HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-01 Work Session PacketIG-Z
AGENDA
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (ETC)
WORK SESSION
MARCH 1, 2011
5:00 P.M. — COMMUNITY ROOM
ROLLCALL
I. ETC INTRODUCTION —Chair Janovy
a. Acknowledgment of Commission Members
II. ETC PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
a. Greater Cornelia Area / West 70th Street Traffic Study
b. Transportation Plan Update (Comprehensive Plan Update)
III. CITY COUNCIL & ETC FUTURE INITIATIVES/ DISCUSSION ITEMS
a. ETC Policy/ Establishment/ Purpose/ Duties
b. Complete Streets Policy
c. Walkability & Bike - ability within the City
d. Funding for these programs/ projects
IV. ADJOURNMENT
Correspondence to -date for the ETC Workshop with City Council:
A. Agenda input from Council Member Brindle
B. Agenda input from ETC Chair Janovy
C. Role of the ETC: Summary Review and Recommendation from ETC Chair
Janovy
D. Draft ETC Minutes of February 17, 2011
G: \Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Transportation Commission \ Miscellaneous \20110301 Workshop with City Council \20110301 ETC and City Council
Work Session Agenda.doc
Agenda input from Mary Brindle.
FYI
Scott Neal, City Manager
® # €
952-826-04011 Fax 952 - 826 -0390
t sneal(oki.edina.mn.us I www.CitvofEdina.com
...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business
From: Mary Brindle [mailto:mbrindle @comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February 28, 20119:13 AM
To: Scott Neal
Subject: RE: Monday Morning, February 28
Hi Scott,
The ETC was created as a reaction to a situation in the past. As I recall, the Country Club street
reconstruction was met with residents concerned with traffic and cut through routes through their
neighborhood. Of late, I think the role of the ETC is evolving and should be a forward- looking
commission, advising us on what we should do going forward to make Edina more pedestrian friendly.
Ideally, I would like to see the ETC come up with a set of standards that would be employed in any
redevelopment or reconstruction in our city.
Specifically, I would like the council to formally ask the ETC to take on Walkability in Edina as a project. I
met previously with Jennifer Janovy about my work in this area so she is aware of it. As a council, we
informally discussed walkability and the desire to ask the ETC to add it to their areas of interest.
FYI.
Mary Brindle
952 - 941 -7746 home
612- 270 -9887 cell
From: Jennifer [mailto:rjmeyovy @comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 20113:42 PM
To: Scott Neal
Subject: Re: Work Session Agenda
Yes, sounds reasonable. The topics that appear to be priorities now are:
• ETC Policy and Establishment (1509.1) and Purpose and Duties (1509.02)
• Sidewalks
• Funding
We had a preliminary discussion on ETC Purpose and Duties at our February meeting. Because
nearly half of the commission members are new, we did not get very far along in formulating
something to present formally to the Council. There are some clear themes, however:
• a greater focus on multi - modal /complete streets /active transportation;
• a focus on transportation planning and review of road reconstruction projects to ensure
they meet policy goals;
• improved sidewalk policies and funding;
• improved positioning so Edina has a better chance when applying for grants and other
sources of funding;
• opportunity to review and advise on the "big" traffic /roadway issues in the city (such as
50th & France, Interlachen /Vernon, and Southdale area);
• need for the TSC and /or TS coordinator to collect, map, and provide data on traffic
complaints in the city so that this data can be used for transportation planning and
project prioritization;
• the need to review and revise the ETC Policy, NTMP, and traffic signs, crosswalks, and
speed limits policies.
The ETC voted to recommend that we hold one regularly scheduled meeting each quarter on
camera and additional regular meetings on camera at the discretion of the chair. All meetings
would be in the Council Chambers. Off camera meetings would be held around a table set up in
the "audience" section of the room, similar to the set up used by the zoning ordinance update
committee.
Please let me know if there is anything else 1 can provide in preparation for this meeting. Have a
great weekend!
Jennifer
On Feb 25, 2011, at 1:58 PM, Scott Neal wrote:
Good Afternoon Jenifer-
For the last two commission - Council joint meetings, the agenda for the meeting has also been a joint
project. In terms of protocol, I would suggest that you, as the chair of the commission, take a stab at
preparing an agenda that has the items that you feel the commission would like to discuss. When that's
ready, you can email it to me. I will solicit feedback from Council and staff, and then merge all of that
input into one compact coherent agenda.
Sound reasonable?
Scott Neal, City Manager
<ima eOO1. If>
952-826-04011 Fax 952 -826 -0390
g g sneal @ci.edina.mn.us I www.CitvofEdina.com
...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Jennifer [mailto:rjmeyovy @comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February 28, 201112:59 PM
To: Scott Neal
Subject: ETC: Summary Overview and Recommendations
Scott,
The attached overview of ETC responsibilities and related recommendations was put together in
preparation for the joint City Council -ETC meeting tomorrow. It has not been discussed by the ETC and
should be viewed as my personal opinion. Please distribute to the City Council and appropriate staff.
Please also let staff know that I am available to discuss if they have any concerns about any statements.
The hope is to share this with the Council before the meeting so that it can inform but not be the focus
of our discussions. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Jennifer Janovy
The Role of the ETC: Summary Review and Recommendations
The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) has been excluded from studying and commenting
on nearly all matters related to traffic and transportation in Edina, except when explicitly
directed to by the Council, or except when ETC involvement has little or no consequence. If the
ETC is going to be an effective body, the following issues need to be addressed.
The ETC has been excluded from reviewing and commenting on road reconstruction projects.
The basis for this appears to be language in the ordinance:
Advise the Council on matters relating to the operation of the local street system with
respect to traffic volumes, congestion, and functional classification, but not
maintenance activities of the City.
Staff has interpreted road reconstructions to be maintenance activities and therefore outside
the scope of ETC purpose and duties. This overlooks, however, the fact that road reconstruction
projects now rarely put streets back exactly as they were. The operation of the street is altered
in some way— whether with a narrowed intersection or realignment, installation of center
island, or addition of a sidewalk —and these activities fall within the scope of the ETC to review.
Further, early in each road reconstruction project, the City sends residents a survey and invites
their comments on traffic management concerns. The survey cover letter says the ETC typically
reviews traffic issues, implying that residents' comments will be forwarded to the ETC for
consideration. The ETC has not been shown these comments, or been given the opportunity to
review a feasibility study prior to it being presented to the Council.
Although road reconstruction projects naturally provide an opportunity for the ETC to advise
the Council on the operation of the local street system (all modes of transportation) and to
evaluate and recommend speed and volume mitigation measures where appropriate, the ETC is
not given this opportunity. The ETC needs to be included in the road reconstruction process.
The ETC has been excluded from reviewing and commenting on resident traffic concerns. The
basis for this appears to be staff's interpretation of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan
(NTMP) as the only means by which the ETC is presented resident traffic concerns, and the only
process by which the ETC addresses resident traffic concerns. The NTMP is the City's policy for
how requests for traffic calming are handled. It provides a list of traffic calming measures,
including realigned intersections, center islands, gateway treatments, pavement striping, and
stop signs —all measures that, over the past few years, have been recommended and
implemented as part of road reconstruction projects or upon the Council's approval of a traffic
safety report. Yet, even though the ETC has an explicit role in evaluating and recommending
traffic calming measures, none of these measures were presented to the ETC prior to staff
presenting them to the Council for approval. None of the measures were implemented in
accordance with the City's traffic calming policy.
Staff has explained that, when a resident contacts them with a traffic concern, the traffic safety
coordinator typically gathers data and then, depending on the specifics, presents the concern
to the Traffic Safety Committee. The purpose and duties of the Traffic Safety Committee have
not been formally defined. On the surface, their purpose is to review requests for crosswalks
and regulatory signs.
A review of traffic safety reports shows that, most often, when a resident requests a stop sign,
for example, it is not because they want the City to assign vehicle right -of -way at an
intersection (the regulatory purpose of a stop sign), but because they are concerned about
speeds and volume on the street and believe a stop sign will deter vehicles or slow them down
(the perceived traffic calming purpose of a stop sign). The Traffic Safety Committee, however,
does not distinguish the requests. As a rule, stop sign requests are denied. In fact, a review of
traffic safety reports shows that most resident requests for speed and volume mitigation that
are funneled through the Traffic Safety Committee are denied. The problem, whether actual or
perceived, remains. A significant number of these concerns are related to pedestrians'
perception of safety.
Staff has said that when a resident contacts them with a traffic safety concern, they advise the
resident of the NTMP. Since the policy was adopted by the Council in 2005, no requests for
speed or volume mitigation measures have been taken through the NTMP process. The NTMP
requires objective data to support a concern; a defined level of agreement among residents
within an impacted area of the problem and proposed solution; and multi -step involvement by
the ETC and City Council through an open process. Under the NTMP, a center island narrowing,
for example, can't be suggested by just one resident and then rolled into a street
reconstruction project. Objective criteria must be satisfied.
The NTMP allows any individual — including staff —to file an NTMP application. It is not
necessary that residents do this themselves. When a resident contacts staff with a traffic
concern, staff can fill out the NTMP application and complete a "preliminary review and priority
ranking" (steps 1 and 2 in the NTMP process). The data that is gathered for a preliminary review
is the type of data that the traffic safety coordinator gathers anyway. The ETC could then be
informed of the traffic concern and a discussion held about whether the concern should go
through the Traffic Safety Committee process or the NTMP. If likely to result in traffic calming,
targeted enforcement, or a public education campaign, it is clear the Council has established
the NTMP as the policy that should be followed.
The ETC has been excluded from reviewing and participating in a timely and meaningful way
on projects or studies for which the City has received grants or other special funding. For
example, the ETC was not included in the Safe Routes to School study or its recommendations;
the Transit for Livable Communities grant for bicycle facilities; the Interlachen trail; the
proposed pedestrian bridge over France Avenue; and the France Avenue Corridor Study.
3
Information on some of these projects has not been shared with the ETC even though it has
been requested, and no information has been shared to allow the ETC to participate through
review or comment in a timely and meaningful way. If the ETC is to be an effective body,
information must be shared with the ETC and the ETC must be given the opportunity to review
and comment on major transportation projects within the City in a timely and meaningful way.
Staff does include the ETC in projects when explicitly directed to by the Council. Examples are
the Northeast Edina Transportation Study; the W. 70th Street Study; and the speed limit on W.
66th Street. The initial Country Club feasibility study, however, included traffic calming and
came to the Council for approval without review by the ETC. The W. 66th Street speed limit
came to the Council in a traffic safety committee report. It is unlikely the ETC would have been
involved in any of these issues if the Council had not explicitly directed. The question is whether
staff should require the Council's explicit direction before including the ETC, or whether this
direction is implicit in the Council's establishment of the ETC and adoption of the NTMP policy.
Although residents reasonably assume the ETC reviews road reconstruction projects, when the
ETC has asked, at times, for information on upcoming projects, staff has directed the ETC to the
road reconstruction map online. Although residents reasonably assume the ETC reviews
resident traffic concerns, when the ETC asked for a copy of the cover letter and survey sent to
residents in conjunction with road reconstruction projects (the one that says the ETC typically
handles traffic concerns), copies were not provided and survey results have never been shared.
When the ETC asked to review and be allowed to comment on traffic safety reports before they
are sent to the Council, the request was denied. Allowing the ETC to comment would not have
slowed the process.
The resistance and lack of information has made it difficult for the ETC to be effective. A look at
ETC agendas over the past few years shows our regular meetings have consisted primarily of
presentations for informational purposes only —such as on Transit Link, MnPass, and the
Mn /DOT rail plan —and opportunities to take action have been limited almost exclusively to
in
areas in which ETC involvement has little or no consequence. The ETC role in reviewing the
transportation impacts of proposed developments is an example.
Recently, the Planning Commission voted "to recommend that the Edina Transportation
Commission be eliminated from the development review process." If this responsibility is
removed from the ETC, the ETC will, essentially, have no business brought to it by staff other
than informational presentations and those issues that staff is explicitly directed by the Council
to bring. In this case, there is no reason for an ETC. The public education benefits of
informational presentations can be achieved through other means.
That said, it is clear there is a great deal of work that the ETC could, should, and is willing to do.
The key to an effective ETC is not necessarily a rewritten ordinance or policies; the key is
including the ETC in those activities that are and have always been within the commission's
scope of responsibilities.
'CIA
1
ow e
vA- a?
0
MINUTES OF THE
Edina Transportation Commission
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Edina City Hall
4801 West 50th Street
Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Katherine Bass, Thomas Bonneville, Ann Braden, Sarah
Jennifer Janovy, Paul Nelson, Bodhe Scheerer, Elin Schold p
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Jean White
STAFF PRESENT:
Jack Sullivan, Sharon Allison
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by chair.Juanovy.
11. Welcome New Members
Chair Janovy welcomed new members Michafel Thompson,
and Katherine Bass to the commission.
1111. Approval of M
a. Regular M
Commissioner Nels
seconded by Commi
The following correctabns
being spry sent; show B
attendance list; page 2,`4
"...four`Vth4ins a day eacj
ROW maV be needed f
approve min the
Davis. ,
n, Nathan Franzen,
�l Thompson
Id Davis, Ann Braden
to approve the minutes of November 18 and the motion was
5f,,4anuary 20, 2011``
ere made to the January 20 minutes: show Elin Schold Davis as
e Scheerer as being absent; delete Nathan Franzen from the
.,,.
paragraph;; 5th line change "is" to was; 6th paragraph, 2nd line add
direction "traveling...'; last line add "...in Edina, where additional
construction of upgrades." Commissioner Bonneville moved to
vrpctions and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Schold
IV. Consent Agenda;; -, %'
a. Traffic Safety Report for February 2, 2011
Commissioner Bonneville said it is too bad that the ETC cannot pick 2 -3 issues to be looked at
such as France Avenue /Crosstown intersection to TH -494 stoplights that malfunctions often.
He said there are many signals and you can either speed to miss them, or drive slow and stop
at each one. He asked if the ETC should look into this. Mr. Sullivan said France Avenue is a
county road and that the University of Minnesota recently completed a study and the county
and has optimized the signals based on the study. Mr. Sullivan said he could get the report for
the ETC.
Commissioner Braden asked how issues are brought forward. Assistant City Engineer Sullivan
explained that Boyd Tate, the City's Traffic Safety Coordinator (and a retired Minneapolis
police officer) is contacted, looks at issues, gathers data, followed by a meeting of the Traffic
Safety Committee (TSC) made up of himself, city engineer, police traffic supervisor, city
planner, traffic safety coordinator and sign coordinator, to see if the issues are within policy or
see if there are other ways to mitigate the concerns. The TSC makes its recommendation to
the Council. He said issues such as crosswalks, no parking signs, and stop signs are
considered regulatory type issues.
V. Community Comment
None.
VI. New Business
a. Review ad
1500);
Chair Janovy said a roster will be available to they
name, address, email and /or phone. She said tha
number or email address are required. Both email ar
commissioners may include both if they want to. She
an give any changes or corrections to Ms. Allison .
requested to have their cell phone numbersr..emoved
Chair Janovy discussed the following:
schedule (Section
iblic that includes each commissioner's
name, address and either ;a telephone
telephone number are not- 'required, but
sked,'cemmissioners to review the roster
Jmmissioners Engbretson and Scheerer
orn- roster.
• Meeting schedule for the entire the yearn
• Open meeting law uvh'rch she said app-l16d jo the ETC because they are advisory to the
Council. She explained that communication should be one way only and emails should
not reach a quorum because t en you've; had a meeting. She stated further that they
should avoid discussions on Facebook or other social media where a quorum could be
reached and also to. avoid 'serial meetings (communication with one to the next to the
• Oi`dirance Section .x1500 the ETC is advisory only to the Council and does not direct
• Attendance requirement;- can 'only miss 25% or three consecutive meetings. She said
attendance at committee'of the whole meetings is optional. Commissioners are to contact
Mr. Sullvan,if not able to'attend a meeting.
• Bylaws shoo; d„be,;:corr ng which would be rules of procedures, dealing with working
groups and how they`are formed, etc. Mr. Sullivan said the City Clerk did a draft for the
ETC to review o"he next meeting. He said the ETC's draft was taken from the Energy
Environment Commission's bylaws.
• Park Board asked Council if they need to meet on camera every time and Council has
asked each commission for a recommendation. After discussion, a motion was made by
Commissioner Franzen for the ETC to meet on camera auarterly and that the chair
would have discretion regarding other meetings. Commissioner Thompson
amended the motion to add holding the meetings in the Council Chamber. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Braden. All voted ave. Motion passed.
2
Review ETC Purpose and Duties (Section 1509)
Mr. Sullivan said each commission was asked to look at their purpose and duties. He said this
discussion will set the table for the March 1 work session with the ETC and Council. Chair
Janovy said the ordinance is already written but the Council will consider changes. She said
there is awareness that the ETC may have outgrown its original purpose and duties and that
the Council is not expecting all the changes on March 1. Mr. Sullivan suggested getting the
draft minutes to the ETC and Council prior to March 1.
Chair Janovy said this past summer, they began discussion on the ETC's scope and
responsibilities and are now returning to this discussion. Sharing perspective from this past
summer' discussions, Commissioner Franzen said he felt the purpose and scope of the ETC,
as written, is narrow and that it should be expanded to incorporate a more multi -modal
approach to transportation planning and review —for example, xrore of a focus on mass transit
and becoming a walkable community rather than just ;focusing on traffic volumes and
congestion. Chair Janovy suggested Mankato's ordinance as an eXam,ple. Commissioner
Bonneville said they have a duty to look at the bigr pficture and referenced areas such as
Southdale, 50t" & France, and the 50t" extension',",: o XJerry's area because Fthere are conflicts
involved in these areas. Chair Janovy said most of these things :are currently handled by staff
and asked if he's suggesting that the ETC handle them. Cornm 'issioner Bonneville said they
could come from staff or the ETC. Chair Janovy asked i tie was suggesting they identify hot
spots similar to what was done by the Local Traffic Task Fbrce, the precursor to the ETC. He
said the Council could, Planning Commission (PC) could ror ask them to team up together.
Commissioner Bass said she would prefer W ose_the modes as a lens to evaluate all traffic
and how all modes serve the networks i e I pedestrJans, bike, transit, etc.
Commissioner Braden aak6d' Af the ETC has tII
discussed. She asked Jf.there are certain thing
liked the idea of expanding to modebut mayb
routes to school, and since they a* a citizen
staff and consulting engineers. Chair: Janovy &
the policies and that they area expectedao t
Commissioner Braden asked if they are cones °i
only m,ak %recom mend ations e
chnical.expertise to evaluate what is being
it a PE would do and not her. She said she
-e of an advocate for complete streets, safe
isory group, make a link between citizens,
iey are advisory to Council, but do not write
some degree of technical understanding.
about liabilities. Chair Janovy said the ETC
Commissioner Schold Davts;.suggested looking at demographic changes that are projected for
Edina and ,how designs will affect pedestrians, older drivers, and other user groups.
Commission" s "r Franzen suggested evaluating connections within the city based upon multi -
modal routes He :,said the northwest area where he lives feels detached from Edina. Chair
Janovy asked if a= iack`fot sidewalk may be the issue and if current sidewalk policy is not
working should they create a funding source?
Commissioner Thompson said he liked the discussion and suggested that staff could come to
the ETC to show how Complete Streets is included in street reconstruction projects. Chair
Janovy said the practice is generally not to involve the ETC with street reconstruction projects.
She cited a questionnaire that is sent out to residents within project areas that asks about
traffic issues and the result of the questionnaire is not shared with the ETC, so there are some
issues that the ETC is not focusing on. Mr. Sullivan said project areas are compared with the
Comp Plan. Chair Janovy asked if it is staff's opinion that the ETC's role is only with the NTMP
and therefore no other involvement and Mr. Sullivan replied affirmatively. Chair Janovy said
3
staff does review how a proposed street reconstruction fits within the Comp Plan and Bike
Plan, but suggested that if the questionnaire to resident says ETC handles traffic issues, the
comments from residents should be given to the ETC. Commissioner Thompson suggested a
level of review by the ETC for street reconstruction projects as a way to create connectivity
with sidewalks so the decision is not made from neighborhood to neighborhood.
Chair Janovy asked how they should handle daily traffic complaints. She said the NMTP has
not worked well. She suggested making the TSC a formal process that would be transparent.
Commissioner Nelson said the report that they were receiving recently that shows the types of
calls that the traffic safety coordinator receives was helpful and hat whey should continue to
receive that report. He said it at least would help them to identify patterns or trends. He also
said getting regular traffic counts would be helpful. Chair Janovy�said they may not be able to
mediate concerns but the data could be helpful. Comm issioner °BonneviIle suggested offering
their assistance to the TSC when needed. Commissioner Bass suggested looking at the data
in aggregate to help inform prioritization. Chair Janovy asked if the NTMP,should be enhanced
to include education before engineering, and if so, v�ould'it be handled bytheTSC?
a. Planning Commission's review o
Chair Janovy said the Planning Commission (PC) has recommended that they fake over the
ETC's responsibility of reviewing Traffic Impact Analy is,(TIN `usually done with developments.
She said there is awareness that the,ETC does have rate as defined by the TIA policy and
asked whether the ETC and Planning Cotnmission should have a joint meeting to pass on the
responsibility. She also said the ETC could recommend thaf the .Planning Commission not take
over review of TIAs. Commissioner Bonn ville sajd he is not comfortable giving responsibility
to the PC. Commissioner Nelsor
them for review as a conceptFpla
would be there like the lie rack`
these issues are taken care of as
takes over, there W661d continue,
there are problems With-,'.,the policy,
he suaaested a meeting a v► RK
recorr
would
concurred <
that did nc
id that tl e
ley move `tF
.0 be unme
ird .with the
Janovy_said one thresh6k
n,;AUAk study is required.
i cited the CVS rplan that was presented to
J =
ncluxde everything on the plan that they said
Y had issuesrwith site circulation. He asked if
ugh the process. Chair Janovy said if the PC
eeds; she's suggested to the PC chair that
►de not calling for a transportation review and
'C: Establishing thresholds for review was
iat the PC has recommended is that the ETC
Eneegy,Environment Commission
Chair Janovy said Edina is a;GreenStep Cities and that the chair of the Energy Environment
Commission ;.,has asked if the ETC could do a review to see if they are meeting the
requirements�through ordinances. Chair Janovy said she is not sure what they are expected to
do and staff was also uncertain. Chair Janovy said she will follow -up to get clarification and Mr.
Sullivan will check ,, Vith JJesse Struve, the staff liaison, and report back.
VII. Bike Edina Task,!Force Update (Commissioner Janovy)
Chair Janovy said the BETF voted to support NICE Ride in Edina at 44t" & France and 50t" &
France as first priority.
VIII. Staff Comments
a. Work Session with Council on March 1, 2011
A work session is scheduled for 3/1, 5 -7 p.m. with the Council in the Community Room.
IX. Commission Comments
In
r�
Commissioner Nelson said there is an upcoming meeting for the SW LRT and he will give an
update report at the next ETC meeting.
Commissioner Engbretson said she's noticed signs around Lake Harvey area saying no to
curb and gutter. Mr. Sullivan said a neighborhood project is planned to include curb & gutter
and at the public hearing, the water quality of the pond was raised and approval of the project
was postponed until staff could meet with the watershed district. A follow -up meeting with
residents is scheduled for February 22. Mr. Sullivan said staff will still be recommending curb &
gutter and it was determined that of the 34 acres around the lake, only 4 is owned by the City;
therefore treatment options would need to be done by the residents on aheir private property.
Commissioner Braden asked how is agendas put
communicates with Mr. Sullivan and others can also send
currently working on solicitina federal funds and Mr_ f
imp
Cor
X.
Mei
Chair Janovy said she
. She asked if the City is
T no, staff is working to