Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-17 Meeting Packet 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 Engbretson, Nathan Franzen, Jennifer Janovy, Paul Nelson, Bodhe Scheerer, Elin Schold Davis, Michael Thompson MEMBERS ABSENT: Jean White STAFF PRESENT: Jack Sullivan, Sharon Allison I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by chair Janovy. II. Welcome New Members Chair Janovy welcomed new members Michael Thompson, Elin Schold Davis, Ann Braden and Katherine Bass to the commission. III. Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of November 18, 2010 Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the minutes of November 18 and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Bonneville. All voted aye. Motion carried b. Regular Meeting of January 20, 2011 The following corrections were made to the January 20 minutes: show Elin Schold Davis as being present; show Bohde Scheerer as being absent; delete Nathan Franzen from the attendance list; page 2, 4th paragraph, 5th line change “is” to was; 6th paragraph, 2nd line add “…four trains a day each direction traveling…”; last line add “…in Edina, where additional ROW may be needed for construction of upgrades.” Commissioner Bonneville moved to approve minutes with the corrections and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Schold Davis. All voted aye. Motion carried. 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. 2 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 advisory role, attendance, meeting procedures and schedule (Section 1500); Chair Janovy said a roster will be available to the public that includes each commissioner’s name, address, email and/or phone. She said that name, address and either a telephone number or email address are required. Both email and telephone number are not required, but commissioners may include both if they want to. She asked commissioners to review the roster an give any changes or corrections to Ms. Allison. Commissioners Engbretson and Scheerer requested to have their cell phone numbers removed from the roster. Chair Janovy discussed the following: • Meeting schedule for the entire the year. • Open meeting law which she said applied to 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 then 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 next). • Ordinance Section 1500 - the ETC is advisory only to the Council and does not direct staff. • 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. Sullivan if not able to attend a meeting. • Bylaws should be coming 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 at the 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 quarterly 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 aye. Motion carried. 3 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 a 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, more 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 example. Commissioner Bonneville said they have a duty to look at the big picture and referenced areas such as Southdale, 50th & France, and the 50th extension to Jerry’s area because there 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. Commissioner Bonneville said they could come from staff or the ETC. Chair Janovy asked if he was suggesting they identify hot spots similar to what was done by the Local Traffic Task Force, the precursor to the ETC. He said the Council could, Planning Commission (PC) could or ask them to team up together. Commissioner Bass said she would prefer to use the modes as a lens to evaluate all traffic and how all modes serve the networks i.e. pedestrians, bike, transit, etc. Commissioner Braden asked if the ETC has the technical expertise to evaluate what is being discussed. She asked if there are certain things that a PE would do and not her. She said she liked the idea of expanding to mode but maybe more of an advocate for complete streets, safe routes to school, and since they are a citizen advisory group, make a link between citizens, staff and consulting engineers. Chair Janovy said they are advisory to Council, but do not write the policies and that they are expected to have some degree of technical understanding. Commissioner Braden asked if they are concerned about liabilities. Chair Janovy said the ETC only makes recommendations. Commissioner Schold Davis suggested looking at demographic changes that are projected for Edina and how designs will affect pedestrians, older drivers, and other user groups. Commissioner 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 lack of 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 4 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 that they 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. Commissioner Bonneville 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, would it be handled by the TSC? a. Planning Commission’s review of Traffic Studies Chair Janovy said the Planning Commission (PC) has recommended that they take over the ETC’s responsibility of reviewing Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) usually done with developments. She said there is awareness that the ETC does have a role as defined by the TIA policy and asked whether the ETC and Planning Commission should have a joint meeting to pass on the responsibility. She also said the ETC could recommend that the Planning Commission not take over review of TIAs. Commissioner Bonneville said he is not comfortable giving responsibility to the PC. Commissioner Nelson concurred and cited the CVS plan that was presented to them for review as a concept plan that did not include everything on the plan that they said would be there like the bike rack and that the ETC had issues with site circulation. He asked if these issues are taken care of as they move through the process. Chair Janovy said if the PC takes over, there would continue to be unmet needs; she’s suggested to the PC chair that there are problems with the policy and with the code not calling for a transportation review and he suggested a meeting a with the ETC and PC. Establishing thresholds for review was recommended. Chair Janovy said one threshold that the PC has recommended is that the ETC would be involved if an AUAR study is required. Energy Environment Commission: Chair Janovy said Edina is a Green Step 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 with Jesse 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 44th & France and 50th & 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 5 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 their private property. Commissioner Braden asked how is agendas put together. Chair Janovy said she communicates with Mr. Sullivan and others can also send ideas to him. She asked if the City is currently working on soliciting federal funds and Mr. Sullivan said no, staff is working to implement monies already received. Commissioner Franzen said he is excited to see new group. X. Adjournment Meeting adjourned.