The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-07-17 Meeting Packet AGENDA CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS July 17, 2014 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of June 19, 2014 V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During “Community Comment,” the Transportation Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight’s agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS A. Living Streets Plan Update B. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Update C. 2015 Transportation Commission Work Plan Update D. Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 2, 2014 E. Updates i. Student Member ii. Bike Edina Working Group – Minutes of June 12, 2014 iii. Living Streets Working Group iv. Communications Committee VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Agenda / Edina Transportation Commission July 17, 2014 Page 2 IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. Project Updates X. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS Thursday July 17 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday August 21 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday September 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday October 16 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday November 20 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday December 18 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday January 15 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday February 19 Regular ETC Meeting 6:00 PM COMMUNITY ROOM G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas & RR's\2014 Agendas\20140717 Agenda.docx April June 12, 2014 Meeting Notes Present: Sally Dunn, Nick Essma, Jennifer Janovy, Tim Sudeith Guests: Mark Nolan (Transportation Planner), Lisa Firth (Bloomington Public Health), Sean Hayford O'Leary (Richfield Bike Advocates), Mary Zarling Recorded by: Sally Dunn I. Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. II. Action items — a. Agenda modified by deleting 2014-2015 work plan; approved. b. May meeting notes approved. Ill. Discussion Items a. Infrastructure—Transportation Planner Mark Nolan was present to update the group on current and planned infrastructure projects related to bicycling. In 2014, Olinger Blvd., between Vernon and Tracy, will get a dedicated bike lane on the west/south side of the street from Vernon to Tracy and a dedicated bike lane on the east/north side of the street from Vernon to Olinger Road. There will be shared lane markings on the east/north side of the street from Olinger Road to Tracy. The city is looking at striping dedicated bike lanes on Ohms Lane and 72nd this summer. Public works is looking at which existing on-street facilities need to be touched up. The City Council approved the use of thermoplastic bike markings. It was noted that some thermoplastic materials can be slippery. In 2015, Valley View Rd., east of 169 and NW of Braemar, will be reconstructed. A consultant is working on preliminary design that will 1 include 5' dedicated bike lanes, 11' travel lanes, and a sidewalk on the south side. There may be a roundabout at the curve. Staff is working on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which may identify additional opportunities. The City Council will review a draft sidewalk plan at their first meeting in July. Members requested to see the draft plan and Mark offered to forward it. There was discussion of the Bike Plan and whether the routes identified address the needs of all levels of cyclists. Riding on sidewalks is now allowed in Edina. There was discussion of the challenges presented to cyclists by streets that have potholes, etc. It was noted that ETC would be meeting with the Public Works director later in June. b. Riding on sidewalks ordinance change loose ends. The riding on sidewalks ordinance was adopted as recommended, making it legal to ride on sidewalks. The ordinance contains several provisions to guide safer riding behavior, such as slowing down when pedestrians are present or when approaching or crossing a driveway or intersection. It also prohibits riding on the sidewalk where posted. A suggestion was made to have the signs say "Walk Your Bike" rather than "No Bikes" or similar. It was noted that a violation of the new ordinance would be a misdemeanor and that the Council would be considering an ordinance amendment to make a violation a petty misdemeanor. Also discussed was a section of code that makes riding a bike in a municipal parking lot (ramp or surface) illegal and the need to modify that to permit riding in surface lots. c. EPD signs on 70th, Wooddale, Valley View. Comments that the signs are difficult to read and that two of the signs could create misunderstandings. For example, although bicyclists are required to ride as close as practicable to the right-hand side of the road, the statute provides many exceptions. Concern that motorists may get the impression that bicyclists should not be in the travel lane, and concern that cyclists (who may not be familiar with the exceptions) may get the impression that they need to stay far to the right even when doing so may be dangerous (due to surface 2 hazards, for example). The sign that read: "Do not ride more than two abreast. Do not impede reasonable traffic" also raised concerns because it could give people the impression that a single bicyclist cannot impede motor vehicle traffic. The prohibition against impeding traffic applies when riding two abreast (basically, if riding two abreast and impeding traffic, ride single file). The signs had not been run past Mark Nolan, ETC or Bike Edina. There was discussion about wanting better coordination of educational messages related to bicycling. d. Fred Richards repurposing —Jennifer noted that a resident had contacted Bike Edina about his interest in advocating for mountain bike trails at Fred Richards. The group discussed the idea and consensus was that the terrain is not challenging enough for mountain bike trails. e. 41h of July Parade—All members present will be out of town on that date. f. Bike To Work Week—Commuter Services and 50th & France Association were hosting a table at 50th & France on June 18. Tim and Lori will be present to hand out bike pins. g. T-shirts—Discussion of whether/where to get Bike Edina t-shirts. Nick will check into it. IV. Next meeting—July 10, 2014 V. Adjourned at 9:00 p.m. 3 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 17, 2014 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 2, 2014 Agenda Item #: VI. D. Action Discussion 0 Information El Action Requested: Review and recommend Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Report of Wednesday July 2, 2014, be forwarded to City Council for approval. Information / Background: It is anticipated that residents may be in attendance at the meeting regarding some of the attached issues (i.e. stop sign requests). An overview of the comments from the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) will be included in the staff report provided to Council for their August 19, 2014, meeting. Attachments: Traffic Safety Committee Report for July 2, 2014. G:\ Engineering \ Infrastructure \Stree1s\ Traffic \ Traffic Safety Committee \Staff Review Summaries\ 14 TSAC & Min \ 07-02-14 Cover.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St, • Edina, MN 55424 Photo: 50 th Street and Indianola Drive, looking east TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, July 2 nd The Traffic Safety Comnnuttee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 02. The City Engineer, Public Works Director, Police Traffic Supervisor, Transportation Planner, Sign Coordinator and Traffic Safety Intern were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can do so at the July 15 Edina Transportation Commission meeting and/or the August 19 City Council meeting. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval: Al. Request to keep the intersection of W. 50th Street and Indianola Avenue South clear of cars that often block the intersection Requestor states that traffic often backs up west from the 50th Street and Halifax Avenue S. intersection and blocks the intersection of 50th St. and Indianola Avenue South. Site visits during off peak observed the queue for the traffic signal at 50th Street and Halifax Avenue, consistently reaching half-way to this intersection and further. No reported accidents at this intersection in the last five years. From the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the street may be marked in a variety of ways, and the sign should be placed before the intersection. As seen on the next page. Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 1 of 14 July 2, 2014 ow. Direction of congested trod lc, R10-7 (the R10-7 sign tray ski.) be mounted oven tho roadway) S c' NO44:. Alillnlbo otigusolIhe box 10 dorm lh.spe141(1uNoul thnt i, oct I bo Mooted. The box tines no4 have b tn re;tantp IT ii mItapat. Optiona dotted lines 4 4 Opt on fkokouly B to 12 blot 5(0 what; ima ‘s4 Adjsoent *marked irltarsention Legend n -ip• Irwin! inn rif 4. 411— OpOOk LI; Oak 01111 'DO NOT BLOC111,"KEEP OLFAR,*rn iinlbir Nx1onb nituatawo ()phial Sox Win 4- to 6-inch eolkl whiff] cross, alLii lirni opticn "Du O I eLOCtç -KEEI, CLEAR; Ur familar telt only' otosliolO too Nxt.1 OP Figure 3846 Do Hot Bbck hiterseciiou Markirgs Map: W. 50 th Street and Indianola Avenue S, After review, staff recommends moving the current sign to the west side of the intersection, and adding orange placards to the sign in order to make it more visible to eastbound drivers on W. 50th St. Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 Page 2 of 14 Map : Olinger Blvd and Jeff PI A2. Request for Crosswalk at the south leg of the Olinger Boulevard and Jeff Place intersection A resident requested a crosswalk across Olinger Blvd. from Bredesen Park to Jeff Place. The maximum two hour pedestrian count observed, from June 6th to June 8th, was 26 crossings at 3:15 to 5:15 PM on June 7th, which meets warrants according to City crosswalk policy (see Appendix A). No crashes at this intersection have been reported for the last five years. After review, staff recommends installation of a marked and signed crosswalk at this location. With it scheduled to be placed during roadwork this year. A3. Request for a street identifier sign for Vernon Lane at Vernon Avenue This request is on the behalf of the Olde Vernon Homeowner's Association. Requestor states that it is difficult for people to find homes in this area as there is no street sign identifying Vernon Lane at its intersection with Vernon Ave. There are brick monument signs at the entrances identifying the street. After review, staff recommends approval for adding street identification signs to the intersections of Vernon Lane and Vernon Avenue. _ Photo : Brick monument sign at Vernon Lane and Vernon Ave. Map : Vernon Ln. and Vernon Ave. Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 3 of 14 July 2, 2014 Photo: Point Dr. and Balfanz Rd. looking south. SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial: B1. Request for stop signs at the intersection of Point Drive and Balfanz Road Requestor believes that this intersection is dangerous and should have stop signs. This intersection is in a neighborhood of mixed traffic control. The surrounding neighborhood has sixteen uncontrolled intersections and twelve controlled intersections (11 with stop signs, 1 with yield signs). The intersection has had one accident reported in the last five years (2010, a right-angle crash, property damage only). An intersection study was performed, and data was retrieved for the west and south legs of the intersection, the east leg has a daily volume of 106 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 24 mph, the south leg has a daily volume of 79 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 20.2 mph. When the study was divided into channels, vehicles entering the intersection had an 85th percentile speed of approximately two mph lower than those exiting. After review, staff recommends denial of this request because it does not meet warrants for placement of a stop sign. Map : Balfanz Rd. and Point Dr. Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 4 of 14 July 2, 2014 Map: Zenith Avenue South and W. 57th Street Photo : W57 St. and Zenith Ave. looking west. B2. Request for stop signs at the intersection of West 57th Street and Zenith Avenue South Requestor states that the intersection of W. 57th St. and Zenith Ave S is uncontrolled, causing the intersection to be dangerous. The area of the intersection is divided between controlled intersections and uncontrolled intersections (9 uncontrolled, 6 stop controlled, within major street boundaries). A traffic study, involving two counts, was done on the streets, and the average daily traffic is 226 vehicles per day on 57th St. with an 85th percentile speed of 25 mph, and 169 vehicles per day on Zenith Ave with an 85th percentile speed of 24.6 mph. There are no reported accidents at this location. Warrants for stop signs are located in Appendix B. After review, staff recommends denial of this request because it does not meet warrants for placement of a stop sign. B3. Request to switch stop sign location at W. 64th Street and Josephine Avenue Requestor states that traffic comes quickly off of 64th Ave. onto Josephine Ave. The resident is concerned that the children in the neighborhood, particularly those getting to and waiting at bus stops, are endangered by this. Requestor wishes to have the stop sign, currently facing southbound traffic from the cul-de-sac, moved to the 64th St approach to the intersection. A traffic study Map : W. 64th St. and Josephine Ave Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 5 of 14 July 2, 2014 Map: Brookview Ave. and W. 55th St. -.d.ff WhIliFENIMPL r %-7411riX Photo : W 5.5th St. and Brookview Ave looking north. was done on the two through street approaches with Josephine Ave. having 590 vehicles per day with an 85th percentile speed of 26.6 mph, and 64th St. carrying 475 vehicles per day with an 85th percentile speed of 20.4 mph. No crashes have been reported at this intersection in the last five years. After review staff recommends denial of this request because of low traffic counts in the area, and lack of warrants. B4. Request for stops signs at 55th and Brookview This request comes from a resident on Brookview Avenue who is concerned with traffic safety at this intersection. Requestor feels that there is a lot of cut through traffic on Brookview Ave. that is driving too fast and feels that the yield signs do not reach the desired level of safety, and that hills in the area lead to even more dangerous driving. Brookview Avenue is a 28-foot wide north/south street with no sidewalks. A traffic study was conducted in 2010 as a result of another request. Brookview Ave. has a Mon.-Fri. (2010) average daily traffic count of 300 vehicles and an 85th-percentile speed of 23.7 mph. West 55th Street is a 26-foot wide east/west street with no sidewalks. West 55th Street has an average daily traffic count (2010) of 127 vehicles with an 85th-percentile speed of 14.6 mph. This study, when compared to one taken in 2002, shows that volume and speed have remained constant. There are no reported accidents at this location; however, the requestor states that there were unreported accidents, and one accident with a pedestrian that was very recent. Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 6 of 14 July 2, 2014 Map : Gleason and Indian Hills Pass Residential stop sign warrants are not met at the intersection of Broolcview Avenue and West 55th Street. Requestor has made similar requests three times in the past five years; two were denied and one resulted in the placement of yield signs to assign right of way (2010). Warrants for stop signs are in Appendix B. After review, staff recommends denial of the request based on lack of warrants and prior denials. B5. Request for electrification of stop signs at Gleason Road and Indian Hills Pass, or provide enforcement Photo : Gleason Road and Indian Hills Pass, looking west. Lighted stop signs are not present within the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), however a red flasher may be installed in conjunction with a stop sign. There are no given warrants for such an installation. Traffic Safety Committee Report, J Page 7 of 14 July 2, 2014 Requestor states that cars routinely ignore the stop sign at the intersection. An intersection study was done (9:10-9:50 AM on June 25th ), 96.4 % of all vehicles on Gleason made either a full or rolling stop, and 100% of vehicles reduced their speeds. When traffic on Indian Hills Pass was present, vehicles on Gleason obeyed right of way rules. Indian Hills Pass had a 100% full or rolling stop rate, with more than half the traffic coming to a full and complete stop before proceeding. The pedestrians at this intersection crossed Indian Hills Pass only during the study, and seemed to have little effect on vehicular traffic. One accident has been reported at this location in the past five years, was attributed to the disregard of a traffic control device by a driver on Gleason Rd. Map : Gleason Rd. and Scotia Photo : Sightlines from the stop of Scotia After review, staff recommends denial of this request based on the high compliance rate for vehicles stopping on Gleason. SECTION C: Requests which staff recommends further study be done. Cl. Request for enforcement of 3- way stop sign on Gleason Road and Scotia Drive Requestor states that stop signs on Gleason Rd. are being ignored. Site investigations showed that this location was at the bottom of a hill, with the 3-way stop had some rolling stops during site visits. Additionally, people were consistently observed stopping to allow vehicles to exit Scotia Dr. Gleason Dr. has an ADT of 2,451 vehicles (from a state-aid count), while Scotia Dr. has an ADT of 200 vehicles. No accidents relating to traffic control in the last five years were reported. After review, staff recommends a using cameras for a longer and more detailed study of the intersection. C2. Request for all-way stop signs on Brookside Avenue and W. 44th Street (possible removal of stop signs at the intersection of Division Street and Brookside Avenue) Requestor states that the intersection delay is very high at 44th St. and Brookside Ave. for those on 44th St. The requestor also noted that Division has an all way stop with Brookside Ave, while it is a more minor street than 44th St. Counts were taken and are shown on the diagram Traffic Safety Committee Report, Looking south on Brookside at 44th (towards Division) July 2, 2014 Page 8 of 14 Photo: 77" Street and Parklawn Avenue, looking west rid - rer in Appendix C. No crashes at the intersection have been reported in the last five years. Application of an All-Way stop is detailed in Appendix B. After review, staff recommends further study, including analysis of delay and queuing at the intersections. Map : Brookside Ave. Division St. and W. 44th St. C3. Request to remove "No Pedestrian" pictorial signs from the intersection of W. 77th Street and Parklawn Avenue, and to install pedestrian signals This request concerns the bus stops on 77th Street and Parklawn Avenue and the pedestrian environment of the intersection. Currently there are near side bus stops, and signs banning pedestrians from crossing the north, south and west legs. The concern is that a law-abiding user of transit would be unable to use the bus stops, due to the ban on pedestrian movements. Specifically the south and west legs were requested to have their signs removed and pedestrian signals installed. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, section 2B.51, addressing such signs states in the support section that the sign is intended to be used on only one leg of an intersection, in order to provide access. Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 EL:10,, 24a Map : Bus stops at W. 77th Street and Parklawn Avenue Page 9 of 14 This request was combined by staff with earlier requests for removal of the no right on red restriction for the intersection. The estimated cost of pedestrian improvements is $10,000 (which includes pedestrian signals and marked crosswalks). The maximum two hour volumes on each leg were determined by video study on June 10th, thirteen pedestrians on the south leg, four on the east leg and six on the north leg. Former studies of the intersection indicated that the no right on red should remain (at least on the southbound approach) due to the dual right turn lanes, and little benefit from the restriction's removal. According to a consultant report done earlier this year, with no change the level of service of the intersection will remain the same, and delay will only rise by a few seconds per vehicle. Mitigation any effect of adding crosswalks should be possible using the mitigation outlined by the consultant. After review, staff recommends that the northern leg of the intersection be investigated for possible addition of a crosswalk, with cost and a detailed investigation of the signal cabinet, to determine if it can accommodate an additional pedestrian signal. SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled Dl. Request was made for stop sign on Gleason at 62, citing long delays to exit the freeway. Requestor was referred to MnDOT, who has traffic jurisdiction in this location. D2. Request on the 5100 block of Indianola Ave called to request a speed bump on her street. Resident was told that the City has not been installing speed bumps on streets; however her street is scheduled for reconstruction in 2015 and that there is a potential for a sidewalk and a narrower street. D3. Resident called to request a stop sign at St. John's Ave. and Garrison Ln. A voicemail was left with here explaining that this same request was denied by City Council last year. D4. A resident on Creek Valley Rd. asked about traffic calming and/or a crosswalk at Creek Valley Rd. and Tracy Ave. Resident was told that this area would be included in a traffic study that will be conducted in the area around TH 62 and Tracy Avenue, to prepare for the reconstruction of Tracy Avenue north of TH 62. D5. A resident at 7500 York called to request an enhanced crosswalk at York Ave. and Parklawn Ave. Resident was informed that Hennepin County will be installing pedestrian-activated flashing beacons at this location later in 2014. D6. Resident called to request a stop sign at Fuller Ave. and Drew Ave., was told that a similar request was denied by City Council in 2011 due to a lack of warrants. Resident asked how he can Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 Page 10 of 14 continue this request, and was told he can voice his concerns at a City Council meeting, or to submit a petition. D7. A request was made to install traffic signals at the south ramps of TH 62 and Gleason Rd. Requestor stated that this intersection is dangerous and very busy during the afternoon rush hour. Information was given to the requestor regarding how to submit this request directly to MnDOT, who has traffic control jurisdiction at this location. D8. A resident called to inquire about additional traffic control at Vernon Avenue and Ayrshire Boulevard. Vernon Ave is a county road, thus the requestor was given contact information for Hennepin County engineering. D9. An email was received from a resident of Interachen Blvd, stating that traffic seems to be moving too fast on Interlachen eastbound near Vernon. Resident requested additional enforcement. The email was forwarded to Edina Police Department. Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 Page 11 of 14 Appendix A: Crosswalk policy 1. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be placed only at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations not readily apparent as having pedestrian movement. 2. Pedestrian crosswalks shall only be placed in an area that has in excess of 20 pedestrian crossings for a minimum of two hours during any eight-hour period. 3. Marking of pedestrian crosswalks shall be established by analyzing the "Vehicle Gap Time". The "Vehicle Gap Time" is the total number of gaps between vehicular traffic (that are equal to or exceed the required pedestrian crossing time of three feet per second) recorded during the average five minute period in the Peak Hour. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be marked and signed using the following criteria: a. More than five Gaps — Pavement markings and signage only. b. Four to five Gaps — Add activated pedestal mounted flasher. Add overhead mounted flasher if roadway is over 40 feet wide. c. Less than three Gaps — Add activated overhead mounted flasher. The activated pedestal and overhead mounted flasher shall be designed per City Engineer Standards. 4. Pedestrian crosswalks shall not be located on arterial roads or roads with a speed limit greater than 30 MPH unless in conjunction with signalization. 5. Pedestrian crosswalks shall only be placed at intersections. 6. Any of the following conditions may warrant pedestrian crosswalks: a. Those locations adjacent to and along established pedestrian routes to and from a school. b. Locations adjacent to community centers, libraries, and other high use public facilities. c. Locations adjacent to public parks. d. Locations where accident records, sight obstructions and/or pedestrian volume (see No. 2) warrants the installation. e. Locations where significant numbers of handicapped persons cross a street. f. Locations where significant numbers of senior citizens cross a street. Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 Page 12 of 14 Appendix B: Stop Sign Warrants (MNMUTCD) When it is determined that a full stop is always required on an approach to an intersection a STOP (R1-1) sign shall be used.... At intersections where a full stop is not necessary at all times, consideration should first be given to using less restrictive measures such as YIELD signs. The use of STOP signs on the minor-street approaches should be considered if engineering judgment indicates that a stop is always required because of one or more of the following conditions: A. The vehicular traffic volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles per day; B. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately observe conflicting traffic on the through street or highway. C. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to correction with the installation of a STOP sign have been reported within a 12-month period, or that five or more such crashes have been reported within a 2-year period. Such crashes include right-angle collisions involving road users from the minor street failing to yield the right- of-way to traffic on the through street or highway. Additional warrants from the city of Edina list that: 1. If an intersection experiences five (5) or more right angle accidents in a three (3) year period, stop• signs should be considered. 2. If the presence of a sight obstruction is contributing to accidents at an intersection, removal of the sight obstruction should be sought before considering a stop sign. 3. If the 85th percentile speed on any leg of an intersection is more than five (5) MPH over the posted speed limit, a stop sign should be considered for the intersecting street. 4. If traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicles per day on each of the intersecting streets, stop signs should be considered. 5. Residential stop signs shall not be installed in an attempt to control speed. 6. Residential stop signs shall not be installed in an attempt to control volume. Applicable multi-directional stop control warrant: Minimum volumes a. The vehicular volume entering the intersection from the major street approaches 300 vehicles per day for eight total hours of an average day; and b. The combined vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle volume entering the intersection on the minor street approaches averages at least 200 units per hour for the same eight hours, with an average delay to minor-street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the highest hour. Consideration should also be given to controlling turns, pedestrian conflicts, and sight- distances for stopped vehicles. Traffic Safety Committee Report, Page 13 of 14 July 2, 2014 F.,rki c4. -71-, -4i. LVivicio\ 05 ADT, 1 E F Appendix C: Brookside and Division/44th Project Name. computations For Improvement No UontraN No 5.31-oot 01 111 RR P X:f(1 By Date 11 4 m-F AD5 6/iVpAi Traffic Safety Committee Report, July 2, 2014 Page 14 of 14 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 17, 2014 Subject: 2015 Edina Transportation Commission Work Plan Update Action Requested: No action requested. Agenda Item #: VI. C. Action 111 Discussion 10 Information El Information / Background: Please recall that last month Chair Bass asked Commissioners to begin considering the 2015 Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) work plan. At that time, copies of the 2014 ETC work plan and Annual Work Plan templates were handed out. The Edina City Council will be reviewing submitted Boards and Commissions 2015 Work Plans at their October 7, 2014 City Council Workshop. Staff is requesting that the ETC start developing the 2015 work plan. Attachments: 2014 Edina Transportation Commission Work Plan Status Update Annual Work Plans Schedule and template G: \ Engineedng \ Infrastructure \Streets\ Traffic \TRANSP COMM\ Agendas & RR's\ 2014 R&R\ 20140717 \Item VI.C. 2015 ETC Work Plan.docx City of Edina . 4801 W. 50th St. . Edina, MN 55424 2014 New Initiative Target Completion 7/08 Status Update Date Target Completion Date 2014 New Initiative 7/08 Status Update Meet with Police Department and Public Works annually to discuss shared interests such as traffic education and enforcement, street maintenance as it affects cyclists and pedestrians, etc. Police Chief Dave Nelson met with the ETC at the May 15 meeting. Public Works Director Brian Olson met with the ETC at the June 19 meeting. June 2014 Progress Report: Monthly meetings held with resident advisory group and internal staff team since September 2013. Plan outline, draft chapters and design guidelines developed and shared with these groups. August 2014 Living Streets Plan Consultant hired to develop Living Streets branding campaign. Logo/brand developed, outreach plan in process. Living Streets Joint Work Session with Council held on July 1 Anticipated Plan completion in November. Progress Report: EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2014 Annual Work Plan 2014 New Initiative Target Completion Date 7/08 Status Update Valley View Rd between Gleason Rd and Antrim Rd June 2014 Staff had one preliminary meeting with School District staff and — work with School District and Active Routes to its engineer/architect regarding traffic/circulation issues. Staff is School working group to address traffic issues. proposing to implement proposed sidewalk on south side of Valley View Rd. from Gleason Rd. to Chapel Ln. (2014 PACS Fund) Progress Report: 2014 New Initiative Target Completion Date 7/08 Status Update $8,000 grant available from SHIP 3 funds, remaining amount from the PACS Fund. ETC held preliminary discussion at their June 19 meeting. City Staff met to discuss safety campaign in late June. Campaign to be rolled out in full in spring of 2015. Educational Safety Campaign May 2014 Progress Report: Ongoing Responsibilities 7/08 Status Update Living Streets Policy: A. Active Routes to School Comprehensive Plan — continue to look at A. City Council approved ARTS Plan in June. ARTS Working Group opportunities for funding. meeting quarterly to guide implementation/funding opportunities. B. Sidewalk Plan — finalize priority sidewalk plan B. Draft plan developed and presented to Council at July 1 work session. Staff anticipates council approval in September (prior to approval of final Living Streets Plan). C. Way-finding Signage for bikeways and pedestrians C. Anticipated completion in November (when Living Streets Plan is complete). D. Education and Communication D. Components being developed through branding and educational/safety campaigns. Broader Living Streets (plan and project-based) education and communication developed during process of drafting plan. E. Ordinance Review for Policy E. Anticipated completion in November (when Living Streets Plan is complete). Ongoing Responsibilities 7/08 Status Update Ongoing PACS Program Greater Southdale Area Transportation Study — anticipated completion date of August 2014 Project delayed as Southdale TIF funds were redirected for the 50th & France Parking Improvements Review transportation projects in the proposed Capital Improvement Program ETC to review at their July 17 meeting Review Public Works street mill and overlays and seal coat projects as to opportunities for remarking for bicycle facilities Projects reviewed by staff and ETC. Olinger Blvd (2014 mill and overlay) and Ohms Ln/W. 72nd St (2013 mill and overlay) identified for bike facility striping/signage France Avenue Intersections Improvement Project Currently under construction. Communications/outreach efforts ongoing. Construction anticipated to be complete this fall. Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail ETC approved Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) final alignment at June 19 meeting. Will be presented to Council for approval on July 15. TRPD hopes to construct entire Edina segment 2015-2017 Traffic Safety Reviews — Mapping system to access traffic safety complaints and resolutions, and traffic data Ongoing. The City hired a consultant this Spring to assist with mapping. Communications Committee Ongoing Coordination with Bike Edina — Review Bicycle Friendly Community Application City received a Bronze level Bicycle Friendly Community Award in May. Grandview Area Ongoing SW LRT Update provided to ETC at their January meeting. Discussed status of freight and passenger rail in the MN&S corridor. Proposed Month for Joint Work Session: G: \ Engineering \ Infrastructure \StreetATraffic \TRANSP COMM \Workplan\ 2014 \ 20140708 Update 2014 ETC Work Plan.docx (BOARD/COMMISSION) 2015 Annual Work Plan Complete each section with a white background. Add or delete tables as needed. Return to the Assistant City Manager by September 24. 2015 New Initiative Target Completion Date Budget Required Staff Support Required Council Approval Progress Report: 2015 New Initiative Progress Report: Date Target Completion Budget Required Staff Support Required Council Approval Target Completion Date Budget Required Staff Support Required Council Approval 2015 New Initiative Progress Report: Target Completion Date Budget Required 2015 New Initiative Staff Support Required Council Approval Progress Report: 2015 New Initiative Target Completion Date Budget Re. uired Staff Support Required Council Approval Progress Report: 2015 New Initiative Target Completion Budget Staff Support Required Council Date Required Approval Progress Report: 2015 New Initiative Target Completion Budget Staff Support Required Council Date Required Approval Progress Report: Ongoing Responsibilities Other Work Plan Ideas Considered for Current Year or Future Years ProposedManth for Joint Work Session: Staff Comments: Council Comments: February: New member interviews City Council finalizes work plans September: Work plan review with City Council New member appointments and orientation Annual meeting — New officers elected Board and Commission Annual Calendar January: New member recruitment Annual Work Plan Begins City of Edina • 4801 W. 506 St. • Edina, MN 55424 161 Action El Discussion El Information MSA PACS Draft 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Plan Projects: Year Anticipated Project REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 17, 2014 Subject: Capital Improvement Plan Update Action Requested: No action requested. Information / Background: City staff in all departments are currently developing the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2015 to 2019. Engineering staff is proposing the following transportation-related projects for that period. For each year, the table below indicates whether Municipal State Aid (MSA) or Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Funds are anticipated to be used for each project. It should be noted that the projects listed in 2015 and 2016 are estimated to utilize most of the PACS Fund budget for those years. For the remaining years (2017-2019), much more of the PACS Fund budget is open for projects that will be defined at later dates. Likewise, transportation projects listed in the CIP after 2016 will be revisited annually to determine if and when they may be constructed. 2015 Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Arden Park D X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Countryside H X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Prospect Knolls B Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Dewey Hill G W. 54th Street Reconstruction (Wooddale Ave to France Ave) X Valley View Road Reconstruction (McCauley Tr to Mark Terrace Dr) X Cahill Rd/Dewey Hill Rd Intersection (Roundabout) X Interlachen Blvd Sidewalk (Oxford Ave to Vernon Ave) X Vernon Rd Sidewalk (Gleason Rd to Blake Rd) X W. 65th St Sidewalk (Valley View Rd to 6500 France Ave) X RRFB Pedestrian Crossings (locations TBD) X On-Street Bicycle Facility Pavement Markings (locations TBD) X Agenda Item #: VI. B. REPORT I RECOMMENDATION Page 2 Year Anticipated Project MSA PACS 2016 Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Strachauer Park A X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Golf Terrace B X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Morningside A/White Oaks C X Tracy Avenue Reconstruction (Benton Ave to Valley View Rd) X Parklawn Avenue Reconstruction (France Ave to W. 76th St) X W. 54th Street (west of Xerxes Ave) Valley View Road/Valley Lane Bridge (over Nine-Mile Creek) Oaklawn Ave Sidewalk (72nd St to south of Gilford Dr) X W. 64th St Sidewalk (York Ave to Xerxes Ave) X Xerxes Avenue South Sidewalk (58th St to 60th St) X RRFB Pedestrian Crossings (locations TBD) X On-Street Bicycle Facility Pavement Markings (locations TBD) X 2017 Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Birchcrest A X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Normandale Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Parkwood Knolls B X Xerxes Avenue South Sidewalk (56th St to 58th St) X On-Street Bicycle Facility Pavement Markings (locations TBD) X Miscellaneous Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects X 2018 Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Chowen Park A X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Chowen Park B X Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Dewey Hill B-E 62nd Street Reconstruction (Valley View Rd to France Ave) X On-Street Bicycle Facility Pavement Markings (locations TBD) X Miscellaneous Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects X 2019 Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Prospect Knolls A Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Indian Hills C/Creek Valley B Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Countryside I Neighborhood Reconstruction Program: Concord D/Parnela Park B, C and E On-Street Bicycle Facility Pavement Markings (locations TBD) X Miscellaneous Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects X Attachments: 2015-2019 Anticipated Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Map G:\ Engineering \ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRANSP COMM \Agendas & RR's \ 2014 R&R \ 20140717 \ Item VI.B. Capital Improvement Plan Update.docx Presidents A Presidents B Interlachen Park A Highlands B Parkwood Knolls A Parkwood Knolls IFox Mead.' F Parkwood Knolls 0 2 Fox Meadow E Parkwood Knol cC cri) Fox Meadow D it tC Parkwood Knolls N Fox Meadow C Pamela Park D Concord F Concord E Pamela Park A Concord G Rolling Green Hilldale Lake Comelia A Lake Comelia C Brookview Heights D Brookview Heights C Brookview Heights A Dewey Hill E Dewey Hill D Dewey Hill C Indian Hills A ler) Indian Trails Indian Hills Indian Hills C 'Creek Valley B Indlenhead Lake VALLEY VIEW RD Braemar Hills 0E4...mar Hills C Braemar Hills E Creek Valley C YO R K AV E XE RX E S A V E S Cahill Todd Park A Highlands FHighlands E HIghlendo Grandview C Lake Highlands D Highlands C Grandview B MALONEY AVE VAN Presidents C VALKENSURG Presidents D INTERL,n CHIEN Interlachen Park B COUNTP, CLUB Parkwood Knolls K Parkwood Knolls LParkwood Knolls J INTERLACHEN BLVD Fox Meadow G Parkwood Knolls P Parkwood Knolls C Fox Meadow B P Parkwood Knolls G arkwood Knolls D Parkwood Knolls E Fox M°°d°w A ,otA ' Parkwood Knolls F GL E A S ON RD Countryside G r3.-E.DECEN Mud Lake Bredesen Park A Bredesen Park C Parkwood Knolls H Bredesen Park B Indian Hills E Indian Hills D Indian Hills F Arrowhead Lake .kfk Creek Valley A ,i, Grandview Melody Lake D Golf Terrace A Melody Lake A 1'66 3,,,Melody Lake C Melody Lake B Birchcrest C _ . - rmandale Park C Normandale Park A Normanda/e Park B Lake Comelia F Country Club C EDINA COUNTR, CLUB Minnehaha Woods AMinnehaha Woods D •TH ST W yor Arden P3111-l3 Lake Comelia D Lake Cornelia E FR A N C E A V E S Ed inborough 78TH ST W Note/Disclaimer The dates shown on the map represent the anticipated years of construction and are subject to change based on budgetary issues, adjacent projects, resident input and other factors. Not all bituminous roadways within the City are shown. If a road is not highlighted then the potential reconstruction date is beyond the City's long term planning process. The City of Edina's street improvement policy is to assess residents for a portion of the roadway reconstruction costs. Public utility improvements are paid for from the City's utility fund. Extensive evaluation regarding the condition of the bituminous pavement, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main were used to set the priority of roadway improvements. This map only addresses local bituminous streets and does not address State-Aid routes or concrete streets within the City. Lake Edina South Comelia B Lake Edina _FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE Morningside C Morningside D Morningside E 4„`A 51 it' "rir M4mtngsieeA White Oaks B Country Club A Country Club B White Oaks A Minnehaha Woods C Chowen Park C Minnehaha Woods B • ft tavola Park-E 58TH ST W Chowen Park BChowen Park A 11130 Southdale C Lake Cornelia The Heights A The Heights B Southdale B Southdale A 66TH ST W 70TH ST W South Cornelia D South Comelia C Parklawn B Parklawn A 76TH ST W City of Edina 2014-2019 Anticipated Local Bituminous Street Reconstruction Presidents E 1/44 Lake Concord H Cs), Pamela Concord A Concord B PamelPark B Concord C Coneded D Pamela Park C Todd Park D J Todd; Park E Todd Park C T dd Park B 7T, 54TH ST W Creek Knolls Sunny Slope Harvey Lake Highlands A "2211414ln Fun voll 44.11.44 FCountryside E Countryside D Countryside C Countryside A Cou - 70TH ST W Braemar Hills B Prospect Knolls D Prospect Knolls A 8 Prospect Knolls C DEWEY HILL RD _ Dewey Hill Aprway Hill F Dewey Hill B • CA H IL L RD Lake Cornelia B Brookview Heights B South Comelia A Braemar Hills A BRAEMAR PARK GOLF COURSE Legend Anticipated Year 2014 2015 Mill 2016 2017 2018 2019 Reconstruction Assessment Areas Need to zoom Into map to seed neighborhood area. June 2014 Engineering Dept. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Work Session Item #: VI. A. Action Discussion Information El Information / Background: Please recall that Council passed the Living Streets Policy in August of last year. Since that time, monthly meetings have been held with the Living Streets Advisory Group (LSAG), made up of members of Edina's boards and commissions, and an internal team comprised of Edina staff members from various departments. Staff is in the process of preparing the draft Living Streets (Implementation) Plan and anticipates the final Living Streets Plan will be presented to Council later this fall. On July I, staff and the LSAG attended a City Council work session to solicit input from Council on the Plan; specifically, the Living Streets street types and design guidelines (attached) were discussed, as well as how the Plan will ultimately function. In general, the Council had very positive feedback regarding the draft Plan, and expressed a desire to approve the Sidewalk Facilities Plan (a component of the Living Streets design guidelines) prior to the approval of the entire Plan document. The former is anticipated to be ready for Council approval in September, while the latter is anticipated to be approved by year's end. Additionally, while the Living Streets Plan functions as a set of guidelines, Council and the LSAG generally agreed that the Plan should be referenced by City Code/Ordinance in order to give the Plan more influence. Attached are two chapters from the draft Living Streets Plan: the "Network of Living Streets" which covers the different types of Living Streets and their location, and the "Design Guidelines," which discusses the different Living Streets elements and how they are applied (including Sidewalk Maps). These chapters are included here because they illustrate the physical manifestation of the Living Streets Policy. Below is an outline of the Plan, the other chapters of which are in various levels of completion. Draft Living Streets Plan Outline I. Background 1.1. Introduction 1.2. The Challenge 1,3. Understanding Living Streets Action Requested: No action requested. To: Edina Transportation Commission From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: July 17, 2014 Subject: Living Streets Plan Update City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 1.4. Benefits of Living Streets 1.5. Supporting City Plans 2. Vision, Principles and Benchmarks 2.1. Vision 2.2. Principles 2.3. Benchmarks and Performance Measures 3. Network of Living Streets 3.1. Classification and Roles of Streets 3.2. Living Street Types 4. Design Guidelines 4.1. Streets 4.2. Pedestrian Facilities 4.3. Bicycle Facilities 4.4. Traffic Calming 4.5. Streetscape and Stormwater Management (draft outline) 4.6. Lighting and Street Furniture 5. Design Process and Resident Engagement 6. Connectivity Guidelines 6.1. Private Development 6.2. Neighborhood Parks 6.3. Schools Attachments: Draft Living Streets Plan Chapter 3: Network of Living Streets Draft Living Streets Plan Chapter 4: Design Guidelines G: \ Engineering \ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \ TRANSP COMM\ Agendas & PR's \ 2014 R&R \ 20140717 \Item VIA. Living Streets Plan Update.docx 41 011.n edina 16-611 living streets our streets connect us all 3.NETWORK OF LIVING STREETS INTRODUCTION Edina Living Streets defines a new set of Street Types that classify the City's streets based not only on their function, but also on the character of the street and adjacent land uses. These Street Types are developed to guide future road design projects and are meant to supplement the traditional functional classification system of streets. The new Street Types support Living Streets principles and designs, and reflect the diverse range of conditions in Edina. Every Edina street is unique and each Street Type plays an important role in its surrounding neighborhood and within the City's overall street network. Designs should balance the accommodation of motor vehicles with the Living Streets vision of promoting safety and convenience, enhancing community identity, creating economic vitality, improving sustainability, and providing meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. Current Functional Classification The functional street classification system uses a hierarchy to group classes of streets based on the relative emphasis of motor vehicle mobility and capacity versus non-motorized transportation and property access. The City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan identifies the following street functional classification hierarchy: • Local Streets: These roadways provide the most access and the least mobility within the overall system. They allow access to individual homes, shops and similar traffic destinations. While through traffic is discouraged on local streets, a new street type called the Local Connector is introduced below as part of the Living Streets Plan that may accommodate local through traffic. • Collector Streets: The collector system provides connections between neighborhoods, from neighborhoods to minor business concentrations, and between major traffic generators. Mobility and land access are equally important, and direct access should predominantly be to developed concentrations. Collector streets carry traffic between the arterial system and the local streets. Examples include West 70th Street and Wooddale Avenue. • Minor Arterials: The emphasis on these roadways is on mobility as opposed to access; only concentrations of commercial or industrial land uses should have direct access to them (exceptions to this include minor arterials such as France Avenue, which includes sections with residential access). Minor arterials should connect to principal arterials, or other minor arterials, and collector streets. Examples include France Avenue and West 50th Street. • Principal Arterials: These types of roadways carry the highest volumes of traffic and include all Interstate freeways. The emphasis is on mobility as opposed to land access. Principal arterials connect only with other Interstate freeways, other principal arterials, and select minor arterials and collectors. Examples include Trunk Highways 100, 169 and 62, and Interstate Highway 494. Principal arterials are not within the maintenance jurisdiction of the City, and as such will not be included in this Living Streets Plan. This traditional functional classification system by itself, however, is not sufficient when designing an Edina Living Street. Street design should also take into consideration neighborhood context and the Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-I Network of Living Streets Ark edina tem living 'Iwage) streets our streets connect us all diverse uses and users of Edina's streets. The Street Types contained in this Plan were developed to provide a range of options to help make informed decisions regarding street design. In terms of functional classification, this Living Streets Plan would apply to the Local Streets, Collectors, and Minor Arterials as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. See Living Streets Classification Map (Figure 3.1) for locations of street types, and refer to Table 3.1 for a summary of each street type and their major design elements. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-2 Network of Living Streets our streets connect us all City of Edina Classification of Living Streets 1 Living Streets Classification Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Connector Local Street Figure 3.1. Edina Living Streets Classification Map WE Engineering Dept July, 2014 .4011, edina fiiiIINA CEP streets Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-3 Network of Living Streets A 0k, edina '410 streets our streets connect us all CLASSIFICATION AND ROLES OF LIVING STREETS The matrix below (Table 3.1) was prepared to summarize the options for each element that are available on each of the four types of Living Street. The following is a brief discussion of each type of Living Street, including example design templates (cross sections). For all four street types, there are options for design elements such as the number of driving lanes, whether or not there are parking and/or bike facilities, whether or not sidewalks are to be provided, etc. The design templates represent the minimum and maximum roadway widths and number of design elements for each roadway type; the templates are not meant to represent all options and combinations of design elements. Table 3.1. Edina Living Streets: Street Types Edina Living Streets: Street Types Street Type Driving Lanes I Parking Lanes Bike Facilities2 Sidewalk(s) 3, 8 2 3 4 0 1 2 0 1 2 Local Street • 5 0 0 04 0 6 0 7 0 Local Connector • 5 0 0 0 4 • 0 Collector Street 0 0 0 0 0 • • 0 Minor Arterial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = Optional feature = Required feature Notes: I . Parking shall fit context, and be limited where unnecessary or to improve safety. 2. Refer to the Bicycle Transportation Plan for location of approved bicycle routes. 3. Multi-use paved path may be used where appropriate. 4. If included, shared bicycle facilities are recommended on local and local connector streets. 5. Travel and parking lanes typically not striped. 6. Requires wider street width to accommodate pedestrians in roadway. 7. Required where street abuts or is in the vicinity of a public school, park or public building. 8. Refer to Context Criteria when considering an optional sidewalk. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-4 Network of Living Streets 17' 2-way Driving lane 7' Parking lane 0 Min 5' Min 5' boulevard sidewalk Varies Varies A010\ edina /*did streets our streets connect us all Local Street For the purposes of the Living Streets Plan, Local Streets are those with a Local Street functional classification as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. These streets provide immediate access to residences and are used primarily for local trips and are characterized by lower vehicle and pedestrian volumes. The primary role of Local Streets is to contribute to a high quality of life for residents of Edina. The following Living Streets standards and typical street cross-sections apply to Local Streets (the typical section below is a representative example of this street type and is not meant to represent all possible configu rations): • Street Width: 24 feet to 27 feet, depending on context and facilities included (see below). • 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 where the street is near a public school, public building, community playing field or neighborhood park. Recommended on one or both sides of the street where determined by context. See Pedestrian Facilities chapter for more information. Living Streets: Local Street Type 24' Roadway width (27' with no sidewalk) 60' Typical right of way O Parking: None, one or both sides of the street, depending on context • Sidewalk required on local streets when certain criteria are met. See Pedestrian Facilities in Chapter 4 Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-5 Network of Living Streets 24 Roadway width „,40n N edina 44 Fiala '1%10 streets our streets connect us all Local Connector For the purposes of the Living Streets Plan, Local Connectors are those with a Local Street functional classification as defined in the Comprehensive Plan but providing higher traveled connections between neighborhoods, destinations and higher-level roadways. 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. The following Living Streets standards and typical street cross-sections apply to Local Connectors (the typical section below is a representative example of this street type and is not meant to represent all possible configurations): • Street Width: 24 feet to 30 feet, depending on context and facilities included (see below). • 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. See Pedestrian Facilities chapter for more information. Living Streets: Local Connector-Street Type 7' Parking Min 5' Min 5' Varies 17' 2-way Driving lane lane boulevard sidewalk Varies 60' Typical right of way • • Parking: None, one or both sides of the street, depending on context O If an approved bike route, shared bicycle facilities are recommended Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-6 Network of Living Streets • Varies • 8' Parking lane 5 Bicycle 5' Bicycle Min 5' Min 5' lane 11' Driving lane 11' Driving lane lane boulevard sidewalk Varies • 104 -1n 4 04 40'11,‘ edina *100 streets our streets connect us all Collector Street For the purposes of the Living Streets Plan, Collector Streets are any streets having a collector street functional classification as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Collector Streets provide connections between neighborhoods, from neighborhoods to minor business concentrations, and between major traffic generators. Mobility and land access are equally important, and direct access should predominantly be to developed concentrations. Like for Minor Arterials (see below), safe and accessible pedestrian and bicycle accommodations should be provided at intersections along Collector Streets. The following Living Streets standards and typical street cross-sections apply to Collector Streets (the typical section below is a representative example of this street type and is not meant to represent all possible configurations): • Street Width: 32 feet to 52 feet, depending on context and facilities included (see below). • Travel Lanes: Two or three • Parking: None, one or both sides if the street, depending on context • Bicycle Facilities: Required if on an approved primary or secondary bike route • Sidewalks: Required on one side of the street at minimum, on both sides as determined by context. See Pedestrian Facilities chapter for more information. Living Streets: Collector-Street Type 40' Roadway width (32' with no parking) IEJ 4- se Typical right of way Parking: None, one or both sides of the street, depending on context Roadway width may increase due to additional turn lane Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-7 Network of Living Streets edina LI=Wg livit , Niat' streets our streets connect us all Minor Arterial For the purposes of the Living Streets Plan, Minor Arterials are any streets having a minor arterial functional classification as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. As Minor Arterials have fewer intersections, which is convenient for motor vehicles, the combination of higher speeds and longer distances between signalized crossings can make these street types difficult for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross. Thus, it is important to provide safe and accessible pedestrian and bicycle accommodations at intersections along Minor Arterials. The following Living Streets standards apply to Minor Arterials, with the exception of minor arterials under Hennepin County jurisdiction (the typical section below is a representative example of this street type and is not meant to represent all possible configurations): • Street Width: Varies, depending on context and facilities included • Travel Lanes: Two, three or four • Parking: None, one or both sides if the street, depending on context • Bicycle Facilities: Required • Sidewalks: Required on both sides of the street. See Pedestrian Facilities chapter for more information. Living Streets: Minor Arterial Type Min 5' Min 5' 6' Bicycle 6' Bicycle Min 5' Min 5' Varies sidewalk boulevard lane 11' Driving lane 12' Turn lane 11' Driving lane lane boulevard sidewalk Varies 4 *4- 1- 10,1 46' Roadway width (27' with no sidewalk) 0.',! 80' Typical right of way (1,) Parking: None, one or both sides of the street, depending on context a) Roadway width may increase due to additional parking, driving and/or turn lanes Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 3-8 Network of Living Streets Sidewalk Boulevard 5' 5' 5' 5' Turn Lane Travel Lane r aiketafte. Parking Lane 5' 5' 5' 5' Local streets are one sides, an Local connectors are on sides, an 12' 12' to two travel lanes, with d do not have pavement e to two travel lanes, with d do not have pavement 1 I' I l' parking on one or both markings. parking o one or both markings. 5. 8' 6' 8' Street Type Local Street Local Connector Collector Street Minor Arterial N otes Travel Lanes 0 On local and connector streets with parking on one side of the street and without shared-lane bicycle pavement markings, the overall minimum pavement width shall be 24 feet. 0 On streets without sidewalks, total pavement width shall be 27 feet to accommodate pedestrians walking on the street. Bicycle Lanes o The preferred width for bicycle lanes is 6 feet in areas with high volumes of bicyclists and in areas of high parking turnover. Bicycle lanes 4 feet in width may be considreed on local or connector streets when not adjacent to on- street parking or at constrained intersections. Decisions regarding parking lane width when adjacent to bicycle lanes should consider parking turnover rates and volumes of heavy vehicles. On collector and minor arterial Street Types, or where pedestrians are likely to travel in groups, wider sidewalks (8 to 1 2 feet) may be recommended. Boulevard width may vary depending on right-of-way or topographical constraints. In shopping districts characterized by zero-lot lines, street furniture and/or on-street parking, the boulevard may be narrowed or eliminated to accommodate a wider sidewalk. e Stormwater best management practices (e.g. rain gardens, street trees) will be located in the boulevard where deemed appropriate. 0 Parking Lanes 0 Sidewalk e Boulevard 0 0 41,01k edina ivL Footig %C0 streets our streets connect us all 4. DESIGN GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION TBD Refer to Table 3. I for a summary of how each element below is applied to each Living Street type. Figure 4.1 below indicates minimum widths for pedestrian facilities and roadway lanes. Figure 4.1. Minimum widths for pedestrian facilities and roadway lanes Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-I Design Guidelines Figure 4.2. Wooddale Avenue parking lane 4,-As* edina streets our streets connect us all VEHICULAR FACILITIES Driving Lanes Driving lanes provide travel space for all motorized and non-motorized vehicles. It is recommended that lane widths be minimized to reduce impervious surface and construction and maintenance costs. Reduced lane widths encourage slower motor vehicle speeds, thereby calming traffic, and also free up space that can then be devoted to dedicated bike lanes or other purposes. Where curb and gutter exist, lane widths are measured to the curb face instead of the edge of the gutter pan or pavement. Width Lane width is determined by context; however, unnecessarily wide lanes should be avoided unless County or State regulations dictate otherwise (e.g. I I' travel lane widths are recommended for Collector Streets). Where dedicated pedestrian and/or pedestrian facilities are not provided, the outside travel lane may be widened to accommodate non-motorized roadway users. Parking Lanes On-street parking can be important in the built environment to provide parking for residents and their guests, as a buffer for pedestrians using a sidewalk when no boulevard exists, to help calm traffic speeds, and for the success of adjacent retail businesses. The need for on-street parking shall be evaluated with each project. The evaluation shall consider: • Living Street and functional classification • Adjacent land uses • Parking demand (on-street parking that is not used results in unnecessarily wide streets, potentially increasing motor vehicle speeds) • Competing uses for road or right-of-way space • Construction and maintenance costs The construction of unnecessary parking should be avoided, with parking prioritized below all travel modes when designing a street. Where possible, on-street parking should be inset and coordinated with the use of curb extensions. Placement Parking is permitted on one or both sides of local and local connector streets. When a street is reconstructed, parking should be limited to one side of the street and pavement width reduced accordingly (or converted for non-motorized vehicle use). Parking should be provided along one side of collector and minor arterial streets unless prohibited. On-street parking may be considered along both sides of these streets, depending upon context. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-2 Design Guidelines A 41* edina Nona qc0 streets our streets connect us all Width On-street parking lanes shall be no less than 7 feet wide; unnecessarily wide parking lanes (i.e. greater than 8 feet) should be avoided. On streets where traffic levels or speed limits are higher than 30 mph (e.g. on some collectors and minor arterials), parking lane width may be increased to eight feet. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Refer to the Sidewealk Facilities Quadrant Maps (Figure 4.9 - Figure 4.12) for locations of sidewalks and park pathways. Sidewalks Sidewalks should provide a comfortable space for pedestrians between the roadway and adjacent land uses. Sidewalks are the most important component of pedestrian mobility. They provide opportunities for active living and access to destinations and critical connections between multiple modes of travel, as users of motor vehicles, transit and bicycles all must walk at some time during their trip. Sidewalks are required where (see Table 3. I for further information): • A street abuts or is in the vicinity of a public school, public building, community playfield, or neighborhood park. Termini to be determined by context. • On both sides of minor arterial streets. • On one or both sides of collector streets. • On one side of local connectors, or both sides as determined by context (see below). • As required by zoning code or condition of plan approval. Context Criteria The following context criteria may be used when determining whether an optional sidewalk should be required. The criteria may be applied in any combination, sidewalk may be required when: • Average daily traffic is greater than 500 vehicles. • 85th percentile speed is greater than 30 mph. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) Design Guidelines Figure 4.3. Sidewalk in the Country Club neighborhood using engineering judgment. An optional 4-3 Figure 4.4. 5-foot sidewalk with planted boulevard City-Wide Standard ("Continental") School Zone Standard ("Ladder") AO* edina "lima fClEgt" streets our streets connect us all • There is a history of crashes involving pedestrians walking along the roadway. • Transit stop(s) are present. • The street is identified as an active (safe) route to school, park, or commercial destination. • A sidewalk would create .a logical connection between destinations. • Site lines, roadway geometry, or insufficient lighting makes it difficult for motorists to see pedestrians walking along the roadway. • The street width is less than 27 feet. Width Sidewalks shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide to provide adequate space for two pedestrians to comfortably pass side-by-side. Wider sidewalks (8 to 12 feet) are recommended where pedestrians are likely to travel in groups, such as near schools and in shopping districts, or where adjacent to transit stops. Boulevard A standard minimum 5-foot boulevard (the space between the sidewalk and the curb or edge of pavement) shall be provided whenever possible to increase pedestrian safety and comfort, as well as providing space for snow storage (Figure 4.4). Minimum planted boulevard widths may be two feet (see following paragraph). In shopping districts characterized by zero-lot lines, street furniture and/or on-street parking, sidewalks may be wider with no boulevard. Additionally, a shallower boulevard or curbside sidewalk may be constructed when the cost of constructing a five-foot boulevard would be excessively disproportionate due to existing right- of-way or topographical constraints. Curbside sidewalks shall have a minimum width of 6 feet unobstructed for travel (5 feet clear of sign posts, traffic signals, utility poles, etc., plus one foot for snow storage/clearing operations). Pedestrian Crossings The safety of all street users, particularly more vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly and those with disabilities must be considered Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) Design Guidelines Figure 4.5. Edina marked crosswalks standards 4-4 Ark, edina amil living q*.lEgt,' streets our streets connect us all when designing a street. This is particularly pronounced at potential conflict points where pedestrians must cross streets. Both real and perceived safety must be considered when designing crosswalks — pedestrian crossings must be comfortable. A safe crossing that no one uses serves no purpose. Refer to Edina's Traffic Safety Committee and the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNMUTCD) for local traffic control policies regarding marked pedestrian crosswalks. Marked Crosswalks Marked crosswalks are commonly used at intersections and sometimes at mid-block locations, and are often the first tool used to address pedestrian crossing safety issues. By state law every intersection has crosswalks, whether marked or unmarked, and motorists are required to yield to pedestrians in these crosswalks (unless pedestrian crossing is prohibited). Marked crosswalks alert drivers to expect crossing pedestrians and direct pedestrians to desired crossing locations; however, marking crosswalks at every intersection is not necessary or desirable. Figure 4.6. Crossing island The City of Edina has standards for types or styles of marked crosswalks (see Figure 4.5). The type of marked crosswalk shall be determined by context and the following general principles: • City-wide standard (Continental) crosswalk: 36-inch wide x 72-inch long painted blocks, spaced at 36-inch intervals • School zone standard (Ladder): Same as Continental (above), with 8-inch lateral painted lines • Specialty crosswalks: May include brick inlay crosswalks (such as in the Countryside Neighborhood), colored concrete crosswalks (50th & France district) or existing patterned Duratherm crosswalks Crossing Islands and Curb Extensions Raised islands/medians and curb extensions are effective measures for improving street crossings. These tools reduce the distance and complexity of crossing wide streets with traffic coming from two opposing directions at once. They can also slow vehicle traffic (see Traffic Calming, XXX). With the use of crossing islands (sometimes referred to as a "median refuge") conflicts occur in only one direction at a time (Figure 4.6). Curb extensions (Figure 4.7) shorten crossing distance, reduce time it takes for a pedestrian to cross a Figure 4.7. Curb extension with crosswalk Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-5 Design Guidelines 4 41'11N edina f6=14 '%)10 streets our streets connect us all street and their exposure to moving vehicles, and can increase pedestrian visibility. See Table 4.2 for recommended applications of crossing islands/median and curb extensions at pedestrian crossings. Activated Mounted Flashers In addition to crossing islands and curb extensions, there are other measures to enhance and improve marked crosswalks. Enhanced crossing measures that may be applied in Edina include pedestrian-activated pedestal and overhead mounted flashers (Figure 4.8). While these techniques are typically applied at mid-block crossings to warn drivers that pedestrians may be present, they can also be used at crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections. If activated mounted flashers are used, they should be placed in conjunction with signs and crosswalks. An engineering study may be conducted to determine if a crossing may benefit from pedestrian-activated mounted flashers. Refer to the City's local traffic control policies for further information. Figure 4.8. Crossing with activated mounted flashers (Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons) Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-6 Design Guidelines 169 !" Oro.. 0n 091, awl. EL I G` Comm-liana % „,..0 „p.a..' 4, 1.4 1 W ,.... O.. A. 4... : - .. ...... I t Mud Lake 1 il et= ST 41 ,...,..- — 'I ;Coostr,11.9.A v,.....=:`, .7•17 " ... s ▪ t rt 4,.. • -... I Colattal rue & "", ,,,„,,,,,ro• ....,, ,,,,...n , wet f.---- --) Latham. \ I Caa.vi.a 2 Sn cor lo toff, A '', Y4,14r,,,,, New e I\...:V ,r i % I, a i 1, Chuck Station (Al.Ake-V i 4 .ArrrAvheal''''',19 ,.',111 SC,C610411171:...Y.TL4 \ e/1.4.4.,_, COI/ •% S '''''''''. \ ) q c, c „,,„ . ..„. .. ...,,,,. .____. :: % naemloirP.; i , 4 . 4. $ =NM n •n ••11 11n • MEN 11 1 1 I Eti:S • ::L-Ck'sh : 1.' - et 1 n „...,..,., \ .., C000noq e r„ N u sowo tenet GAtt( 2 i 1 tels“... ,,, •I, .i ‘ —./...\.,rstp.i.......,„ii ..i.../ ..j.. J:,,,,,,,,Ir.ysiczoc.,,,...,,,::::,,,, , Illianhea) a a, % k .‘a '4 te i \ ,i 1 g P _LotIonao 1 ; 45' n ;..... I II"' m um co .,...„,(•.. _,.7:,.....,,fe g i.„„,o, , E " '"l'-' OA ' = ' '.-n _ ' .1 I t . • t ; t I SI* 311 f I WM\ .1202.,02270 etra221,- gIr II I i : 1..1 hn 1 s. I .1.1eV'MMI X ' I 2 : , ,; %. 1 .1 I I i am.. mama n ....1. 1 sa...n .... I ; 4...... 2 e ; ' i .. et', w....,.... ..„.....t:k J^I° 'mai 111.1. 7 4 1 i f 1%o-owl"' l'oP,,, S & ,o4±.) .' .. & C4.a .1.03 t •cnn WO ,240 1 i tette. et 21022 ! i . •:::: a 4. liawk, ,,,,, 94 rla Ps .. 141, V210.1. et I ; i i .0,ttf°7 ..,0%.• • ',. . L'' lAi ' , k ) i ' :it:, \ 1 r 1 ao...0 c.a.. i I _ I 1 i ---- is\ ' •k, ; .p A L C.,,,,,,,,,A. Cetele•tet It 1 . *.. 1 3140.01501; eke; t2." i bd.-4 ..........„i ^ Ii Nomura Irk edina Hying VIM n 1110 streets our streets connect us all 4,011. edina jii 'SLCO streets our streets connect us all Draft Sidewalk Facilities: Northwest Quadrant Existing Sidewalk Living Streets Classification Existing Park Pathway Collector & Local Connector - - Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Regional Trail Minor Arterial - Recommended Active Routes To School Sidewalk ENO-we *ng D opt July, 2014 Figure 4.9. Pedestrian Facilities Map: Northwest Quadrant Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/ I 4) 4-7 Design Guidelines 9 6 3 Calvin 0-) Chn stian Golden 171 Montessor t 3 z 4.11.1111. tn a t Stephens Episcopal --41411141ittilterk ina ,a,eso 111147 FAA overlent 4044 4 0,0,4_ at, 1‘,4 ‘I.P1ViC r 1.1 ai;:ot Lady of & School '7. tate Church I icc • 1S.t c 1___4 '--.... '-.. e .._ Y .. , - \1 A I 3 a E C d omdam - n i : t , y I 2, , 1 II S C t h Pu retCehr == & s = .. L = •Su -=c t ==hh eorn .1 LuheranChurh Colony P r1 I .. i 3. . f Parkl 1 Baptist , a i , , Normandale I ,,,..,,, s Elementary i ....,...,... I 4 Southview =Edina Middle School Community Center Concord School St f Tuttle Pak Calvin Christian Rgorm Church Calvin Christian School I I k /Le „,,e4 1 , -1-11 Warne ...."" 1 te,... -- . ...0 ; ) .1* Draft Sidewalk Facilities: Northeast Quadrant wfa LIvIng Streets Classification Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pathway - - Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Regional Trail - - Recommended Active Routes To School Sidewalk Collector & Local Connector Minor Arterial Engineering Deal July, 2014 edina streets our streets connect us all edina 14zatal streets our streets connect us all Figure 4.10. Pedestrian Facilities Map: Northeast Quadrant Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-8 Design Guidelines oo. 5% etNontrk 71411.14S.W tstao tans ctok '111.WIN WU, RI) ru 4 1.144 . ant,a: 5 BENTON AN Guar. I' 'Mud Lake N.,. N. Colonial I- ite Chinch Station Cada P.", C.rek Valley is C4.4 Neu Schooli Cities 1 • cliee:h !Ana I ligh * Sch., Si Albans Eriaenpal ;. i V a I 1,, y Vico Middle Svhool I 5" i'ii.i.EY VIM RI) Cohere I e—.... ....'...7 , I.uhcrti )- • St l'atricht R N.I. m.o.. Catholic , tirtoL 70111STW anate 1il f ::„ 1.•.= I i I 1 attlage Ark 4.4't , IY Cf., i" v 4 Nore.odof tuthetate l 'a,r'ir.r• ChqI I fills 1 Congrefaional Ar • 1,1 MA 1.11dIVTall .)Arreityltead Sidewalk Facilities: Southwest Quadrant Living Streets Classification Collector & Local Connector Minor Arterial Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pathway — — Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Regional Trail — — Recommended Active Routes To School Sidewalk Ensinee mg Dept May. 2014 ed i na amil Uving n IletIt streets our streets connect us all 10°10N edina Femlid itz to streets our streets connect us all Figure 4.11. Pedestrian Facilities Map: Southwest Quadrant Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-9 Design Guidelines our streets connect us all e edina streets our streets connect us all Engheering Dept July, 2014 Fs I I i Station — I i ---'-....L t• I 1 1 ake\ _ • ii I Sinn *r PrK er Cornelia 40,,,T40 " I eV-Alms Ann. Park I kok, ii I I I ' / iL arra SSW ; 3 I --- --L_J 111 A I 4 72ND STW ••• • I I r Li ml McInnis C.11" Co mrs. ▪ •••••••••••=j . 7TIH STW J 76TH S TW • sautilamos.„„... i • I jjts,,.._ E Presbyterian "" I - Church I a Draft Sidewalk Facilities: Southeast Quadrant Living Streets ClasslflcatIon Collector & Local Connector Minor Arte d al Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pathway — — Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Regional Trail — Recommended Active Routes To School Sidewalk IeMIN edina 1%a> streets Figure 4.12. Pedestrian Facilities Map: Southeast Quadrant Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-10 Design Guidelines WimMillitM111 4a-'1A edina -!'t0 streets our streets connect us all BICYCLE FACILITIES The Living Streets Policy and Plan indicates that bicyclists — just like motorists and pedestrians — should have safe, convenient, and comfortable access to all destinations in the City. Indeed, every street (excepting principal arterials) is a bicycle street, regardless of bikeway designation. Edina's network of Living Streets shall accommodate all types, levels, and ages of bicyclists. Bicycle facilities should take into account vehicle speeds and volumes, with shared use on low volume, low-speed road and separation on higher volume, higher-speed roads. Types and Placement Table 3.1 indicates on which street types bicycle facilities (shared or separated) shall be located/considered. The City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan shall be consulted to determine where approved bike routes are located. Refer to Table 4.1 for guidance on the application of each type of bicycle facility. Bike Lanes Bike lanes provide dedicated space on the roadway for bicycle use. Bike lanes are separated from the lane used by motor vehicles by a solid white line. Bike lanes are also marked with a white bicycle symbol and arrow on the pavement and signed at regular intervals (Figure 4.13). "Buffered" bike lanes are similar to regular bike lanes, but also include a marked buffer between the bike lane and the adjacent driving lane. This buffer area is marked with white diagonals or chevrons to indicate that no vehicles are allowed to travel in the buffered area. As a bike lane approaches an intersection or bus stop, a dashed line may be used instead of a solid white line to indicate the space is shared by motorists and bicyclists. A dashed line may also Figure 4.13. Bike lane on Tracy Avenue Figure 4.14. Advisory bike lane Figure 4.15. Shared lane markings or "sharrows" Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4- I I Design Guidelines Figure 4.16. Bike Boulevard on Cornelia Drive Figure 4.17. "Share the Road" signage edina %egg' streets our streets connect us all be used to stripe the bike lane through intersections. Advisory Bike Lanes Advisory bike lanes are used on streets that are too narrow for dedicated bike lanes. Advisory bike lanes look like dedicated bike lanes, except a dashed line is used in place of a solid bike lane stripe (Figure 4.14). A dashed line signals to drivers that they may drive in the advisory bike lane. Advisory bike lanes do not narrow the travel lanes or reduce the amount of roadway space that can be used by motor vehicles. Additionally, they bring greater awareness to the roadway as shared space and can help to reduce vehicle speeds and improve roadway safety. At present, advisory bike lanes are considered experimental by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Shared Lane Markings Shared lane markings or "sharrows" (derived from "shared" and "arrows") are pavement markings used to mark a designated bike route. Placed in the travel lane, they encourage bicyclists to ride in a safe position outside of the door zone (where driver's side doors of parked cars open). Shared lane markings include a bicycle symbol and a double chevron indicating the direction of travel (Figure 4.15). They do not designate any part of the roadway as exclusive to either motorists or bicyclists. Rather, shared lane markings emphasize that the travel lane is shared. Bike Boulevard A bike boulevard is a lower-volume street that has been improved for bike traffic, often serving as an alternative bicycle route to a street with higher traffic volumes. Bike boulevards may include traffic-calming measures such as traffic circles, and can be optimized for use by cyclists (e.g. removing stop signs in through direction). Bike boulevards are designated with pavement markings that include a large bicycle symbol with the text "BLVD" (Figure 4.16). The markings are not intended to guide the bicyclists. Share The Road "Share The Road" reminds motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians that all modes of transportation may use the roadway. "Share The Road" may be posted in conjunction with shared lane markings, on a bike boulevard, or on a bike route without pavement markings (Figure 4.17). Where a bike lane ends, but the bike route continues, "Share The Road" may also be posted. Signage that Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/ I 4) Design Guidelines 4-12 Figure 4.18. Shared use path along Gallagher Drive Figure 4.19. Example of a paved shoulder ;4 05 1k„ edina rimmin qz§:e streets our streets connect us all indicates "Bikes May Use Full Lane" may also be considered where appropriate. Although all roads in Edina are shared, these signs communicate to motorists and cyclists that the road has been identified to encourage use by cyclists, but lacks separate bicycle facilities. Bicycle or Shared Use Path A bicycle or shared use path is a facility that has been designed for bicycle use and constructed separately from the roadway or shoulder. A bicycle path may be for exclusive use by bicyclists (bike path), or it may be shared with pedestrians (shared use). A bicycle path that is adjacent to a roadway is a side path (Figure 4.18). Paved Shoulders The shoulder is the part of the street that is contiguous to and on the same level as the part of the street that is regularly used for vehicle travel, and may be paved, gravel or dirt (Figure 4.19). The shoulder is typically separated from the traveled part of the street by a solid white line, called an "edge line" or "fog line." Paved shoulders can look a lot like bike lanes, but differ from bike lanes in some important ways: • Bike lanes have bicycle pavement markings and Bike Lane signs; paved shoulders do not. • Bike lanes have been designed for cycling; paved shoulders have not. • Parking is not permitted on bike lanes unless posted otherwise; parking is permitted on paved shoulders unless posted otherwise. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-13 Design Guidelines Figure 4.20. Bike lane "pocket" on W. 70th Street 404 n A3 edina Roma living qtgg' streets our streets connect us all • Cyclists may use the shoulder, but are not required to. Table 4.1. Appropriateness of bicycle facilities BICYCLE FACILITIES Living Streets Classification Local Street Local Connector Collector Street Minor Arterial Bike Lanes 0 0 0 Advisory Bike Lanes 0 0 Shared Lane Markings/Sharrows C.) 0 0 0 Bike Boulevard 0 0 "Share the Road" 0 0 0 0 Shared Use Path 0 0 0 0 Paved Shoulders 0 0 0 0 Legend: Appropriate Appropriate in specific circumstance: Not Appropriate Intersections Given that intersections are junctions where different modes of transportation meet, a well- designed intersection should facilitate the interaction between bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists and transit. This should be done in a safe and efficient manner that reduces conflicts between bicyclists and vehicles, including heightening the visibility, denoting a clear right-of- way, and ensuring all users are aware of each other. Bike Lane Markings Pavement markings for bike lanes (see above) should extend up to the crosswalk (or stop bar if crosswalk is not marked) to ensure that separation, guidance on proper positioning, and awareness by motorists are maintained through these conflict areas. At right-turn lanes, a bike lane "pocket" (Figure Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-1 4 Design Guidelines !Pk edina II-0 living "zgit) streets our streets connect us all 4.20) shall be placed between the right-turn lane and the rightmost through lane. If a full bike lane cannot be accommodated, a shared bicycle/right- turn lane can be installed that places a standard- width bike lane on the left side of the right-turn lane. A dashed stripe delineates the space for bicyclist and motorists within the shared lane. Sharrows are another option for marking a bike lane through an intersection where a bike lane pocket cannot be accommodated. Green Bike Lanes at Conflict Points Green colored pavements are used to highlight conflict areas between bicycles and motor vehicles at heavy turning and merging locations approaching and within intersections (Figure 4.21). Green colored pavement can be used in conjunction with sharrows and/or dashed white stripes to delineate the edge of the green colored pavement. Bicycle Signal Detection Bicycle detection is used at actuated traffic signals to alert the signal controller of bicycle crossing demand on a particular intersection approach. Bicycle detection can occur by automated means such as in-pavement detection loops (Figure 4.22). Such loops have increased sensitivity to detect bicycles. Signage and pavement markings should be used to provide clear guidance to bicyclists on how to actuate detection. Figure 4.21. Green colored pavement highlighting a "conflict area" at W. 706 Street and Metro Boulevard Figure 4.22. In-pavement bicycle detector loop on 546 Street at France Avenue TRAFFIC CALMING The primary goal of traffic calming is to slow motorists to a desired speed by using design in a context- sensitive manner while working with stakeholders. Traffic calming is acceptable and encouraged on all street types, and when utilized effectively can physically encourage motorists to drive at the desired speed. Traffic calming uses a combination of physical measures that alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non-motorized street users while accommodating the needs of motorists. While speed reduction of motor vehicles and increased motorist awareness of non-motorized road users are the primary goals of traffic calming, these measures can also be designed to treat and manage stornnwater and improve the aesthetics of the street. Please refer to Table 4.2 for guidance regarding the applicability of the traffic calming techniques described below. It should be noted that often a combination of techniques is needed to calm traffic Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-IS Design Guidelines edina Nowid streets our streets connect us all effectively, and their application should take into account overall traffic flow and emergency vehicle access throughout the corridor. Road Diet A road diet entails the narrowing and/or removal of driving lanes from the street cross-section (both of which are traffic calming measures). The reclaimed roadway space can be used for bicycle lanes, sidewalks, landscaped boulevards or medians, and/or on-street parking. For streets to be considered for this measure Raised Medians Often used as components of a road diet, raised, planted medians can calm traffic in multiple ways. Medians can help define the travel lane, while the vertical curb and median plantings provide visual cues to motorists to slow speeds. Medians that extend through intersections can also provide volume control by blocking through movement at a cross street. Additionally, medians can provide a refuge (if designed appropriately) for pedestrians crossing a wide, multi-lane street (see "Crossing Island and Curb Extensions" above). Roundabouts and Traffic Circles Roundabouts and traffic circles require traffic to circulate counterclockwise around a center island. Traffic circles are raised islands placed in intersections, and are effective for calming traffic at these locations (Figure 4.25). This is especially true within neighborhoods, where large vehicle traffic is not a major concern but speeds, volumes and safety are problems. Traffic circles replace stop signs at intersections, which can improve safety at locations where stop sign compliance may be lower. Roundabouts, unlike traffic circles, are used on higher volume streets to allocate to minimize conflicts between competing movements (Figure 4.26). Roundabout have been shown to be reduce the number and severity of crashes while at the same time more efficiently moving vehicles Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) Design Guidelines Picture (see caption) Figure 4.23. Roadway before road diet Picture (see caption) Figure 4.24. Roadway after road diet Figure 4.25. Traffic circle at W. 546 Street and Drew Avenue South 4-16 A#11N edina %123" streets our streets connect us all through an intersection when compared to traditional signalized intersections. Roundabouts can moderate speeds on collector and arterial streets and are aesthetically pleasing if well- landscaped. Curb Extensions In addition to shortening the crossing distance for pedestrians (see "Crossing Island and Curb Extensions" above), curb extensions (sometimes referred to as "bumpouts" or "neckdowns") can also help to reduce the speed of vehicles. This is accomplished by reducing the roadway width --1 -- from curb to curb at planned locations, and by Figure 4.26. Roundabout at W. 706 Street and Valley tightening the curb radii at intersection corners, View Road reducing the speeds of turning vehicles. Curb extensions also protect on-street parking bays and provide opportunities for landscaping and rain gardens (see below). On-Street Parking On-street parking also functions as a traffic-calming device when vehicles are regularly parked in the parking lane. Vehicles parked in the street physically and visually narrow the roadway and can increase the level of activity on the street as people come and go from parked cars. This can cause motorists to be more alert and slow vehicle speeds. On-street parking (when striped and/or utilized) can also provide a buffer between moving vehicles and pedestrians who may be walking on an adjacent sidewalk. Bike Lanes/Buffered Bike Lanes Like on-street parking, marked on-street bike lanes provide a buffer between pedestrians on an adjacent sidewalk and motor vehicle traffic. Additionally, the lane markings indicate where motorists should be driving and effectively narrow the travel lane. The potential presence of cyclists can also alert motorists to slow down and be aware. Street Trees In addition to their environmental benefits (see section XX.X), trees, when located on both sides of the street (especially in boulevards and medians) create a sense of enclosure that discourages drivers from speeding. Street trees create vertical walls that frame streets and provide a defined edge. This helps motorists guide their movement and assess their speed, which can lead to overall speed reduction. Also, the presence of street trees creates a safer walking environment by providing distinct edges to sidewalks so that motorists can better distinguish between their environment and the one shared with people. Raised Intersections/Crosswalks A raised intersection is a flat raised area covering an entire intersection, with ramps on all approaches and often combined with textured materials (see below) on the flat section. Typically, they raise to just below the level of the sidewalk. Raised intersections are more readily perceived by motorists to be "pedestrian territory" and the change in grade slows vehicle speeds. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4- I 7 Design Guidelines ;A* edina rtbn ila ‘210 streets our streets connect us all Similarly, raised crosswalks are often marked by different materials to provide pedestrians with a level street crossing and to make them more visible to approaching motorists. They can act as "speed tables" to slow vehicle speeds. Textured and/or Colored Pavement Textured and colored pavement includes the use of stamped pavement or alternate paving materials to create an uneven surface for vehicles to traverse. They may be used to emphasize either an entire intersection or a pedestrian crossing, and are sometimes used along entire street blocks. Locations where textured and/or colored pavement are often used include parking lanes, bike lanes, pedestrian crossings (Figure 4.27), and intersections. Figure 4.27. Brick crosswalk in the Country Club neighborhood Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-18 Design Guidelines 4 09 1nn edina Irdmi living tICICE0' streets our streets connect us all Other tools that can be used to calm traffic include fixed and temporary dynamic speed signs and enforcement of traffic laws. Table 4.2. Applicability of Traffic Calming Measures Traffic Calming Measure Living Streets Classification Local Street Local Connector Collector Street Minor Arterial Reduction in number of lanes 0 0 0 0 Lane width reduction 0 0 0 0 Median refuge 0 0 0 Curb extention 0 0 0 0 On-street parking 0 0 0 0 Bike lanes/protected bike lanes 0 0 0 Street trees 0 0 0 0 Textured and/or colored paving materials 0 0 0 0 Roundabouts 0 0 0 0 Traffic Circles 0 0 Raised intersections 0 0 0 Raised crosswalks 0 0 0 Speed tables 0 0 Legend: Appropriate Appropriate in specific circumstances Not Appropriate Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-19 Design Guidelines Flood Protection Flood Protection Clean Water Clean Water Service Performance Measure Service cfs ac-ft Phosphorus pollutant removal in pounds Gross and fine solids removal in tons Peak rate control in cubic feet per second Flood volume control in acre feet volume lb-P ton-sed Stormwater Utility 015*1 edina ivinçj qbttO streets our streets connect us all STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE Stormwater Management The implementation of Living Streets practices has the potential to enhance two core stormwater utility functions, flood protection and clean water, by retaining water on the landscape and filtering runoff. Living streets stormwater practices are broadly named "Low Impact Development" (or LID) practices, and also referred to as "Green Infrastructure." These living streets practices have the potential to provide multiple benefits as well including a beautiful streetscape, flourishing trees, Service Level Definition The City of Edina stormwater utility provides two services to the public, flood protection and clean water. Stormwater management priorities are described in the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (December 201 I). Performance measurements for flood protection include peak rate measure in cubic feet per second and runoff volume measured in acre-feet, and for clean water include removal of sediment measured in tons and phosphorus measured in pounds. To the extent that implementation of living streets concepts coincides with stormwater management goals, and overlaps with identified priorities watersheds, funding from the City of Edina stormwater utility is available for public improvement. Some LID techniques, and the specific location and efficiency of any technique will vary based on design, and location in the watershed. Engineering review and cost benefit comparison can often provide guidance to the most effective selection and placement of individual practices. The following table summarizes the living streets practices, and their overlap with stormwater services, and relative cost effectiveness. Practice Flood Clean Protection Water High Medium High Medium Medium Medium Cost Effectiveness Impervious cover reduction Soil / Turf / Trees Bio-retention / Rain Savings Low Medium Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-20 Design Guidelines edina hvni %CO streets our streets connect us all Gardens Pervious Pavements Medium Medium High Underground Sediment / Infiltration Low Medium High Swales, filters / other Low Medium Medium Natural area creation, protection, restoration High High Savings Regional ponds and wetlands Pollution prevention High Low Medium High Low Low Discuss capital cost efficiency, maintenance burden and lifecycle cost efficiency, efficiency and relation to size of BMP, Sustainable Infrastructure ENVISION, multiple benefits, community maintenance, public maintenance, Sustainable techniques Streetscape and Toolbox LID techniques Living Streets Prioritization See Figure 4.28. Describe priority watersheds / Describe targeted treatments that match the need of each priority watershed/ describe areas of the city with existing treatment as non-priority and diminishing returns of layered BMPs Prioritize flood protection in landlocked catchments, water quality in lakes catchments, both in creek catchments. Opportunistic treatment in already treated areas draining to wetland networks that provide treatment. A subwatershed assessment study is a useful tool for scoping where and what types of stormwater treatments are best applied in an individual neighborhood. Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-21 Design Guidelines Ark edina F IC I; living streets our streets connect us all Figure 4.28. Living Streets Priority Watersheds Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/ I 4) 4-22 Design Guidelines *1#'* edina *tie' streets our streets connect us all Example Project Schedule and Design Process Describe schedule for scoping study and neighborhood engagement, Public meeting, Sustainable Infrastructure Purpose and ENVISION Quality of Life Description + transit, safety, overlap Leadership Description Resource Allocation Description + CH 10 overlap Natural World Description + stormwater management policy overlap Climate and Risk Description + flood protection overlap Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-23 Design Guidelines 41.406* edina 16•116i 100 streets our streets connect us all Streetscape / Toolbox Description Impervious cover reduction Opportunity, Examples for each level of street, limitations, costs Soil, turf and trees Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs Bio-retention and rain gardens Rain gardens collect, filter and infiltrate stormwater from roads, driveway, roofs and other hard surfaces. A rain garden uses water runoff as a resource to grow flowers and trees, and replenish local groundwater. Rain gardens are generally well landscaped with native plants and greenhouse cultivars and tend toward ornamental arrangements of flowers and grasses. Rain gardens are subset of bio- retention practice. Bioretention Examples, limitations, costs Pervious pavements Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs Underground sediment capture and underground infiltration Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs Swales, sand filters and other controls Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs Natural area creation, enhancement or conservation Opportunity, Examples for each level of street, limitations, costs Regional systems, ponds and wetlands Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs Pollution prevention Opportunity, Examples, limitations, costs (similar to sustainability analysis, SWPPP operations, WHPP) Edina Living Streets Plan — DRAFT (7/8/14) 4-24 Design Guidelines 1 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM JUNE 19, 2014 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were members Bass, Boettge, Iyer, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, Olson, Spanhake, and Whited. ABSENT Members Sierks, Van Dyke. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Janovy to approve the meeting agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 15, 2014 – Approved as corrected. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Boettge to approve the amended minutes of May 15, 2014. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT – None. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Final Alignment Update Mr. Eric Nelson and Mr. Jonathan Vlaming from Three Rivers Park District sought approval for Edina’s segment of the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail final alignment. Mr. Nelson said the alignment is the same as was presented on Apr. 17 with more definitive details worked out along the route as follow: • The trail will be a sidewalk on Smetana until it is reconstructed and a bike lane will be added; • They are in discussion with the County on the Gleason Rd segment where the County has a designated 5-ft shoulder for a bike lane; they are proposing a multi-use trail on the east side of Gleason; • In Bredesen Park, the existing trail will be widened to 10-ft and become a two-way, currently a one-way trail; • The school board approved the alignment that runs on district property after changes were made so the ski trail would not be impacted; • They are in discussion with City staff about ways to make the intersection at Tracy Ave and Valley View Rd safer; • At 70th St by the railroad crossing, they are going to have an underpass under 70th because of flooding concerns and are in discussion with City staff regarding use of a piece of City-owned land; • They are in discussion with MNDOT staff to put the trail in their right-of-way on the eastside of TH-100; • From MNDOT’s right-of-way, the trail meanders behind Burgundy Place (working with owners for an easement) and along the edge of Fred Richards Golf Course to Parklawn (in 2016 Parklawn is scheduled to be reconstructed similar to Gallagher Dr); • 77 property owners along the trail were surveyed regarding screening and to date, 32 responded and they’ve selected all the options available from no screening, vegetation, chain link or wood fence; no single option was selected more than another. 2 During discussion, they were asked how property values are affected by a nearby trail and Mr. Vlaming said studies show that property values are not reduced and realtors will often refer to the nearby trail as a selling point. Regarding parking, they said they are going to wait and address this based on needs, same as they did with the Dakota Rail Trail. Approvals to date include Park Board (6/10) and School Board (6/16) and they plan to present to City Council on 7/1. Preliminary design will begin in the fall with final design completed in the winter. Construction on the east half is expected to begin in 2015 and the entire trail completed by 2017. Total project cost is $20M and secured funds to date include a $6.2M grant, plus Three Rivers District’s contribution of $8M. They are confident that they will be approved for federal funds for the rest of the project when application opens this fall. Mr. Vlaming said the board will decide later on if the project is built in stages or if they’ll need to pledge money to build it all at once. Contact for the project is Jason McGrew King, 763-559-6779 or JMcGrew-King@threeriversparkdistrict.org. Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Janovy to approve the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail alignment with the understanding that it could change as the property that is now Fred Richards Golf Course is redeveloped. All voted aye. Motion carried. Discussion with Edina Public Works Director Mr. Brian Olson described the public works department as multi-faceted with divisions that include electric, HVAC, facilities, utilities, asphalt and concrete streets, parks maintenance, etc. He said the streets division crew is responsible for doing mill and overlays, pothole repairs, concrete street repairs and also assist with bike lane striping. He said all employees plow snow and their biggest challenge was this past winter where they saw two distinct winters. He said their goal is to have the streets plowed within 6-8 hours of a snow fall but sidewalks can take up to two days. In addition to street maintenance, they also maintain approximately 40 athletic fields, lift stations, sanitary and storm sewers, water mains, etc. Mr. Olson said public works work closely with the engineering department on things like mill and overlay, bike lane striping, and they recently drafted a new crosswalk standard; he thanked the ETC for their input on the crosswalk standard. Mr. Olson was asked how public works respond to residents questions and concerns and he said questions or concerns can come to the department via the website’s ‘Report A Problem’ or the new ‘Edina To Go’ mobile application. He said these are tied directly to their work order system. There is also an FAQ online. He said everything they do is about quality public service and he welcomes feedback and input. Mr. Olson was asked how they decide when to repair or not to repair a pothole. He said this is a delicate balance because in the winter months the asphalt mixes does not stay very long which means multiple applications. Chair Bass said with the Living Streets Policy they are trying to meet the needs of all residents, including non-drivers, and the Active Routes to School plan was just approved by City Council. She asked if sidewalk plowing is prioritized and Mr. Olson said they are not because they only plow County and State Aid streets. He said the France Ave sidewalk, for example, has to be plowed multiple times because the City plows and the County puts the snow back when they plow the street. He said because of this, they prefer boulevard style sidewalks where they have some separation. He said they have four 5-ft wide sidewalk plows ($110,000 per plow). Member Nelson asked if they will be responsible for plowing the new Nine Mile Creek Trail and Mr. Olson said this has not been discussed. He said the City of Hopkins is in a trial phase and Three Rivers provide funding but he is not sure what will happen in Edina. 3 Member Janovy asked how the ETC could advocate for facility and maintenance funding. Mr. Olson said he could put together a recommendation of costs. He said Living Streets is great but it present challenges, for example, last winter they did not have anywhere to put the snow and streets became narrow. He said too that median landscaping is expensive to maintain. He said including maintenance with infrastructure changes would be great. Member Iyer asked why not restrict parking during the winter and Mr. Olson said it would be expensive to install the necessary no parking signs. Member Janovy asked about the 1 a.m. parking restriction and if it could be move to 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. and Mr. Olson said 1 a.m. is ideal because it gives staff more time to plow and be done by 6 a.m. Chair Bass thanked Mr. Olson for taking time to meet with them. ITNTwinCities: Edina Taxicab Ordinance Modifications Ms. Arlene Forrest, board member and Edina resident, 4400 W. 50th St., and Ms. Debra Burton, executive director, and White Bear Lake resident, requested support from the ETC to recommend to the City Council modifications to Chapter 12, Article VII of Edina City Code for the purpose of creating a new category of licensed vehicle called a “Charitable Non-Profit Transportation Vehicle.” Ms. Forrest explained that ITNTwinCities, a Minnesota nonprofit affiliated with ITNAmerica, was established in Edina to provide dignified transportation for older adults and those with impaired vision; however, based on current taxicab ordinance in Edina, it is illegal for them to operate. They are seeking support to modify Chapter 12, Article VII similar to language adopted in other cities. They plan to begin offering rides by late summer 2014. After discussion, motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Whited to write an advisory communication to the City Council recommending that Chapter 12, Article VII of the Edina City Code be modified. The advisory will provide guidance and recommendation to staff but will not define how the Code should be modified. All voted aye. Motion carried. Member Janovy will write the advisory communication and will be assisted by chair Bass and members Boettge and Whited. It was recommended that the City’s legal counsel review the ETC’s recommendation. Educational Public Safety Campaign Goals Chair Bass said Educational Public Safety Campaign is in the ETC’s 2014 Work Plan and asked for feedback regarding who the participants should be in the working group. She said it is a joint planning campaign with the school district. Planner Nolan suggested the police and communications departments and said they are already teaming up to work on a similar effort. He said SHIP money is available and probably some PACS Fund money. Other suggestions were the Chamber of Commerce, Bloomington Public Health, 50th & France Business Association, Commuter Services; and additional City departments suggested were Park & Recreations, Engineering, and Senior Center. Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 4, 2014 D-2: Planner Nolan was asked if a comprehensive neighborhood study could be done because of recurrent complaints in the area so that they can identify the problem(s) and find solution(s). Member Spanhake said this would probably be an ideal capstone project for an engineering student. She will check on this and report back. B-1: The issue was referred to the TSC by Cindy Larson, residential redevelopment coordinator. B-2: The attachment was not included in the report. Planner Nolan will rewrite the recommendation for better clarity. 4 C-1: Chair Bass said it is important that they are being careful to balance the level of service for pedestrians and motor vehicles. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Whited to forward the June 4, 2014, report with the attachment and edits for B-2 to the City Council. All voted aye. Motion carried. Updates Student Members - None Bike Edina Working Group – Minutes of May 8, 2014 Member Janovy said planner Nolan attended their last meeting. She said they discussed infrastructure and ordinance changes, and one outstanding issue with the sidewalk ordinance change is that a violation would be a misdemeanor. She recommended that they review the code to see where they can make changes. She said she could distribute what she’s put together so far. Living Streets Working Group Planner Nolan said they reviewed the updated cross sections or network of Living Streets and discussed topics and goals for the July 1 City Council work session. He said they also talked about identifying people that they can feature to champion Living Streets similar to Hometown Heroes, for example, engineering are aware of a couple residents who were against a sidewalk and now they enjoy using it. Planner Nolan was asked if anyone is working on the green streets piece of the Living Streets Policy and he said environmental engineer Ross Bintner is working on it. Communications Committee Member LaForce said they discussed: • The new boards and commissions blog to determine if they would participate and he said they agreed that they would use it for more in-depth issues; • Getting the message out about biking on sidewalks; • How they can better coordinate with other departments, for example, the police’s recent bike campaign; • Pedestrian Facilities Map is really a Sidewalk Map and therefore should be called Sidewalk Map; • Forwarding website recommendations to planner Nolan that was suggested last year. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS – None. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Whited said the letter to Ms. Arbelig was completed and ready to be mailed. Member Olson noted that City Council approved the Olinger Boulevard bike striping based on the original design plan. Planner Nolan said they were given staff’s original plan plus the ETC’s recommendation. He asked if sidewalks were prioritized for 2015 and planner Nolan said majority of the sidewalks will be in conjunction with neighborhood reconstruction projects. Chair Bass said she presented the Active Routes to School plan to the school board recently and they were very receptive, and also to the City Council and they approved the plan. She said the City Council advertised recently for youth boards and commissions’ members and they received 60 applicants for 16 spots and because they do not want to turn anyone away they are planning on including them in working groups. STAFF COMMENTS 2014 Project Update: • Bredesen Park D Neighborhood Reconstruction – delayed 3-4 weeks due to discovery of rusted watermain 5 bolts; • Countryside F Neighborhood Reconstruction – ready to be paved; • Strachauer Park B Neighborhood Reconstruction – partially paved; • Birchcrest B Neighborhood Reconstruction – delayed because the same contractor is working on Bredesen Park D; • Morningside B Neighborhood Reconstruction – June to early July start, except the sidewalks outside of the main project area will begin earlier; • Todd Park F Neighborhood Reconstruction – mid-July start date; • Olinger Boulevard – City Council approved staff’s recommended design; State Aid variance was approved; • France Avenue Pedestrian Intersection Enhancement – stage 1 is completed; • Hazelton Road – closed until Jun. 30; • Xerxes Avenue – on schedule; letter will be mailed this week to residents regarding the bumpouts. Other: • Boards and Commissions Blog – a guideline is being written and it may be that staff liaisons will write the blogs. Planner Nolan will forward information to member LaForce. • Bloomington Public Health is looking for a volunteer to train to do bike counts in Edina. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. ATTENDANCE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE - 2014 NAME TERM J F * M A M J J A S O N D SM 2/27 S M 3/1 0 W S 3/18 # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 7 Bass, Katherine 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 86% Boettge, Emily 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100% Iyer, Surya 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100% Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100% LaForce, Tom 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100% Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100% Olson, Larry 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Sierks, Caroline student 1 1 1 3 43% Spanhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 80% Van Dyke, Jackson student 1 1 2 29% Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 5 71% *Cancelled due to weather 2/27 Feb's rescheduled meeting; 3/10 Urban Design meeting #4; 3/18 City Council Work Session; Respectfully submitted, Sharon Allison, Secretary RECOMMENDATION TO: ETC RE: Recommendation to appoint new member DATE: July 11, 2014 Background Bike Edina and ETC bylaws govern the process for appointing new members to the working group. Bike Edina bylaws read: “Prospective members should complete a Bike Edina working group membership application and attend two regular Bike Edina working group meetings before being recommended for appointment. A recommendation requires a majority vote of Bike Edina working group members.” ETC bylaws say: “The Bike Edina chairperson shall forward to the Transportation Commission the names of individuals recommended for appointment to Bike Edina. The Transportation Commission shall vote on the recommendation at the next regular meeting. Appointments will be made by a majority vote of ETC members. At the June 10, 2014 Bike Edina meeting, members voted unanimously to recommend Mary Zarling for appointment (see attached draft meeting notes, section highlighted in yellow). Mary attended at least two Bike Edina meetings and filled out the membership application before being considered for membership. Mary describes herself as “a long time Edina resident and recreational biker.” She is “excited that Edina is committing resources to improve bicycling options in the community and [she] would like to be involved in the process.” When asked what specific skills she would bring to Bike Edina, she shared “I am active; I experience Edina roads as a biker, walker, and motorist. This gives me the unique perspective of having a vision that includes all sectors of the community. I communicate well with a wide variety of audiences; schools, parents, teachers, athletes, businesses.” Recommendation: Motion to appoint Mary Zarling to the Bike Edina working group. RECOMMENDATION TO: ETC RE: Recommendation to modify Sec. 24-399 of City Code DATE: July 11, 2014 Background Sec. 24-399 of Edina City Code reads: “No person shall use a skateboard, roller skates, in-line skates or blades, bicycles, scooters or similar devices on or within any municipal parking facility.” Sec. 24-395 (1) and (2) read: “The term ʻmunicipal parking facilityʼ means any lot or ramp, and the lanes giving ingress thereto and egress therefrom, and all accessories thereof, owned or operated by the City or the housing and redevelopment authority of the City, herein called ʻHRA,ʼ and made available to the public for parking of private motor vehicles whether for a fee or at no cost. The term ʻmunicipal parking facilityʼ does not include parking spaces located along public streets and highways.” Bike Edina members discussed the ordinance and how it prohibits bicycle access to City facilities, including parks, unless a bicyclist rides on the sidewalk. Members understood the probable intent of the ordinance but believed that is written too broadly. A motion was approved to recommend modifying Sec. 24-399 of City Code by striking the word “bicycles.” The group agreed that, just as with the biking on sidewalks ordinance, safety education should go along with the ordinance change. See draft meeting notes, section highlighted in blue. Recommendation: Recommend to the City Council that the City Council modify Sec. 24-399 of City Code by striking the word “bicycles.” 1 July 10, 2014 Meeting Notes Present: Sally Dunn, Nick Essma, Don Eyberg, Jennifer Janovy, Peter Kelley, Larry Olson, Lori Richman Guests: Mary Zarling Recorded by: Sally Dunn I. Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. II. Action items — a. June meeting notes put on file. b. Motion made by Lori and seconded by Larry to recommend Mary Zarling for membership. All voted in favor. Jennifer will forward the recommendation to the ETC. III. Discussion Items a. City communications regarding bicycling—The Mayorʼs column in the most recent issue of AboutTown was mentioned. The column highlights Edinaʼs Bicycle Friendly Community Award. Lori noted that the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) has a standard list of recommendations for mayors to champion to help make a city more bicycle friendly. A good place to start is by making City Hall and the Public Works facility bicycle friendly to employees. It was noted that the City has a facilities manager and that the LAB recommendations for mayors could be prioritized and then distributed to the Mayor, Mark Nolan, and the facilities manager. 2 Bike Edina page on the Cityʼs website—the group reviewed the page and made suggestions for improvements. There was consensus on the following: 1. Remove the paragraph at the top right (What Is the Bike Edina working group?). The paragraph says Bike Edina “supports an active biking culture.” It was noted that our mission is to “advance bicycling in Edina.” The preference was to use the language in our mission when describing what Bike Edina is/does. 2. Modify the next paragraph (Get involved…). It gives the impression that the only way to get involved is by completing a Bike Edina membership application. It was noted that the membership application still says BETF and Jennifer explained that MJ Lamon in Administration is working on a standard application that will replace the current application. Once ready, the link will need to be updated. The group discussed different ways interested residents can get involved and suggested the following as a starting point: a. Be part of Bike Edina—attend a meeting, become a member b. Attend or help with a Bike Edina event (it was noted that there are no events currently scheduled, but when there are events, there can be a link to information. Nick volunteered to contact nearby bike shops to ask whether they have regular rides that meet in or near Edina. A schedule of rides could then be posted.) c. Sign up for our email list The group discussed possible additional content and wanted to spend more time developing the ideas. Jennifer will send the suggestions to date to the Communications Department. 3. Meeting notes link—No meeting notes have been posted since February. Needs to be updated with more current information. 4. Rules of the Road link—this same page is titled “Biking in Edina” when linked to from the Transportation section under Engineering. 3 There was discussion about ways to improve this page. Jennifer stated that the ETC communications committee had already provided similar feedback. 5. Add a Report A Pothole link and/or Edina To Go link to the Bike Edina and Biking in Edina pages so residents and others can easily report unsafe conditions. 6. Bike Facilities Handout—Lori noted that the content is more suitable for people who already have some understanding of bicycling rules. She noted that some pages need to be updated (for example, where it says that riding on sidewalks is not allowed). 7. Videos—members questioned why the City is producing its own bicycling videos when there are excellent videos from sources such as LAB that can be linked to. Members will take another look at the bicycling information on the Cityʼs website and send additional comments to Jennifer by Thursday, July 17. The need for communications efforts/messages re: cycling (from all departments) to be coordinated with Mark Nolan and the importance of utilizing those most familiar with the subject matter and projects in the development of the content was discussed. Jennifer noted that the ETC/ETC communications committee have stated similar concerns and have, at different times, provided feedback and asked for the opportunity to provide input on content before it is distributed. The consensus of the group is that they would like the involvement of subject matter experts in both the development and review of the content. Bike Edina is interested in serving as a resource for City staff is this area. Lori knows a retired police officer who is now a consultant who works with police departments on bicycling-related issues (bike patrols, bike education, bike enforcement, etc.). She plans to meet with him soon to “pick his brain.” 4 Members noted the very important role the EPD has in bicycle education and enforcement and again stated an interest in having a collaborative relationship. b. Ordinance updates—Jennifer noted that the City Council adopted a modification to the bicycling on sidewalks ordinance that now makes a violation of that ordinance a petty misdemeanor rather than misdemeanor. Members asked whether there are any educational efforts re: biking on sidewalks in the works. Jennifer noted the Madison handouts could be adapted. There was brief discussion about how information could be distributed. Ideas included through the schools/PTOs, youth athletic associations, and mountain bike team. The group discussed the section of City Code that makes it illegal to ride a bicycle in a municipal parking facility. This includes both ramps and surface lots (City Hall, parks, other facilities). Members understood the probable intent of the ordinance but believed that it is written too broadly. Mary moved and Peter seconded the motion to recommend striking the word “bicycles” from Sect. 24-399: “No person shall use a skateboard, roller skates, in-line roller skates or blades, bicycles, scooters or similar devices within any municipal parking facility.” The group agreed that, just as with biking on sidewalks ordinance, safety education should go along with the ordinance change. Jennifer will forward the recommendation to the ETC. Jennifer gave the group an update on the bicycle registration ordinance. A couple of years ago when BETF made a recommendation to modify the biking on sidewalks ordinance, it also recommended eliminating the bicycle registration requirement. This requirement was based on a repealed state statute and the City provided no way for people to register their bicycles; therefore, the ordinance was not enforced. Jennifer noted 5 that in a recent review of the code she did not see the section, yet the Council had not had a discussion to repeal it. On checking, she was told that the section on bicycle registration was excluded from the code when it was recodified last year. c. Work plan discussion—Consensus was to wait until the City receives detailed feedback from LAB to finalize the work plan. Feedback is expected sometime in July. d. Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail update—Members looked at the information shared with the ETC at the June meeting. The trail will be constructed during 2015 and 2016 and is expected to open in 2017. e. T-shirts—Nick checked with a coworker at QBP, who provided information about t-shirt pricing. There was discussion about whether to order extra t- shirts and whether Bike Edina could sell the t-shirts. Lori will check with Karen Kurt re: selling t-shirts. Lori will also check with people in the marketing department at QBP to see if they can work on a t-shirt design on a volunteer basis. Jennifer will send Lori the logo file. IV. Next meeting—August 14, 2014 V. Adjourned at 9:00 p.m.