HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-12-15 Meeting PacketAGENDA
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMUNITY ROOM
December 15, 2011
6:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes -- Regular meeting of November 17, 2011
B. Traffic Safety Committee Report of December 7, 2011
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. Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Review
- Richmond Hills Park
- Tracy Avenue: Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue
B. Bike Edina Task Force — Bike Routes
C. High School Traffic
D. Questions/Updates from Student Members
E. Working Group Updates
- Transportation Options
- Living Streets
F. Grandview Small Area Study Update
G. Bike Edina Task Force Update
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
- Normandale and 66th Street discussion
\\ED-NT8 \ EngPubWks \ Engineering\ Infrastructure \ Streets\Traffic \ TRANSP COMM\ Agendas\ 2011 Agendas \ 20111215_Agenda.docx
VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS
IX. STAFF COMMENTS
- Living Streets
- TLC Grant/Bike Boulevards
France Avenue Bridge Scope Change
Council Actions/discussions related to transportation since last ETC meeting
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.
\\ED-NT8VngPubWks\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2011 Agendas\ 20111215 Agenda.docx
MINUTES OF
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMUNITY ROOM
November 17, 2011
6:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bass, Nelson, Schold Davis, Janovy, Franzen, Schweiger
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Transportation Options Working Group Update was added after Questions/Updates
from Student Members, and 44th and 70th Street Update will no longer appear on the agenda after this meeting.
Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Nelson approving the amended meeting agenda. All
voted aye. Motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 2011
Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member Schold Davis to approve the minutes. All voted ave.
Motion carried.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT OF NOVEMBER 3. 2011
Section A.1. Assistant city engineer Sullivan will check to see if the 85th percentile speed listed as 17 mph is accurate.
Regarding moving the "No Parking" sign 22 feet, Mr. Sullivan explained that this decision was arrived at based on actual
measurement in the field.
Section B.1. Chair Janovy asked what happens after a request is denied for stop sign for speed control that does not
meet warrants. Mr. Sullivan said the requestor is typically told ahead of time that it is likely that the intersection will not
meet warrants; however, data is gathered. Requestor is notified of TSC's denial via phone, at which time data gathered
and reason for the denial are discussed (if requested, requestor can get copy of report). The requestor is also informed
that the next steps are to attend the ETC or Council meeting for discussion if they disagree with the decision, or use the
NTMP process to look at other options. Chair Janovy said she sees an opportunity for education because stop signs will
not address speeding and also, when the requests are received, staff knows that they will not meet warrants. She
suggested revising the NTMP to include two phases to provide more options.
Section C.I. Mr. Sullivan said a survey will be sent to residents.
Section C.3. Mr. Sullivan said this was referred to the ETC because of the NTMP process that includes traffic calming
options. Mr. Sullivan said he would bring it back to the ETC in December for further discussion.
Other traffic safety issues handled: Item 2. Delete "permanent." Item 3. Chair Janovy said the data will be helpful as they
continue to discuss France Avenue. Item 4. Chair Janovy suggested including data in future reports.
COMMUNITY COMMENT None.
1
REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Review
Chair Janovy explained that they will receive the feasibility reports for the neighborhood reconstruction projects for
review and then make recommendations to Council. She said tonight is an opportunity for them to give input before the
feasibility reports are completed.
Mr. Sullivan said nothing unusual is planned for any of the 2012 neighborhoods. Regarding Valley Estates, he said the
area is in the walking shed for Creek Valley Elementary and he and member Bass met with school officials and discussion
included adding a sidewalk on Creek Valley Road. Mr. Sullivan said staff was not proposing a sidewalk in this
neighborhood. The current sidewalk funding policy is 25% school district, 25% City and 50% assessed to residents. After
discussion, the following recommendations were made: 1) sidewalk on Creek Valley Road; 2) inform residents of options
for private rain gardens and possible funding (due to drainage issues); 3) review parking issue on Nordic Circle/Creek
Valley Road; 4) try to address drainage issue if in ROW through rain gardens or other environmentally sound ways; and
5) remove stump street [street name?] to reduce impervious surface.
In Countryside, upgrades will include water main and water service upgrades, certain intersection upgrades to minimize
impervious surface, and new curb and gutter. Discussion included narrower intersections and pedestrian safety. The
question was asked how the decision is made to include sidewalks? Is it based on 750 cars per day or on other initiatives
that the Council may be focusing on, such as walkable communities? It was noted that the City is making decisions now
that will have an impact for 40 years. After discussion, the following recommendations were made: adding sidewalk on
one side of Westridge from Highland to Valley View and on one side of Crescent from Hillside to Tracy; and to review
curb radius of narrowed intersections to ensure adequate turning radius for larger vehicles, especially school buses.
Concern was expressed that a too-short curb radius will not necessarily slow down vehicles but will cause vehicles to
turn into the oncoming traffic lane of the receiving roadway. Mr. Sullivan said they generally plan for a 20 ft. curb radius
and they have tested this with school buses. A slightly longer radius was suggested. Additional discussion focused on the
need for a sidewalk on Valley View/Whiting; the need to review the Valley View/Whiting and Tracy intersection, per
resident concerns; and the need to review safe crossing locations from the neighborhood to Countryside Park.
In Vikings Hill, Mr. Sullivan said upgrades will include spot utility repairs. Mr. Sullivan was asked about the STOP sign at
Arctic and Vernon, per resident concerns. Does it have a stop line and double yellow? He thought so, but said he would
check. An effort to improve STOP sign compliance was recommended. Also discussed was the need to improve
pedestrian facilities along Vernon and Gleason and safe crossing locations. It was noted, however, that Vernon and
Gleason are outside of the project area.
Mr. Sullivan said in December, Tracy Avenue, Gallagher Road, and Richmond Hills Park will be presented.
TLC Phase 1 Bike Boulevard — Steve Clark, Transit for Livable Communities
Mr. Sullivan said a 2 nd open house is scheduled for December 12, 7 p.m. at Public Works and Park Maintenance, 7450
Metro Blvd. He said staff should have a consultant selected by next Monday from the two companies that responded to
the RFQ. Regarding advisory bike lanes, Mr. Sullivan said MnDOT said they have never seen them before and the street
in Minneapolis where it was used did not require MnDOT's involvement. He said if advisory lanes are approved, it would
be the first of its kind in the state and the country.
Update of Proposed 494/Xerxes Avenue Public Open House
Mr. Sullivan said MnDOT would like to attend the December ETC meeting to present their proposed plan and they will
be holding an open house on November 29.
2
Update of Proposed Tracy Avenue Reconstruction
Mr. Sullivan said an open house is scheduled for November 28, 7 p.m. at Public Works and Park Maintenance, 7450
Metro Blvd.
Traffic Counts for 2011
A map showing traffic counts for 2011 were handed out. A map showing street names was requested.
Questions/Updates from Student Members
Member Schweiger said it was interesting seeing the petitions against the neighborhood street reconstruction projects.
Transportation Options Working Group
Member Schold Davis said they held their first meeting in November and also that Arlene Forest, a Planning Commission
member who also serves on the Transportation Options Working Group, visited the Independent Transportation
Network (ITN) in Portland, OR, and will present information from her visit to the working group. The next meeting is
scheduled for December 13.
Bike Edina Task Force Update
Chair Janovy said bike routes were prioritized and the top four are: 70th from Antrim to Hwy 100; Cahill Road from 70th
to 78th; Antrim from top of hill to the schools; and Valley View from Antrim to Hwy 62.
Grandview Small Area Study Update
Member Nelson said feedback have been interesting and good including concerns with the pace at which planning is
moving forward and some thinking that the group's work would lead to redevelopment immediately. He said member
Bonneville is at tonight's meeting where MnDOT is giving a presentation on their 2030 plan for freight and passenger rail
for the line that runs through the Grandview area.
44th and 70th Streets Update
Striping of 44th is on hold until next spring so that a determination can be made regarding the type of bicycle markings to
be incorporated; 70th is open to traffic and EPD is saturating the area doing educational outreach to let drivers know
about the new 25 mph speed limit.
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS None.
CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS
Chair Janovy said the Living Streets Working Group was approved by Council.
Regarding commission membership, Chair Janovy said there is one opening; member Bonneville's term will end January;
two members (Schold Davis and McKlveen) are up for reappointment.
Chair Janovy said the commission needs a process to make sure the ETC is getting Council's directives that are discussed
at Council meetings, for example, they would like the ETC to prioritize sidewalks, and at their 11/18 meeting, there was a
comment about 'use, improve or get rid of the NTMP." Other discussions included Tracy Avenue and WSB's proposal;
and $1M in the CIP for scope change for France Avenue.
Member Schold Davis said MnDOT has a Complete Streets Coalition that she has interviewed for and should learn soon
if she is selected.
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Sullivan said a Boards and Commission survey have been emailed to everyone.
3
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned.
4
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
To: Edina Transportation
Commission
Agenda Item Item No: IV.B
From: Byron Theis
Traffic Safety Coordinator
X Action
Discussion
Information Date: December 7th, 2011
Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of December 7 th, 2011.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review and approve Traffic Safety Staff Review of Wednesday December 7th, 2011.
BACKGROUND:
It is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the meeting regarding any of
the attached issues. An overview of the comments supplied by the Transportation
Commission will be included in the staff report provided to Council at their January 3rd,
2012 meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Traffic Safety Review for December 7th, 2011.
GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffic Safety Committee\ Staff Review SummariesU 1 TSAC & Min\ 12-07-11.doc
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The Committee review of traffic safety matters occurred on December 7th, 2011. The
Committee is comprised of staff members included the City Engineer, Assistant City
Engineer, City Planner, and Traffic Safety Coordinator.
From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items,
persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed
with them. They were also informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or
have additional facts to present, they can be included on the December 15, 2011, Edina
Transportation Commission and then on to the January 3, 2012 Council Agenda.
SECTION A:
Requests on which the Committee recommends approval of request:
1. Request for striping on the south side of the intersection of Normandale
Road and West 70th Street.
This request is from a resident in the area of Aspasia Lane. Their concern
is vehicles on Normandale Road do not have any stripes to divide traffic.
This can be a problem when there are vehicles entering and exiting that
intersection. The requestor stated that they believed there was enough
room for a right turn lane and a left turn lane for northbound traffic.
Unnecessary delays could occur due to a vehicle making a left turn while
blocking what appears to be the whole northbound lane. This request
would create three lanes on the south side of the intersection: one for
southbound traffic, one for northbound left turns, and one for northbound
right turns.
Normandale Road is a city street with an average daily traffic of 1016
vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 29.2 mph measured south of the
intersection. Normandale Road at the intersection has sufficient widthfor
the proposed three lanes.
Staff recommends the approval of striping the south intersection of
Normandale Road and West 70th Street to create the left and right
turn lanes.
Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 1 of 4
December 7, 2011
SECTION B:
Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request:
1. Request for in-street pedestrian crossing signs at all of the intersections
around the Concord School area.
This request comes from a resident on School Road near the Concord
school. The resident is concerned about the safety of students who use the
crosswalks regularly. The resident feels that there is not enough visibility
for vehicles to see pedestrians in the crosswalk. The requestor feels that
placing the in-street pedestrian crosswalk signs would be enough of a
warning for vehicles.
The policy for in-street pedestrian crossing signs states that the signs are
seasonal, and they are on a rotating basis throughout the City of Edina.
The requested signage does not conform to the in-street pedestrian
crossing signs policy.
Staff will be reviewing the feasibility of sidewalks along School Road
from Concord Avenue to West 60th Street during the winter of 2011/2012.
Staff recommends the denial of the request for in-street pedestrian
crossing signs.
2. Request for School Zone speed limit signs exiting the parking lot between
the Edina Community Center and the Southview Middle School.
This request is from a resident of Sherwood Avenue who has stated that
they regularly witness vehicles travelling faster than the posted speed
limit. The resident has requested that speed limit signs to be posted
exiting the center parking lot to inform the drivers of the speed limit.
The road that was specifically mentioned was Southview Lane. This is a
collector street with an average daily traffic of 4403 vehicles with an 85th
percentile speed of 28.1 mph.
The practice regarding School Zone speed limit signs requires that the
boundaries of the zone are posted.
Staff recommends the denial of the request for School Zone speed
limit signs exiting the parking lot between Southview School and and
Community Center.
Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 4
December 7, 2011
3. Request for School Zone speed limit signs to be placed around the area of
Normandale Lutheran Church at 6100 Normandale Road.
This request comes from two residents who live off of Valley View Road
near the Normandale Church. Both of the residents feel that the speed of
the vehicles is too high traveling near the church. Requestors know that
the city can reduce speeds in the area of a school, and would like this area
to be considered a school area so the speed can be reduced.
Valley View Road in that area is a City street with an average daily traffic
of 1430 vehicles with an 85th percentile speed of 35.9 mph.
City policy states that speeds cannot be regulated by the City of Edina
below 30 mph. A special justification exists in the case of school zones
and bridges. Normandale Lutheran Church does not fall into the category
since the education they provide is only during Sunday worship and
weekday early childhood daycare.
Staff recommends the denial of the request for School Zone signs
around the Normandale Lutheran Church area.
4. Request for a crosswalk near the wider section of York Avenue just north
of the Promenade, referred to as the traffic circle.
This request comes from a resident who lives on York Avenue. This
person states that the only crosswalks available to cross York Avenue are
the ones at Hazelton Road and Parklawn Avenue. The requestor feels that
a crosswalk going across the traffic circle would help in assisting
pedestrians across York Avenue.
The grade-separated Promenade walking path is the safest crossing of
York Avenue at this location.
Staff recommends the denial of the request for a crosswalk to be
placed across York Avenue.
Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 4
December 7, 2011
SECTION C:
Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others.
1. Requestor has stated that the crosswalk at the intersection of West 50th
Street and Eden Avenue is not within the current crosswalk policy. The
policy states that a crosswalk crossing an Arterial road must have
signalization. This intersection is not signalized. More study regarding
the policy of crosswalks, the current situation of crosswalks in the area,
and the history of that specific crosswalk should be conducted prior to
spring of 2012.
2. Request for the speed to be reduced in the area of Normandale Road and
West 66th Street. This request comes from multiple residents living on
West 66th Street who have stated that the reduced speed on West 70th
Street has increased the volume on Normandale Road. Staff has discussed
options regarding the reduction of speed in the area. Post-construction
traffic count will be conducted in the spring of 2012 to determine the
possible change in traffic volume and speed. Studies will also be
conducted to determine the feasibility of bike lanes on Normandale Road
and West 66th Street.
SECTION D:
Other traffic safety issues handled.
Call from a resident who would like parking restricted to residents in the
neighborhood only. Resident was informed that the City of Edina does
not regulate who parks in neighborhoods.
2. Call from a resident inquiring about our methods of gathering traffic
volumes and speeds. Resident was informed about our traffic counters
and the methods of determining information regarding traffic studies.
3. Call from a resident inquiring about our policy on speed limits. Resident
was informed that Edina speed limits are set by the State.
Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 4 of 4
December 7, 2011
To: Transportation Commission
From: Jack Sullivan
Assistant City Engineer
Date: December 15, 2011
Subject: Neighborhood Street
Reconstruction Review
Agenda Item No.: VI.A
ACTION:
Recommendation/Motion
Discussion
m Information
Page 1 of I
Item VI.A.
Edina Transportation Commission
REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Info/Background:
In November the staff presented Countryside, Valley Estates and Viking Hills Neighborhood
Street reconstruction projects to the ETC for discussion. The ETC will have a opertunity to
review the draft feasibility report prior to the report going to Council for consideration. These
draft feasibilities are not available until the December 15 ETC meeting.
At our December meeting we'll be discussing Richmond Hills and Tracy Avenue street
reconstruction projects.
Gallagher Drive will be discussed in early 2012.
\\ED-NTMEngPubWks\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2011R&R\20111215_Item.VI.A Street Recon.docx
17.._
PrrEftlEACHS:\t)tVE
NTERLACHEN
rNTRY
CWB
Legend
*Arridpated
Reconstructlon
Year
2014
— 2015
2016
Artldpated MilS Oveoby,
Concrete Reha b and sIdemIcYear
E CM 2012 CONC
1301E1 2015 CONC
NEN 2016 CONC
n I 2012 MO
2014 MO
,:•StateAld Roadvays
EDINA
COUNTRY
CW8
BRAEMAR PARK -
GOLF COURSE •
(
I I \
'‘
78TH-ST W
Note/Disclaimer
City of Edina 2012-2016
Anticipated Municipal State Aid Street Reconstruction, ri
Mill and Overlay and Sidewalks
LU 1
1
VAN LONE-Wr
VALKEN8URG
PARK
e2ND ST W
_
An...e.t.a
(
66TH ST W
The dates shown on the map represent the anticipated years of construction and are subject to change based on budgetary issues, adacent projects, resident input and other factors.
If a road is not highlightedthen the potential reconstruction date may be beyond the City's long term claming process. The City of Edna also has hvolvement with the 1494/ TH169
Interchange P roject for the years of 2012 -2016.
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 regardilg the condition of the bluminous pavement, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main were used to set the priority of roadway improvements.
This map only addresses State-Aid routes within the City.
* Project schedules to change due to a deficit funding.
ErdsItn
Pork Pathway LEGEND: Existing liennepin Proposed I Front (ho 2007 Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan
County Corridors Pork Pathway I — • — Prirnary Route • • Secontialy Reulo
riloptio 1'1:1p.:Aikidos
rigure 7.11
• •
city of kdina
Y..-) 2003 Comprohomivo lipektto
HA117(ES TER
LOGISMap Output Page Page 1 of 1
—HgrDUNDEE RD
VERNA'', AVE S
\
Hawkeli Lake
JIAKRES DR
BENtOti A V5
DONCASTER WAY
GROVE ST
SUN RD
cr axl A .'IS Ccur 9'4.(C 11..0(05 G17.2))5
BENTON AVE
"II
NM
iii OMNI
.pv311 COM7RYSDE
http://gis.logis.org/LOGIS_ArcIMS/ims?ServiceName=ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE&Client... 11/29/2011
LIIIIIIIIIIIL
COUNTRYSIDE RD
1111111111111111
11111
!WI/LAW fW
RIDGEWAY RD
REST LA
Countrysido Palk
COLONIAL WAY
8'N
riNcy
Ivo/
C•wl,(C/1„0:,15Gri?)35 h•yo,
LOGISMap Output Page Page 1 of 1
http://gis.logis.org/LOGIS_ArcIMS/ims?ServiceName=ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE&Client... 11/29/2011
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
1 Tracy south of Vernon MSA (5/2009) 4213 32 5.2
Tracy south of Vernon MSA (5/2005) 5064 38.1 5.6
Tracy south of Vernon 08/27/01-08/31/01 8909 37.3 NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1997 3460 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1995 3994 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1993 3128 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1991 3321 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1989 3076 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1987 3415 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1985 3538 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1983 3085 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1981 3790 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1979 4015 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1977 2766 NA NA
Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1975 3235 NA NA
Tracy south of Hawks Terrace @ 5629 06/17/08-06/25/08 3654 36.7 3.3
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Tracy.xisx
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
3 Tracy north of Benton MSA 1997 3605 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1995 3766 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1993 3654 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1991 3623 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1989 3695 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1987 3354 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1985 3168 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1981 3408 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1979 3173 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1977 4636 NA NA
Tracy north of Benton MSA 1975 3570 NA NA
4 Tracy south of Benton 08/27/01-08/31/01 3558 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1997 4747 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1997 6483 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1995 4958 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1993 4814 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1991 5016 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1989 4947 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1987 4156 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1985 5828 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1981 5265 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1979 4266 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1977 3784 NA NA
Tracy south of Benton MSA 1975 4435 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Tracy.xlsx
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
5 Tracy south of Countryside Rd. 06/17/08-06/25/08 5119 38.9 5.3
6 Tracy south of Ridgeway Rd. @ 6104 06/17/08-06/25/08 5062 31.7 4.2
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA (5/2009) 5984 29.2 5.5
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA (4/2005) 6700 30.9 5.6
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1997 4114 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1995 5517 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1993 5010 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1991 5556 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1989 4829 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1987 5384 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1985 4712 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1979 4123 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1977 4658 NA NA
Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1975 4578 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06111
By Byron Theis
GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Tracy.xlsx
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
8 Tracy north of Hillside 08/27/01-08/31/01 6010 NA NA d
Tracy north of Hillside MSA 1975 4578 NA NA
Tracy north of Colonial Way 06/17/08-06/25/08 6821 36.8 4.5
10 Tracy south of Colonial Way 4/12/06-4/14/06 8660 37.9 NA
Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA (5/2005) 9444 36 5.6
Tracy south of Colonial Way 08/27/01-08/31/01 7381 NA NA
Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1997 6483 NA NA
Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1981 9901 NA NA
Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1979 5763 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Tracy.xisx
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
11 Tracy north of Valley View MSA (5/2009) 7730 34.7 5.6
Tracy north of Valley View MSA (5/2005) 9837 39.9 NA
Tracy north of Valley View 08/13/01-08/17/01 7881 42.9 NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1997 6266 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1995 7249 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1993 8155 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1991 8542 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1989 9164 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1987 8576 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1985 7455 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1981 8276 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1979 6832 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1977 5298 NA NA
Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1975 4435 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis G:\Engineering\infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Tracy.xlsx
III ILY
WARDEN AVE
G.artion Park
Gardun Park Additlo
BENTON iiVE
1ST ST W
;I A,1115 Co.,,- d otCi LC*15 C G29,5
LOGISMap Output Page Page 1 of 1
e_10 Al Ave.
littp://gis.logis.org/LOGIS_ArcIMS/ims?ServiceName —ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE&Client... 11/29/2011
Location Description Date Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
Benton 5700[Countryside School] 07/30/98-08/05/98 391 NA NA
Benton 5714[Countryside School] 05/26/98-06/01/98 I 381 NA NA
2 Benton east of Tracy 06/19/01-06/22/01 3007 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy 07/29/98-08/03/98 2215 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy 05/26/98-06/01/98 3182 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1997 1897 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1995 2570 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1993 2459 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1991 2183 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1989 1765 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1985 2177 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1983 2071 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1981 1791 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1979 1380 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1977 1005 NA NA
Benton east of Tracy MSA 1975 1508 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUD1ES\2011\Benton JCISX
Location Description Date Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks
3 Benton west of Hansen-RECOUNT MSA (10/2009) 3221 30.7 4.4
Benton west of Hansen MSA (6/2009) 2582 30.4 2.4
Benton west of Hansen MSA (4/2005) 3752 34.1 NA
Benton west of Hansen 06/19/01-06/22/01 3586 34.1 NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1997 2977 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1995 3150 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1993 2951 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1991 2774 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1989 2710 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1987 2459 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1985 1149 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1983 1239 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1981 2795 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1979 1887 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1977 1973 NA NA
Benton west of Hansen MSA 1975 2080 NA NA
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Benton.xlsx
-so
p rGY L a
0
0 , o_,
0111
South Dr
1_ Ayrshire lvd
1 Dundee Rd
wke
Lai
0
Qlinger Clr
W 61st St
Jeff PI
Olinger Blvd
Cu
Grove
Benton Ave
co
4 12
W 6:
Whiting ve
With St
co
W 63rd St
W 6 lb St 43 1
Ti
n
g
da
le
A
v
e
4.-;• 0
C4
W 66th St
No Sire°
lloic1191/1 or
Doron La
I
4°-
) Le Vella
tnalTle
Creeir Valle Rd
Nie
, nter St
Grove Cir
°reek,
?:
1?:/
e Park Rd I
/
i‘l
co
>. t,
/ -
< co -.'
c
0
" c RIchwoo Dr
Windsor Ave
Rich Orl
-
Wind or Ave 16-
W 56t St
Countryside 2d
Highland Rd
W poth St
iorslin Or
Wet St
Birchcrest Ave __.
W 62nd St
Maddox La
t
th St
C.)
W 58th St
Po ter La
dic
Roberts Pli
(I ) Grove St e
‹c Grove St 5
a.
Benton Ave
cy fJe
Arc ',dep.--1---Doce
Colonial Way
Stato Hwy 62
0000, 'a!/
Rio
Warden Avi
Time
2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 2/1; 8/7 2125;
1445
2 Injury: Possible Injury 2/8; 4/17 0800;
1500
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2010
Total:
Severity:
Location
4; 1
4; 1
4
Date
3 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 1/6; 5/15;
12/15
1535;
1315;
0900
2 Injury: Possible Injury 6/15; 9/17 0932;
1210
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Severity:
1; 3; 1
1; 1
Date Time
0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
1 Injury: Possible Injury 4/23/2011 1725
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2007
Total:
Severity:
Location
9
1
Crash Statistics
Year: 2001 - 2010
Intersection: Tracy: Vernon to TH 62
Total Crashes: 33
Breakdown by Year
Year: 2009
Total: 5 Date Time Location
Date Modified: 12/07/2011
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Crashes\2011\Crash Data Tracy Vernon to TH62.xlsx
6 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
6/26 (2); 10/31 1715
1249
(2);
(2); (2); 11/30 (2) 1200 (2)
4 Injury: Possible Injury 4/12 (2); 9/12
(2)
1237
1843
(2);
(2)
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Severity:
9 (2); 7
9 (2); 1 (2)
Year: 2005
Total: 3
2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 1/20; 2/14 1803;
0731
1 Injury: Possible Injury 5/2/2011 1555
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Date Time
Severity:
Location
9; 7
1
Time
1130;
2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 8/17 (2) 2340
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year 2004
Total:
Severity:
Location
6 (2)
2
Date
Time
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/3; 220
1 Injury: Possible Injury 1/9; 740
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2003
Total:
Severity:
Location
1
9
2
Date
Year: 2006
Total: 10 Date Time Location
Date Modified: 12/07/2011
By Byron Theis G: \Engineering\ Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Crashes\ 2011 \Crash Data Tracy Vernon to TH62.xisx
3 Date Time
2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/12; 10/25 1300;
1100
1 Injury: Possible Injury 10/4/2011 1300
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year. 2001
Total:
Severity:
Location
5; 4
2
Year: 2002
Total: 3 Date Time Location
Severity:
1000;
3 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/14; 4/15; 1500; 5/30 1000
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
3; 1; 8
Date Modified: 12/07/2011
By Byron Theis GAEngineerinA Infrastructure \Streets\Traffic\Crashes\2011 \Crash Data Tracy Vemon to TH62.xisx
Tracy Avenue Street Reconstruction
Questionnaire Data from the Tracy Avenue project has
not yet been submitted by residents.
Preliminary data will be available on December 15 th for
discussion.
13111 CITY OF EDINA
Project Location Tracy Avenue
Phase 1: Benton to Vernon Summer, 2012
_
L.
,
•,,
— arr,atmortE.1
EZ seta, .r 7.c
Tracy Ave/Benton Avenue Intersection
obA
"
- 74.1e
5701
5601
MARK J ARONSON
5609
B GRAVELLE & H GRAVELLE
- 5608
AnysoN 4JORK
Grove Street
5825
DENNIS W DAHLIEN
WIFE Benton Avenue
5901
C M NOLTE
& D S NOLTE
— -Vernon-Ave-nue--
1 , J
5600
K & J KJELLAND
5604
SONNEK & L J SONNEK
5605
RICHARD J CONKEY
- • •
mtY*141041105411iitt
).;c4"= r • c
, 5612
H THOMAS SHANIGHT JR
& WIFE
Hawkes Terrace
- , r 5701
S NELSON
\
A IL
• _- - 7.71., ' .......--ii....
/
5700
, KRISTA M
ERICKSON
Hawkes Terrace
5701
CHRISTINE
-EHRL ICH
— 5615
- I JAMES E SUCCIG JR
5617
WAYNE JAMES NELSON
5621
J J TOTH III & K 10TH
1. 5625
lo J.DEAL & C A MICHUDA
5629
KRISTI D & MICHAEL I CURTIS
5633
MIRIAM S KISER TRUSTEE
0;0
.41111110.
Tr
ac
y
A
v
e
n
ue
_sdigg.4.1 00
S A L S
WE INBERG—'
(No
Wacdeta_Averwe_
5708
D K;J: HART
5712
T & WIDMARK
1 - ,
MARLIN J SUNDERMAN
Warden Avenue
5715
J MOONEN &
A R SHEEHAN
_
5616" .
GgSRK ,
RUSTAD-
GTöV Streel-
5804
WAYNE V FRIDLUND ET AL
5801
5700
WAYNE V
FRIDLUND ET AL
M K KALENBORN
/J A KALENBORN
, 5805
ANDREW ..G.&
SHERI A LANGFIELD
5'16t
• Hi FRANK
& L M KLAVER
Benton Avenue
-
5809
J J SMASAL &
T L SMASAL
5813
idTISAm NASER
ALKAM
5817
SN&SL
ROSEOU1ST
-
5821
ROCHELLE R
LACKNER
5700
STEVEN J ENCK
u6p .c1Diry ,coofo_Jd 50-9991\s,ci9yyx3\po3\oge-96.910\:y :9wrxrall2 gsw
110E/90/11 ,Pa4.4-11-1,1 :04-00
LOGISMap Output Page
Page 1 of 1
REK DR 1.****4ti wtti.
1111:111 110111iloon
5TH ST
Mel dy Lek
YVONNE TER
57TH ST IV
IMNDSORAVE
1
Map ce3v2d Aral S Ccup it (Cy LOStS GO 201
'c1/4k Dicc4c_.
pto #1/5 -F.)
H.-1., 1 11 T 0 A ..- T /:— -00 -1,T--- T flrITCIT X-- ryx 7C1 0-1-11! — 4-X 7 1 el /0 In
Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed
1
W. 56th Street East of Bernard Place 2011 359 29.6
2 W. 56th Street West of Normandale Road 2011 348 28.6
W. 56th Street West of Normandale Road 2011 402 28.1
W. 56th Street West of Normandale Road 2002 823 29.5
W. 56th Street West of Normandale Road 2001 882 32.2
3 Code Avenue South of Windsor Avenue 2011 278 27.8
Code Avenue South of Windsor Avenue 2007 298 29.4
4 Code Avenue North of Windsor Avenue 2007 256 26.3
5 Richmond Drive West of Normandale Road 2011 512 23
6 Windsor Avenue East of Code Avenue 2007 136 24.7
Normandale Road South of Kent Avenue 2008 2170 38.3
Date Modified: 12/08/11
By Byron Theis G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Richmond Hills_NTD.xlsx
"a
Pinewood T r
Richwood 91
Our Lad of
Grace I -urch
&Sc
Windsor Ave
Windsor Ave
Kent Ave
W 5 th St
a.
57th St
1 Date Time
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 2/6; 1156
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2010
Total:
Severity:
Location
2
2
Date Time
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/8; 1200
0 Injury: Possible Injury
1 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury 9/23; 1058
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2009
Total:
Severity:
Location
3
4
1 Date Time
0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
1 Injury: Possible Injury 12/26; 1408
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2007
Total:
Severity:
Location
6
Crash Statistics
Year: 2001 -2010
Intersection: Richmond Hills
Total Crashes: 8
Breakdown by Year
Date Modified: 17/08/2011
By Byron The'. GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Crashes\2011\Crash Data_Richmon( xlsx
2 Date Time
0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
2 Injury: Possible Injury 9/19 (2) 1115 (2)
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2006
Total:
Severity:
Location
1 (2)
1 Date Time
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 5/20; 2345
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2005
Total:
Severity:
Location
2
Time
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 2/6; 1400
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2004
Total:
Severity:
Location
5
1 Date
Date Modified: 12/08/2011
By Byron The'
G:\Engineering\ Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Crashes\2011 \Crash Data_Richmon .xlsx
QUESTION / COMMENT CARD
Name eiRS*04)1 Address sm,f,&440(19#41z.e
PLEASE PRINT
PLEASE PRINT
5103
PROPOSE
CURB AND
GUTTER
5101
5053
5056
XIST1NG
DRIVEWAY 5048 5044
-KENT AVE
5516
_
ROPOSED
BOULEVARD
EXTENSION
5517
5520
ROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
EXTENSION
5041
Project Details
Proposed
Improvements -
Streets:
• Windsor Ave and
Kent Ave
Intersection
• Warwick PI and
Kent Ave
Intersection
CITY OF EDINA
TM-23
RICHMOND HILLS RECOSNTRUCITON
2012 PROPERTY QUESTIONNAIRE
ADDRESS
Returned
Survey
Sump Pump Discharge Service Line Drainage Private Underground Utilities Residential Roadway Lighting Option Pedestrian Issues Traffic Management
Draintile or Footin. Drain Has a Sum. Pum.
Willing to
to Ci
Connect
Drain
Willing to Connect
Roof Drains Local Draina e Problems
Inggation sys. in
blvd.
Pet containment
s stem
Favors Upgrading
Street Li. his Preferred S es
Sidewalk
Need
Specific N'hood Pedestrian Comments Yes No Unkn No Unkn Yes No Yes No Explain Yes No Yes No Yes No Acorn Coach
mg on • oun
Lantern Latem Yes No
Construct new sidewalks
where? Yes No If yes where?
5045 56TH ST W 1 I 1 I 1 NE CORNER 58TH AND WARWICK 1 1 1 1 NONE
5040 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1
WATER POOLS AT THE FRONT OF
OUR PROPERTY AND HAS OVER
TIME ERODED OUR LAWN AT THE
STREET, THIS IS EXACERBATED BY
OUR NEIGHBORS (5044W 56TH)
DRIVEWAY EXTENDING INTO THE
STREET 1 1 1 3 2 4 5 1
NO ISSUES, OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD HAS
MEDIUM DENSITY VARIANT
AGES AND TODAYS FAMILIES
TEND TO DRIVE THEIR KIDS
TO EVERYTHING,WE'VE
LIVED HERE SINCE 77
WITHOUT SIDEWALKS
WITHOUT COMPLAINT
5044 50TH ST W 1 1 1 I NONE I 1 4 4 4 4 1
THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS
BUT NO PROBLEM, THERE IS
A WEST FRONTAGE RD, W
OF 100 WHICH IS PLEASANT
FOR A WALK
5120-22 Richmond Dr 1 1 1 1 1 NONE AWARE OF 1 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 1
5020 Kent Ave 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 I 1 5 2 3 1 1
TRAFFIC IS RATHER FAST ON KENT
AVE AND THERE ARE LOTS OF KIDS
5020 56TH ST W
YES WATER GATHERS BETWEEN
5020 AND 5028
CARS ARE TOO FAST ON W SETH ST
ALL THE TIME
5011 Richmond Dr
5209 Windsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 NONE 1 1 1 1 1
WINDSOR AND CODE/RICHMOND
INTERSECTION
5053 Windsor Ave
5005 Windsor Ave I 1 1 1 1
BACK PROPERTY LINE OF
NEIGHBORS HOUSE SW CORNER
DOESN'T IMPACT OUR PROPERTY 1 1 1 4 3 5 1 1 1
EXCESSIVE SPEEDING ON FRONYAGE
RD AND WINDSOR
5117 Richmond Dr NONE I 1 I 1
IF I WANT MY DRIVEWAY REPLACED AT
MY COST IS THERE ANY SAVINGS
DOING IT AT THE SAME TIME USING
THE SAME CONTRACTOR WHO IS
DOING CURB WORK?
5021 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CARS DRIVE TOO FAST ON
RESIDENTIAL STREETS, TOO MANY
KIDS AND PETS FOR 30 MPH, SIGN
DESIGNATING SLOWER SPEEDS SPEEDS ON ALL STREETS TOO FAST
5041 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 NA 1
NOT REALLY DRAINAGE BUT IT
SEEMS THE GROUND OVER STORM
SEWER BEHIND 5041 & 5045 HAS
SETTLED IN BACK YARD, WILL YOU
BE INSPECTING THE DRAINS TO THE
LAKE? 1 1 1 3 5 5 3 1
THE SIDEWALK ON THE
FRONAGE RD IS
WONDERFUL, USE IT
EVERYDAY!
5404 Richmond Dr 1 1 1 1 1 1
5105 Windsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 NA I 1 1 1 NO PEDESTRIAN ISSUES
5033 VVindsor Ave 1 1 1 NA 1
NONE OBSERVED BY OUR HOME
WE'RE AT THE TOP OF A HILL 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 1
NONE OBSERVED,
GENERALLY QUIET STREETS 1
5017 IN 58th 1 1 1 1 1 NOT AWARE OF ANY
5032 Normandale Ct 1 1 1 NA 1 1 1 2 6 5 1
NEED SOUND WALL-HVVY 100
SOUND KEEPS GETTING
WORSE
5028 Windsor Ave ALREADY DID ON FRONTAGE ROAD
5109 Richmond Dr 1 1 1 1 1 NONE
5016 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1
SCHOOL BUSES DRIVE WAY TOO
FASTII
517 Code Ave
5103 Windsor Ave 1 I I
AT KENT AND WINDSOR
INTERSECTION Y WATER POOLS
WITH LOW AREAS, DOESN'T DRAIN
OR FLOW CORRECTLY
GAPW \ CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DI \APROJECTSUMPR NOS \BA388 Richmond Hills Park(2012)\ PRELIM DESIGN \INFO MTG \Survey Tabulation.xls
12/8/2011 2 of 5
RICHMOND HILLS RECOSNTRUCITON
2012 PROPERTY QUESTIONNAIRE
ADDRESS
Returned
Survey
Sump Pump Discharge Service Line Drainage
LarifIllIN
Private Underground Utilities Residential Roadway Lighting Option Pedestrian Issues Traffic Management
Draintile or Has Sump Pump a
Willing to Connect
to CR, Drain
Willing to Connect
Roof Drains Local Drainage Problems
Iriggation eye. in
blvd.
Pet con ainment
system
Favors Upgrading
Street Lights Preferred Styles
Sidewalk
Need
Construct new sidewalks
where? Specific N'hood Pedestrian Comments If yes, where? Yes No
Footing Drain
Unkn Yes No Unkn Yes No Yes No Explain Yes No Yes No . Yes No Acorn Coach
Arlington Hound
Lantern Latem Yes No Yes No
5033 Richmond Dr 1 1 1 1 1 NONE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5105 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 I KNOW OF NONE 1 I 1 1 NO PEDESTRIAN ISSUES
5049 VVindsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5100 Windsor Ave
5032 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1
AT THE END OF OUR DRIVE AND
ALONG FRONT ROAD IS LOW AND
ALWAYS HAS STANDING
WATER/MUD ON ROAD 1 1 1 3 1 5 4 1 NONE I
W 56TH CARS GO TOO FAST, NONE OF
NEIGHBORING STREETS GETS THIS
LEVEL OF TRAFFIC OR SPEED
5028 Kent Ave I I 1 1 1
PUDDLING OF RAIN WATER AND
EXCESSIVE LAWN WATERING BY
NEIGHBORS-IT IS ASSUMED NEW
(MANDATORY) CURBS AND GUTTERS
WILL FIX THESE PROBLEMS 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 NONE
5601 Warwick PI 1 1 1 1 1
PRIOR TO OUR PURCHASE IN 2007
ROAD/BASEMENT HAD FLOODED
DUE TO SEWER BACK-UP, I DON'T
KNOW HOW MUCH RAIN CAUSED
THIS? 1 1 1 4 2 5 1 1 NA NONE 1
5009 Kent Ave
5023 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 1
DON'T WANT STREETLIGHTS,
AND ABSOLUTELY NOT ON
SIDEWALK-WOULD TAKE UP
TOO MUCH OF HOUSE TO
STREET AREA NO NEED FOR SIDEWALK 1
5028 Yvonne Ter
5012 Norrnandale Ct 1 I 1 1 1 NONE THAT I KNOW OF 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 1 NONE
5113 VVindsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5037 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1
STREET IN FRONT OF HOUSE WATER
POOLS 1 1 1 1
NOT SURE, WOULD NOT
OPPOSE GOOD OPTIONS OR
IDEAS 1
SPEED AND VOLUME MAYBE A
STOPSIGN. PLEASE CHANGE NAME OF
STREET BACK TO SURREY LANE.
PLEASE DO WORK ON ALL OF W 56TH-
DON'T STOP AT CODE
5048 Kent Ave 1 1 1 1 1
POOR DRAINAGE AT INTERSECTION
KENT AND WINDSOR 1 1 1 2 3 5 4 1 NONE-VERY LIGHT TRAFFIC ON KENT
5009 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 NONE OF WHICH WE ARE AWARE 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 1
THERE IS NOTA
NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL,
MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL
BUSES GO DOWN YVONNE
TER, I THINK OLG AND ELEM
BUSES ALSO GO DOWN
YVONNE
SOMETIMES SIDEWALKS CAUSE MORE
PROBLEMS-LOTS OF COMMENTS HERE-
WANTS MORE GREEN GRASS, LESS
SIDEWALKS AND DOESN'T WANT TO
HAVE TO SHOVEL EVERYONE ELSES
SIDEWALK IF THEY DON'T... 1
5004 Kent Ave 1 a 1 1
STANDING WATER IN FRONT OF
HOUSE AND TO EAST OF DRIVE
AFTER RAIN
5028 Richmond Dr
5041 Windsor Ave
5033 Kent Ave 1 1 1 1 1 WATER COLLECTS IN STREET 1 1 1 5 3 3 5 1 ON EITHER SIDE 1
HAS CONCERNS ABOUT HAVING TO
MOVE GARDEN AND ARBOR
5033 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1 1
1ST BLOCKS WEST OF HWY 100
FRONTAGE ROAD MUCH SPEEDING
NEED A STOP SIGN AT
56TH/WARWICK/YVONNE TER
5008 Windsor Ave
NOT AWARE OF ANY DRAINAGE
PROBLEMS 1 1 1 1 1
5104 Richmond Cir
5032 Windsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 5 2 1 1
5013 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1 NA I 1 1 1 NA
5017 Richmond Dr 1 1 1 1 1
STANDING WATER AT RICHMOND
DR/RICHMOND LN AFTER RAIN 1 1 I 5 1 1 3 1 SPEEDING I
SPEEDING AM/PM RUSH HOUR NEED
MORE ENFORCEMENT
5400 Richmond Ln I 1 1 1 1 NONE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5029 Yvonne Ter 1 , 1 1 1
ALWAYS RUNNING AND CONSTANT
FLOW OF WATER DOWN STREET.
ALSO WHEN HYDRANTS ARE
FLUSHED IT CHANNELS RIGHT INTO
OUR DRIVEWAY AND INTO THE 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 1 1
5044 Kent Ave I I 1 1 1 1
KENT AVE 56TH ST TO
GARDEN PARK
NO SIDEWALK LINKING TO GARDEN
PARK
G: \ PWCENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS IMPR NOS BA388 Richmond Hills Park(2012)1PRELIM DESIGN \ INFO MTG \Survey Tabulation.xls
12/8/2011 3 of 5
RICHMOND HILLS RECOSNTRUCITON
2012 PROPERTY QUESTIONNAIRE
ADDRESS
Returned
Survey
Sump Pump Discharge Service Line Drainage Private Underground Utilities Residential Roadway Lighting 0 ,tion Pedestrian Issues Traffic Management
Draintile or Footing Drain Has a Sump Pump
Willing to Connect
to City Drain
Willing to
Roof
Connect
rains Local Drainage Problems
Iriggation sys. in
blvd.
Pet containment
system
Favors Upgrading
Street Lights Preferred Styles
Sidewalk
Need
Construct new sidewalks
where? Specific N'hood Pedestrian Comments If yes, where? Yes No Unkn Yes No Unkn Yes No Yes No Explain Yes No Yes No Yes No Acorn Coach
Arlington Rouno
Lantern Latem Yes No Yes No
5037 Windsor Ave 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 3 5 4 2 1 1
5021 Windsor Ave
5017 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 1 1 are water gardens being considered? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Add a speed bump, cars drive too
fast/children
5024 Normandale Cl
5104 Windsor Ave '1 1 1 1
middle of street in front of house water
pools, have called many times to notify
City 1 1 1 1
5004 W 66th
5005 W 56th 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 1
frontage rd and traffic noise from Hwy 100,
build a sound wall along west frontage road
5029 Kent Ave I I I 1 1 water pool in front of lawn and drive
5217 Windsor Ave
5053 Yvonne Ter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 1 NOWAY'
6029 56TH ST W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5
6012 Kent Ave 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 3 3 ,
5200 Windsor Ave I 1 1
water stands on corner of our lot Code
and Windsor after rain
comer of Code and Windsor is busy and
could use stop signs
8005 Yvonne Ter
5516 Warwick PI
6016 66TH ST W 2 ,
5012 Richmond Dr excessive speed
5012 Windsor Ave
116 50 35 30 53 51 13 11 83 9 90 _ 35 80 7 107 19 96 _ 189 226 219 223 6 105 26 84
Sent 173 67% 29% 20% 17% 31% 29% 8% 6% 48% 5% 62% 20% 46% 4% 62% 11% 55% 3% 61% 15% 49% Surveys
Returned 116 100% 43% 30% 26% 46% 44% 11% 9% 72% 8% 78% 30% 69% 6% 92% 16% 83% 5% 91% 22% 72%
GAP1AACENTRAL SVCS \ ENG DIV1PROJECTS \NPR NOSt8A388 Richmond Hills Park(2012)1PRELIM DESIGN11NFO MTG1Survey Tabulation.xls
12/8/2011 5015
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Transportation Commission
Jack Sullivan
Assistant CityEnineer
December 15, 2011
Bike Edina Task Force — Bike
Routes
Agenda Item No.: VI.B
ACTION:
X Recommendation/Motion
Discussion
Information
Page 1 of 1 Item VI.B.
Edina Transportation Commission
REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
If so desired by the Transportation Commission, adopt a motion recommending to the City
Council that the Transportation Commission concurs with the routes identified by the Bike
Edina Task Force.
Info/Background:
In October the Bike Edina Task Force identified four segments of roadways that they'd like to
see improved bike treatments (lane striping and signage) during 2012.
The four segments are:
• 70th Street — Antrim Road to Hwy 100
• Cahill Road — 70th Street to 78th Street
• Valley View Road — Antrim Road to Hwy 62
• 50th Street — Wooddale Avenue to Halifax Avenue
Staff is suggesting that the ETC review these routes and make a recommendation to the City
Council. The Engineering department will review the routes for proper geometric
configurations and parking restrictions as part of the feasibility report that would be presented
to Council. If approved by Council, the Public Works department would complete the
restriping and signage using maintenance funds in late spring or early summer of 2012.
\\ED-NTMEngPubWks\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMM\Agendas\2011R&R\20111215 Jtem.VI.B_BETF.docx
N BLVD
St6TH ST
Lake_ ' WO
O
D
D
A
LE
A
VE
1-jawket
Lake
MALONEY AVE
Lake
tel)
54TH sTw
74TH ST W
,Laken
'Pamela.
HWY 62
OTH ST W
Camelia gaa
70TH STW
A
VE
76TH ST W
1-494
City of Edina
Municipal State Aid Streets
• State Aid Streets
-en Ecd.'"4,ct
-7 -Z5
-
k F v-c e_, --Roc)
W 1 E
Engineering Dept 4.eFebruary. 2003
Transportation Commission
Jack Sullivan
Assistant City Engineer
December 15, 2011
Grandview Small Area Study
Update
Agenda Item No.: VI.F
ACTION:
Recommendation/Motion
Discussion
x Information
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Page 1 of 1 Item VI.F.
Edina Transportation Commission
REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Info/Background:
Please see the attached excerpt from the Draft Report for the Grandview Heights Small Area
Plan. I have only included the information pertaining to the Transportation aspects of the
report.
I have sent the entire document electronically if you'd like to read the sections on land use,
public space and sustainability.
\\ED-NTMEngPubWks\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMMAgendas\2011R&R\20111215 Jtem.VI.F_Grandview.docx
Grand View Heights Small Area Plan
Edina, Minnesota
December 7 2011
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Transportation
The GrandView area street and movement
network is primarily composed of Vernon/50th
Street (reliever/augmenter arterial), Eden (local
street, state-aid facility) and the multiple ingress/
egress ramp system of Hwy 100 (designated a
principal arterial) . There are other local streets
but most only provide limited service (such as
Summit Avenue) or access that dead ends (such
as Brookside off Eden). The Hwy interchange has
a number of on and off ramps that according to
MNDOT are redundant and/or unsafe. Vernon is
a county facility that south of Interlachen has seen
a reduction of average daily traffic over the past
10 years; Eden provides a secondary connection
within the district east and west over Hwy 100.
Eden is designated the primary bike route through
the district; Vernon/Interlachen are designated as a
secondary routes.
'The are two major recommendations that support
the overall movement and transportation goals
of the plan. One, propose that the Hwy 100
interchange be reconfigured into a split-diamond
interchange to better manage through traffic
and provide improved local access/circulation
via frontage roads east and west of the highway.
Overtime, this would provide a more connected
local system (i.e., more local streets) tied into direct
access to Hwy 100 via the frontage roads. Second,
propose a new east —west street be built along the
north property of the public works site (spanning
the CP Rail corridor) connecting to Arcadia from
Vernon that would be paired with Gus Young to
provide a one-way circulation pattern. The plan is
based on one-way in (eastbound) from Vernon on
the new GrandView Crossing and one-way out
(westbound) to Vernon/Interlachen on Gus Young
Lane. This pattern would eliminate the left hand
turn from Vernon (southbound) into Gus Young
Lane.
Bike improvements would focus on more lane
area and identification along Vernon and Eden,
consistent with Living and Complete Streets
principles. Over the long term east-west bike and
pedestrian access would also be improved with the
addition of a new bridge over Hwy 100 that would
connect the GrandView Commons to Tupa Park,
City Hall and the Minnehaha Creek mill area.
In addition to more bike parking facilities in the
district the plan also recommends the potential
to develop an at-grade bike path in the CP Rail
ROW from Eden connecting to Brookside as an
off road option within the district.
Functional Class:
• Highway 100: Principle Arterial
• 50th St: A Minor Augmenter
• Vernon Ave: B Minor Connector
• Interlachen Blvd: Major Collector
• Eden Ave: Local Street
Traffic Volume:
• 13,000 — 23,000 AADT along W 50th St /
Vernon Ave
• 4000 — 8000 AADT along Eden Ave
Goals
• Support a more efficient, compact and safe
interchange access to Hwy 100 from Vernon and
Eden
• Create a more bike and pedestrian environment
by applying Complete Streets and Living Streets
principles to Vernon, Eden and the local street
network
• Create an improved circulation and access
network between public streets/parcels and
private development/destinations
• Create an enhanced parking environment that, in
part, depends on shared district parking supplies
centrally located
• Partner with Metro Transit to implement a
community-scale Park-n-Ride in the area
• Complete the historical transition of Vernon
from old Hwy 169 to a local district street
• Identify and implement a demonstration project
for "Complete/Living" streets principles
• Provide additional auto, bike and pedestrian
connections east and west in the district
• Maintain and improve parking, access, circulation
in the short term for convenience, retail, and
service uses
• Complete the pedestrian/bike system...make
bikes and pedestrians a priority and allow for a
safe crossing over Hwy 100
• Take leadership related to highway 100
interchange.. .build the "reason platform" for
multi-modal access and gateways
• Reserve the CP Rail corridor for future, possible
public transit and non-motorized movement/
connection in the district
• Reduce congestion by providing safe travel
choices that encourage non-motorized
transportation options, increasing the overall
capacity of the transportation network.
1 2/07/1 1
CUNINGHAM
GR 0UP
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Transportation
District Framework
The movement framework for the district begins
with addressing policy issues like the adoption
of the Living Streets principles and applying
Hennepin County's Complete Streets policy as
well as considering larger and more long term ideas
like reconstructing the Hwy 100 interchange using
a "split diamond" configuration. This approach
accomplishes a number of objectives that meet the
District Principles and provides an a incremental
approach to addressing change over time. The
existing slip ramp location off the southbound
ingress ramp would be retained but would be
combined with an additional connection to Gus
Young as part of the one way frontage road system.
Traffic would be controlled at four signalized
intersections.
In the shorter time frame there is the opportunity
to begin implementing streetscape, bike and
pedestrian improvements. Another important
recommendation is to implement the GrandView
Crossing/Gus Young one way pairs that will help
manage traffic access and circulation in the upper
core of the district.
IMI complete / living streets improvements
private streetscapes
III split diamond interchange
newt improved bridges
CUNINGHAM
12/07/11
CR ^UP
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Transportation
District Framework Before and After
Existing Proposed
CUN:NO:-iAM
12/07/11
6Sn3P
Short Term Improvements Long Term Improvements
CUNINGH AM
G a ', UP
36
new ramps
eliminated ramps
signal e
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Transportation
Highway 100 Improvements
A major proposal involves both the short term
and long term configuration of the Hwy 100
interchange. The plan proposes a "split-diamond"
arrangement that would management access on
and off the highway at signalized intersections at
Vernon and Eden and be connected with parallel,
one-way frontage roads. This configuration would
allow regional traffic to clearly and safely access
the highway and still move into the district with
greater predictability and safety. Long term
prospects might include the transfer of unused
MNDOT ROW for local and community uses
such as civic building sites, future bus rapid transit
support, parking and open space.
12/07/11
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Transportation
Bicycle Improvements
Bike lanes are shown for Vernon, a secondary bike
route, and Eden, a primary bike route, through
the district. The lanes are shown with enhanced
paint and striping as well as additional lane area.
A potential bike facility using the CP Rail ROW
could connect Eden, at grade, to Brookside, thereby
providing an off-road option to move thru the
district.
Primary Bike routes
Secondary bike routes
Trail (on CP ROW)
12/07/11 CUNINGHAM
GROUP Is
Transportation
Bicycle Improvements
Eden Avenue Vernon between Eden and Interlachen Vernon south of Eden
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Precedent
12/07/11 CUNINGHAM
GR 0UP
Existing Existing
Proposed
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
12/07/11
Sustainability
One dictionary defines sustainability as:
• the ability to be sustained, supported, upheld, or
confirmed.
• the quality of not being harmful to the
environment or depleting natural resources, and
thereby supporting long-term ecological balance
For GrandView sustainability is concerned with
how the natural and manmade environments co-
exist (certainly in a way that limits and/or prohibits
harmful impact on the environment now and
for generations to come).But it also has meaning
for how the community and businesses will be
sustained, supported and upheld. Interestingly
enough one is not isolated or independent from
the other - a comprehensive, long term definition
of sustainability should guide how the district
and the community move forward with goals,
recommendations and actions.
Recent Activities
Sustainability is a broad and deep subject that
is being constantly refined from principles and
policies to products and practices to financing and
implementation. Perhaps so much so that it may
seem difficult about where to begin and what next
steps should be taken. For GrandView it seems
practical to review some of the recent decisions
and actions the city has taken that will provide a
foundation for how the district will grow, change
and redevelop.
• Edina Energy & Environment Commission:
Solar/wind ordinance amendments task force.
City staff is reviewing proposed ordinance.
• PACE Financing: The Edina City Council
unanimously adopted the Edina Emerald
Energy Program Nov. 15,2011 making it
the first Minnesota city to take advantage of
Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)
legislation. PACE, which was approved by
the state Legislature in 2010, allows property
owners to have the cost of energy efficiency and
conservation improvements assessed to their
property and paid alongside property taxes.
GrandView Tire & Auto, 5415 70th St. W, used
the tool for the necessary financing to install a
27-kilowatt solar panel system on the already
green auto shop's roof.
• New Public Works Facility: The public works
building was built with sustainability in mind.
It has geothermal heating and cooling and used
recycled materials, and its landscape was designed
to minimize the development's impact on the
environment. A rain garden at the corner of 74th
and Metro Boulevard holds and infiltrates water
from sloping parking lots with curb cuts to direct
the water to native grasses and plants.
• City Hall: Installation of solar panel project in
Fall of 2011
• City Council Living Streets policy:
Recommendation of the Edina Transportation
Commission (ETC) to establish a comprehensive
Living Streets Policy that integrated all modes
of transportation and addressed issues such
as: traffic calming, stormwater management,
promoting active living, community feel,
improving walking and biking, and enhancing
urban forests. If approlr -by the Council, the
ETC would work in collaboration with staff
to prepare the policy for the Council's future
consideration. Mr. Sullivan reported a $15,000
grant was available to initiate the creation of
this policy, which may cost $60,000-$100,000 to
complete.
• Adoption of MinesotaGreenStep Cities
program, 2011: On January 18,2011 Edina
passed a council resolution becoming a member
of the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program.
Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary
challenge, assistance and recognition program
to help cities achieve their sustainability goals
through implementation of 28 best practices.
Each best practice can be implemented by
completing one or more specific actions from
a list of four to eight actions. These actions are
tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on cost
savings and energy use reduction, and encourage
innovation.
CUNINGHAM
G Cnt.IP
3. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
Sustainability
Greenstep's 28 Best Practices:
Buildings and Lighting
1. Efficient Existing Public Buildings: Work with
utilities and others to assess and finance energy and
sustainability improvements of existing structures.
2. Efficient Existing Private Buildings: Work with
utilities and others to assess and finance energy and
sustainability improvements of existing structures.
3. New Green Buildings: Construct new buildings
to meet or qualify for a green building standard.
4. Efficient Building &. Street Lighting and
Signals: Improve the efficiency of public and
private lighting and signals.
5. Building Reuse: Create economic and regulatory
incentives for redeveloping and repurposing
existing buildings before building new
Land Use
6. Comprehensive Plan and Implementation:
Adopt a Comprehensive Plan and tie regulatory
ordinances to it.
7. Efficient City Growth: Promote financial
and environmental sustainability by enabling
and encouraging higher density housing and
commercial land use.
8. Mixed Uses: Develop efficient and healthy land
patterns.
9. Efficient Highway-Oriented Development:
Adopt commercial development and design
standards for highway road corridors.
10. Conservation Design: Adopt development
ordinances or processes that protect natural
systems.
Transportation
11. Complete Green Streets: Create a network of
multimodal green streets.
12. Mobility Options: Promote active living and
alternatives to single-occupancy car travel.
13. Efficient City Fleets: Implement a city fleet
investment, operations and maintenance plan.
14. Demand-Side Travel Planning: Implement
Travel Demand Management and Transit-
Oriented Design
Environmental Management
15. Purchasing: Adopt environmentally preferable
purchasing policies and practices.
16. Urban Forests: Increase city tree and plant
cover.
17. Ecologic Stormwater Management: Minimize
the volume of and pollutants in rainwater runoff.
18. Parks and Trails: Enhance the city's green
infrastructure.
19. Surface Water Quality: Improve local water
bodies.
20. Efficient Water and Wastewater Facilities:
Assess and improve drinking water and wastewater
facilities.
21. Septic Systems: Implement an effective
management program for decentralized wastewater
treatment systems.
22. Solid Waste Reduction: Increase waste
reduction, reuse and recycling.
23. Local Air Quality: Prevent generation of local
air contaminants.
Economic and Community Development
24. Benchmarks & Community Engagement:
Adopt outcome measures for GreenStep and other
city sustainability efforts, and engage community
members in ongoing education, dialogue, and
campaigns.
25. Green Business Development: Document the
use of assistance programs for green business and
job development.
26. Renewable Energy: Remove barriers to
and encourage installation of renewable energy
generation capacity.
27. Local Food: Strengthen local food and fiber
production and access.
28. Business Synergies: Network/cluster
businesses to achieve better energy, economic and
environmental outcomes.
12/07/11 CUNINGH AM
GR OUP
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Transportation Commission
Jack Sullivan:.., ,
Assistant city Engineer
December 15, 2011
Bike Edina Task Force Update
Agenda Item No.: VILE
ACTION:
7 Recommendation/Motion
111 Discussion
Information
Page 1 of 1
Item VIE.
Edina Transportation Commission
REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Info/Background:
Please see the November meeting minutes from the Bike Edina Task Force (BETF).
Chair Janovy will give an update regarding the BETF at our meeting.
AED-NTMEngPubWks\Engincering\Infrastnicture\Streets\Traffic\TRANSP COMMkAgendas\2011R&R\20111215_1tem.VI.E_BETF Minutes.docx
&IKE
EDI NA
Bike Edina Task Force: News & Meeting Outcomes
November 10, 2011
Purpose: The Bike Edina Task Force (BETF) meets to serve citizens and partner with City staff
and elected officials to promote bicycle improvements in Edina for education, encouragement,
infrastructure, enforcement, and ongoing assessment. We support implementation of the
approved City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan that serves all levels of
bicyclists, connects key destinations including safe routes to schools, and integrates with the
Twin Cities' regional bike network. Our vision is a progressive bicycle-friendly community where
citizens can integrate cycling into their daily lives.
Time & Location: BETF monthly on the 2 nd Thursday of each month at 8 p.m. in the Mayor's
Conference Room at Edina City Hall. For questions contact Brad Schaeppi or Peter Kelley, Co-
Chairs. Guests are welcome.
Distribution: BETF, guests, City Manager, City Engineer, Edina Police BETF Liaison Sgt. Timothy
Olson, SHIP contact Robyn Wiesman, and Mayor & City Council. Also, Jack Sullivan to forward to
the Edina Transportation Commission, and Dianne Plunkett Latham to post for the Edina Energy
and Environment Commission.
• Present: Peter Kelley, Alex Johnson, Kirk Johnson, Marty Mathis, Andrew Heyer, Carl
Gulbronson, Rob Erickson, Tom Randall, Larry Olson, Don Eyberg, Sally Dunn
• Absent: Brad Schaeppi, Carl Follstad, Alice Hulbert, Ellen Jones, Jennifer Janovy
• Guests: None.
• Recorded by: Sally Dunn
1. New Member Voting
Alex Johnson introduced himself and described his interest in being a student
representative on the Task Force. He is in 10th grade at Edina High school. Carl
nominated Alex; Kirk seconded. All approved.
2. Tour d'Edina Debrief
a. Chief Long reported that there were 2 officers at the event. The road was not
meant to be intended to be closed, but officers saw a safety issue when bikers
began ignoring traffic signals so they waved riders through.
b. Those at the race indicated the officers did a fantastic job
c. The group discussed how to improve this type of event in the future. Ideas
included: more volunteers, improved pre-event communication with
participants, BETF table with handouts, specific instruction on rules of the road
for riders.
d. Other community rides were briefly discussed—Northfield, Chicago, Amsterdam.
Question was raised about doing an Edina event with closed roads, perhaps in
conjunction with the annual 4th of July parade, or the Homecoming parade on
Wooddale Ave.
3. Status Updates
a. Bike Blvd- Peter reported on status. There will be another public meeting on
December 12 where consultant designs will be shown. $30,000 grant will be
used for this. Proposals will be in this Friday. On Dec. 20, there will be a hearing
in front of the city council. There was a Dec 1 deadline to get some paperwork
into TLC. If all approved, it would go into project planning for next summer.
b. Road Striping-Peter sent Wayne a list of 4 roads: 50th, 70th, Cahill Road; Valley
view from 62 to Antrim road. Next steps are that Wayne will pass the list to the
ETC. There will be engineer studies done. The request would then be brought to
the City Council. Wayne indicated he can pay for this out of his existing budget. If
all went smoothly striping could be accomplished early next summer. Discussion
of 70th street being completed and some new material on the roads for marking
the bike lane. This would be a good item for the Bike Edina blog.
4. New Business
a. Kirk Johnson received a project request from a resident that he was unsure how
to handle. The resident had apparently been forwarded to Kirk by a member of
city staff. Discussion occurred about how to handle similar resident questions
better. Should city staff be forwarding calls to the BETF? If so, they should go
through the group chair. Perhaps the ETC would be a more appropriate starting
point. The task force sees itself as a resource for the city, but lacks the resources
or procedures to handle specific resident request. Discussion of how to gather
more information about resident wants and needs. Last survey was done in 2004
or 2006.
b. Grandview redevelopment discussion: Sally Dunn and Peter Kelley attended
planning committee meetings. General scope of the project was discussed. Sally
will forward 42 page report to Peter to send to group.
5. General Project Discussions
Over this and the next several meetings the group will review all current BETF projects
and proposed projects. The goal is to determine the priority of each project, identify a
leader and BETF members interested in helping/participating. These are the first
projects discussed. Stay tuned for more in upcoming minutes.
a. BETF Website: high priority for improving communications with community and
provide an Edina specific bike resource. Dan Atkins is developing site. Andrew
Heyer will lead for content. Kirk Johnson and Peter Kelley will assist. Group also
discussed creating a Bike Edina Blog to better update the community on key
biking issues and a Bike Edina Facebook page to develop a list of bike friends to
support BETF initiatives in the future.
b. Bike Rodeo: high priority. Larry Olson will lead next year's event at Cornelia
School. Rob Ericson, Kirk Johnson, Alex Johnson, and Mary Mathis will assist.
c. Ride with the Mayor: Medium priority. Has been organized by Alice Hulbert in
the past. Verify her interest in continuing. Alex Johnson will assist.
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Transportation Commission
Jack Sullivar."7,1 ,
Assistant Cit4ngineer
December 15, 2011
Correspondence
Agenda Item No.: VII.
ACTION:
1-1 Recommendation/Motion
El Discussion
Ell Information
Page 1 of 1
Item VII.
Edina Transportation Commission
REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
Info/Background:
Attached is three pieces of correspondence from residents.
\\ED-NTMEngPubWks \Engineering\ Infrastructure \Streets Uraffic\TRANSP COMM \Agendas \2011R&R\20111215 Jtem.VII_Corndocx
Jack Sullivan
Subject: FW: Transportation Commission
Original Message
From: Emily Sever Imailto:emilvsever@comcast.netj
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 10:18 PM
To: Lynette Biunno
Cc: Sheila Rzepecki
Subject: Transportation Commission
Council Members and Engineering Staff,
My Name is Emily Sever and I reside at 6713 Normandale Road. I wanted to let you know that I am very
disappointed in the 70th street project. I will say it is very beautiful with all of the bells and whistles, a bit
extreme for the half mile stretch that it is. I am disappointed in the 25 MPH speed limit. I am seeing extreme
speeds in the neighborhoods adjacent to 70th street. West Shore, Southcrest, etc. and especially Normandale
Road and 66th Street. I don't know exactly why the extreme measures for this small stretch of road, especially
since it is a main artery from HWY. 100 to the main shopping areas and restaurants off France Avenue in
Edina. It is obvious to me that people on 70th, especially Council Member Josh Sprague wanted to detour
people from their street to others streets, I am outraged! Unless all of the streets adjacent to 70th street speed
limit is changed to 25 MPH I feel that this is going to be an ongoing problem. Our street has an ongoing
problem of excess speeds, no sidewalk, no crosswalk over 66th street, no bike path on 66th street to
accommodate the wonderful parks, tennis courts, water park and baseball fields along with picnic facilities. It
is interesting to me that the 70th street study did not look at all of the other streets affected. I am convinced
that if one of the city council members did not live on 70th, none of this would be an issue. I will be present for
the meeting Tuesday evening and would love to discuss issues I have with you.
Thank you,
Emily Sever
6713 Normandale Road
Edina, MN 55435
612-770-2578
1
Jack Sullivan
Subject: FW: Traffic Info and Feedback
From: Debra Sabatini fmailto:dlsabatini@_yahoo.comj
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 7:43 PM
To: Lynette Biunno
Subject: Traffic Info and Feedback
Hello,
I wanted to give you some feedback on the 70th St. "redo" that's been under construction for many, many
months now, between Hwy 100 & France Ave. It inconvenienced all of us but I thought that it was going to be
more of an expressway (like other states have) and make, ultimately, help traffic flow quicker and smoother.
Boy, was I wrong.
I live off 70 St., one mile west of 100.
I'm not sure why you did what you did but I think this street is now one of the worst roadways in the city. In
the state, in fact.
First of all, you have slowed traffic down to a turtle pace of 25 mph. My car goes faster than that when it's
idling. Secondly, Minnesotans DO NOT know what to do, or how to drive with round-abouts, which are
designed to keep traffic moving. The MN drivers, instead, come to a complete stop, ignorant of the road laws,
and wait, backing up traffic even further. You might as well put up 4 STOP signs, as traffic would flow just the
same.
And the fact that you had already messed up 70th St., between France Ave. and York Ave., with the two
ound-abouts in front of The Galleria, was already bad planning at it's extreme.
I had already been avoiding that portion of 70th St. street entirely, which is inconvenient for me, as I used to
drive straight on 70th St. to Walgreens, or the library, or Target. Now, I consciously avoid that street, AND
NOW get to avoid more of 70th St.
I do not understand why you are going backwards with traffic flow, and making it slower than ever to get
around our city. We no longer live on the farm.
We live in a growing city, and our traffic patterns should reflect that growth with proper planning. Getting
around the city shouldn't be so much work, or take more and more time to go the same distance. Is there no
progress in Edina?
I pay high property taxes on my home in Edina, and for what?
I suggest that you teach people in Minnesota how to drive on city roads that go faster than
25 mph, teach them how to use their blinkers, and how to merge.
I encourage you to insist that we move forward into the future with city planning and traffic patterns instead
of taking giant leaps BACKWARDS.
Signed,
Tired of the 10 minute Edina drive to go one mile, Debra Sabatini (resident since 1996)
7305 Lanham Lane
Edina MN 55439
1
Jack Sullivan
From: Michele Debrey <michele@legacygift.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 5:51 PM
To: Lynette Biunno
Cc: Jack Sullivan
Subject: To Members of Edina City Council
Greetings,
I am writing by e-mail because I am not able to attend tonight's City Council meeting, but would otherwise
communicate my thoughts to the Council in the Community Comment section of this December 6
meeting.
I would like to register my dissatisfaction with the 25 mph speed limit on 70th Street, between highway 100
and France Ave. and request that the Council consider reverting back to the original, long-standing road
speed limit of 30 mph.
After a recent lengthy conversation with Jack Sullivan to register my complaint, I understand that the new
speed limit was established primarily due to neighborhood feedback in the redesign planning process. I
have lived in the neighborhood for 8 years, and was aware of and participated as a resident in the
planning process. At the time, there were a great many proposals and possibilities on the table, causing
some confusion and overwhelm; it was very hard to keep track of what was happening with the process,
and stay knowledgeable on specifics.
I propose that the City, while commendably attempting to gather resident input, did not receive adequate
(thorough enough) resident input on the question of the speed limit.
I note that, during the planning deliberations, a 70th Street home owner and strong advocate for the 25
mph limit was campaigning for the Council and now sits on the Council, and has therefore more power
than the average resident.
I do not believe that the 25 mph speed limit best serves the community of Edina, and here are 7 good
reasons why:
• It is an efficiency impediment on a major throughway of the city
• 70th is not an incidental street; there is no other means of traveling east or west at that latitude -
everyone must travel it, which as you know is many hundreds (thousands?) of cars daily. The
requirement for travel on 70th compels the Council to be as generous as possible regarding traveler
speed.
• The new stoplight at West Shore Drive now adequately and sufficiently serves to impede speed
(keep traffic docile and speed-resistant), making the lower speed limit unnecessary
• It irritates people
• It causes drivers to cut through quieter, more residential side streets that are not plagued by the
lower speed limit, frustrating the "victim" residents of those streets, potentially permanently
• A 25 mph speed limit is not becoming to, nor reflects favorably on, a city of Edina's stature, which
is investing in its cosmopolitan identity and prime location as an immediate suburb of the major city
of Minneapolis - 25 mph speed limits are what small, fading towns are made of (and if people keep
paying higher taxes even when their property values drop, one would certainly expect the value of
1
residency to continue to rise to account for the higher property taxes — a 25 mph is a disincentive
to continue residency — I know because I'm thinking of moving because of it)
• 30 mph is more than adequate to serve the city's interest, and provides the best balance between
respect for traffic flow and reasonable speed
The people who voted for this speed limit are highly likely to live on this street (and if you have evidence
of who voted for it, I think it would be worthwhile for the city to examine the proximity of these residents to
the street). I understand their interest in keeping the speed down. However, these residents did in fact
choose to purchase a house on this main artery when the speed was 30 mph, which is by all accounts a
very reasonable city speed limit (as proven by the fact that all city of Edina streets are 30 mph in normal
circumstances, except for this one).
If the Council were to more broadly request resident input into the speed decision, I highly doubt that the
25 mph speed would stand. It is unnecessary and wasteful of people's time and patience.
Please reconsider.
Sincerely,
Michele Debrey
7112 Glouchester Ave.
Edina
952-920-3399
2
Jack Sullivan
Subject: Normandale Road and 66th Street
Hi Joni,
I have asked my staff to collect the enforcement information you are looking for and I will provide that to the council
when it's completed later today. I won't necessarily be able to give you
the specific number of hours we have spent at each location by our general patrol staff, we do not track that data. The
officers are called to and from locations so often
on calls, that it would be difficult to give a true number of hours.
When our officers are assigned to a specific location while working an assigned traffic detail, we do keep track of hours
at each location.
The number of hours logged, and speed citations issued, between May-Nov 2011 while officers were assigned to only sit
at those locations are:
(May 2011 was used as it represents the approximate month these locations began receiving increased complaints)
• Normandale Road, 16 hours worked resulting in 5 speed citations.
• W.66th Street, 8.5 hours resulting in 3 speed citations.
**This equates to about 1 citation for every 3-hours worked**
We do have some 2011 traffic data supplied to us by Jack Sullivan for both locations. My understanding is that this data
does not reflect "post-construction" on W7Oth.
We use the 85-percentile as an indication of speed compliance.
• The 85th-percentile for Normandale was 32.6MPH (85% are traveling 32.6MPH or less)
• The 85th-percentile for W 66th is 38.2MPH (85% are traveling 38.2MPH or less)
This data seems to indicate that Normandale does not have a significant "speed" complaint. However, the data collected
for W66th does seem to indicate a speed concern. Despite the 85% percentile showing approximately 8 MPH over the
limit, the citation threshold for the typical officer is in the area of 12- 15MPH over the limit, which would suggest the
citation numbers on W66th would not be very high.
As a side note, we have these streets on our priority list for enforcement and have ever since W.70th street opened. We
have also been receiving complaints, but ours seem to focus on people being upset by the 25 MPH limit on W.70th Street
and that traffic is now being diverted onto their streets. We have had some speed complaints, but generally the
complaints we hear focus on the 25 MPH limit and the volume on Normandale and W.66th Street.
Again, when I get the citation numbers, I will forward them along. I hope all of this helps. I imagine you already have
some of the data from Jack, but I wanted to put it in context of our enforcement threshold. Please let me know if I can
provide any other information outside of the citation numbers.
Thanks!
Jeff Long, Chief
952-826-0491 I Fax 952-826-1607
llong@ci.edina.mn.us 1 www.CityofEdina.com/Police
1
MTH ST W 111011WAY 82
11.1Y62 TO v ST W
-1 tILJ I I II II
FRocsAvss To iv rl It I 1M
4
U.
•• •• mi. um ••• ;••U.
U.•• ••
•• 10.
I.7 pkcz-,1"7—
LOGISMap Output Page
Page 1 of 1
http://gis.logis.org/LOGIS_ArcIMS/itus?ServiceName=ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE&ClientV... 12/6/2011
66th Street/Normandale Road Traff Data
Location Description Year Average Daily Posted Speed, 85th Speed, MPH Traffic MPH
1 6813 Normandale Rd. 07/19/03-07/29/03 1257 30.5 30
6813 Normandale Rd. 04/13/01-04/24/01 1905 38.8 30
2 Normandale Rd. South of W. 66th St. 05/12/11-05/23/11 4081 32.6 30
3 W. 66th St. East of Normandale Rd. 05/12/11-05/23/11 8784 36 30
W. 66th St. East of Normandale Rd. 08/24/10-09/02/10 4503 38.2 30
W. 66th St East of Normandale Rd. 06/02/10-06/21/10 4838 / 4950 38.3 /37.5 35/30*
4 6608 Brittany Road 05/12/11-05/26/11 576 26.9 30
S 'West Shore Drive North of W. 66th St. 05/16/11-05/20/11 437 26.6 30
6 West Shore Drive South of W. 66th St. 05/17/11-05/26/11 897 29 30
7 W. 66th St. East of West Shore Drive 05/16/11-05/20/11 9539 38.7 30
W. 66th St. East of West Shore Drive 06/02/10-06/21/10 5206/5312 39.7 / 39.0 35/30*
8 W. 66th St. West of Comelia Circle 05/16/11-05/20/11 9611 37.8 30
W. 66th St West of Comelia Circle 08/24/10-09/02/10 5146 37.3 30
W. 66th St. West of Cornelia Circle 06/04/10-06/21/10 5316/ 5546 37.9 /36.6 35/30*
9 IW. 66th St East of Cornelia Circle 06/02/10-06/21/10 5596/ 5498 35.0 /33.8 I 35/30*
10 6701 Comelia Drive 05/17/11-05/26/11 940 29.7 30
11 W. 66th St East of Cornelia Drive 05/16/11-05/20/11 9823 33.5 30
W. 66th St East of Comelia Drive 08/24/10-09/02/10 5484 34.6 30
* Council approved reduction of speed on 06/01/10. Speed data was collected immediately before and after speed signage revisions.
Date Modified: 12/06/11
By Byron Theis GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\TRAFF STUDIES\2011\Normandale and 66th.xlsx
Legend
*Artldpated
ReconsWellon
Year
2014
2015
- 2016
Antlelpaled MIllt Overlay,
Cmerele Ranh eeld81drvrale Year
CC] 2012 CONC
CEJ 2015 CONC
NMI 2016 CONC
IMO 2012 MO
a 2014 MO
• v_ 'wen kl Roadmays fl TERI ACHET1
OUNTRY
CLUB
VAN
ILLONJN/AV
VALSENBURG
PARK
I NTErtkAO11141 4 Et)ip
8Preer• Lae
•
II
n
n„ 4
(
100 -
untie.
THEN W
FRED RICHARDS
OOLF COURSE w
gov,
4 City of Edina 2012-2016
- Anticipated Municipal State Aid Street Reconstruction,
Mill and Overlay and Sidewalks
IMINA
CCONTRY
CLUB 100
„5.5;
•
61TH SPIV
0
• LitElrtr-al
PARK
169
BRAEA1A1111ARK
(Xt. E COURSE
I
11
78TH STW
Note/Disclaimer
The dates shown on the map represent the anticipated years of construction and are subject to change based on budgetary issues, adacent projects, resident input and other factors.
If a road Is not highlighted then lie potential reconstruction dale may be beyond the City's long term planning process. The City of Edna also has twolvement with the 1494 / TH169
Interchange Prdect for the years of 2012 -2016.
The City of Edina's skeet improvement policy is to assess resklents for a portion of the roadway reconstruction costs. Public utilky improvements are paid for from the CIty's utility fund.
Extensive evaluation regarding the condOlon of the Numinous pavement, sankary sewer, storm sewer and water main were used toad the priority of roadway improvements.
This map only addresses Stele-Aid routes within the City
* Project schedules to change due to a deficit funding.
5701 5700
5705 5704
5709 5708
5713 5712
571 7 5716
5721 5720
5725 5724
us it-i 5051 5315
331 301 17
PROJECT LIMITS
5071 5245
5264
5256 260 5252
\ •11••••r•r•IIIIENTIO•117•Mir•Or• •• NM •••• ••• 1
'1\ C4 \•''113 \ 63 en 2_12 8 2
5104 II \ hp 44\19 (s.1.1 &'w 5012 50081 10
51121.-"—
I 5120C \-0;. At 0124A 22 N6ii
e128 13 26
—
'1 * \ 5400 ,
5113 )5100105 \ .--- . 5117,
2 5404
5253
\4. RICHMDI D DR 48C r)
In
It)
2 in IS 2
WINDSOR AVE
0 •
2 I
•
w I 0I
I
ii I
T, 5100 /
5300 5017
(5056/
5048 p044
._.
C' CO Cs1 s—
IS 2 12 g
KEIIT AVE
5029 1j 5025 11 5017
co
.2 5036
2 In
51011
55'16 1 4',
-
5520 41. --i5-17- 10415037
-- .
Q C\I .1:14 8
1 CO -c
0 -
t 1 Nr '
176 Y1 12 . L
5212 I
520 5528
5520
5524
5532
521E
00. 5224 5033 228 01 5220
I g <0 cv do -Fr 5032 5028 5020
V/ 56TH ST
5041 0375033 029 025 0215017 15013 00911 5905
C-
%an
11.1
5209 2011 115109 1 5105 5600 ,!5601 I
••••1
5600 s# 5053 .5040
521 3
5603
griV
5024 5020 5016 5012 5008 5004
YVOIIIIE 1ER
5013 5009f5-1 -3051
ti
5008 5004 !
5036 5032
5605 5049
5045.1
5041
11 5025 5021 1 5017
5029
5609
(5.605 5604
5617 \5608
5621 5612
\5016 15012
5018
5613 5616 5037
5617 5620
5701 /.1. 50251 2, \
\\ 5029
50:33
/
50'36
5020
5705
5725
5100 5729
5032
1
I I
1—I . -71
Engineering Dept
Fugust , 2011
Project Area
Richmond Hills Park Street Reconstruction
Improvement No: BA-388
48'
481
5021
0424
PROJE CT L
MILE1111111,1111111 MMMMM 11•11•111•M all tIUMEMOINIMIENIIOMMIN
0401
• HORDIC CIR
6413i-
6409\ 6417.:
. \
N-::" 6420
6505
45-08
3504
6512
6524
6520
6528
6516 6525
6529
0533
6537
--
6521 630
6500
6520
6600
6421
6112!, 6425
6601
6600 6616
6405
• _
6204 6200 6116
CREEK VALLE Y RD
00) '1. 6201 (NI
Co (.0
cy\-1
KT
, 6200
ioN CD co
BALDER LII
tn I cn —
co C I
CO CO
620 Q
6528 \ 6528 : ' I 6521
:, 6524
1 6525 A 6525 6524 I 6600 (
6600 A
' 1 / 6605 6600 II 66131
/
-_-1_ 1 '—
6613
5609/ I
I S. 0602/66w6606(
6604 ,( 66,05
----'6617 6608 / prog 6613 / 6600 / "
6612 I\ /
,/
1 6610 i ..."--r----\---. --
6629 k ./. i \
. \ \
1, 6620 / 6625 6621 6628 6632
6633 % ! i \
•• id:.•••• ••:imer....
3308
6605
6621
6501 6500
6505 6504
6509 6508
6513 6512
6517 6516
6520 II
O
R
D
I
C
C
U
R
6612
6609
", •
6712 6708
„ 6613
I I
Engineering Dept
Augurs. 2011
Project Area
Valley Estates Street Reconstruction
Improvement No: BA-387
0313
5917
5324 20
5401
0)00
8004
8003
6012
OJOS
5912
5915
0320
6301
6024
0328
6103
6104
5103
6112
6116
6120
6124
6123
6200
0204
6203
6e12
6216
6220
6224
8223
0232
6201 Lc)
---- 41
6329 63
6221
6,2,5 _ .0
6223
6205 —
6203 "ati
6104
6113
6103
1
5301
4)
.C3
6701 . -5612
[PROJECT LIMITS k
6009
6113
611
6121
5201
6201
6205
620)
6213
6301
0300
6004
0303
6910
‘t, 5003 0)01 4
5912 6015
o420
424
No2132222
i ir5421
Pr \ 2 8 2 Eq 8 2 2 2 g 18 k \__ • .. !• . •• • • .• • • ., EN
., &Ho \ 6520 1,5616 •
5512 5509 5504 55C0 '', _I
•
8005 . i \ 6005 e 66134 . ' 1
I HIGHLAIID RD \.,-
0009 ,
6517 ' F613 5509 MO5 ----s '''' 13°M1
I
( eioi I - -- 5soi\\, \ . I
6013 \ .,./ 6' •
6105 . ..- mos I 04 1 ---------) ) 1
-- n 5512 - - I " ( MO) n 2
610.) ....-- , ',..,-,' M16 ' j_ -1 1 ,'' i 6317
‘ --. \ \ I_------ -HUHTE R Si- ----. i I
6104 II
'...-.811)13 ti" 81-1-3 \ 5509 I .5501 ) / 61°1 I i
_..-- .., __---
17 /
1 6105 1
-.-6112 s. \ __-
1
8113 \ ,
. 6117 6104 1 1
2 6116
, 6109 1 t:- -j r
1 t_. r 1 8133 n '' 6121 8103 I
I L 6113 i
'31 17 16121 \------ -- 11
], II
1 I
I I 6124 II 6125 1 6112 r
L A . _ _ __
. RI 6129 II 61'15 'I egill 66112171 I
RIDGE WAY RD
I 1 'I
8124 I 6128 1 6132 I 5.128 Ii -1,-
1 m-1 1
6120 1- 1 a _ I
1 11 1,iebi 11 6133 I 612) t7 6125
1 0
1 c.,
6204 62C0 ,.. I 6201 2.1
6203 62C.0 24 0201 1
0
I 6205 I I
IT!
•
•
6205
CREST!. 11 6
20
8--
6212
I 6204 6201 -
6204
6213 '
O0°
6203
6300 Inn 6303
6227
630)
6204
6203
6212
5712
6243
5704 570)
f250
.4.6303
6304
6033- 6303
lB
5333
lB lB
<1/471
to
•-•"'
Project Area
Countryside Street Reconstruction
Improvement No: BA-385 Engineering Dept
Pogust, 2011
5917
651 2
CO
109-'
1.11
• -._!_.,1 1 i I IVLI i llc°11°11 I , II
41.1/10 .44wiummio#61toup
5916 5917
5920 5921
5924
5929 5928
5933 5932
5937 5936
5941 5940
6670
59411 5945
5949
6000 6001
6730 6004 6005
6008 6009
6710 6012 6015
6
6017
6024
I II I L.- - 1 II I 6106 6153 ,6151 6149,6147,6145,61431614116139 I 1 IL •
5912 5913
6517
5914
6420 6418
5916 641 2
6 020 '
1
i4Or,.
._ -
-- • .6 ,
I
6
5 2
I
9
165I2
1'6 - 52
1
1
-.409
6650 (6100 6103 -------
6101
_ .
6102
60 04
6008
6012
6016
5932
6000
5920
5924
5928
.. .r" , 6537 4 ..
' 8 511 *
5925
5929
5933 6500
. I . . - -
5
-1
6512
_
64211-- 6417
.---" 15 1 04 I - _ _
\ 81-15 6'117 1611916121 .6123 6125 \6127 1, 1,.
\6113
pit•-r-r_. .(7/31-- 14iLe0031 irl) - L- $
00
6416 641 2 .840 6013
6501
6505 14fte513 • I"
p.o.,LA/ 70_96 R. .6..41.7
5 c 6 413 6404i =
t?)
. 6400.6 III
i
•
<
6405
PROJECT LIMITS
L. I I _1_ .,1_ .6133
- -4 . / ._
6136 ARCTIC WAY . _
' II /6152 1 6150 6148 16146 16144 6401 1 6142 1 6140 ...).
Pr-t--. 91, ,66130 ,:-., Iola 1 ..Q,,,, 1, 1 1
r
...1/‘ T-1, \ oi„, 1127 :.pa 1r, II 5.1,11._
.1
..tplillty;,--2 .3.101,001Q15-e,E-5
.7-.7.-\\-1--:-5--1:1-_•-.11:('4-2.—LI ri i ' 18 ,' ---,
— -11,LE111,113S10N$ICI 11`21 so- .--.Ion•Lomm-- il-1 and J 1 I.
1 -411•4 mairewm,,.... . , I I I :
] H -7114714.111"1, 14‘1•••ar - - • ,..,, -- ---1- ' y-tvi6----T•F r l I
I I ... I V ',2 lo A p 64oci , I 1 i' '6516 cl § {,1g,I ,531,9,
71,
6110
•
/ iTT
.,'. 6112 /6114 6116 16116 16120 161 22 1 6124 161261 61 28
I I
6601
6108
'.---- I .__I___L____li I I ..._.\_. -
6130 TF ---
bs
6300
6302 6645
6301 1
6317 6313
Project Area
Viking Hills Street Reconstruction
Improvement No: BA-386 Engineering Dept
Aigust, 2011
Countryside Crash Data (2001-2010)
Crash Statistics
Year: 2001 -2010
Intersection: Countryside
Total Crashes: 10
Breakdown by Year
Location
1; 2; 4
4
3 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
1 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
1
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
1
0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
0 Injury: Possible Injury
1 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Year: 2010
Total:
Severity:
Year: 2009
Total:
Severity:
Year: 2005
Total:
Severity:
Location
5
Location
6
2
1 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
1 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Location
5
1
Year: 2002
Total:
Severity:
Year: 2001
Total:
Severity:
2
2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury
0 Injury: Possible Injury
0 Injury: Non-Incapacitating Injury
0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury
Location
3; 4
Countryside Neighborhood
Traffic Counts
Location: Countryside Neighborhood
Street
Year ADT
85th Speed
1 2011 190 29.5
2 2011 77 26.3
3 2011 283 26.8
4 2011 127 25.9
5 2011 121 26.4
6 2011 187 24.6
7 2011 257 23.6
Neighborhood Attributes
Neighborhood:
Countryside
Curb ADT
Street Width Bit/Conc Type (Bulk/Sur) Sidewalks Parking (2011) 85th % Location School Zone
Hillside Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
190; 77 29.5; 26.3 1; 2 Yes
Westridge Blvd. 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
283; 127 26.8; 25.9 3; 7 Yes
Crescent Drive 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
257 23.6 4 Yes
Ridgeway Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
121 26.4 5 Yes
Highland Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
187 24.6 6 Yes
Hunter Street 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
NA NA NA Yes
Crest Lane 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
NA NA NA Yes
\\ED-N18\EngPubWks\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\ENG DIV\PROJECTS\IMPR NO5\BA385 Countryside(2012)\PRELIM DESIGN\INFO MTG\Traffic Info_Countryside.xlsx
Neighborhood Attributes
Neighborhood:
Countryside
Curb ADT
Street Width Bit/Conc Type (Bulk/Sur) Sidewalks Parking (2011) 85th % Location School Zone
Hillside Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
190; 77 29.5; 26.3 1; 2 Yes
Westridge Blvd. 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
283; 127 26.8; 25.9 3; 7 Yes
Crescent Drive 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
257 23.6 4 Yes
Ridgeway Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
121 26.4 5 Yes
Highland Road 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
187 24.6 6 Yes
Hunter Street 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
NA NA NA Yes
Crest Lane 30' Bituminous City None None
Allowed
both sides
NA NA NA Yes
\\ED-NT8\EngPubWks\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\ENG DIV\PROJECTS\IMPR NOS\BA385 Countryside(2012)\PRELIM DESIGN \INFO MTG\Traffic Info_Countryside.xlsx
5701
PROJECT LIMITS 8
8
55C0 &112 8312
5403
20
5416
MB)
fia21
— 6)20/ .-----
III -...'',../6103
5105/
y• Ei104
6103
6003
0304
6103
5 61(5 _
11---8103
6103
8103
8113
61 -12
-61115
i 5,61 /62(5 62(5 „,--',
8201 203 5111 ; 1—
\ e,253 5204 ; C§20)0.1
0
/ -s. 6212 \ .---- CREST LII 3
▪
1 E203 ,i 8204 \
-..., .,. 19201 l 62134 3 •-•••..--- _
,
8203 \- 424‘ i
i 6201 ;,,....--. 6213 ,,, 1 \
i
- \ '''n 5203 A -
, \ <11‘'1, ' 6203 '
\
62-17
's, \ 6210 ',, 0
204 \ ;\''iS‘,., 9203 15215 \ El
EL21".6 ,--- .A,:..., 6217 -1/2,
.---' %,:•"..b \ \ 5212 .1 i ------
6203 ,, „.. ‘ \ I \ EOM e ...,.., / , , ,--- \ 0221 i
\,
.
/ \ 0220 3- c),___ i.
-/-; - 6233 6220 '1 .,;,(Li.c , 1, C u2.&-:
9212 ,..r • -, , - s
6213 • /
1522D ......:::\a\„ ...----";.27
20 03,,.16,5s,',, ;,40101191.:,.._,I:Elcil 63131 9303 6223 s ,
0241
02217
,
11:112.33
_
_---- - 6022 6317
./?.. s.,,
3virt3,17/ .7
J
. ,.....,
-------
, .,., En-13 gi _
qN 1 g
FE03 I r6
--____ ,
--7 .,
1 5512 ' ' 134 i 6603 1 ,;
ti I/ ca
4..7 601 ....\ ,,,.81c4 _:.\ \ _____--01:1-1_ITE R ST------ i -- - 1
_ ii
03v
"5 ,.. „„..,1 a
--------- 6105 _ "...---6103 ‘k, ----;113 . 5503 E601 i' I '-' '''''' 5
- &fog \--- 6112
s s
i
o
0
61-17 6104
6105 0 0 .3.. --- I
I 61 03 uri
'1.- 0116 I
81 -13 1. _,------- ---.%-s., j7..-----L-----=
0120 \ \6121 11
6103 !
1 61 e3
.., 0117 6121 -----------1; '1 __-- i
, \n-- d
! 0117 n
1 61 24 ; 0125 I 8112
4_/----- . RIDGEWAY RD =
!. J
— 1 , ,i 6128 1 0115
/ i _1
. / 1
a
6121 El /61.213 16124 l' 8123 1 6122
I
1 (
129 2 I— If
1 ; .5-133 6120
t- -
,EJEFEMEinti iii •
\ = 0
6303
6012
6016
ni..7.,_,___
ii 11 1 N
. gi in 2 , , I t::
,,..., Lf3 - 0 0 <.-I Al.A21Fic 5.415
12., R 138 Ay.
P.) CD - El _ g„ . '-' il 5403 6020
I ., - a
,3. an -1,:m-DL---aric 7-4C OUCE1-0 arr ofilb---- .%,--Inao-c3.1:
\ G3E0 \15520 ',Cole 55-12 :8503 E604 1 5503 \ 1, a &-10 -1
., 1 3' ''. Ei 01 5301 . II
\ \ , —1
\ s 83115 gi 0005 I 55Q4\ , i,
,,. -4 , 3? HIGHLAND RD
:07011 t
\\ , , / .
8517 i 5513
1
---, , ea:23 . .„, %
-F.-- a
0
/ MIN I 55ali k. E603 6505 a
161 Cl
5316
5:103
5303
w(e
8121 0
- 0
6125 ,121
620-1
6205
-3:Ef
6024
0329
01C0
6104
6-1C9
8112
6110
6123
6124
6128
6203
6204
6203
0212
10218
6220
6224
6220
62M
6316
5303
6304
I. •
MO)
t/goo?
ProjeciT Area
Countryside Street Recons'Uucidon
improvement No: BA-385 Enljirraering CIpt
Apyy_t 2011
10/24/2011 Report Name: SectionSummary2.rpt
1
Section Summary
Name: Countryside
From / To: AC =>
Inventory Status: Active
Surface Type: AC
Functional Class: Local
Latest ADT:
Latest Survey Date: 6/23/2009
Latest Maintenance Date: 1/1/1980
Latest Structural Project Date: 1/1/1980
Latest Non-Structural Project Date:
Map ID: 53
Units: Ft
Length: 9,576.61
Width: 29.50
Total Area: 282,510.00
Latest Survey Cl: 29
Latest Structural Project Type: Construction-AC
Latest Non-Structural Project Type:
Today's Projected CI: 15
City of Edina Section Information by Neighborhood
STREETNAME FROMNAME TONAME SURVDATE SURVCI
SUNNYSIDE RD - WOODDALE to WOODDALE
SUNNYSIDE RD - WOODDALE to WOODDALE
WOODDALE - BRIDGE ST to SUNNYSIDE RD
WOODDALE - SUNNYSIDE RD to 44TH ST
Countryside AC 06/23/2009 29
COLONIAL CT - CDS to VALLEY VIEW 19
CRESCENT DR - HIGHLAND RD to COUNTRYSIDE 29
CRESCENT DR - HILLSIDE RD to WESTRIDGE 15
CRESCENT DR - HUNTER ST to HIGHLAND RD 42
CRESCENT DR - WESTRIDGE to HUNTER ST 33
CRESCENT DR - WESTRIDGE to WESTRIDGE 33
CREST LA - CDS to WESTRIDGE BVLD 22
HIGHLAND RD - TRACY AVE to WESTRIDGE 24
HIGHLAND RD - WESTRIDGE to CRESCENT DR 33
HILLSIDE RD - TRACY AVE to CRESCENT DR 14
HILLSIDE RD - VALLEY VIEW to CRESCENT DR 21
HUNTER ST - WESTRIDGE to CRESCENT DR 45
RIDGEWAY RD - TRACY AVE to WESTRIDGE 31
WESTRIDGE - CRESCENT DR to CREST LA 33
WESTRIDGE - CREST LA to RIDGEWAY RD 26
WESTRIDGE - HUNTER ST to HIGHLAND RD 45
WESTRIDGE - RIDGEWAY RD to HUNTER ST 16
WESTRIDGE - VALLEY VIEW to CRESCENT DR 33
Creek Valley Road PCC 06/11/2009 47
CREEK VALLEY - CUL DE SAC to VALLEY VIEW 47
Creston Hills AC 08/10/2010 96
BALFANZ - CRESTON RD to WOODDALE 100
BALFANZ - WEST SHORE to CRESTON RD 95
BALFANZ - WOODDALE to POINT DR 97
CRESTON RD - 70TH ST to DUNBERRY LA 98
CRESTON RD - DUNBERRY LA to BALFANZ 97
DUNBERRY LA - CRESTON RD to WOODDALE 88
DUNBERRY LA - OAKLAWN AVE to CORNELIA DR 99
DUNBERRY LA - POINT DR to OAKLAWN AVE 98
DUNBERRY LA - WEST SHORE to CRESTON RD 99
DUNBERRY LA - WOODDALE to POINT DR 96
JUDSON LA - WOODDALE to POINT DR 97
LAGUNA DR - WEST SHORE to WOODDALE 91
OAKLAWN AVE - DUNBERRY LA to POINT DR 92
POINT DR - BALFANZ to CDS 97
POINT DR - DUNBERRY LA to JUDSON LA 100
POINT DR - JUDSON LA to BALFANZ 100
WOODDALE - 70TH ST to DUNBERRY LA 97
WOODDALE - BALFANZ to LAGUNA DR 97
WOODDALE - DUNBERRY LA to JUDSON LA 95
WOODDALE - JUDSON LA to BALFANZ 95
Crocker & Crowells 1st Ad AC 05/29/2009 58
42ND ST - CITY LIMITS to OAKDALE AVE 31
42ND ST - CROCKER AVE to KIPLING AVE 79
42ND ST - KIPLING AVE to GRIMES AVE 66
42ND ST - LYNN AVE to CROCKER AVE 65
42ND ST - LYNN AVE to LYNN AVE 27
42ND ST - MONTEREY AVE to LYNN AVE 28
42ND ST - OAKDALE AVE to MONTEREY AVE 69
CROCKER AVE - MORNINGSIDE RD to 42ND ST 67
GRIMES AVE - MORNINGSIDE RD to 42ND ST 62
LITTEL ST - OAKDALE AVE to LYNN AVE 85
14
8
8
01 a
3301 61 13 6103
8 57 12
0 5704 5700
6104
6103
6101
6103
6105
2
5303
5312
5315
5920
324
5401 (3\ :710
6004
6003
8312
ctu.kr
Ei313
5317
5320
53
6324
6328
6103
6104
6103
6112
6116
6120
6124
6128
6203
6204
Z14
:t3
6201
6303
6307
01
53E0
5919
5312
5315
5420 57 01
PROJECT LIMITS a
55
542‘
t9
NO ON •• • MO IBM •• X
416 5611 50/
4
-a
_60 01 ip
6005
HIGHLAIID RD
6003
woo
6004
6303
6012
5316
5305
6003
HUIITEP ST
13 15603
935 a
a
6199"
6y3 a
61,0 a
f3)21
•
t,117
RIDGE WAY RD
cc
612 61;32
62C
62 12
624-62
6243
62
CREST UI
20
6205
6203 b.1
EttECI--•
atoll`
6212
13216
5220
6224
6228
622?
5232
Preliminary Assessments
$ 1/3 REU
—$1 REU
6253 a - - I
6305 O
O - 6303 6..4E-Et
—...„.„.\\ ammo:
632i 412
6301
6304
6333 13303
a3zo
Cl
12
Preliminary Assessments
Countryside Street Reconstruction
Improvement No: BA-385
I
• ""r
Engineering Dept
October, 2011
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
City of Edina
September 7, 2010
Item IV. C.
Revision to:
Special Assessment Policy
Policy / Background
1. Cost of Non-State Aid Residential Street Curb
and Gutter will be financed by the Storm
Water Utility Fund.
Rationale: The curb and gutter system is an above-the-
ground water drainage system that controls storm water
within the City. Staff feels very strongly about the addition
of curb and gutter in the City where it does not exist today.
It is very important in areas of poor soil condition, steep
grade changes or very flat conditions. It also decreases
the degradation of the residential roadway system,
reduces fall and spring street maintenance and aids in
street cleaning and snow plowing.
February 9, 2009 1
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
CITY OF EDINA
Policy / Background
DIN
1111
2. Street Reconstruction Cost (excluding curb
and gutter) should be assessed at 100% of
the cost.
Rationale: Based on an appraisal study conducted by the
Valuation Group, the consultants indicated that the
market value benefit of the street improvements equates
to the cost of the improvements being done. Assuming
Council agrees with the financing of curb and gutter
improvements, the risk of losing an assessment challenge
by a resident or neighborhood is diminished due to the
extensive study that was conducted and the subsidy of
the curb and gutter cost. In most projects, the street
reconstruction cost represents only a percentage of the
entire project costs. Most projects include other storm
water improvements as well as sanitary sewer and water
CITY OF EDINA
Policy / Background
2. Continued:
system improvements. The table below shows the total
and assessable costs of projects that were assessed in
2005 or 2006.
Project
Cost of All
Improvements
Curb &
Gutter
Assessable
Cost
%
Assessable
Halifax & Grimes $ 888,900 $ 137,000 $ 420,000 47%
So. Harriet Park $ 1,029,872 $ - $ 588,000 57%
Sunnyslope $ 1,028,218 $ 40,000 $ 663,000 64%
Schaefer Rd. $ 264,290 $ - $ 195,000 74%
Shannon Dr. $ 168,719 $ 18,000 $ - 0%
Bridge Lane $ 106,601 $ 9,975 $ 97,000 91%
February 9, 2009 2
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
3. The assessable unit for non-state aid
residential street projects should be the
residential equivalent unit (REU) rather than
the front footage of the lot.
Rationale: Trips generated for residential lots are the
same regardless of the size of the lot. A resident on a
corner lot, cul-de-sac or circular street does not use
the roads differently than a mid-block resident on the
same street.
Policy / Background
4. If a corner lot is subject to multiple street
reconstruction assessments, the total
assessable cost should be the equivalent to
1 residential equivalent unit. The address of
the lot shall determine if the corner lot is
assessed at 1, 1/3, 2/3, or 0 RE U's for that
project:
Rationale: A corner lot does not generate more trips onto
residential roadways system than a non-corner lot. The
total of both assessments should not exceed one R.E.U.
so that lots are equitably assessed throughout the City.
February 9, 2009 3
Policy / Background
4. If the address of the lot is on the roadway being
reconstructed and no previous roadway
assessments have been levied for that lot, then
the REU shall be 1 REU.
298 Z STREET 300 Z STREET 302 Z STREET
EET - w
299 Z STREET 301 Z STREET 303 Z STREET
301 Z Street: REU= 1
Policy / Background
4. If the address of the lot is on the roadway being
constructed and a roadway assessment has
been levied previously for that lot, than the REU
shall be 2/3 REU.
301 Z Street: REU= 2/3
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
February 9, 2009 4
300 Z STREET 302 Z STREET
Existing
Roadway-
Never
Assessed
Z - STREET
300 Z STREET 302 Z STREET
Existing
Roadway -
Previuosly
Assessed
Z - STREET
301 Z STREET 303 Z STREET 299 Z STREET
Policy / Background
4. If the address of the lot is not on the roadway
being constructed, but the side or rear yard is
and no previous roadway assessment has
been levied for that lot, than the REU shall be
1/3 REU.
>-
301 Z Street: REU= 1/3
298 Z STREET
Policy / Background
4. If the address of the lot is not on the roadway
being constructed, but the side or rear yard is
and a roadway assessment has previously been
levied for that lot of 1 REU, than the REU shall be 0
REU.
301 Z Street: REU= 0
298 Z STREET
1- 11.1
111
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
February 9, 2009 5
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
5. Lots subject to multiple assessments cannot
be treated differently than lots subject to a
single assessment.
Rationale: Assessments must be equitable to all homes
that are being assessed. This issue was driven by the
potential of a portion of the Country Club being
assessed for sound walls and residential road
reconstruction. When the Country Club area gets
assessed for street improvements, you have the option
to re-assess the sound wall improvement to a longer
term. By re-assessing, the Council opens the
assessment up to a potential challenge. If a challenge
was raised, you could leave the sound wall assessment
at the current term of 15 years and decide not to re-
assess.
Policy / Background
6. Capitalized interest, engineering costs, and
other project related costs shall reflect the
costs that have been incurred for that
particular special assessment. All
engineering costs and other project related
costs shall be directly related to that
particular special assessment. Capitalized
interest is the cost of funds used to finance
the project construction until the adoption of
the resolution imposing the special
assessment.
February 9, 2009 6
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
6. Continued
Rationale: The assessment costs should include all costs
associated with that assessment. These costs typically
include engineering costs, advertising and bidding,
construction administration, cost of financing project
until final assessment hearing, construction costs, and
any miscellaneous costs not covered under the general
contract cost, such as landscaping, irrigation, etc.
Engineering costs include any staff time or consultant
costs that are associated with the particular assessment.
CAI CITY OF EDINA all
Policy / Background
7. Payback of special assessments:
a.The term of special assessments are as
follows:
I. Local roadway reconstruction - 10 years.
ii. Sidewalks (stand alone project) -3
years.
iii. Decorative street lighting (stand alone
project) -3 years.
iv.Sound walls - 15 years.
February 9, 2009 7
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. a. Continued:
v. Garbage and debris removal,
aquatic weeds, weed mowing, and,
and maintenance districts - 1 year.
vi.Tree removals - 1 year if under $500,
2 years if $500 to $1000, and 3 years
if over $1000.
Policy / Background
7. a. Continued:
Rationale: There was some discussion of extending the
term of residential roadway reconstruction to 15 years.
While this would be legal, rating agencies prefer the
term for residential assessments to match the term of
the bonds. This would also increase the interest cost to
the homeowner. The assessments with less than ten
years of payback are typically smaller assessments and
usually are not financed with bonds.
February 9, 2009 8
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. Payback of special assessments:
b. Assessment Interest Rate - The interest
rate for a special assessment shall be
2% higher than the true interest ("net
interest") rate of the bonds that have
been issued for the project. If a bond is
not issued for a project then the interest
rate shall 2% higher than the true interest
rate of the most recent bonds sold by
the City prior to ordering the public
improvement. The interest rates for
7.a.v. and 7.a.vi. above shall be 6.5%.
Policy / Background
7. b. Continued:
Rationale: The City is required by MN Statute 429 to levy
assessments and taxes in a similar fashion to show how
the bonds are being paid. The assessment and tax levy
amount must also be at least 105% of the amount of the
bond (principal and interest) payment amount that
comes due each year plus the issuance and other
costs of the bonds as well as to cover any negative
arbitrage on reinvestment of prepaid assessments.
The assessment interest rate should comply with MN
Statute 429 and with bond covenants for the bonds
issued to finance the project. For the 6.5%
assessments, if a project is to be assessed (example: If
a resident is considering a tree removal assessment)
February 9, 2009 9
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. b. Continued:
the interest rate should be consistent so the resident
can know what the assessment rate will be when
deciding whether to utilize the City's assessment to
finance the project. The resident always has the
choice to finance the project themselves or prepay the
assessment and not utilize the City's funds.
Policy / Background
7. Payback of special assessments:
c. The City will accept both partial pre-
payments and full pre-payments on
assessments before certifying the
assessment to the County. For ease of
administration, a minimum of 25% of
the assessable cost must be applied
for a partial payment.
February 9, 2009 10
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. c. Continued:
Rationale: Prior to 2005 the City's past practice allowed
only 100% pre-payment on assessments. Many residents
inquired in the past about partial pre-payments to
reduce their annual tax bill. This will create some extra
calculations, but this was a good public relations move
with a minor increase in workload. The full and partial
pre-payments can only occur after the assessment
hearing and before the certification to the County. This
gives the resident approximately 30 days to make the
payment. Staff will make sure extra information is
provided to the residents when they get their formal
assessment notice information before the hearings.
Policy / Background
7. Payback of special assessments:
d. Senior Deferral Program will be accepted
as a repayment.
Rationale: This program will still be offered. See
attached policy.
February 9, 2009 11
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. Payback of special assessments:
e. Payment Schedules shall be amortized
using a level principal declining total
payment schedule.
Rationale: See Level Principal Declining Total
Payments vs. Level Total Payments below:
Policy / Background
7. e. Continued:
Level Principal Declininq Total Payments
Levy: $12,000
Interest Rate: 6%
Term: 10 years
Total Cost: $15,960
'fear Principal Interest
Total
Payment Balance
1 $ 1200, $ 720 $ 1,920 $ 10,800
2 $ 1,200 $ 648 $ 1,848 $ 9,600
3 $ 1,200 $ 576 $ 1,776 $ 8,400
4 $ 1,200 $ 504 $ 1,704 $ 7,200
5 $ 1,200 $ 432 $ 1,632 $ 6,000
6 $ 1200, $ 360 $ 1,560 $ 4,800
7 $ 1,200 $ 288 $ 1,488 $ 3,600
8 $ 1,200 $ 216 $ 1,416 $ 2,400
9 1,200 $ 144 $ 1,344 $ 1,200
10 1,200 $ 72 $ 1,272 $
February 9, 2009 12
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
7. e. Continued:
Amortized Level Total Payments
Levy: $12,000
Interest Rate: 6%
Term: 10 years
Total Cost: $16,304.15
Year Principal Interest Total Payment Balance
1 $910.42 $ 720.00 $1,630.42 $ 11,089.58
2 $965.04 $ 665.38 $1,630.42 $ 10,124.54
3 $1,022.94 $ 607.47 $1,630.42 $ 9,101.60
4 $1,084.32 $ 546.10 $1,630.42 $ 8,017.28
5 $1,149.38 $ 481.04 $1,630.42 $ 6,867.90
6 $1,218.34 $ 412.07 $1,630.42 $ 5,649.56
7 $1,291.44 $ 338.97 $1,630.42 $ 4,358.12
8 $1,368.93 $ 261.49 $1,630.42 $ 2,989.19
9 $1,451.06 $ 179.35 $1,630.42 $ 1,538.13
10 $1,538.13 $ 92.29 $1,630.42 $
Policy / Background
8. The new policy will not be retroactive to
projects that have already been assessed.
Rationale: It would be very difficult to determine how
many years to go back and re-assess projects that
have been completed and already assessed. The 2005
analysis looked at projects that were assessed since
1999, most of the projects were assessed at a cost per
lot of around $2,000 - $4,000 per lot. The 2004 Maple
Rd./White Oaks assessment cost $5,941 per lot. This
year's projects have taken a substantial jump in total
cost due to the need to reconstruct vs. reclaim the
street pavement. Estimates for this year's project range
from $7,200/lot for So. Harriet Park to $11,000/lot for
February 9, 2009 13
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
Policy / Background
8. Continued:
from $7,200/lot for So. Harriet Park to $11,000/lot for
Sunnyslope. As we forecast future street projects, our
estimates indicate most will be in the $8,000 - $12,000
per lot range.
Our research with other City's policies indicates that all
cities made a clean break when beginning their new
programs.
February 9, 2009 14
ETC 2012 Meeting Schedule
Regular meetings are scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on the third Thursday of the month.
Meetings in January, April, July and October are in the Council Chambers. Other
meetings will be in a City meeting room as announced.
A joint work session with the City Council will be scheduled in 2012. Date TBA.
Special meetings may also be called during the year.
Attendance is required at regular meetings and at the joint work session with City
Council, per City code. Attendance is not required at special meetings.
Please review the schedule below. The schedule will be approved at the
January meeting.
January 19, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers
February 16, 6:00 p.m.
March 15, 6:00 p.m.
April 19, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers
May 17, 6:00 p.m.
June 21, 6:00 p.m.
July 19, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers
August 16, 6:00 p.m.
September 20, 6:00 p.m.
October 18, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers (NOTE: No school October 18-19)
November 15, 6:00 p.m. (NOTE: K-12 parent/teacher conferences 4:00-8:00 p.m.)
December 20, 6:00 p.m. (NOTE: School winter vacation begins following day)
Possible conflicts with religious observance:
April 19 conflicts with Jewish holiday Yom HaShoah
1-3iLA
„:,,, ',--- . in : r) , 1-7 -C.k_ 11 (d ,LV — C ili, 6
't ', T___ - 1 1 , ,.
T ha vc._ ,, cim d rcn 8 ) HP‘i i
to --4\-r. pcxil (-:k _n,LL
,rV._ i-r-, -m-c sumincr, . --nr)c\r- Arc
mc ur\ll alvs -1-110L-i- cfirwt v(y-ti i
1 DVN NO\rtYlkil_c_16-0-C trakcA and -I,
:t)rarC,t,, ,Ar
c
IcX•irT LO
VLi cle.L; cy-) Ot 1-e 17-6
CILS5
(cLiZT1 H- I bC
(rc-J ulry
cl Haiku') ants._
--A [0 Nil(
1-1. 64 n C_
IA 4 ki 5 -3 5
Ob -7