Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-08-19 Meeting PacketAGENDA Regular Meeting of the Edina Transportation Commission 6:00 PM, Thursday, August 19, 2010 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Council Chambers I. Call to Order II. Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of July 15, 2010 *# b. Work Session Minutes from July 1, 2010+ III. New Business a. 7355 York Avenue (Southdale YMCA Expansion) *+ b. Edina Police Presentation # IV. Planning Commission Update (Commissioner Schroeder) # V. Bike Edina Task Force Update (Commissioner Janovy) # VI. Staff Liaison Comments a. 7e Street Reconstruction Update # VII. Commission Comments VIII. Adjournment * Attachment included + Item requiring action by the ETC # Item for information only During "Public Hearings," the Chair will ask for public comment after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to speak on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your comments are relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: • Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less. The Chair will modify presentation times, as deemed necessary. • Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit comments to the matter under consideration. • In order to maintain a comfortable environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. During "Public Comments," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about something not on the agenda. Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes or less and cannot speak to an issue for which a public hearing was previously held and closed or a matter scheduled for a future hearing. Individuals should not expect the [Board or Commission] to respond to their comments. Instead, the [Board or Commission] might direct the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. 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. - MINUTES OF THE Edina Transportation Commission Thursday, July 15, 2010 Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Jennifer Janovy, Paul Nelson, Michael Schroeder, Josh Sprague, Jean White, Geof Workinger, Nathan Franzen, Julie Sierks MEMBERS ABSENT: Usha Abram ovitz, Tom Bonneville STAFF PRESENT: Jack Sullivan, Sharon Allison I. Call to Order The meeting was called order by chair Janovy. II. Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of May 20, 2010 Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the minutes of May 20 and it was seconded by Commissioner Workinger. b. Work Session Meeting of June 17, 2010 Commissioner Sprague moved to approve the minutes of June 17 and it was seconded by Commissioner Nelson. Commissioner Schroeder abstained. C. Work Session Meeting of July 1, 2010 (Non-mandatory attendance) Approval was tabled until verification can be made with Assistant City Manager Worthington regarding whether this should be 'Work Session Notes' that should be formally approved. III. Old Business Janovy recapped how they started the process by stating that they recognized that the ETC policy was folded into Comp Plan and may need to be updated; that most of the Traffic Task Force items have been completed; an awareness that the ETC policy makes reference to bylaws but they do not have bylaws; and the Planning Commission's discussion about the ETC's role in development proposals. And they reminded themselves that they are advisory to City Council and to staff and do not direct staff. She stated further that they've identified different areas in scope that are not all listed in the meeting handout. She said the handout shows a topic area for them rate and identify the next steps which can be one, none or a combination. The discussion began with the role of the ETC. Janovy said the role is that which has been discussed or that exist, e.g. the ETC is not currently involved with road reconstruction. And just because something is in the scope does not mean the ETC will be involved all the time, or have a role. She said they may just develop policy and not be involved any further. In reference to Complete Streets, Janovy said she has learned from Houle that a policy is likely for Edina. Sullivan concurred. Sprague asked if Mn/DOT would write a model that Edina will have to conform to. Sullivan said Mn/DOT will write a policy to fit their needs and Edina would modify it to fit Edina's needs. He said staff would prefer to wait to see where Mn/DOT is heading with the policy. He also said other groups such as the City/County Engineers Association may have a model that Edina could use. Janovy said she sees this as a high priority, but now is not the right time to act. Workinger concurred and stated that they should wait and then react. Sprague said they should suggest to staff that they develop a policy for local and non-collector streets since what was passed is for State Aid roads only. Schroeder said they should broadly define the principles and then fill in as you move along. Sullivan said staff practices in broad/vague language that is not formulated into a policy. He said they have given brief thoughts to what the policy may look like. He said Hennepin County would have a policy to cover their roads; Mn/DOT would have one to cover the State Aid roads, and Edina would have one that focuses on local roads. Janovy said there is pressure to encourage active transportation, including mass transit, and a Complete Streets policy is a way to have some design standards. Sullivan said most policies are generally vague that states that it will try to accommodate most users, but how do you do this. Janovy said sidewalks are hard to pass and if Complete Streets policy said they will install sidewalks but they do not get passed then where would they have gotten. She said they have the Bike Task Force but not an equivalent for pedestrians, so there may be one winning over the other. Workinger said he was not sure what they were talking about because they already do their best to accommodate all users. Janovy said they probably need policies to back up the practices, e.g. the petition process is confusing and she heard examples of a petition being submitted and for six years nothing was done; or, using franchise fees instead of assessments. She said there are competing demands on franchise fees and if the ETC felt that it would be valuable to use this money for sidewalk, a recommendation could be made to the Council and this could help to facilitate sidewalks. She said on-street parking on local streets is good for calming traffic as an approach to Complete Street and it probably should be evaluated, but most people do not park on the streets which make driving 35 mph appealing. White said they should have measures for doing certain things. Sprague said Mn/DOT generally create specicifications. Sullivan said there is none to his knowledge. He said Mn/DOT has documents that are in conflict with what they are doing and Complete Streets might mean more variables and be a guiding principle. G..1 b7- Y-L '''(-Aprague moved that they create uniformity- for local streets with a Complete Streets policy. Motion seconded by Nelson. Schroeder suggested changing 'uniformity' to 'comprehensive' and Sprague agreed. Nelson asked if Complete Streets was considered for Parkwood Knolls Reconstruction. Sullivan said sidewalk was recommended on Parkwood Road but it was not approved and neither was narrowing of a certain section of roadway. He said some residents did not want curb and gutter but it was approved. He said not delineating for cars, pedestrians, and bikes when traffic is low may have been the argument for some residents. Workinger asked if the France Avenue Sidewalk was still in progress. Sullivan said yes. White asked if this should be professionally studied to see how other cities have implemented Complete Streets. Sprague said in Bloomington, there is a threshold and the policy apply or it does not. Franzen said he is in favor of a Complete Streets policy. He said a trail was funded 2 in his neighborhood that would have benefited an entire community but neighbors stopped it. He said community-wide goals should be stressed so that some residents cannot stop a project. Sprague said the policy would help to manage public expectation. The motion was amended to say 'comprehensive.' Six voted aye. One abstained (White). Road Diet/Re-Stripinq Pol cv Sprague said Bloomington s a collector restriping policy and he asked if this would be redundant or could be created in parallel with Complete Streets. Sullivan said it could be incorporated and it would be a way to maximize the usage while minimizing footage of the corridor. Janovy said they can distribute Bloomington's policy, or it is on their website. Road Reconstruction Regarding road reconstruction, Janovy said they talked about having a role. She said one idea that was suggested was that staff would present an annual overview of upcoming projects. She said the presentation to the ETC could be in September since staff knows which projects they will be working on by August. Janovy said the presentation would be for information only purposes only. Workinger said if they can add value, they should be part of the review process and should be able to make recommendations as part of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) so that it goes to Council with some suggestions. Sullivan said they would need to become involved around June/July. Nelson suggested looking at 2012 since 2011 are already set. He also suggested that they could look from 2012 to 5 years out. Sullivan said they look at pavement conditions, utilities, drainage and other things associated like sidewalk, speed bump, etc. and these are areas where they ETC could help. Nelson asked about the gateway treatments in the Cornelia Neighborhood. Sullivan said they were staff initiated and residents in neighboring project area did not want them. Janovy said in her meeting with Houle, she got the impression that he does not want the ETC involved with this process. Sullivan said yes, staff has a process that works well and wants to continue this. Janovy said there are things in a feasibility study that will be questioned and the ETC could help to facilitate. She reiterated that she got the feeling that Houle does not want the ETC involved with reconstruction or the CIP. Sprague asked if value would be added with their involvement in the CIP process. Janovy said it is challenging to get residents to pay attention and when they get to the feasibility stage it is too late. Sprague moved that the ETC receive annual update of road reconstruction projects. Seconded by Franzen. Schroeder said the ETC's role should be to shape what gets in the CIP for years 6 and 7. He said they should be responsible for the wider system and that there will be changes taking place outside of the city such as replacement of the Crosstown bridge that the Comp Plan should address but does not. He went on to say that they are at a point where conditions of the roadway dictate what they do. Janovy said it sounds like there may be two policies. The motion was modified that the ETC receives (annuTI updatek)f road reconstruction and tin CI ep r c)ic P s- •JJ All voted aye. 3 Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Janovy said the NTMP does not provide for education and enforcement. She said other communities have models of enforcement, not in the strict sense, but outreach. She said the idea is complaints often involve speeding and volume and the request is usually for a stop sign but a stop sign does not usually meet warrants. She said the NTMP would give staff a direction to take residents with complaints. Sprague concurred. Janovy said this is a way to use education and enforcement and since the NTMP has never been used, maybe it is time to evaluate. Workinger asked how this would help the TSC. Janovy said residents are usually asking for traffic calming. She said the requests are generally seasonal -- April to September they are looking for ways to slow traffic, not so much volume and in the winter they are looking for no-parking signs. She said the TSC has a different kind of toolbox and the NTMP gives a different option. Janovy said it would help to develop a policy and define ETC's role within it. She said Mankato has an example of an NTMP that deals with education and enforcement before engineering. Sprague moved to update the NTMP to include education and enforcement. Seconded by Franzen. Workinger asked what education would provide. Janovy said Mankato for example, trains residents how to use a radar gun or stealth monitor speed/volume for 24 hours. She said they would look at some good models and put some responsibility on the person making complaint. She suggested getting Phil Larsen from the police department to attend a meeting. All voted aye. Franzen moved to have the TSC minutes placed on the ETC's agenda. Seconded by Sprague. Amended by Workinger to include "before schedule to go to Council" and this was agreed to by Franzen. TSC meetings are the 1st Wednesday each month and are closed meetings. Workinger suggested having an ETC member on the TSC to keep their process moving without slowing it down. Sprague suggested tabling this for later a date. All concurred. All voted aye. Development Proposals Janovy said they do have a TIA policy and asked if it is not properly defined or not well integrated. Sprague said the laN-. Schroeder said he was never concerned with the ETC having a role. He said it's the lack of clarity to the public concerning who is responsible for what. He said the ETC should say what role they want and push this to the ZOUC, i.e. that ETC will not be holding public hearings. He said two are already held -- one by the Planning Commission (PC) and one by the Council. He asked why add another. He thinks there should only be one done by the PC to talk about development and transportation. He said one recommendation is for Cary/Jack/P.C./ETC to work to integrate an idea and bring back to the ETC. Workinger recommend that two members of the ETC serve on this group. 4 Janovy moved that Planning and Engineering staff, and two ETC commissioners meet to try to integrate the process. Seconded by Sprague. All voted aye. Workinger suggested a meeting time that most people can make. ETC Policy Janovy said the Comp Plan has replaced everything prior to the NTMP. She said the NTMP was left hanging and asked if it should be absorbed or left as a stand-alone and eliminate the ETC Policy. Forming a subcommittee to pull out from the Comp Plan the relevant areas for the ETC to use as a guide was suggested. Workinger volunteered for the subcommittee. Pulling7P-A out pieces of the Local Traffic Task Force and NTMP was also suggested. Janvoy said they are looking for a broader vision and statement in this new ETC policy. She said they could table the discussion until everyone has had a chance to refresh their memory of the Transportation Chapter in the Comp Plan and ETC policy. Schroeder and Franzen also volunteered for the subcommittee. Janovy said she serve in some form. Janovy moved to approve the formation of the subcommittee of Workinger, Schroeder and Franzen. Seconded by Franzen. The subcommittee is to report back by September. All voted aye. Projects not within Edina's Jurisdiction Janovy said this is important to Bonneville. She said he had an idea where each member would bring a concern forward. Schroeder said this could mean each member having more power and further, staff has been responsive to members when they bring concerns forward. It was pointed out that they are getting information but not early enough to influence. Schroeder said they should be aware but not review, which implies jurisdiction. He suggested that they ask other jurisdiction to come to the ETC so that the ETC can comment when they have a chance to influence. By consensus, the ETC as a matter of policy, will comment on projects outside of their jurisdiction at a time when comment can influence. Bylaws Janovy said they do not have bylaws even though the ordinance says they do. She said they could ask the City to provide standard sections on data practice, open meeting law, etc. Workinger said he is not excited about bylaws. Janovey said they elect a chair but do not have bylaws to guide them. Janovy moved that the ETC recommend that the City develops a standard model that they can modify fit their needs. Seconded by Franzen. All voted aye. ETC Ordinance and Minutes Recommendation Tabled until next meeting. Janovy thanked Sierks for her service on the ETC and wished the best as she heads off to college. 5 IV. Adjournment 6 Transportation Commissioners Jack Sullivan, PE Assistant City Engki6er August 19, 2010 Agenda Item No III. B. ACTION: Recommendation/Motion ZI Discussion Information To: From: Date: Subject: Transportation Impact Analysis — 7355 York Avenue: Southdale YMCA Expansion Page 1 of 2 Item III. B. Edina Transportation Commission REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING REPORT/RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Review the attached transportation impact analysis submitted by Spack Consulting on August 9, 2010, review memo dated August 2, 2010 from WSB and Associates and the following staff report. Staff and WSB have reviewed the Transportation Impact Analysis from Spack Consulting for the Southdale YMCA Expansion dated August 9, 2010 and believe the development team has met our requirements. If so desired by the Transportation Commission, adopt a motion recommending that the traffic as demonstrated in the transportation study for 7355 York Avenue — YMCA Southdale Expansion does not adversely affect to the adjacent transportation system. Info/Background: The Southdale YMCA submitted a proposal in September 2008 to demolish the 70,000 sq. ft. YMCA building and rebuild a 72,000 sq. ft. YMCA along with 130 unit of Multi-family housing. The transportation analysis was approved by the ETC with the condition that the median nose on York Avenue, at the north entrance, be modified to match the proposed reconfiguration of the parking lot. The parking lot had a 150 foot exclusive right turn lane and a shared left/thru to accommodate the on-site delays. However, the proposed redevelopment as outlined in September 2008 was never constructed. The current application is to expand the existing YMCA facility by approximately 21,900 sq. ft. without the addition of a housing component. GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\TrafficUransportation Commission\Agendas\2010 R&R\20100819_7355_York_YMCA.docx Page 2 of 2 Item III. B. Edina Transportation Commission With the revised site redevelopment the City required the development team to update the 2008 transportation impact analysis (TIA) with the most current existing traffic and projected traffic impacts. The TIA's objectives were to: 1. analyze the existing and proposed traffic operations of the following intersections: York Avenue at Parklawn - York Avenue and the north and south YMCA entrances York Avenue at the "oval about" north of the YMCA facility 2. Recommend improvement to the local street network, if needed. An initial TIA was submitted to the City and WSB for review in Mid-July. From that report a memo with 12 outstanding issues was created (dated August 2, 2010, not included in your packet) and sent back to Spack Consulting. The follow up TIA dated August 9, 2010 from Spack Consulting addresses all the questions and comments as outlined in the WSB memo. The Southdale YMCA's Transportation Impact Analysis shows that all study intersections will continue to operate at LOS D or better during all study periods once the facility is fully operational (2012). They have addressed travel demand management and pedestrian concerns to our satisfaction. In addition, no improvements are required of the local street network. The median nose at York Avenue and the north YMCA entrance can remain as is. GAEngineering\Infrastructure\ Streets \ Traffiffransportation Commission\Agendas\2010 R&R\20100819_7355_York_YMCA.docx A WSB & Associates, Inc. Infrastructure • Engineering • Planning • Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum To: Wayne Houle, PE, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jack Sullivan, PE, Assistant City Engineer City of Edina From: Chuck Rickart, PE, PTOE Transportation Engineer WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: August 2, 2010 Re: Southdale YMCA Expansion Traffic Impact Study Review City of Edina WSB Project No. 1686-02 As requested, we have reviewed the Traffic Impact Study dated July 12th, 2010 prepared by Spack Consulting for the proposed Southdale YMCA Expansion located on the east side of York Avenue between Hazelton Road and Parklawn Avenue A previous redevelopment project was proposed for the YMCA site in 2008. The original project included a new YMCA building with Multi-Family on the site. The previous plan, although was approved, is now proposed to be modified. The current proposed project involves the expansion of the existing 67,700 SF YMCA facility by approximately 21,900 SF. A Traffic Impact Study was prepared and reviewed as part of the proposed project in 2008. That study has been updated with the new development proposal. Based on our review of the updated Southdale YMCA Expansion Traffic Impact Study, the following questions and comments are made. 1. The original Traffic Impact Study indicated that the existing YMCA was 70,000 SF. The new Traffic Impact Study indicates the existing YMCA is 67,700 SF. This needs to be clarified. 2. The Land Use discussion on page 3 indicates that the total square footage with the expansion will be 91,900. Table 2.1 indicates that the total square footage will be 89.620. This needs to be clarified. 3. On page 4 the development phasing and timing indicates that the project will be fully operational by the "END" of 2012. The analysis looked at 2012 as the full build out of the site with background traffic. What would be the impact of another year of background traffic on the study intersections? This would provide a more realistic indication of full build out impacts. CAWSMEdinAMEMO-whoule-080210 YMCA.doc Wayne Houle and Jack Sullivan City of Edina September 9, 2008 Page 2 of 3 4. Figure 2.2 shows the proposed concept plan. A more detailed figure should be provided showing the existing medians on York Avenue in association with the site driveways. 5. The existing analysis indicates that the north YMCA access experiences longer delays during the PM peak hour. How does this impact the existing site circulation? 6. The analysis shows that only 177 spaces are used on an average day. Are there events that require additional parking? The parking need should be based on a peak event. How does the parking compare with what is required by Zoning? 7. Figure 3.4 does not show existing "Stop Signs" for the YMCA access driveways. It is implied in the text that they are there. If not they should be added with this project. 8. Figure 3.8 shows existing Average Daily Traffic volumes from 2005. 2009 volumes are now available. This figure should be updated. The other figures (4.13) and analysis associated with the ADT volumes should also be updated. 9. The analysis results indicate that the intersection of York Avenue and Parklawn Avenue and York Avenue with the North Site entrance will have some movements at unsatisfactory Levels of Service. • The overall Level of Service at the North Site entrance will be at a LOS D with the westbound movement at LOS F. If another year of background traffic were to be assumed how, would the North Site entrance intersection be impacted? • The queuing analysis indicates that there may be "significant queues of vehicles waiting to turn onto York Avenue in the AM and PM peak hours". How does this significant queue get handled on the site? • The queuing analysis in the previous study and for the AM condition shows 150 foot storage for the westbound through, left and right at the North Site access intersection. The PM peak shows a 600 foot available storage. This appears to be a typo. If that is the case the PM peak queue will be in excess of the available storage. This should be mitigated. 10. No mitigation is recommended with the proposed expansion. The mitigation, based on the queuing analysis from the previous study recommended adding a right turn lane on York Avenue and a westbound right turn lane at the North Site entrance. The queue analysis does not show a significant improvement from the original study to the current study. Why are these improvements not being recommended now? CAWSBlEdingIVIEMO-whoule-080210 YMCA.doc Wayne Houle and Jack Sullivan City of Edina September 9, 2008 Page 3 of 3 11. The study discusses the use and availability of transit for the YMCA site. It should be expanded to include, how people at the YMCA can get to the transit facilities. Are sidewalks provided / available? 12. A general discussion on pedestrian! bike accommodations should be provided. A figure similar to that provided with the previous study should be included showing existing and planned sidewalk and bike facilities. Will YMCA have bike racks or other amenities for pedestrians? If so, where are they in relationship to the sidewalk and trail facilities? Based on these comments and my general review of the site configuration and the traffic impact study, additional information and analysis should be provided before any approval recommendation can be made. CAWSMEdinalMEMO-whoule-080210 YMCA.doc --7A'r•:korn WO, : 4414040kwerm464 A Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Traffic Impact Study Southdale YMCA Expansion Edina, MN I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: Michafil P. Spack, P.E. License No. 40936 Date: August 9, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction and Summary 1 2. Proposed Development and Study Area 3 3. Existing Traffic Conditions 7 4. Projected Traffic 16 5. Traffic and Improvement Analysis 32 6. Conclusions and Recommendations 36 7. Appendix 37 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 - Location Map 5 Figure 2.2 - Concept Plan 6 Figure 3.1 - Existing Weekday AM Peak Period Parking 9 Figure 3.2 - Existing Weekday PM Peak Period Parking 9 Figure 3.3 - Existing Saturday Peak Period Parking 10 Figure 3.4 - Existing Conditions 11 Figure 3.5 - Existing A.M. Peak Hour Traffic 12 Figure 3.6 - Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic 13 Figure 3.7 - Existing Saturday Peak Hour Traffic 14 Figure 3.8 - Existing Daily Traffic 15 Figure 4.1 - Trip Distribution 19 Figure 4.2 - A.M. Peak Hour Volumes Due to Development 20 Figure 4.3 - P.M. Peak Hour Volumes Due to Development 21 Figure 4.4 - Saturday Peak Hour Volumes Due to Development 22 Figure 4.5 - Daily Volumes Due to Development 23 Figure 4.6 - 2012 No-Build A.M. Peak Hour Volumes 24 Figure 4.7 - 2012 No-Build P.M. Peak Hour Volumes 25 Figure 4.8 -2012 No-Build Saturday Peak Hour Volumes 26 Figure 4.9 -2012 No-Build Daily Volumes 27 Figure 4.10 - 2012 Build A.M. Peak Hour Volumes ...... .......... ...... ...... ..... . 28 Figure 4.11 - 2012 Build P.M. Peak Hour Volumes 29 Figure 4.12 - 2012 Build Saturday Peak Hour Volumes 30 Figure 4.13 - 2012 Build Daily Volumes 31 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 - Before/After Square Footage of Uses 4 Table 3.1 - Existing Level of Service (LOS) 8 Table 4.1 -Trip Generation 18 Table 5.1 - 2012 No Build Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS) 32 Table 5.2 - 2012 Build Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS) 32 Table 5.3 - 2012 Build Peak Hour Stacking Results 34 Southdale YMCA Expansion i Traffic Impact Study 1. Introduction and Summary a. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis is proposing to expand the existing facility located on York Avenue in Edina, MN. They are proposing to build an approximately 21,900 addition onto the approximately 67,700 square foot YMCA. The purpose of this report is to determine if completion of this addition will significantly impact the adjacent transportation system. The study objectives are: i. Determine how the existing York Avenue South intersections at Parklawn Avenue, YMCA south entrance, YMCA north entrance and the 4 intersections comprising the traffic circle north of the YMCA north entrance and south of Hazelton Road currently operate. ii. Determine if the existing Parklawn Avenue, YMCA south entrance, YMCA north entrance and the 4 intersections comprising the traffic circle north of the YMCA north entrance and south of Hazelton Road will operate with acceptable vehicle delays and stacking after the addition is fully occupied in 2012. iii. Recommend improvements if needed. A traffic study was prepared in 2008 for a proposed redevelopment, which included housing. The current proposal eliminates housing and is limited to expanding the existing YMCA. Based on discussions with City of Edina staff, this traffic study updates the report from 2008 to account for the proposed expansion project. b. Executive Summary The YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis is proposing to expand the existing facility located on York Avenue in Edina, MN. The facility currently has approximately 67,700 square feet and the addition is proposed to add approximately 21,900 square feet. The site is located in Edina, MN on York Avenue South between Parklawn Avenue and the traffic circle south of Hazelton Road. Access to the site will be from two existing intersections on York Avenue South. The north intersection is a full intersection and the south intersection is a right in/right out intersection. City staff has requested a traffic study be completed to determine the traffic impacts of the redevelopment on the adjacent roadways for 2012 (when it is assumed full occupancy will occur). The intersections studied are: Southdale YMCA Expansion 1 Traffic Impact Study • York Avenue South & Parklawn Avenue • York Avenue South & South YMCA Entrance/Apartment Entrance • York Avenue South & North YMCA Entrance/Apartment Entrance • York Avenue South & the 4 intersections comprising the traffic circle north of the YMCA north entrance and south of Hazelton Road The principal findings of this study are: i. The York Avenue intersections at Parklawn Avenue, South YMCA Entrance, North YMCA Entrance, and the traffic circle currently operate at LOS B or better in the weekday a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, and Saturday midday peak hour. The study intersections will continue to operate acceptably at LOS D or better during the study periods in both the 2012 No-Build and Build scenarios. ii. The maximum queues at the study intersections are anticipated to be contained within the existing lanes through the 2012 Build scenario. iii. None of the study intersections will meet the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices warrants for installing a traffic signal in the 2012 Build scenario. The York Avenue/Parklawn intersection may meet the peak hour warrant in the ten to twenty year timeframe if traffic continues to grow at the intersection. iv. Based on the parking analysis completed for the redevelopment, it is anticipated that providing 297 total parking spaces for the site will be adequate. To adequately mitigate the traffic impacts of the proposed development, the following improvement plan is recommended: i. Monitor the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue intersection in the future for traffic signal control. ii. Maintain a minimum 269 parking stalls on the site. It should be noted right turn lanes were proposed to be added for the site in the 2008 Traffic Study. They are no longer recommended for the following reasons: • The previous redevelopment plan was more intense with a housing component proposed for the site. The housing component is not part of the current redevelopment plan, so there will not be conflicting traffic patterns within the site compared to the previous plan. Southdale YMCA Expansion 2 Traffic Impact Study • The southern YMCA driveway currently has little traffic using it. It is believed the YMCA patrons will utilize this alternate route if congestion occurs at the north driveway. • The addition of right turn lanes lengthens the pedestrian crossing distance at the intersection. Eliminating the right turn lanes results in a more pedestrian friendly environment. 2. Proposed Development and Study Area a. Site Location The proposed development site is located on York Avenue South north of Parklawn Avenue and south of the traffic circle located south of Hazelton Road in Edina, MN. The existing site driveways are planned to remain unaltered with the expansion project. See Figure 2.1 for a location map. It shows the location of the study intersections, which are: • York Avenue South & Parklawn Avenue • York Avenue South & South YMCA Entrance/Apartment Entrance • York Avenue South & North YMCA Entrance/Apartment Entrance • York Avenue South & the 4 intersections comprising the traffic circle north of the YMCA north entrance and south of Hazelton Road b. Land Use and Intensity The existing YMCA is approximately 67,700 square feet. Note the 2008 Traffic Study listed the existing YMCA as 70,000 square feet, but that figure did not account for stairwells, mechanical rooms, etc. per Edina City Code. The proposed addition will add approximately 21,900 square feet, bringing the total square footage to approximately 89,620 square feet. The site will provide 297 parking stalls after the expansion project is complete (a reduction of 40 stalls from the existing 337). Table 2.1 shows the uses in the existing facility as well as the uses planned to be in the facility after the remodeling/addition project are complete (along with their associated square footages). Southdale YMCA Expansion 3 Traffic Impact Study Table 2.1 — Before/After Square Footage of Uses Use Square Footage Before Expansion Square Footage After Expansion Fitness Spaces (cardio, weights, studios, racquetball together, walking track) 20,570 33,450 Locker Rooms 11,140 10,560 Aquatics (pools and Jacuzzi) 6,800 10,500 Drop-in Childcare 5,255 5,510 Staff (offices, conference) 2,010 2,360 Total Area (including hallways, mechanical spaces, etc.) 67,720 89,620 YMCA staff believes there will be a maximum of 15% growth in membership associated with the new building. c. Concept Plan See Figure 2.2 for the proposed concept plan. The building expansion will be added to the west and north sides of the building. The hatched area on the concept plan shows the area where pavement will be altered. The site plan in the Appendix shows the existing parking lot alongside the proposed parking lot design. Circulation patterns on the site will remain the same for vehicles and pedestrians. As shown in the concept plan, a pedestrian promenade is proposed to connect the sidewalk along York Avenue to the front door of the YMCA building. Approximately 15 to 20 bicycle racks are planned to be constructed near the front door of the building to provide adequate parking for bicyclists. No changes to the existing driveways on York Avenue are proposed at this time. d. Development Phasing and Timing The current plan is for the addition to be fully open to patrons in October 2011. This study assumes the development will be fully operational by the end of 2011 and analyzes the year 2012, which allows traffic patterns to mature. Southdale YMCA Expansion 4 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 2.1 Location Maps YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN .1 1 , ... • 1 • • s_ IV . , ' ' ••••••••••••n 11..tr-armg. '04...wiwa •n •nnn , n ,. ••• 1,4; / , , ese-- i 17 d n id, n = .1 ,a) r,.... i-- tiezelton ..:. et , ' ! MAPOWE ST ,,..,..y ,..... 1101: ,16.'" . . Andover° °Harn Lel. D. 1161 4 EE l y . s M . t ale,. ,. .1: f 1.'. i -0- kS g h , i-ss- •- , S ._ U .. M i 12 S iA av e isch.:::° ( ) E.„ . ,_L „ .. n . La iigs q lenItn nCele Pr% Coon apids I Oak% _ ..an Fridley sho,.,. , ta B ear Lake MapleGrove ' ogehtome di :id Brooklyn Center Arden Hills wm,,, ip cS 60Th ft ?I Bolden Valley °Lake Sinus „•Derphsven yous, na y ,,pMinnetonka ; Burnsville Study Area Z [104 -, Ch.flhatIOn Eden Prairie ' navy Shakopee „PlymoUth Hosea ille St. Paul - '°.4"e .,St_ Louts Park Meplewoect I n 10a, ;at St. peal Weedbory • Si111) Richfield Bloomington ti;15 Inver Grove Height. vcottage Grave Eagan i Apple Valley •P'14'r 041 M Wasting ' 55' North No Scale Proposed Site - • = Study Intersections Southdale YMCA Expansion 5 Traffic Impact Study Driveway Remains Unaltered r7z: New Sidewalk Planned from York Avenue to Front Door Driveway Remains Unaltered 15 to20 Bike Racks Planned Near Front Door kt Sp eck THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 2.2 Concept Plan YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN It North No Scale Concept Plan prepared for YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis by BWBR Architects. 6 Traffic Impact Study Southdale YMCA Expansion LOS D = Acceptable 1,4.1114kt {ft-h,;514 -1; — . LOS F = Unacceptaille atiel.44t Source: City of San Jose, CA 3. Existing Traffic Conditions a. Physical Characteristics Access to the site will be provided by two existing intersections on York Avenue South. York Avenue South is Hennepin County State Aid Highway 31 and is designated as a Major Collector by Hennepin County. Parklawn Avenue is a City street and is designated as a collector by the City of Edina. Existing traffic control, speed limits, and travel lanes are shown on Figure 3.4 for each study intersection. Figure 3.4 shows the stop signs that physically exist, although all driveways are legally stop condition. Sidewalks are provided along both sides of York Avenue near the site. No roadway improvements are scheduled near the site. b. Traffic Volumes The weekday a.m., weekday p.m. and Saturday peak hour turning movement counts were conducted in 2008 at the study intersections (see Figures 3.5, 3.6 & 3.7). The weekday a.m. and p.m. peak periods align with typical rush hours. The YMCA classes have the heaviest attendance during the morning on Saturdays. Since the traffic patterns in the area are most impacted by the shopping district, it is believed the late a.m. period on Saturday has the heaviest combination of site traffic and background traffic. The turning movement count data is contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. The daily traffic volumes for the area roadways are shown on Figure 3.8. c. Level of Service An intersection capacity analysis was conducted for the existing intersections per the Highway Capacity Manual. Intersections are assigned a "Level of Service" letter grade for the peak hour of traffic based on the number of lanes at the intersection, traffic volumes, and traffic control. Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light traffic flow (free flow conditions) while Level of Service F (LOS F) represents heavy traffic flow (over capacity conditions). LOS D at intersections is considered acceptable in urban conditions. Individual movements are also assigned LOS grades. One or more individual movements typically operate at LOS F when the overall intersection is operating acceptably at LOS D. The pictures on the left represent some of the LOS grades (from a signal controlled Southdale YMCA Expansion 7 Traffic Impact Study intersection in San Jose, CA). These LOS grades represent the overall intersection operation, not individual movements. The LOS results for the 2008 study hours are shown in Table 3.1. These are based on the existing traffic control and lane configurations as shown in Figure 3.4 (all driveway exits are treated as having stop control, which they are legally, even if a stop sign isn't present). The existing turning movement volumes from Figures 3.5 through 3.7 were used in the LOS calculations. The LOS calculations were done using SYNCHROTM software. The SYNCHROTM model was created for this project since the study intersections are not part of the city's existing model. The intersections will be added to the city's model if the project is approved and constructed. The complete LOS calculations are included in the Appendix. Table 3.1 — Existing Level of Service (LOS) Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour York Ave S & Parklawn Ave A/C B/F A / D York Ave S & South YMCA Entrance A / B A / B A / B York Ave S & North YMCA Entrance A / C A / F A / D York Ave S & SE traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & NE traffic circle A / B Al C A / B York Ave S & NW traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & SW traffic circle A / B A / C A / C Note: The first letter is the Level of Service grade for the overall intersection. The second letter is the Level of Service grade for the worst operating movement. All of the study intersections operate acceptably at LOS B or better in the existing a.m. weekday, p.m. weekday and Saturday midday peak hours. As often happens along busy corridors such as York Avenue, some individual side street movements experience longer delays while the overall intersection operates acceptably with little overall delay. The eastbound and westbound approaches at the York Ave/North YMCA Entrance currently experience LOS F in the weekday p.m. peak hour. The eastbound approach currently experiences LOS F at the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue intersection in the weekday p.m. peak hour while the westbound approach experiences LOS E. d. Parking Volumes Parking capacity was determined to be 337 stalls combining spaces on both the west and east sides of the existing facility. Data on the actual number of cars parked was collected immediately prior to all three data collection timeframes. This beginning number was then adjusted based on the turning movement counts completed at the Southdale YMCA Expansion 8 Traffic Impact Study 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 < < < < < < < < < D Lc) cc) Lo c) In c) to a co 1- a <— CO •cr 0 .— CO ▪ CO eci Co CO GD0)Cri Pa r ki n g St a ll s 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Occupied Capacity 400 350 300 Tri 250 al 200 ;El 150 100 50 0 Occupied Capacity site's driveways to provide a total number of cars in the lots in fifteen minute increments. Following in Figures 3.1 through 3.3 are the results of this data collection. Additional details are contained in the appendix. Figure 3.1 - Existing Weekday AM Peak Period Parking Figure 3.2 - Existing Weekday PM Peak Period Parking 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 O a a O 0 0 a co Lo c. c) co o < ▪ - co • cp co 4 4 cri cri c:ci Southdale YMCA Expansion 9 Traffic Impact Study —Occupied Capacity 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 < < < < < < ci_ a. a c) LU cpLO o in o in o co Tr 0 N-- CO 71: 0 N— cr) 6 d l-- l— C— C— (' \ i eNi N.i 400 350 300 Ts, 250 t") 200 150 a. 100 50 0 Figure 3.3 — Existing Saturday Peak Period Parking The maximum number of occupied spaces during the study periods was 177 spaces. Average occupancy, based on the available 337 parking spaces, was 40% of capacity. Following are the high and low occupancy rates for each time period: • Thursday a.m. - high 53% and low 31% • Thursday p.m. — high 42% and low 29% • Saturday — high 47% and low 27% e. Data Sources The sources for the data sited above are: • Turning movement counts — Traffic Data Inc. • Roadway geometrics and traffic control — Spack Consulting • Concept plan — BWBR Architects • Daily traffic volumes — Mn/DOT traffic flow maps Southdale YMCA Expansion 10 Traffic Impact Study Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 4111. 41 c:*1- Oa. Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 3.4 Existing Lanes & Traffic Control YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE (enter only) > Pedestrian Underpass 41,4 Apartment North Driveway Bus Stop (Routes 538, 539, 578) Apartment South Driveway YMCA North Driveway + 441* Bus Stop (Routes 41 538, 539, 578) YMCA South Driveway Parklawn Avenue 41114 30 mph t.4 _c 0 Cl) a) >- Southdale YMCA Expansion 11 Traffic Impact Study Traffic Circle SE CP 0 `Ct 4J I ta 22.5 Traffic Circle SW 36 4=1.24 41 e NJ N Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 54 16 n lio. Apartment North Driveway YMCA North Driveway Apartment South Driveway YMCA South Driveway 47 0 n 11. 24. Parklawn Avenue Southdale YMCA Expansion 12 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 3.5 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale 16 Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 03 C41. 2 (O 4 I 14 25 n 01. 0 03 03 Q1 N- CO C) ,r 1---,0 •,-- l'..- 03 Apartment North Driveway 1 YMCA North Driveway YMCA South Driveway Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 3.6 4 North No Scale Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue . L 6 co r... olio -o 481 I r 5 13 Southdale YMCA Expansion Traffic Impact Study 14 Southdale YMCA Expansion Traffic Impact Study Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 24 n lo. Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE Apartment North Driveway Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue YMCA North Driveway YMCA South Driveway 71 mt 2 n Ir- 20 Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 3.7 Existing Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 3.8 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN + North No Scale 0 0 VI ai ,— Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle SW Apartment North Driveway 1 Apartment South Driveway Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SE YMCA North Driveway AIIIIIMINYMCA South Driveway Parklawn Avenue 3.500 LEGEND 2009 Average Annual Daily 411 Traffic Volumes source: Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps Southdale YMCA Expansion 15 Traffic Impact Study 4. Projected Traffic The assumptions described in this section were reviewed by City of Edina engineering staff before the forecasts in this section were developed. a. Site Traffic Forecasting A trip generation analysis was performed for the proposed YMCA expansion based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. The Weekday a.m. peak hour trip generation is for the "one hour of adjacent street traffic" from 7-9 a.m. The Weekday p.m. peak hour trip generation is for the "one hour of adjacent street traffic" from 4-6 p.m. The Saturday peak hour trip generation is for the "peak hour of generator". In addition a 15% growth factor was applied to the existing entering and exiting peak hour volumes. This represents the possible maximum growth in membership. The resultant trip generations are shown in Table 4.1. No trip reductions for pass-by or diverted trips were made. It is assumed all of the trips for the site will be newly generated. Also, there is bus service available near the site on York Avenue but no trip reductions were taken for transit use. These assumptions result in a more conservative analysis. The directional orientation of the generated traffic is shown in Figure 4.1. This orientation is based on a weighted distribution of the traffic volumes currently using York Avenue South. The daily traffic volume on each road segment was divided by the sum of the daily traffic volumes on the road segments to develop the directional orientation. The a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, Saturday peak hour and daily trips generated by the site were assigned to the area roadways per the trip distributions shown in Figure 4.1. The traffic volumes added to the study roadways through this process are shown in Figures 4.2 through 4.5. These traffic volumes will be added to the existing traffic volumes to develop the build-out conditions. b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2012 scenario by applying a 0.92% compounded annual growth rate to the existing traffic volume data. This growth rate is based on the 20 year growth factor of 1.2 the Mn/DOT State Aid office assigned to Hennepin County in 2008. The 2012 No-Build forecasts are shown in Figures 4.6 through 4.9. Southdale YMCA Expansion 16 Traffic Impact Study c. Total Traffic for 2012 Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2012 Build scenario by adding the traffic generated by the proposed development, as shown in Figures 4.2 through 4.5, to the No-Build volumes shown in Figures 4.6 through 4.9. The resultant 2012 Build traffic forecasts are shown in Figures 4.10 through 4.13. Southdale YMCA Expansion 17 Traffic Impact Study SP a Ck THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Table 4.1 Forecast Trip Generation YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN Daily Volumes LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS (GFA) QUANTITY DAILY RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT 15% in Membership Growth 330 330 YMCA Expansion 495 1,000 GFA 21.9 22.88 50% 50% 0% 0 0% 0 251 251 TOTALS 0 0 581 581 AM Peak Hour LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS AM RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT 15% in Membership Growth 29 21 YMCA Expansion 495 1,000 GFA 21.9 1.62 61% 39% 0% 0 0% 0 22 14 TOTALS 0 0 51 35 PM Peak Hour LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY PM RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT 15% in Membership Growth 26 21 YMCA Expansion 495 1,000 GFA 21.9 1.45 37% 63% 0% 0 0% 0 12 20 TOTALS 0 0 38 41 Saturday Peak Hour LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY SAT RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT 15% in Membership Growth 14 22 YMCA Expansion 495 1,000 GFA 21.9 1.07 54% 46% 0% 0 0% 0 13 11 TOTALS 0 0 27 33 NOTES: 1. GFA = Gross Floor Area 2. YMCA Expansion Daily = 2.75 x normal ITE rate for existing 67.7 KSF x 15% growth 3. YMCA Expansion Peak Hours = 15% growth x existing entering and exiting volumes 4. All other trip generation rates based on "Trip Generation", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 8th Edition unless otherwise noted. 5. All other A.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 7:00 & 9:00 a.m.). 6. All other P.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 4:00 & 6:00 p.m.). 7. All other Saturday Midday Trip Generation is for the peak hour of generator 8. No Saturday peak hour trip generation is available for ITE Code 253 - assume Saturday is the same as pm peak hour. Southdale YMCA Expansion 18 Traffic Impact Study Spack, THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.1 Trip Distribution YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Southdale YMCA Expansion 19 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.2 Southdale YMCA Expansion 20 Traffic Impact Study AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Development YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN + North No Scale 4 4.,,,.• Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle NW 0 0 0 Yo r k A v e n u e So u th 0 1. t.20 o 0 0 el 4n 0 Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue Apartment North Driveway 0 mv YMCA North Driveway 0 0 CV 0 YMCA South Driveway Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 0 Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE YMCA North Driveway Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue YMCA South Driveway 0 0 0 N t* %20 •nn 0 20 K0t e 0 0 0 0 my Apartment North Driveway Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Development YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Southdale YMCA Expansion 21 Traffic Impact Study Apartment North Driveway r 0 0 0 Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 0 414 0 N Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE 0 nn 0 YMCA North Driveway 0 Apartment South Driveway YMCA South Driveway 4111 r , 0 0 Parklawn Avenue 4001 I 0 N 20 •nn • 0 r io Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.4 Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Development YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale 22 Traffic Impact Study Southdale YMCA Expansion Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.5 + North No Scale Daily Traffic Volumes Due to Development YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN 0 0 CD Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SE YMCA North Driveway Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue i n IYMCA South Driveway Apartment North Driveway Yo r k A v e nu e S o u th Southdale YMCA Expansion 23 Traffic Impact Study k A v e n u e So u th Apartment North Driveway 411 e 20 wit 0 0 0 Southdale YMCA Expansion 24 Traffic Impact Study Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE 2O. 0 0 0 60 YMCA North Driveway YMCA South Driveway 0 0 VI LO 0 I L. 4-10 4n 0 10 c 50 0 0 0 .4- 0 .1. n 10. 2O. Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue e 0 v- 0 Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.6 2012 AM Peak Hour No-Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Traffic Circle SE Traffic Circle SW 0 6, 4 CO Apartment North Driveway Apartment South Driveway YMCA North Driveway YMCA South Driveway k A v e n u e So u t h Traffic Circle NW ' Traffic Circle NE ,...io 7. 0 0 ID 01 N- '1:. I 4J 100 3 o nn 90 1.. Parklawn Avenue o >- Southdale YMCA Expansion 25 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.7 2012 PM Peak Hour No-Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN t North No Scale Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle SW Apartment South Driveway Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SE YMCA North Driveway YMCA South Driveway 0 0 NI" CO 0 0 Cc, 0 DI CD I,- It. 20 7 A.100 .50 I e 0 0 0 Apartment North Driveway Parklawn Avenue Southdale YMCA Expansion 26 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.8 2012 Saturday Peak Hour No-Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY 2012 Daily No-Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN Figure 4.9 + North No Scale ! Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle SE Traffic Circle SW YMCA North Driveway Apartment North Driveway I Apartment South Driveway YMCA South Driveway Parklawn Avenue I 3,600 1 k A v e n u e S o u t o >- Southdale YMCA Expansion 27 Traffic Impact Study .4In TNIO 4. 30 Parklawn Avenue Yo r k A v e n u e S o u t 90 0 r 80 Apartment North Driveway r YMCA South Driveway Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.10 + North No Scale 2012 AM Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE 40 _IT= 30 20. Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE Apartment South Driveway 0 t 20 0 CD 0 0 CO 0 tal YMCA North Driveway o ID ul c• t. 10 0 Southdale YMCA Expansion 28 Traffic Impact Study *.10 Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE Co 0 Co I 1 0 11, 0 0 0.. 0 YMCA North Driveway 0 0 0 0 LAI 90 my co Co Co CO Co I to 41n 1 0 AN--7-TON 10 YMCA South Driveway 100 1 1 I r Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.11 2012 PM Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale I t.n 30 w000. 20 0 0 < < CO < I t.n 10 . 0 n 10, 0 0 0 CO Apartment North Driveway Apartment South Driveway Parklawn Avenue 29 Traffic Impact Study Southdale YMCA Expansion H.:.) Am 20 •nnn 20 Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle NE +it rn 0 0 0 CI Co %- CD 0 Co 0 CV CO 414 20 n 10, Traffic Circle SW Traffic Circle SE 20 Yo r k A v e nu e S o u th Co Co CD 10 mt YMCA North Driveway L 120 .1In 0 r 60 ro 0. Co Co Co 0 CO 0 Co CO 411* Co Apartment North Driveway Co CO Co CoI. Apartment South Driveway YMCA South Driveway Co Co Co CI Co •t- Co Parklawn Avenue Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 4.12 2012 Saturday Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes YMCA Redevelopment Edina, MN North No Scale Southdale YMCA Expansion 30 Traffic Impact Study Spack THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY 2012 Daily Build Traffic Volumes Figure 4.13 YMCA Redevelopment North Edina, MN No Scale 0 Traffic Circle NE Traffic Circle SE Traffic Circle NW Traffic Circle SW YMCA North Driveway Apartment North Driveway Apartment South Driveway YMCA South Driveway Parklawn Avenue I 3,700 I Yo r k A v e n u e S o u th 31 Traffic Impact Study Southdale YMCA Expansion 5. Traffic and Improvement Analysis a. 2012 Level of Service Analysis The LOS results for the 2012 study hours are shown in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. These are based on the existing traffic control and lane configurations as shown in Figure 3.4. It is assumed all of the lane configurations and traffic control are the same between the No-Build and Build scenarios. Table 5.1 No Build LOS calculations use turning movement volumes from Figures 4.6, 4.7 & 4.8. Table 5.2 Build LOS calculations use turning movement volumes from Figures 4.10, 4.11 and 4.12. The LOS calculations were done using SYNCHROTM software. The complete LOS calculations are included in the Appendix. Table 5.1 — 2012 No Build Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS) Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour York Ave S & Parklawn Ave AID B/F A / E York Ave S & South YMCA Entrance A / A A / B A / B York Ave S & North YMCA Entrance A / D A / F A / D York Ave S & SE traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & NE traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & NW traffic circle A / B A / C A / B , York Ave S & SW traffic circle A / C A / C A / C Note: The first letter is the Level of Service grade for the overall intersection. The second letter is the Level of Service grade for the worst operating movement. Table 5.2 — 2012 Build Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS) Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour York Ave S & Parklawn Ave A / D C / F A / E York Ave S & South YMCA Entrance A / B A / B A / B York Ave S & North YMCA Entrance A / E D / F A / D York Ave S & SE traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & NE traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & NW traffic circle A / B A / C A / B York Ave S & SW traffic circle A / C A / C A / C Note: The first letter is the Level of Service grade for the overall intersection. The second letter is the Level of Service grade for the worst operating movement. All of the study intersections will operate acceptably at LOS D or better in all of the study scenarios. Based on level of service analyses, there may be vehicle stacking issues at the North YMCA entrance and on Parklawn Avenue. Vehicle stacking at these two intersections is addressed in the next section. Southdale YMCA Expansion 32 Traffic Impact Study Figures 4.9 and 4.13 show the 2012 daily volumes anticipated on York Avenue and Parklawn Avenue in the No-Build and Build scenarios. Based on calculations from the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual, a four lane divided roadway such as York Avenue will operate at LOS D if the road carries approximately 28,000 to 35,000 vehicles per day. A four lane undivided roadway such as Parklawn Avenue will operate at LOS D if the road carries approximately 15,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day. The daily traffic volumes will be below the daily volume thresholds for LOS D on York Avenue and Parklawn Avenue in both the 2012 No- Build and Build scenarios. b. Queuing Analysis Based on the Level of Service analyses above, the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue and York Avenue/North YMCA Entrance intersections may have significant queues of vehicles waiting to turn onto York Avenue in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. To determine the length of the queues in the 2012 Build scenario, a more detailed traffic analysis was performed with a SimTrafficTm micro-simulation model. The intersection traffic control and turn lanes from Figure 3.4 were used with the p.m. peak hour turning movement volumes in Figures 4.10 and 4.11. These inputs for the York Avenue corridor were transferred from SYNCHROTM to SinnTraffiem. The simulation software was seeded with a random number seed of 0, a seeding duration of 3 minutes, and a recording duration of 60 minutes. Then the simulation software was run and recorded five times with random number seeds of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; using a seeding duration of 3 minutes and a recording duration of 60 minutes. The stacking and delay results are contained in the Appendix. Table 5.3 shows a summary of the stacking results for the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue and York Avenue/North YMCA Entrance intersections in the 2012 Build a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Southdale YMCA Expansion 33 Traffic Impact Study Table 5.3 — 2012 Build Peak Hour Stacking Results York Ave/Parklawn Ave York Ave/North YMCA A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. Ea s t bo u nd I Left 70 ft (600 ft) 280 ft (600 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) Thru 70 ft (600 ft) 280 ft (600 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) Right 30 ft (600 ft) 170 ft (600 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) 50 ft (100 ft) We s tbo u nd Left 30 ft (150 ft) 40 ft (150 ft) 150 ft (600 ft) 220 ft (600 ft) Thru 30 ft (150 ft) 40 ft (150 ft) 150 ft (600 ft) 220 ft (600 ft) Right 30 ft (150 ft) 40 ft (150 ft) 150 ft (600 ft) 220 ft (600 ft) No r t hb o u n d _ Left 50 ft (150 ft) 50 ft (150 ft) 40 ft (100 ft) 40 ft (100 ft) Thru Oft (900 ft) Off (900 ft) Off (650 ft) Oft (650 ft) Right Oft (250 ft) Off (250 ft) Oft (650 ft) Off (650 ft) [ S o u t hb o u n d Left Oft (150 ft) 30 ft (150 ft) 60 ft (100 ft) 60 ft (100 ft) Thru Off (550 ft) Off (550 ft) Oft (550 ft) Oft (550 ft) Right 20 ft (225 ft) 20 ft (225 ft) Off (550 ft) Oft (550 ft) Notes: Approximate queue engths are in feet with the first value being the maximum queue reported by SimTrafficTm for the longest queue for that movement, regardless of which lane it occurs in. The second number in parentheses is the storage in feet for either the dedicated turn lane or the through distance to the next intersection. Storage lengths within parking lots are approximated based on length of total parking aisle. All of the maximum queues at the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue intersection will be contained within the existing storage lanes, as will the maximum queues at the York Avenue/North YMCA Entrance intersection. A maximum queue of approximately nine vehicles may occur in the p.m. peak hour at the North YMCA entrance within the parking lot waiting to exit onto York Avenue. This is not uncommon at parking lot driveways on busy roads such as York Avenue. The maximum queue at the south driveway is only forecast to be two vehicles. Patrons will learn to use the south driveway as well when going northbound during congested periods. Southdale YMCA Expansion 34 Traffic Impact Study The Mn/DOT crash database was reviewed (with the Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool). From January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008 there was one crash at the York Avenue/North YMCA Driveway intersection. It occurred on June 13, 2007 and was a rear end crash between two northbound vehicles. There is not a significant crash problem at the intersection that will be exacerbated by the expansion project. c. Traffic Control Needs Traffic signals or roundabouts should be installed at intersections when justified per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. None of the traffic volume warrants in the Manual will be met in the 2012 Build condition. In order to meet the Peak Hour Warrant (Warrant 3), the minor street would need to have 150 left turn volumes on one approach. None of the study intersections will meet this threshold. The westbound approach at the northern YMCA access will have 80 vehicles in the a.m. peak hour with little traffic growth after the redevelopment happens. The eastbound Parklawn Avenue approach to York Avenue will have 100 vehicles in the 2012 Build p.m. peak hour. If traffic grows in the study area, the York Avenue/Parklawn Avenue may be a long term candidate to be controlled by a traffic signal or a roundabout. No new traffic control devices are required for the YMCA site redevelopment. The existing stop sign control for traffic leaving the site should be maintained with the redevelopment. d. Parking Analysis The maximum number of occupied parking spaces was 177 during the study period. The facility will be expanded by approximately 32% with the proposed addition. Increasing the peak parking demand by 32%, results in the need for 234 parking stalls. Increasing the 234 stalls by 15% to account for additional membership growth, results in a maximum expected parking need of 269 stalls. The site is proposed to have 297 parking stalls after the expansion, which will be adequate for the peak parking demand. e. Transit Facilities There is a bus stop on York Avenue directly in front of the YMCA. Metro Transit routes 538, 539, and 578 serve the bus stop during the morning and evening rush hours. Downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America are directly accessible via these routes. In addition, these routes stop at the Southdale Transit Center where transfers Southdale YMCA Expansion 35 Traffic Impact Study uo p uedx 3 v o i AJ A o p p y in os 0 4' COSTING SITE KAN r PARKING COUNTS: 205 CARS WEST LOT 125 CARS EAST LOT 330 CARS TOTAL PA H IH RKING COUNTS: COUNTS: 185 CARS WEST LOT 112 CARS EAST LOT 297 CARS TOTAL AREA OF PAVING WC RK SITE OPTION A I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 IT Soutkniale YMCA Edina, Minnesota > CD B WB wiccH at& 330 St. **Stmt.* WO ,Stt 1,11r 0102 > cm.* CD _• 3 haul 45V e_ - 0 =.7= 0 3 0,) OVALLO in (1) IDA 0 1701061 AO C.A. SHEET INDEX SITED PLANS A0a C.***0301381a***i EXISTING CURB EXISTING CURB CUT TO REMAIN CUT TO REMPJN * * ° OPPON AWE PON TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW Wednesday, June 2, 2010 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on June 2, 2010. Staff present included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, City Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator and Police Traffic Supervisor. From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and 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 June 15, 2010, Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which staff recommends approval of request: None for Wednesday, June 2, 2010 meeting. SECTION B: Requests on which staff recommends denial of request: 1. Request for a stop sign for north/south Brookview Avenue traffic at the intersection of West 55th Street. This request comes from a resident on Brookview Avenue who is concerned with traffic safety at this uncontrolled intersection. Requestor feels that there is a lot of cut through traffic on Brookview that is driving too fast and feels the stop sign would help slow vehicles down. The requestor says that the traffic creates a safety issue for children and other pedestrians. Brookview Avenue is a 28-foot wide north/south street with no curb, gutter or sidewalks. A traffic study was conducted as a result of this request to obtain current data. Brookview has a Mon.-Fri. average daily traffic count of 300 vehicles and an 85th-percentile speed of 23.7 mph. West 55th Street is a 26-foot wide east/west street with no curb, gutter or sidewalks. West 55th Street has an average daily traffic count of 127 vehicles with an 85th-percentile speed of 14.6 mph. This study, compared Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 1 of 3 June 2, 2010 G:\Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets \Traffic\Traffie Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries\10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 06-02-10.doc to one taken in 2002, shows that the volumes and speeds have remained constant. There have been no accidents reported at this intersection in the past five years. A similar request was made on June 24, 2002, and was denied by the Council on August 20, 2002 for lack of warrants. Volumes and speeds have remained virtually the same since 2002. Residential stop sign warrants are not met at the intersection of Brookview Avenue and West 55th Street. Staff feels that there is a need to establish the "right-of-way" at this intersection, and because warrants are not met for residential stop signs, staff would recommend the installation of 'Yield" signs on West 55th Street for both east and west bound traffic at Brookview Avenue so the right-of-way would be made clear. Staff recommends the denial of the request for residential "Stop" signs for Brookview Avenue for lack of warrants and recommends the approval of the installation of "Yield" signs for east/west traffic on West 55th Street to better define traffic right-of-way. 2. Request to place specified time restrictions for parking on Barrie Road north of West 65th Street, north of the bus shelter (across from 6400 Barrie Road). Parking is allowed on both sides of the street on this section of roadway. Requestor is a resident that lives in the 6300 block of Barrie Road who states that people using the express bus to downtown Minneapolis park their vehicles and leave them longer than six hours. Requestor states that there are 10-15 vehicles per day that park in this location during the week (not a problem on weekends). Parking is restricted on all other parts of Barrie Road between West 66th Street and Heritage Drive. Barrie Road is a 36-foot wide city street with curb, gutter and no sidewalks. The Mon.-Fri. average daily traffic count is 1,364 with an 85th-percentile speed of 29.0 mph. There has been one reported property damage accident that occurred on July 2, 2003, at approximately 8:00 am. (The driver struck a parked car from behind and was cited for driver inattention or distraction). Staff has contacted the area supervisor for Metro Transit who stated that the bus company will be placing fliers on a daily basis on all cars parked on this section of Barrie Road starting Monday, June 7, 2010. The fliers Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 2 of 3 June 2, 2010 GA.EngineeringlInfrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Surnmaries\10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 06-02-10.doc will inform drivers of the Edina City Ordinance that prohibits cars from parking for more than six consecutive hours. The fliers will also give drivers suggestions for alternative parking. This one block area of B arrie Road is the only place that Colony residents and their guests can park. All other sections have restrictions. Staff will continue to monitor parking in this area. Edina Police have been advised and have stated that they will enforce the parking ordinance. The requestor has been advised on the procedure for reporting violations to the police. Staff recommends the denial of the request to restrict parking on the 6400 block of Barrie Road. Staff will continue to monitor this area. SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. None for Wednesday, June 2, 2010 meeting. SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled: 1. Twenty-seven phone calls requesting information concerning various traffic safety issues. 2. Three phone calls from residents with parking concerns. 3. Three phone calls from residents concerned with the speed of traffic on their streets. 4. A request from Edina Public Works to restripe Link Road at Vernon Avenue in order to widen the turn lane (buses were damaging curb). 5. Sixteen traffic studies were conducted on various streets in the past 30 days. Also, a 10-day study conducted in the 58th & Chowen neighborhood. 6. Request from a real estate agent for traffic volumes on 491/2 Street and France Avenue. 7. A meeting with Sgt. Phil Larsen to discuss Radar Trailer locations throughout the city. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 3 of 3 June 2, 2010 GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries \10 TSAC & Min\Traffie Safety Review 06-02-10.doc TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW Wednesday, July 7, 2010 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 7, 2010. Staff present included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator and Police Traffic Supervisor. From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and 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 July 20, 2010, Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which staff recommends approval of request: 1. Request to put up 30 MPH Speed Limit signs along Parklawn Avenue between York Ave and France Avenue. This request comes from a resident on Coventry Lane who is concerned with the speed of vehicles on Parklawn Avenue. Parklawn Avenue, between York Avenue and France Avenue is a Collector Roadway with a Mon.-Fri. average daily traffic count of 3,391 and an 85th percentilespeed of 31.4 mph. There have been two possible injury and one property damage accident reported along this roadway in the past five years. Parklawn Avenue does not have speed limit signs on this section of road. Because of the posted speed of 40 mph on France Avenue and 35 mph on York Avenue, staff feels that speed limit signs are warranted on this section of Parklawn Avenue. Staff recommends the installation of 30 mph speed limit signs on Parklawn Avenue between York Avenue and France Avenue for both east and west bound traffic. Sign placement to be determined by the sign coordinator. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 1 of 4 July 7, 2010 GA.Engineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffie Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries\ 10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 07-07-10.doc 2. Request to enhance the "No Parking" signage on the west end of Lexington Street just east of St. Johns Avenue. This request comes from a resident on Oak Drive whose back yard abuts Lexington Street and states that the no parking zone is frequently ignored by people attending events at Wooddale Church. The north side of Lexington Street is currently signed "No Parking Sundays 8AM — 1PM." There are several of these signs along Lexington Street but none along the requestor's property line. Requestor feels that people think that the no parking ends with the last installed sign and park along his property line. Requestor feels enhancing or adding additional signage would solve this problem. Staff concurs and feels that a "No Parking Here to Corner" sign, thirty feet to the east of the intersection of Lexington Street and St. Johns Avenue would end the confusion. Staff recommends the approval of the installation of a "No Parking Here to Corner" sign on the north side of Lexington Street, thirty feet east of St. Johns Avenue. SECTION B: Requests on which staff recommends denial of request: 1. Request for a "Children at Play" sign to be placed in the area of York Park (55t and York Ave). This request comes from a resident on the 5500 block of York Ave who states that York Park is seeing a higher use due to the installation of a ball field. He feels that the sign would alert motorists to children in the area. Staff is no longer putting up this type of advisory sign. Staff recommends the denial of a "Children at Play" sign in the area of York Park due to past practices. 2. Request to paint a center line in the intersection of Grove Street and Merold Drive. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 2 of 4 July 7, 2010 GA.Engineering\InfrastructureStreets\Traffic\Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries\10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 07-07-10.doc This request comes from a resident on Merold Drive who is concerned with the safety of motorists and pedestrians at this intersection. She states that cars often make "lazy" turns and drive into the oncoming lane while making the turn off of Merold Drive onto Grove Street. Requestor is concerned that this may cause an accident. Both Merold Drive and Grove Street are 30-foot wide city streets with curb, gutter, and no sidewalks. There are no parking restrictions and there have been no reported accidents in the past five years. It has been the policy and past practice of staff not to paint residential intersections. Staff feels that center striping residential streets would be costly, require high maintenance and would be not insure proper driving habits of motorists. Staff recommends the denial of the request for center striping at the intersection of Merold Drive and Grove Street due to past practice. SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. 1. Request for a Pedestrian sign crossing the north bound ramp onto Highway 100 at Vernon Avenue. Referred to Minnesota Department of Transportation. 2. Request for a Pedestrian Crosswalk in front of 3600 Minnesota Drive. Staff is in contact with the City of Bloomington on this request. 3. Request for a stop sign at the intersection of Limerick Lane and Brook Drive. A traffic study will be conducted on all legs of this intersection in September after the school year begins to obtain needed data. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 3 of 4 July 7,2010 GAEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets\Traffic\Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries\ 10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 07-07-10.doc SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled: 1. Thirty-eight phone calls from residents requesting information on various traffic safety issues. 2. Two requests for temporary "No Parking" signs at two construction sites. 3. Two phone calls from real estate agents requesting road counts on various streets. 4. Eight traffic studies were completed on eight different streets. 5. Three requests from residents regarding clear-view issues. 6. Two calls from residents regarding the resurfacing of France Avenue. 7. One phone call from a resident regarding the six-hour parking ordinance. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 4 of 4 July 7, 2010 GEngineering\Infrastructure\Streets \Traffic \Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries\ 10 TSAC & Min\Traffic Safety Review 07-07-10.doc PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT (PRT) WORKSHOP Wednesday, August 18, 2010 Radisson University Hotel — Minneapolis Humphrey Ballroom 615 Washington Ave S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55414 FINAL AGENDA Purpose: The purpose of this workshop is to share responses to Mn/DOT's request for PRT information and to allow participants to understand PRT benefits and barriers to its implementation. Workshop participants will also explore the viability of PRT in Minnesota. 8:00 am. Registration and Continental Breakfast 8:30 a.m. Welcome and Opening Comments Moderator: Laurie McGinnis, Director, Center for Transportation Studies Speakers • Tom Sorel, Commissioner, Mn/DOT • Derrell Turner, Division Administrator, FHWA • Jeff Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission • Arlene McCarthy, Director, Metropolitan Council 9:15 a.m. Workshop Goals and Context & Summary of RFI Responses • Mukhtar Thakur, Director, Office of Multimodal Innovation, Mn/DOT 10:00 a.m. RFI Responders Comments & Reactions from Attendees 11:00 a.m. Break 11:15 a.m. Policy Issues Panel Discussion Moderator: Tim Henkel, Assistant Commissioner, Mn/DOT Panelists • Steve Elkins, Council Member, Bloomington City Council • Representative Frank Hornstein, MN State Legislature (invited) • Senator David Senjem, MN State Legislature • Dennis Sweet, Treasurer, Citizens for PRT • Barb Thoman, Executive Director, Transit for Livable Communities 12:30 p.m. Lunch & Keynote Presentation • Curt Johnson, President, Citistates Group 1:30 p.m. Facilitated Group Discussions • Ferrol Robinson, Research Fellow, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs (Informal breaks) 3:30 p.m. Summary Comments and Next Steps • Ferrol Robinson • Mukhtar Thakur 4:00 p.m. Adjourn Personal Rapid Transit • Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) is a public transportation concept that may offer on-demand, non-stop transportation using small independent vehicles on a network of specially built guideways. • Also known as Automated Transit Network, Group Rapid Transit or PodCars, PRT vehicles typically carry four to six passengers, are computer-controlled, and operate on, or are suspended below, an elevated guideway. • Because the vehicles would be lightweight, the necessary infrastructure may cost less to build, require less space and consume less energy than conventional transit systems. PRY in Minnesota • Currently, there are no PRT systems operating in Minnesota. • In November 2009, Mn/DOT hosted a PRT symposium in Rochester, Minn., that brought together community leaders and stakeholders, transportation officials and industry experts in PRT. • Mn/DOT's role, initially, is to facilitate the study of the potential for and the feasibility of PRT in the state. • Mn/DOT issued a Request for Interest in February 2010 from local government agencies, companies, universities and other organizations interested in demonstrating the viability and benefits of personal rapid transit in Minnesota. Deadline for responding was May. • Mn/DOT received 21 responses from cities, technology providers, consultants and a citizens group. For additional information see http://www.dot.state.mn.us/transit/prt/PRT RFI 060210.pdf. • Next step is to gather interested parties via a workshop on Aug. 18, 2010. The purpose of this workshop is to share responses to Mn/DOT's request for PRT information and to allow participants to understand PRT benefits and barriers to its implementation. Benefits, Questions to be Answered • What are pods and how do they compare to today's automobiles? • Will PRT transportation be more convenient since vehicles would be available on-demand and not tied to a schedule? • Will trips be quicker since vehicles can go directly to their destination without stopping? • Will the lower weight of PRT vehicles be more environmentally friendly than larger vehicles since the pods are expected to use less energy for slowing and accelerating? • Will the lower weight of PRT vehicles require less intrusive infrastructure and smaller easements, resulting in possibly lower construction costs? For More Information Contact: Mukhtar Thakur Multimodal Innovations Office Director 651-366-4691 mukhtar,thakur@statesmn.us Ono Datittation...0 Federal Impacts/Funding Support • Mn/DOT has offered a Letter of Support for Winona's Federal Grant Application for the FTA Urban Circulator Grant Process, advertised in the Federal Register dated December 2009. • Neither the FHWA nor FTA provides traditional funding sources to fund PRT planning or construction initiatives or projects via traditional funding sources. Current installations of PRT networks Currently there are no PRT* networks in passenger operation. Some notes: • *Morgantown, W. Va., has a "quasi-PRT" network that has been in operation since 1975 and serves 15,000 riders per day. The vehicles hold 20 passengers, but the trips can be direct without stops. • There are PRT networks planned or under construction, including the $40 million London Heathrow Airport system (undergoing passenger trials) and Masdar City, a suburb of Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates. • San Jose, Calif., also is investigating the feasibility of a PRT system. They received 19 responses to an RFI they published in 2008. They are moving ahead with an RFP for a $4 million feasibility study at the Norman Mineta Airport and a transit station. Potential transportation system integration ideas COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY DIAGRAM First Train Mile 4-- Walk PRT Station JOB CENTER/ SHOPPING COMPLEX/ MEDICAL & EDUCATIONAL CAMPUSES BikelScooter Other-1 PRT SYSTEM Last Mile & Mid-day Trips Short Pickup Carpool Long /First Mile Carpool N First Sus Mile Source: Ferrol Robinson, University of Minnesota PRT Workshop August 18, 2010 Discussion Topics 1. Potential Impediments to PRT Implementation • Unproven technology; too space-age • Safety concerns: failure to stop, stranding passengers on guideway • Visual impacts and impacts on built environment • Security concerns about sharing rides with strangers • Uncertainty about who pays for capital and operating costs • Concerns about passenger-carrying capacity • Other concepts? 2. Anticipated PRT Benefits • Ability to serve "last-mile/first-mile service gap • Complements other transit modes; can help increase ridership levels • Level of service competitive with autos in niche applications • Can substitute for many auto trips and reduce auto-dependency and congestion • Green technology: low energy use and low local emissions • Minimum use of surface land • Other potential benefits 3. Principles for PRT Deployment in Minnesota • Who finances testing/demonstration? Development? Implementation? • What financial models—traditional and innovative—are available? • What is the potential role for public-private partnerships? • Should a preferred technology be chosen? Open architecture? • Who would be the system operator? • What statutory or regulatory issues need to be addressed? • What policy should govern possible use of Mn/DOT's right of way? • Other principles? Goals: • Sharing of Response Information Received Exploration of PRT The world moves, and ideas that were once good are not always good. Personal Rapid Transit PRT Workshop August 18 2010 Radisson, Mpls •Mukhtar • umook-tar" Thakur P.E. Director- Office of Multi Modal Innovation MilzVa.14.33X,:-"t;:tj =,04:4Y-7 1 Opening Comments Share Overview Info from Responses Received Comments from Attendees Policy Issues Moderated Panel Lunch and Keynote Facilitated Discussion This Presentation Agenda -Timeline of Status in Mn/DOT -Notes about Applicability of PRT Mode -Summary of Responses Received -PRT Regionally, Statewide, Nationally and in the UK 2 Mn/DOT- Whats happened so far? - Nov 2009* Symposium in Rochester, MN - Request for Interest (RFI) published in State Register of February 08, 2010 -Deadline for responding was May 18, 2010 - Received 21 responses - Responses are on website: http://vvww.dot.state.mn.us/transit/ - *prior to this date, sometime in the '70's and '80's Mn/DOT had looked at PRT mode Purpose of RFI "The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) seeks input from local government agencies, companies, universities, and/or organizations (as responders) interested in providing information about the viability and benefits of Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) in Minnesota." 3 Mn/DOT Update on Personal Rapid Transit Thus far we have noted the following: • Don't view PRT as being in competition with line-haul bus or LRT services. • That PRT may be competitive with feeder/shuttle buses in niche applications. • Don't see PRT being implemented as a "network" around the city. • Complement traditional modes of transit. • That there are issues that need to be addressed when trying to establish the feasibility of a PRT application, namely: aesthetics, how it fits in the current land form and surrounding land uses, ROW, and how it is going to be funded, O&M costs, among others. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY DIAGRAM Train PRT Station-I. First Bus Walk JOB CENTER/ SHOPPING COMPLEX/ MEDICAL & EDUCATIONAL CAMPUSES Bike/Scooter Mile Short Pickup Carpool Other-* Long /First Mile Carpool PRT SYSTEM test Mile & Mid-day Trips 4 Responses Received From: Vendors/PRT "Technology" Providers 1. 2getthere - The Netherlands 2. Unimodal Systems - Moffett Field, CA 3. VECTUS - Uppsala, Sweden 4. Automated Transportation - Hartland, WI 5. Composite Solutions UK - United Kingdom 6. PRT Minnesota, Inc. - Maple Grove, MN 7. PRT International, LLC - Hopkins, MN 8. ULTra PRT - Berkeley, CA & Bristol, UK 9. ALDEN DAVe Systems - East Falmouth, MA 10. MISTER PRT - Opole, Poland 11. Honeywell - Golden Valley, MN 1. Citizens for PRT - Roseville, MN 1. HDR Engineering - Minneapolis, MN 2. Aerospace Corp. - Pasadena, CA 3. SRF Consulting and Krech Ojard & Associates - Minneapolis, MN 4. Mathews Industrial Mgmt. - Minneapolis, MN 5. PRT Consulting - Franktown, CO Advocates City and Airport Entities 1. City of Maple Grove - Maple Grove, MN 2. City of Bloomington - Bloomington, MN 3. Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) 4. City of Winona - Winona, MN Consultants / Researchers Information Pulled from Responses and Requested in the RFI • Proposed PRT concepts and objectives • Public involvement approach • Integration with and impact on existing transit systems and right-of-way • Scope of the system (track/guide way length, number of stations, number of vehicles, maintenance facility) • Alternatives and/or preliminary engineering analysis • Technology utilized • Estimate of capital costs of some example options • Estimate of operating and maintenance costs of some example options • Estimate of revenue generation of some example options • Anticipated benefits from the demonstration • Proposed public-private partnership arrangements • Implementation plan and schedule • Partnership opportunities and overall quality of scope and design concept 'AL 5 Vendor: Unimodal Systems Response Summary • Estimated Costs: • Technology Utilized: Magnetically levitated Linear Synchronous Motor (LSM) • Financing : Have interest from private financing entities seeking PPP • Headway: 1/2 second for projected max passenger capacity • Passenger Capacity: 3 pass/car, 21,000 people/hour (projected max passenger capacity) • Speeds: • O&M costs: • Other notes: prototype on a 42 ft. maglev guide way located at NASA Ames Research Center Vendor: Vectus • Estimated Costs: $21m Per mile (Approx.), Elevated • Technology Utilized: Track bound driverless vehicles, linear motor possible • Financing: MOU for PPP with Suncheon City in South Korea • Headway: 3 seconds and lower is possible • Passenger Capacity: More than 1000 veh/hour on single track segment • Speeds: 30 mph • O&M costs: • Other notes: Test track in Sweden Safety Standards followed 6 Vendor: PRT Minnesota • Estimated Costs: $8m - $10m per mile approx. ($25m for a 3 mile system) • Technology Utilized: 3rd gen PRT under development, LIM propulsion • Financing : Suggest public funds for a trail system • Headway: 0.5 —2 sec. • Passenger Capacity: 3 —4 seats/car; 1,800— 7,200 veh/hour line capacity; 21,600 passenger/hr max passenger capacity/line • Speeds: 20 — 60 mph • O&M costs: • Other notes: Potential PRT System for Maple Grove— 13 stations, 3.5 mile circulator and Bloomington idea mentioned Vendor: PRT International, LLC • Estimated Costs: $10m - $15m per mile of guide way • Technology Utilized: Electromagnetic propulsion through LIMs • Financing : • Headway: • Passenger Capacity: • Speeds: • O&M costs: • Other notes: Ready to develop procurement documents and to construct and operate a test facility 7 Vendor: Automated Transportation • Estimated Costs: • Technology Utilized: Dual mode buses and personal vehicles travel manually on existing roadways and driverless on electrified, computer controlled roadways • Financing : Revenue recd. from tolls will pay costs of public transit vehicles, installation privately funded, R/W by Govt. action • Headway: • Passenger Capacity: • Speeds: • O&M costs: • Other notes: D.T. Mpls. with MOA connections with lowest possible need for public finance Vendor: ULTra PRT Estimated Costs: $13m per mile of guideway Technology Utilized: Electric car (Battery Powered) Financing : PPP a possibility Headway: Start with 6 sec. and then progressively lowered Passenger Capacity: London Heathrow 800 passenger/hr Speeds: London Heathrow -30 mph O&M costs: Approx. $3m per year for example Edina System Other notes: s' All weather grid for MN weather conditions System compatible with Federal and State PRT standards as well as National Fire Escape Code Example PRT concepts for Edina, St. Mary's Hospital/Rochester system and St. Paul Ford Plant Site 8 Vendor: ALDEN DAVe Systems (ADS) • Estimated Costs: Said to cost 50% less than a PRT system since no stations and guideways • Technology Utilized: Dual mode Autonomous Vehicle (under operator control or remote control) • Financing : • Headway: • Passenger Capacity: • Speeds: • O&M costs: • Other notes: Company is in early stages of planning a prototype demo for this technology Vendor: Composite Solutions UK Estimated Costs: Technology Utilized: LIMs, suspended PRT System that uses lightweight composite materials Financing : Community Interest Company (CIC) Headway: 1 second; 3,600 cars/hr in each direction (theoretical max throughput) Passenger Capacity: 4-6 pass/car, 18,000 passengers/hr in each direction (theoretical max throughput) Speeds: 30 mph O&M costs: Other notes: 9 Vendor: MISTER PRT • Estimated Costs: $8m per Km (- $13m per mile) for Ithaca, NY proposal • Technology Utilized; MISTER - Metropolitan Individual System of Transportation on an Elevated Rail • Financing : Equity stake possible, zero cost to extend after pilot done • Headway: • Passenger Capacity; 5 pass/car; 3,000 - 10,000 person per direction per hour (high realistic capacity) • Speeds: 30 mph • O&M costs: Approx. $700,000 per mile for Ithaca, NY proposal • Other notes: Proposal made to City of Ithaca, NY Vendor: 2getthere • Estimated Costs: Euro 4m to 8m per km ($5m - $10m) per km; $8m - $16m per mile • Technology Utilized: CyberCab (PRT concept), ParkShuttle (GRT concept) • Financing : • Headway: • Passenger Capacity: 4 - 6 pass./veh, 400 - 600 pphpd peak hour capacity (CyberCab); 20 - 24 pass./veh, 400 - 1200 pphpd peak hour capacity (ParkShuttle) • Speeds: 25 mph • O&M costs: Yearly costs are 8 - 10% of investment • Other notes: Built cars for MASDAR City PRT demo system 10 7 E4ri. 934— A P), RV. , Consultants / Researchers Honeywell • Brings together expertise in many areas relevant to PRT including: - Guidance, navigation and control - Real-time safety critical system design - Large scale distributed control system and optimization - Sensors and wireless - Safety and surveillance - Condition based maintenance Citizens for PRT • Can help provide public participation and education about how PRT can contribute to Minnesota's transportation system. Consultants / Researchers HDR Engineering • Proposes to be potential PRT or P3 advisors either through a formal contractual role or as members of an advisory committee Aerospace Corp. • Offering a model for comprehensive, noncommercial, institutional support that is believed to be a crucial component in any effort to fully and fairly evaluate the potential of a PRT system and, if found to be viable, guide their development • A team led by Aerospace has been selected along with a commercial transportation consultant to advise the City of San Jose Department of Transportation in studying the feasibility of a PRT system for a specific application serving San Jose Mineta International Airport and nearby mass transit stations 11 Consultants / Researchers SRF Consulting and Krech Ojard & Associates • Project proposals are said to have been prepared or are under development for specific PRT projects that include system scope, technologies, estimated capital and maintenance costs, revenue, plans and schedules but it will remain confidential at this time Mathews Industrial Mgmt, Inc. • This responder has mentioned that it can: — Assist in setting up criteria for proposed PRT projects or PRT project planning — Identify design gaps in proposed PRT systems PRT Consulting • Proposing to consult in PRT efforts including assisting in determining goals and objectives, helping find what public really wants in a transit system, helping discriminate between responses received to RFI, providing independent modeling, simulations, route and station planning and feasibility analyses Cities/Public Entities City of Maple Grove • Looking to potentially be a helpful partner in the process of understanding the place for PRT technology within Minnesota. City of Bloomington • Looking to discuss key questions regarding PRT including financial viability, system safety, permitting, use of public ROW, and how the system's fit into the overall transportation network. MAC • A verbal expression of interest in exploring the mode was given. City of Winona • City of Winona recently submitted a grant application to the FTA for a PRT Lab and Partnership Center. The City is looking forward to collaborating with Mn/DOT and participating in future discussions about PRT viability, benefits, and development in the State. 12 Interesting to Note • PRT system technologies — Hanging pods vs. pods that travel along a guideway or track — Magnetically levitated pods vs. motor driven pods — True PRT systems vs. quasi PRT systems — Fare collection • Cost of systems (range is $8m-$21m per mile*) • Financing of systems ideas — (Govt, PPP, Private and Community Interest Company) (*-Note- These are more like "guestimates" or early planning level costs) Interesting Notes.. cont. •Aesthetics of various systems •Level of PRT experience among the various vendors and consultants •Speeds 25 mph - 60 mph •Headways are from 0.5s to 10s (This has design implications) •Timeline Suggested: 15 months from NTP to 48 months - to revenue service. 13 Model of the London Vehicle (Photo by ULTRA) "What we know about PRT Regionally, Statewide, Nationally, & in the UK" In the Metro Region • City of Bloomington has had discussions/ presentations from three different PRT related groups. • Maple Grove is said to have discussions about developing the parcel near the Gravel Pit with a crossing over 694. • Mn/DOT has heard of or seen printed sketches of proposals for: - Ford Plant Site — connections to Hiawatha Light Rail Station - Edina - Richfield - Bloomington (in combination) 14 Statewide City of Winona is interested in pursuing a PRT demonstration project: - Winona has submitted for a Federal (PRT) grant - A sketch shows crossing of TH 61 - The City Council is supportive - Mn/DOT has issued letter of support for their Grant Application Nationally City of San Jose, CA is exploring PRT at their airport. - RFI issued October 2008- 19 responses received; and - RFP issued for -$4M study - ongoing. ($1.8m Reported in NYT) There may be others which have not been reported in tracked media. 15 Nationally New Jersey (Feb 07) & Virginia (Dec 08) Had a Legislative Study Performed Reports stated: • PRT Systems are approaching but not yet ready for deployment. • Many of the technical components needed to support PRT systems are commercially available and are used in other industries. (NJ) • Global PRT interest and development programs are expanding(NJ) • A fully operational PRT system is needed to demonstrate the theoretical benefits of PRT and establish commercial readiness. (NJ and VA) Nationally (New Jersey and Virginia reports.. .continued) • A comprehensive technology research and demonstration program is needed to develop a PRT system. • Construction of PRT underway in two locations. • Several other cities in the world are seriously considering the development of PRT systems. • Many challenges that face PRT in terms of large scale deployment such as: - technological limitations - a very small number of manufacturers worldwide - proprietary system components that limit open competition and sustainability 16 In the UK - Connects two Park & Ride locations to Terminal 5 approx. 1 mile away - Costs stated to be approx. $40M - Start date has been delayed at least twice, now stated to be 2010 London's Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 Station (Photo by ULTIIA) • PRT "demoline" start date is this year at London's Heathrow Airport. • Stations are like bus stops. Destination selected by Smart Card and touch screen. (Smart Card keeps info on passengers for personalized service.) Stop at London Park and Ride • For typical 1 mile journey approximately 3 minutes, up to 30mph, 4 passengers + luggage. • Expected to be very reliable. • Pods run either at ground level or elevated guideways supported by lightweight steel structures. Photos by Mukhtar Stop at London Park and Ride 17 In the UK (continued) • In the UK these points were noted about PRT: - Less disruption to ongoing operations at Heathrow; Faster construction due to smaller scale; - Scalability; - Opportunity to extend to Airport Environment and other terminals; and - Low Emissions. Personal Rapid Transit Car= similar to London Airport (Photo by ULM) 18 Concept Showing Sky web Express Vehicles Passing a Station A Vectus Vehicle on the Test Track ln Uppsala, Sweden F London Heathrow PRT Photos by Vectus, Skyweb, ULTRA, and Mukhtar London Heathrow Guide way MISTER Prototype on Display in Opole, Poland (photo by MISTER) 19 Model of the Masdar Vehicle (photo by 2getthere) A JPOD Vehicle Option (photo by JPODS) 20 21 PRT Workshop August 18, 2010 Radisson University Curtis Johnson Citistates Group Why spend time and money? • Getting the transportation question right • Access — not just mobility • Fitting the emerging urban form • Intensifying use of activity-rich zones — Reducing unwelcome auto use — Reducing air and noise pollution — Raising quality of life 2 Where does PRT fit? • Large last-mile zones — Airports, military bases, recreational parks — Any place unwalkable where PRT beats driving Minnesota? MSP Rochester Winona Southdale A quota of quandaries Governance and Finance Project Initiation / Management System Operation Capacity for Collaboration 3 The Minnesota Questions -- should we? ---can we? ---will we? 4 oving Cities Toward a Sustainable Future Years Ahead of Other PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) Systems ULTra is the first PRT system to turn a 21st-century travel concept into reality, Delivering 200-mpg transit with zero local emissions, ULTra is an environmentally sound answer to traffic congestion. Developed and tested over 12 years, ULTra will debut at London Heathrow Airport in Spring 2010. The Heathrow system has 100% private sector funding from BAA (formerly the British Airports Authority). How It Works Jra is ideal circulator transit for office parks, airports, universities, and other major activity centers. Saving time and energy, it uses an automated fleet of five-seat electric vehicles moving along a network of elevated tracks to carry passengers non-stop, point to point. Stations are located on track separated from the main track so that stopped vehicles do not Interfere with the free flow of passing traffic. Comfortable and quiet, the vehicles travel to personally selected destina- tions at 25mph. Commuters need only relax and enjoy the ride. The system operates only in response to user requests, A Friend to City Planning Offering tremendous design flexibility, ULTra can readily adapt to irregularly-shaped areas or narrow corridors, and fits both emerging and existing buildings and developments. "If this [PRT] is as successful as I think it will be, this could be a big breakthrough, which could transform our cities in ways that we can't yet see:' Sir Peter Hall, AUTHOR: CITIES OF TOMORROW Laura Stuchinksy, San Jose DOT Sustainability Officer: One of the advantages of a PRT network "is that it offers a lot of flexibility. It's much less expensive than traditional transit. It doesn't serve the same needs as HSR or BART. It's a complement to those systems." "There is so much development going on right in this area. In 10 years we'll have gridlock at 101/85. PRT will be like a dam breaking. We're all frustrated with current transit in the area." - Google employee. --3504Bmwtsr PRT for Dntn, Shoreline, Google, and NASA PRT makes carpooling, Caltrain, HSR, VIA light rail, 1 the "last mile problem." CA PRT proposals are emerging VIA bus, and Google bus more effective, by solving for San Jose Airport, Alameda Point, and Santa Cruz, For Mountain View, it makes sense to consider PRT in long-range planning. Market research for two transit- served Bay Area office parks forecasts a PRT-induced commuting mode reduction from more than 80% single occupancy vehicle (SOV) down to 45% SOV. Google's "transportation platform" (Google Transit, Google Ride Finder, Android GPS phones, etc) can help glue all the green transportation options together. A rough PRT system sketch is provided on this page. The orange portion has 8.5 miles of guideway and 24 stations. PRT is faster than a car: 6-minute PRT trip time from Caltrain to iPlex beats 8-minute driving time (assuming light traffic). Google co-founder Larry Page's U of M commencement speech: "When I was here at Michigan, I wanted to build a PRT system on campus to replace the buses. It was a futuristic way of solving our transportation problem. Many things that people labor hard to do now, like cooking, cleaning, and driving will require much less human time in the future. That is, if we 'have a healthy disregard for the impossible' and actually build new solutions." MK. Mtn, Advanced Transport Systems, Inc. 2340 Roosevelt Avenue Berkeley, CA 94703 ultraprt@ultraprt.com www.ultraprt.com More convenience, less congestion. Lower environmental impact, greater quality of life. "It is short sighted to think that significant changes in land use and regional structure can be realized without fundamentally reorder- ing our circulation system. If you think about what you'd want from the ideal transit technol- ogy, it's PRT:' Peter Calthorpe,Au-nioa: THE NEXT AMERICAN METROPOLIS ULTra- Transforms Transportation • Immediate private, point-to-point service • Reliable, predictable, and congestion-free nonstop travel that is faster than driving • Comfortable and attractive seating for up to four chosen companions • Smooth, swift, and relaxing computer-driven rides on protected tracks that are far safer than car travel • Easy access for people with bikes, wheel chairs, backpacks, and briefcases • Practical first- and last-mile solution that makes walking, cycling, carpooling, and transit more effective. ULTra Enhances the Environment • Zero local emissions • Produces three times less carbon than a car per passenger mile • Battery-powered ULTra vehicles are quiet like other electric vehicles. 2,0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Urban Urban bus car 75% carbon emissions benefit over the automobile ULTra Remakes Cities • Less congestion as ULTra frees up road capacity and parking space • Reclamation of city areas now dominated by the automobile • Small and unobtrusive vehicles and guideways minimize visual intrusion and conform to modern architecture • Low-impact infrastructure requires fewer resources as compared with other forms of transport, yielding lower costs and faster construction time. Dimensions cr: Wheelchair Accessibility ULTra is fully bike and wheelchair accessible, complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Capacity Each ULTra guideway loop can serve 4,000 passengers per hour. ULTra systems can have multiple loops, further increasing system capacity. Ma p le p er Pa s s e n g er k i n UlTra Rall