and CalTrain. Homes near those tracks and stations were directly affected with decreased value, and every other effect outlined above. While many people do benefit from those commuter lines, that is also directly correlated with San Francisco being "49 square miles." Minneapolis and the surrounding suburbs have nowhere near the space constraints for parking, bussing, etc. We aren't limited by the ocean and a bay boxing us in. - If we are willing to spend vast amounts of time and money on improving public transit--which can be fantastic--why haven't other options been made known to the public that will fund and use this? For example, can our buses be made to be more environmentally friendly? Can they run more often? Can we implement a city/county/state version of "Lyft" using electric or hybrid vehicles with ride sharing, perhaps something like programs that help older residents get out and about, but in this case structured around commuter hours? If we are going to have taxpayers foot the bill for this, which is obviously the case, let's be savvy with how we invest. Building a commuter train service in a state/area that has a more disparate population like our area does when compared to cities like SF and NYC, with our larger lot sizes and a much more confined metro area, doesn't make much sense given the new technology on the horizon. - Have you read the vast amount of studies done on suicides and homicides on the SF Peninsula commuter rails and train stops? Take a look at the great sadness and expense experienced in Palo Alto, CA, especially related to suicides. Fruitvale's BART station is world famous now for a horrific homicide there. Of course this doesn't mean that no one can commute, but this safety issue and expense is a very important consideration. If in doubt about the importance of suicide prevention, especially, please also reference studies done on San Francisco's suicide rate after the Golden Gate Bridge had netting installed (it decreased, the assumption being that a more "accessible" mode had been negated, combined with increased awareness and hotline support--which is being cut back in Minnesota now, which is unacceptable, and related to this issue). Obviously, the negative effects are many.NIMBY Blocking traffic causing more congestion. Noise. Ongoing maintenance costs. Traffic congestion on residential roads waiting for trains, safety of residents accessing the stations via bicycle/existing transit/walking What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Setting aside unwanted noise pollution in highly residential areas, the layout of the roadways and residential lots along the Dan Patch make it ill suited for passenger boarding and de-boarding. Accordingly, the primary benefit of passenger rail would likely be enjoyed by those outside of Edina and those adversely impacted would receive very little, if any, value. Breaking up a community; residential area; not needed; not used; MNs dependent on cars; the intercity transportation not developed paying for the construction - who would pay and how much would passengers be paying? traffic back-ups at rail crossings The fact that tracks run through yards Cost and the impact on residents' lives and homes. Would the existing trains also continue to use the Corridor? The new regional bike trail was just constructed. Disrupting residents, community, nature, and habitat again does not make sense. The bike trail doesn't have the ridership which was projected. The rail bed would have to be improved, which of course costs money, time and inconvenience. More importantly, there are safety and noise concerns. More trains and at higher speeds creates safety hazards, as well as more noise from train horns, crossing gates and the sound of the locomotive engines, etc. Additional noise pollution, additional risks to children who are playing in the area. Too expensive. Far cheaper for a bus. the current ones running are a subsidized form of transportation for people living out of the loop. Let them pay for it and see how much ever would get built. It's way too expensive. It won't pay for itself so it will be a waste of money. And the increased traffic will be dangerous. People have been injured and killed by light rail in other parts of msp and stp. Parts back up to residential areas 1) more crime brought to Edina via the railway, perhaps perpetually 2) perpetual noise 3) more foot and car traffic in areas where the train passes and releases / picks up passengers 4) higher taxes for residents, perhaps perpetually 5) transit impediments while the line is being built Noisy, intrusive and not needed as far south as suggested. Too costly; probably would need taxpayer subsidies. Cost of development exceeds users fees Noise Construction Resident buy in Noise, traffic Environmentally challenged and a waste of tax payers money What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Almost certainly will cost far more than it is worth. To the extent it makes transportation from remote areas (e.g., Mankato) easier, will encourage sprawl. Will cause disruption for people who live close to the tracks. Crime! Increase in noise and crime Snobby attitudes People fear change not realizing that the only constant in life is change Traffic, noise and disruption The cost is way too high considering the limited benefits Noise in the neighborhood. Decreased property values. Lack of demand from Edina residents. Construction- related disruption and inconvenience. Huge expense. Cost, noise, low ridership, need for extensive ongoing operating subsidies, safety of trains running through neighborhoods. People don't want to hear it near their homes that they bought thinking this would never move forward. Disruption and noise for houses along the current rail for public transit in addition to lowered house values. Expensive and non-profitable. Less usage than many other communities because of affluency in Edina. Dealing with Excelsior Ave and not blocking access to Methodist hospital. Too close to a number of homes. noise, increased train crossings, cost Narrow corridor, winding tracks (slow speeds even with new track infrastructure), surrounding residential uses will make it difficult to find consensus. Noise. People walking around the neighborhood. Noise. Rail crossings become more dangerous. - Costs; crossing the river is worthwhile, especially if this might be used as a mixed-local (LRT) + regional (~hourly trains reaching Northfield) but the river crossing and tracks south of there need more work. Making the case on a cost/rider basis might be challenging - Funding - State-level GOP opposition - Local opposition along the route - Given all the above, is this the best use of Edina's political and monetary capital? Overcoming local opposition / NIMBYers, finding the political capital to build it. Noise. Cost Added noise, traffic, parking to edina residential areas Decrease in property values What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Noise. congestion. Crime. Take away from surburban feel of edina. Unhappy residents who will have passenger rail running right through their front or back yards. Also, the tracks twist turn so much that high speed won't be possible in some areas if it's going to be safe. I don't see issues as long as crossings along the route all have gate arms. Increased traffic on a rail line could happen at any time for CP. I live directly against the rail line and I understood when I bought in 2011 that CP can change the frequency of trains at any time. I think commuter rail would actually increase property values similar to the Amtrak corridors in the Northeast. Costs and construction Uninformed public opinion, government red tape, concerns from residents near the actual line many Hesitant Stakeholders potentially having to relocate or alter their property. Noise/safety. Amount of traffic. How it would affect homeowners close by. Too narrow. Poor track geometry. Neighborhood disruptions, natural resources destroyed, noise, traffic. The incredible disruption to homeowners on the train line, 2 trains a day is the most that feels reasonable as it currently stands. Property value negative impact due to challenges of increased traffic on the line. Properties on the line are already impacted by 'undesirable tracks' and this would only get increasingly worse with additional traffic. Safety concerns for parents living near to any tracks, not only families on the tracks. We treasure our community full of great schools, a safe environment created by our residents and police force, why would we consider ruining the peaceful community that we all work so hard to maintain? We seek for improvements in quality of life, not to deteriorate. Older homeowners who have a disproportionately loud voice in local politics. Lots of people are too busy working and raising families to show up to meetings! Noise, cost, potential decline in property values, lack of ridership. NIMBYs. Republicans. Cost. Volume of trains, both passenger and freight. The noise created, effecting those living nearest to the corridor. Safety. The cost of it and anti rail anti metro outstate politicians. It is not well-centered in Edina relative to the population center. Ideally, I'd prefer a rapid transit solution that provides better access to the Southdale area. Noise for residents near the track also concerns me. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Concerns about train noise and congestion due to additional train crossings. Major disruption of existing neighborhoods. Property values diminshed. Higher tax demands on residents. Residents have their own modes of transportation already. Complicated intersections to accomodate rail system. May increase crime in Edina by bringing in unwanted transgressors to citizens. Basically a rail system is not needed. Most residents who drive have from one to three cars per household. Nearby residents pushing back because they fear change, or assume that those that ride the train will be 'undesirable'. Noise, cost, will the train lead to major shopping or work destinations? Noise, Safety, Congestion Infrastructure & bridge work, cut off neighborhoods from emergency vehicles, lights and drop arm needs, noise, if commuter rail & deisel fuel, EIS (environmental impact study) being done? What is the current creosote build-up on surface and in ground water from existing track rails? Has anyone studied the natural flight pattern impacts from the Piliated woodpeckers? Who has contacted the National Audobon Society for that information? Any issues with Todd Park and watershed/nature areas near the Minnehaha Creek? Traffic tie ups at Excelsior for emergency vehicles. Emu any domain costs. 1 or 2 rails? Why this vs trails and who does it benefit? Retrofitting in tight very developed area, home owners who say "not in my backyard ". More traffic and possible littering/garbage Access by all Decreased property values, increased crime and pollution Neighbors who don't want it. harmful to the overall property values in our community and poses major danger to children. I think it AWFUL for homeowners effected and neighborhoods close by. It will KILL their property values. I think they need to be compensated in some way. Buildings/houses in the way. Too much money; paying too much for the whistle Too many to list them all but primarily the drastic and crippling decline in value of hundreds, if not thousands, of homes in Edina. My retirement as well as many others depend upon the value of their home and it would all be lost because of this rail. Do you really need another reason? Property and home values will exponentially decline, noise pollution, loitering Safety as it goes thru the heart of Edina residential and will also decrease property values for blocks around! construction, noise, traffic, homes being affected What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) How many times a day will it run? How will it affect traffic? Will travelers be held up for long periods of time? Where will passengers park? Will there be congestion in neighborhoods near parking areas? How noisy will it be? What hours would it run? Noise bothering homes, nearby streets getting congested due to train crossings causing backups, sleep being disturbed by horns, injuries or deaths caused by intersections NIMBY mentality. let's get on board and do something to rid our reliance of personal vehicles. I am pro expanding busing. Much cheaper than the dan patch corridor. Increase in noise and possibly traffic in the area in areas along the rail line. coordinate with the freight line. win over the people who have the railroad in their backyards... Getting passengers from their homes to the rail. Cost and community resistance. Homeowners near the rail line will likely object to increased rail traffic. Noise, occasional road closure, people and animals on track. Parking for those using the train and car traffic to train station. Cost for value received. Competition with self-driving cars. I would like to see a cost benefit analysis that tells me how much it will cost to send someone downtown because there is no other location on that line that someone from Edina would want to go. More tax dollars to subsidize government waste. Plus congestion increase near rail lines. interruption of current traffic as rail trains go by, building of stations and parking for cars at the stations; limitations and constraints of utilizing a few routes vs. complete grid of streets and roads available to cars. Passenger rail determines future buildout of communities and residential areas.H Overcoming the "not in my backyard" mentality. Decrease in property values of houses on the tracks - and the surrounding neighborhoods - those that would have the trains running through them but are not close to the stop. Also traffic flow - I live in Brookview Heights where the only way west (to VVMS and EHS) is on 66/Valley Lane. Can't imagine what that would look like at the beginning and end of day with trains stopping traffic frequently - school buses. There is already a lot of traffic headed East on Valley Lane/66th at the evening rush hour. Terrible for people who live on those streets if all of those cars were waiting to cross the tracks every day. Noise and decreased property values for neighborhoods on or near the line. The cost benefit may not be feasible - Metro Transit suffers an annual deficit of ~ $74M. The existing metro commuter lines do not fare any better. Those who live along the route not wanting the increased noise/rail traffic, consistent ridership. Expense vs benefit What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Line has had little traffic in recent years so hasn't had investment in intersection safety that would be needed if commuter train was added to line. Would ABSOLUTELY need a stop in Edina to make it worth the disruption and that means a station with lots of parking and lots of traffic going in/out of it - would need to be planned well to make a positive and not a negative for the community. more trains will interfere with automobile traffic - noise and air pollution intrusions into private property No flexibility like the best sides. Too much maintenance. Way too much money that benefits way too few people. We need roads and highways not more rail. too expensive and outdated concept... driverless vans will be here soon ... Uber is wonderful... Train travel even in great places like Chicago is declining. Impractical. Financially irresponsible. Lowers property values. Unsafe. Causes congestion. Ridership. Responsible government spending. Creating services that are not used. Noise, Property devaluation, danger to kids yards Noise, expense, space, investment with no pay off Getting to the rail. more noise, more people, more congestion, we don't really need this N/A upgrading crossings for more frequent trains Increased rail traffic going through neighborhoods Understanding why people don't want it. Another billion in taxpayer money. 1. Will not meet the needs of Edina residents - won't go to the areas of metro that are most frequently visited 2. Increased rail traffic will negatively impact homes near rail line - noise/loss of property value 3. Commuter rail/bus etc. is not well integrated in metro. Even if you were to use commuter rail to reach downtown, there is very limited options to get beyond that area. 4. Cost to Edina city residents in tax increases would not be in line with the benefit residents receive in using the service cost vs benefit the multi users, the freight line and the passenger trains What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) It would cost lots of money. --- Cause some upheaval in neighborhoods affected. Noise and crime The only potential challenges of this project are those who stand in the way of progress due to their own ignorance, intellectual and cultural deficiencies and insecurities, and those who are self-interested. Environment impact. Local residents not wanting change in their backyards. Environmental destruction. Pollution. Added traffic through residential areas. Eminent domain lawsuits. Construction time Noise for nearby houses. Cost. People don't like change....even change for the better. NIMBYS I don't live near the rail line, but I imagine that those who do would oppose construction of light rail there. congested traffic Who pays for it and how? Construction disruptions to residents, merchants & anyone who drives through the area; finding consensus among all the stakeholders; overall cost of the project... Too many trains daily in a residential neighborhood. Noisy. Traffic congestion at crossings. This will cause unneeded traffic thought Edina. I don't know enough about the rail plan - currently the challenges seem minimal - perhaps noise inconvenience for residents living close to the line. Disruption to the lives and property of those living along the line. There should and hopefully will be further assessment of the potential use. Cost is a huge challenge. Also the large number of Edina residents who are adjacent or close to the Dan Patch line. These people would suffer property value depreciation, the disruption of their peaceful use of their property and even potential loss of property if the line expands and takes adjacent land Low usage. The current commuting environment is at a pivotal time, similar to the change from horse to automobile. With the use of autonomous electric vehicle, the limited flexibility of trains is a serious challenge. Once we have electric mass commuter vehicles (with 4-10 ppl), the flexibility and reliability of this will outweight the rigidity of the rail. Some neighbors in the immediate vicinity will fight it tooth and nail. Rail traffic increase at road crossings - need to change intersections of rail & car traffic so dont intersect; public acceptance especially those living closer to track(even though in long run thise within walking distance to stations will see increase in home value). CP already owns it and plans on continuing its use. The Edina community does not want it. It will require eternal subsidies. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Criminals having easier access to Edina. I am VERY against having a passenger rail go through Edina. I believe this will cause crime to increase. Not enough riders. Noise. Crime increase. expense, more traffic, noise noise from trains?, accidents at rail crossings Fitting it in with current homes, businesses, and new development. But it's worth it. Modern, thriving cities have strong public transportation. I'm sure the folks with the line in their backyard are against it, but I think overall it will serve us all . After all the tracks were there when they purchased their homes. I'm not sure where the stations are to be but making sure that parking is available is key. noise Neighbors. Trains already run there, however. Where are the ends of this line going to be? How does it help me get to work? people's infatuation with their own convenience at social costs Residential homes backing up to the line and current train speed is very slow vs. increased commuter speed. Cost to tax payers, devaluation of property value of nearby homes, disruption/noise concerns of narrow mined people who live lose to the proposed route disruption and destruction of neighborhoods near the line, alteration of traffic patterns in much of west Edina, cost to build and maintain, places current homeowners in a very difficult position as they can not sell their homes without disclosing, changes values of homes, changes type of community The usual challenges; cost, 'not in my back yard' mentality. The good to the community outweigh these objections. Traffic conjestion. Trains running through the city creating noise pollution. The city council has damaged the city enough. They are junking up the place. Minnesota has a bad rail system and to compare it to any other major metropolitan is a lie. Disrupt life along the corridor. Have to have easy access to use the train - expensive. Make sure adequate parking near station. Rich people not wanting noise funding would be number 1. the route suggests usage would be #2. #3 would be the argument that would vacate the 2002 study results of "impractical". Make sure there is ample parking Noise, congestion, property value hits, change to the complexion of our city, continued population densification of our community. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Congestion near rail stops, including parking, which should be manageable as it appears that only two stops are proposed. Payment, upkeep, and poor long term usage. It will become extinct. Noise. Traffic congestion at crossings. Safety. A Northfield regional train would be unlikely to any local benifit. Seems likely we would just be stuck in our cars and on our bikes waiting for the train to pass. noise for those along it, outdated thinking and design of project, by the time new and improved comes, we could be sorry with our choices Congestion, hog speed on a winding path, not enough ridership to make it financially feasible, does' follow a established busy road. i.e.: the L in Chicago. Connection to Northfield would be nice. Too expensive. It won't be used for more than commuters if the trains are not frequent and fast. Noise pollution and possible dangerously fast trains for kids and animals. too low ridership..Fixed rail systems are going to fail to provide the individualized transport people need in the next 10 years Neighborhood NIMBY. Access point location. Who funds startup costs. Increased crime. Listed above. Cost, funding, generating support, NIMBYism. A noisy mess for residents and heavy rail vibrations affecting residential houses Antiquated diesel trains. And with the upgrade to the tracks it will increase train traffick greatly, noise, pollution. A lot of people will lose there homes to acomodate the trains. Property values, safety, noise, traffic at railways, tax hikes Making the venture profitable and self-sustaining. If it could pay for itself, it might be worthwhile. A long-term money-losing proposition is not worth starting. No idea Noise, safety and lowering of property values Also property values will go way down. People like to use their Cars. We don't just go in a straight line---North and South. Paying for ongoing upkeep and maintenance. We all know fares won't cover all the operating costs. Noise, getting the land without taking from residents, will it actually be used, where will it go Not the density in the area. Not a destination that is popular. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) train noise in residential neighborhoods; safety (train accidents/pedestrians/cars); locating stations for access points and having adequate parking at those sites for park & ride; scheduling conflicts with freight trains. Houses very close to tracks, street crossings of tracks and the impact on driving patterns Lowering property values, and noise Neighbors against change, rejecting progress and modernization. The attitude that they are losing something, when in fact they are gaining much more. How do people get there? If by car, where do they park? Does it disrupt any current homes or businesses? Noise, if not electric - pollution higher frequency of trains, noise Approval from the residents a. noise abatement near houses b. safety issues c. adequate parking for train station Neighbors/businesses may be relocated, convenience Cost, nimby, noise, right of way, inertia ??? Safety- passenger rails go fast and the tracks are close to houses with kids. No benefit to edina people as the bus service is plenty fast and is flexiable . Noise pollution. Declining property values for many residents. With driverless cars on the horizon, and electric vechicals becoming more popular, it don't think trains will be a preferred method of transport and thus the project seems outdated I believe lowering property values, more noise, more wait times at railroad crossings. Increased crime, increased noise, reduced property values adjacent to rail. Impact on homes right next to rail Convincing people to see the wisdom of a long-term solution to a transportation problem. Funding sources to ensure it is an attractive community asset with positive transit oriented development Noise, increased traffic, high cost, inflexibility of rail transportation vs buses, small population served. Houses impacted by the rail Working with the neighborhoods and getting people to accept change. Make people see this will be a good change, enhansing our neighborhoods, not taking something away from them (our cars) Does another track have to be added, i.e. dual tacks. How often will it run? Will the freight trains have priority? Current neighbors Nobody using it Expensive and annoying for those living near the tracks. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) People who live along the corridor might feel imposed upon. 1. Getting an agreement with other communities. Not sure. Can you get enuff ridership,to u. Log freeways? Is there an incentive for people to walk o. Ike, v. Driving the car? Ridership, noise to neighborhoods, cost Cost, safety- too fast through city neighborhoods, upkeep. Rail traffic on Dan Patch, noise, reduced home value, money needed to make this happen I don not have enough information to answer.What is the purpose of having the rail other than improving transportation to Northfield speed, construction troubles,costs Cost overall, disruption, lower property values and not a great usage. I don't live too far from the line so I believe that there would be additional noise. Huge negative impact on residents who live near the Dan Patch corridor (noise, congestion at light rail/car intersections, environmental impact). High cost noise, cost of changing the current use to what is needed. this will be operated at a loss and we will never recover the cost. The proximity of the rail system in residential areas. We've already seen the challenges that light rail presents around the twin cities. Cost and property displacement, a short sighted solution for a long-term problem Waste of money, decreased property values, increased taxes, increased crime, and not a good idea. Keeping cost down, identifying key stops, coordinating with neighboring communities and those who currently operate freight trains on the tracks. Many. Costs, traffic, lower property values, potential for lawsuits. Construction. Cost. Possible disruption to the neighborhood during construction. There is a state law prohibiting it. The Met Council through its manipulation of the city manager, mayor, city council and transportation department to have meeting and discussions is violating state law. Construction Potential decrease in property values, increased neighborhood traffic to reach the light rail stations, for some neighborhoods there will also be increased noise from the necessary warning signals of the trains. We'll have it all--airplanes and trains! Objections of Residents along the corridor. Determining frequency. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) 1. Access to stations from Edina residents homes (bike, bus, park & ride lots?) 2. Travel time. Needs to be faster than driving between Edina and downtown mpls (during traffic) 3. Cost Noise pollution It runs through people's backyards. Inconvenience and noise during construction periods. Cost of subsidizing rail while ridership ramps up. Potential that driverless vehicle impact will obviate the need for rail in the future. Some environmental degradation. Impact to surrounding neighbors. Increased noise in surrounding neighborhoods. Funding. Residents who live adjacent to the rail line will fight it even though they paid less for their properties because they are close to an existing rail line. Disruption and complication in residential areas. Balance speed/service with convenient stops/locations. Cost. NIMBY Additional noise. Safety issues in surrounding areas and those in close proximity. Those of us close to highway 100 already have to put up with additional noise. Pollution. Potential negative issues when considering sale of our homes in close proximity to the line. Additional congestion of traffic. Negative impact to wild life along the Creek and Meadowbrook area. Increased noise for homes that originally purchased based on its limited use prior,, increased slow downs at crossing during rush hour which will increase backed up traffic during busy times. Increased areas needed for police patrols at the stops. 1) What events are located on or near Dan Patch Corridor? 2) Safety. Cost; More irritating road construction; increase in crime in Edina Reduced property values, more crime, more noise. Cost Cost to build. Noise, Congestion in a 100% residential neighborhood Limited use. After the initial excitement wears down, and the two year olds have grown up, I cannot see this community embracing rail service. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Parking. Live the idea BUT Not in my neighborhood protestors. Parking to service the stations. Potential increase in "riff raff" in our neighborhoods. Easy access. Increased noise in for those that live close to dan patch. Of course, no one wants the rail to run in their backyard. not enough density or commonality of destination to work here no one that lives in the path here in Edina will want it. Until there is better statewide connection, there is little benefit for the immediate urban areas. It will not get used. Noise pollution. Increased noise in an area that already has noise from Hwy. 100. Negative PR for the City, as residents already feel that the City plows through with projects that residents don't want. ongoing financial costs - who pays? Where is the data to support this will reduce traffic congestion - light rail has not lessened congestion. Impact around the home owners in the area - noise impact, and home values. St. Louis Park, Bloomington, Lakeville are not in favor. Huge disruption through neighborhoods. Extensive decreases in value of houses near the railway. Very loud and dangerous going through neighborhoods. Waste of taxpayers money. Property issues, crime Noise associated with rail service. Wait times at crossings. Spend more tax payer dollars, citizens don't want Having it be financially viable. Having it produce enough Revenue to pay all of its costs neighborhood opposition, opposition to initial cost, changing attitudes about car transportation--often with only one person per vehicle Homeowner objections Adversely affecting many residential neighborhoods without comparable benefit to Edina residents Increased crime without a doubt, panhandlers & garage plus increased noise. passengers paying and fiscal responsibility for the project to be in the black,and not asking for subsidies. Noise -- a new parking lot near train Noise, cost, construction disruption, safety parking, cost Might encourage drug trafficking. Dealers can get to wealthy neighborhoods easily, and leave quickly. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Schedule-- striking the right kind of balance. I live quite close to the tracks, we notice the noise the few times a day freight trains come through. I'm worried the noise will be a major nuisance. I'm also worried about the increase in traffic affecting the air quality and the wildlife in my neighborhood-- the noise from trains can be substantial and can affect natural environments even if the noise is not audible to human ears. I'm concerned about the rider interest and if it makes economic sense-- I've regularly used commuter trains to the suburbs in MA and see first hand the struggles they have providing reliable service and attracting and retaining ridership. It is a bit of a money pit out there, and that is an area with a harder commute and steeper downtown parking prices than we have here. Would people use it? Can the price be low enough to entice people that are already happily driving or bussing? Can reliable service be offered in the winter? I'm assuming some people will have to be relocated as it will require their land; it could be an eye sore for houses that aren't relocated but are on the line; the construction period will most likely be difficult for everyone living in the area; you need to ensure there are enough bus lines to actually get to the rail where people aren't having to walk a long way to get to a stop; the adoption rate of the rail could be slower/lower in the suburbs as people aren't used to having a rail to take - you need a great marketing team - which means the city will have to sink a lot of money into it with very low returns for a while although I really think as the number of lines around the city increase so will the adoption rate. none put it in make sure it either goes above ground or below when going through existing intersections and streets it should have no affect on current traffic and intersections which is my biggest issue with current light rail system Not sure Will there be costs to the City of Edina that will be added to our property taxes? Maybe some additional traffic and parking issues. Coordination with other municipalities, Metro Transit, HRRA, and MnDOT--may be competing interests. Gag rule. Prior studies and conventional wisdom that it is not a high value corridor for transit. Neighbors opposed to more trains in their backyards. Cost even if DMU is used. SWLRT not 100% certain. Analysis may show transit needs can be met by SWLRT, express on 100, and 35W BRT. Focus may instead be on identifying/improving access to already proposed/existing transit routes. Changing livability of too many neighborhoods impacted by tracks and traffic Noise/air pollution, rail crossing dangers, loitering - where will the stations be? - increased usage = de facto increase in risk of derailment. That plus potential loitering decreases jeopardizing neighboring property values. Will there be passenger lines only to offset industrial usage of the railroad? Add more foot traffic and congestion to edina What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Infringement of property rights and people will lose quiet peaceful enjoyment of adjacent properties, loss of property value, congestion, parking, pedestrian traffic, constant train traffic, increased potential for crime being brought into Edina, and an increase of clutter, trash and uncleanliness along the rail lines, etc. Noise i don't know Noise. May have to erect barrier. Also, blocking other means of transportation. Parking, hours of departure and arrival, cinvenience of boarding. inconvenient times, not enough trains, service hours not long enough for evening use (getting home after a night out), stations too far apart? parking at stations for bikes or cars? Higher crime rate, noise pollution, lower home values It runs through a lot and of residential areas and these people are likely to oppose. Disruption during construction High cost. Disruption of certain neighborhoods. Lack of approval from other cities. Time and energy should be spent elsewhere. Crime follows the path of light rail. What will Edina do to protect citizens that use this form of transportation? expensive & possibly bad for neighborhoods affected by it. Tax payer funding passenger and freight conflicts; traffic near stops (are you going to put in parking for commuters?), high high cost that will get picked up by taxpayers cost too much Finding space for park & ride. Noise issues for the home adjacent to the tracks. Buses are easier to access. Public transportation may not be available to get people to the passenger rail. Inconvenience to people that live along the train line. Disability access and education of riders on the benefits of light rail. Crossing private property It's close to houses Noise pollution Could decrease home values right near the rail Safety as I sometimes see kids walking along the tracks by the new bike path Cost to build and potential to lose money on it Where would the stops be and are there good areas to park nearby for passengers? I worry about the neighborhoods now next to the tracks,though I'm not sure if they really just get one or two trains a day,as I've heard. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) I THOUGHT THIS HAS BEEN SHELVED 2 TIMES BEFORE. LETS LEAVE IT THERE. NIMBY - nearby residents may oppose additional rail traffic for noise and "safety" considerations. Resident push-back Noise Construction Will enough people use it to make it worthwhile Homes along the corridor will suffer, and the plan needs to adequate compensate those homeowners or the rest of us will fight it. Property value decline near rail lines, noise and general traffic issues waiting for trains to pass Too populated if an area to add rail. You are decreasing property values and hurting the residents of Edina. noise Don't know citizens not liking it in their backyards. more trains. Noise traffic parking at the station sites. People not wanting the passenger rail running through their neighborhood Noise, derailing, rail maintenance, increase train traffic, wildlife endangering, devaluing property near tracks due to noise/traffic Lower property values, noise, danger, People in that area might not want the rail in their neighborhood. 1. people don't see the need. 2. Too much NIMBY 3. where to get funding? Permanent public transportation like this is very expensive, inflexible and usually results in use of immanent domain to take away personal property. Rail runs through city parks, property owner yards, are noisey, create unsafe environments for children to play around, bring in low-income housing and lower the Edina "standard" considerably. Noise and will substantially impact home values in the surrounding area. Cost!!! Right now light rail doesn't break even. Edina homeowners near the rail line. Non-passenger rail traffic Decrease in property values, noise, safety issues, traffic problems, etc. Additional traffic, heightened noise levels Short term cost. Maybe noise? rise in residential neighborhood noise? Boarding stop locations. off street parking at rail stops What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Where to construct stations How do those coming to Edina travel to their jobsites? Where will Edina commuters park, where are the stations? Affects on surrounding residents. Noise, congestion, loitering, footprint related to parking areas, cost, noise, construction. Noise Crush property values Safety Lack of ridership Cost Zero value proposition or ROI for the city or residents Crabby neighbors Costs! Please do not use any more Edina taxpayer money on this project. Drop in home values near the tracks. Expense of building it. Don't see a lot of demand for a line. Noise, crime, ruining our community Spending money on something that may not be used- not sure the route would be one that people needed to use. After living across from Garden Park and also using the park itself, I would just hope the rail lines are safe for more usage. I've seen a lot of people walk on the rail lines. There is also a lot of human traffic coming in and out of park crossing the lines. Running very often in my back yard!!! Dangerous crossings in our neighborhood. Messed up traffic in our neighborhood Too many to innumerate. Crime increasing, noise, increased traffic, less sense of safety & community. NIMBY mentality. Dealing with the rail road not quite sure what the linkage is for, doesn't really go anywhere not being a financial drain on Edina make it pay for itself instead of soaking the taxpayers Possible extra noise from different types of trains. Disruption to residential areas due to construction of railway upgrades. Sustaining ridership. Will require rethinking existing traffic routes. Cost. Traffic, noise and what people it bring into the community. If you want it so bad let it go through your neighborhood. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Not enough density Waste of money we live in Edina so we are close to downtown No one will ride train when they can easily drive and be downtown in 15 minutes Where to begin? These projects are disastrously expensive and ridership is always low. The rail projects are not self sustaining and cost taxpayers dearly. Additionally, and more importantly, there would be absolutely too much disruption and destruction to homes and businesses along the tracks. Please don't do this. Surrounding communities north and south of us do not want these trains either. Way too expensive and disruptive. Please add more busses and lanes to existing roads. Many. Especially the urbanization of a suburban residential area. Build out of Stations/Parking Parking at stations, noise in surrounding neighborhoods, parking on street near stations Paying for it. Getting people to use it. 1) noise, 2) pollution, 3) more trains and increased train traffic on a line already used by freight (I don't see freight going away just because passenger rail is implemented), 4) traffic increase in areas already difficult to exit during rush hour (some with only one street exit out of an entire neighborhood), 5) cost, 6) lack of flexibility (i.e., for such a costly solution, it only provides a few stopping points vs. self-driving cars or buses which are not limited by tracks), 7) decreased property values for many homes immediately on the tracks (What will be done to compensate said homeowners?) Obtaining rail right of way - integrate with bike/pedestrian trails (cramming too much into one area). The right of way does not appear to be broad enough to accommodate light rail alongside the existing heavy freight rail line. Heavy passenger rail scheduled around freight service (Northstar example) lacks frequency and is is inappropriate to a low population density area like Edina. Funding. Declining property taxes as property values decline . . . Design of stops/stations within dense neighborhoods. Using railroads that are in developed neighborhoods and causing houses and neighborhoods to lose value. Will this bring extra traffic and pollution to areas with kids Safety must remain the #1 priority for residents near the route and it's stops. Additionally, mitigation of the negative impacts of the trains on residents whose properties are adjacent or affected by the commuter line must be thoroughly assessed and fairly handled. The gag order must be lifted. That is the worst piece of legislation ever passed! Other challenges: Closed minded people who do not want change! Also lack of vision. I don't know What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Impacts to surrounding neighborhoods; costs Increased traffic on the tracks. With the right of way already in place this is not a technical issue but a cultural/social issue that can be overcome. One could argue there is an issue of noise, but given location right next to Rt 100 it would not be noticeable. There really are no downsides on this one - it is a no brainer as the corridor is already in place! This should be easy compared to other rail projects around the country So many challenges. Thinking through how this would effect the residents of the community you serve--many people in Edina live in the neighborhoods this runs through. How would you make it safe enough? Traffic congestion because of the stops that would be needed during rush hours. Loss of residents and decreased home values along the line. Challenges are that it will change the look and feel of Edina. The building I work in is right in front of the light rail on Hiawatha and it is loud and causes delays with the surrounding traffic. All the neighborhoods along the line would definitely be affected by the noise. Destroying neighborhoods. Edina residents will not use it yet will have to face commuter trains in the neighborhoods. It is a single track, how are you going to do passenger rail with a single track? Getting enough suburbanites to give up the car for commuting. Reasonable fare rates. Keeping the rail neighboring property owners happy. It is not a viable economically, the rail bed is in poor condition, the property values along the line will decrease, what will be the cost to Edian for construction and operation after construction The loss of homes, the loss of neighborhoods due to passenger rail RUNNING THROUGH their back yards, increase crime rate, increase sound pollution, huge decrease of home value, the loss of the "neighborhood feel". Disruption to neighborhoods and residential traffic that are real and quantifiable. Cost. Crossings. Neighbor perceptions that being near a commuter rail line is bad. emergency vehicles would face delays in responding to calls. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) 1) Few places for rail stations / stops. These tracks were laid out decades ago to transport freight. There are very few places along the route where passengers could board the train. Maybe Brookside Ave. Traveling south, it goes through a deep gully (behind Holiday gas, Edina Liquor, bus garage) then highly elevated tracks (behind OLG church) then people's backyards. Finally at Garden Park might be suitable stop. Then it goes through another long, deep gully in people's back yards (Garden Park to just past the Crosstown highway). From the Crosstown south, it goes through people's private back yards and low swamp land that is part of Nine Mile Creek, and it's also elevated high up. The final stretch from W. 70th St has the Excel Energy industrial yard and then the back of warehouse/office park area (no residential) 2) Private property owners will NOT want train stations in their back yards or neighborhoods. 3) No place to go. You really think people will pay to ride a train to Grandview area, then walk several blocks to Jerry's? The best use would be if it stopped at Bunny's bar in SLP. Impact to adjacent residential properties. Participation by other affected communities. NIMBY individuals. See next question It would destroy established neighborhoods. Edina's image as a good place to live, raise a family, benefit from excellent schools would be damaged, at least on the southwest quadrant. Noise. Neighbor opposition. Safety. Train speeds. Too much traffic on that rail line. Lower property taxes. Edina being just a pass through city, not enough business along the line in Edina for it to make sense Getting our political leaders on board More trains, noise, pollution, delays traveling from one side of Edina to the other as tracks cross side roads and highways are not useable during peak commuter times. Getting every community on the same progress train! Properties along the rail will drop--how many families will be adversely affected when their homes are no longer investments? We paid nearly half a million dollars for our home--is it going to be worthless in twenty years because no one will want to buy a house with constant train traffic going behind the house? Tons of children are growing up along the rail--this will be very dangerous with the increase in rail traffic. Stations will introduce strangers into the community who have no incentive to keep our community safe. Resident opposition. Noise, unsafe crossings, decreased property values for those along the right-of-way. Increased traffic near stops. Lack of parking for those using the rail with resultant increased on street parking in nearby neighborhoods. Fares will not pay for operations resulting in an increase in taxes. Neighboring cities not in favor. Edina doesn't own the rail-CP does! What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Make it cost effective and attractive to potential users. Lessen negative impact on residents living close to the operating rail line. Creating a noise abatement system. Creation of way stations with parking facilities. Establishing safe crossings for neighborhoods which border the rail line. Allow access to emergency vehicles needing to use crossings during LRT passing times. more traffic in our street, more noise Exorbitant start-up costs with no conceivable return for the people of Edina, significant negative impact on the quality of life of the families living near the proposed line as well as a major decrease in property values. Decreased home values, additional noise, additional people coming through the Grandview area that we may or may not want there, decreased lot sizes for those currently off the Dan Patch Corridor. Location, disruption, lack of usage of current light-passenger rail, people dependent on flexibility of own transportation, an answer for a need that doesn't exist, respect to those who lobbied for the gag order, lack of transparency in process, current use of scare tactics with residents Cost as shown in the previous study would be prohibitive, decline in property values of the homes along the line, lost tax base from the future decline in people wanting to tear down and rebuild homes in that area. Safety issues with uncontroled intersections and increased passenger rail traffic and potential of canadian pacific to carry more freight and possible derailment of toxic waste. The buld it and they will use it mentality has been shown to be false. See the study in San Fransisco that did not work after building passenger rail in mixed use areas. The ridership actually declined by 30%. The community is opposed to the project. We have a strong opposition group to this project. The gag rule. You do a poor job explaining what the gag rule is and that it protects home values along the the Dan Patch Line. Any money on transportation issues should go to improving roads and bridges. Buses do a better job than rail. Buses can travel dufferent routes at a cheaper scale the rail which the line of travel is fixed. This survey is biased. It does not ask any where should we study this matter further--yes or no question. It should also ask yes or no should we repeal the gag order. Again you designed this survey to gear the answer towards your plans to pursue the gag order repeal. Whoever the consultant is did a lousy job creating an unbiased survey. Other Edina residents that are afraid if it. The line doesn't reach the parts of Edina that need better transit other than possibly Grandview, and it runs directly adjacent to hundreds of homes. I expect that the negatively impacted neighborhoods within both Edina and St. Louis Park will mount tremendous opposition to a transit option that would be of limited use, especially given that Grandview could be equally well served by buses on Highway 100. Buses could also potentially then go to 50th and France or Southdale, places that are in huge need of better service, rather than the spread-out neighborhoods and warehouses where the rail line runs. Possible neighborhood disruption at stations. Whiney people What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Train speed, traffic congestion in Edina, cost to taxpayers, Emergency vehicle access, crossing safety, noise, low property values, increase in city spending Construction issues and disrupted traffic during that time. I don't think the citizens of Edina would be better off having passenger rail run through our city. The costs will be enormous and the increased activity and speed on the rail line will be dangerous and reduce property values and increase noise throughout our community. The cost is exorbitant. Passenger rail is not a realistically scaled solution for Minneapolis car congestion. Passenger rail is profitable in densely populated, major metropolitan areas--of which Minneapolis is not. Edina prides itself on its persistent and increasing property values. A passenger rail going through the community would eliminate that key differentiator. Criminals get easy access to Edina and passengers are at risk. My friend was threatened by young hoods taking the light rail. I don't want it in Edina. changing land uses around stations - need to make sure the changes are right for Edina Funding sources -funding -impact to existing conditions Travels through areas that have 'forgotten' they are located next to rail tracks Those property owners that live next to the rail and there safety Cost None. Rails and infrastructure are in place. Will need stations and improvements for parking. Obviously noise will be concern, however communities along the rail line may see an uptick in value since it may be a valuable place to start a business or a desirable place to put high density residential housing. Cost Noise and congestion in my neighborhood. The costs and change. People don't like change. Land acquisition, funding and political obsticales Politics,resident opposition, funding Poor track conditions; crossings at busy streets and intersections; goes through mostly residential and park type areas in several communities; people would still have to drive or bus to stations depending on placement so would likely not be very convenient Freight trains already use this route What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Congestion at intersections in my neighborhood; noise of the train; safety concerns for children; residential area with parks would be negatively affected Safety. Lack of projected use. Access for edina residents. houses that live near the tracks and "at grade" crossings. There should be walls or some way to buffer the train and crossings should not be at street grade eventually. The railways are privately owned so subsidized improvements for the sake of commuter rail opens a Pandora's box of potential abuses from private rail companies- specifically high speed freight. Also, more frequent rail traffic of any type represents a drag on adjacent property value given the low rate of adoption of commuter rail in the Twin Cities. Too close to houses and schools. Crossings are at grade and would need to be changed. Only one track. Cost, cost, cost. Increased noise. Safety issues with increased rail traffic. Hazardous speeds through residential neighborhoods, air pollution, cost of maintenance paid by taxpayers and not the owner of the railway. This is encouraging the use of fuel when light rail should be the way to go. Noisy Dangerous Too frequent Lowers property values Increased rail traffic through neighborhoods Need to work with freight rail & its relation to Edina without all the facts, I can't be sure, but my thought is that the costs would greatly outweigh the benefits. My concern is that the metropolitan council may have too much say in this and that the people's voices won't be heard. The light rail to Big Lake is heavily subsidized from what I understand and usage is declining I believe. What is the motivation to provide this rail line to Northfield? are buses currently being utilized to the max, and are they also heavily subsidized? buses are not on fixed routes so they can reach more people easily- light rail can't do that. Too close to homes,crosses a number of streets,saftey?. More traffic, disruption and destruction of neighborhoods, lowered property values of homes near line. Bridge, added trains, needed infrastructure, railroad crossings, What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) The Dan Patch Corridor Commuter Rail Feasibility Study found that St. Louis Park, Edina, Bloomington, Lakeville, Savage and Northfield citizens opposed the commuter rail due to the following study findings: •ImplementaƟon of commuter rail would have no significant decrease in traffic congesƟon. •The rail corridor would be provide rail service within a corridor owned and operated by freight carriers. The cost of rebuilding and maintaining the railroad tracks and subsidizing ridership would be paid by tax payers. ($461 million dollars in 2010) •The railroad is adjacent to a large number of residenƟal properƟes and values of these properƟes would be negaƟvely impacted. (1662 residential parcels between Northfield and St. Louis Park adjacent to the railroad tracks in 2001) •The rail corridor would be used by diesel passenger and freight trains travelling at 79 miles an hour, day and night impacƟng air quality, environmental noise, local traffic, emergency services and safety. (14 trains/day on a single track) Much of what was found in this study is still true! The need for more parking spaces, a greater amount of congested traffic, a greater danger for children living nearby and a great loss to Edina's image! Reluctance to change from residents, push back from residents along line. Depending on volume of traffic, property owners adjacent to the tracks may be unhappy. Added noise. Additional trains. More traffic from Poole driving to train station. Very limited stops and once you get there, would still need transportation to final stop. Stops along way would not save commuter time- I've driven from Edina to DT MSP and it takes 20 minutes and it costs me $1.50 in gas at best- train will take longer, provide less flexibility, and cost more. House values on tracks will depreciate. Finally, self driving cars and electric and hydrogen cell cars are coming. Nobody will wait for a train to take then to a fixed location. Look at retail. People want things now and on their terms. Commuter Trains are old thinking from 1990-2000's. Livability for those near the tracks. Noise, safety, extra traffic/parking in neighborhoods, lifting gag impacts pending real estate sales. The tracks are based on freight transportation needs and not high volume, sustainable, people moving needsmoving needs. Freight trains already use the line, cost, danger of accidents, noise, wasted planning that could accomplish something worthwhile, lack of transparency by the City of Edina, again. Residents rejecting the effort or not being open minded and hearing the message. Parking lots where train riders board. 1. Impact on property value of homes along the corridor some of which is directly in the homes backyard. 2. Access to maintain and noise control of the corridor. 3. Will it be used to transport oil or hazardous materials, what if there's a derailment ? What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Does not get used Noise and traffic in rail in private neighborhoods Noise pollution for those living near the tracks. Increased crime, foot traffic near the stations. Cost of implementing. Cost and space for a second rail parallel to the existing line. Edina and Bloomington are built to the edge of the existing line. That's a lot of property that will be impacted. Landscaping and maintaining the corridor so that it doesn't become an eye sore or blight on the community and homes nearby. Who pays for that maintenance? Getting residents to use the line. Many people within the community do short drives to local places not great distances. Noise from increased rail traffic. It's not a convenient mode of transportation for a mother of young children that need to be in multiple places in a short period of time and then need to be picked up again. Getting people out of their cars Traffic, noise, pollution. Neighborhood disruption, unnecessary wasteful spending, neighborhood noise, increased crime rate, too close to residential neighborhoods. Noice. The whistles blowing as they cross neighborhood intersection. Traffic delays. This has no business being in an edina neighborhood. It's ridiculous and irritating. Noise, safety at crossings and around the tracks in general, property values decreasing for the unusable (for edina) passager rail traffic. I feel like I already feel my house shake when trains go by and I am a few blocks away. Potential right of way challenges in expanding rails / tracks that go through predominantly homestead areas. May run into NIMBY issues - even though people like the idea. Environment impact and safety Homes being taken down. Neighborhoods becoming unsafe and very disruptive with all the trains. The cost of the project. Too much traffic to and from the potential station. The roads can not handle the traffic the way it is today. Home values declining in the area of the train!!! it risks having freight traffic on the line Dangerous for children with all the residential homes along the track. Loss of home values and damage to homes on the track. Increased noise, environmental pollution and impacts to air quality. Paid for by taxpayers. All those who invoke the "not in my backyard" kind of thinking, even though the rail lines have been there for around a century. Making sure the access points are reasonable - enough connectivity and speed to downtown through reasonable # of stops, perhaps even stops to the south through to Northfield. MANY. more trains on narrow right of way track. Get people to only north south areas, unless transit centers are made. increased noise and travel on tracks. more frequent RR cross stops due to increase in train movements. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Another way for the Metropolitan Council and its puppets at the Edina City Council and City Manager's office to waste hundreds of millions of dollars on a project that will be cost-ineffective and disruptive to low density neighborhoods in St. Louis Park, Edina, Bloomington and Lakeville. Neighborhoods who will complain about rail traffic even when they knowingly bought houses (at presumably lower prices due to the rail proximity) near the rail line. Since neighborhoods near Crosstown often get commuters cutting thru neighborhood streets due to the traffic on three highway - the rail study should include the positive impact of keeping those additional cars out of the side streets. neighbors, children,noise and slow speeds because of track configuration. The primary challenge is the cost and the inevitable displacement of dozens of homes along the track, likely resulting in minimal use of the trains. Safety, noise, unknown costs to operate. Decreased property values, increased noise, more crime, Edina residents not using train, How will the train, bring more people to use the shops and restaurants in Edina, since the only restaurants are a pizza place, coffee and Jerry's. Too many trains going through residential, quiet neighborhoods. The rail crosses the same roads that transport our students to multiple schools. Safety, noise, decreased home values. Two independent realtors surveyed the proposal and concluded that home values within one block of the tracks could decrease between 10-15%. NIMBYs blindly opposing passenger rail. Angry residents and lawsuits as a result of broken promises. Increased noise and traffic on the rail line. Running numerous trains through established residential areas. Train crossings for Edina youth getting to garden park activities. Speed of rapid transit trains along the winding rail line through Edina. Close proximity to homes. Fatal accidents on Mpls St. Paul corridor. Increase traffic congestion at station sites. Currently facing a 110 million dollar deficit by 2020 on existing line. The residents do not want it built. They will not use it. Per rail road law we are not going to pay for the rail improvements, the sound walks etc. per rail road law the train companies do not have to follow state or local laws so your train schedule idea is a joke and false. The train companies follow federal laws. They can transport dangerous cargo and higher rates. You are asking for a dangerous situation in Edina's back yard. The other cities along the line that don't want this project revisited will have a wrath of tge Edina elitist starting the process. What are the potential challenges of passenger rail in the Dan Patch Corridor? (506 responses) Safety at all street crossings. Safety all along the tracks. More traffic increases risk to community children. Property values along the tracks will see significant hit. Change the entire feeling of the nice quiet suburb we have to a bustling major city. We moved here to get away from that. negative impact on safety, cost , noise Disruption to residential neighborhoods, costs to tax payers with an unpredictable offset, predicted ridership not matched by current ridership trends on the Northstar line of light rail Ensuring neighborhood quietude and safety. Property values will go down Negotiating schedules with freight railroads and determining how much capacity is needed for passenger and freight trains to coexist. Safer railroad crossing would have to be added. The corridor passes in close proximity to far too many Edina neighborhoods and Edina homes. It is absolutely unacceptable for passenger trains to pass that close to our residences. This would unfairly reduce our property values and our quality of life. Neighborhoods being opposed to it. Hazmat and increased freight traffic as unintended consequence. Noise, traffic back ups, safety concerns, pollution Expensive, expensive, expensive. Unproven ridership. You open yourself up to freight, possible hazmat, barreling through nice neighborhoods. Won't necessarily take many cars off the roads. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) Why is this resurfacing as a conversation? No other city has even looked at this. Cost of construction vs Increased Express Metro bus line to Southwest stops Hopkins and Wooddale. As an example, the A line bus runs along Sneliing in St Paul to the 46th street station. Our metro transit bus lines are underutilized Why is the City exploring this instead of trying to promote bus use? Where would the passenger rail go? How is it necessary given the Southwest LRT? Why do we need it? In what way would it benefit Edina How can we make this improvement faster ? Who would fund this project? none return on investment. Why is this even being considered when it was previously off the table. Why would we need this if there is going to be a Southwest passenger line in the near future? How many trains per day? Speed going through neighborhoods? Where would the stops be? No questions Why would the city feel the need for this running right through residential areas? It seems like a terrible idea. Why would we add something so disruptive to our city? Who is in favor of this and why? How have the neighborhoods changed in other communities when light rail is installed? None, we dont want it! Why are you pushing this so hard?!!!! Why can't the Dan Patch Line be turned into a bike path? Will it be light rail -- then won't another track need to be added to accommodate trains in both directions? If it is a trolley, why not use the existing streets? Where will the stations be? It it remains one track & shares with the existing freight train how will both directions be handled, what will be the frequency, & how will passenger schedules be met by sharing with freight? How much will this cost Edina taxpayers? With almost empty trains, with no place to go, will we have to pay for train engineers, ticket collectors, ticket vending machines, train police & security, etc? N/A Why do we waste money on it? Make crosstown 62 at least three lanes on both sides. Light rail is 10 times more expensive and is used 1/10 as much as freeways. Why is the even being discussed again? what is the impetus for this study, and how much time and money is Edina spending on this project / study? none....as a resident only blocks away from the tracks, we are highly opposed to this idea None but would like LRT to be looked at more as an option for the Dan Patch Corridor. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) No Questions, We just DON'T WANT IT IN EDINA Why do does the city of Edina believe that there is a large volume of Edina residents that would benefit from passenger rail that would primarily serve individuals outside of the community (locations further away from Minneapolis that would likely utilize these services). Unless there is a large demand for passenger rail from Edina residents why are we looking to incur such a cost to develop it? Why is this being discussed without any reference to other options? This is irresponsible. Can this line be electrified down the road? How will traffic congestion be mitigated? How will noise be mitigated? Who will pay for it? how often would it run? day time service? Why is passenger rail along the Dan Patch being resurrected, rather than putting effort into other more feasible options for passenger rail routes or other modes of mass transit? It may be convenient to convert existing freight track, but it certainly does not produce a tenable result. If you want to develop this area - turn it into a bike/running trail What is the projected funding sources that are being considered? Will there be stations in Edina? Where will the stops be on this line? Who will par for such a thing? Do the people who have homes along the Dan Patch have support/representation so potentially affected people can have input so a passenger rail system can't be forced to be installed in the Corridor? If forced, the system should be built along freeways/existing roads instead of through neighborhoods. The frequency of the Dan Patch line trains is bad enough. People were not aware of the recent July meeting. What happens to all of the homes along the Dan Patch line if a passenger rail system was forced upon the residents? We see that residents have made substantial home improvements only to have homes taken away or have property values decreased? Assuming property taxes for them would decrease, would everyone else's taxes increase? How much would they be paid for their homes if forced to move out? We are terribly concerned about the future of Edina. The Passenger Rail Engagement terminology sounds serious as if a decision has already been made. Should residents who live near/adjacent to the Corridor who are selling their homes now have to disclose the passenger rail system? The realtors don't seem to want to talk about it for obvious reasons. What communities will it serve? How will this be funded? How will safety issues be addressed? How will noise concerns be addressed? What benefits will there be for Edina? Who would pay for it? Why has the city not developed the site where the station would theoretically be built. They should state why this property sits vacant. How would Edina benefit? I can already get anywhere in the city and m not taking a train to go 5 miles away. Who benefits, nor Edina residents, not those within a mile of that rail? Who really benefits? If you follow the money then who profits? Frequency and available stops that are convenient none Wouldn't you need parking facilities at each stop for people to reach the rail line to begin with? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) none Where will it connect to? Why have it? What will it cost the taxpayers and riders? How many people will be projected to use it? Cost and ROI Why has this taken so long? How many people in Edina and other cities on the potential rail would really use it. What is the cost/benefit ratio? What is the cost per passenger mile? This should include the entire cost to include cost of construction and operating cost. The cost should include all funding, local, state and federal funding. Why are you doing this survey? There's a gag order in effect. None. Where would the stops be? Would it be making an effort to be green energy (solar, wind, etc) powered. Noisy? Barriers separating houses from the line? Widening of existing single rail bed? More traffic on Link Road? Cost borne by residents? Expected usage to cover costs (Big Lake is not profitable and is underwritten annually)? Why when we're an affluent, independent community? What are current bus usage figures for Edina? What would be the cost? Timeframe needed for construction?? Noise?? How often during the day and night will it be used? What happens to present trains??? I have no idea where the passenger rail will go. None I am most curious about the potential speeds that could be achieved on this narrow & winding single-tracked corridor. I worry that potential speeds would be so low as to not be worth the investment in rail. I support investment in light rail, rapid bus, etc. but I am worried this line will not be cost- effective when other improvements are needed - namely Arterial Rapid Bus (aBRT) on France Avenue (Route 6) Why is this even important? We have buses that people don't use? The density of population in Mplsis way lower than Europe. Buses are better. Could we implement it as soon as possible? The benefits are wonderful! Why are we even considering adding value to outside suburbs when no value is added to edina How often would it run. How many homes are immediately impacted? I just hope to have a station in the grandview area as part of the plan. Will it be used for the light rail? And will there be adequate public parking? None, get it done how much money will be wasted on this outdated idea? What sorts of ideas are being considered? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) What kind of rail would it include? What would be the safety measures? What is the cost? What are the possible benefits to the city as a whole? Would houses lose value? How many stations would there be? Where would the line connect? Where could I go? Why is this being proposed? Why is this a consideration when you look at impact to so many homes and neighborhoods? We do not need any additional challenges. Would Edina allow actual walkable and transit-focused development to be built around stations? Things like setback requirements and parking minimums prevent this. None. Having lived in big cities where passenger rail is needed, I am of the opinion that passenger trains on the Dan Patch line would not be used to the extent needed. The population density is not high enough to financially support the project. How soon can we get the discussion ban lifted? I really don't have any questions . I am a STRONG supporter of passenger trains in public transportation. How will it be funded? What are potential routes? How long will travel time be? When could it be built? How much will it cost? How many people will ride it? How noisy will the train be? Where would there be a station in Edina? Where will it go (exactly), what will it cost, can the noise be controlled, are there any factors to consider based on other communities that have added a rail line. If the majority of residents are not in favor of your rail plan, why pursue it now, as it was rejected once before by the residents? They really may not want to fund any more projects in Edina that would result in more property taxes. I think we all need a breather from the cities embellished needs. How fast can we make this japoen, and what funding would be needed? I don't - quit wasting taxpayer money on this worthless effort. When would payback be? Stop with the political garbage from loud voice of few. Routes, where would it link with the southwest line, park and ride lot availability Na Where will it be What about a gag order isn't a gag order? No means no. Where would the stop be in Edina? Can you design it so a north - south off street dedicated bike trail can be included? i've familiarized myself with light rail when it first was introduced in minneapolis. none Who's going to ride it? Why the hell are you even considering this as a viable option for your residents???!!! And when is re-election? Lots. Mainly why is the city considering this? Where is the need/request coming from? When can it open ;-) What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) How often do they run?, where are the stops,?where do they go? Who pays for them? Is there a need in the first place? Cost to taxpayers? Cost of tickets? Where exactly will it run? Where will passengers park? How often and what hours would it run? What is the need for rail transportation is the areas that are involved? Why was it deemed unfeasible in the earlier study? Where are the places for platforms ( getting on /off, getting tickets. Will it prevent or reduce freight trains? What can be done to mitigate neighbors' concerns over noise and increased traffic. What form will it take, how much will it cost, and where will the stations be? Who in Edina wants it? and why? How does it help me get anywhere in Edina? Who outside of Edina will use it? Who would use it to come to Edina? and how many? How much pollution does it spew compared to the electric car per occupant? Because by the time you get rail up and running the electric will be running and they will be much more convenient. Why are you wasting time and money when a gag rule is in place? how handicapped accessible it will be; how available to seniors; how will it be made safe - having been on the light rail when passengers have been harassed and robbed by other gang/passengers, I wonder how safe it will be and if it gets the reputation of being unsafe as the light rail has now, will people even use it if they have the option of not using it but staying in their own safer cars. Where it would stop? Needs to have parking or bike access. Which bike paths are really lacking in edina. What is the plan for traffic flow on busy cross streets? Have you thought about putting a stop near 70th st? People who live in that area of Edina are dying for that area to be developed. Bars, Restaurants, GROCERY STORE! LTR would help support. It would also potentially offset some of the property value damage done by frequent trains in the neighborhoods to the North as they would become commuter friendly. Is the route a route people would use? What is the cost benefit analysis? What would be the frequency of the routes? What is the noise impact? None! We moved here from Chicago, used public transit (rail and subway/El) almost exclusively, and remain stunned that MN hasn't done more to promote these options. What are benefits? How many people will benefit? What is the capital cost? What is operating cost? What will the passenger fare be? Will it connect to other light rail lines? How often? What speed? Where would the stop in Edina be? How would manage traffic in and out of Edina station? What is the plan to upgrade intersection safety along route? What is the perceived economic benefit to Edina? noise level, speed, safety issues None. Don't even think about it. None ... old topic and not an investment opportunity for those who try to keep up with the latest innovations in which to invest. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) When will you *stop* asking the same questions and expecting a different answer? There is a name for that behavior... I am very familiar with it in dense urban settings where networks of transit options make ridership possible. Please dont do it. Do not do it Where would it go? who is paying for it? Hopefully not me. what are the declared advantages, and who determined them? who are the major beneficiaries? what would this rail system morph into in the years ahead? Construction schedule How much would a ticket cost? same as North star? Where would stations be located? How often would trains run? What would be the terminals? How many street level crossings would there be? None. Why are we still exploring an obsolete 19th century transportation model in the 21st century? What is the potential cost to individual city residents - tax increases etc. My question is why Edina thinks this would be beneficial? none as I like the idea. I use other lines now. Is it economically feasible? None. Why is Edina considering this? What are the lobbyists saying? Who benefits? Would it have comparable times to simply driving through the corridor How soon would it be before serious planning could begin? I was at the first meeting and have no questions at the moment. I would like to see the proposed routing, cost, and estimated time to completion. Also commuter parking plans. None. None do not do it None, I think it is an important move forward Is it 10 years to late to be of use ? How long does it have to be in service (and have a high use), to warrant the effort. How do we envision the future, and where does the competitive approaches fit in. Cost, ridership expectations, plan for parking near stations, will it connect to light rail system, can get federal and/or state financial support Why do we keep doing studies of it? What will my expense be? None. It does not provide a benefit to the community. It is not located or routed to benefit retired citizens, going to medical appointments or to Edina's retail area along France Avenue. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) none How can we get it on Xerxes or down France? I think we are long overdue for good passenger rail and commuter service. Why has it taken so long? where does the line go, where are the stops? will it connect to a larger system? Want it accessible in terms of fare, ergonomics, park and ride options. Air, noise and light pollution? Other environmental impact? Why? I mean, I don't live close to this corridor, so, it would very little impact on me, but, the folks that live next to it will hate the extra traffic and noise the train will produce. station distance to make runs efficient for moving and ability to embark and dis-embark Frequency of passenger trains and travel with commercial hauling trains. Is there any stopping this or is this a done deal how can we make the process move fast and actual implement it so the light rail network and options are available. Light rail is a effective and efficient transportation choice as shown by use in many cities. MSP needs to continue to grow and develop the light rail network. Cost, impact, advantages vs disadvantages, How soon can we get it! STOP THIS PROJECT!!!!! Our city manager turned Eden Prairie into a city where you can drive into but you can't drive out... now he has turned Edina into a worst example. Get rid of him NOW! Why do we not just say no Please don't do it Where will this go to and which other lines will his be connected to? I would take this tomorrow if it hooks up to the light rail or I could get downtown near Target Field. Where is the proposed route? why lock a huge funding commitment to a rigid method of transportation when similar projects (SW light rail) can't figure out their funding solution? Why do we continue to chase this rabbit -- especially since there have been multiple studies and a gag order placed to keep us from doing so? Why better communication about the core issue, which is obtaining a stake in the management of the rail line that goes for a long way through the city, does not exist. This keeps getting sidelined by loud worries about trespassing by passengers and other territorial issues that, while regrettable, affect only a few. Would it pay for itself or need to be subsidized? whats is the design Take a vote of Edina Residents to find if people are for or against. Stops would be important What about parking at the stations/stops? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) Where would stops be? How often would trains run and at what time do they start in the morning and stop at night? Would there be park and rides in Edina? How fast is the train? How loud is the train? none Would this rail be comparable to the rail heading out of downtown towards Saint Cloud? How would we measure success of the rail? When can it start? How exactly does it benefit this community? I see the downside and would like the "upside" explained clearly. It will further minimize any natural space and make the community feel more congested; it will increase noise pollution and it will further degrade the "small town feeling" of a pleasant, first ring suburb. Economic viability? Why are you bringing this issue up? Will the residents of the city use it? Volume of trains, # of stops, impact on property values, safety measures, impact on taxes, apples of trains, impact on noise Can it be made self-funding and profitable, so that the burden on taxpayers can be reduced, rather than increased? How much will a ticket cost? Where do I board? How often would they run and what times. Where would they be taking on and stations? Why won't this issue just die? Is it going to be Green? Will it be similar to the light rail or different? Why do rail and not expand the bus system in the area? Will you take land from residents? Or homes from families? How frequently would it run; how long would it take to get to Northfield (end of run); would it link up with SW light rail station; how much would it cost to implement; what would the fare cost; would it be part of Metro Transit Noise, frequency of trips, why build passenger rail to benefit people who choose so far out of metro at the expense of us who choose to live in metro area How would Edina make the rail a benefit to the neighborhood, through investment in additional amenities for those neighborhoods?? That would be the only way property values might not drop Where would the lines connect, expected levels of service, cost - technical things that come at a much later date. Will it connect to the light rail? Where would the stops be? Would there be sufficient parking to avoid nearby streets being used for parking? How often would it run? And how early and late? frequency of service, cost Would there be security in the cars? I know that many people have felt unsafe on the light rail. None - it sounds like a great idea. Park & ride availability, cost, timing of construction How much will it cost? Who will pay for it? Will homeowners be impacted? Where will we park to get onto the rail? None @ this time What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) Why would Edina do it? The benefits are small and the negatives are huge. If the council wants a fight on it hands they'll get it from many people. Will a fence or tree line be built between the rail and houses that are along the line? Why does our city council continue to push projects that have no support in the community. Vote unincumbent across the board How many stops? Where would it go from/to How soon can it happen? How quickly can we get it up and running? How are we or king with the private sector to ensure significant sustainable transit oriented development Why is this even being considered?? It's extremely costly, serves vs few people compared to autos & buses. Moves people from point a,b,c to point d,e,f vs a thousand points to a thousand points. This is 19th century transportation. Hope it dies on the drawing board. Get real!!! When will it be in service and where does it go. How will it affect my taxes and property value When I think of mass transit it generally needs to go thru areas where most people live and work. If this just uses the existing rail line, Vernon and 50th, Excelsior are busy areas, but hwy 100, or France Ave is where this belongs; apartments, shopping areas will be successful. St Paul/Mpls University Ave, suffered during construction, now the avenue is booming. Why can't you run a test or prototype train on the exiting track, build temporary stations and see what the interest would be. Will there be transportation to the station from Edina? What transportation options will be availbe at other stations? How much will it cost. Who is going to use it? Why would anyone use it? Where will it be? N/a How far into Edina will it extend. I am really hoping it will connect wight he France Avenue Medical corridor. . Who will use it, where will it go o, is there a monitored, safe place to Let's get this studies and built if possible! Would need to include ramp parking at the Edina end. Why are we spending money to look into this? Has there been a large interest or is there a need? Why now? How much noise would it create and how many homes and/or businesses would be adversely affected by the noise and air pollution? Are there businesses in the environs which would benefit from the rail traffic? HOW long it will take, how much it will cost Cost is a big thing. None of the LRT' s come close to operating without a huge subsidy. Get the ones we have now operating then maybe think of another. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) I would be curious about it's route and where it would hit existing light rail lines. I would also be interested in the tax payer cost and environmental impact. Noise abatement plans, environmental impact, neighborhood impact and safety concerns with the light rail and more frequent traffic through neighborhoods as a result Why spend the money and add to our budget deficit what are the budget for the operating loss and who is going to pay for it. remember the federal gov is us the taxpayer. Financial responsibility of Edina residents. Why are we spending money on "surveys" if the majority of the residents don't want it? Stop wasting money! Work on our current infrastructure within your budget without increasing my taxes year after year. Destinations planned on the route, cost, control of traffic and noise. Parking for sites with stops. Why are you thinking about doing this Cost and how many people would actually use it. Why are you participating in the Met Council's violation of state law? What's the status? How will it affect normal daily auto transportation along the corridor? From my brief period of time in Edina, I have the sense that a lot of the public schools will be very near to the rail line! Again, how will the rail lines affect travel to and from the schools? Who will pay for this? 1. What neighborhoods would the stops be in and what hours would it run? 2. How much per taxpayer up front and per year for next 5 years (to subsidize)? Scheduled service, operator (met council or other), connections, end points, park and ride options, cost to Edina What other sites may be considered? It seems to me that a passenger rail that would go along 169 would make a lot of sense. Cost, timing to completion Would fares be based on distance traveled? One disincentive to take a bus downtown from Edina is that parking is $7/ day vs. ~$5.40 for round trip express (10 punch price). With gas prices low and congestion not all that bad, most people still prefer to pay a little extra for the convenience of a warm car in the morning. Do you plan to move people from 70th & Cahill to Grandview? Potential 70th & Cahill area developers would want rail to give the perception of increased property values. Who would pay for the rail? Where would it go? How much would it cost Edina? Speed, noise, crossings, safety concerns. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) What type of connection to other lines would be considered. What are the main destinations/entry points in Edina that are envisioned What makes it interesting to the City of Edina to consider this? We need yo exam cost per mile per passenger vs buses. Rail carrys way fewer and costs way more. I realize it looks "cool" to politicians, but it does not relieve traffic nearly what a busp or more lanes for cars. Quit trying to force expensive ideas for 1% or less usage projects. What is the cost? How much would it cost me? Where would it pick up and drop off? How often would passenger service run? Noise? Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Any Effect on neighborhood safety, noise concern? Cost. Impact on houses, will anyone be forced to move? R u planning on parking facilities? What would be the frequency of service. How would this line interface with present and future rail lines. the only benefit of this is if it connected to downtown Minneapolis &/or the airport. Is this going to connect downtown MPLS? Will it connect to airport? schedule frequency noise better network. now it serves a small population and while better for the environment, the network is too small and too limited. Need multiple lines to actually make this a benefit to more communities. How will this impact my taxes which have gone up significantly in the past few years especially with the education levies and the subsequent misuse of funds What makes you think it will get used? Who's idea is this project? How many people approached the city to initiate this $30,000 study? What is the route? How are they going to keep us safe. Crime issues in Mpls How frequent? How loud? Nothing, don't do this Why is this even on the table.? These things are money pits schedules, fees, stations/stops, noise Will it actually reduce congestion? Increased Noise with passenger rails, increased crime, destruction of our natural areas. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) It's still tough to use on a consistent basis problem is one or two evening events downtown usage does not out way the problems the train comes with which ultimately will see decreased usage from the paying tax payers. what impact will it have in terms of traffic congestion and what is the duration? would it go directly from Edina to DT w/ out having to transfer Why, when this close in, adequate bus service existing Are there any plans to bring passenger rail access to Southdale or other shopping areas? See above. Where are stations being considered? Is there a map that includes more detail-- street names (can there be?). Perhaps surveys door to door should happen in neighborhoods that would be directly affected to ensure more feedback from affected households. When can you get started on construction and how long do you anticipate it taking? How does it effect the current environment and what are the negative impacts for the surrounding neighborhoods the Dan Patch runs right through some home owners would lose value on their properties - never a good thing What problem is being solved? Concern about potential for increased freight on the line? If yes, what are all the ways that could be addressed? Concern about safety of at-grade crossings and noise of freight train whistles? It's assumed a passenger rail project would include crossing improvements. If it's a priority should tbe city look at improving them regardless? Congestion on HWY 100? Need data and analysis to show how many trips could be diverted. If there is a need for transit then what transit in addition to rail should be considered? Stalled development in Grandview, potential TOD at Grandview and Cahill? In terms of public input, this will create its own problems. Coming up with a plan or at least a stance on the issue so Edina's interests can be represented if other municipalities/agencies seek to develop use of the line. MnDOT has already identified it for high speed passenger without stops in Edina. Other than potential for crossing mitigation this would seem not to benefit Edina residents. So Edina not only needs to make sure it has a place at the table. It needs to understand the menu and know what it wants to order. This is I think the most important reason to move forward. Why is Edina spending money now on this issue If the passenger rail doesn't happen, what other options do citizens have to enact/enforce safety and livability rules on the railroad? Can the railroad owners do whatever they want (aka, run trains 24 hours a day, adjacent to a neighborhood)? Where/how many stops in edina Why are we studying this? The cost will in addition add a burden on taxpayers that will not be recouped and will need to be subsidized, just as the existing light rail line has proven already. Where is the route and how often do the trains run each day? how to maximize use of public funding & ridership What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) Where is the Dan Patch Corridor. Hopefully, not near my house. how much is the fare? how often are the trains, where do they go, what lines do they connect to? This project was already declined by Edina, why are we reconsidering? Who was involved in reopening this discussion? Who is going to pay for all costs associated within Edina - police, construction, etc.? Where would the Edina stations be and how often would service run? Total cost? Cost to city of Edina? Approval from saint Lois park and other cities along line? Impact on edina neighborhoods? Nope cost, location, timeline, etc. Why the fixation with rail when Uber today and autonomous cars tomorrow? why do we need to build something that cant be moved How soon would it be in place? Electric or diesel (pollution)? Availability of parking? Cost per expected passenger? Will downtown Mpls be the hub passengers are trying to get to in 20 years? To what areas are you looking to offer rail service from Edina? What is the route? What government entity is going to pay for it? What is the exact proposed path for the passenger rail? I've already asked them in #1 and #2 how many trains and exactly where would they go WHY IS EDINA SPENDING OUR TAX DOLLARS ON THIS STUDY? Can it be paid for entirely through a combination of ridership fees and transportation related fees and taxes? I oppose using general funds for this kind of project but am happy to pay a "fair share" of fees even on license tabs and fuel as the removal of vehicles on the road during commuter hours benefits drivers as well. What is the plan to overcome the objections and make this a reality. None. How much rail traffic would there be? Where is the Edina stop proposed or is this just a pass through Edina None. Very familiar with Mpls. and Denver Lines. stop locations Why? If it doesn't bring revenue to the businesses -- it doesn't make since to even consider the additional noise and potential environmental issues how often? where to? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) How often would it run and where to??how much would it cost to build and would it be worth it financially. How long will it take to build? Where exactly will it go/how far will it go? None Would it affect current housing, noise level of trains, etc. Where will the line go? How frequently? What will be the cost to passengers? How will it be paid for? Will property owners be treated fairly? Why are we spending tax dollars to research a hypothetical instance? Where are the facts? Who in Edina stands to gain from a passenger rail? How? Does anyone own land in Northfield on the transportation board, city officials or key community influencers? Why is Edina the only city along the line exploring this? Show me the data that it is even warranted Why is proposed in the current configuration? Cost? Timeline? Why is this even being considered? I don't know one person that lives in Edina that likes the idea. why does City of Edina feel it is necessary to re-visit the subject again? Would it connect to other light rail lines? see above Why is the city interested in this? None. Don't do it. Parking opportunities near tracks Why is Edina spending money to look at it? The only way it will happen is if the State or County pushes it. Save our money and our feedback for the time when something real is on the table. None, don't do it None- would use if it was convenient but it's not for my current location How often would trains run? Why would we ever do this? How efficient would the line be? Cost to city and residences. what's the intent of it? what does it connect do? the benefit? maybe think about connecting to Big River South in Scott County (casino, valley fair, etc) Why does Edina need it? don't build it What would be the impact to surrounding residential areas. What would be the impact to city of Edina residents in the way of property tax increases. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) Where would it go? How will we build in parking lots/ramps to help create easy ridership? How can we connect it to walking/biking paths around the city for non-car commuting? None yet How soon can we get this line established? What do we need it for?????????? None, its a waste of money. Why waste any more money moving forward with researching this project ?? Have you analyzed ridership in other areas with similar sized populations? Have you analyzed current ridership with the existing light rail trains in Minneapolis and St. Paul? They are not self sustaining. Ridership never meets expectations. Please don't spend tax dollars researching and studying what we already know. Why would anyone want to do this in a residential area? Would be great to have it! How would crossing at Valley road be impacted? Frequent trains would strain intersection. What is the timeframe? What are the noise levels associated with the trains that would be utilized? How many trains would travel the Dan Patch line per hour? How many passengers can a train car hold, and how many train cars will be used for a single trip (affects traffic congestion issues)? What are the specs on the type of trains that are being considered (i.e., fuel type, dimension, noise levels in decibels)? How fast will trains be allowed to travel in residential neighborhoods? How much are trains and train track upgrades going to cost? What enables the city of Edina to use the tracks since they are private property? How much will tickets cost from Edina to downtown Minneapolis? How much will Edina residents subsidize train passenger tickets? How much will Hennepin county subsidize tickets? How much will MN subsidize tickets? Will residents who live on the tracks still be able to access their backyards from the train track property? Will this connect to both metro and future out lying cities (Northfield, etc.) similar to Chicago el and Metra? Why are we wasting time and taxpayer money on such an impractical project? none What type of rail? light rail? I would like it to be as clean energy/low emissions as possible, aka electric. What railroads will be used. How does the city plan to compensate houses along the lines. Will there be stops in Edina and where Will a cost/benefit study be conducted, to give the city and it's residents a meaningful way to evaluate if the funds required are efficient and worthy of the investment? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) I would suggest doing the study, working with the cities along the line to plan for the future. It will not happen tomorrow but we need to plan for tomorrow or get left behind as a thriving region. Where and who would it serve, costs to the city and to the rider Cost-benefit analysis needed Why is Edina even considering supporting this? None! How fast would it go? how many times a day would it run? How would homeowners along the line be compensated in terms of decreased home value--would they receive better windows/insulation similar to the airport? How loud would it be? I have read that the current transit system has a deficit. What makes you think that this would be any different? Has the City of Edina encouraged consideration of this line despite that it's residents rely on the gag law. Is there hope for approvals and funding? I would be a supporter. Why is it needed as we move into a new age of transportation Why in the world are you thinking of putting this in Edina?!?!?! It would be nice to know what the MAJORITY in Edina want rather than a few elected and appointed officials Who in the world is pushing this? Certainly NOT the general citizens of Edina. How soon can we do it? Will is also have an adjacent bike path? It's not for Edina. Who revived this dumb idea? This same issue came up about ten years ago, and was roundly rejected by property owners near the tracks. Hope you're not going to force this upon us without listening to people who are against it. Will there be adequate policing and security for riders? Noise, number of trains per day, speed of trains, only one track now will they add more track, increase in freight, crossing safety, Where would the station(s) be located in Edina, St. Louis Park and Bloomington. How much noise. How much traffic. How many stops and where and for what reason Consistency of operation, hours of operation Why would we even consider this - it was ruled a bad idea in the past with. Great deal of extensive, expensive research already done and legislation put in place to stop pursuing it - so why is it an issue again? Is this a best long term method of transit or are there going to be other developments in the future. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) I have no questions about the passenger rail itself, but I am very upset that the city council has so little disregard for the families who will be affected by this decision, so I suppose my question is why is the council so hell bent on pushing this issue? Why there is so much oppositon? The traffic on highways is so stressfull as our outer ring suburbs grow and so many people work down town. Less vehicles on our roads makes driving around town safer. Who is pushing this and who is going to financially benefit from it? The idea would not have come up unless someone was going to make a lot of money from it. What will be the impact on property values for nearby homes? What is the expected noise level during operation? What is the REAL cost to the tax payer? This project was fully researched and vetted over a decade ago and found to have no real benefit and many detriments to the people of Edina. Why consider it again? It is remains a bad idea which will not benefit the people of Edina. What benefit would this actually bring to Edina? I have a city express bus that goes past my house every day during the work week and it's either empty or has 1-2 people on it. And how many people would come up form Northfield on the passenger rail to work or hang out in Edina? My guess is the answer is likely slim to none. It seems this would benefit Minneapolis, not Edina. none We should not be wasting $30,000 studying this matter. We should not have Edina employees being paid or consultants to study this. Passenger rail is highly subsidized prooving that it dies not work and will nit be a preferred method of transportation. All of tge so called improvements will not be paid by the rail riad but by tax payers of Edina and Minnesota. We do not need a passenger rail service in Edina. The bije lanes are already a disaster taking away rioads and creating one lane of traffic to debvote for bikes. Bikes than should pay taxes to use that lane of traffic. They are not paying to use the road surface like cars do in liscence fees, gas tax, and sales tax. Where would the stops be to get on and off? Why is the city looking at this specifically rather than more generally at how transit could be improved in Edina? Where will the stations be, what is the route - None....not much has changed in 100 years What is the beginning and ending points of this line? Where are the stops. Why is the transportation commission/mayor/city council pushing for an issue that appears to have little benefit for their community and has so many opponents? I would be interested in seeing a vote of the community members. My guess is that you would see a great majority of citizens vote against passenger rail through Edina. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) None. How can we stop it? What is the difference between something that uses DMUs, and something that doesn't? Is DMU better for the environment? How long would it take to get service in Savage? -ongoing safety for passengers from increase in opportunistic crime that has been seen on other passenger rail throughout the Twin Cities. What is the future potential given other commuting options that are evolving (driverless cars, telecommuting, etc) What are the costs for property acquisition and upgrades None at this time How come it has taken this long to bring this up for discussion? Why not utilize existing infrastructure that is currently in place (such as this line) instead of evaluating other costly alternatives? How many stops will there be. There are too many stops and too few. I'd also be interested in the possibility of having an express line thrown in the mix. How soon can this be implemented? How often does it run through my neighborhood? what will be the route? Passenger rail is viable in other metropolitan communities. With this form of transportation be affordable? When can we get it operational. Why are we revisiting this? Wasn't this discussed at length several years ago and sunsetted? How would this benefit edina residents and taxpayers living on or near the line Parking at the stations could be difficult - and the road to the stations for commuters need to be widened. Also how many stations are planned. What are the hard data (cost / benefits) that would suggest commuter rail should be given any consideration? This is a terrible use of public funds even to study feasibility. The verdict is in on commuter rail in communities like the the Twin Cities- they are a money pit that pose a safety risk and bring financial hardship to Edina residents. Why waste the money? Busses are cheaper and flexible. Why are we looking at this, again. The 1999-2000-2001 study came to the conclusion that this silly idea carried a HIGH cost. The increased rail traffic would come with little, if any benefit, while increasing noise, environmental concerns from the exhaust, safety concerns. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) What will be done to protect the children from the train running 80 miles an hour next to the park and in their school neighborhoods, what will be done to protect the residents loss of property value, what will be done about the increased traffic near the train stations? Why are you bringing this up again...we do not want it Will the city realize the use of modern technology along the line see above Why was the City of Edina so secretive about it? Why didn't every household get a letter? Where's the transparency? Burying information deep inside a web site makes me wonder what kind of money is exchanging hands under the table. The mayor and council members have lost my vote. none What type of passenger rail is Edina talking about? How will Edina compensate people adjacent to the corridor for loss in property value? Why fund passenger rail that can't accommodate changes in transit routes rather than deluxe buses with Wifi and coffee which can change routes? How are you going to convince people to give up their cars? The high cost and the lack of use compared to predictions. Why are People here so reluctant to use rail and public transport. Curious about what type of trains, where stations will be, frequency of service. But I see it all as a plus. Why are we spending $30k in tax dollars just to see if we should study it. Fix our roads first. What's the measurable goal- beside a "me too" placeholder. What's the value of spending tax dollars to hire a consulting firm. Who are the elected or volunteer city leaders pushing the agenda and what conflicts of interest might be noted. How can Grandview be considered for a station when we can't move cars thru Vernon and interlachen and cars back up blocks on Eden to tirn into Starbucks. Bad idea. But what if changes are made. OMG no Why? It makes little sense to me. Not direct benefit to Edina I can see. Where are the stops planned for: Jerry's and ?? Will there be public parking for those who wish to commute ? NA Where will it go and what would the stops be? We would be most interested if there was a stop at grandview, the normandale park office buildings. A bonus if it goes all the way to Rochester. The US is significantly behind other countries when it comes to the use of a well connected rail system. What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) What happens to the rail lines and who pays for them if ridership doesn't cover the cost. Long term how do you keep existing residents confident that their property values won't decrease or that residents won't move from Edina to Northfield? Having read all the changes that are potentially happening in Edina I can picture a shift in the community and a shift to higher taxes to pay for the extra infrastructure which could easily turn off current residents. Edina has had subtle changes over the past 45 years, I grew up here. In the last year to 6 months there has been at least a dozen major projects being discussed or started. That all comes with a cost. If you grow too fast something is going to fail and in the end it could be the whole city. It costs money to grow. Is the city being fiscally responsible? Where would there be stations and would it hook up with the the North Star line to get downtown How many times per day and what times will this run? How will it affect my property? Melody Lake neighborhood. How will it be funded? Will my taxes increase for something I don't and won't use. Has a crime rate study been done? Will there be increased police presence? Why would Edina consider this? What would be the average speed of the train going through residential neighborhoods? How frequently would trains be running? Would they build sound barriers where tracks butt up to homeowners' property lines? How many homes would be taken down? Why did the city pay 30K when the City of St. Louis Park is against it? Will there be a person who can give the residents actual facts in a presentation about this potential project? I found more useful info on "Next Door". I feel the city is not being forth coming in this project. it has already been studied why do it again What proof is there that this will help with traffic congestion? How much with tax payers have to pay to rebuild and maintain the tracks? Will it be a mixed service line (passenger and freight) or more of an exclusive passenger line? why are we doing this. there seems to be very little people interested in this right now. Mayor and City Council - stop dreaming up way to spend money you don't have. Why can't you people be satisfied with the LRT that you've shoved at us? Why do you have to try to put LRT on every damn track? Why do you have to spend taxpayer money on things we don't need you fucking socialists. None. why was a study done before public approval? Will it be a light rail service merely between Edina and downtown Mpls., of will it be a commuter rail between Northfield and Mpls. What is the upfront and ongoing taxpayer burden? Why is this being brought up? Is there special interest, such as developers that want to build in southern suburbs and need a commuter line to get people to purchase homes in those areas? If so, how does Edina benefit? Why are we spending money on a project that was rejected about 25 years ago? The people decided back then we did not and still do not see this as being a beneficial project for Edina What benefit does it bring to Edina? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) None. I am a supporter of the Dan Patch Line. None - there are no questions that should be explored. This was resolved when the legislature passed the Dan Patch law. Honor the promises made and the law by not pursuing this. How many trips per day Maximum speed requirements Station site Cost Criminal activity We do not need itl. Who are tge influential people who wanted tge process studiied in Edina. This survey is biased. It should start with do you think we need passenger rail in Edina. Yes or No. That should be the first question of the survey. What were the citizens of Edina not contacted sooner in the process? The city sent two letters about tge sewer line insurance witin two weeks. I am sure the city received some sort of compensation to let the company mail it with the city's endorsement. The city did nit explain accurately what the gag order was and how it protected the property values of homes along the Dan Patch Line. Why would it be considered now when all we as residents have been told is that it will never change. Why weren't residents notified in totality prior to spend tax dollars to research? It sure makes me question motives none Why is the City of Edina raising an issue and paying tax payer money for something that is strongly opposed by the majority of residents? If there are compelling reasons for this discussion, why have those reasons not been clearly explained to residents. Why was no public notice distributed to each household by mail? Have members of the city council or Edina city government fully disclosed all potential ways in which they may stand to benefit or profit from passenger rail in Edina? If the surrounding cities are strongly opposed, why is Edina even pursuing this investigation? Why is such a poor approach to community engagement being taken for this one issue? Is there something to hide? Is the city government afraid of negative public feedback? Why is this survey so unscientific when a scientific, factual approach to this topic is what is needed? What kind of trains are we really talking about, here? How soon could it happen? I hope it would be available in my lifetime. Exactly what type of trains are we talking about? Diesel? Electric? How big? How fast? How often? What improvements will be made to the corridor? Fences? Sound barriers? Encroachment on individual lots? Where will stations / stops be? Parking? Security? Who will pay for this? Many more concerns. Why can't it operate on a profit or at least break even. What are the projected usage numbers from Edina? Nearby or surrounding communities? Out state or farther away? What questions do you have about passenger rail? (472 responses) If this track is shared with freight and it is built all the way to Northfield, what are your projections for freight and hazmat sharing the track in the future. What are your noise mitigation, safety and possible property buyout plans for homes along this track? Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Mark K Nolan, Transportation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:P edes trian and Bic yc le Mas ter P lan Dis cus s ion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : N one. I N TR O D U C TI O N : M embers of the C ommunity D esign Group/S E H team will be on-hand to discuss the P edestrian and B icycle M aster P lan with the E T C . T he focus of the meeting will be the following: S ummary of public outreach meetings S ummary of key commonalities and inconsistencies between current policies and plans Draft vision, goals and objectives Draft best practices guide - pedestrian and bicycle toolbox Visit the project website (https://www.edinamn.gov/494/P edestrian-Bicycle-M aster-P lan) for additional information. Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: O ther F rom:Mark K. No lan, AI C P, Trans p ortation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:2018 Neighb o rhood and MS A S treet R ec o nstruc tion Draft Engineering S tudies Disc ussio n C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : N o action required. I N TR O D U C TI O N : P lease recall that at the J uly and August E T C meetings commissioners provided input into the 2018 neighborhood/state aid reconstruction projects. Attached are the draft 2018 E ngineering S tudies for these projects. C ommissioners are asked to review these studies and provide comments. AT TAC HME N T S : Description W 62nd St MSA Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study Bredes en Park A Neighborhood Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study Bredes en Park E Neighborhood Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study Concord A and G Neighborhood Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Roadway Recons truction Draft Engineering Study ENGINEERING STUDY WEST 62ND STREET ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION West 62nd Street, Brookview Avenue IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-445 NOVEMBER 28, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 11-28-17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The West 62nd Street Roadway Reconstruction project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement and installation of new concrete curb and gutter, construction of new concrete sidewalks, concrete bike lanes and bituminous trails and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $X,XXX,XXX. The estimated roadway construction cost is $X,XXX,XXX (XX%); 80% of the roadway cost will be funded by MSA funds and 20% will be funded by special assessments at a rate of approximately $XX,XXX per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX (XX%) and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk and bicycle facility improvements are estimated to cost $XXX,XXX and will be funded through the Pedestrian and Cyclists Safety (PACS) fund. INITIATION: The project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure.” This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. LOCATION: The project includes West 62nd Street and Brookview Avenue. A detailed location map of the project is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed between 1940 and 1950 (Photo 1). Photo 1: West 62nd Street, 1956 Most roadways in the neighborhood do not have concrete curb and gutter. The roadway width varies between 28’-31’ (measured between the edges of the existing bituminous pavement and curb). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed the roadway section varies from 3” to 5” of pavement over a sandy clay and gravel base, with areas of organic material found in the deeper borings. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 66 and the average PCI for West 62nd Street is 41. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 4 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Historical data shows average daily traffic volumes between 1,500 and 2,750 vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds between 26.8 and 34 miles per hour. Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There are no sidewalks within the project area; however, there are sidewalks on France Avenue, Valley View Road and a portion of Oaklawn Avenue immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix A). There is also a bituminous trail connecting Pamela Park to West 62nd Street. Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area; however, there are shared bicycle lanes on Valley View Road immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix B). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 9” and 15” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and 10” polyvinyl chloride pipe (PVC) installed between 1954 and 1956. The original lift station and associated pipes were abandoned and replaced with Lift Station #4 in 2000, and an 8” PVC forcemain was installed along West 62nd Street. Historical records indicate there have been few sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix C). Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 5 Watermain The watermain system consists of 8” ductile iron pipe (DIP) and 12” cast iron pipe (CIP) installed between 1954 and 2005. The overall system has experienced a relatively large amount of breaks (see Appendix C). Most of the fire hydrants and valves are original to the neighborhood. Storm Sewer The storm sewer system is located along the legal boundary of Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD); however, the subwatersheds drain to MCWD. The system consists of 12” - 24” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and 18” corrugated metal pipe (CMP) installed between 1958 and1982. Lake Pamela to the north serves as the outlet for the majority of stormwater runoff in the project area. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overhead and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Xcel Energy owns wooden poles on the north side of West 62nd Street carrying 3-phase power lines along with feeder lines. Several of these poles also include lighting. CenturyLink owns a buried concrete duct bank on the south side of the road carrying fiber and copper communication lines. These duct banks are connected at buried vaults measuring 8’x4’x6’(L-W-H). Street lighting consists of standard “cobra head” lights mounted on wood poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix D. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Plan”), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. As shown in Appendix A, there are proposed sidewalk facilities on West 62nd Street between Valley View Road and France Avenue. Appendix B shows an approved primary bicycle route on West 62nd Street between France Avenue and Valley View Road. 2015 Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan Chapter 5 of this plan identifies the intersection of Oaklawn Avenue, West 62nd Street and Valley View Road as “not desirable” for the following reasons; • Inadequate spacing between intersections • Insufficient vehicle storage for turning movements • Lack of traffic control devices The plan recommends studying this intersection to reduce vehicle conflicts and improve pedestrian accessibility. One option mentioned is eliminating the connection between West 62nd Street and Valley View Road at Oaklawn Avenue. In Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 6 July 2017, the City implemented a test closure scenario at this intersection. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. completed a traffic study to analyze traffic counts collected before and during the closure (see Appendix E). Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2015 (see Appendix F). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Also noted in the Livings Streets Plan are the opportunities to implement the vision and principles: Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program… Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified potential manhole surcharging in the 10-year and 100-year frequency events. There were no areas of structural flooding identified. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Environment and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, creating lasting environments, and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 7 Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: The project provides homeowners a piping system to discharge ground water into, eliminating standing water, ice and algae buildup along the curb lines. Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive seal coating and overlaying. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipebursting, cured-in- place liners). Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. [COMMENTS] Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. [COMMENTS] Parks and Recreation A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. [COMMENTS] Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, a draft engineering study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to open houses on September 28, 2015 and September 26, 2016. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. Two questionnaires were mailed to affected property owners soliciting feedback for the design of this project. The first was a multi-modal traffic survey, which inquired about ways to promote safe driving, bicycling, and walking. This survey was mailed Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 8 on October 17, 2016, and was completed and returned by 10 of 34 property owners, a return rate of 29%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: • 1 of 10 (10%*) were satisfied or very satisfied with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 7 (70%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 1 (10%) were satisfied or very satisfied with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 7 (70%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 4 (40%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. • 10 (100%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 6 (60%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 6 (60%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 4 (40%) reported parking on the street less than once per month. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys A second questionnaire was mailed to property owners on June 6, 2017, inquiring about sump drains, local drainage problems, street lighting, and other project- related concerns. This survey was completed and returned by 14 of 34 property owners, a return rate of 41%. The following is a summary of feedback received from the residents: • 4 of 34 (29%*) reported having drain tile or a footing drain on their property. • 2 (14%) reported having a sump pump on their property. • 5 (35%) identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix H. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on May 23, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood. The meeting was attended by 33 residents representing 24 properties. Another informational meeting was held July 31, 2017 to discuss improvements planned for all neighborhoods proposed for construction in 2018. This meeting was attended by 12 residents representing 10 properties. Materials from these meeting can be found in Appendix I. Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 9 Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadway is proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 10” of recycled gravel material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 4” of bituminous base and 2” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. West 62nd Street is designated as a Collector in the Livings Streets Plan, while Brookview Avenue is designated as a Local Street. Per the design guidelines of this plan, Collectors have a design width (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) of 32’ without parking and 40’ with parking. These sections both include two 5’ bike lanes, a 5’ boulevard and 5’ sidewalk on one side. Local Streets have a design width of 24’ with a 5’ boulevard and 5’ sidewalk on one side, or a width of 27’ without a sidewalk. Geometric Modifications Some roadway segments within the project area are proposed to be modified from their existing geometric conditions. Although SRF’s traffic study suggests consideration of a right-in/right-out option at West 62nd Street and Oaklawn Avenue, staff is proposing a short concrete median be constructed at the intersection of West 62nd Street and Valley View Road (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Proposed Concrete Median and Turning Movements The intention of this median is improve delineation for turning movements through this intersection (specifically westbound Valley View Road to northbound Oaklawn Avenue, and eastbound Valley View Road to eastbound West 62nd Street), while maintaining all existing turning movements through the intersection. The median will also improve pedestrian safety by reducing the crossing distance at this intersection. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 10 It is also proposed to construct designated left-turn and right-turn lanes on West 62nd Street at the intersection of France Avenue (see Figure 3). This improvement will increase the service level of the intersection for eastbound traffic. Figure 3: Proposed Turn Lanes Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlaying, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and costs of construction and maintenance. As West 62nd Street is classified as a Collector, and given the existing demand for parking adjacent to Pamela Park, staff believes that one-sided parking on the south side of West 62nd Street between Brookview Avenue and France Avenue is appropriate. As parking is preferred on the same side of the road as the sidewalk for pedestrian safety, the location of the parking is determined by the location of the sidewalk (or trail). Staff recommends no parking on West 62nd Street between Valley View and Brookview Avenue and no parking on Brookview Avenue between Valley View Road and West 62nd Street given the geometric constraints. The existing and proposed roadway widths, sidewalk widths and parking recommendations are shown in Table 1. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 11 Street Existing Roadway Width (face to face), feet1 Proposed Roadway Width (face to face), feet Trail Width, feet Sidewalk Width, feet Boulevard Width, feet Parking West 62nd Street (Valley View Road to Brookview Avenue) 31 27 5 5 None West 62nd Street (Brookview Avenue to France Avenue) 30 31 10 0 South side only Brookview Ave (West 62nd Street to Valley View Road) 26.5 32 5 5 None 1 Existing roadway widths are measured from edge of bituminous to edge of bituminous on streets with no curb and gutter. Table 1: Roadway Widths, Sidewalks and Parking Roadway Signage All street signs within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix K). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation A 5’ boulevard-style concrete sidewalk is proposed on the south side of West 62nd Street between Valley View Road and Brookview Avenue. The separation from vehicle traffic creates a more pedestrian-friendly environment and is preferred by Public Works for snow storage. Between Brookview Avenue and France Avenue, staff is proposing a 10’ bituminous trail with no boulevard on the south side. This mixed-use facility for pedestrians and bicyclists will minimize construction impacts compared to a roadway section with a separate sidewalk, boulevard and two bike lanes. A pedestrian bump-out is also proposed on the south side of West 62nd Street across from Pamela Park (see Figure 4). This bump-out will reduce the crossing distance between the proposed mixed-use trail and the existing trail in Pamela Park, and will restrict parking at this crossing to enhance pedestrian visibility. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 12 Figure 4: Proposed Pedestrian Bump-Out Brookview Avenue between Valley View Road and West 62nd Street is proposed to be constructed with a 5’ boulevard-style concrete sidewalk on the east side. Two 5’ on-street bike lanes are also proposed for this segment of Brookview Avenue, constructed with B660 concrete curb and gutters, to connect the proposed mix-use trail to existing bicycle facilities on Valley View Road. Figures 5 and 6 show all existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 13 Figure 5: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Facilities Figure 6: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities The extra width needed for these facilities will be balanced between both sides of the street where feasible. The trail and sidewalk along West 62nd Street will be maintained by City staff, including snow removal; the sidewalk on Brookview Avenue will not be maintained by the City. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The abandoned lift station and the majority of the associated abandoned pipes will be removed. No work is proposed on Lift Station #4. The sanitary sewer main has been televised and portions will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 14 Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. Storm Sewer New concrete curb and gutter will be installed throughout the project area, providing a continuous, function conduit for stormwater runoff. The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations through the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures and pipes will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3, 2017 to discuss the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and the preliminary scope of improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. After receiving several inquiries from residents along this corridor, the City requested an estimate from Xcel Energy to bury their power lines along the north side of the roadway. The estimate was over $200,000, which would be divided among the benefiting properties within the project area. As this additional cost would significantly increase the special assessments for this project, this option was not pursued. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: The existing right-of-way (ROW) for West 62nd Street is 66’, and 60’ for Brookview Avenue. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. A permit from Hennepin County will be required for work that occurs within the right-of-way for France Avenue. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls or other landscaped items within the City right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $X,XXX,XXX (see Table 2). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 15 construction cost is $X,XXX,XXX ; 80% will be funded through MSA funds and 20% will be funded through special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk and bicycle facility improvements amount to $XXX,XXX and will be funded through the PACS fund. Item Amount Total Cost MSA Funds $ XXX,XXX Special Assessments $ XXX,XXX Roadway Total: $X,XXX,XXX Sanitary Sewer $ XX,XXX Watermain $ XX,XXX Storm Sewer1 $ XX,XXX Utility Total: $XX,XXX Sidewalk/Bicycle Total: $XX,XXX Project Total: $XXX,XXX 1 A combination of MSA and City storm sewer funds may be utilized based on bid results. Table 2: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 21.48 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the West 62nd Street project area (see Figure 7). The estimated assessment per REU is $XX,XXX. Figure 7: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs for properties that are corner lots or non-single family residential are described below: Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 16 Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Lots 6144 and 6143 Brookview Avenue; 6145 Oaklawn Avenue: = 0 REU (previously assessed 1 REU for Brookview Avenue and Oaklawn Avenue in 2010) 4301 West 62nd Street: 1 REU - 0.67 REU (previously assessed for Valley View Road in 2005) = 0.33 REU 4305 West 62nd Street: 1 REU - 0.2 REU (previously assessed for Valley View Road in 2005) = 0.8 REU Previously Assessed Multi-Family Residential Lots 6201 Brookview Avenue (Units 1-5): 1 REU - 0.33 REU (previously assessed for Valley View Road in 2005) = 0.67 REU x 0.5 (multi-family REU factor) = 0.33 REU (0.07 REU per unit) Previously Assessed Commercial Lots 4404 Valley View Road: 1,338 square feet (Gross Floor Area) / 1000 x 1.5 (REU factor) = 2 REU - 2 REU (previously assessed for Valley View Road in 2005) = 0 REU Single-Family Residential Corner Lots 6124 and 6300 France Avenue; 6200 and 6201 Halifax Avenue; 4013 and 4101West 62nd Street: 1 REU - 0.5 REU (partial access off France Avenue, Halifax Avenue and Peacedale Avenue) = 0.5 REU City-Owned Lots 4303 West 58th Street (Pamela Park): = 1 REU (based on size of adjacent developable lots) PID 1902824440029 (Pamela Park): = 0 REU (lot is undevelopable due to the FEMA Administrative Floodway) Engineering Study West 62nd Street Reconstruction BA-445 November 28, 2017 17 All other properties are single-family residential located entirely within the project area and will be subject to an assessment of 1 REU. The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix L. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: RECOMMENDATION: The project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure on West 62nd Street. APPENDIX: A. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities B. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities C. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks D. Streetlights E. Valley View Road/West 62nd Street Intersection Study F. Living Streets Policy G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Property Owners Questionnaires I. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials J. Correspondence from Residents K. Signs L. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (all 2017/2018 projects) September 28, 2015 Neighborhood Open House (all 2018/2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting (W 62nd St only) May 23, 2017 Neighborhood Informational Meeting (all 2018 projects) July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Report Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study November 28, 2017 Public Hearing December 5, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 ENGINEERING STUDY BREDESEN PARK A NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Habitat Court, Waterford Court IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-450 OCTOBER 31, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 10-31-17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter, and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $215,515. The estimated roadway construction cost is $126,570 and will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $6,085 per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $85,945 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. INITIATION: The Bredesen Park A project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure.” This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems. LOCATION: The project includes Habitat Court and Waterford Court north of Lincoln Drive. A detailed location map of the Bredesen Park A project is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed in 1980 (see Photo 1). Photo 1: Bredesen Park A neighborhood, 1985 The roadways in this neighborhood have surmountable-style concrete curb and gutter, and the average width is 30’ (measured from the back of curb to the back of curb). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed the roadway section varies from 3” to 4” of bituminous pavement over aggregate base. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 66 and the average PCI for Bredesen Park A is 32. An example of the current street condition can be seen in Photo 2. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 4 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Given the location and context of this project, staff has not measured traffic volumes or speeds. It is assumed that volumes and speeds on both roads are less than most local streets in the City (≤ 500 vehicles per day, 85th-percentile speeds ≤ 30 miles per hour). Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There are no sidewalks within the project area. There is a sidewalk adjacent to the project area on Lincoln Drive from Vernon Avenue to Londonderry Drive. Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 8” vitrified clay pipe (VCP), installed in 1980. Historical records indicate there have been no sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix B). Watermain The watermain system consists of 6” ductile iron pipe (DIP) installed in 1980. There has been one recorded break in the area (see Appendix B). The fire hydrants are original to the neighborhood. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 5 Storm Sewer The storm sewer system is located within the legal boundary of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD). The system consists of 12” to 24” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) installed in 1980. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications, and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “coach lantern” lights mounted on fiberglass poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Plan”), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. Appendix C shows no proposed sidewalk facilities with the project area. Appendix D shows a proposed bicycle facility adjacent to the project area on Lincoln Drive. Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6th, 2015 (see Appendix F). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified the pond area between Habitat Court and Waterford Court as an area to increase pond depth to improve the water quality in the area. The CWRMP identified potential manhole surcharging in the 10-year and 100- year frequency events. There were no areas of structural flooding identified. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community, and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Environment, and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 6 creating lasting environments, and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors, and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: The project provides homeowners a piping system to discharge groundwater into, eliminating standing water, ice, and algae buildup along the curb lines. Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive sealcoating and mill and overlays. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipebursting, cured-in- place liners). Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works department. [COMMENTS] Police/Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire departments. [COMMENTS] Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 7 Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, the draft Engineering Study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from ETC meetings can be found in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to an open house on September 26, 2016. Materials from this meeting are available on the City’s website, or upon request. Two questionnaires were mailed to affected property owners soliciting feedback for the design of this project. The first was a multi-modal traffic survey, which inquired about ways to promote safe driving, bicycling, and walking. This survey was mailed on October 17, 2016, and was completed and returned by 3 of 29 property owners, a return rate of 10%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: • 0 of 3 (0%*) were satisfied or very satisfied with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 3 (100%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 0 (0%) were satisfied or very satisfied with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 3 (100%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 3 (100%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. • 3 (100%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 1 (33%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 0 (0%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 3 (100%) reported parking on the street less than once per month. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys A second questionnaire was mailed to property owners on June 6, 2017, inquiring about sump drains, local drainage problems, street lighting, and other project- related concerns. This survey was completed and returned by 14 of 30 property owners, a return rate of 47%. The following is a summary of feedback received from the residents: • 3 of 14 (10%*) reported having drain tile or a footing drain on their property. • 3 (10%) reported having a sump pump on their property. • 3 (10%) identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix H. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood and others proposed for construction in 2018. The meeting was attended by 5 residents representing 5 properties. Materials from this meeting can be found in Appendix I. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 8 Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadway sections are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 8” of recycled gravel material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous base and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Habitat Court and Waterford Court are designated as Local Streets in the Living Streets Plan. Per the design guidelines in the Living Streets Plan, Local Streets without sidewalks have a typical width of 28’ (measured from the back of curb to the back of curb), however, it is proposed to keep the curb in place leaving the existing width the same. Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlaying, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand, and construction and maintenance costs. As the majority of the land use in this neighborhood is residential, and given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that two-sided parking on Habitat Court and Waterford Court is appropriate. Roadway Signage All street signs, including street name blades, within the project area will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix D). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation There are no proposed sidewalk or bicycle facilities within the project area. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer has been televised, and portions of the main will be repaired using a cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) method. These repairs will address the issues of cracks, offset joints and groundwater infiltration into the trunk sewer. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 9 Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area, and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. Storm Sewer Based on existing conditions and the limited scope of utility work, only damaged or non-functioning portions of the curb and gutter will be repaired and the roadway width will not be altered. The existing drainage castings will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3rd, 2017 to notify them of the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and discuss preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works, and other City staff. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood is 50’ with 100’ diameter cul de sacs. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls, or other landscaped items within the City right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $212,515 (see Table 1). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway construction cost is $126,570 and will be funded by special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $85,945 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 10 Item Amount Total Cost Roadway Total: $126,570 Sanitary Sewer $ 22,389 Watermain $ 39,066 Storm Sewer $ 24,490 Utility Total: $85,945 Project Total: $212,515 Table 1: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 20.8 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Bredesen Park A project area, as shown in Appendix K. The Land Use Class used for all properties in this neighborhood is Multi-Family Residential – Single Family Attached, which carries an REU factor of 0.8. The estimated assessment per REU is $6,085 (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs are described below: Single-Family Residential Corner Lots 6114 and 6119 Habitat Ct; 6107 and 6110 Waterford Ct; = 0.4 REU (0.5 x 0.8 REU partial access off Lincoln Dr) All other properties are single-family residential located entirely within the project area and will be subjected to an assessment of 0.8 REU. Engineering Study Bredesen Park A Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-450 October 31, 2017 11 PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: RECOMMENDATION: The project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective, and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Bredesen Park A Neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks B. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities C. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities D. Streetlights and Signs E. Living Streets Policy G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Property Owners Questionnaires I. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials J. Correspondence from Residents K. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (all 2018/2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting (all 2018 projects) July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Study Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study October 31, 2017 Public Hearing November 8, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 ENGINEERING STUDY BREDESEN PARK E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Lincoln Drive IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-449 OCTOBER 31, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 10-31-17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of a local bituminous street, installation of a bituminous trail, select replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $827,350. The estimated roadway construction cost is $552,630 and will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $1,356 per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $239,200 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Bike and pedestrian improvements are estimated to cost $35,520 and will be funded through the Pedestrian and Cyclists Safety (PACS) fund. INITIATION: The Bredesen Park E project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services and maintain a sound public infrastructure.” This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 3 LOCATION: The project includes Lincoln Drive north of Londonderry Road. A detailed location map of the Bredesen Park E project is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadway in this neighborhood was originally constructed in 1971 (see Photo 1). Photo 1: Bredesen E Neighborhood, 1971 The roadway has concrete curb and gutter, and the average width is 49’ (measured from the back of curb to the back of curb). The street is currently signed for two- sided parking. A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed the roadway section is consistently 7” of bituminous pavement over a silty sand base. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 5 66 and the average PCI for Bredesen E is 51. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Due to the current road closure at Dovre Drive, staff was limited in their ability to measure representative traffic volumes and speeds within the neighborhood. Average daily traffic volumes within the neighborhood range between 2,032 and 2,891 vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds around 29 miles per hour. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There are no sidewalks within the project area; however, there are sidewalks on Dovre Drive, Londonderry Road and Lincoln Drive immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix B), as well as recently constructed Nine Mile Creek (NMC) Regional Trail. Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area. The NMC Regional Trail runs immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix D). Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 6 Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 12” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP), installed in 1962 and 1973, respectively. Historical records indicate there have been no sewer back-ups or blockages in the area. Watermain The watermain system consists of 12” ductile iron pipe (DIP) installed in 1973 and 1976. The overall system has experienced no breaks. The fire hydrants are original to the neighborhood. Storm Sewer The storm sewer system is located within the legal boundary of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD). The system consists of 12” to 21” RCP installed in 1973. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications, and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “cobra head” lights mounted on wood poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Plan”), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. As shown in Appendix C, there are proposed sidewalk facilities on Lincoln Drive between Londonderry Drive and Dovre Drive. Appendix D shows proposed bicycle facilities along that same corridor. Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6th, 2015 (see Appendix F). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Also noted in the Livings Streets Plan are the opportunities to implement the vision and principles: Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 7 Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program… Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified potential manhole surcharging in the 10-year and 100- year frequency events. There were no areas of structural flooding identified. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community, and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Environment, and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, creating lasting environments, and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors, and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: The project provides homeowners a piping system to discharge groundwater into, eliminating standing water, ice, and algae buildup along the curb lines. Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 8 Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive sealcoating and mill and overlays. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipebursting, cured-in- place liners). Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. [COMMENTS] Police/Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. [COMMENTS] Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, the draft Engineering Study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to an open house on September 26, 2016. Materials from this meeting are available upon request. Questionnaires were not mailed to the commercial offices in this neighborhood. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood and others proposed for construction in 2018. The meeting was attended by one resident. Materials from this meeting can be found in Appendix I. Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works, and other City staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadways are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 10” of recycled gravel material to be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 3” of bituminous base and 3” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 9 Lincoln Drive between Londonderry Road and Dovre Drive is designated as a Local Connector, while the portion north of Dovre Drive is designated as a Local Street. Per the design guidelines in the Living Streets Plan, Local Connectors have a typical width of 24’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) with a 5’ boulevard and 5’ sidewalk on one side, and Local Streets without sidewalks have a typical width of 27’. Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlays, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and construction and maintenance costs. The land use in this neighborhood is commercial, and given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that one-sided parking is appropriate. As a Local Connector, staff is recommending one-sided parking on Lincoln Drive. As parking is preferred on the same side of the road as the sidewalk for pedestrian safety, the location of the parking is determined by the location of the sidewalk (or trail). The existing and proposed street widths, sidewalk width and parking recommendations are shown in Table 1. Street Existing Roadway Width (back to back), feet Proposed Roadway Width (back to back), feet Bituminous Trail Width, feet Boulevard Width, feet Parking Lincoln Drive (Londonderry Road to Dovre Drive) 49 37 12 0 East side only Lincoln Drive (Dovre Drive to cul-de-sac) 49 49 East side only Table 1: Street Widths, Sidewalks and Parking Roadway Signage All street signs within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix D). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation A 12’ bituminous trail with no boulevard is proposed on the east side of Lincoln Drive from Londonderry Road to Dovre Drive. This mixed-use facility for pedestrians and bicyclists will minimize construction impacts compared to a roadway section with a separate sidewalk, boulevard and two bike lanes. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 10 This facility will connect to existing sidewalk facilities on Dovre Drive, Londonderry Road and Lincoln Drive, as well as the NMC Regional Trail. All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ACA). Figure 2 shows all existing and proposed pedestrian facilities. Figure 2: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Facilities Exact locations were selected by staff based on existing topography, available right- of-way, potential construction conflicts and connections to existing facilities. The extra width needed for this facility will be obtained by removing the existing concrete curb on the east side of Lincoln Drive between Londonderry Road and Dovre Drive and narrowing the roadway section by 12’. As this trail is not along a Municipal State Aid roadway nor included in the City’s Active Routes to School Plan, it will not be maintained by City staff. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 11 Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer has been televised, and portions of the main will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. Storm Sewer In addition to the removal of the existing concrete curb and gutter along the east side of Lincoln Drive to accommodate the proposed trail, portions of the remaining curb and gutter will be removed and replaced, improving stormwater drainage. The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3, 2017 to notify them of the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and discuss preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood varies from 35’ to 60,’ with portions of the roadway on City property. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW or on City property. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls, or other landscaped items within the City right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $827,350 (see Table 2). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway construction cost is $552,630 and will be funded by special assessments. Utility improvements Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 12 amount to $239,200 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Mixed-use trail improvements amount to $35,520 and will be funded through the PACS fund. Item Amount Total Cost Roadway Total: $552,630 Sanitary Sewer $ 50,220 Watermain $ 86,320 Storm Sewer $ 102,660 Utility Total: $239,200 Trail Total: $35,520 Project Total: $827,350 Table 2: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 407.54 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Bredesen E project area (see Figure 3). The estimated assessment per REU is $1,356. Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 13 Figure 3: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs are described below: Commercial - Office and Retail – Gross Floor Area (GFA) / 1,000 x 1.5 (REU factor) 5500 Lincoln Drive (31,707 GFA) = 47.6 REU 5600 Lincoln Drive (77,896 GFA) = 116.84 REU Engineering Study Bredesen Park E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-449 October 31, 2017 14 5700 Lincoln Drive (66,167 GFA) = 99.3 REU 5720 Lincoln Drive (59,563 GFA) = 89.3 REU 5750 Lincoln Drive Unit 1 (8,864 GFA) = 13.3 REU 5750 Lincoln Drive Unit 2 (4,600 GFA) = 6.9 REU 5780 Lincoln Drive (22,846 GFA) = 34.3 REU The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix J. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: RECOMMENDATION: The project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Bredesen Park E neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities C. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities D. Streetlights and Signs E. Living Streets Policy F. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes G. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials H. Correspondence from Residents I. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (all 2018/2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting (all 2018 projects) July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Study Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study October 31, 2017 Public Hearing November 8, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 ENGINEERING STUDY CONCORD A/G NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Parnell Avenue, Ryan Avenue, Virginia Avenue, Virginia Lane, West 60th Street, West 62nd Street, West 63rd Street, West 64th Street IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-447 NOVEMBER 28, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 11-28-17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter, installation of new concrete curb and gutter, construction of new concrete sidewalks and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $X,XXX,XXX. The estimated roadway construction cost is $X,XXX,XXX (XX%) and will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $XX,XXX per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX (XX%) and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk improvements are estimated to cost $XX,XXX and will be funded through the Pedestrian and Cyclists Safety (PACS) fund. INITIATION: The Concord A/G project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure”. This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, watermain system, storm sewer system, sanitary sewer system and pedestrian facilities. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 3 LOCATION: The project includes Parnell Avenue, Ryan Avenue, Virginia Avenue, Virginia Lane, West 60th Street, West 62nd Street, West 63rd Street and West 64th Street. A detailed location map of the project is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed between 1947 and 1966 (Photo 1). Photo 1: Concord A/G Neighborhood, 1956 Most streets in the neighborhood have concrete curb and gutter. The average roadway width is 30’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed the roadway section varies from 3” to 7” of pavement over a sandy clay and gravel base. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 66 and the average PCI for Concord A/G is 39. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 5 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Staff measured traffic volumes and speeds at several locations within or near the neighborhood. Average daily traffic volumes within the neighborhood range between XXX and XXX vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds between XX and XX miles per hour. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There is an existing sidewalk on West 60th Street from Normandale Road to School Road within the project area. There are also sidewalks on School Road, Normandale Road, Concord Avenue and Valley View Road immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix C). Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within or adjacent to the project area. (see Appendix D). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 8”, 9” and 10” vitrified clay pipe (VCP), 18” and 21” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) installed between 1947 and 1966. Historical records indicate there have been few sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix B). Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 6 Watermain The watermain system consists of 6” cast iron pipe (CIP) and 1.5” copper pipe installed between 1947 and 1966. The overall system has experienced a relatively large amount of breaks (see Appendix B). The fire hydrants are original to the neighborhood. There are five properties within the project area that have been identified as having private wells. Storm Sewer The storm sewer system is located within the legal boundaries of the Nine Mile Creek the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts. The system consists of 15” to 21” RCP installed between 1955 and 2007. There are a small amount of storm sewer drains located within the project area. The streets south of West 62nd Street drain into the regional storm system underneath State Highway 62. The streets between West 62nd Street and Valley View Road flow East to storm drains located at West 62nd Street and St Johns Avenue. The streets North of Valley View Road drain towards Concord Avenue storm drains which lead to Pamela Park. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “cobra head” and “coach lantern” lights mounted on wooden or fiberglass poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Plan”), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. As shown in Appendices C and D, there are no proposed sidewalk or bicycle facilities within the project area. Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2015 (see Appendix F). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 7 Also noted in the Livings Streets Plan are the opportunities to implement the vision and principles: Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program… Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified potential structural flooding near Valley View Road between Ryan Avenue and Parnell Avenue in the 100-year frequency event. Potential manhole surcharging was also identified in the 10-year and 100-year frequency events. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Environment and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, creating lasting environments and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: The project provides homeowners a piping system to discharge ground water into, eliminating standing water, ice and algae buildup along the curb lines. Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 8 is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive seal coating and overlaying. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipe bursting, cured-in- place liners). Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. [COMMENTS] Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire departments. [COMMENTS] Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, a draft engineering study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from the ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to open houses on September 28, 2015 and September 26, 2016. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. Two questionnaires were mailed to affected property owners soliciting feedback for the design of this project. The first was a multi-modal traffic survey, which inquired about ways to promote safe driving, bicycling, and walking. This survey was mailed on October 17, 2016, and was completed and returned by 38 of 125 property owners, a return rate of 30%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: • 15 of 38 (39%*) were satisfied or very satisfied with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 17 (45%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 16 (42%) were satisfied or very satisfied with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 16 (42%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 16 (42%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. • 32 (84%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 18 (47%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 7 (18%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 18 (47%) reported parking on the street less than once per month. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys A second questionnaire was mailed to property owners on June 6th, 2017, inquiring about sump drains, local drainage problems, street lighting, and other project- Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 9 related concerns. This survey was completed and returned by 81 of 126 property owners, a return rate of 64%. The following is a summary of feedback received from the residents: • 11 of 81 (9%*) reported having drain tile or a footing drain on their property. • 21 (17%) reported having a sump pump on their property. • 23 (28%) identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix H. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood and others proposed for construction in 2017. The meeting was attended by 32 residents representing 21 properties. Materials from this meeting can be found in Appendix I. Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadways are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadways where feasible. A minimum of 8” of recycled gravel material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous base and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. West 60th Street is designated as a Local Connector in the Living Streets Plan; all other streets within the project area are designated as Local Streets. Per the design guidelines of the Living Streets Plan, Local Streets have a typical width of 27’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) without sidewalks and 24’ with a 5’ sidewalk on one side. Local Connectors have a typical width of 24’ with a 5’ sidewalk on one side. Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlaying, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 10 Parking The City’s Living Streets Plan evaluates on-street parking based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and costs of construction and maintenance. As the majority of the land use in this neighborhood is residential, and given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that two-sided parking on the Local Streets within the project area is appropriate. Staff is recommending one-sided parking on West 60th Street, which is the only Local Connector within the project area. As parking is preferred on the same side of the road as the sidewalk for pedestrian safety, the location of the parking is determined by the location of the sidewalk. The existing and proposed street widths, sidewalk widths and parking recommendations are shown in Table 1. Street Existing Roadway Width* (face to face), feet Proposed Roadway Width (face to face), feet Sidewalk Width, feet Boulevard Width, feet Parking Parnell Avenue 25 - 30 27 - - Two-sided Ryan Avenue (Valley View Road to West 62nd Street) 30 27 - - Two-sided Ryan Avenue (West 62nd Street to West 63rd Street) 22 24 - - Two-sided Virginia Avenue 28 - 30 27 - - Two-sided Virginia Lane 30 27 - - Two-sided West 60th Street 30 24 5 5 North side only West 62nd Street 29 27 - - Two-sided West 63rd Street 27 27 - - Two-sided West 64th Street 24 24 - - None * Existing roadway width is measured from edge of bituminous to edge of bituminous on streets with no curb and gutter. Table 1: Street Widths, Sidewalks, and Parking Roadway Signage All street signs within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix E). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities A 5’ boulevard-style concrete sidewalk is proposed on the north side of West 60th Street between School Road and Concord Avenue. The grass boulevard that will separate the new curb and the proposed sidewalks will be 5’-wide for the majority of the length of the streets, but may vary depending on existing conflicts. [reconstruct existing sidewalk segment to create a uniform, continuous corridor or leave existing sidewalk as is?] The separation from vehicle traffic creates a more pedestrian-friendly environment and is preferred by Public Works for snow storage. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 11 This sidewalk will connect to existing sidewalk facilities on West 60th Street, School Road, Concord Avenue and Normandale Road. All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Figure 2 shows all existing and proposed sidewalk facilities. Figure 2: Existing and Proposed Sidewalk Facilities Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 12 Exact locations were selected by staff based on existing topography, available right- of-way, potential construction conflicts and connections to existing facilities. The extra width needed for the sidewalks and the boulevards will be balanced between both sides of the street where feasible. As this sidewalk is not along a Municipal State Aid roadway nor included in the City’s Active Routes to School Plan, it will not be maintained by City staff. Bicycle Facilities There are no proposed bicycle facilities in this project area. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer main has been televised, and portions will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All of the existing watermain will be replaced using a combination of pipebursting and open cut methods, and all water services will be replaced. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. New 6” watermain will also be installed along Ryan Avenue between West 62nd Street and West 63rd Street and along West 64th Street between Virginia Avenue and Concord Avenue. These segments will provide looped connections to existing watermain and improve distribution within the neighborhood. As part of the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan, adopted in 2013, staff plans to engage property owners who have private wells and encourage them to have them properly sealed. Storm Sewer Based on existing conditions and the scope of utility work, new concrete curb and gutter will be installed throughout the project, providing a continuous, functional conduit for stormwater. The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3rd, 2017 to notify them of the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and discuss preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 13 Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood varies from 40’ to 60’. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls or other landscaped items within the City right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $X,XXX,XXX (see Table 2). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway construction cost is $X,XXX,XXX and will be funded by special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk improvements amount to $XX,XXX and will be funded through the PACS fund. Item Amount Total Cost Roadway Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Sanitary Sewer $ XXX,XXX Watermain $ XXX,XXX Storm Sewer $ XXX,XXX Utility Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Sidewalk Total: $ XX,XXX Project Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Table 2: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 115.84 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Concord A/G project area (see Figure 3). The estimated assessment per REU is $XX,XXX. Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 14 Figure 3: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs for properties that are corner lots or non-single family residential are described below: Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Lots 4820 and 4900 West 60th Street; 1 REU - 0.33 REU (previously assessed for School Road in 2001) = 0.67 REU Engineering Study Concord A/G Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-447 November 28, 2017 15 Single-Family Residential Corner Lots 5944, 6140 and 6200 Concord Avenue; 4708, 4712, 4713, 4717, 4724, 4725, 4800, 4801, 4809 and 4825 Valley View Road; 4700 and 4701 Virginia Lane; 4701 and 4829 West 60th Street; = 0.5 REU (partial access off Concord Ave, School Rd, and Valley View Rd) All other properties are single-family residential located entirely within the project area and will be subjected to an assessment of 1 REU. The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix K. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Concord A/G neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks C. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities D. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities E Streetlights and Signs F. Living Streets Policy G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Property Owners Questionnaires I. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials J. Correspondence from Residents K. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (all 2017/2018 projects) September 28, 2015 Neighborhood Open House (all 2018/2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Report Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study November 28, 2017 Public Hearing December 5, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 ENGINEERING STUDY COUNTRY CLUB C NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Edina Court IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-448 OCTOBER 31, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 10/31/17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of a local bituminous street, select replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer and watermain systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $XXX,XXX. The estimated roadway construction cost is $XX,XXX and will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $XX,XXX per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $XX,XXX and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. INITIATION: The Country Club C project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure.” This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, sanitary sewer and watermain system. LOCATION: The project includes Edina Court. A detailed location map of the Country Club C project is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadway in this neighborhood was originally constructed between 1940 and 1956 (see Photo 1), and was reconstructed in 1986. Photo 1: Country Club C neighborhood, 1956 The roadway in this neighborhood has concrete curb and gutter, and the average width is 30’ (measured from the back of curb to the back of curb). The street is currently signed for one-sided parking. A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed a roadway section of 3.5” of bituminous pavement over silty sand and gravel fill. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 66 and the average PCI for Country Club C is 18. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 4 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Given the location and context of this project, staff has not measured traffic volumes or speeds. It is assumed that volumes and speeds on Edina Court far lower than most local streets in the City (≤ 500 vehicles per day, 85th-percentile speeds ≤ 30 miles per hour). Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There are no sidewalks within the project area; however, there are sidewalks on West 50th Street and Wooddale Avenue immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix C). Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area; however, there are bicycle facilities on Wooddale Avenue adjacent to the project area (see Appendix D). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) installed in 1940. Historical records indicate there have been few sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix A). Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 5 Watermain The watermain system consists of 4” and 6” ductile iron pipe (DIP) installed in 1986. The overall system has experienced a relatively small amount of breaks (see Appendix A). The fire hydrants are original to the neighborhood. Storm Sewer There is no storm sewer located within the project area. The surface water drains to catch basins at the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and West 50th Street. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. There is one street light within the project area, consisting of a standard “cobra head” light mounted on a fiberglass pole as shown in Appendix B. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the “Plan”), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. As shown in Appendices C and D, there are no proposed sidewalk or bicycle facilities within the project area. Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2015 (see Appendix E). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified potential manhole surcharging in the 10-year and 100-year frequency events. There were no areas of structural flooding identified. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 6 Environment and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, creating lasting environments and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive seal coating and overlaying. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipebursting, cured-in- place liners). Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. [COMMENTS] Police/Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. [COMMENTS] Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 7 Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, a draft engineering study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from the ETC meeting are included in Appendix F. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to open houses on September 8, 2015 and September 26, 2016. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. A questionnaire was mailed to property owners on June 6, 2017, inquiring about sump drains, local drainage problems, street lighting and other project-related concerns. This survey was completed and returned by 6 of 7 property owners, a return rate of 86%. The following is a summary of feedback received from the residents: • 0 of 6 (0%*) reported having drain tile or a footing drain on their property. • 0 of 6 (0%) reported having a sump pump on their property. • 1 (17%) identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix G. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood and others proposed for construction in 2018. The meeting was attended by one resident. Materials from this meeting can be found in Appendix H. Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix I. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadway is proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 8” of recycled gravel material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous base and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 8 Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed pavement sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20- year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlaying, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand, and construction and maintenance costs. As the land use in this neighborhood is residential, and given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that one-sided parking on Edina Court is appropriate. Roadway Signage All street signs within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix B). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation There are no proposed sidewalk or bicycle facilities within the project area. All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer main has been televised and will be repaired using a cured-in- place-pipe (CIPP) method. These repairs will address the issues of cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area, and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. Storm Sewer Portions of the existing concrete curb and gutter will be removed and replaced, improving stormwater drainage and leaving the roadway width unchanged. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3, 2017 to notify them of the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and discuss preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 9 intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood varies from 45’ to 60’. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls or other landscaped items within the City right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $XXX,XXX (see Table 1). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway construction cost is $XX,XXX and will be funded by special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $XX,XXX and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Item Amount Total Cost Roadway Total: $XX,XXX Sanitary Sewer $ XX,XXX Watermain $ XX,XXX Storm Sewer $ XX,XXX Utility Total: $XX,XXX Project Total: $XXX,XXX Table 1: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 6.33 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Country Club C project area (see Figure 2). The estimated assessment per REU is $XX,XXX. Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 10 Figure 2: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs are described below: Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Lots 2 and 3 Edina Court; = 1 REU - 0.33 REU (previously assessed for Wooddale Avenue in 2009) = 0.66 REU Single-Family Residential Corner Lots 8 Edina Court, PID 1802824130155; = 0.5 REU (partial access off West 50th Street or Wooddale Avenue) All other properties are single-family residential located entirely within the project area and will be subjected to an assessment of 1 REU. The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix J. Engineering Study Country Club C Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-448 October 31, 2017 11 PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: RECOMMENDATION: The project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Country Club C neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks B. Streetlights and Signs C. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities D. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities E. Living Streets Policy F. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes G. Property Owners Questionnaires H. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials I. Correspondence from Residents J. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (all 2017/2018 projects) September 28, 2015 Neighborhood Open House (all 2018/2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Study Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study October 31, 2017 Public Hearing November 8, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 ENGINEERING STUDY NORMANDALE PARK D NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Creek Drive, Doron Drive, Doron Lane, Limerick Drive, Limerick Lane, Valley View Road IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-446 OCTOBER 31, 2017 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 44908 10-31-17 Carter Schulze Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $X,XXX,XXX. The estimated roadway construction cost is $XXX,XXX (XX%) and will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $XX,XXX per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX (XX%) and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. INITIATION: The project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, as well as Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure.” This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, watermain system, storm sewer system, and sanitary sewer system. LOCATION: The project includes Creek Drive, Doron Drive, Doron Lane, Limerick Drive, Limerick Lane and Valley View Road (see Figure 1). Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The streets in this neighborhood were originally constructed between 1966 and 1979 (see Photo 1). Photo 1: Normandale Park D Neighborhood, 1967 All streets in the neighborhood have concrete curb and gutter, in either B618 or surmountable style. The average roadway width is 30’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area showed the roadway section varies from 3” to 7” of pavement over aggregate base and silty sand with gravel. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 66 and the average PCI for Normandale Park D is 11. An example of the current street conditions can be seen in Photo 2. Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 4 Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Staff measured traffic volumes and speeds at several locations within or near the neighborhood. Average daily traffic volumes within the neighborhood range between 67 and 248 vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds between 19.3 and 23.1 miles per hour. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Multi-Modal Transportation Sidewalk Facilities There is a sidewalk on Valley View Road between Valley Lane and Doron Drive. There is also a sidewalk on Creek Drive that connects to the recently constructed Nine Mile Creek (NMC) Regional Trail and to Heights Park. There is a sidewalk on Valley Lane adjacent to the project area (see Appendix C). Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area. The NMC Regional Trail runs immediately adjacent to the project area (see Appendix D). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 8” and 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and 12” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) installed between 1966 and 1979. Historical records indicate there have been few sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix B). Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 5 Watermain The watermain system consists of 6” and 12” cast iron pipe (CIP) and ductile iron pipe (DIP), and 1.5”-2” copper pipe installed between 1966 and 1979. The cast iron pipe system installed during the 1966 era has experienced a relatively large number of breaks (see Appendix B). The fire hydrants and valves are original to the neighborhood. The hydrant spacing does not meet public safety standards. Storm Sewer The storm sewer system is located within the legal boundary of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The system consists of 12” - 42” RCP and 15” – 54” corrugated metal pipe (CMP) installed between 1964 and 1998. Nine Mile Creek serves as the outlet for stormwater runoff for the majority of the neighborhood. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications and cable utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “coach lantern” lights mounted on fiberglass and wood poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: Staff All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update (the Plan), the Living Streets Policy, the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan and sustainable project evaluation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7 of the Plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. As shown in Appendix C, there are no proposed sidewalk facilities within the project area. Appendix D shows no proposed bicycle facilities within the project area. Living Streets Policy The Living Streets Plan was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2015 (see Appendix F). The vision statement of the Living Streets Policy expresses the need to look at future projects differently: Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Also noted in the Livings Streets Plan are the opportunities to implement the vision and principles: Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program… Staff has included elements that pertain to residential neighborhoods in the rehabilitation of the infrastructure and replacement of the roadways. Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 6 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified potential manhole surcharging in the 10-year and 100-year frequency events. There were no areas of structure flooding identified for the 100- year frequency event. Sustainability Staff has also included elements of sustainable engineering into this project. Sustainability in engineering means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community, and available funding. This is essentially the “Triple Bottom Line” of sustainability; Equity, Environment and Economy. Staff views sustainability as maximizing our resources, creating lasting environments, and improving and shaping our community so that future generations are not burdened by the decisions of today. The project was evaluated based on the following key indicators to look for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and risks. • Equity: How well does the project provide or maintain core city services such as transportation, sanitation, clean water, emergency access, and emergency service? How does the project influence the well-being of the community? • Environment: How does the project influence the natural environment, such as surface or ground water health, forest canopy, natural resource diversity, wildlife habitat, air quality, noise, and others? • Economy: How does the project influence the local economy? What are the short term and long term costs? Is the continued service worth the price? The following is a summary of this evaluation: Equity: The project maintains access and mobility to the transportation network. Where available, this includes transportation options for a variety of user groups including, but not limited to, children, seniors and disabled individuals. In addition, the project improves mobility for different types of users, such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Updates to the fire hydrants provide public safety staff the ease of connection needed during an emergency. Environment: The project provides homeowners a piping system to discharge ground water into, eliminating standing water, ice and algae buildup along the curb lines. Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work, thus protecting the existing natural environment. The project also analyzes the sanitary sewer to ensure that inflow and infiltration of clear water is kept out of the system, which minimizes regional wastewater treatment. Bituminous pavements will be recycled on-site, minimizing truck traffic to and from the site. Economy: The project is designed to reduce construction costs now and into the future. The new roadway section can easily be maintained long-term with the use of proactive seal coating and mill and overlays. These maintenance operations will significantly extend the life of the pavement. The project will also use less disruptive construction methods, such as trenchless technology (i.e., pipebursting, cured-in- place liners). Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 7 Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works department. [COMMENTS] Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire departments. [COMMENTS] Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on September 28, 2017, the draft Engineering Study was provided for review. [COMMENTS] Relevant minutes from ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to open houses on September 29, 2014 and September 28, 2015. In October 2015, the project was postponed from 2017 to 2018 due to budget constraints in the City’s utility fund. Residents were subsequently invited to a third open house on September 26, 2016. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. Two questionnaires were mailed to affected property owners soliciting feedback for the design of this project. The first was a multi-modal traffic survey, which inquired about ways to promote safe driving, bicycling and walking. This survey was mailed on October 17, 2016, and was completed and returned by 28 of 94 property owners, a return rate of 30%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: • 9 of 28 (32%*) were satisfied or very satisfied with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 13 (46%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 6 (21%) were satisfied or very satisfied with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 20 (71%) were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. • 18 (64%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. • 25 (89%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 10 (36%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. • 8 (29%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 9 (32%) reported parking on the street less than once per month. • 8 (28%) favored upgrades to existing street lighting. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys A second questionnaire was mailed to property owners on June 6, 2017, inquiring about sump drains, local drainage problems and other project-related concerns. This survey was completed and returned by 60 of 96 property owners, a return rate of 63%. The following is a summary of feedback received from the residents: • 28 of 60 (47%*) reported having drain tile or a footing drain on their property. • 39 (65%) reported having a sump pump on their property. Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 8 • 31 (51%) identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix H. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on July 31, 2017 to discuss the improvements planned for this neighborhood and others proposed for construction in 2018. The meeting was attended by 29 residents representing 24 properties. Materials from this meeting can be found in Appendix I. Resident input regarding the project was also received in the form of emails, which can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadway sections are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 8” of recycled gravel material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous base and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. All roadways within the project area are designated as Local Streets in the Living Streets Plan. Per the design guidelines in the Living Streets Plan, Local Streets without sidewalks have a typical width of 27’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb). Pavement Maintenance The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. With proactive maintenance procedures, including seal coating and overlays, the design life of the entire roadway can be extended considerably. Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and construction and maintenance costs. As all the land use in this neighborhood is residential, and given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that two-sided parking on all streets within the project area is appropriate. Roadway Signage All street signs within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix E). All new signs shall conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 9 Multi-Modal Transportation There are no proposed sidewalk or bicycle facilities within the project area. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer has been televised, and portions of the main will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the trunk sewer. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain A non-invasive pipe condition assessment was performed on the watermain within the project area and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. The majority of the existing watermain will be replaced using a combination of pipebursting and open cut methods, along with all associated water services. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and additional hydrants will be installed, as needed, to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fitting desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. Storm Sewer Based on existing conditions and the scope of utility work, new concrete curb and gutter will be installed throughout the majority of the project area, providing a continuous, functional conduit for stormwater. Partial curb repairs will be performed on Limerick Drive south of Creek Drive, which has surmountable-style curb in relatively good condition (see Figure 2). This segment will therefore retain its existing width (30’ face-to-face). Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 10 Figure 2: Proposed Curb Replacement The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on August 3, 2017 to notify them of the proposed 2018 reconstruction projects and discuss preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 11 intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. RIGHT-OF-WAY /EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood varies from 50’ to 66’. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders, retaining walls or other landscaped items within the City’s right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $X,XXX,XXX (see Table 2). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway construction cost is $X,XXX,XXX and will be funded by special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $X,XXX,XXX and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Item Amount Total Cost Roadway Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Sanitary Sewer $ XXX,XXX Watermain $ XXX,XXX Storm Sewer $ XXX,XXX Utility Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Project Total: $ X,XXX,XXX Table 2: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 88.50 residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Normandale Park D project area, as shown in Appendix K. The estimated assessment per REU is $XX,XXX (see Figure 3). Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 12 Figure 3: Preliminary Assessment Map The formulas for calculating REUs for properties that are corner lots or non-single family residential are described below: Single-Family Residential Corner Lots 6501 Creek Dr; 6409 Doron Ln; 6421, 6500 and 6501 Limerick Dr; 6412 and 6413 Limerick Ln; 5408, 5501, 5600, and 5608 Valley Ln = 0.5 REU (partial access off Valley Ln) All other properties are single-family residential located entirely within the project area and will be subjected to an assessment of 1 REU. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: Engineering Study Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-446 October 31, 2017 13 RECOMMENDATION: The project can be completed during the 2018 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Normandale Park D Neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks C. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Sidewalk Facilities D. City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities E Streetlights and Signs F. Living Streets Policy G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Property Owners Questionnaires I. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials J. Correspondence from Residents K. Preliminary Assessment Roll Neighborhood Open House (2016-2017 projects) September 29, 2014 Neighborhood Open House (2017-2018 projects) September 28, 2015 Neighborhood Open House (2018-2019 projects) September 26, 2016 Neighborhood Informational Meeting (2018 projects) July 31, 2017 ETC Engineering Report Review September 28, 2017 Receive Engineering Study October 31, 2017 Public Hearing November 8, 2017 Bid Opening March/April 2018 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2018 Complete Construction Fall 2018 Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2019 Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: VI.E. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendatio n, O ther F rom:Mark K. No lan, AI C P, Trans p ortation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:2018 Trans portation C ommission Work P lan Ac tio n C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve draft 2018 T ransportation C ommission work plan. I N TR O D U C TI O N : Work plan proposals are due this month. C ity C ouncil will review them with the board and commission chairs at their O ctober 3 work session. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Draft 2018 ETC Work Plan and Ins tructions Ch a r g e 1 Study and Report - Commission is asked to study a specific issue or event and report its findings to City Council. - Advisory Communication required / staff report optional. - No vote is taken by the Board or Commission. - No official Commission recommendation is provided to the City Council. Ch a r g e 2 Review and Comment - Commission is asked to review a specific policy issue and to seek comments from each individual member of the group to pass on to City Council for further consideration. - Member comments will be included in the Staff Report (optional Advisory Communication can be included with the staff report). - No vote is taken by the Commission. - No official Commission recommendation is provided to City Council. Ch a r g e 3 Review and Recommend - Commission is asked to review a specific policy issue and to issue a recommendation on the issue to the City Council. - Individual member comments are not included in the Staff Report (optional, BC can include an Advisory Communication with the staff report). - A majority vote is necessary for a recommendation to be formally submitted to City Council. Ch a r g e 4 Review and Decide - Commission is asked to study, review, and decide on an issue. - The group’s decision will be the City’s official position on the matter unless the issue is formally considered and reversed by a majority vote of City Council. Commission Work Plan Instructions Updated 2017.05.24 Instructions: Each section with a white background should be filled out. Do not fill out council charge. Scott will complete this section with his proposed charge to the Council. Liaisons are responsible for completing the budget and staff support columns. List initiatives in order of priority Definitions New Initiative – not on previous work plan and has completion date Continued Initiative – carried over from a previous work plan with a revised target completion date Ongoing Responsibility – annually on the work plan and may or may not have a target completion date Parking Lot – initiatives considered by not proposed as part of the work plan. Not approved by Council EVENT Initiatives – if it is an annual event list the initiative as ongoing. It if is a new event list the items as a new initiative. Dates Return proposed work plan to MJ by September 20, 2017 The Annual work plan meeting with Council is October 3, 2017 – Chairs present Finalize work plans works session with Council is November 8, 2017 – Liaisons present Work Plans should be approved by Council by December 5, 2017 Commission: Choose an item. 2018 Annual Work Plan Proposal Initiative #1 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☒ New Initiative ☐ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Recommend transportation solution(s) within and between current and planned high-density nodes. ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Initiative #2 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☒ New Initiative ☐ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Define and implement equity criteria for Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund projects, and integrate with the City’s Race and Equity Task Force efforts. ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Initiative #3 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☒ New Initiative ☐ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Develop a process to integrate Edina’s transportation initiatives with those of neighboring communities and Hennepin County. ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Parking Lot: (These items have been considered by the BC, but not proposed as part of this year’s work plan. If the BC decides they would like to work on them in the current year, it would need to be approved by Council.) Initiative #4 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☒ New Initiative ☐ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Recommend solutions for issues associated with the effects of high school motor vehicle traffic on adjacent neighborhoods. ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Initiative #5 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☐ New Initiative ☒ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Monitor and evaluate the results of the Edina/Southdale Bus Circulator Pilot project ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Initiative #6 Council Charge (Proposed Charge Completed by CM) ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Target Completion Date Budget Required (Staff Liaison) Staff Support Required (Staff Liaison) Initiative Type ☐ New Initiative ☒ Continued Initiative ☐ Ongoing Responsibility ☐ Funds available Funds are available for this project. ☐ Staff Liaison: Hrs____________ ☐ CTS (including Video) ☐ Other Staff: Hrs_____________ Assist as requested with the development of the City’s new Comprehensive Guide Plan. ☐ Funds not available There are not funds available for this project (explain impact of Council approving initiative in liaison comments). Liaison Comments: Click here to enter text. City Manager Comments: Click here to enter text. Progress Report: Click here to enter text. Proposed Month for Joint Work Session (one time per year, up to 60 minutes): ☐ Mar ☐ April ☐ May ☐ June ☐ July ☐ Aug ☐ Sept ☐ Oct ☐ Nov Council Comments: Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: VI.F. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Nic k Bauler, Traffic S afety C o ordinator Item Activity: Subject:Traffic S afety R ep o rt o f S eptember 6, 2017 Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : R eview and recommend the T raffic S afety R eport of Wednesday, S eptember 6, 2017, be forwarded to City C ouncil for approval. I N TR O D U C TI O N : I t is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the meeting regarding the report's recommendations. An overview of the comments from the E dina Transportation C ommission will be included in the staff report provided to the C ity C ouncil for their O ctober 17, meeting. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Traffic Safety Report of September 6, 2017 September 28, 2017 Traffic Safety Committee Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator Traffic Safety Report of September 8th, 2017 Information / Background: The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on September 8. The Transportation Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Police Lieutenant, City Engineer, Public Works Director and Assistant City Planner were in attendance for this meeting. The Traffic Safety Specialist was not able to attend and was informed of the decisions and did not object to the recommendations. For these reviews, 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 informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, these comments can be included on the September 28 Edina Transportation Commission and the October 17 City Council meeting agendas. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action: A1. Request to raise pedestrian awareness at the intersection of France Avenue and Sunnyside Road • A resident has had issues with vehicles traveling on France Ave with vehicles not yielding to pedestrians • France is classified as a ‘Minor Arterial’ road that is under Hennepin County jurisdiction • Hennepin County’s Pedestrian Safety Committee (PSC) reviewed this intersection and recommend continental crosswalk markings, and leading pedestrian interval (LPI) for France Ave at Sunnyside Rd. After review, staff recommends the approval of Hennepin County’s plans to raise pedestrian STAFF REPORT Page 2 awareness on France Avenue at Sunnyside Road. Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends no action: B1. Request for a crosswalk over Maloney Ave at Tyler Ct • A resident requested a crosswalk at this intersection claiming Maloney has busy traffic and high pedestrian volume crossing at Tyler Ct • Maloney Ave is a state-aided ‘Collector Street’ • Maloney Ave is uncontrolled at Tyler Ct • A sidewalk is located on the north side of Maloney Ave • Maloney Ave totaled 11 crosses/day After review, staff recommends placing no crosswalk, as this intersection does not meet Edina’s crosswalk warrants. Section C: Items which staff recommends for further study C1. Request for crosswalks in both directions at the intersection of W 56th St and Xerxes Ave • Residents requesting a crosswalk at this intersection stating a crosswalk will increase pedestrian awareness • Xerxes Ave borders Minneapolis • Xerxes is a two-lane Hennepin County Road which is classified as a ‘Collector Street’ • W 56th St is classified as a ‘Local Street’ • This intersection is controlled with an all- way stop • The East side of Xerxes Ave includes a gas station, a salon, a dry cleaning store and a restaurant • This intersection has a north and southbound bus stop (route 6) • North and Southbound crosses totaled 168 pedestrians with a two-hour peak of 45 crosses at 6:15 PM • East and Westbound crosses totaled 202 pedestrians with a two-hour peak of 77 crosses at 6:00 PM • All data was collected and averaged from a two-day collection period STAFF REPORT Page 3 After review, staff recommends contacting the City of Minneapolis and Hennepin County to gather input towards placing crosswalks at this intersection, as Xerxes Ave is under Hennepin County jurisdiction and Xerxes Ave borders Minneapolis. C2. Request for a crosswalk at W 54th St over Xerxes Ave • Xerxes and W 54th St border Minneapolis • Xerxes is a two-lane Hennepin County Road which is classified as a collector street • Xerxes Ave is uncontrolled, W 54th St. is controlled by stop signs • W 54th St leads to a dead end, one block west of Xerxes • This intersection has a north and southbound bus stop (route 6) • Xerxes totaled 87 pedestrian crosses with a two-hour peak at 7:15 am with 33 crosses After review, staff has the same recommendation as item C1- to coordinate with the City of Minneapolis and Hennepin County. C3. Request for crosswalks at Sunnyside Rd and Curve Ave • A resident in the Morningside neighborhood requested a crosswalk over Sunnyside Rd and Curve Ave • The roads of Sunnyside and Curve were reconstructed in 2016 • Sunnyside is classified as a ‘Local Connector’ as Curve is classified as a ‘Local Street’ • Curve totaled 80 pedestrian crosses with a two-hour peak of 21 crosses at 5 PM • Sunnyside totaled 19 pedestrian crosses with a two-hour peak of seven crosses at 1:30 PM After review, staff recommends placing no crosswalk across Sunnyside Ave as it does not meet Edina’s warrants. Staff also wants to look into Edina’s current crosswalk warrants as placing a crosswalk at Curve Ave does meet warrants, but has a very low ADT, meaning a crosswalk in this location will be seen by few vehicles. STAFF REPORT Page 4 C4. Request to add pedestrian crossing signage at crosswalks over W 66th St near HWY 100 • Resident states the crosswalks are difficult to see and adding signage will improve awareness traveling up to and over the bridge over HWY 100 • MnDOT installed these crosswalks during the HWY 100 improvement project in 2016 • W 66th St is classified as a ‘Collector Road’ and a State-Aid Road • Sight lines exceed 350’ from each direction- acceptable distances After review, staff recommends requesting MnDOT to install signage to coordinate with the crosswalk marking they installed in 2016. Staff also wants to review Edina’s crosswalk requirements in regards to consistently include signage if other agencies install new crosswalks. C5. Request to add ‘No Bicycles Beyond This Point’ sign in Rosland Park pedestrian path • Residents using the pedestrian path at Rosland Park are requesting more signage to prevent bicyclists from using the pedestrian path • Residents fear bicyclists traveling at high speeds may hit a pedestrian • Two signs are placed along the path at Rosland Park from W. 66th St • W. 64th St has signage telling vehicles to share the road with bicyclists after crossing the pedestrian bridge over Crosstown Highway 62 After review, staff recommends coordinating with the Parks Department in regards to adding signage along Rosland Park trails. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Section D: Other Traffic Safety Items handled D1. A resident requested a speed trailer on West Shore Drive in an attempt to slow vehicles in the neighborhood. This request was forwarded to the Police Department. D2. Request stop sign at Code and Porter. This request was studied and analyzed in November of 2015 and the Traffic Safety Committee recommended not adding a stop sign. D3. A resident requested a ‘No Parking’ sign to be removed from 5228 Highwood Dr. W. Upon researching Edina’s database and inspecting this sign, the sign was removed due to being improperly placed by a resident on Highwood Dr W. D4. A resident requested a ‘No Parking’ sign to be placed at their residence on the 5800 Block of Abbott Ave. Neighbors guests are parking in front of the requestor’s property and believe the parked vehicles are leading to unsafe situations with the requestor’s child playing in the front yard. The requestor was informed there will be no limiting of parking in front of their property. The City recommended the resident to communicate with their neighbors to keep guests from parking in front of their home. D5. A resident requested a crosswalk to be placed on Eden Avenue connecting the Edina Library/ Senior Center and Jerry’s foods. The resident was informed a crosswalk with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons are scheduled to be placed in this location following construction at the old bus garage location. D6. A resident in the Chowen Park neighborhood was adding a fence to their corner lot and traffic safety inspected the fence for clear-view sight lines. After inspection, the proposed fence passed clear-view sight lines. D7. A Request was sent to traffic safety reporting a pothole on W 76th St, west of Xerxes Avenue. Traffic safety inspected this pothole and forwarded the request to public works. D8. A request was sent to traffic safety to place directional signs for Edina Morningside Community Church. Upon receiving request, traffic safety informed the Church, Edina does not permit the use of directional signs for churches. D9. A resident requested traffic calming on Golf Terrace stating vehicles are traveling ‘way too fast’. After collecting data on Golf Terrace, 85% speed was 29.6 MPH. The traffic calming request was denied as Golf Terrace was reconstructed in 2016. D10. A resident placed a request to add a sidewalk on Delaney Blvd. The resident stated it is difficult to see pedestrians walking on the ‘winding road’. This request has been denied as Delaney Blvd is not planned to install a sidewalk in the Edina Comprehensive Sidewalk Facilities Map. D11. A property manager off Lincoln Drive was requesting more signage to prevent large trucks from entering the cul-de-sac in regards to the HWY 169 road closure. Upon review, there is sufficient signage entering onto Lincoln Drive stating there is no outlet, which leads to a denial in the request to add signage. STAFF REPORT Page 6 Appendix: Crosswalk Warrants A. Marked crosswalks are placed at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations not readily apparent as having pedestrian movement. B. Marked crosswalks will only be placed in an area that has 20 or more pedestrian crossings in a two-hour period. C. Marking for crosswalks will be established by measuring the “Vehicle Gap Time”. This is the total number of gaps between vehicular traffic recorded during the average five-minute period in the peak hour. Criteria for markings are: 1) More than five gaps – pavement marking and signage only. 2) Less than five gaps – add actuated pedestrian signals. D. Crosswalks will not be placed on arterial roads or roads with a speed limit greater than 30 mph unless in conjunction with signalization. E. Other conditions that warrant crosswalks: 1) Routes to schools 2) Locations adjacent to libraries, community centers, and other high use public facilities. 3) Locations adjacent to public parks. 4) Locations where significant numbers of handicapped persons cross a street. 5) Locations where significant numbers of senior citizens cross a street. F. Crosswalks will only be placed at intersections. Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: I X.A. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: O ther F rom:Mark K Nolan, Transportation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:C omprehens ive P lan Update: Trans portation "To o l Kit" Info rmatio n C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : N one. I N TR O D U C TI O N : Attached is the T ransportation C ommission's "C ommission C omprehensive P lan Tool K it." W hile we will not be discussing this topic at the S eptember meeting, the C ommission will be working on this at their O ctober meeting. I am giving you these materials now to have some extra time to review. AT TAC HME N T S : Description 1. Work Objectives 2. Ins truction and Timeline 3. 2008 Transportation Chapter Summary 4. 2008 Chapter Res pons ibility Chart 5. Chapter Assess ment Tool 6. Goal and Policy Development Example 7. Vis ion Edina Report 8. Big Ideas Report 9. Met Council 2015 Sys tem Statement WORK OBJECTIVES Commissions are being asked to: 1. Review and analyze policies and goals outlined in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan to determine their current relevancy 2. Identify which existing 2008 policies and goals should be: a. eliminated or retained b. retained and modified c. completely re-written or d. created for inclusion in a current chapter and/or new chapter 3. Engage with other commissions a. identify overlapping topics/issues b. work together to determine relevancy of each other goals and policies c. assist with writing additional goals and policies 4. Make recommendations to policies, goals and/or the addition of content INSTRUCTIONS & TIMELINE October 2017 A 2008 Comprehensive Plan chapter(s) will be given to the Commission whose work is most closely related. For example, members of the Edina Transportation Commission will receive the Transportation Chapter from the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Objective 1 November 2017 Commissions will discuss their chapter(s), giving attention to goals and policies at the conclusion of each chapter to determine their current relevancy. It is anticipated that the discussions will include critical evaluations of the goals and policies using the following considerations and documents: Changes that have taken place since the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Examples of changes include: Economy, Environment, Demographics, Housing, etc. Vision Edina 2015 and Big Ideas Report (2017) Commissions should review chapters through the eight Vision Edina strategic focus area lenses. Additional Edina Guiding Documents Chamber of Commerce – Economic Development/Stakeholder Engagement Analysis (January 2017) Quality of Life Survey (August 2017) Living Streets Plan (2015) Affordable Housing Policy (2015) Parks, Recreation and Trails Strategic Plan (2015) Metropolitan Council System Statement for the City of Edina (2015) Objective 1 November 2017 Determine if the goals and policies outlined in 2008’s Comprehensive Plan should be: eliminated or retained retained and modified completely re-written or created for inclusion in a current chapter and/or new chapter Objective 2 Dec 2017/ Jan 2018 Engage with other to discuss overlapping issues and assist with writing appropriate goals and policies. Objective 3 Jan/Feb 2018 Complete work objectives Objective 1,2,3 March 2018 Make recommendations to policies, goals and/or the addition of content Commissions will present recommendations to the Planning Commission at March work sessions. Objective 4 TransportationTransportationTransportationTransportation ToolToolToolTool----KitKitKitKit Edina Comprehensive Plan Task Force September 2017 Transportation: Main Ideas This report was prepared with excerpts from the Transportation Chapter of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Living Street Policy Plan. • Maintain and enhance mobility for all residents and businesses through creation and maintenance of a balanced system of transportation alternatives that efficiently coordinates both local and through traffic. • Implement a fully multi-modal transportation system that supports the land use vision and future land use plan for managing and shaping future growth. • Reduce the overall dependence on and use of single-occupant vehicles by promoting land use patterns that allow for shorter vehicular trips and the use of alternative travel options, while minimizing negative impacts of transportation infrastructure on environmental and neighborhood quality of life. • Promote a travel demand management program through a coordinated program of regulations, marketing, and provision of alternative travel options. • Provide multiple travel options for transit users, pedestrians, bicyclists, and rideshare users, as well as for drivers of private automobiles. • Manage parking provision to encourage joint and shared use of facilities, ride- sharing (car pools and van pools), bicycle parking, and increased transit use. • Provide for efficient movement of goods within Edina, while minimizing the impacts of freight traffic on other trips and reducing negative impacts on land uses on freight corridors. Transportation: Current Conditions Current Conditions: Overview The City of Edina is a first-tier suburb within the I-494 beltway. Important regional roadways passing through or adjacent to the City are: I-494, Trunk Highway (TH) 169, TH 100, and TH 62 (Crosstown). Cities adjacent to Edina are: Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, Bloomington, and Richfield. Scheduled transit service for Edina is provided by Metro Transit (a division of the Metropolitan Council) and Southwest Transit Functional Classification The functional classification system is the creation of a roadway and street network that collects and distributes traffic from neighborhood streets to collector roadways to arterials and ultimately, the Metropolitan Highway System. Roads are placed into categories based on the degree to which they provide access to adjacent land versus provide higher-speed mobility for “through” traffic. Functional classification is a cornerstone of transportation planning. Within this approach, roads are located and designed to perform their designated function. The functional classification system used in the City of Edina, as described below, conforms to the Metropolitan Council standards. The Metropolitan Council has published these criteria in the Transportation Development Guide/Policy Plan. This guide separates roadways into five (5) street classifications, including principal arterials, minor arterials (A and B), collectors, and local streets. Under the following headings, information is provided for each of the respective functional classes, as well the roadways that fall under those classes in Edina. The descriptions of the characteristics of the functional classes provided below are based on Metropolitan Council information. It may be noted that these descriptions represent “ideal conditions” and that not all roadways within that functional class will fit the specific description due to unique local conditions, history of the roadway, or other factors. Principal Arterial Roadways. The metropolitan highway system is made up of the principal arterials in the region. Principal arterials include all Interstate freeways. Interstate freeways connect the region with other areas in the state and other states. They also connect the metro centers to regional business concentrations. The emphasis is on mobility as opposed to land access. They connect only with other Interstate freeways, other principal arterials, and select minor arterials and collectors. The principal arterials through or adjacent to Edina are: I-494, TH 100, TH 169, and TH 62 (Crosstown). Minor Arterials. The emphasis of minor arterials is on mobility as opposed to access in the urban area; only concentrations of commercial or industrial land uses should have direct access to them. The minor arterial should connect to principal arterials, other minor arterials, and collectors. Connection to some local streets is acceptable. The Metropolitan Council has identified “A” minor arterials as streets that are of regional importance because they relieve, expand, or complement the principal arterial system. The “A” minor arterials in the Edina area are summarized below. “A” Minor Arterial Roadways Roadway From To Type France Ave. (CSAH 17) Southern City Limit Northern City Limit Reliever Arterial Valley View Rd.* TH 62 W. 66th St. Reliever Arterial 66th St.* Valley View Rd. Eastern City Limit Reliever Arterial Vernon Ave/Gleason Road (CSAH 158) TH 62 TH 100 Reliever Arterial TH 169 E. Frontage Rd./78th St./Edina Ind. Blvd./77th St./76th St. Western City Limit Eastern City Limit Reliever Arterial W. 50th St. (CSAH 21) TH 100 France Ave. (CSAH 17) Augmenter Arterial All other minor arterials are considered “B” minor arterials, which have the same function as “A” minor arterials, but are not eligible for federal funds. The “B” minor arterial roadways in Edina are identified below. “B” Minor Arterial Roadways Roadway From To York/Xerxes Ave. (CSAH 31) TH 62 Southern City Limit (ultimately to American Drive, Bloomington) Valley View Rd./W. 69th St. W. 66th St. York Ave. (CSAH 31) Collector Streets. The collector system provides connection between neighborhoods and from neighborhoods to minor business concentrations. It also provides supplementary interconnections of major traffic generators within the metro centers and regional business concentrations. Mobility and land access are equally important. Direct land access should predominately be to development concentrations. In order to preserve the amenities of neighborhoods while still providing direct access to business areas, these streets are usually spaced at one-half mile intervals in developed areas. Collector roadways in the Edina are summarized below. Collector Streets Street From To Blake Rd./Interlachen Rd. North City Limit Vernon Ave. (CSAH 158) Blake Rd./Olinger Blvd. Interlachen Blvd. Tracy Ave. Londonderry Rd./Lincoln Dr./Vernon Ave. TH 169 Gleason Rd. Gleason Rd TH 62 W. 78th St. Valley View Road/Tracy Ave. TH 169 Vernon Ave.(CSAH 158) Cahill Rd. W. 78th St. W. 70th St. Normandale R./Valley View Rd.* Benton Ave. TH 62 (Crosstown) Normandale Rd./Grange Rd. Benton Ave. W. 50th St. Minnesota Dr. Parklawn Ave. Edinborough Way Edinborough Way W. 76th St. Xerxes Ave. (CSAH 31) Wooddale Ave. W. 50th St. Valley View Rd. 7th St. W./Lincoln Drive TH 169 Maloney Ave. Maloney Avenue Lincoln Drive Blake Road Brookside Ave. Interlachen Blvd. North City Limit 44th St. Brookside Ave. East City Limit Link Rd./Eden Avenue Vernon Ave. W. 50th St. W. 49 1/2th St./W. 51st St. France Ave. (CSAH 17) France Ave. (CSAH 17) W. 54th St. Wooddale Ave. East City Limit Southview Lane Normandale Rd. Concord Ave. Concord Ave. Southview Ln. Valley View Rd. W. 58th St. Concord Ave. France Ave. (CSAH 17) W. 60th St. France Ave. (CSAH 17) Xerxes Ave. (CSAH 31) Benton Ave. Tracy Ave. TH 100 Hansen Rd. Benton Ave. Vernon Ave. (CSAH 158) Hillary Lane/Dewey Hill Rd. Valley View Rd. Cahill Rd. Cahill Rd. W. 78th St. W. 70th St. McCauley Trail Gleason Rd. Valley View Rd. TH 100 West Frontage Rd/Arcadia Ave. Benton Ave. W. 50th St. Valley Lane/Ridgeview Valley View Rd (west of Valley View Rd.(east of Dr./66th St. TH 100) TH 100, south of TH 62) Antrim Rd. Valley View Rd. W. 70th St. W. 70th St. Antrim Rd. York Ave. (CSAH 31) Valley View Rd. W. 70th St. W. 69th Street Hazelton Rd. France Ave. (CSAH 17) York Ave. (CSAH 31) Parklawn Ave. France Ave. (CSAH 17) York Ave. (CSAH 31) York/Xerxes Ave. (CSAH 31)* North City Limit TH 62 Metro Boulevard Edina Industrial Boulevard W. 70th St. W. 62nd Street France Ave. (CSAH 17) Valley View Rd. W. 66th St.* York Ave. (CSAH 31) East City Limit Washington Ave. Valley View Rd. W. 78th St. Local Streets provide the most access and the least mobility within the overall functional classification system. They allow access to individual homes, shops, and similar traffic destinations. Through traffic should be discouraged by using appropriate geometric designs and traffic control devices. Jurisdictional Classification Roadways are classified on the basis of which level of government owns and has jurisdiction over the given facility. The three levels of government involved are the State of Minnesota (Mn/DOT), Hennepin County, and the City of Edina. Mn/DOT owns/maintains the Trunk Highway (TH) system, Hennepin County the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) and County Road (CR) system. The City owns/maintains the local streets, including Municipal State Aid (MSA) streets. Existing Paratransit Paratransit services are provided by Edina Dial-a-Ride Transportation. Door to door service is provided using a wheelchair lift-equipped van on a first come-first served basis. 2008 hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Scheduled Transit The key transit facility in Edina is the Southdale Transit Center, part of the Southdale Shopping Mall. It includes a covered shelter area with route/schedule information, with eight transit lines which stop and link at this location, and 100 parking spaces at its associated park and ride lot. Scheduled transit service for Edina residents provided by Metro Transit (a division of the Metropolitan Council) and Southwest Transit is summarized in the table below. Scheduled Transit Service in Edina (2008) Route Number Service Route/Area Service Description 6 Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), Uptown, downtown Minneapolis, University of Minnesota High frequency local service, all day/evening, all week; 5-15 minute headways 46 Edina (includes 50th/France), south Minneapolis, St Paul Local service all day/evening, all week; 30-60 minute headways 114 Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), south Minneapolis, Uptown, University of Minnesota Commuter/student service during a.m. and p.m. rush hours, weekdays 146 Edina (Vernon Ave.), southwest Minneapolis, downtown Minneapolis Commuter express (I- 35W) service during a.m. and p.m. rush hours, weekdays 152 Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), Lake Street, University of Minnesota Commuter/student express (I-35W) service during a.m. and p.m. rush hours, weekdays 515 Edina (Includes Southdale Transit Center), Richfield, South Minneapolis, Bloomington (includes Mall of America), Veterans Medical Center (alternate route) Local service, all day/evening, all week; 10-30 minute headways 538 (B-E Service) Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), Bloomington (includes Mall of America) Local service, all day/evening, all week; 30-60 minute headways 539 (B-E Service) Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), Bloomington (includes Normandale Community College, Mall of America) Local service, all day/evening, all week; 30-60 minute headways 540 Edina, Richfield (includes Best Buy Headquarters), Bloomington (includes Mall of America) Local service, all day/evening, all week; 15-30 minute headways during a.m./p.m. rush hours, otherwise 30-60 minute headways 568 Downtown Minneapolis, south Minneapolis, Edina, Minnetonka (Opportunity Partners) Weekdays only, one a.m. run from Minneapolis to Opportunity Partners; one p.m. run from Opportunity Partners to Minneapolis 578 Edina (includes Southdale Transit Center), downtown Minneapolis Commuter express service (TH 62 and I- 35W) during a.m. and p.m. rush hours 587 Edina, downtown Minneapolis Commuter express service (TH 100 and I- 394) during a.m. and p.m. rush hours, weekdays 631 (Southwest Metro Transit) Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Edina (Southdale Transit Center) Weekday service, morning through evening; approximately 10 runs per day each direction Note: all routes are Metro Transit with the exception of 631, which is Southwest Transit. Routes 538 and 539 comprise what is termed Bloomington-Edina (B-E) Area Transit Service, which is planned and financed by Metro Transit, but is contracted out to private operators. B-E service uses smaller van-type buses rather than full-sized 40-foot buses. Access Management Access management refers to balancing the need for access to local land uses with the need for mobility and safety on the roadway system. Arterials generally have limited access, collectors allow a greater degree of access given their combined mobility/access function, and local streets allow the most access of the roadway functional categories. Appropriate access control works to preserve the high mobility on arterial streets, along with high accessibility on local streets Relevant guidelines on curb cut placements include the following: • 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 Transportation: Trends and Challenges Roadway Network Planning Traffic Forecasting To evaluate and plan for future network improvements, traffic forecasts were made for the year 2030 consistent with Metropolitan Council guidelines. The foundation of the traffic forecasting model is the use of Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs), which have boundaries defined by the Metropolitan Council. Information regarding planned/anticipated future land use is established for individual TAZs, including population, household, and retail/non-retail employment information. The regional model uses the social and job data from each zone, combined with roadway information, regional travel tendencies identified from Travel Behavior Inventory surveys, and other factors, to generate and allocate trips throughout the study area. The TAZ inputs used to generate 2030 results were based on the land use information discussed in the Land Use and Community Design Chapter of this Comprehensive Plan. The resulting traffic volumes are shown below: Safety Analysis Five-year Mn/DOT crash data for the period 2002-2006 was obtained in Geographic Information System (GIS) format. It shows that the highest crash locations are at interchanges involving trunk highways, and he overall France Avenue corridor has a relatively high number of crashes, particularly at the TH 62 interchange, and at higher-volume cross streets. However, locations of particular interest are those that seem surprisingly high relative to traffic volumes, and therefore may have unique design or other problems which should be corrected. These locations include the following: • TH 100/TH 62 interchange – While the interchanges generally have high accident counts, this one has the most crashes of the interchanges by a significant margin. The majority of these crashes appear to be where the eastbound-to-northbound loop merges onto northbound TH 100. The City should coordinate with Mn/DOT to further investigate this location and potential deficiencies that may be corrected. • Northbound TH 100 at exit ramp to W. 50th Street/Eden Avenue • TH 62/Gleason interchange • France Avenue at W. 58th Street • France Avenue at W. 65th Street • France Avenue at Minnesota Drive • W. 70th Street at Metro Boulevard • Vernon Avenue at Interlachen Boulevard These locations should be monitored and further evaluated as deemed appropriate. Deficiencies, Problem Locations, and General Improvement Needs The City of Edina is considered fully developed and therefore it is not expected to see substantial traffic increases over the planning horizon in many locations. However, with the anticipated redevelopment of land use in some locations, combined with regional traffic trends and considerations, there will be some areas of significant traffic growth. Taking into account projected future traffic conditions, together with current issues, the following areas have been identified for recommended improvements and/or monitoring and further evaluation: Gateway Area Redevelopment • The City should require that transportation improvements be clearly identified and addressed. • The City will expect developers to plan, coordinate and finance their fair share of the required improvements proactively. • Any roadway reconfiguration associated with the Gateway redevelopment will need to be consistent with the long term vision of the East-West Connector roadway summarized below. France Avenue (I-494 to TH 62) – TH 62/France Avenue interchange and other issues • Not enough bridge width to provide storage for vehicles waiting in queues on France Avenue at the interchange. There is a single southbound right turn lane to accommodate both eastbound and westbound I-494 traffic. • Hennepin County has identified a roadway re-striping plan which would help address this problem. This plan separates the traffic turning onto the westbound I-494 ramp from the traffic turning onto the eastbound loop. The City will work with the County to ensure that this improvement takes place. • Could be improved by expanding current traffic management efforts to redirect traffic to York/Xerxes Avenue along with promoting access and street design to encourage its viability, though limited by lack of Interchange with I-494. • A more complete solution is to reconstruct the bridge at this location, costing approximately $15 million. Given that TH 62 is a state highway and France Avenue is a County roadway, it is the role of Mn/DOT and Hennepin County to secure the bulk of this funding for this long-needed project. • An East-west connector corridor north of I-494 could also offer a long-term solution. W. 70th Street • Experiences relatively high traffic levels for a roadway passing through a residential setting. • Traffic levels are currently high end for capacity of 2-lane roadway with turn lanes, residents in the vicinity have difficulties with traffic conditions. • Bounded by TH-100 and France Ave, which contribute to traffic levels. East-West Connector Corridor • This improvement area would tie into W. 78th Street west of TH 100 at its west end, and W. 76th Street at its east end. It would involve a new bridge crossing of TH 100, which would relieve traffic levels on the W.77th Street/Edina Industrial Boulevard Bridge over TH 100. • The City should continue to coordinate with neighboring communities, Hennepin County, and Mn/DOT to advance the planning and evaluation of the this corridor as a long-term possibility. • As redevelopment is proposed and implemented in the southern portion of Edina, consideration should be given to this potential corridor in terms of long term right-of-way issues and access design. • Major stakeholders would include Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, and Metro Transit. Other important interchange projects • I-494/TH 169 o High priority o Not within Edina, but related congestion impacts Edina residents and leads to “cut- through” traffic on Edina roadways. • TH 169/Bren Road/Londonderry Road o Driven by a planned major expansion of a large employer in Minnetonka. o The City of Edina supports the efforts to improve this interchange, but views the responsibility to fund improvements to lie with other government bodies and the expanding employer. • TH 62/CSAH 31 (Xerxes Avenue) Trunk Highway system congestion • Peak period congestion occurs on nearly all of the trunk highway segments passing through or adjacent to the City. This includes I-494, TH 169, TH 100, and TH 62 (Crosstown Highway). In addition to the mainline congestion, queuing from ramp meters provides a source of localized congestion. Through traffic on local streets • Various residential areas experience, or perceive that they experience, large amounts of through traffic. France Avenue/West 50th Street 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. It is a destination for local as well as many non-local visitors. West 77th Street/Edina Industrial Boulevard interchange with TH 100 • This interchange experiences congestion related to freeway access and local traffic. Roadway Functional Classification For “B” minor arterials and above, the Metropolitan Council determines functional classification for individual roadways. Local authorities may request changes with justifications, and the Metropolitan Council makes the final determination. The City of Edina will coordinate with Hennepin County and/or the Metropolitan Council regarding the appropriate functional classification for the following roadway segments: • Vernon Avenue/Gleason Road (CSAH 158) between TH 100 and TH 62 • York/Xerxes Avenue (CSAH 31) between TH 62 and American Boulevard (will also require coordination with the City of Bloomington) • Valley View Road/W. 69th Street between W. 66th Street and York Avenue (CSAH 31) Roadway Jurisdictional Issues It is generally good policy that Hennepin County and Mn/DOT assume responsibility for and jurisdiction over the arterial network, and cities 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 (Mn/DOT) jurisdiction that are being considered for turnback to Hennepin County or the City of Edina, but there are two identified by Hennepin County for possible turnback to the City of Edina. CSAH 31 (York/Xerxes Avenue) from 50th Street to south City limit and CSAH 158 (Vernon Avenue/Gleason Road) from TH 100 to TH 62 are identified in its Transportation System Plan. The City of Edina does not support either turnback option because they serve an inter-community function, and carry significant traffic not originating or terminating in Edina. In the event the City is ultimately required to accept one or both of the transfers identified above, it should ensure that the roads are brought up to the appropriate design and maintenance standards beforehand. Transportation Demand Management The primary emphasis of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is to reduce the number of vehicular trips on congested roadways during peak travel times. Since the many or most of these trips are commuter (work) trips, TDM strategies primarily involve places of employment and associated travel behavior. These strategies are identified below: • transit • car/van-pooling • telecommuting • flex-time • non-motorized commuting In general, the policies or incentives to promote TDM activities are provided through employers. Cities can increase TDM activities through promotional activities and by coordinating with key employers to identify and implement TDM plans. The City of Edina is an active member of the 494 Corridor Commission, which is a Transportation Management Organization (TMO) striving to limit single occupancy vehicle trips on I- 494. The City of Edina currently requires developers proposing projects with the potential for significant traffic impacts to submit TDM plans as part of the plan review and approval process. The thresholds which are currently in place requiring these plans to be generated are projects that would: • generate 1,000 or more vehicle trips per day, or • generate 100 or more trips during any one-hour period, or • increase the traffic levels on an adjacent roadway by 50 percent or more It is recommended that the City evaluate the possibility of making TDM requirements more rigorous for developers, perhaps using the Minneapolis program as a guide. Community/Aesthetic Design for Transportation Facilities Roadways are an important component in community design because they represent a significant percentage of the overall land area of any community, they represent public space over which the City has jurisdiction (the municipal right-of-way area), and are very visible to many travelers, local and non-local. The Land use and Community Design Chapter established a hierarchy of thoroughfares from a character/aesthetic perspective, which is distinct from the functional classification system discussed in this chapter. The functional classification network is used to determine design parameters for transportation, while the community design hierarchy of thoroughfares involves aesthetic or contextual design elements which can impact transportation such as pedestrian and biking activity. As stated in the Land use and Community Design Chapter, the recommended hierarchy of thoroughfares includes the following: • Primary Thoroughfares – Centrally located streets that service multiple land uses. Only France Avenue south of TH 62 is in this category. • Residential Thoroughfares – Important, linking roadways that run through largely residential neighborhoods, including Vernon Avenue, Interlachen Boulevard, and North France Avenue. • Business District Thoroughfares – Serve commercial and office centers. Examples include York Avenue, W. 66th Street, W. 77th Street, and Metro Boulevard. Transportation: Transit Services Scheduled Service The City of Edina, as an inner ring suburb, is situated to the regional transit network, including regular commuter service to downtown Minneapolis. The Southdale Transit Center is one of the busiest transit facilities in the region. However, transit service in western portions of the City is quite limited. Additionally, the need has been identified to evaluate additional park and ride capacity to improve the usability of commuter service for Edina residents. The population of Edina is aging to a greater degree than many communities in the region, and along with other factors including increasing gasoline costs will likely increase the demand for transit services in the coming years. The City should to assess on-going demand for enhanced scheduled transit service, working with Metro Transit and Southwest Transit to advance such service as demand is identified. Facilities Metro Transit’s Central-South (Sector 5) Plan (revised 2004) identifies that a park and ride facility (300- 500 car facility) is envisioned at TH 100 and Vernon Avenue. A park-and-ride facility in this location would be of significant benefit for City residents desiring express service to downtown Minneapolis. This is particularly true given that there currently is only limited transit service in the western portion of the City. An assessment of local traffic and other impacts will be required prior to implementing a park and ride facility at this or any other location within the City. Circulator Shuttle Service As discussed above, there is very limited Metro Transit Service in the western portions of Edina. The City has had discussions with Metro Transit regarding additional circulator service to the western areas, involving smaller vehicles which would seat between 12 and 18 riders. Metro Transit has determined that there is not enough demand in this area for it to viably provide such service, given its funding limitations. The City has preliminarily evaluated the option of providing its own circulator service, summarized below: • Baseline capital costs(three vans): approximately $150,000 • Annual operating costs would be over $250,000. Any more extensive operational scenario would result in substantially higher costs. To move this issue forward, a more detailed study will be required to address the following issues: • Clarify the City’s understanding of potential ridership; who will use the service and at what times? • Preferred service type and frequency • If fixed route, identify the optimal routes and stops • If a hybrid fixed route/flex service, identify optimal operating parameters • Hours of operations • Fare structure Greater Southdale Area Shuttle Service Studies conducted for the City of Edina have performed preliminary assessments of potential shuttle transit service in the greater Southdale area. Most recently, the Edina Promenade Urban Design Plan (URS Corporation) identified a concept involving small bus or tram service shuttling passengers from the Southdale hospital complex to the north to Edinborough on the south end. It is recommended that the City perform further study to assess the viability and implementation requirements associated with proposed shuttle service for the Greater Southdale area, addressing: • Clear definitions of what function the service is supposed to provide and who its patrons would be • Review of similar systems elsewhere • Assessment of vehicle types • Service delivery (City operation vs. contractor) • Preferred route alignment (efficient running time vs. comprehensive “front door” service) • Infrastructure improvement requirements • Traffic control requirements • Overall cost considerations • Business coordination issues • Recommendations for pilot project Light Rail Transit During the public involvement portion of the Comprehensive Plan preparation process, residents expressed a desire for Light Rail Transit (LRT) service and asked about the possibility of such service in Edina. Planning and implementation of LRT systems are primarily the responsibility of the Metropolitan Council and the metro-area counties. The Metropolitan Council has identified a series of transitway corridors for planning purposes. The transitway corridor which has the most relevance for Edina is the Southwest Corridor, Connecting downtown Minneapolis to Eden Prairie, passing just north of the northwest corner of Edina. Two park and ride transit stations are currently identified for the overall line; one at Blake Road just north of Excelsior Boulevard, and the other at Excelsior Boulevard just west of TH 169. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is another form of express transit service which often is less expensive than LRT. However, the costs are significant because of the need for a dedicated transitway (or, at minimum, substantial transit advantages), and the nature of the service is that these routes are regional in scale. No regional BRT routes in the vicinity of Edina are currently under consideration. The Dan Patch corridor has been identified as a possible commuter rail corridor by the Metropolitan Council. Development of this corridor for commuter rail is beyond the time horizon of this plan (2030). Transportation: Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Pedestrian Facilities The goal of this section is to build upon the current City practices to create a framework for planning and implementation of future sidewalks. An effective municipal sidewalk system provides network continuity such that there is broad geographic coverage for a range of users and uses, without notable gaps. A thorough review of the existing sidewalk and path network has been completed by City Staff, using the following categories, in descending order of priority: • Public school walking zones • Park and activity center walking zones • Retail business walking zones • Public transit facilities • Roads where high vehicle traffic volumes create an impediment to pedestrian movements • Roads defined as Collectors and above • Roads with State-Aid designation • Sidewalks internal to larger sites Citizen- and/or business-petitioned locations will also receive important consideration as they are brought forward for City review. A walking zone of 0.7 miles was used for public and private elementary schools, retail business centers and parks. A one-mile walking zone was used for middle and senior high schools (both public and private). These zones are consistent with the Edina School District guidelines. Sidewalks within the City are divided into the following four categories: 1. State-Aid sidewalks are located adjacent to Municipal State-Aid Streets (MSAS) and are funded from MSAS funds. 2. School Zone sidewalks are identified by the City and Edina School District and are located within the identified school walking zones. 3. Destination Zone sidewalks are typically located along roadways that link existing systems and carry over 750 vehicles per day. Examples of destination nodes are business districts, parks and other community activity areas. 4. Local / Low Volume Street Zone sidewalks are any sidewalks that do not meet any of the above definitions, but have importance from access and system continuity perspectives. A boulevard style sidewalk is recommended for new construction wherever feasible to maximize safety conditions for pedestrians minimize impacts to large trees, avoid steep grades, and generally accommodate other site constraints. Sidewalks are typically five feet wide; however, a four foot width is acceptable for boulevard style sidewalks when not maintained by the City of Edina. Boulevard widths should be approximately five feet wide to allow proper growth of sod. Financing of the proposed sidewalks are separated into four categories: 1. State-Aid Costs cover any proposed sidewalk located adjacent to a State- Aid designated roadway and are paid 100 percent by State-Aid funds. 2. Public School Zone Costs will be split using 25 percent City funds, 25 percent School funds, and 50 percent Special Property Assessments. 3. Destination Zone Costs will be split between 25 percent City funds and 75 percent Special Property Assessments. 4. Local / Low Volume Street Zone Costs will be financed 100 percent through Special Property Assessments. Bike Facilities In 2006, the City Council appointed the Bike Edina Task Force (BETF), made up of citizens interested in bicycle issues and planning. The BETF has overseen the preparation of the City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. This document provides a detailed identification of current conditions and problem areas regarding bicycle facilities within the City. It also provides a vision regarding system-wide improvements to the City’s bicycling facilities. It is the goal of the City to improve conditions for bicycling by reducing hazards and by developing and improving Edina’s bicycle transportation infrastructure so as to invite Edina residents, workers, and visitors to include bicycling as part of their daily mobility activities. The guiding principles for improving bicycle facilities in Edina are as follows: • Improve safety conditions for cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists • Provide safe routes for all ages and ability levels • Improve connections to local and regional destinations • Provide a useful and realistic transportation method within the City • Promote bicycling to improve community health Transportation: Movement of Goods and Aviation No major trucking operations exist within the City. Edina has one rail line, a branch of the Canadian Pacific, which has low utilization. Most goods movement in Edina is associated with the Cahill light industrial/warehouse area which is generally bounded by Cahill Road to the west, West 70th Street to the north, TH 100 to the east, and Edina Industrial Boulevard to the south. Trucks in this area have adequate access to Trunk Highways without passing through residential neighborhoods. No major improvements to accommodate goods movement are anticipated to be required over the planning horizon. Aviation There currently are no airports within the City of Edina. The closest airport is the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Edina is not in the influence area of MSP as determined by Metropolitan Council Guidance. Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) height regulations apply to altering or building new structures. There is currently one heliport in the City of Edina, at the Fairview Southdale Hospital. Heliports are regulated through City ordinance. Transportation: Goals, Policies, and Implementation from the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Plan Adoption By adopting the overall Comprehensive Plan Update including the Transportation Chapter, the City Council will establish the guidelines by which decisions regarding transportation facilities and programs will be made in Edina. The City should periodically review the assumptions under which the plan was developed, including estimates of future development, changing financial resources, citizen and governmental input, and other factors which may arise, and update the plan as appropriate. Background The goals and policies provided in this section are based on the policies from the 1999 Edina Transportation Plan, the 2005 Edina Transportation Commission Policy, and current discussions and deliberations by the City. A. Overarching Transportation Goals 1. Maintain and enhance mobility for residents and businesses through creation and maintenance of a balanced system of transportation alternatives. 2. Implement a fully multi-modal transportation system that supports the land use vision and future land use plan for managing and shaping future growth. 3. Minimize the impacts of the transportation system on Edina’s environment and neighborhood quality of life. 4. Reduce the overall dependence on and use of single-occupant vehicles by promoting land use patterns that allow for shorter vehicular trips and the use of alternative travel options. 5. Ensure that all Edina’s residents, workers, and visitors, including those with transportation disadvantages, have viable travel options. 6. Promote a travel demand management program through a coordinated program of regulations, marketing, and provision of alternative travel options. 7. Provide multiple travel options for transit users, pedestrians, bicyclists, and rideshare users, as well as for drivers of private automobiles. 8. Support attractive and high performance transit service and connections. 9. Manage parking provision to encourage joint and shared use of facilities, ride-sharing (car pools and van pools), bicycle parking, and increased transit use. 10. Provide for efficient movement of goods within Edina, while minimizing the impacts of freight traffic on other trips and reducing negative impacts on land uses on freight corridors. Roadway Design Goals 1. Design roadway facilities constructed in conjunction with redevelopment projects 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. Monitor and address transportation requirements associated with demographic trends, such as an aging population. Policies 1. Design/enhance residential street systems to discourage through traffic and to be compatible with lower speed bicycling and walking. This includes consideration of traffic calming measures on local streets and, in some cases, collector streets. 2. Design/enhance collector and arterial roadways to minimize through traffic on local streets in the functional classification system, and to be compatible with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle and pedestrian. 3. 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. 4. Consider the 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. 5. Encourage beautification of local roadways, where appropriate, with amenities such as boulevard trees, decorative street lighting, and monuments. Roadway Function and Access Goals 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. 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 only. 6. 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. 7. Evaluate and implement measures required for school safety. Policies 1. Encourage, through roadway design and signage, intra-area trips on minor arterials rather than the principal arterial system, and promote serving regional trips on the metropolitan highway system. 2. Separate, to the extent possible, conflicting uses on the roadway system in order to minimize safety problems. Give special attention to pedestrian and bicycle routes. 3. Provide access to redeveloping sites using current functional classification and standards rather than the existing access at the sites. 4. 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. 5. Review and recommend traffic calming policies and consider traffic calming implementation where requested by residents. 6. When requested by the Edina Transportation Commission and/or the Planning Commission, review land use that may impact traffic implementations. Continue to monitor adjacent community redevelopment and other activity that potentially impacts the City of Edina. Roadway Maintenance and Operation Goals 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 I-494 frontage road 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. Continue current on-going pavement improvement plan. 4. Use economic and environmentally sound management techniques for snow and ice removal. 5. Track developments regarding the most current transportation systems and technologies, evaluate and implement as warranted. Policies 1. Replace substandard bridges and bridges that present safety or traffic problems. 2. Support state legislation to decrease statutory urban speed limits from 30 to 25 miles per hour. 3. Complete speed zone studies and establish speed zones for Safe Routes to School. Roadway Network Implementation Goals • TH 62/France Avenue Bridge reconstruction – continue to promote the advancement of this project, working with Mn/DOT, Hennepin County, and local organizations including adjacent landowners. Partner with these organizations in efforts to secure future funding for the necessary improvements. • France Avenue – work with Hennepin County to ensure the overall operation and safety of this roadway, particularly at its interchanges with TH 62 and I-494. • W. 70th Street – consider study recommendations, balancing local concerns with transportation network factors. • Gateway redevelopment project area – continue to work with the local developer to define roadway needs and ensure that the developer (s) participates appropriately in the funding of improvements. • East-west connector roadway – continue to coordinate with adjacent communities, Mn/DOT, and Hennepin County to discuss and advance this concept as appropriate. • Functional classification – work with the Metropolitan Council and other agencies as needed regarding the appropriate functional classification of the following roadway segments: o Vernon Avenue/Gleason Road (CSAH 158) between TH 100 and TH 62 o Xerxes/York Avenue between TH 62 and American Boulevard (Bloomington) o Valley View Road/W. 69th Street between W. 66th Street and York Avenue (CSAH 31) • Jurisdictional Classification – Hennepin County has identified two roadway segments as potential candidates to turn back to the City. The City opposes these reclassifications. The City should coordinate as needed with Hennepin County to demonstrate that turning back jurisdictional authority to the City is not appropriate for the following locations: o Vernon Avenue/Gleason Road (CSAH 158) between TH 62 and TH 100 o York/Xerxes Avenue (CSAH 31) between I-494 and 50th Street (CSAH 21) Transit/Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Goals 1. Participate in the I-494 Corridor Commission to encourage all forms of travel demand management in order to reduce single occupancy vehicle travel, overall vehicle miles of travel, reduce petroleum consumption, and improve air quality. 2. Review and recommend policies necessitating a Transportation Demand Management Plan and/or a mass transit component with all types of development. Review and implement substantive requirements associated with these TDM Plans, potentially including TDM escrow accounts, transit passes, preferential parking for car-poolers, and other measures. 3. Find a location for an additional Park and Ride facility to be established in close proximity to major mass transit routes including TH 100 and Vernon Ave./W. 50th Street. Review the potential need to expand capacity at the existing Southdale Park and ride facility. 4. Review all major new developments in light of the potential for ridesharing including bus accessibility, preferential parking for carpools/vanpools, and mixed-use development. 5. Support High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) bypasses and other preferential treatments for transit and high occupancy vehicles on streets and highways. 6. Include transit planning in the construction or upgrading of streets and highways. 7. Pursue development of a circulator system within the City. 8. Review and potentially implement the option of increasing TDM requirements for developers. Parking Goals 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. Policies 1. 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. 2. Address specific parking requirements in small area plans for given study areas. Pedestrians/Bicycles Goals 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. 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. 4. Provide appropriate signage in areas of potential conflict between pedestrians and automobile traffic. 5. Review special assessment methodology for funding the construction of sidewalks and trails. Policies 1. Review and recommend construction of pedestrian and bike paths throughout Edina cooperatively with the Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. 2. Support inclusion of pedestrian and bicycle access planning when upgrading roadways, bridges and redevelopment projects. 3. Provide sidewalks and safe crossings for areas of potential pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, including high-traffic streets, commercial areas, areas with transit access, and in high-density residential locations. 4. Separate pedestrian traffic from bicycle traffic to ensure desired safety conditions. When a bicycle facility is provided, consideration should also be given to providing a corresponding pedestrian way where possible. This could be as a separate facility or through striping. 5. Support recommendations of the Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan for implementation. Goods Movement Goals 1. Serve major truck users and intermodal facilities with good minor arterial access to the metropolitan highway system. Funding and Jurisdiction Goals 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. Encourage the legislature to continue a dedicated source for funding for efficient mass transit. 5. Encourage the legislature to provide stable, long-term roadway funding for capital, operating/traffic management, and maintenance. 6. Develop and support legislation permitting a transportation utility. Policies Funding for transportation improvements and programs can be obtained from a variety of sources, as listed below: • Property Taxes • State Aid • Federal Transportation Funds • Cooperative Agreements with Mn/DOT and/or Hennepin County • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) • Developer Contributions/Impact Fees • Assessments • Capital Improvement Program Two potential sources of transportation funding have been proposed and discussed for a number of years, but are not currently allowed under state law. They are: • Road Access Charge – All new developments would be charged based on the trip generation rates of the given development, without an estimation or documentation of specific traffic impacts or improvement requirements. It would be analogous to the Sewer Access Charge (SAC) for access to the Metropolitan Council’s sanitary sewer system. Revenues from this source could be used to build or improve collector and arterial roadways within the local jurisdiction collecting the tax. • Transportation Utility Billing – All properties within the local jurisdiction would be subject to a periodic fee, based on the number of vehicle trips generated by the type of property. The pool of funding generated in this manner would be used for community-wide transportation improvements such as preventive maintenance and road reconstruction. The periodic nature of the billing would be beneficial in terms of supporting on-going or routine roadway maintenance projects through the entire network. The City should continue to support and promote the passage of legislation at the state level which would allow these forms of dedicated local transportation revenue generation. From Edina’s Living Streets Plan 2015 The Living Streets plan has significant overlap in defining the goals of Edina’s Planning Department with the 2008 Comprehensive plan. There is a strong focus on environmentally and socially sustainable, livable, engaged communities. Highlighted here are the concrete updates or deviations from the 2008 comprehensive plan. The Living Streets Plan is founded on a set of core ideas and principles, which shape goals and policies. All Users and All Modes • Principle 1: Living Streets are high-quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and the disabled; and • Principle 2: Living Streets provide access and mobility for all transportation modes while enhancing safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity • Principle 3: The City designs, operates and maintains a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel; • Principle 4: The City seeks opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation by preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way and adding new rights-of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit; • Principle 5: The City prioritizes improvements to non-motorized connections to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas; • Principle 6: The City will require new developments to provide interconnected street and sidewalk networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development; and • Principle 7: Projects will include consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, in order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. Context Sensitivity • Principle 8: Living Streets are developed with input from stakeholders and designed to consider neighborhood character and promote a strong sense of place; • Principle 9: Living Streets preserve and protect natural features such as waterways, urban forest, sensitive slopes and soils; • Principle 10: Living Streets are designed and built with coordination between business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts; • Principle 11: Living Streets coordinate with regional transit networks and regional authorities; and • Principle 12: The City will consider the fiscal context of projects and potential financial impacts when implementing Living Streets at the project level. Sustainability • Principle 13: Living Streets will improve the current and future quality of life of the public, • Principle 14: Living Streets will reduce environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of roadways; and • Principle 15: The City will increase the life span and resilience of its infrastructure and will build infrastructure with consideration for lifecycle costs and ease of maintenance. • Design Guidelines Goals: • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared-use pathways on all arterial, collector and local connector streets. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid-block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. • Every street and neighborhood is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling. • Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely. • Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably. • An active way of life is available to all. • There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. • Reduce untreated street water flows into local waterways and reduce storm water volume. • The use of infrastructure that retains, settles, filters, infiltrates, diverts or reduces the volume of stormwater that flows to local surface waters. • Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. Policies: The City will draw on the following data to measure performance: • Number of crashes or transportation-related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post-project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy is implemented. Functional Roadway Classification A new street classification called the “Local Connector,” accommodating local through traffic, is introduced as part of the Living Streets Plan. In terms of current functional classification, this Living Streets Plan applies to the Local Streets, Collectors and Minor Arterials as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. When the next required update to the Comprehensive Plan occurs, it is recommended that the Local Connector be added to the City’s functional classifications, including the definition that differentiates it from the Local Street classification. The following Living Streets standards and typical street cross-sections apply to Local Connectors. • Average daily traffic (ADT) of at least 1,000 vehicles. • Serves as a connection between neighborhoods, destinations and higher-level roadways. • Street Width: 24 feet to 30 feet, depending on context and facilities included (see above). • Travel Lanes: Two, typically without pavement markings. • Parking: Provided along one side of the street, or along both sides if deemed necessary. • Bicycle Facilities: Required if on an approved primary bike route, recommended if on an approved secondary bike route. • Sidewalks: Required on one side of the street at minimum, on both sides as determined by context. Local Connectors provide continuous walking and bicycling routes, and some may accommodate transit routes as well. While they are essential to the flow of people between neighborhoods and destinations, the needs of people passing through must be balanced with the needs of those who live and work along Local Connectors. Roadway width depends on context and facilities. Bicycle Facilities Goals 1. Expansion of existing networks and providing connections to key traffic generators or destinations provide immediate benefit to all network users and is a top priority. 2. Network connections serving vulnerable users such as children, seniors and the disabled are a top priority. 3. Network connections serving high-volume uses such as schools, retail destinations or regional public transit are a top priority. Policies 1. Bicycle facilities will be classified as the following: • “Share the Road” • Bike Boulevard • Shared Lane Markings/ Sharrows • Advisory Bike Lanes • Paved Shoulders • Bike Lanes • Buffered Bike Lanes • Protected Bike Lanes • Shared Use Path 2. The following strategies will be employed to improve bicyclist safety: • Bicycle Signal Detection • Green painted Bike Lanes at Conflict Points Community Engagement Goals During the development of project recommendations, the City of Edina will: • Clearly define the scope of the project and the engagement process that will take place; • Communicate the latitude afforded to the stakeholder to influence the project recommendations; • Proactively share data that support preliminary recommendations; • Invite the public to the process as early as possible and conduct open and public forum(s) that welcomes conversation and builds trust; • Encourage a wide diversity of stakeholder communication over multiple channels of communication/media; • Set a civil tone and encourage communication among neighbors to build the capacity of neighborhoods to work together to define and solve problems; and • Keep records of public input and summarize issues and consideration in project recommendations. Policies: The City of Edina has established a program for communication and outreach as part of its annual street reconstruction process. Engagement about Living Streets will become a part of this program. The following is a typical timeline for resident engagement for roadway reconstruction projects. • August: Informational Letter to residents (for preceding two years construction) • Mid-September: Open House (for preceding two years construction) • May/June: Resident Feedback Requested by Questionnaire • July/August: Neighborhood Informational Meeting • December: Feasibility Report/Public Hearing • January – March: Plan Preparation/Bidding • April/May: Start of Construction • October/November: Completion of Construction • Following Spring: Warranty Work • Following Summer/Fall: Final Assessment Hearing 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTERS A Commission will be provided a chapter(s) as the lead reviewer. This does not mean Commission’s cannot provide input on other chapters AND there may be cases when a Commission creates content that might be better served by its own chapter. The 2008 chapters includes: Land use Transportation Housing Water Resources Parks Health Heritage Preservation Sustainability Community Facilities and Services Chapter Responsibility Chart: We will look to Commissions for input on chapters most closely related to the goals and missions of the Commission. The chart designates the chapter or chapters your commission will be asked to focus on. Chapter Title Commission(s) Community Profile Human Rights and Relations Commission Community Health Commission Landuse & Community Design Planning Commission Housing Human Rights and Relations Commission Heritage Preservation Heritage Preservation Commission Transportation Transportation Commission Water Resources Management Energy and Environment Commission Parks, Open Space and Natural Resources Parks and Recreation Commission Arts and Culture Commission Energy, Environment, and Resilience* Energy and Environment Commission Community Services and Facilities Parks and Recreation Commission Community Health Commission Human Rights and Relations Commission Arts and Culture Co m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n : C h a p t e r A s s e s s m e n t T o o l Ch a p t e r T i t l e : x x x x Co m m i s s i o n N a m e : x x x x x Cu r r e n t G o a l s El i m i n a t e f r o m 2 0 1 8 p l a n St i l l R e l e v a n t , In c l u d e i n 2 0 1 8 p l a n Still Relevant, but should be updated 1 2 3 4 5 Ne w G o a l s 1 2 3 4 Cu r r e n t P o l i c i e s 1 2 3 Ne w P o l i c i e s 1 2 3 GOAL AND POLICY DEVELOPMENT EXAMPLE The example goal and policy included in this tool kit was taken from the Parks, Open Space and Natural Resources Chapter of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Each chapter in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan concludes with goals and policies that: discuss aspirations, a vision, and steps the city will take establish parameters and define overall approaches and directions the city will follow The chapter on Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources provides a particularly useful example for Commissions on how these might be written for inclusion in the 2018 comprehensive plan update. Setting the stage for a successful physical plan are policies that are outlined in the plan. As a policy plan, the plan document will reflect community goals and aspirations in terms of community development. (These have largely been defined in Vision Edina and through the Big Ideas Workshop.) High-level policies are the backbone of the plan because they will provide overall direction, set parameters and limits, and guide the development of the physical plan. Provided below (for your consideration as you review, analyze, and document goals and policies) are excerpts from the 2008 Comprehensive Plan’s Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources Chapter. EXAMPLE BELOW: Natural Resources Conservation and Management Background Over the past decade, residents of the Twin Cities metropolitan area and nation-wide have shown an increased interest in the preservation and restoration of open space and unique natural areas. Consistent with national trends, Edina residents have voiced a strong interest in the protection and restoration of Edina’s natural resources. The community wants to examine ways to better restore native landscaping and maintain native vegetative buffers along the riparian corridors of Minnehaha Creek and Nine-Mile Creek, and the small lakes in Edina, to maintain and improve water quality, and to provide more and higher quality habitat for birds and wildlife. The Community Needs Assessment Survey shows that 66 percent of Edina residents have a need/desire for natural areas and wildlife habitats compared to 48 percent which is the national benchmark response for that need/desire. Edina residents feel strongly about natural resources, natural areas and their protection and (where appropriate) restoration. The need/desire for natural areas and wildlife habitat was second only to the highest need/desire, which was walking and biking trails at 86 percent. Third place was the need for golf courses (49 percent) and fourth was playground equipment at 45 percent. The City owns over 1,565 acres of park land and open space areas and the City is essentially 100 percent developed. Therefore, in establishing goals for Edina’s natural resources the primary focus is on establishing restoration and preservation management practices. Open space areas owned by the City are intended to remain protected and preserved from any future development. Therefore, the focus will be to determine what level of management and restoration is desired for Edina’s natural resources. Policies 1. The City’s Parks Department will conduct resource inventories and assessments to identify Edina’s prairies, woods and wetlands and produce a landscape comprehensive resource map. The inventories and assessments will identify rare plant and animal species, and exotic non-native plant species. The assessment can also include other important information such as soil types, existing infrastructures, and areas of significant historical and cultural values. 2. The City will establish a Natural Resources Conservation and Management Plan that outlines policies to address exotic or invasive plants and further protect native habitats for the health and safety of the public. 3. The City will develop a landscaping master plan, which will be updated on an annual basis, to identify additional landscape plantings are desired for each park. 4. The City will continue to coordinate with the Minnesota DNR and continue to carry out all Minnesota state mandates for shade tree disease control and noxious weed control. 5. The City will develop and implement a program for maintaining trees throughout the City, and replacing them as necessary. , 6. The City, through its Parks Commission and Energy and Environment Commission, initiate programs to embrace and utilize volunteer service that provides valuable resident input and advice on natural resource conservation and management plans. 7. The City will not sell any park and/or open space property currently owned by the City. An exception to this policy might include a property exchange for land of equal or greater value that is determined to be in the best interest of the community. Goals 1. Establish a scientifically-based Natural Resources Conservation and Management Plan to identify, restore and/or protect natural resources and native wildlife habitat. The primary reason to restore and/or protect natural resources is to sustain their ecological integrity and functions and protect the health and safety of the public. Natural resource areas shall include prairies, woods and wetlands. The Water Resources Management Plan is addressed under the Water Resources section of this Comprehensive Plan. 2. Ensure that Edina’s development regulations include provisions for protection of the shorelands of those sections of Minnehaha Creek and Nine-Mile Creek within Edina, and for the shorelands of the lakes within Edina. 3. Identify a master landscape plantings plan for all Edina parks, which is the final phase of park development that has yet to be completed. 4. Conserve, and replace as necessary, Edina’s urban forest to ensure the long- term vitality and viability of this integral part of Edina’s overall identity and attractiveness. VISION EDINA CITY OF EDINA STRATEGIC VISION and FRAMEWORK This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad-based community engagement and visioning process, conducted between September and December 2014 May 2015 CITY OF EDINA STRATEGIC VISION AND FRAMEWORK VISION EDINA This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad-based community engagement and visioning process, conducted between September and December 2014. May 2015 Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 3 VISION EDINA Vision Edina represents a fresh look at the future for the City of Edina. This work builds on the previous Edina Vision 20/20 planning work that was undertaken 15 years ago. Since that time, the world has changed. We are subject to stronger external trends and forces, and we face renewed pressures with increasing population and developmental pressure. The future we face is one filled with greater uncertainty, more rapid pace of change and emerging new opportunities. Vision Edina allows us to step back and look again at the big picture, and decide how we continue to evolve to remain a relevant, competitive and progressive city. Vision Edina is a long-term strategic framework that helps our community understand and guide the important decision-making that will impact Edina’s future. This framework lays out the key issues identified by our community, which we need to be focusing our attention and resources on, over the coming years. The Vision Edina work and publications have been developed through a broad-based and inclusive community visioning process conducted in 2014. It is proposed that the current City of Edina mission statement remain largely unchanged. This is a potent and relevant mission statement that has, and continues to, serve the City well. “Our mission is to provide effective and valued public services, maintain a sound public infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all in a manner that sustains and improves the health and uncommonly high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses.” INSERT SECTION TITLE HEREBALANCING EDINA’S REDEVELOPMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 20154 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE EDINA’S VISION STATEMENT Edina holds a well-earned reputation as a city of choice. It is the model of a successful, mature, and progressive urban community, that strives to lead in a modern and evolving world. We maintain our heritage and attractiveness, and afford our residents the highest quality of life, while actively embracing the future. The features that define our future community include: Inclusive and Connected • Our community embraces diversity and cherishes the contributions of all residents and stakeholders. • Our community offers an enticing mix of residential development that retains and builds upon our strong foundation of single-family housing, but also includes a dimension of higher density multi- family options, especially for the young and the old. • We strive to promote a healthy demographic mix that builds on the tradition of multi-generational families, and also provides entry opportunities for new people seeking to raise families, start businesses, and join our quality community. • Our residents enjoy a wide range of transportation options that foster mobility and interconnectedness. • Our cohesive neighborhoods are able to retain their unique individual character, while being linked seamlessly together into the broader fabric of our city. • Our residents benefit from close access to parks and other gathering spaces where they can regenerate, connect with community members and enjoy nature. Built-to-Scale Development • Our community has worked hard to create an innovative and long-term comprehensive development policy that strikes the right balance between renewal and progress, and protection and preservation. • Our development policy promotes partnerships between developers and community members and encourages innovative ideas. • Our community’s commercial and retail base has been significantly enhanced through the creation of more mixed-use locations, carefully woven throughout our neighborhoods. • We have proactively developed planning procedures and policies that allow the character of our neighborhoods to be preserved and enhanced. Local development reflects the aspirations of both neighborhood residents and the community as a whole. EDINA’S VISION STATEMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 5 Sustainable Environment • Edina has focused and invested in world-class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental sustainability. • We have substantially reduced our overall environmental impact and significantly increased our resource use efficiency. • Our planning has integrated the best-proven standards of sustainable building and environmental stewardship into all aspects of our city planning and building codes. • Our community continues to treasure and protect our public spaces and parks. We have enhanced our biodiversity and natural ecosystems, which in turn support and purify our natural environment. A Community of Learning • Edina has continued to evolve as a highly engaged community, where residents share the responsibility for decision making and working collectively toward the common vision. • We recognize and appreciate the significant value of our education system, and we continue to work and invest to strengthen and grow this key community asset. • As technology and society have evolved, so has our prized education system. We have a high quality, future- oriented education system, which undeniably prepares our students to thrive in an increasingly competitive and globalized world. • As residents, we never tire in our pursuit of knowledge and understanding. We collectively promote the value of engagement and education, and we ensure that we have the capacity as a community to understand and remain agile in a fast changing and complex world. Future-Oriented • As a community, we continually look forward and are always working to remain competitive, relevant and innovative. We stand on the foundation of our traditions, but are not afraid to adapt and change as the city evolves. • Our city leaders and organizations are actively engaged in regional leadership and in ensuring the interests of Edina are represented at the level of the Twin Cities metropolis, but also beyond. • Edina is willing to use its resources and expertise to apply new ideas and technology, and we actively invest ourselves in finding and creating innovative solutions to the emerging challenges of living in a major city. INSERT SECTION TITLE HEREEDINA’S VISION STATEMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 20156 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA, ISSUES AND ACTIONS Eight key strategic focus areas have emerged through the Vision Edina process. These areas are built from the key drivers and issues identified early in the Vision Edina process, and have carried through the extensive community and stakeholder engagement process. These focus areas, and the attendant issues and actions, represent emerging priority areas that can both leverage and guide the future evolution of our city. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, and in no way displaces the underlying foundational work that continues on our key areas of infrastructure, community services, governance and fiscal management. Rather, these strategic focus areas represent key emerging priorities, and reflect the core drivers of our future that can be summarized in the categories of Balancing Edina’s Redevelopment, and Enhancing Our Community Fabric and Character. STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA, ISSUES AND ACTIONS Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 7 INSERT SECTION TITLE HEREBALANCING EDINA’S REDEVELOPMENT 1. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX The issue of residential property development has been repeatedly raised throughout the Vision Edina process. The City has been faced with a number of redevelopment pressures and challenges across numerous areas. Residents strongly favor a continued focus on the single-family housing nature of the majority of the city neighborhoods, but there is increasing concern about the trend and impact of so-called ‘teardowns’ on the community. There is also recognition of some need for additional multi-family options to create more diversity in housing affordability. This would provide increased options at all stages of life and attract younger residents. ISSUES • Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods. • Residents take a great deal of pride in their homes, and express concern about the escalating redevelopment pressures facing some neighborhood areas. • Edina continues to face competition from neighboring communities that claim to offer a similar quality of life while also offering more available land for development. • The community must balance the needs of the families that have defined its character, with an aging population that desires to ‘age in place.’ STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Further encourage the development of neighborhood associations and the overall neighborhood concept. Define the unique character and brand of each of the well-established neighborhoods, and explore innovative planning guidelines to allow preservation and enhancement of the desired neighborhood visual appeal. • Pursue further planning and development options that protect and locate key amenities, such as parks and community facilities, within the neighborhood framework to allow neighborhood centers and focus points to further evolve. • Continue to explore options for new multi-family housing throughout the city in mixed-use areas and near public spaces, including areas such as Southdale, Pentagon Park and Grandview. • Work to create affordable housing options close to transit, shopping and employment centers. Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 20158 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE 2. TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Participants in the Vision Edina process expressed a strong desire to continue to expand a variety of transportation options to both reduce dependency on automobiles and enhance the community’s work and life balance, and ease of connectivity. Walking, biking, and transit options represent key amenities that help residents feel connected to their community, and improve the overall quality of life. A diversity of transportation options is also highly preferred among younger residents. However, such options have met resistance in some areas, largely a reflection of a ‘not in my back yard’ reaction. The larger community sentiment of support should be highlighted to advance policies and developments deemed to be in the larger public good. ISSUES • The community’s infrastructure continues to age and be stressed by increasing traffic volume. • The majority of Edina’s employed population works outside of the city and is therefore reliant on the connectivity and maintenance of the roadway system for their livelihood. • The community overall is highly supportive of increased diversity and integration of transportation and local access options. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Undertake community education and promotion to highlight the broad support and benefits of more diverse transportation options, and particularly to highlight the support expressed across multiple age demographics. • Work to expand transit options to Edina, and ensure that Edina residents do not become further isolated from the larger transit infrastructure. • Develop an integrated long-term plan that lays out a future-oriented and ambitious transportation network that covers multiple modes of transportation, and takes into account potential impacts of future technology on transportation modes and corridors. • Continue to promote and develop the sidewalk, trail and bike networks to improve accessibility and connectivity throughout the city and beyond. BALANCING EDINA’S REDEVELOPMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 9 3. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX Edina has traditionally embraced commercial development along a relatively narrow corridor along France Avenue, and originally anchored by Southdale Center. While this practice has been successful and has led to additional growth along France Avenue, Vision Edina participants have expressed a desire for easier and more proximal access to small retail options and other amenities. Many participants of the engagement process highlighted the unique and appealing experience of the 50th & France district. New development opportunities can build upon this example and model to develop neighborhood nodes of an appropriate scale in other locations across the city. ISSUES • Edina has historically favored large-scale commercial development. Best practice and community desire has moved toward also including smaller-scale models. • Residents currently feel somewhat disconnected from common amenities, including banking, dry cleaning, groceries and pharmacies – and this is an issue likely to be exacerbated with an aging population. • The community has significant redevelopment opportunities in the Pentagon Park, Grandview, and Southdale areas, but as of yet, there appears to be no clear consensus as to the best and most appropriate uses and ultimate outcomes. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • In light of the escalating developmental pressures facing the Council and City, the City should as a priority renew its broader land use plan. This plan should examine and consider the future broad fabric of the community, and begin to define key nodes of higher-density mixed use, and potential nodes of small-scale commercial opportunity, embedded in more of a neighborhood context. • More consideration of scale and appropriate mixed use could be used in the review of new commercial development proposals, especially to take into account the compounding impact of numerous developments in close proximity and the concerns about this overall impact on streetscape, environmental aspects, transportation and utilities and services. • The community should further examine and consider the development of small neighborhood-based business nodes to provide a range of local amenities and services. • Edina should continue to explore strategies that promote the continued vitality of existing core retail zones around Southdale Center, and also actively pursue economic development strategies targeting specific professional services clusters. These approaches could enhance the core economic underpinning of the local economy. INSERT SECTION TITLE HEREBALANCING EDINA’S REDEVELOPMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 201510 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE 4. LIVE AND WORK Edina’s community has a large number of high-wage earners, most of whom commute to areas outside the city for work. Therefore, Edina is highly dependent on the vitality of the regional economy to maintain prosperity. At the same time, the community also recognizes a growing desire, especially among young professionals, to both live and work in the same location. There is evidence to suggest this represents part of a larger societal trend, and could have important implications to the future location appeal of Edina. The city currently offers limited opportunities to do so, as a mismatch exists between the wage- earning potential of many of the employment opportunities in the community and the relatively high cost of quality housing. However, the city is very well endowed with recreation facilities, which offers excellent outdoor and sporting amenities. ISSUES • Many of the city’s residents commute outside of the city for work. This creates a disincentive to young professionals who may aspire to live and work in Edina. • The community does not possess significant spaces for collaborating, start-ups or telecommuting. • Many people who work in Edina cannot afford to live in the community. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Edina should support the development of a start-up or entrepreneurial climate in the city, and bring together key stakeholders to develop an integrated economic development strategy. • The community should consider the inclusion of incubators or co-working spaces in any new redevelopment projects and in mixed-use proposals. • The City should promote the development of a mix of commercial amenities, including restaurants and cultural amenities, which are attractive to young families and professionals and can further act as connection points or hubs within the fabric of neighborhoods and development areas. BALANCING EDINA’S REDEVELOPMENT Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 11 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE 5. EDUCATIONAL FOCUS Edina Public Schools are recognized as one of the principal assets of the community. The school district and its institutions are routinely recognized as among the best in the state and nation. Participants in the Vision Edina process routinely singled out quality education as one of the defining characteristics of their preferred future. However, respondents also expressed a desire for the greater use of technology in the classroom, expansion of cultural and ‘globally-focused’ learning opportunities and the promotion of lifelong learning. ISSUES • Education policy and funding are largely a state matter, placing the City in an advocacy and partnership role. • Respondents desire an educational system that maintains high quality while also embracing new techniques and technologies. A balance needs to be struck. • While Edina Public Schools and other local institutions adeptly provide K-12 education, lifelong learning and other cultural education opportunities requires leadership from a variety of community institutions. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • The community should promote a culture of learning among all of its residents, and continue to find ways to explore, understand and present best practices across a range of topics. In particular, it is important to expand the scope beyond regional expertise and explore best practices and emerging trends on a global scale. • The City should continue to foster its productive working partnership with Edina Public Schools. These two entities represent some of the key leverage points in the city, and combining their influence could accelerate the progress on key initiatives. Similar partnerships should be established with the Richfield and Hopkins school districts. • The City and school district should continue to explore future opportunities for expanded partnerships between the schools and existing employment opportunities within the community, thereby helping develop career paths and local workforce development. ENHANCING OUR COMMUNITY FABRIC AND CHARACTER Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 201512 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE 6. POPULATION MIX The demographics of the Twin Cities are constantly changing as new residents are attracted by strong regional employment prospects, economic tailwinds and quality cultural and public amenities. Edina is well positioned to attract many of these new residents because of its high quality of life. Edina’s population is also undergoing a generational transformation as its population continues to age, creating a new group of active senior citizens with different housing and amenity needs. Developing an effective balance in each of these areas is critical to ensuring future sustainable growth. ISSUES • The perception of an ‘Edina Bubble’ carries with it the stigma of being an exclusive and exclusionary community. • The relatively high cost of housing is a barrier to entry into the community, especially for younger families. • The needs of an aging population are often in conflict with the preferences of the younger residents the community seeks to attract. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • The City should expand its work with local school districts to expose students and parents to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. • Edina’s civic organizations should promote a welcoming image of the city. These efforts should be equally directed toward new residents and businesses. These organizations should also take a lead role in publicizing the city’s cultural amenities. • The City should continue to prioritize amenities that meet the needs of residents of all ages. The City should continue discussions about the effects of an aging population, as referenced in the Vision 20/20 process. Similar efforts should be used to engage young adults, including high school students. ENHANCING OUR COMMUNITY FABRIC AND CHARACTER Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 13 INSERT SECTION TITLE HEREENHANCING OUR COMMUNITY FABRIC AND CHARACTER 7. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP Participants in the Vision Edina process were more supportive of environmentally responsible policies and practices than any other issue area. There is a growing awareness of the impact that the built environment has on the natural environment, and the individual and collective responsibility we all have toward good environmental stewardship. Community residents and stakeholders believe that Edina can take an active and ambitious internal and regional leadership role in embedding environmental stewardship principles through actions such as promoting more comprehensive recycling, smart building and energy efficiency practices. These themes couple well with the parallel benefits in smarter urban planning, increased transportation options and application of technology. ISSUES • Residential and commercial developers have little incentive to balance environmentally friendly building practices with market pressures, or in fact to provide leading-edge examples of energy efficient and environmentally sensitive construction. • Currently, residential waste removal and other environmental services are poorly coordinated, and in some cases multiple providers are serving the same streets, contributing to noise, environmental impact and inefficiencies. • The need for green spaces is well recognized, but the use of these areas currently follows more traditional ‘green lawn’ approaches rather than integrated habitat zones. • Developmental pressures are likely to continue to place increased demands on the City’s infrastructure and contribute to concerns about decline in environmental quality in the community. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Develop a comprehensive city-wide environmental management plan that explores and includes best practices in water management, biodiversity, green space management, street scape enhancement and waste management. • Partner with energy and utility service providers to educate residents on the importance of energy efficiency in their daily living and promote energy efficiency and smart building practices at all City-owned properties. This could include well-established practices such as publishing data on the carbon emission, waste levels and recycling levels. • Identify a series of environmental flagship pilot projects to bring stakeholders together and begin exploring creative solutions. Examples could include: waste collection and management across the city; recycling and green waste management; environmental overlays on development projects such as Pentagon Park; and utilization of available areas such as Fred Richards Park as community gardens and biodiversity spaces. • Develop incentives for individual households to take an active role in the overall city responsibility for environmental management, including reducing nutrient loads in run-off, local recycling and efficient resource usage. Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 201514 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERE 8. REGIONAL LEADERSHIP Edina has long been recognized as one of the premier communities in the Twin Cities. The City has been historically viewed as somewhat progressive in its development policies and practices. The existing phase of redevelopment and the expanding pressures from the surrounding metropolitan area highlights the need and opportunity for Edina to continue as an innovator, seeking and implementing creative solutions to local and regional issues. ISSUES • City leadership has rightfully focused on many local issues, in large part driven by changing community needs and expectations. In recent years, City officials have also been playing an important role in some significant regional discussions. • Edina’s size may limit its influence when compared to larger neighboring communities, its popularity with respect to redevelopment has presented a unique set of challenges and the opportunity to lead on some issues previously not encountered in the larger metropolitan area. • The community has regional economic importance, but its cultural importance has been somewhat more limited. However, there is potential for Edina to have some destination value as a regional cultural center. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • City leaders should actively advocate for Edina’s interests in the Met Council and other regional bodies. In addition, the City should form particularly close functional connections with the immediately neighboring cities, as they share many aspects and challenges. • City leaders should continue to inform residents on the impact of issues of regional importance and work to better integrate an understanding of the importance of being an active participant, and leader, in the larger regional system • City leaders and residents should collaborate to discover, develop and apply new best practices in environmental sustainability, aging in place, educational quality and other broad areas of consensus. These efforts will ensure that Edina builds the future intelligence capacity to retain a future-focused worldview, and act as an example and role model to other cities in North America. ENHANCING OUR COMMUNITY FABRIC AND CHARACTER Vision Edina – Strategic Vision Framework – May 2015 15 INSERT SECTION TITLE HERECONCLUSION CONCLUSION The Vision Edina process has presented an opportunity for the community to come together and explore the longer-term future. The current period of intense redevelopment, which is occurring within Edina, represents an important juncture in the community’s history and evolution. This is coupled with a more gradual generational shift, as the predominant Baby Boom generation moves through the demographic system. The resultant situation is where Edina stands poised before some significant choices about future trajectory and outcomes. This has been well articulated in the Vision Edina process. The community has chosen a path forward that represents some significant change and reinvention, but without losing touch with the important family values and rationale that has always defined Edina as a community. The path ahead is not without its challenges and will require careful balancing of differing priorities, aspirations and desires. The collective decision-making process required to move forward will set Edina apart as an intelligent, engaged, thoughtful and forward-looking city. It will require maturity and patience on behalf of the citizens and leadership, and recognition that the complex resident mix, which makes Edina interesting, also brings with it differing opinions and perspectives. Understanding the importance of the common good over personal self-interests will be critical to build alignment around important future shaping decisions and actions. The population and leadership of Edina possess and exhibit more than sufficient knowledge and experience to guide the City toward the vibrant and balanced future desired by the residents and stakeholders. FOR MORE INFORMATION VISION EDINA The Vision Edina initiative has aimed to define a shared vision for the City of Edina. The vision and strategic framework is the outcome of a broad-based and inclusive community visioning process. The engagement portion of this important planning process ran from September to December 2014, and gathered significant community input. From a strategic planning perspective, Vision Edina examines the issues that have been identified as having the highest priority within the community. The initiative examined future trends in cities across North America and the world, and how generational values are changing. This was also linked to local aspirations, values and desires for the future. This process provides a clearer understanding of what people might be looking for in Edina in 2030 and beyond. Vision Edina has represented an opportunity for all residents to have a say and contribute to creating the shared future vision. Vision Edina is part of the overall community process to update the long-term vision for the City of Edina. Vision Edina will also serve as an important foundation for other strategic efforts, such as the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. The City of Edina partnered with Future iQ Partners, an international consultancy company, to design and facilitate the process. For more information on the Vision Edina project and the City of Edina, please contact: Scott H. Neal, City Manager City of Edina 952-826-0415 SNeal@EdinaMN.gov www.EdinaMN.gov MAPPING EDINA’S BIG IDEAS Bridging Between Vision and Planning City of Edina, Minnesota Page i Mapping Edina’s Big Ideas Bridging between Vision and Planning Prepared for: City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 W 50th St, Edina, MN 55424 Prepared by: Biko Associates, Inc. 79 13th Avenue NE Studio 107 Minneapolis, MN 55413 May 24, 2017 Page ii Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ............................................................................................................. 1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1 Wednesday, April 19 Big Ideas Workshop ........................................................ 7 Summary of Findings......................................................................................... 7 Transportation .................................................................................................. 8 Environmental Stewardship .............................................................................. 8 Education Focus ................................................................................................ 8 Commercial Development Mix ......................................................................... 9 Residential Development Mix ........................................................................... 9 Regional Leadership ........................................................................................ 10 Population Mix ................................................................................................ 10 Live and Work ................................................................................................. 11 Saturday, April 22 Mapping Edina’s Big Ideas ................................................. 13 Agenda and Format ........................................................................................ 13 “Where is Important to me in Edina?” ........................................................... 15 “How do I Travel to Important Places?” ......................................................... 15 “Where Should Big Ideas be Implemented and How are Big Ideas Related ....................................................................................... 16 Physical Framework for Implementing Big Ideas ........................................... 16 Edina’s Big Ideas by Quadrant ........................................................................ 19 Interpreting Edina’s Big Ideas for Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan and Implementation ......................................................................... 21 Proposed Process for Incorporating Big Ideas in the Comprehensive Plan ................................................................................ 23 Page iii Page 1 Introduction Purpose This report documents two community-based events held in the City of Edina in April 2017 to provide community members opportunities to collaborate and develop future-oriented Big Ideas that will shape the city’s growth and development in extraordinary ways over the next 20 years. The report summarizes outcomes from these two events and identifies a recommended process that will be put in place during a study to prepare the city’s 2018 comprehensive plan update to ensure that the Big Ideas will be given consideration in the plan. Background Comprehensive Planning in the Twin Cities Communities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area are required by statute to update their comprehensive plans every ten years. Traditionally, a community’s comprehensive plan, based on a shared community vision and goals, outlines growth and development policies and describes what, where, and by how much a community will grow…and, as importantly, where growth will not occur. Local comprehensive plans, which provide communities with a foundation to support defensible land use decision making, land use regulations, and building codes, can also include urban design guidelines to help define the desired design and appearance of districts and new developments. Within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, completed comprehensive plans are approved and adopted by local governments. The plans are also reviewed for adequacy by the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council, the metropolitan area’s regional planning agency. As such, the Council is charged with planning and coordinating the growth and development of the seven-county metropolitan area. Its review of local comprehensive Page 2 plans is largely focused on determining how a local community’s growth plans will impact regional systems (e.g., transportation, sanitary sewer and water treatment, water systems, and regional parks) and whether a local community’s plans are aligned with an overall framework that is provided in regional plans. Thus, comprehensive plans in the metropolitan area have two purposes. They are tools for local governments to use in planning for their communities, and they are tools the Council uses to ensure that regional systems can be provided to communities in the metropolitan area in a planned and cost efficient manner. Without a defined community vision, potential exists that a community’s comprehensive plan, while adequately addressing regional concerns, could fail to adequately address its own local concerns. Edina’s Current Comprehensive Planning As mentioned, a community’s comprehensive plan is fundamentally built on a shared community vision and goals, and initial steps in accepted, comprehensive planning processes include community outreach activities designed to define community members’ vision for the future. Thus, it is a community’s shared vision and support for the vision that permit a comprehensive plan to assert an overall direction for growth and development. Future iQ’s Vision Edina 2015: The City of Edina in 2014 contracted Future iQ to prepare Vision Edina, a series of documents that articulated a vision for the city and outlined a long-term strategic framework that lays out key issues identified by Edina’s community members. The visioning process used by Future iQ included extensive community outreach activities (focus group meetings, community-wide surveys, think tank meetings, community meetings, etc.) and demonstrated wide spread community support for the vision and strategic framework. Eight strategic focus areas were identified in Vision Edina: Page 3 Residential Development Mix Transportation Options Commercial Development Mix Live and Work Educational Focus Population Mix Environmental Stewardship Regional Leadership Vision Edina established the stakeholders’ desire to pursue a preferred future of “Nodes and Modes,” an effort to maintain and enhance the characteristics and fabric of Edina while embracing balanced urban renewal. The central part of this preferred future is the focus on unique nodes that represent the character and future goals of each neighborhood with highly connected modes of transportation between them. Biko Associates’ 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update: The Biko Associates consultant team was contracted in January 2017 to update the 2008 comprehensive plan. Per instructions in the city’s Request for Proposals (RFP), the Biko Associates team submitted a proposal that did not include extensive visioning exercises, because a community-supported vision had already been developed and documented in 2015 by Future iQ. Instead, the team’s proposal described steps that would be taken to work with Small Area Plan Work Groups in each of three small areas (44th/France, 50th/France, and 70th/Cahill) to determine how the city-wide vision from 2015 might be applied. Bridging the Vision and Comprehensive Planning With Edina’s vision document already two years old, there was a desire to give community members and the comprehensive planning process an opportunity to revisit Vision Edina and provide additional opportunities to define a future vision for the city. Page 4 It was determined by the Edina Council that Vision Edina should be revisited in two workshops in order to ensure a bridge between the city’s vision and the 2018 comprehensive plan update. Page 5 Big Ideas Workshop: The purpose of the first workshop, held April 19, 2017 was to encourage new “Big Ideas” and connect them to the eight key strategic focus areas that emerged from Vision Edina with an ultimate goal of propelling Edina toward its “Nodes and Modes” preferred future. Mapping Edina’s Big Ideas: The purpose of the second workshop, April 22, was to determine where and how earlier defined “Big Ideas” would be located on the landscape of the city. Page 6 Page 7 Wednesday, April 19 Big Ideas Workshop Summary of Findings The workshop began with a review of major conclusions reached in Vision Edina 2015. Participants were asked to rank which major strategic focus areas should be a priority for innovation in Edina over the next 5 years. The participants ranked Environmental Stewardship (25%) and Transportation Options (25%) as the top two innovation priority areas, followed by Education Focus (18%), Commercial Development Mix (11%), Residential Development Mix (9%), Regional Leadership (6%), Population Mix (4%), and Live and Work (1%). Participants were then asked to identify Big Ideas under each strategic focus area and then rank them. The top Big Ideas with the most votes, under each focus area, are listed on the following pages. A complete list the Big Ideas is presented in Nodes and Modes: Bridging between Vision and Planning, April 19 Big Ideas Workshop, Future iQ., 25% 25% 18% 11% 9% 6% 4% 1% Page 8 Transportation Environmental Stewardship Education Focus Page 9 Commercial Development Mix Residential Development Mix Page 10 Regional Leadership Population Mix Page 11 Live and Work Page 12 Page 13 Saturday, April 22 Mapping Edina’s Big Ideas Agenda and Format The agenda followed for the Saturday morning workshop is presented on the following page. The all-day session was divided into two parts. Part I The first part, an early meeting, was held to map the Big Ideas that had been developed at the April 19 Big Ideas Workshop. Three mapping exercises were completed, and each was followed by a discussion where participants were able to comment on outcomes from the mapping and report on observations. The three mapping exercises were: 1. Where is important to me in Edina? (I.e., identify nodes) 2. How do I travel to important places? (I.e., identify modes) 3. Where Big Ideas should be implemented? (I.e., where are opportunity sites, where are opportunities to link Big Ideas, and does this reinforce Edina’s future vision?) The three mapping exercises were completed on a 25 foot-long by 20 foot-wide map of the city that was printed on a durable fabric and taped to the floor in the city’s Public Works Department Building. (See the attached hyper-link https://youtu.be/X8hZ8m9m8h4) Part II The second part included a discussion that was held among design and planning professionals, residents, Planning, Commission members, and staff. The planning consultants who have begun preparing the city’s 2018 comprehensive plan update requested the post-mapping discussion to help bring clarity to their work tasks and ensure that there would be a physical framework on which Big Ideas could be implemented throughout the city and discussed in the comprehensive plan. Page 14 Mapping Edina’s Big Ideas Workshop Agenda Saturday, April 22, 2017 8:00 Doors open, social hour 9:00 Welcome, Introductions, and Purpose ............... Cary Teague, City of Edina and Bill Smith, Biko Associates 9:15 Recap Big Ideas Workshop ..................................................................................... David Buerle, Future iQ 9:30 Post-It Mapping Exercise 1: Nodes — Where is important to me in Edina? - My home - Places I haunt (shop, get coffee, meet friends, entertainment) - Where I work or attend school - Recreational places or systems I use 10:00 Observations on important places 10:20 Yarn Mapping Exercise 2: Modes — How do I travel to important places: - Light green for existing walking/running/biking recreational trails - Dark green for desired walking/running/biking recreational trails - Light yellow for the existing bike network (on-street or commuter — separate from more exclusively recreational trails) - Orange for desired bike network - Light blue for existing transit - Dark blue for desired transit - Black for motor vehicle - Pink for sidewalks and pedestrian systems - Red for critical gaps in any of the above networks 10:50 Observations on transportation modes 11:10 Post-It Mapping Exercise 3: How should Edina evolve, and how can this evolution incorporate the Big Ideas you explored on Wednesday? White Post-Its with written descriptions: - What are the best opportunities for change? - Where should they be located and why? - How do they reinforce Vision Edina? - Why is this important to Edina’s future? 11:40 Observations on the relationships physical nodes and modes and Edina’s Big Ideas 12:00 Invitation to return for Pin-Up at 3:00 ..................................................................................... Cary Teague Policy, Project and Design Discussion 12:00 Lunch break and discussion ...................................................................... CPTF, Staff, Urban Design Team - Big Ideas contribution to the Comprehensive Plan update - Policies - Projects 1:00 Urban Design Team illustrations 2:45 Prepare for Pin-Up 3:00 Pin-Up presentation 4:00 Adjourn Page 15 “Where is Important to me in Edina?” 1. The majority of nodes are located in the eastern quadrants of the city. Fewer are located in the western quadrants. 2. The important places are known activity centers. 3. The most active nodes are five of the six small areas that are being addressed in the comprehensive plan. 70th/Cahill, one of the six small areas, is not widely viewed as a high activity center. 4. The schools are recognized as important places. 5. How does the city’s changing demographics impact the identification of important places? 6. Churches (houses of worship) are also important places where people gather. 7. Opportunities to increase the number of live/work uses should be place-based. 8. What are the engines for change in Edina? 9. The northwest quadrant is an area with large lots. Residents in this quadrant cannot walk to many places. Is this the way they want to live….without a node, gathering place, or activity center? “How do I Travel to Important Places?” 1. The major transportation mode is driving. Is this the way we want to be? 2. It’s a big city; 4 miles by 4-1/2 miles. Travelling across the city is not easy without a car. 3. How do people travel within the four quadrants? How do people travel across quadrants? 4. Our city has been cut apart by the highways (TH 100 and TH 62). It is not possible to get to other places without travelling (sometimes) out of the way to get to an overpass. 5. There aren’t lots of transit routes. Those that the city has are very good at providing transportation service. There should be more routes, however. Page 16 6. The Southwest LRT should have a station at TH 169/Valley View Road. 7. The streets that are county roads are problematic: they function to carry lots of traffic and there isn’t much room left over for other functions like bikes. France is an example. 8. There should be more inter-quadrant connectors in Edina. Observations from “Where should Big Ideas be Implemented and How are the Big Ideas Related?” 1. Because of our aging population, the housing needs of the future will change. 2. Health care clinics and child care facilities could be physically combined in community centers. All of these should be accessible to all travel modes. 3. The Promenade should be extended north of TH 62. 4. Grandview should have a freeway lid. 5. The Zoning Code should be modified to allow pocket neighborhoods with several bungalows on a parcel. 6. Each neighborhood should have a community-specific, community defined activity center. 7. A circulator transit service is needed to connect the nodes. 8. Streets should be complete for all types of users. 9. Parks and park buildings could be expanded and redeveloped to meet neighborhood needs. 10. Large buildings should be energy self-sufficient with solar and green roofs. The Physical Framework for Implementing Big Ideas in the Comprehensive Plan Presented on page 18 is a City of Edina aerial base map that shows each of the city’s neighborhoods. The map shows that the city is divided into four quadrants that are defined by north/south Trunk Highway (TH) 100 and east/west TH 62 (aka Crosstown Highway); Quadrant 1 – Northwest Page 17 Edina, Quadrant 2 – Northeast Edina, Quadrant 3 -- Southeast Edina, and Quadrant 4 – Southwest Edina. The map identifies the following physical features that form a framework for incorporating Big Ideas in the comprehensive plan. Six existing small areas (activity centers/nodes): - 44th/France - 50th/France - Grandview - Wooddale/Valley View - 70th/Cahill - Southdale Three potential small areas for future consideration: - Lincoln/169/near Eden Prairie - Expanded 70th/Cahill - Pentagon Park Parks and Nine Mile Creek Golf courses Recreation destinations Canadian Pacific Rail alignment Southwest LRT alignment TH 100 and TH 62 with adjacent pedestrian and bicycle paths Pedestrian and bicycle lids over TH 100 and TH 62 to re-connect the city’s four quadrants Conceptual parkway (Edina Grand Rounds) alignment that forms a ring around the city and a ring within each quadrant In support of the fundamental element of Edina’s future development, e existing and potential future small areas and recreation destinations (nodes) are linked by the parkway system (pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes). Page 18 Page 19 Edina’s Big Ideas by Quadrant (all participants’ comments are shown below) North/south bike corridor that avoids France, from 50th to Centennial Lakes Technology center campus uses with hotel High tech, innovation sub-divided for small tenants Events facilities for conferences Education-focused uses Full, safe bike/ped access to/from and within Southdale Extend Promenade to Strachauer Park East and west promenades Low scale townhomes/duplexes Affordable housing Integrated node: Southdale, Pentagon Park, and Fred Richards Communities center with YMCA Break up Southdale into parcels where affordable housing can be constructed Break up Southdale to allow small retail shops and housing Artist destinations and arts focus Regional leadership Bike/Ped bridge over TH 169 Protected bike trail to/from City Hall Community park, co-op, restaurant, and coffee shop Pocket neighborhoods Access to LRT for bikes/peds Safe bike paths Eliminate buckthorn Parking and dog park for Weber Woods Wellness clinic at 44th/France , 50th/France, and Wooddale/ Valley View Gateway into Wooddale/Valley View Coffee shop and neighborhood gathering centers at Wooddale/Valley View Freeway lid over TH 100 at Grandview No “un-used” city land at Grandview Improve Valley View Parkway linkage to Rosland Park No more six story mixed use buildings Live/work at 70th/Cahill 70th/Cahill redevelopment as activity center Medium density residential with more activity 70th/Cahill should be walkable and connected Variety of housing types (townhomes, duplexes, affordable. Medium density housing Start up office space with affordable rents Access to LRT and Methodist Hosp on intra-city transit line (CP Rail) Trail around circumference of Braemar Nine Mile Creek trail should be developed Mixed use ground floor commercial and retail; second and third story residential “Maker space” and incubator uses 1 2 3 4 Page 20 Edina’s City-Wide Big Ideas (all participants’ comments are shown below) All neighborhood parks should have community centers A Grand Rounds should be developed to allow people to walk and bike around the city A transit circulator that links nodes should be implemented Access guards for children walking/biking to school Educational activities should be everywhere for all ages, including elementary, high school, post-secondary Nature parks with educational focus should be developed along a Grand Rounds Wellness centers should be developed throughout the city that provide services including daycare, early childhood education, eldercare, and primary health care Housing diversity to allow wider diversity in the city’s population mix Community meeting facilities are needed 1 2 3 4 Page 21 Interpreting Edina’s Big Ideas for Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan and Implementation Nodes and Modes Create a Vibrant Public Realm in Edina: Reimagine nodes as places of more dense community activity connected by vibrant multi-modal parkways and boulevards What are Nodes? Nodes are existing and potential future commercial districts. Nodes can be some parks, some schools, and many of the city’s existing and future gathering places. Nodes are defined as the point where a minimum of two transportation facilities cross. The connections (parkways and boulevards) are the key….there must be a facility that accommodates a range of movement type. Enliven Edina’s Commercial Zones: Reform commercial zones as unique combinations of activity offering greater diversity of use, especially related to housing choices and opportunities for public gathering. This should be a primary focus of the small area plan portion of the comprehensive plan. Without some statement like this, that effort seems un-comprehensive. Encourage Infrastructure Development that Serves Many Purposes: Reconsider the community’s infrastructure in ways that are sustainable, prudent, efficient, and most important, are relevant for people. Work with other taxing authorities in Edina need to work better to achieve the plan. The city might become more active in pursuing relationships with MnDOT (arterial trails and lids), Hennepin County (turn backs, library site), Watershed District (day-lighting creeks and storm water ponds). Page 22 Refocus Energy on Education as a Community Value: Excellence in education is one of Edina’s strongest selling points. Make education and learning a hallmark of any development, redevelopment, and revitalization strategy. Provide opportunities for learning at each node and along all modes. Recreate the Community’s Industrial Areas: The city’s industrial areas are showing signs of age. In recent times, non- industrial uses are being approved to occupy industrial spaces. Industrial uses are a major source of tax revenue where the demand for public services is comparatively low. This is about not starting over… we don’t want to get rid of what we have… we want to encourage innovation and evolution. Retaining existing industrial uses, encouraging existing uses to stay, and attracting new uses is the direction the city should establish. Reclaim Unused Pieces of Bisecting Arterials: Edina is a community that is divided into four quadrants by TH 100 and TH 62. Use under-utilized roadway facilities as new bridges and decks over these highways to reconnect the community. Create Vital and Relevant Neighborhoods: Renew Edina’s neighborhoods through thoughtful new introductions for contemporary living that respects the fabric unique to each street and block and so that the grain of how it happens is really critical—so street and block are the scale, not neighborhood. Reinforce Equity in the Practices and Actions of the Community Edina should be a Fair, Inviting, and Equitable community. Efforts should be made, when developing policies and goals and when implementing programs and projects, to determine the implications on existing and future Edina residents. Questions to ask: Are city practices and actions exclusionary or inclusionary? Do city practices and actions invite or discourage a diverse population? Page 23 Proposed Process for Incorporating Big Ideas in the Comprehensive Plan Community Engagement Community engagement activities will be conducted throughout the comprehensive planning process. These events can be divided into two categories -- 1) events that will take place during three small area planning studies and 2) events that will take place as the city-wide comprehensive plan update is being prepared. Small Area Planning Engagement Activities: Each of the three small area planning processes will include direct and close involvement with a Work Group and three community meetings. Findings from Edina’s 2015 vision study will be reviewed for each small area with Work Group members and community members at community meetings. Community members will be asked to provide input on how the city-wide vision applies to their particular small area. In addition, the Big Ideas workshop activities will be explained, and community members will be asked to contribute additional Big Ideas, which will be added to the already existing list (see pages 15 through 20). The three small area planning processes are anticipated to extend from mid-May 2017 to mid-May 2018. City-Wide Comprehensive Planning Update: Work on the city-wide comprehensive plan update has already begun with the consultant team working to update chapters of the 2008 plan in areas where outreach and engagement are not required. For example, the demographic analyses, which will be included in the Community Character Chapter of the plan, have already been completed. Outreach and engagement activities will begin in earnest in the spring of 2018. These activities will include pop-up events at locations where community members gather; e.g., shopping venues and community Page 24 festivals. Opportunities will be provided for community members to contribute to the list of Big Ideas at these events. Comprehensive Plan Task Force and Commissions All information learned by the consulting team during its community engagement activities will be brought to the Comprehensive Plan Task Force (CPTF). In activities that are focused on an evaluation against preliminary screening criteria , the CPTF will determine which of the Big Ideas should be eliminated from further discussion and which should be retained. Big Ideas that are retained will be defined and categorized to match chapters of the comprehensive plan and brought to the attention of the city’s respective commissions at their monthly meetings. It is proposed that the CPTF members will then share information about the list of retained Big Ideas with their respective commissions and conduct a second screening (with their commissions) to determine how the retained Big Ideas measure against established evaluation criteria. Based on their performance, the commissions will help CPTF members by letting them know which Big Ideas they can support as candidates for inclusion in the comprehensive plan. Following their meetings with their respective commissions, CPTF members will participate in larger discussions at their monthly workshop meeting with the comprehensive plan consultants. It is proposed that, at this level, the CPTF members will jointly agree on the Big Ideas that should be included in the plan. The evaluation criteria for the preliminary evaluation should be taken from the city’s mission and vision statements, city adopted goals, and the strategic focus areas outlined in Vision Edina. The evaluation criteria for the second evaluation should be taken from goals that have already been developed by the commissions to guide and direct their work. Page 25 The final discussion and decision to include or not include a Big Idea in the comprehensive plan should consider a number of evaluation criteria, including: Affordability Costs and benefits Opportunity costs Environmental consequences and impacts Implementation feasibility Public acceptance 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT System Statement Issue Date: 2015SYSTEM STATEMENT Page - 1 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA INTRODUCTION 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT FOR CITY OF EDINA September 17, 2015 Regional Development Plan Adoption In May 2014, the Metropolitan Council adopted Thrive MSP 2040. Following adoption of Thrive, the Council adopted the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan, the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan, the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, and the 2040 Housing Policy Plan. The Metropolitan Council is now issuing system statements pursuant to State statute. Receipt of this system statement and the metropolitan system plans triggers a community’s obligation to review and, as necessary, amend its comprehensive plan within the next three years, by the end of 2018. The complete text of Thrive MSP 2040 as well as complete copies of the recently adopted metropolitan system and policy plans are available for viewing and downloading at http://www.metrocouncil.org/Communities/Planning.aspx. Paper copies are available by calling the Council’s Data Center at 651-602-1140. System Statement Definition Metropolitan system plans are long-range comprehensive plans for the regional systems – transit, highways, and airports; wastewater services; and parks and open space – along with the capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater services, transportation, and regional recreation open space. System statements explain the implications of metropolitan system plans for each individual community in the metropolitan area. They are intended to help communities prepare or update their comprehensive plan, as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act: Within nine months after receiving a system statement for an amendment to a metropolitan system plan, and within three years after receiving a system statement issued in conjunction with the decennial review required under section 473.864, subdivision 2, each affected local governmental unit shall review its comprehensive plan to determine if an amendment is necessary to ensure continued conformity with metropolitan system plans. If an amendment is necessary, the governmental unit shall prepare the amendment and submit it to the council for review. Local comprehensive plans, and amendments thereto, will be reviewed by the Council for conformance to metropolitan system plans, consistency with Council policies, and compatibility with adjacent and affected governmental units. Updated local comprehensive plans are due to the Council for review by December 31, 2018. What is in this System Statement The system statement includes information specific to your community, including: • your community designation or designation(s); • forecasted population, households, and employment through the year 2040; • guidance on appropriate densities to ensure that regional services and costly regional infrastructure can be provided as efficiently as possible. • affordable housing need allocation; Page - 2 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA INTRODUCTION In the following sections, this system statement contains an overview of each of the system plan updates and specific system changes that affect your community. The sections are: • Transportation, including metropolitan highways, aviation, and transit • Water Resources, including wastewater, surface water, and water supply planning • Regional parks and trails Dispute Process If your community disagrees with elements of this system statement, or has any questions about this system statement, please contact your Sector Representative, Michael Larson, at 651-602-1407, to review and discuss potential issues or concerns. The Council and local government units and districts have usually resolved issues relating to the system statement through discussion. Request for Hearing If a local governmental unit and the Council are unable to resolve disagreements over the content of a system statement, the unit or district may, by resolution, request that a hearing be conducted by the Council’s Land Use Advisory Committee or by the State Office of Administrative Hearings for the purpose of considering amendments to the system statement. According to Minnesota Statutes section 473.857, the request shall be made by the local governmental unit or school district within 60 days after receipt of the system statement. If no request for a hearing is received by the Council within 60 days, the statement becomes final. Page - 3 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA INTRODUCTION Regional Development Guide The Council adopted Thrive MSP 2040 as the new regional development guide on May 28, 2014. Thrive identifies five outcomes that set the policy direction for the region’s system and policy plans. Building on our region’s history of effective stewardship of our resources, Thrive envisions a prosperous, equitable, and livable region that is sustainable for today and generations to come. The Council is directing its operations, plans, policies, programs, and resources toward achieving this shared long-term vision. Three principles define the Council’s approach to implementing regional policy: integration, collaboration, and accountability. These principles reflect the Council’s roles in integrating policy areas, supporting local governments and regional partners, and promoting and implementing the regional vision. The principles define the Council’s approach to policy implementation and set expectations for how the Council interacts with local governments. Thrive also outlines seven land use policies and community designations important for local comprehensive planning updates. The land use policies establish a series of commitments from the Council for local governments and uses community designations to shape development policies for communities. Community designations group jurisdictions with similar characteristics based on Urban or Rural character for the application of regional policies. Together, the land use policies and community designations help to implement the region’s vision by setting expectations for development density and the character of development throughout the region. Community Designation Community designations group jurisdictions with similar characteristics for the application of regional policies. The Council uses community designations to guide regional growth and development; establish land use expectations including overall development densities and patterns; and outline the respective roles of the Council and individual communities, along with strategies for planning for forecasted growth. If there are discrepancies between the Thrive MSP 2040 Community Designations Map and the Community Designation map contained herein because of adjustments and refinements that occurred subsequent to the adoption of Thrive, communities should follow the specific guidance contained in this System Statement. Thrive identifies Edina with the community designation of Urban (Figure 1). Urban communities experienced rapid development during the post-World War II era, and exhibit the transition toward the development stage dominated by the influence of the automobile. Urban communities are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 10 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. In addition, Urban communities are expected to target opportunities for more intensive development near regional transit investments at densities and in a manner articulated in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. Specific strategies for Urban communities can be found on Edina’s Community Page in the Local Planning Handbook. Forecasts The Council uses the forecasts developed as part of Thrive to plan for regional systems. Communities should base their planning work on these forecasts. Given the nature of long-range forecasts and the planning timeline undertaken by most communities, the Council will maintain on-going dialogue with Page - 4 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA INTRODUCTION communities to consider any changes in growth trends or community expectations about growth that may have an impact on regional systems. The Thrive forecasts for population, households, and employment for your community are: 2010 (actual) 2014 (est.) 2020 2030 2040 Population 47,941 50,261 49,800 52,500 53,000 Households 20,672 21,645 22,000 23,800 24,500 Employment 47,457 49,082 51,800 54,000 56,100 Housing Policy The Council adopted the Housing Policy Plan on December 10, 2014, and amended the plan on July 8, 2015. The purpose of the plan is to provide leadership and guidance on regional housing needs and challenges and to support Thrive MSP 2040. The Housing Policy Plan provides an integrated policy framework to address housing challenges greater than any one city or county can tackle alone. Consistent with state statute (Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 2(c) and subd. 4), communities must include a housing element and implementation program in their local comprehensive plans that address existing and projected housing needs. The Council has also determined the regional need for low and moderate income housing for the decade of 2021-2030 (see Part III and Appendix B in the Housing Policy Plan). Edina’s share of the region’s need for low and moderate income housing is 878 new units affordable to households earning 80% of area median income (AMI) or below. Of these new units, the need is for 365 affordable to households earning at or below 30% of AMI, 234 affordable to households earning 31% to 50% of AMI, and 279 affordable to households earning 51% to 80% of AMI. Affordable Housing Need Allocation for Edina At or below 30% AMI 365 31 to 50% AMI 234 51 to 80% AMI 279 Total Units 878 Specific requirements for the housing element and housing implementation programs of local comprehensive plans can be found in the Local Planning Handbook. Page - 5 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA INTRODUCTION Figure 1. Edina Community Designation Page - 6 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Edina The 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) is the metropolitan system plan for highways, transit, and aviation to which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement summarizes significant changes to these three systems, as well as other changes made to the Transportation Policy Plan since the last 2030 TPP was adopted in 2010, and highlights those elements of the system plan that apply specifically to your community. The TPP incorporates the policy direction and the new 2040 socio economic forecasts adopted by the Metropolitan Council in the Thrive MSP 2040, and extends the planning horizon from 2030 to 2040. Federal Requirements The TPP must respond to requirements outlined in state statute, as well as federal law, such as some new requirements included in the federal law known as the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). For instance, metropolitan transportation plans must now be performance based, so the TPP now includes goals, objectives, and strategies outlined in chapter 2. In previous versions of the TPP the strategies were known as policies; while some are new, the wording of many strategies are similar to the wording of policies in previous plans. Performance measurements for this plan are also discussed in Chapter 12, Federal Requirements. Federal law requires the long range plan to identify regionally significant transportation investments expected to be made over the next two decades, and to demonstrate that these planned investments can be afforded under the plan’s financial assumptions. Both costs and available revenues have changed since the last plan was adopted in 2010, resulting in many changes in the plan. Federal law does allow the plan to provide a vision for how an increased level of transportation revenue might be spent if more resources become available, but the programs or projects identified in this scenario are not considered part of the approved plan. The TPP includes two funding scenarios for the metropolitan highway and transit systems: the “Current Revenue Scenario” and the “Increased Revenue Scenario.” • The Current Revenue Scenario represents the fiscally constrained regional transportation plan, which assumes revenues that the region can reasonably expect to be available based on past experience and current laws and allocation formulas. • The Increased Revenue Scenario represents an illustration of what be achieved with a reasonable increase in revenues for transportation. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local comprehensive plans are expected to conform to the Current Revenue Scenario, which is the official metropolitan system plan. Potential improvements in the Increased Revenue Scenario can be identified separately in local plans as unfunded proposals. A more detailed description of how to handle the various improvements in this category is included under Other Plan Considerations. In addition to reviewing this system statement, your community should consult the entire 2040 Transportation Policy Plan to ensure that your community’s local comprehensive plan and plan amendments conform to the metropolitan transportation system plan. Chapter 3, Land Use and Local Planning, has been expanded and all communities should carefully review this chapter. A PDF file of Page - 7 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION the entire 2040 Transportation Policy Plan can be found at the Metropolitan Council’s website: http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Planning-2/Key-Transportation-Planning- Documents/Transportation-Policy-Plan-(1)/The-Adopted-2040-TPP-(1).aspx. The format of the plan is slightly different than past Transportation Policy Plans. An introductory Overview, Chapter 1: Existing System and Chapter 10: Equity and Environmental Justice have been added to this version of the TPP, in addition to the changes noted in the first paragraph. Please note some modifications have been made to the appendices as well. Key Changes in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in January 2015, the revised 2040 Transportation Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: Metropolitan Highway System - Chapter 5 The Metropolitan Highway System is made up of principal arterials, shown in Fig 1-1 of the TPP and also attached to this system statement. Although no new highways have been added to this system in the 2040 TPP, the last incomplete segment of this system, TH 610, is now under construction in Maple Grove. • The TPP acknowledges that congestion cannot be eliminated or greatly reduced. The region’s mobility efforts will need to focus on managing congestion and working to provide alternatives. The majority of resources available between now and 2040 will be needed for preservation, management and operation of the existing highway system. • Due to increased costs and decreased revenue expectations, many long-planned major projects to add general purpose highway lanes are not in this fiscally constrained plan. While the preservation, safety, and mobility needs of these corridors are recognized, investments in these corridors will be focused on implementing traffic management strategies, lower cost-high benefit spot mobility improvements, and implementing MnPASS lanes. Some specific projects have been identified in this plan, but funding has primarily been allocated into various investment categories rather than specific projects. The highway projects specifically identified in the Current Revenue Scenario are shown in Figure 5-8 of the TPP which is also attached to this system statement. • Modifications were made to Appendix D - Functional Classification Criteria, and Appendix F – Highway Interchange Requests. Appendix C – Project List is new and contains all of the transit and highway projects that have been identified between 2014 and 2023. Transit System - Chapter 6 The transit system plan provides an overview of the basic components of transit planning, including demographic factors, transit route and network design factors and urban design factors that support transit usage. Local governments have the primary responsibility for planning transit-supportive land use, through their comprehensive planning, and subdivision and zoning ordinances. • The TPP includes updated Transit Market Areas (shown in TPP Figure 6-3, also attached) which reflect 2010 Census information and an updated methodology that better aligns types and levels of transit service to expected demand. These market areas identify the types of transit services that are provided within each area. • The TPP includes limited capital funding for transit expansion and modernization. Opportunities primarily exist through competitive grant programs such as the regional solicitation for US DOT Page - 8 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION funding. These opportunities are guided by the strategies in the TPP and the various elements of the Transit Investment Plan. • The TPP includes an updated transitway system plan that more clearly articulates which projects can be funded within reasonable revenue expectations through year 2040 (Current Revenue Scenario as shown in TPP Figure 6-8, which is also attached). The plan includes five new or expanded METRO lines, three new arterial bus rapid transit lines, and three corridors under study for mode and alignment but identified in the Counties Transit Improvement Board’s (CTIB) Phase I Program of Projects. This system was developed in collaboration with CTIB, a major partner in regional transitway expansion. • The TPP does not include operating funding for transit service expansion beyond the existing network of regular route bus, general public dial-a-ride, and Metro Vanpool. • The Increased Revenue Scenario (shown TPP Figure 6-9, which is also attached) illustrates the level of expansion for the bus and support system and transitway system that might be reasonable if additional revenues were made available to accelerate construction of the transitway vision for the region. • The plan includes updated requirements and considerations for land use planning around the region’s transit system. This includes new residential density standards for areas near major regional transit investments and an increased emphasis on proactive land use planning in coordination with the planning of the transit system. Aviation System - Chapter 9 The Metropolitan Aviation System is comprised of nine airports (shown in Figure 1-9 of the TPP and also attached to this system statement) and off-airport navigational aids. There are no new airports or navigational aids that have been added to the system in the 2040 TPP. • The TPP discusses the regional airport classification system as well as providing an overview of roles and responsibilities in aviation for our regional and national partners. The investment plan in includes an overview of funding sources for projects, and an overview of projects proposed for the local airports that will maintain and enhance the regional airport system. • Modifications were made to Appendix I – Regional Airspace, Appendix J – Metropolitan Airports Commission Capital Investment Review Process, Appendix K – Airport Long Term Comprehensive Plans and Appendix L – Aviation Land Use Compatibility. Other Plan Changes Regional Bicycle Transportation Network - Chapter 7 The 2040 TPP encourages the use of bicycles as a mode of transportation. To that end, the TPP establishes for the first time a Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN). The goal of the RBTN is to establish an integrated seamless network of on-street bikeways and off-road trails that complement each other to most effectively improve conditions for bicycle transportation at the regional level. Cities, counties, and parks agencies are encouraged to plan for and implement future bikeways within and along these designated corridors and alignments to support the RBTN vision. Page - 9 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Freight - Chapter 8 Most aspects of freight movement are controlled by the private sector, so unlike other sections of the TPP, there is not a specific plan adopted for future public sector investment in freight facilities. However, the discussion of the need for a safe and efficient multimodal freight system has been updated and expanded in the TPP to recognize challenges and opportunities for freight movement as well as the future direction of freight by mode. It acknowledges the closure of the Minneapolis Upper Harbor in 2015, leaving St Paul and Shakopee as the region’s major barge terminal areas in the future. The plan also acknowledges the increase of trains since 2010 carrying oil from North Dakota on BNSF and CP rail tracks, which is expected to continue into the future. Although railroad trackage in the region was significantly decreased over the last 20 years to “right size” the system after federal deregulation, communities should not expect much additional rail abandonment. Many tracks that appear to be seldom used are owned by the smaller Class III railroads that serve local businesses by providing direct rail connections from manufacturing and warehousing/distribution facilities to the major national railroads. The major Class I railroads are approaching capacity and actually adding tracks in some locations. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Edina should consult the complete 2040 Transportation Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Edina should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the current version of the Metropolitan Council’s Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. Specific system plan considerations affecting Edina are detailed below. Metropolitan Highways There are several principal arterials located within Edina: I-494, TH 169, TH 100, and TH 62. The TPP does not identify any specific regional mobility improvements on these highways, although maintenance and preservation investments will be made on all highways. Transit System Edina includes the following Transit Market Areas: Transit Market Area Market Area Description and Typical Transit Services Market Area II Transit Market Area II has high to moderately high population and employment densities and typically has a traditional street grid comparable to Market Area I. Much of Market Area II is also categorized as an Urban Center and it can support many of the same types of fixed-route transit as Market Area I, although usually at lower frequencies or shorter service spans. Market Area III Transit Market Area III has moderate density but tends to have a less traditional street grid that can limit the effectiveness of transit. It is typically Urban with large portions of Suburban and Suburban Edge communities. Transit service in this area is primarily commuter express bus service with some fixed-route local service providing basic coverage. General public dial-a-ride services are available where fixed-route service is not viable. Edina should identify and map existing transit services and facilities in the local comprehensive plan. Edina should also work with transit providers serving their community to identify potential future transit service options and facilities that are consistent with the TPP and the applicable Transit Market Areas. Communities can find further maps and guidance for transit planning in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook. Page - 10 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Transitways Current Revenue Scenario Transitways Edina should acknowledge in your local comprehensive plan the transitway investments planned for your community in the Current Revenue Scenario (TPP Figure 6-8) as the community may be impacted by the Green Line Extension with a mode and alignment adopted in the TPP. Edina should also identify potential stations along planned transitways (once identified) and adopt guiding land use policies, station-area plans, and associated zoning, infrastructure, and implementation tools that support future growth around transit stations consistent with Chapter 3 - Land Use and Local Planning from the TPP and consistent with the project phase of development. Communities can find further guidance for station-area planning in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook and the Transit Oriented Development Guide. The Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook also includes a map of existing, planned, and proposed transitway stations throughout the region and the planning status of these stations that should be reflected in Comprehensive Plans. Increased Revenue Scenario Transitways The TPP Increased Revenue Scenario shows additional transitway corridors beyond the scope of the plan’s adopted and fiscally constrained Transit Investment Plan (the Current Revenue Scenario). These corridors are listed on page 6.63 of the TPP, and TPP Figure 6-9, which is attached, shows the complete transitway vision for the region. If Edina believes it might be directly impacted by transitways in the Increased Revenue Scenario (for example, because they are participating in transitway corridor studies or feasibility analyses), the transitways may be acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan. These additional corridors are or will be under study for mode and alignment recommendations, but they are not included in fiscally constrained plan. However, they should be clearly identified as not funded within the currently expected resources for transitways. The Council recognizes the important planning work that goes into a corridor prior to it becoming part of the region’s Transit Investment Plan, especially if increased revenues were to become available. Similar to Current Revenue Scenario Transitways, communities should identify known potential stations along planned transitways and consider guiding land use policies, station area plans, and associated zoning, infrastructure, and implementation tools that support future growth around transit stations. These policies can also influence station siting in initial planning phases of transitway corridors and influence the competitiveness of a transitway for funding. Communities can find further guidance for station area planning in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook and the Transit Oriented Development Guide. Aviation All communities must include an aviation element in the transportation sections of their comprehensive plans. The degree of aviation planning and development considerations that need to be included in the comprehensive plan varies by community. Even those communities not impacted directly by an airport have a responsibility to include airspace protection in their comprehensive plan. The protection element should include potential hazards to air navigation including electronic interference. Edina is within the influence area of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The long term comprehensive plan (LTCP) for this airport shown in Appendix K of the 2040 TPP has not changed from the LTCP included in the 2030 TPP adopted by the Metropolitan Council in 2010. However, updated LTCP’s are anticipated prior to 2018. Communities influenced by this airport should review the LTCP to assure that the updated comprehensive plan developed by the community remains consistent Page - 11 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION with the airport plans. Consult the Local Planning Handbook for specific comprehensive planning requirements and considerations such as airport zoning, noise and other environmental mitigation, airport development and economic impacts, ground access needs, infrastructure requirements, and general land use compatibility. Other Plan Considerations Regional Bicycle Transportation Network TPP Figure 7-1 shows the RBTN as established for the first time in the 2040 TPP. The network consists of a series of prioritized Tier 1 and Tier 2 corridors and dedicated alignments (routes). The process used to develop the RBTN, as well as the general principles and analysis factors used in its development, can be found in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Chapter of the TPP. The RBTN corridors and alignments make up the “trunk arterials” of the overall system of bikeways that connect to regional employment and activity centers. These are not intended to be the only bicycle facilities in the region, and local units should also consider planning for any additional bike facilities desired by their communities. RBTN corridors are shown where more specific alignments within those corridors have not yet been designated, so local governments are encouraged to use their comprehensive planning process to identify suitable alignments within the RBTN corridors for future incorporation into the TPP. In addition, agencies should plan their local on and off-road bikeway networks to connect to the designated Tier 1 and Tier 2 alignments, as well as any new network alignments within RBTN corridors to be proposed in local comprehensive plans. Bikeway projects that complete segments of, or connect to, the RBTN are given priority for federal transportation funds through the Transportation Advisory Board’s biannual regional solicitation. Figure 7-1 shows that your community currently has one or more RBTN corridors and alignments within its jurisdiction. The Council encourages local governments to incorporate the RBTN map within their local bicycle plan maps to show how the local and regional systems are planned to work together. An on-line interactive RBTN map, which allows communities to view the RBTN links in their community at a much more detailed scale than Figure 7-1, can be found in the Transportation section of the Local Planning Handbook. The handbook also includes best practices, references, and guidance for all local bicycle planning. A Minor System / Functional Classification The TPP has always recognized the A minor arterial system as an important supplement to the regional highway system, and the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) continues to maintain the official regional map of these roads. The 2040 TPP does include an updated functional classification map (Fig. 1-2 in Chapter 1) and a modified Appendix D - Functional Classification Criteria. Communities should consult the Local Plan Handbook for more information on functional classification, how to reflect the A minor arterial system in their plan, and how to request functional classification changes if necessary. Freight The Council encourages all local governments to plan for freight movement in their communities. Trucks are the major mode of freight movement in the region and across the nation to distribute consumer goods as well as move manufactured goods and commodities, and they operate in every community. Communities with special freight facilities shown on TPP Figure 8-1, Metropolitan Freight System, (attached) should also include those additional modes and facilities in their local plan, and plan for compatible adjacent land uses. Page - 12 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 1-1 of the TPP Page - 13 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 1-2 of the TPP Page - 14 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 5-8 of the TPP Page - 15 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-3 of the TPP Page - 16 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-8 of the TPP Page - 17 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 6-9 of the TPP Page - 18 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 7-1 of the TPP Page - 19 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 8-1 of the TPP Page - 20 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA TRANSPORTATION Figure 9-1 of the TPP Page - 21 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES WATER RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS/ WASTEWATER SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Edina The 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan includes policies and strategies to achieve the following goal: To protect, conserve, and utilize the region’s groundwater and surface water in ways that protect public health, support economical growth and development, maintain habitat and ecosystem health, and provide for recreational opportunities, which are essential to our region’s quality of life. The Policy Plan takes an integrated approach to water supply, water quality, and wastewater issues. This approach moves beyond managing wastewater and stormwater only to meet regulatory requirements by viewing wastewater and stormwater as resources, with the goal of protecting the quantity and quality of water our region needs now and for future generations. The Policy Plan includes policies and strategies to: • Maximize regional benefits from regional investments in the areas of wastewater, water supply and surface water. • Pursue reuse of wastewater and stormwater to offset demands on groundwater supplies. • Promote greater collaboration, financial support, and technical support in working with partners to address wastewater, water quality, water quantity and water supply issues. • Implement environmental stewardship in operating the regional wastewater system by reusing wastewater, reducing energy use and air pollutant emissions, and reducing, reusing, and recycling solid waste. Key Concepts in the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in May 2015, the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan is the metropolitan system plan for metropolitan wastewater services with which local comprehensive plans must conform. The Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: • Centers on and around an integrated approach to water supply, wastewater, and surface water planning. • Promotes the investigation of the issues and challenges in furthering our work in water conservation, wastewater and stormwater reuse, and low impact development practices in order to promote a more sustainable region. • Promotes the concept of sustainable water resources where, through collaboration and cooperation, the region will take steps to manage its water resources in a sustainable way aimed at: o Providing an adequate water supply for the region o Promoting and implementing best management practices that protect the quality and quantity of our resources o Providing efficient and cost effective wastewater services to the region o Efficiently addressing nonpoint and point sources pollution issues and solutions, and, o Assessing and monitoring lakes, rivers, and streams so that we can adequately manage, protect, and restore our valued resources. • Continues the Council’s position that communities that permit the construction and operation of subsurface sewage treatment systems and other private wastewater treatment systems are Page - 22 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES responsible for ensuring that these systems are installed, maintained, managed and regulated consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080-7083. • Includes requirements in Appendix C for comprehensive sewer plans, local water plans, and local water supply plans. • Establishes inflow and infiltration goals for all communities served by the regional wastewater system and requires all communities to include their inflow and infiltration mitigation programs in their comprehensive sewer plan. • Works with the State to attempt to (1) make funds available for inflow and infiltration mitigation, and (2) promote statutes, rules, and regulations to encourage I/I mitigation. Edina should consult the complete Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Edina should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Metropolitan Sewer Service Under state law (Minn. Stat. 473.513) local governments are required to submit both a wastewater plan element to their comprehensive plan as well as a comprehensive sewer plan describing service needs from the Council. Specific requirements for the sewer element of your comprehensive plan can be found in the Water Resources section of the Local Planning Handbook. Forecasts The forecasts of population, households, employment, and wastewater flows for Edina as contained in the adopted 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan can be found at: http://www.metrocouncil.org/Wastewater-Water/Planning/2040-Water-Resources-Policy-Plan.aspx and on your Community Page in the Local Planning Handbook. These forecasts are for sewered development. The sewered housing forecasts were estimated using SAC data, annual city reports, current trends, existing and future local wastewater service areas and other information relating to your community. The wastewater flows are based on historical wastewater flow data, future projected wastewater generation rates, and the projected sewered population and employment data. The Council will use these growth and wastewater flow forecasts to plan future interceptor and treatment works improvements needed to serve your community. The Council will not design future interceptor improvements or treatment facilities to handle peak hourly flows in excess of the allowable rate for your community. Edina, through its comprehensive planning process, must decide the location and staging of development, and then plan and design its local wastewater collection system to serve this development. The Council will use its judgment as to where to assign growth within your community to determine regional system capacity adequacy. If Edina wishes to identify specific areas within the community to concentrate its growth, it should do so within its Comprehensive Sewer Plan. You should also note that urban development at overall densities that are substantially lower than those identified for your community in the Community Designation Section of this Systems Statement will also be analyzed by the Council for their potential adverse effects on the cost of providing metropolitan sewer service. Description of the Metropolitan Disposal System Serving Your Community Figure 1 shows the location of the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS) serving your community. Wastewater flow from Edina is treated at the Metropolitan and Seneca WWTP’s. Page - 23 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Description of the Regional Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) Program The 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan states that the Council will establish I/I goals for all communities discharging wastewater to the MDS. Communities that have excessive I/I in their sanitary sewer systems will be required to eliminate excessive I/I. The Council will continue the implementation of its on-going I/I reduction program. Communities identified through the program as needing to eliminate excessive I/I will be required to submit a work plan that details work activities to identify and eliminate sources of I/I. The Council can limit increases in service within those communities having excess I/I that do not demonstrate progress in reducing their excess I/I. The Council will meet with the community and discuss this alternative before it is implemented. It is required that those communities that have been identified as contributors of excessive I/I, and that have not already addressed private property sources, do so as part of their I/I program. Significant work has been accomplished on the public infrastructure portion of the wastewater system. The Council will pursue making funds available through the State for I/I mitigation, and promote statutes, rules and regulations to encourage I/I mitigation. Management of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) and Private Systems The Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires the sewer element of the local comprehensive plan to describe the standards and conditions under which the installation of subsurface sewage treatment systems and other private wastewater treatment systems will be permitted and to the extent practicable, the areas not suitable for public or private systems. The appropriate density for development with subsurface sewage treatment systems depends on the suitability of the soils to treat wastewater and whether space is available for a primary and back up drainfield. It is the Council’s position that all municipalities and counties allowing subsurface sewage treatment systems should incorporate current MPCA regulations (Minn. Rules Chapter 7080-7083) as part of a program for managing subsurface sewage treatment systems in the sewer element of their local comprehensive plan and implement the standards in issuing permits. Edina should adopt a management program consistent with state rules. An overview of Edina’s management program must be included in the community’s local comprehensive plan update. If adequate information on the management program is not included; the comprehensive plan will be found incomplete for review until the required information is provided to the Council. Specific requirements for the local comprehensive plan can be found in the Local Planning Handbook. Small private treatment plants are located throughout the Metropolitan Area serving such developments as individual industries, mobile home parks, and other urban type uses. The Council’s position is that such private wastewater treatment plants should be permitted only if they are in areas not programmed for metropolitan sewer service in the future and they are provided for in a community’s comprehensive plan that the Council has approved. Furthermore, the community is responsible for permitting all community or cluster wastewater treatment systems consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080- 7083 and MPCA standards. The Council will not provide financial support to assist communities if these systems fail. Edina should include in the sewer element of its local comprehensive plan the conditions under which private treatment plants or municipal treatments would be allowed, and include appropriate management techniques sufficiently detailed to ensure that the facilities conform to permit conditions. Edina is responsible for ensuring that permit conditions for private treatment plants are met and financial resources to manage these facilities are available. Page - 24 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Surface Water Management In 1995, Minnesota Statutes Section 473.859, subd. 2 was amended to make the local water plan (often referred to as local surface water management plans) required by section 103B. 235 a part of the land use plan of the local comprehensive plan. Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, updated in July of 2015, includes the requirements for local water management plans. The main change that you need to be aware of is that all communities in the metropolitan area must update their local water plan between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. This means that Edina must update its local water plan as part of the comprehensive plan update. The community’s updated local water plan should be submitted to the Council for its review concurrent with the review by the Watershed Management Organization(s) within whose watershed(s) the community is located. Failure to have an updated local water plan will result in the comprehensive plan being found incomplete for review until the required plan is provided to the Council. Local water plans must meet the requirements for local water plans in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.235 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410. In general, local surface water plans need to include a summary of the priorities and problems in the community; structural, nonstructural and programmatic actions to take to address the priorities and problems; and clearly identified funding mechanisms to fix the problems. More detailed guidance for the local water plans can be found in Appendix C of the Council’s 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan and in the Council’s current Local Planning Handbook. In addition, the Council has also updated its priority lake list that was first developed in the 1980s as part of the Water Resources Policy Plan update. Figure 2 shows the priority lakes for Edina. The Council uses the priority lake list to focus its limited resources. The list is also used in the environmental review process. Where a proposed development may impact a priority lake, the project proposer must complete a nutrient budget analysis for the lake as part of the environmental review process. Also included on Figure 2 is the watershed organization(s) that Edina is part of and a list of impaired waters in the community for use in development of your local water plans. Other Plan Considerations Water Supply Local comprehensive plans also address water supply (Minn. Stat., Sec. 473.859). For communities in the metropolitan area with municipal water supply systems, this local comprehensive plan requirement is met by completing the local water supply plan template, which was jointly developed by the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR). FOR COMMUNITIES WHO OWN/OPERATE A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM: Because your community owns/operates a municipal community public water supply system (PWS), the local water supply plan must be updated as part of the local comprehensive plan (Minn. Stat., Sec. 103G.291). The updated local water supply plan should include information about your community along with information about any neighboring communities served by your system. You should update your local water supply plan upon notification by DNR. Local water supply plan due dates will be staggered between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Your updated local water supply plan should be submitted to the DNR. DNR will share the plan with the Council, and it will be Page - 25 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES reviewed concurrently by both agencies. This schedule allows the local water supply plans to be completed and included in the local comprehensive plan. Failure to have an updated local water plan will result in the comprehensive plan being found incomplete for review until the required plan is provided to the Council. The water supply plan template fulfills multiple statutory obligations including: • Minn. Stat., Sec. 103G.291 to complete a water supply plan including demand reduction • Minn. Stat., Sec. 473.859 to address water supply in local comprehensive plans • Minn. Administrative Rules 4720.5280 to address contingency planning for water supply interruption The plan must be officially adopted by your community, and if applicable the utility board, as part of the local comprehensive plan. At a minimum, the updated local water supply plan must use the joint DNR and Metropolitan Council template and include water demand projections that are consistent with the community’s population forecast provided in the introductory section of this system statement. Potential water supply issues should be acknowledged, monitoring and conservation programs should be developed, and approaches to resolve any issues should be identified. Guidance and information for water supply planning can be found in the Appendix C of the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, the Local Planning Handbook, and the Council’s Master Water Supply Plan. The Council’s Master Water Supply Plan provides communities in the region with planning assistance for water supply in a way that: • Recognizes local control and responsibility for owning, maintaining and operating water systems • Is developed in cooperation and consultation with municipal water suppliers, regional stakeholders and state agencies • Protects critical habitat and water resources over the long term • Meets regional needs for a reliable, secure water supply • Highlights the benefits of integrated planning for stormwater, wastewater and water supply • Emphasizes and supports conservation and inter-jurisdictional cooperation • Provides clear guidance by identifying key challenges/issues/considerations in the region and available approaches without dictating solutions Figures 3-5 illustrate some water supply considerations that the community may consider as they develop their local water supply plans, such as: aquifer water levels, groundwater and surface water interactions, areas where aquifer tests or monitoring may be needed to reduce uncertainty, regulatory and management areas, and emergency interconnections. Page - 26 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Figure 1. MCES Sanitary Sewer Meter Service Areas Page - 27 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Figure 2. Surface Water Resources Page - 28 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Figure 3. Surface water features and interaction with the regional groundwater system, and state-protected surface water features Page - 29 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Figure 4. Availability of MN Department of Natural Resources groundwater level and MN Department of Health aquifer test data Page - 30 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA WATER RESOURCES Figure 5. Municipal public water supply system interconnections and regulatory management areas Page - 31 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS REGIONAL PARKS SYSTEM STATEMENT City of Edina The Regional Parks System includes 62 regional parks, park reserves, and special recreation features, plus more than 340 miles of regional trails that showcase the unique landscapes of the region and provide year-round recreation. The Regional Parks System is well-loved by our region’s residents and attracted over 48 million annual visits in 2014. The organizational structure of the Regional Parks System is unique, built upon a strong partnership between the Council and the ten regional park implementing agencies that own and operate Regional Parks System units. The regional park implementing agencies are: Anoka County Ramsey County City of Bloomington City of Saint Paul Carver County Scott County Dakota County Three Rivers Park District Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Washington County The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan was developed based on furthering the Thrive MSP 2040 outcomes of Stewardship, Prosperity, Equity, Livability, and Sustainability. Thrive MSP 2040 states that the Council will collaborate with the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, the regional park agencies, and state partners to: • Expand the Regional Parks System to conserve, maintain, and connect natural resources identified as being of high quality or having regional importance, as identified in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. • Provide a comprehensive regional park and trail system that preserves high-quality natural resources, increases climate resiliency, fosters healthy outcomes, connects communities, and enhances quality of life in the region. • Promote expanded multimodal access to regional parks, regional trails, and the transit network, where appropriate. • Strengthen equitable usage of regional parks and trails by all our region’s residents, such as across age, race, ethnicity, income, national origin, and ability. Key Concepts in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan includes the following policies, each with specific associated strategies: • Recreation Activities and Facilities Policy: Provide a regional system of recreation opportunities for all residents, while maintaining the integrity of the natural resource base within the Regional Parks System. Page - 32 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS • Siting and Acquisition Policy: Identify lands with high-quality natural resources that are desirable for Regional Parks System activities and put these lands in a protected status so they will be available for recreational uses and conservation purposes in perpetuity. • Planning Policy: Promote master planning and help provide integrated resource planning across jurisdictions. • Finance Policy: Provide adequate and equitable funding for the Regional Parks System units and facilities in a manner that provides the greatest possible benefits to the people of the region. • System Protection Policy: Protect public investment in acquisition and development by assuring that every component in the system is able to fully carry out its designated role as long as a need for it can be demonstrated. The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan is the metropolitan system plan for regional recreation open space with which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement highlights the elements of the system plan which apply specifically to your community. Find the complete text of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan on the Council’s website. 2040 Regional Parks System Facilities The Regional Parks System is comprised of four main types of facilities: regional parks, park reserves, special recreation features and regional trails. Regional Parks Regional parks most notably contain a diversity of nature-based resources, either naturally occurring or human-built, and are typically 200-500 acres in size. Regional parks accommodate a variety of passive recreation activities. Park Reserves Park reserves, like regional parks, provide for a diversity of outdoor recreation activities. One major feature that distinguishes a park reserve from a regional park is its size. The minimum size for a park reserve is 1,000 acres. An additional characteristic of park reserves is that up to 20 percent of the park reserve can be developed for recreational use, with at least 80 percent of the park reserve to be managed as natural lands that protect the ecological functions of the native landscape. Special Recreation Features Special recreation features are defined as Regional Parks System opportunities not generally found in the regional parks, park reserves or trail corridors. Special recreation features often require a unique managing or programming effort. Regional Trails Regional trails are classified as 1) destination or greenway trails and 2) linking trails. Destination or greenway trails typically follow along routes with high-quality natural resources that make the trail itself a destination. Linking trails are predominately intended to provide connections between various Regional Parks System facilities, most notably regional parks or park reserves. Page - 33 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS 2040 Regional Parks System Components The 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan identifies six components which together comprise the vision for the Regional Parks System in 2040, as described below. Existing Regional Parks System Facilities: include Regional Parks System Facilities that are open for public use. These facilities include land that is owned by regional park implementing agencies, and may include inholding parcels within the boundaries of these parks and trail corridors that have not yet been acquired. Existing regional trails may include planned segments that will be developed in the future. Planned Regional Parks System Facilities (not yet open to the public): include Regional Parks System Facilities that have a Council-approved master plan and may be in stages of acquisition and development, but are not yet open for public use. Regional Parks System Boundary Adjustments: include general areas identified as potential additions to existing Regional Parks System Facilities to add recreational opportunities or protect natural resources. Specific adjustments to park or trail corridor boundaries have not yet been planned. Regional Park Search Areas: include general areas for future regional parks to meet the recreational needs of the region by 2040 where the regional park boundary has not yet been planned. Regional Trail Search Corridors: include proposed regional trails to provide connections between Regional Parks System facilities where the trail alignment has not yet been planned. 2040 Regional Trail Search Corridor System Additions: include regional trail search corridors that were added to the Regional Parks System as part of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. Key Changes in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan Adopted by the Metropolitan Council in February 2015, the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: Identify all proposed regional trails as regional trail search corridors All proposed regional trails that are not yet open to the public and do not have a Metropolitan Council approved master plan are represented as a general regional trail search corridor. The 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan depicted these trails with a proposed alignment. The alignment of these regional trails will be determined in the future through a planning process led by the regional park implementing agency. The alignment of these trails is subject to Metropolitan Council approval of a regional trail master plan. Acquire and develop ten new regional trails or trail extensions to meet the needs of the region in 2040. The 2040 Regional Trail Search Corridor Additions include: Carver County: • County Road 61 • Highway 41 Page - 34 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS Three Rivers Park District: • CP Rail Extension • Dakota Rail Extension • Lake Independence Extension • Lake Sarah Extension • Minnetrista Extension • North-South 1 • North-South 2 • West Mississippi River The 2040 Regional Parks System Plan Map is depicted in Figure 1. Edina should consult the complete 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan in preparing its local comprehensive plan. In addition, Edina should consult Thrive MSP 2040 and the current version of the Metropolitan Council’s Local Planning Handbook for specific information needed in its comprehensive plan. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Regional Parks System Components in your community The following Regional Parks System Components within Edina as identified in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan are listed below. Regional Trails Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail: This is an existing regional trail that is open to the public. The regional trail travels through Hopkins, Edina, Richfield and Bloomington as it connects Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail, South Hennepin West and South Hennepin East (CP Rail) Regional Trail Search Corridors, Intercity Regional Trail, and Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. The regional trail alignment as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. South Hennepin West (CP Rail) Regional Trail Search Corridor: The regional trail search corridor travels through Bloomington, Edina, St. Louis Park, and Golden Valley as it connects South Hennepin East Regional Trail Search Corridor, Hyland-Bush-Anderson Lakes Park Reserve, Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail, Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, North Cedar Lake Regional Trail and Luce Line Regional Trail. The trail will follow existing railroad grades. The railroad is still in active use so planning for the conversion to a regional trail is on hold pending a change in status of the active railroad operations. Three Rivers Park District will lead a planning process in the future to determine the alignment of the regional trail. When preparing its comprehensive plan, Edina should verify whether a master plan has been approved by the Metropolitan Council. If a master plan has been approved, the planned regional trail alignment should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Otherwise, the general search corridor as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the comprehensive plan. Please contact Three Rivers Park District for more information regarding Regional Parks System Components in Edina. Page - 35 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS Figure 1. 2040 Regional Parks System Plan Map Page - 36 | 2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT – EDINA REGIONAL PARKS Figure 2. Regional Parks System Facilities in and adjacent to Edina Date: S eptemb er 28, 2017 Agenda Item #: X.A. To:Trans p o rtatio n C o mmis s io n Item Type: O ther F rom:Mark K. No lan, AI C P, Trans p ortation P lanner Item Activity: Subject:S c hedule of Meeting and Event Dates as of S eptemb er 28, 2017 Information C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : N one. I N TR O D U C TI O N : AT TAC HME N T S : Description Schedule of Upcoming Meetings /Dates /Events TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SCHEDULE OF MEETING AND EVENT DATES AS OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS Thursday Sep 28 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday Oct 26 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM MAYOR’S CONFERENCE ROOM Thursday Nov 16 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Dec 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Jan 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Feb 15 ETC Annual Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Mar 15 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday Apr 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday May 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday June 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday July 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM 4115 Sunnyside Road Edina, Minnesota 55424 October 6, 2017 Edina Transportation Commission Edina City Hall Edina, Minnesota By email Re: Consultant Report on Rail Transit Ladies and Gentlemen: The Report from the consulting firm engaged by the Commission to elicit public opinion concerning development of rail transit along the Canadian Pacific Railroad line traversing the City does a profound disservice to the City and should be rejected by the Commission. The Report at best represents the divided views of no more than 1% of Edina’s residents and essentially none of its employers. The consultants failed to survey Edina residents or businesses in a statistically valid manner to ascertain the opinions or preferences of a majority of Edina residents and businesses. The Report does not claim otherwise, and is therefore completely unreliable as an index of public opinion, or as a basis for forming an informed judgment about prudent transit policy for the City. The Report fails to note that even in the limited public exposure to rail transit ideas afforded to Edina residents and businesses in the public meetings, the consultants affirmatively misrepresented the nature of a probable rail transit service in the CP corridor in two critical respects: (a) No reference was made to the use of Diesel Multiple Unit (“DMU”) trains, which is the only appropriate rolling stock to use in a corridor of this character (DMU trains are self-propelled coaches, usually operated in trains of two or three cars, which are small scale, quiet and unobtrusive; they are the vehicle of choice being used today in all similar corridors in the western United States); and (b) the possible service was not accurately represented as being part of a larger regional network of transit and Regional Rail passenger services connecting to the Twin Cities’ growing LRT network plus Northstar and a number of potential regional services to Duluth, Eau Claire, Owatonna and other regional destinations. No reference was made to the ability of rail transit service to support the plethora of businesses and job locations across southern Edina along the 77th Street Corridor by means of feeder buses. No mention was made that the CP corridor is already part of the first-tier Southern Minnesota Corridor designated in the Revised State Rail Plan. These are critical failures that completely invalidate the Report, and its recommendations. The Report also fails to point out that regional discussion of the development of these rail transit services are and will continue to be ongoing, and that Edina will either be a participant in them, or—in a sense—the victim of them if the City is not a participant. Since the Southwest Corridor LRT project will leave Edina as the only southwestern suburb inside of Chanhassen without rail transit service, the steps recommended by the Report would be a strategic blunder by Edina. The Report does no more than document the obvious: a highly unscientific and statistically unreliable public meeting process suggested only that some members of a self-selected and tiny group of residents who own homes near the railroad prefer not to have (more) trains operate over it. This adds nothing to the discussion of an important transport policy issue affecting the interests of the entire city of Edina, and all of its residents and employers. Based on these considerations, the Commission should reject the consultant Report, and instead advise the City Council that the City should (a) conduct a statistically-reliable survey of all of its residents and businesses to ascertain the opinions of a majority of Edina residents and businesses on the actual transit service likely to be developed in the CP corridor, not just a self- selecting sample of known opponents; (b) consult with the City’s many businesses to ascertain their opinion about a rail transit service on the CP corridor supported by circulator buses along the 77th Street Corridor and north to Galleria and Southdale; and (c) actively participate in current and future regional discussions concerning development of rail transit and Regional Rail passenger services that might serve and benefit Edina. Respectfully, Andrew Selden 952.926.5373 Ncl25@yahoo.com Cc: City Council members Mayor of Edina