Memo- Presentation Of Report - Bellgrove ImprovementMemorandum
Office of the City Manager
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Steven C. Mielke, City Manager
Date: October 10, 1997
Subject: Presentation of Report — Bellgrove Improvement Association
Arrangements have been made for a presentation by the Bellgrove Improvement
Association at the October 14 work session. The . presentation will be concerning their
report on the Analysis of Feasibility Study by SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
It is anticipated that the association will present the report so that the Council has it
along with SRF's report when discussions are held on October 21.
Mayorccbellgroverpt
City of Hopkins
Minnetonka Boulevard & Hopkins Crossroad Intersection
Analysis of Feasibility Study
of SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Prepared and Presented by
Bellgrove Improvement Association
Board of Directors
August 1997
ti
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
. The predictable conclusions of the "study" are unsupported by the existing data and
meaningful studies.
• Traffic through Hopkins east of the intersection (and traffic south of the interesection)
has decreased substantially since the completion of T -394 and is now below 1984
levels
. The numbers and severity of accidents has not increased since 1990
. There have been no fatalities, no serious personal injury, child, or bicycle accidents at
the intersection; most accidents are minor "fender- benders"
. Serious personal injury, child, and bicycle accidents have occurred east of the
intersection, due to the high rate of speed, which, concededly, would
increase if a semaphore is installed
. The only comprehensive study conforms to the observations of law enforcement
officers and common sense experience and indicates that number and seriousness
of accidents at semaphores increase, substantially, over 4 -way stop intersections
. The "upgrading" of this intersection would be part of the process of moving traffic from
adjacent freeways back to city streets
. Speed limits cannot be lowered on the Boulevard in Hopkins
. 1992 recommendations adopted by the City Council (including improved signage, road
marking, and enforcement) have not been fully and consistently implemented
U pgrading the intersection will increase the likelihood that the Boulevard will become
four -lane thoroughfares
. The proposal will destroy, even further, the local network of bike paths
. The neighborhood, the quality of life, and the safety of the residents will be immediately
and negatively impacted by this proposal
BELLG03.SAM
Catherine Anderson, President
Ann Gleason, Vice President
Phyllis Stromberg, Past President
Dean Weber, Secretary
Ross Bartz, Treasurer
Jerry Lavin
Linda Heubach
Margie Mathison
Jean Mandeville
Bellgrove Improvement Association
Board of Directors
Introduction
History
Alternate Routes
Environmental Impacts
The Neighborhood
Traffic
Safety
Speed
Conclusion
Appendix
Contents
SRF Study Summary
1992 Council Briefing Summary
1992 Police Summary of Capt. Liddy
Traffic Table
Accident Table
1992 Speed Analysis
1991 Star Tribune Article
1993 Philadelphia Study
Introduction
In June, 1997, SRF Consulting Group, Inc. prepared a "feasibility study" for
"improvements" to Hopkins Crossroad (from Highway. 7 north, Minnetonka Boulevard
Intersection). SRF presented their report and recommendations at a public meeting on June 18,
1997. A revised draft was circulated on August 1 1997.
This is an analysis of the SRF study and proposed "improvements" at the Minnetonka
Boulevard intersection. It is based on the SRF written report, received by the Council on August
12, 1997, the June 18, 1997 meeting, and data collected over the past fifteen years from Hennepin
County Department of Public Works, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Hopkins and
Minnetonka Police Departments, previous studies, and Hopkins City Council briefing documents,
Resolutions, and Council meeting minutes.
The Bellgrove Improvement Association Board of Directors respectfully submits this
report to its City Council for consideration. The Board believes important issues of
neighborhood, quality of life, and public safety concerns directly affecting Hopkins residents are at
stake.
We hope the information in this analysis will assist the Council and help to provide a
complete and accurate understanding of the issues.
History
The issue of "improvements" or "upgrades" to Minnetonka Boulevard itself and the
intersection have been raised previously in 1978, 1981, 1988, and 1991. The Hopkins City
Council has consistently rejected proposals previously made because the reasons given to justify
"upgrades" did not outweigh the negative impact on Hopkins residents or overcome the safety
concerns of residents and law enforcement officials. Hopkins City Council minutes of March,
1992 reflect the sentiment of council members"
Shirley: "...avoid another thoroughfare..."
Anderson: "...the four-way works well..."
Critzler: " ...downgrade."
Redepenning: "...upgrade will only Lead to more upgrading, more traffic.'
At that time, just five years ago, the Council rejected again Minnetonka's request for a
semaphore.
The Council did adopt a Resolution to increase enforcement of speed limits, improve road
marking and signage, particularly at cross walk and for bike paths. The objective at that time was
to create circumstances under which the Boulevard could be downgraded, reducing lanes, speed
and traffic, and increasing safety. Unfortunately, little was done to implement these steps.
The same issues are now before the Council. The "feasibility study" reflects no change since
1992, except that the completion of I -394 resulted in a substantial decrease in traffic through the
neighborhood (as predicted). When the work is completed on Cedar Lake Road, the same thing
will happen (unless a thoroughfare is created through the neighborhood).
Alternate Routes
In 1992, the Hopkins Council deferred the possibility of a traffic study of the intersection at
Minnetonka Boulevard until 1-394 was completed. This was done because drivers were using
Minnetonka Boulevard as an alternate route during that construction.
In fact, traffic on the Boulevard diminished considerably after I -394 was completed. Traffic on
the Boulevard is now below 1986 levels, despite the fact that there has been significant detour
traffic from the Cedar Lake Road construction during the current construction season.
The authors of the proposal concede that "upgrading" the intersection will increase traffic. In
fact, today, even with the four -way stop, many motorists use these streets because they are faster
than the adjacent freeways, with their metered ramps. If the "improvements" are made, motorists
will encouraged to bypass the freeways, in favor of commuting on these streets.
The Council has, in the past, expressed a desire to discourage traffic on these streets and to avoid
the creation of more thoroughfares. By resisting the inevitable pressures to drive traffic through
the routes of least resistance, Hopkins has been somewhat successful in achieving this goal. In the
face of massive urban sprawl, Hopkins has maintained some of the most attractive neighborhoods
in the metropolitan areas.
In the case of this particular neighborhood, by a conscious effort, the City has kept traffic volumes
down and kept speeds as low as possible.
There are plenty of routes for commuters in a rush. Highway 169 is 0.9 miles from Hopkins
Crossroad, I-494 only slightly farther. I -394 is less than two miles from Minnetonka Boulevard;
Cedar Lake Road and Ffighway 7 even closer. There are many routes for these commuters.
Hurried travelers, who avoid the meters of the freeways, by driving through town, might like
higher speeds, no stops, and wider roads. They would also more lanes and no meters on the
freeways, which were built to support commuter traffic. It would be an extraordinary error if,
while the State moved these vehicles off the freeways, the City of Hopkins moved them onto our
streets.
BELLGI5.SAM
The Neighborhood
Bellgrove is the Northernmost residential neighborhood in Hopkins. It is bordered in the
South by Oakridge Country Club and West Oaks residential development; on the east by Atwater
Street; on the North by the M nnehaha Watershed; and on the West by Hopkins Crossroad..
Minnetonka Boulevard runs through the center of the neighborhood.
There are over eighty homes in Bellgrove on one -plus acre properties. Twenty -five percent of
these properties border on Minnetonka Boulevard or the Crossroad and are directly impacted by
any changes to these roadways.
There are over 150 children in the neighborhood who wait for buses on Minnetonka
Boulevard or Hopkins Crossroad and who use the designated bike paths. Residents of the
neighborhood and adjoining neighborhoods enjoy walking, jogging, and biking, regularly utilizing
the bike paths on Minnetonka Boulevard.
Literally thousands of biking enthusiasts travel along Minnetonka Boulevard, unlike 1-394,
Cedar Lake Road, Highway 7, etc. Exactly the characteristics which hold down the volume of
high -speed vehicle traffic on the Boulevard, attract the bicyclists, pedestrians, and roller - bladers.
Unfortunately, bike lanes on the north/south routes have already been dismantled, in the rush to
feed vehicles to I -394.
There are hundreds of trees that give a rustic, rural feel to this neighborhood which has no
sidewalks, no curbs, or other urban street and roadway designs. The unique properties in this
neighborhood are highly appraised because of these unusual characteristics. An examination of
the Boulevard today, at the peak of the growing season, discloses that increased traffic and
vehicle speed will mean significant removal of trees and bushes, even before further expansion of
the Boulevard.
It must be conceded that the nature of the neighborhood makes the intersections an area
for great care, particularly the intersection of Loring road and the Boulevard. Substantial clearing
will be necessary to protect against higher and higher speed traffic.
Environmental Impacts
The intersection of Minnetonka Boulevard and Hopkins Crossroad is located just south of
Minnehaha Creek and the watershed. The northwest corner of the intersection is undeveloped
and runs off directly into the watershed.
The proposed "improvements" at this intersection would substantially increase the paved and
concrete surfaces at and around the intersection. In the event that higher traffic volume would
lead to additional increase in road surface, the runoff would be increased, while the land between
the pavement and the Creek would be decreased. Nonetheless, no consideration has apparently
been given to run -off, drainage, or ponding requirements.
No Environmental Impact Statement nor even an Environmental Assessment appears to be
contemplate, despite the location of this project and the potential for significant impact on the
immediate enviroment.
In addition to the potential impact on the watershed, the proposal will require the immediate
destruction of trees, landscaped and natural land areas, and will involve potential noise increases.
The current proposal does not address these or other environmental concerns, does not reflect
noise analysis, nor does it appear to contemplate these or more formal studies. The proposal
merely concludes that massive construction is the appropriate course, in an area that is unique in a
variety of ways and remarkably delicate. No such project should even be considered, much less
undertaken, without these thorough analyses completed, in advance.
In addition, the concerns of other government and community organizations should be
considered. Before any consideration of such proposals, the formal opinions of the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Environmental Quality Board, the Pollution Control
Agency, the Minnehaha Watershed Advisory Board, and the Minnesota Center for Environmental
Advocacy should be sought.
BELLGI6.SAM
Traffic
In both 1988 and 1992 the Council recognized that increased traffic on the Boulevard was
due to construction, first on TH 7, then on Cedar Lake Road, and then on I -394. The Council
determined that until I -394 was completed in 1993, traffic on the Boulevard could not be
accurately assessed. Traffic daily average numbers are now available from 1994 and 1996. These
data reflect a reduction of traffic on Boulevard in Hopkins to a level significantly lower than
during these construction periods. In fact, daily average traffic through Hopkins in 1996 was
lower than it was in 1984, despite current use by large numbers of construction vehicles and a
detour for Cedar Lake Road. (See attached traffic table).
SRF nonetheless proposes an "upgrade" of the intersection of the Boulevard and Hopkins
Crossroad. These changes will have the greatest impact on the section of I fmnetonka Boulevard
east of the intersection, where traffic levels have decreased to below 1984 levels. Consequently
Hopkins residents would lose the most property and trees and experience the significant negative
impact which would result from the recommended "improvements
Further. the National Traffic Safety Control Code, adopted by Ivfinnesota, requires that, to
"warrant" consideration of a semaphore, not only must all four arms of an intersection have a
substantial daily traffic count, but at least one arm must have a minimum of 500 vehicles per hour
for eight hours.. The Code also anticipates a study by type of vehicle and a study of pedestrian
and bike traffic.
At the first public meeting, SRF conceded that they relied only on gross vehicle counts.
No consideration was given to the more sophisticated measurements. (Informal analysis indicates
that the "8 hour" levels are not satisfied by this intersection).
Safety
In the first draft of their report, SRF asserts that the number of accidents will decrease
with their recommended changes, and that severity will not increase. In the second draft, SRF
appears to claim that the higher speed accidents at a semaphore will actually be less serious. SRF
offers no basis for these conclusions, nor can they.
At the public meeting, SRF offered to provide to the neighbors the studies which
supported these extraordinary conclusions, which contradicted both the experience of every
driver who has ever seen someone try "run" a yellow light and the statements of the Hopkins
Police. Upon a written request and some reflection, SRF withdrew that offer.
An independent search for such studies disclosed that there are many "studies" of various
intersections, which reach reasonable conclusions:
1. Semaphored intersections attract through traffic
2. Traffic volumes are higher
3. Traffic speeds are higher
4. The number of accidents may go up or down, depending upon what controls
were previously in place
5. Due to increased speed, the accidents are invariably more serious
There is, however, one comprehensive "same intersection" study of hundreds of
intersections, spanning the experience for a period of three years before and three years after the
changes. The entire report is attached. The results could not be more clear.
With a semaphore:
1. Traffic volume goes up
2. Speed goes up
3. Accidents go up
4. Accident seriousness goes up
5. Fatalities go up
Although the results across the hundreds of studied intersections were marginally higher or lower,
on average, introduction of semaphores causes:
1. The number of accidents to double
2. The seriousness of those accidents to double
•
At the intersection before the Council, accidents over the past six years have remained relatively
constant, even during heavy traffic years. (See attached traffic table). Accident seriousness,
adjusted for traffic flow, has not increased over the last six years. Accidents which have occurred
have been relatively minor fender- benders. There have been no fatalities, child/bike accidents, or
serious personal injury accidents. (See Captain Liddy's report from 1992).
There have been serious accidents on Minnetonka Boulevard, not at the intersection.
Those accidents were caused by speed and other factors, exactly the problems a semaphore would
increase. A Bellgrove mother of six was killed when her vehicle was hit by a school bus at
Minnetonka Boulevard and McGinty Road. Two school children crossing the street on bicycles
were hit by a speeding driver on the Boulevard between Loring and Mill Roads. A Bellgrove
mother and two young children were seriously injured when they were hit from behind by a
speeding drunk driver, as they slowed to turn into their driveway. And, two young school
children narrowly missed being hit by a speeding car as they waited for their school bus on the
Boulevard east of Loring Road, when the car hit a telephone pole before reaching the children.
SRF concedes, in both drafts, that the recommendations will result in increased speed,
but, in the second draft, apparently attempts to reverse field on the severity of the accidents which
will result. Real accident data, the experience of residents, and the observations of law
enforcement personnel indicate that speed has caused the most serious accidents. There is
available comprehensive data showing that the number of accidents and the number of serious
accidents in this Hopkins neighborhood will increase, if the Council allows these changes to take
place.
Speed
Accident data and law enforcement observation confirm that speed is the most important
factor in the seriousness of accidents. Any increase in speed will contribute to the risk of more
serious accidents in the neighborhood.
Speed limits on Minnetonka Boulevard in Bellgrove are currently higher than they are
west of the intersection in Minnetonka or east of Hopkins in St. Louis Park. Previous studies by
Hopkins and Hennepin County in 1992 indicate that traffic on the Boulevard regularly exceeds the
posted speed limit. (See attached summary).
Speed limits are set by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) and are
based on vehicle speed using the roadway. Speed limits can only be changed by MNDOT, based
on a study of vehicle speed. In 1992, Hopkins city staff recognized that a MNDOT speed study
would result in an increased posted speed limit and recommended against a study. There is no
reason to believe 1997 speeds have decreased.
MNDOT's authority is statutory and there is no way to reduce a speed limit, save by
special legislation. Hopkins staff and Hennepin County concur that a speed limit reduction is not
possible under these circumstances.
The SRF "feasibility study" concedes that speeds will increase if the recommended
changes are implemented. This can only increase the risk to neighborhood residents and
visitors. In fact, the current controls at the intersection have been effective in reducing
both the volume and speed of traffic.
Conclusions
Hopkins residents believe that the safety of residents and the quality of neighborhoods
should be primary considerations in matters before the Council, as they have been when this
matter has been before the Council in the past.
SRF asserts that "improvements" are necessary to correct a "poor level of service" on
Hopkins Crossroad, to eliminate "excess queuing," "short headway," and "difficult time intervals."
SRF recommends massive physical changes and a semaphore "in order to improve the traffic flow
problems." The consultant rejects, out of hand, any other option, including those adopted, but
not implemented, in 1992.
SRF claims that the number of accidents will decrease and suggests that severity will
remain consistent.. The report presents no basis for this remarkable conclusion. In fact, the best
evidence only supports the contrary conclusion. It is the nature of "studies" that, when
consultants want to show speed and volume increases, that is what the studies show. The
attached massive study from Philadelphia is unique in that the changes were undertaken for other
(economic) reasons and the review was commissioned after the fact. This objective report shows
that semaphores cause substantial increases in the number and severity of accidents. SRF
concedes that traffic volume and speed will increase, but that, somehow, accident numbers and
serverity will go down.
SRF has given no consideration to bike or pedestrian concerns, which greatly affect the
quality of life for Hopkins residents, the safety of their children, and the interest of thousands of
bicycle visitors to our neighborhood.. Bellgrove is not a neighborhood with sidewalks, curbs, etc.
SRF's recommendations in this regard, as well as for concrete islands and divided highways at the
intersection are inconsistent with the rustic characteristic of a very unique neighborhood, 25% of
whose properties border on the boulevard, and whose property values will be directly impacted.
Finally, SRF observes that there is, today, almost no traffic diverted through the
neighborhood. It takes twice as long to drive two blocks through Bellgrove as it does to wait at
the intersection. According to SRF, the average wait, at peak hours, is 69 seconds. A timed
semaphore will cause an even longer wait, more impatience, more traffic diverted through the
neighborhood, and again, negatively impact the peace, tranquillity, enjoyment, and safety of
Hopkins residents.
SRF may be right. These "improvements" may increase traffic flow and traffic speed
through this intersection. But, will "improvements" substantially increase traffic volume and
speed going through Hopkins? Are "improvements" necessary or beneficial for Hopkins? Will
they make our neighborhood safer? Will they increase serious accidents? The actual data
available give a clear answer to these questions.
East of the intersection on Minnetonka Boulevard Hopkins children ride their bikes and
wait for school buses, residents walk, jog, and walk their babies in strollers. Will these
"improvements" exacerbate the speed problems on Minnetonka Boulevard? Will these
improvements increase the now minimal traffic through the back streets of the neighborhood?
Will traffic noise be increased? Will property values of 25% of Hopkins residents in this
neighborhood be negatively impacted, simply so that impatient motorists can hurry through this
quiet residential area? Should Hopkins give up property and the very nature and quality of this
neighborhood to widen a roadway where average daily traffic counts are actually lower than they
were in 1984?
What is construed by SRF to be a "poor level of service" on Hopkins Crossroad does not
justify the admitted negative results, potential negative impact, and considerable expense of these
proposed "improvements ".
The four -way stop which has been at this intersection for twenty years does . not represent
"progress ", as it would be construed by those who build roads. The fact that Minnetonka
Boulevard has remained a two -lane road for twenty years, while the County long -range plan
anticipated a major thoroughfare to downtown, does not represent "progress ", as it would be
construed by those who build roads. But, as Minnetonka has committed to development to the
very edge of the watershed, wildlife has returned to Bellgrove in abundance and the nature of the
neighborhood has become increasingly unique. The Council has reviewed these same issues,
repeatedly, for twenty years, and reached the same conclusions.
Traffic Averages
(Daily total traffic count per MNDOT)
'84 '85* '88* '89* '90* '94 '96*
73 N 10,800 12,300 9,700 11,500 12,000 12,400 14,000
73 S 10,700 11,800 9,450 9,150 9,850 10,900 10,500
5 E 10,200 12,100 11,500 10,900 11,200 8,500 8,600
5 W 9,850 11,900 11,900 12,300 11,800 9,800 11,300
* The figures from '85 -'90 represent the time period during which there was construction on
HWY 7, Cedar Lake Rd, and I -394.
*The figures from 1996 are during a period when a detour from Cedar Lake Rd accounted for
some traffic at the intersection.
Note that 73S and 5E presently have lower average daily traffic levels than in 1984. The 1996
numbers were not available when SRF was compiling data. Currently Minnetonka Boulevard is
being used by construction vehicles to access 73 construction sites and is also the posted detour
for Cedar Lake Road.
Years in which proposals were made to "upgrade" C.S.A.H. 5 and 73 intersection:
1981, 1988, 1991, 1997
In 1 992 one vote was cast in favor of a "study" on the Hopkins City Council. No votes were ever
cast in favor of an "upgrade" or semaphore despite staff recommendation. (Lee Gustafson, '91)
Accidents
(annual number per Hennepin County)*
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95
7/73 14 15 18 8 13 11
5/73 22 8 9 9 9 9
CLR/73 7 8 4 3 9 5
*These numbers were obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Public Works. While
Hopkins and Minnetonka numbers may vary from these, those police numbers include accidents
two to three blocks from the intersections, of which a large percentage are car /deer accidents.
There is also an overlap in police department statistics, as, on occasion, both departments respond
to a call. Consequently, it is difficult to determine exactly how many accidents occurred at the
intersection.
The high ranking of this intersection by Hennepin County is based upon this number of accidents
(multiplied by an "average" for property damage). Therefore, if both the number of accidents is
lower than indicated and the seriousness is not up to the average across the County, this
intersection is wildly over- rated.
APPENDIX
to
The Analysis of the Feasibility Study
SRF Study Summary
The most important characteristic of the SRF "feasibility analysis" is that it concludes that the
Minnetonka Boulevard/Hopkins Crossroad intersection should be "upgaraded" far beyond the
level of either of the intersecting streets. This is particularly interesting in that most of the
conclusions of the "study" are unsupported by any evidence, the "comparable" intersections cited
are remarkably dissimilar, and all changes in traffic levels have coincided with related
construction. Only the long - standing desire of Minnetonka supports the conclusion of the study.
Proposed development on C.S.A.H. 73 does not significantly affect the traffic study. p.l
The intersection is operating at a "poor level of service" similar to problems along the C.S.A.H.
73 corridor, including, excess queuing, start headway, difficult time intervals. p.15
Very little traffic uses the neighborhood to avoid the intersection, because it takes twice as long to
travel through the neighborhood as it does to wait at the intersection. (Average maximum at peak
hours - 69 seconds) p.15
There is already speeding away from the intersection. p.16
SRF recommends a major expansion and semaphores at the intersection to "improve the traffic
flow problems." p.16
According to SRF, the recommended upgrade will:
1. Require condemnation and grading of Hopkins neighborhood yards and driveways.
2. Necessitate tree removal in Hopkins.
3. Require acquisition of right of way from Hopkins residents.
4. Will create longer traffic gaps.
5. Will increase speed.
6. Will reduce que lengths.
7. Will reduce accidents.*
8. Will not increase accident severity.*
9. Will eliminate cutting through neighborhood.
10. Will increase the amount of traffic.
11. Will reduce the delay at the intersection.
12. Will not affect noise levels.
13. Will make access to Big Willow Park easier.
p.22
Even if these conclusions were supported, they would not justify this massive change and
conceded negative impact on the neighborhood, life quality and safety.
* No support is offered for these key conclusions. SRF was unwilling to share the basis upon
which these conclusion were drawn.
and 73 intersection:
mprovement Impacts"
concludes the following effects on the area of the C.S.A.H. 5
SRF Consulting Group, Inc. concl
Regrade driveways/yards
Tree removal
Right of way acquisition
Speed may increase
Not reduce accident severity
Increase amount of traffic
Not affect noise level
Longer traffic gaps
Reduce queue lengths
Reduce accidents
Though
now minimal, reduce cutting through neighborhood
Reduce delay on 73
Easier access to Big Willow
Add curbs and sidewalks
Eliminate bike path at intersection
BELLGI.SAM
Consider Action Highway 73 and 5
REPORT 92 -70
Mayor Berg has proposed a study of this issue and is asking for
council support. The mayor acknowledges, however, that he and
the council are on record postponing any consideration of this
issue until completion of I -394.
The council's 1988 position to postpone consideration of a study
until the completion of I -394 followed a lengthy debate on the
merits of a study, as well as on the issue of a light at the
intersection.
1 -394 is not completed and permanent lane construction will not be .
completed until the end of this year (per Minnesota Department
of Transportation). Landscaping construction will not be
completed until 1993.
HENNEPIN COUNTY POSITION:
No recommendation or action at this intersection is being made, .
nor is any contemplated at this time. Any action at this
intersection would have to be initiated by the city. The city
would bear full responsibility for any study, plans, and .
subsequent projects at the intersection, as well as payment
for all costs associated with either. The County's role would
be only to approve or disapprove plans or proposals that might
be made.
The County would not approve any• light installation at the
intersection unless the intersection is upgraded to provide
left -hand turn lanes. It is the County's position that
installation of a traffic light without such upgrade would
create a greater safety problem than the current four -wary
stop. The purpose of the left -hand turn lane would be to
safely insure the more efficient flow of traffic through the
intersection without necessitating stop- and -go traffic or
slowing down of through traffic.
On the issue of a study, the County is of the opinion that no study
is necessary since all information that a study would reveal
is currently available, save the impact of I -394 completion
and traffic pattern stabilization. The County suggests that
the only reason the city would need to have a study done is to
justify an upgrade to this intersection greater than the one
the county would approve.
MINNETONKA'S POSITION:
Minnetonka officials have consistently expressed an interest in
installing lights at this intersection and have also proposed
upgrading the boulevard. The council has used this issue to
hold up Hopkins projects such as the police radio tower,
finally giving in.
Minnetonka (per Mayor Bergstad) will not hold up the Shady Oak and
County 3 project on this issue. Hopkins has not yet presented
a proposal to Minnetonka on Shady Oak and County 3 for the
council's approval, however. The mayor is of the opinion that
the current council (as opposed to the previous council) would
not hold up the Shady Oak project on this issue and said he
would confirm this with Mayor Berg (as of Friday March 13).
SCHOOL BOARD POSITION:
The School Board has no requests or recommendations for change at
this intersection.
The School Board has received no complaints regarding this
intersection, in spite of the fact that they receive many
complaints regarding traffic and safety issues, and despite
that many school transportation routes utilize this
intersection.
ACCIDENT INFORMATION:
No fatalities have occurred at this intersection.
No pedestrian, bike, or child - involved accidents have occurred at
this intersection.
Accidents at the intersection have primarily been "fender- bender"
accidents due to low -speed resulting from four -way stop - and -go
traffic.
Accidents involving children have occurred between East and West
St. Alban's Road, where vehicles' speed in excess of speed
limit and visibility is limited due to terrain.
MN -DOT provides the following accident and traffic information:
Accidents reported in: 1990 1991
At 7 and 73: 14 15
At 5 and 73: 22 8
At CLR and 73: 7 8
In 1990, traffic on I -394 was between 85,000 and 95,000 vehicles
per day and there was no access to the sane lane from 169 N.
In 1991, traffic on I -394 rose to 120,000 vehicles per day and a
sane lane was access opened on 169 N.
No child /bike /car accidents were reported during 1990 and 1991. A
child /car accident did occur at Loring Road on Minnetonka
Boulevard.
NEIGHBORHOOD POSITIONS:
A majority of the residents of Bellgrove, which includes the
Northeast and Southeast corners of the intersection, have
opposed installation of lights at this intersection or
upgrading of the intersection or boulevard consistently for
two decades.
In October, 1991, at the annual meeting of the Homeowners'
Association, residents voted unanimously to oppose
installation of a light at this intersection. A majority of
residents were present.
On March 12, 1992, a meeting was held to discuss how to respond to
the mayor's proposal for a study. The majority voted to
oppose a study under any circumstance. Slightly fewer opposed
a study until I -394 was completed, and then only with certain
conditions. No one voted to support the study at this time.
A summary of the meeting is attached.
On March 16, 1992, the Bellgrove Board of Directors met to discuss
additional information and the position of the Association
before the council and adopted the attached resolution. This
resolution incorporates the position taken at the meeting on
March 12, 1991, the position of the Association adopted in
October, 1992, and the position of the council to wait until
1 -394 is completed. It also incorporates affirmative action
to address safety concerns.
Board of Dir ctors Findings and Recomm ndations
for Action by the Council
* The Association unanimously adopted a resolution to oppose a
stop light in October of 1991, at the annual meeting. Notice
was sent to all residents and a majority attended the meeting.
* Several proposals were discussed on March 12, 1992, as
responses to a study. None of the 27 residents in attendance
voted to support a study at this time. All residents had been
notified of this meeting as well.
A petition has been circulated by the Fogelbergs supporting a
study now and a stoplight under certain conditions. Because
of some apparent confusion regarding the petition, an informal
tally was taken, and the Association's Board of Directors met
to assimilate the information received from all sources.
* The Board, after consideration of all information, determined
the following:
1) The Hopkins City Council made a commitment in 1988 to
wait until I -394 was completed to determine whether a study
was needed.
2) I -394 will not be completed until 1993 and traffic
patterns established until at least 1994.
3) Safety issues of speed limit, crosswalk for
pedestrians, and inadequately- marked bike lanes have not been
addressed and could also impact on a subsequent study. These
safety concerns can be addressed without a study at this time
and are primarily within the control of Hopkins.
4) The clear majority of residents oppose a light. Some
residents oppose a light until it means upgrading the
intersection on the boulevard. A small minority favor a light
with conditions. No residents appear to favor a light without
conditions regarding speed and no upgrading of the boulevard.
5) The Board has taken into account the overwhelming
support for the positions adopted by the Association, the
concerns expressed by proponents of the petition, and the
telephone tally and contacts during distribution of the
President's memo on March 15. It has also considered concerns
relative to strategy and ultimate results based on past
experience of the Association with the council. Based on all
of these considerations, the Board of Directors, in an effort
to incorporate as many points of view and concerns as possible
toward a common goal of safety, property values, and community
harmony, recommends and supports the attached resolution of
the issue by the council.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM
HOPKINS POLICE CHIEF LIDDY 10/25/92
RE INTERSECTION OF CTY ROADS 5 AND 73
Chief James Liddy participated in the Bel'grove Intersection Task Team meeting on
October 26, 1992. Members of the Task Force include Mayor Nelson Berg, City
Administrator Steve Mielke, Public Works Director Lee Gustafson, and Bellgrove
Residents Marjorie Mathison Hance, Catherine Anderson, Marjorie Hammond, Andy
Marlow and Mike Winship. Below is a summary of his comments about the
intersection.
In reviewing the number of accidents at this intersection (data supplied by Steve
Mielke and included data from both Hopkins and Minnetonka police departments
for the past 4 years), Chief Liddy indicated that the number of accidents for this
intersection is not at all high. Furthermore, he indicated that the numbers actually
look higher than they are. One day, for instance, there were four accidents near
that intersection due to extremely icy conditions. Three of the accidents were
caused by traffic being backed up several blocks from the first accident and cars
not being able to see the backed up traffic until they came over a hill.
Chief Liddy indicated that most of the accidents that occur at this intersection
are fender benders, since all traffic must come to a stop. He said this would NOT
be the case if a traffic light is installed, since cars will be travelling through the
intersection at much faster speeds and many will try to run a yellow light. He also
indicated that it has been his experience that the number of accidents will
increase if a traffic light is installed. This was corroborated by a police officer
in attendance.
A pedestrian /car accident has occurred at Cedar Lake Road and 73 since it has
been controlled by a stoplight. None have occurred at the intersection of 5
and 73.
• Chief Liddy said that he does not consider this intersection a safety hazard.
Chief Liddy pointed out that many cities are now eliminating stop lights for
reasons of both economy and better speed control and are going back to four -way
stopsigns.
7/73
5/73
CLR/73
Accidents
(annual number per Hennepin County)*
'90 '91 '92 '93
14 15 18
22 8 9
7 8 4
'94 '95
8 13 11
9 9 9
3
*These numbers were obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Public Works. While
Hopkins and Minnetonka numbers may vary from these, those police numbers include accidents
two to three blocks from the intersections, of which a large percentage are car /deer accidents.
There is also an overlap in police department statistics, as, on ocassion, both departments respond
to a call. Consequently, it is difficult to determine exactly how many accidents occurred at the
intersection.
The high ranking of this intersection by Hennepin County is based upon this number of accidents
(multiplied by an "average" for property damage). Therefore, if both the number of accidents is
lower than indicated and the seriousness is not up to the average across the County, this
intersection is wildly over - rated.
Traffic Averages
(Daily total traffic count per MNDOT)
'84 '85* '88* '89* '90* '94 '96*
73 N 10,800 12,300 9,700 11,500 12,000 12,400 14,000
73 S 10,700 11,800 9,450 9,150 9,850 10,900 10,500
5 E 10,200 12,100 11,500 10,900 11,200 8,500 8,600
5 W 9,850 11,900 11,900 12,300 11,800 9,800 11,300
* The figures from '85 -'90 represent the time period during which there was construction on
HWY 7, Cedar Lake Rd, and I -394.
*The figures from 1996 are during a period when a detour from Cedar Lake Rd accounted for
some traffic at the intersection.
Note that 73S and 5E presently have lower average daily traffic levels than in 1984. The 1996
numbers were not available when SRF was compliling data. Currently Minnetonka Boulevard is
being used by construction vehicles to access 73 construction sites and is also the posted detour
for Cedar Lake Road.
Years in which proposals were made to "upgrade" C.S.A.H. 5 and 73 intersection:
1981, 1988, 1991, 1997
In 1992 one vote was cast in favor of a "study" on the Hopkins City Council. No votes were ever
cast in favor of an "upgrade" or semaphore despite staff recommendation. (Lee Gustafson, '91)
MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
Speed
jmph)
# of cars
3 -19 -92
E.B. at
Loring
1015 -1115
1
2
37 3
38 6
39 6
40 6
41 8
42 11
43 8
44 4
45 2
46 3
47 1
48 3
49
50 2
31
32
33
34
35
36
Avg. Speed
3 -19 -92
W.B. at
W. St. Albans
1430 -1500
2
1
2
2
6
6
6
5
6
9
7
4
1
3
Traffic Speed Checks
7 -15 -92
E.B. at
E. St. Albans
0715 -0815
30 2 4
2
4
3
20
24
32
23
29
28
15
18
11
7
5
1
3 1 1
7 -15 -92
W.B. at
E. St. Albans
1705 -1800
3 3 4
5
6
9
25
12
21
25
22
22
1
7 -17 -92
W.B. at
W. St. Albans
0720 -0820
4
11
9
26
23
17
21
9
9
11 5
7 -20 -92
E.B. at
1600 -1700
9
13
23
35
31
48
49
39
35
30
5 6 16
7 3 8
4 2 5
1 2 1
1 3
1 1 1
66 63 223 181 154 354
41.7 40.5 38.8 37.9 36.9 37.7
Philadelphia Streets Department
Accident Data Analysis
10
The city began signal removal for economic reasons
The original study included 360 intersections
— Injury accidents 40% lower without signals
(67% higher with signals)
Through 1992, removed more than 800 signals
Same intersection study of 325 intersections
- Three years before, three years after
Changes in every type of accident
— Reductions from 42 -60%
(60 -150% higher with signals)
Other factors
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ACCIDENT REDUCTION PROGRAM
— Available alternative routes
TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS CITY -WIDE OVER THE PAST 72 YEARS
The City of Philadelphia has experienced a significant decline In traffic
accidents through the past 3/4 century:
PHILADELPHIA TRAFFIC ACCIDENT SUWARY (average- per -Year
FATALITIES INJURIES
OCCUPANTS PEDESTRIANS BICYCLISTS OCCUPANT PEDESTRIANS BICYCLISTS
1920 -1929
1930 -1939
1940 -1949
1950 -1959
1960 -1969
1970 -1979
1980 -1989
90
90
50
50 .
80
80
80
While these city -wide totals by decade show long -term trends, a closer look
reveals eras of significant growth and decline In the past 3 decades:
AVERAGE- PER -YEAR ERA -. PERIOD
Pedestrian Fatalities 1948 -1973 26 years
1977 -1991 15 years
Pedestrian injuries 1946 -1964
1967 -1970
1977 -1990
Occupant Injuries
250
230
160
110
110
85
50
1952 -1964
1967 -1973
1977 -1984
5
4
3
2
2
4
4
THE. 1964 - 1970 ERA AND TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
19 years
4 years
14 years
13 years
7 years
9 years
THE 1973 - 1977 ERA AND TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
6900
4800
7900
11700
14900
12700
TOTALS
6600
7600
4000
4200
3900
3800
2500
108 - per -year
51 -per -year
3900 -per -year
4760- per -year
2830- per -year
8600 -per -year
16700 -per -year
10100 -per -year
CHANGE
- 53%
+17%
-41%
+94%
- 40%
550
300
360
340
730
630
Thus clearly something occurred around 1964 -1967 which caused total injuries
to increase by 40% from a previous plateau of over a dozen years. While other
factors certainly may have Impacted during then, 1964 -1969 was particularly
volatile for 'traffic signal demonstrations'. This 6- year.perlod alone accounted
for 635 new signal installations, representing a 25% increase over the prior
total. Traffic In most of the long- developed areas had actually declined over
the previous half decade because of the diversion of traffic to the recently
opened Schuylkill Expressway. Nonethe less, over 75% of these new signals were
placed in the long developed sections not as the result of an objective engineer-
ing analysis but rather solely to terminate blockades. There Is probably at
least a partial direct cause /effect relationship between some 500 unnecessary
new signal and a 40% Increase In traffic accidents.
Similarly, something occurred around 1973 -1977 which caused a 40% declIne
In Injuries to a plateau where they remained for a decade. Even more spectacularly,
after a quarter century of averaging 2- per -week, Pedestrian Fatalities declined
In but 4 years to a plateau of 1- per -week where they have remained for 1 112
decades1 Not coincidentally, for the 10 years following Its Incept/on In 1968
250 all -way stops -per -year were being Installed. Once again, there is probably
at least a partial direct cause /effect relationship between the placement of
2500 all -way stops and the cited spectacular injury and fatality reductions.
2
THE TRAFFIC StGNAL REMOVAL PROGRAM TO DATE AND TRAFFIC. ACCIDENTS
In the Appendix there Is a chronology of the evolution of the all -way stop
In Philadelphia from Its Inception In 1968 through several studies documenting
Its superior safety benefits. After an in -house 1975 study comparing the
accident rates at 360 signals, 360 all -way stops and 180 conventional stops at
similar volume and similar geometrlcs intersections In North Central and South
Philadelphia clearly demonstrated the all -way stop to be the safest control for
these moderate volume Intersections, the Department logically concluded that
there would be an accident reduction benefit derived from replacing similar
traffic signals with all -way stops.
Thus in 1978 the Department began deliberately and Judiciously removing
traffic signals and repiaceing them primarily with al! -way stop control. As
the Table "Comparison of Traffic Controls and injuries by Police District" shows,
some 426 signal removals have taken place to date. These have clearly been city-
wide since each Police District Is represented. 27% have been In South Phila-
delphia Police Districts, 17% In North Central -East, 14% In the Central Business
District, 11% In West Philadelphia, etc. Thus over 1/3 of the Intended signal
removals have already occurred.
Also In the Appendix Is a comparison of '3- years - before' vs '3- years - after'
the replacement for 235 intersections which went from traffic signal to all -way
stop control. Dramatic accident reductions resulted:
- 42% decline In pedestrian-Injury accidents
- 47% decline In vehicle occupant Injury accidents
- 60% decline In property- damage -only accidents
- 60% decline In right -angle accidents
- 52% decline In rear -end accidents
This accident reduction benefit across - the -board results because all -way stop
serve to eliminate the common element In all serious accidents - speed.
DESIGNATED SCHOOL CROSSINGS. AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL REMOVALS
Among the 426 traffic signal removals to date, 25 were at locations which
appear on the Police Department School Crossing Guard Unit's List of Approved
Crossing Guard Locations. Since this list exceeds the number of crossing guards
actually funded, It is probably that many of these 25 locations have no guard
assigned. Nonetheless, for calendar year 1990 there were a total of 2 pedestrian
accidents at these 25 locations, none of which occurred during school hours or
Involved school children. We have no reason to believe that the overall pedes-
trian-Injury reductions demonstrated In the previous section would not apply
equally to school crossing intersections.
PROJECTED ACCIDENT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF REMOVING 800 TRAFFIC SIGNALS
In the Appendix listing alphabetically the locations Identified for signal
removal, there Is Included the accident record at each for the 5- year - period
1986 thru 1990. Based on these acc /dent totals and the accident reductions
experienced at the 426 locations to date, we protect the following accident
benefits -per -year to be derived from the 800 add/tonal signal removals:
90 fewer pedestrian-injury accidents per year
220 fewer occupant-Injury accidents per year
300 fewer major property- damage -only accidents per year
600 fewer minor property - damage -only accidents per year
TRAFFIC DIVERSION FROM SURFACE. STREETS. TO THE EXPRESSWAY NETWORK
Traffic volume counts through a Cordon Line around the Philadelphia Central
Business District Indicate that volumes have remained constant at around
290,000 vehicles- per -day since 1955. In the 1950s such commuter traffic descended
through the surface street networks of North, South and West Philadelphia. With
the opening of the Schuylkill Expressway In the late 1950s this surface street
traffic began to decline significantly. Today there are 44 miles among th 5
expressways In Philadelphia:
ROUTE COLLOQUIAL LENGTH MAXIMUM AVERAGE - DAILY - TRAFFIC
1 -76 Schuylkill Expressway 11 miles 150,000 vehicles- per -day
1 -95 Delaware Expressway 24 miles 140,000 vehicles- per -day
1 -676 Vine Expressway 2 miles 80,000 vehicles- per -day
US -1 Roosevelt Expressway 3 miles 105,000 vehicles- per -day
PA -63 Woodhaven Expressway 4 miles 55,000 vehicles- per -day
In the Appendix we provide a street -by- street comparison of 1956 (pre- expressway
vs 1980s (post - expressway) traffic folumes for the long developed areas of the
City and document the tens of thousands of vehicles which no longer traverse
the surface streets of these areas. The following summary demonstrates these
traffic reduct ions:
1956 -1980s
SECTION VEHICLES /DECLINE /PERCENTAGE
North Central - 93,000 veh /day -20%
East (Bridesburg /Kensington) - 20,000 veh /day -33%
West Philadelphia 40,00 veh /day -22%
South Philadelphia - 73,000 veh /day -33X
4
4- APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - A chronological history of the evolution of the all -way stop
in Philadelphia from the late 1960s through the present. /t
Includes the several background studies which documented the
dramatic accident reduction benefits of the device.
APPENDIX 8 - A documentation of the traffic decline In the long developed .
area of Philadelphia from 1956 (pre - expressways) through the
1980s (post- expressways). These can be summarized as follows:
APPENDIX C - Alphabetical listing of the 400* traffic signal removal loca-
tions to date.
APPENDIX D - A comparison of traffic accident data at 235 locations wher
traffic signals were replaced by all-way stop control from
1977 through 1988. In comparing 3 -years before vs 3- years-
after the change, the following results are documented:
APPENDIX E - A listing of the ma /or corridors which will remain signalized
for through traffic movement on the surface streets.
APPENDIX F - Alphabetical listing of the 800 /octat Ions where traffic
signal removal Is planned. This list includes the following
specific data for each location:
APPENDIX G
SECTION VEHICLES PERCENTAGE
North Central -93,000 vehlday -20%
East (Br/desburg /Kensington) - 20,000 veh /day -33%
West Philadelphia
South Philadelphia
- 40,000 veh /day -22%
- 73,000 veh /day -33%
Pedestrian Injuries declined by 50%
Vehicle- occupant injuries declined by 45%
Right -angle accidents declined by 65%
Rear -end accidents declined by 50%
Property - damage -only accidents declined by 60%
- the Average Dally Traffic (ADT) for all intersecting streets
- a summary of the 1986 through 1990 traffic accident data,
Including:
Pedestrian or Occupant injuries.
Pedestrian or Occupant fatalities;
Ma /or or minor property - damage -only accidents.
- A set of 17 plate maps showing area -by -area the following:
- the arterial corridors which will remain signalized for
through traffic movement �n the surface street network;
- the location of the planned traffic signal removals.
THE ALL -WAY STOP - •A PROVEN SAFE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL
THE QUARTER CENTURY CHRONOLOGY OF THE ALL -WAY STOP IN PHILADELPHIA
1964 thru 1966 - This tumultuous period nationally translated locally Into
residents blockading an intersection to obtain traffic signals.
Despite the fact that the vast majority of these locations had no
objectively demonstrable 'problem' In need of remedy, the adminis-
trative policy was one of appeasement. During this 3 -year period
370 traffic signals were Installed - 10 per monthl It is not
coincidental that pedestrian injuries rose by 30%, occupant injuries
rose by 46% and traffic fatalities rose by 23% when comparing 1963
(before) vs 1967 (after) totals.
1967 - Study by John J. Heany, P.E. - currently Streets Department Chief
Traffic Engineer. Study of 300 Philadelphia Intersections established
accident vs volume criteria for determining 'unsafe' Intersections.
This objective criteria became the basis for evaluating the 'need'
for the Initial all -way stop controls.
1967 thru 1969 - Even though these blockades declined slightly, 265 signals
were Installed (7 per month) during this 3 year period. Once again
the vast majority of these were not Installed to solve a demonstrated
traffic problem. The 1964 -1969 period Increased the citywide total
signals by 25%. By years end 1969, pedestrian injuries were up by
54% and occupant Injuries were up by 33% compared to 1963. By decade
end, pedestrian fatalities were at a 22 -year high and occupant fatali-
ties were at a 35 -year high!
1968 - As these deleterious accident liabilities of this half decade of
blatant misuse of traffic signals became clearly evident, the Streets
Department began Judiciously Installing all -way stops based on the
objective Heany accident vs volume criteria. About 100 Intersections
were converted to all -way stop control In 1968.
1969 - Study by John J. Heany, P.E. - 'The 4-way Stop - Effective Safety Device'
published In September 1970 'Public Works'. Before /after study of the
Initial 57 all -way stop Installations found total accidents decreased by
87%, personal injuries decreased by 92% and fatalities were eliminated.
1969 thru 1977 - Over this 9 -year period, on average 5 Intersections per week
are converted to all -way stop control.
1970 thru 1974 - At long last the blockade era essentially ends and new traffic
signal Installations during this period average 3 per month.
1970s thru 1980s - The positive effects of the all -way stop installations,
the removal of over 400 unwarranted traffic signals and the opening
of the Delaware Expressway enabled pedestrian injuries and fatalities
to decline by 1/3, and occupant injuries to decline by 30%.
THE ALL -WAY STOP - A PROVEN SAFE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL
1976 - Study by Gerard M. Ebbecke, P.E. - currently Streets Department Assist-
ant Chief Traffic Engineer 'Areawide impact of Traffic Control Devices'
published by the National Academy of Sciences in 1977 'Transportation
Research Record #644'. Study of 900 Intersections of similar geometries
and similar volumes In North Central Philadelphia and South Philadelphia
The focus was twofold:
1. It contrasted the accident rates (accidents vs volumes) of 360
traffic signals, 360 all-way stops and 180 conventional stops
(only the lower volume street stopped). It found the all -way
stop to be clearly the safest device, with identical results
In both areas - a 30% lower accident rate than the trafftb
signal and a 50% lower accident rate than the conventional
stop.
2. It contrasted 2- years- before vs 2 -years after conversion from
conventional stops to all -way stops and again found identical
results In both areas. When the Heany 1967 'unsafe intersec-
tion' criteria was used, overwhelmingly the accident rate de-
alined. Total accidents decreased by 55%, both pedestrian
and occupant injuries decreased by over 80% and right angle
accidents decreased by over 80%.
1977 - The new Pennsylvania Vehicle Code Incorporated PennDOT's 'Regulations
governing the Design, Location and Operation of all Official Traffic
Signs, Signals and Markings on and along Highways within the Common-
wealth of Pennsylvania'. This document Includes 'WARRANTS' for
traffic signals and all -way stops. City Solicitor ruled that the
Streets Department Is legally obliged to comply with these Regulations
1978 thru 1988 - in a very low -key manner, the Streets Department !ndlvldual1,
and judiciously removes 'unwarranted' traffic signals throWhout the
city. A comparison of 3- years - before vs 3- years -after after 235 con -
versions from signal to all -way found both pedestrian and occupant
Injury accidents down by 50%.
TRAFFIC SIGNALS merely alternate the right - of-way at an Intersection. As the
preceding clearly illustrates, traffic signals are not necessarily an inheres
safe device. When properly installed as the result of an engineering study
they perform their Intended function safely and well. When Improperly placed
for non- englneering reasons, there is a high probability that accidents will
Increase. Every time the signal changes, there Is the possibility of someone
running the yellow coming in contact with someone on the cross street jumping
the green.
ALL-WAY STOPS merely assign equal priority to all approaches at .a' intersect
They would be both impractical and unsafe on high volume roadways, such as
Broad Street, Roosevelt Boulevard, City-Avenue, etc. However, they have pro
' to be the safest control at Intersections of collector streets. They are In,
ent/y safe at such Intersections because speed, the common element in all se'
acc /dents, Is essentially eliminated.
4-2-92
Memorandum
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
File Name:
The following are key aspects of the proposed lease with the Hopkins Area Arts
Association:
Term: 2 years
Annual HAAA Exclusive Use:
24 weeks in the gallery
3 weekends in the gallery
6 weeks in the multi -use performance hall
Annual Additional Hours
244 additional hours in the gallery (equals two weeks)
18 hours in the multi -use performance hall
40
16
180
100
CI
tt
6{
The additional hours would be booked through the meet - and - confer process involving all
the project partners. HAAA would be the curator of the gallery during its exclusive use
time and additional hours.
Annual Rehearsal Time
Steve Mielke and Jay Strachota
Jim Parsons
Oct. 9, 1997
HAAA Partnership Agreement Proposal
HAAA lease joint venture 6.doc
hours in the rehearsal room
hours in the theater
hours in the art classroom
hours in the conference room
HAAA would receive 40 more hours to rehearse in a suitable space in the Center, as
scheduling permits at the Landlord's discretion. These 40 hours would be at no
additional charge; the Landlord will make every effort to accommodate HAAA's rehearsal
needs.
HAAA Office
HAAA would have a mailbox, signage, and literature display throughout the term of the
agreement, subject to Center policies.
HAAA would have an office: desk, filing cabinet, and office divider (supplied by HAAA) in
the gallery during HAAA's exclusive use times and additional hours in the gallery. When
HAAA is not using the gallery, HAAA would lock its file drawers and the desktop would
be available to the gallery user.
There is no charge to HAAA for installation of a phone line to the gallery. Phone
services and hardware would be at HAAA's option and expense.
Concessions
HAAA could have concessions at all HAAA events, e. g., food /beverage, souvenirs,
coatroom, flowers.
HAAA could have the coatroom concession at all events by all major tenants. This is a
valuable concession and could pay much of the rent proposed. The Landlord would
charge a $50 /month fee for the coatroom concession. This is a minimal fee and is in
keeping with established practice at the Hopkins Pavilion. HAAA would staff the
coatroom at all events by all major tenants and retain all proceeds. The coatroom
service would be for tips only, not for a set charge. There are 8 -9 major tenant events
planned per month; the fee would equate to $5 -6 per event. Proceeds per event will be
many times that amount.
Gallery Storage Room
HAAA would have use of most of the gallery storage room throughout the term of the
agreement for art and equipment. HAAA would share the room with the Landlord;
Landlord would store art pedestals and other equipment in the room.
Rent
Balance of 1997: Free
1998: $1,000 /quarter for 4 quarters = $4,000 /year
1999: $$1,500/quarter for 4 quarters = $6,000 /year
STATEMENT OF RELATIONSHIP
Understanding of the Relationship between HAAA and the City of
Hopkins.
To clarify the relationship there will be a statement or explanation of the
relationship between HAAA & the City of Hopkins. This statement will be
in the form of an introduction to the lease.
ll. What the relationship statement would say.
A. To HAAA's side the City would:
1. State that the City recognizes the value of HAAA as a
community non - profit volunteer arts organization.
2. State that the City further recognizes that HAAA is a relatively
young organization, that is aggressively taking on the new
responsibility of the Arts Center Gallery and more.
3. State that the City recognizes the uncertainty of this new
venture for HAAA.
B. To the City's side HAAA would:
1. State that HAAA recognizes that tenant lease rent is a vital part
of the revenue source for the Hopkins Center for the Arts.
2. State that HAAA recognizes that it is not the intention of the
Hopkins City Council to support the HCA with general fund
dollars.
C. Having stated all of the above, HAAA and the City would conclude that:
1. The City desires to have HAAA as a tenant and will not hold
HAAA or members of the organization liable for the financial
obligations of the lease.
2. Should HAAA be unable to pay a quarterly commitment there
will be a mechanism in the contract by which the City and HAAA
document and assess the situation. This documentation and
assessment will be taken into consideration by both parties
when entering into future lease agreements.
•
X al
I 11
t.r
w� I
C•Z.Z•Zi1
.......
N
W
W
0
0