CR 91-20 Extension Request - Prelim Design Plans SW LRT
"\ Y
\ 0
G '"
m
. January 10, 1991 ~ 0 ~ c, Council Report: 91-20
P K \
EXTENSION REQUEST - PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS
FOR SOUTHWEST LRT CORRIDOR
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move that the
Council adopt Resolution No.91-06 - A Resolution Requestinq An
Extension From The Hennepin County Reqional Railroad Authority
Regardinq The A~proval Of Preliminary Desiqn Plans For Southwest Liqht
Rail Transit Corridor.
Approval of this motion will allow the city to formally request of the
HCRRA an extension of 90 days to allow for further study on issues
pertaining to the preliminary Design Plans for the Southwest LRT
Corridor.
Overview.
On January 8, 1991 the city Council conducted a public hearing on the
Preliminary Design Plans for the segment of the Southwest LRT Corridor
located in the city of Hopkins. During this public hearing a
representative from Edco indicated concern for an LRT station proposed
to be located on their property along Second Street N. E. The
representative from Edco indicated that the property ln question was
important in terms of Edco's future business needs. During the public
. hearing it was also noted by City staff that several questions had
been raised regarding traffic impacts as related to the station
locations on Second Street N.E. and at T.H. 169.
Unless an extension is granted, the city is required to approve or
disapprove the 10% Preliminary Design Plans by January 27, 1991. If
the City does not approve or disapprove the plans by January 27, or if
an extension is not granted, the plans are considered approved.
Due to the obj ections raised by Edco regarding the Second Street
station, and also due to questions which have been raised by the city
regarding traffic concerns at the various LRT stations I staff is
recommending that the City Council request from the HCRRA an extension
of 90 days to allow these issues to be reviewed further.
Please note that the City of st. Louis Park has requested a 60 day
extension from the HCRRA.
primary Issues to consider.
o What are the concerns expressed by Edco?
o What are the traffic issues that will need to be addressed in
the future for the Second street station?
o What are the traffic issues that will need to be addressed in
the future for the Excelsior Avenue station?
Supporting Documents.
. ( 0 Analysis of Issues 0 Resolution No. 91-06
o Alt rnatives 0 Benshoof Memo dated 12/19/90
IhJtI ~ ~
Tom Harmening, "ty Development Director
. EXTENSION REQUEST
CR: 91-20
Page 2
Analvsis.
0 What are the concerns expressed by Edco?
The Preliminary Design Plans illustrate a park and ride lot along
Second Street N.E. on property currently occupied by Dick's Towing.
Edco purchased the impound lot property along with the Massey Ferguson
property last spring. Edco purchased this property with the idea of
utilizing the Massey Ferguson building for their business operations.
In addition, Edco also plans on expanding the building towards the
east into the proposed LRT site. Edco has indicated to staff and at
the public hearing that it is critical to their operation to have the
ability to expand the building towards the east.
Edco has requested that the HCRRA reconsider the station location.
HCRRA staff has indicated they would be willing to re-evaluate the
situation. This re-evaluation would include an examination of
alternate sites, the possible re-design of the proposed site to
accommodate the Edco expansion and at the same time allow for some
type of LRT station, or the elimination of an LRT station from this
area entirely.
. 0 What are the traffic issues that will have to be addressed in the
future for the Second street station?
- Benshoof & Associates has identified several issues regarding the
Second Street station. The following issues are recommended for
further study (please see attached report for more detailed
information) .
. Number of access points on Second street
. Need for/desirability of restripping on Second Street
. Location of driveway relative to existing parking lot access on
north side of Second Street
. Access implications for residential area to the north
. Implications of at grade pedestrian crossing
. provision of pedestrian access to/from North Blake Road on
south side of railroad tracks
. Possibility of sidewalk construction on Second Street
0 What are the traffic issues that will need to be addressed in the
future regarding the Excelsior Boulevard station?
- Benshoof & Associates has identified several traffic issues at
the Excelsior Boulevard station. The following issues are
. recommended for further study:
. Traffic impacts at the intersection of 5th Avenue and
Excelsior Avenue and need for improvements on 5th Avenue.
. Traffic impacts at the intersection of 5th Avenue & Third
Street.
. EXTENSION REQUIEST
CR: 91-20
Page 3
. Location of driveways relative to existing and future access
on south side of Third Street.
. Adequacy of spacing of access from Third Street/5th Avenue
intersection.
. Traffic impacts at Third street/Washington Avenue
intersection.
. site distance at access on Washington Avenue.
. Need for/desirability of a new railroad crossing
. Traffic at west and east T.H. 169 ramps.
- Possible redesign of park and ride lot to allow direct access
from County Road 3 to Hennepin County property to the south.
This involves a road through the park and ride site for access
to the Hennepin County site.
Alternatives.
Based on the information provided by staff, the City Council has the
. following alternatives to consider:
1. Approve staffs recommendation.
2 . Approve or disapprove the Preliminary Design Plans. If the
Council should desire to approve the Preliminary Design Plans,
conditions should be attached to the approval.
3 . Table the matter for further information. Unless the City
Council would meet and act on this issue prior to January 27,
the plans would be considered approved.
.
CITY OF HOPKINS
. Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 91-06
RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN EXTENSION FROM THE HENNEPIN
COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY REGARDING THE
APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS FOR
THE SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins has been and continues to be a
strong supporter of light rail transit, and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin county Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA)
has approved for distribution the Preliminary Design
Plans for the Southwest Light Rail Transit Corridor
which extends into Hopkins, Minnesota, and
WHEREAS, unless an extension is granted by the HCRRA, the city of
Hopkins is required to approve or disapprove the
Preliminary Design Plans by January 27, 1991, and
WHEREAS, as a part of the city's review of the Preliminary Design
Plans, questions have been raised by a property owner of
a site identified as an LRT station along Second Street
Northeast. This property owner expressed concerns
. regarding the use of the site for LRT purposes as
related to the property owners use of the site for
business expansion purposes. Furthermore, the city has
raised questions regarding traffic impacts regarding the
.LRT stations, and in particular traffic impacts relating
to the station at T.H. 169, and
WHEREAS, it does not appear that sufficient time is available for
the city and HCRRA to study the items in question such
that the City may be in a position to approve or
disapprove of the Preliminary Design Plans by the
deadline of January 27, 1991.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA:
The Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority is
respectfully requested to approve an extension of 90
days from the January 27, 1991 deadline such that the
City and HCRRA may address issues pertaining to the LRT
station on Second Street Northeast, traffic issues which
have been identified at the LRT stations, and other
items which may arise.
Adopted by the city council this 15th day of January, 1991.
.
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
ATTEST:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
~~
. . - _ J,.,l;' , -\c ,- -....=..
.." "[.~.Ir"'" " ., ,- ---- 1~' ,-, ;-"" ., ,,,.,r;---;:~'-i' - I
.,' .",' '"w, , , ."f' ," ., ." . --,.., ,Y,.,,' "',' '
II ~~j,_,~/'/~' __"" ,. , ."'.- .."", ',,, ; -- ,,' ,~, 'Ct,\-:: '~ I
\ ~" }J4' ':.. .::, ' : ,,,::: : , : , " ::,1'1 ><A.. " ::
_ ,_, _. _ . ,_ ' , _ ,_ = __\I)~:J' .1---- ·
~y; Py,,">>' .," "., .',. " .,., 7,' ".'-
I\.~ I "'.If ." ,:,' ;, .' --' " ' . --,. ,--. . , .: " ,,' .,
_ l. . F ., "__,, ., , ' "..'" ' " ,,' ~ I
:, --; ;", . ,.. ~ .,.' .'. , '-i' "." .', ," . '.: ,P ".:,," ~ ~
'" __ "...',' ' . ,U . .," . ," ,,,,,,' -I--; I ~
, ,~ ~. _, '; ~ ';:; ,.~", _ .' ' _ _ ' .~: _ _ r" ..'~ -- ,~c -:-r---'!! - :: 0
"" )~. . '-- , ". """,' - ", U"
, ,~,;' ,: ',"':':" '~':" --. - ::: ,.' -:; "",' -- ~ ", ":'" ;" :: ,,~ '
~; \\'. __ ~_~~_'_~ t-~./.::..:j. ..1"1' _ h. ~ .~.. r- ,- ."- . ; --'= == I
I-!~ ""--,,~. _,r .::::' . " " ',", - "
, ',' ....".. ' ' , ' , --,,,,, ~" " " ~ -' ---
: __ _ .- n' <<~~: '-_-, " ~ '-. - .' _. - ,I '". : '\ t . ; - - \J ..
" -" ,\ - -- ' . -, '- I f-':"" - ~. \ ' "" . . - - ' a
. --" ' " . . - ,.'
I~ p. \\....\~ ,..., '. ',_' '(' t"t "" aI " " ,', -' "t
,~-- ' ,,"' -- ' ", ,,- - .- '" " ,~." '
j-.--.--:. 01:\''''''. ):_>~ .~P\Th'" ( .r ;;'.-,.~i'1i.' C '- --, ~~ ; , -', ; ...: . t
,,,"'T ,,,;,' .. _ .;, : '.t ,_-,. ..... '_ '> - il r,', - -\{ - ,-; <1.)
, ,"' ,,"',', " . ." . ' ,'. ' ",_ "____ f >--- --, >--- . ' , ,h
.",'_' ,_, '~~. I '. C'" ., ,/~~_ ' ;-~'r~,' " r-- '". l..
" _n ,_ .\\ .,_:S:;l~. ~ _ _--"\", loa ,IT>" 1.."......,;- I ~" - ." ~ ~ ,..
, ... _ . . . :..__ ,-t': .~ ' l' "'o' .- """- I./'{' ' . . - " I
" ,,, '_" ...-, . , I . 0 CD ' . _ '" . -"" --' .... >---h
'.: _ ,;,i! (__':~~ ,',::, '" ~ -. I ",,,' . ',-:. ' , '~('!.::' Fd
.' It:, v;f_.~ ~..\ --.- -.-.cl "'1 J .. , -. -,- ',,"
, ,," " ,~",' - - -, ' ' -' .-- .~
;.,' __' li~.=--::::::r- 'j-:;-"--< -7. -, r" ~
_ . ....J rT--'-' - , --"
/. --. ," ,', .,.." ' -- .,' ", ~ , . -'--
. , !f'_ - ." .' -', ' ' _.~.: ' ,-' ,-: -. ,--. ' .,...
I pd ",. , ~ ,,,. '. ' " ' . . W .1;;; ,.. ., ~ 0 .-
1';1 ,',,' ", ":" ,--' ': -,-' , , ,',' -- ,-- ,--'-'-
, ' ~ '" .. . . .. - - - '" ~'-
__ ,u A-- _," ~ "='" 'i'~.- ,->,,,, ~ll"" '\. .,' . ii', c-:. <Ii I., ' " :'" . ,,,, ~",'- 5 J..)= I
I\~,_";'fl K*" . -T'& ~'~,'~ II~' " 1.1 - ,h ·
; '5,' '''.":> \: t ", ':: __ ," ::;:: '9 \ : :,,: ":" ':'T" "",! '---~ ':~~. ,I j co.. f :~ <U l3
l":;:.rO,. ~ __, ~, ,~,: ,,;~<---h: .-,Trit. ",",,-"':-.: ,:"",,, -'J"~ ~ v ~"~ ~~ti:':' - -'17r:~G' S ~t-~
.,I;i- ....., ,\,#_~,..J-::-I;---r-:"~ _.. .~~.. .l-I -\~ - ,-- .,~ _.: V r-r),
" ,__" , ' __~" ' .. . __ . .." ." c- ,,___ , " '" .."" w'.' -, "'"
,._ _.'_" _ .) /,: ---I,;-.~. ~ ~ ,,' \\ ..,. .,.c=,' -. --w,.< ,:'-'...:. ,-; ,~- ,-/l;
I~ 0,- ..,1\.' _ ,_ ,\ ~..~ _ """''" - -,..- ,~.". -, , P'I
I::> "," \, , ' __ ___<)--.-" ,. .-::' . ' "." ~,...\-"-::+-,:.-"" A' - ': " ,:y' " ,11 rr" ~ · ...
.' . "__",,," " '_. _' ""","'-'?T', ,,,J,,,,--.!'- " ,," 'Cl"'- ., ~
., ." ,,- ' ,.,=~,' ",~. '," "..' '," --
; ,__, \ -.. "''' T." _, ' . \"".- ,. . --.-,-',' I\' : ' ""
I~ L ' '. J\~"~~"~~ 'c" <& re, 1~-1L~" '.f: : ::- \(s.~ ~.. r~;, CI)(~ I
-c; ~'\ '_1'-~ _ .p..... ., "I"'" ," To -:\\- j-,;;:' - - ,\ .,.'
__ "".. v ' .' -,' ~-, ,,___.C< ,,"-- /' -- "" ~ '-f':," '
", _. \ ,,' .~ """ '" __ ", "F-"" , '" , ',,'"~
.~\I1!'}" "... ,,' -'\5' " . V~__" . ..lirh,<-"":A::~1:"', '''"'c,;r;\~'''-:!'~i''-.J t~;:'L ' I
rI.' __ .-' ' ," '" ""..,'", .-:::.k".,>" '--JE'
._" .r..---.' -. ,T" \''''''1~''~
, ",.. ,,,- -. ' ' " "..,. ,,- ,: -- ' , ,~.... ---- . ," ,," .;'
, ,..,....... ' . _ ..... ", ~ --' .' :;----'--"'~ ' "c'"'-''' ,," "
, , ,i-,--.-.,l ....." _ ,_ ." ~, ,': ,,, --' --, ,,,'~ "''1.0< -- ,.,-
~ .:_, """.-';~"-I" '_ ' , ,_ :1"".1 'iI' . - '. .. ;.r -. ;f~t:~.. ~~. " .. '
, __ .1--" ~ ".' __ ,-- -i "" ,,----,. .'." , , · , - g^". '1'~
= ",,' ,."" . __ "', - ',-" " -' "" "':'W'-- '\n.;I;-~
_ _ 0.\~ ' ~~ .. "I, I ' ,- , ~, .. . '
. . ,."."" ,,-- .-' , #'" . " -- ,,-- , ,,' -- '
'll" ." -.. .,-- ..., ,,'" .-', ',' ' , ,~',,," --, .,~
,,' , ,,,,,. '.' "'. ,'__' ,~~" ,",,' ", __~I . , ' "T"' . '"
:,1 ' .. T-,-n~\.. ~ -.... "'~~ .a.....~~ .~~0 ~: .-'- ~-- -" : ~__!m'"
_, _ _ - "w \ I r_ ..." -~, '~- - - ---" '. . """,,-. . I
, . ,"" ,,__ , " " '" __ _ . C . " ,. "",="
. ,,,,,,; ,,,- ' ,,, "," ".', -'" . ' ".' ,'" ", ~.." ,
-7 __ ',~ ..:!,~ \.,-: "," c, :~, " ,i; _.;\ ~. .;.-- - n-;t~':K'
l~ IUt V~' _ " _.' -w,~: ~. - ' ';?: , .1~
''',' ',:\ 1~":-' ,,"'. .::"', -"li"___ \.~,..'"".;:'~<' '/~~-:l '..("-.,Jjr~"~')
1_ 4 j. ~..'t' 6...~..t \'," '_"' ,,"','" '",':' , .~,~ ,/.',," W,"
, , ' ,,' 7" '.' ,F'?'-( ~'I"":_ ' ' -- ," "'- "1'1.,'<
liJ..., _,,--'_ ~fjj"" ,,:,~~~,---...-= ,I,I::'~ ;~" ~,-) :':"0'" "!,0t.-1 'v~' ,~_.t-. 1 - t \.: OH I
Si;"-4 . ~\t )"~ -.I .J ,_~' ""._.;;tlil _"_ , ... -. _.r.';...: , .) 'J t:.c
,. ' .." v ," "" ~ ~ - ' -- ,,,,,".. ' ,,' ' '"
\J -- ~)_ ~,,' 'tX ~i1'-' k : - : -.' 'r?' ;.r. _"\ ~-" ....... - , \ y.1'--- ~. ~
..' ' ., ,,,",' , ,~__' " "', ~ , .; ," ',,' .. "--." , 'r,,::-C '
., ., "," n", ,,'" .;" __, ..', ,." IW' '" -- ,-- ,,, --
"~~(' ,'_ :'_ :~' :I~"~'~" ......,-.-_f-'-.v~ A':~ :::' 'n .- '_~'I:~.L- ;.~o/~..J. ~ .
'''LI . [~t:' . - ~ c- r1 -k=h''''--~' .":~l\' (3
: :, ___ '':'_~:: ({\, I,,~ __ _:,._), ",,',.:;;..' ..::- ':._1' -' , ~~- '~-.; 1"'" ~o
~,' ,.:... _ I ~l \.rL . - ~7'rt-:-:t ""--;-1.- ,:' 'J~J' - III "1 ".1;::,. -: . ~)..1~[r[;' '" ~ g.
,'_, " ,. _ ~__". ." __ '" ,.JJI;JIJ . ,'J ,,,,-,,,' "" ' · ,-~.'" ·
~ I ; _, ':'-' ,_ . .~ V\ ..<~\:;,. ..,~ ~,-~,' 10' -'t, ~~ ~. 1- - ,-j!~ ~-:6
. " '--'-- ,. ,"" ,~ ,. --, '""" ' "
.." ,__ ",'" ", ,.~. ,"''''C -- ~" '"
i~ ~ ,( l~ 1---l'" \ L:l~ ,.~;~.~ ":~.' .-< -, f.7 --" 1-...'" . ~ ii:Jl I.
_ ,~.' .' d- \. _' (-I;'" '_' , l-';i~LI"" . -I-' -" -- '"
, -- " '..." , ":' ,,--- -- ',,"" ,,~",', "', =>-=-- . ,
. 1 TtT~'I".J " ~.. IT' '\ '<:~ ~~~' ,:.:... . L' :"7 l. f-J ;,;; :~ '-"'-.-.: I ,~,.x'_' ;..,., I
I, ~ 'r---\4' ",'. ',' ,"', '" '( '.;'~_' ' ' '." -,' ~ .,'--:~ /("~-' ':' " -," i
Ill':';' . ~' . ' ' \ j " ...' ~ --. -.JL . - :\:y "":: h ' .~...
1_ J....~'-' __ '. ..--.".. -..., ~.' I 'L - -.' '" \~r=J1 'r,.. ,;"I
I."~ . . " 'i(l; - - -' .....' ,. --. - ,~" ell
" .' __" ,B; , ' " : ," -- '. ,'=".- ,'0=:1 , ' ' " ·
_ ,,'_' ,,' . ~ _ r. : . _ _ ,Y '1m \, ,~ ~ : i I ~
- ,,--' "'" ' ' . " . .
"'H-'" ,-----' ~__,,' i ,'" "..-- -", ,__ - ,;.-" -- >, "" ,'",'\n~~
__ , ,__"", ",,,\i- ' ," "",' .' , '
1.,.--.<- ~-nH"---= "'. ","' .--\";', ~ ' L ",J-l;" : '" -- ' CD'::~ lid, " , !. I
, "--- L..Y __ ,'''' ' ' __" ' """ \. -" , .. ",:; , .. .~. ""vI
, '-"" '." --.' --' " .. .
.11-"-'c I i .- -~~:--3' :\C\ i \ ~.~.'l' -11' ;{. - ~,::J \-~ ... -- - -' '. V-l'~.
~_" / If" ~j, _. ~ :. ~ \' '- .. ....: .: ~ \i" '_"'."1" -0- \, \."- :.7- , , -
f. _';;' ,_ 1. "1,' \ -" -. '-' - -WT' l"~ ' .. <". I
~~. {"""",, , ',_ .' ',I .-' , ,-' " - --- .. - -- \" " ,,-; -- .
",_.' ,"',' . --.'" ',..--- "",~" ,,",.' ,.~' / -- '
~ '. 1, ' -...;l ._~ ;,' \ _\" L.er-'A-,.' . '\...J-'...~~;~- -', ~ -I--. ,:C.':_-I
'Y'" iI' \ ' _ '0' _ .. _ ' " "." - .' e
, .", ' --' '--' --, ,.' ' -- .- '" "'
, . -- ...." . -- ' ' " " ,-- -- ,-" --
I_~ n'I~~'} - :~:, ~:~(~~ 'I~~\ '-, .;~:;~ffih.:.--;~,~:... i -:,.'- ~~:.,~ J'~;~' '\~;:.' ',-\.'__,1 '.- ~.
I~I: . ~;\!1' '.,,'~ "i ,,; "--jlr-o" '\'II~'t:::) ".' ,,-~,' lK
,,:":: ' __ " ,..-: ,~M:: "'I :: '~c-J7 - T ,', ',"': \b:::J \-"1-')", ~ . --: i VtI-~-UJ'--j ---'1
. . ( ';", " ~,'I\. _.(~ " :~ -;"'';: : ' ",' ~/ a I:::!
-
-
Hi BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
7901 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE, SUITE 119/ EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 553441 (612) 944-7590 / FAX (612) 944-9322
December 19, 1990 REFER TO FILE: 90-50
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Harmening, ~ty of HO~
FROM: James A. Bensh~~ & David. . gan
RE: Review of Traffic Issues Relating to Proposed LRT Stations in City of
Hopkins
PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the results of our review regarding
preliminary plans for proposed LRT stations in the City of Hopkins. Key purposes of
. our review have been to identify important traffic issues relating to the proposed T.H.
169 and North Blake Road Stations, review available materials regarding previous
analyses of these issues, and offer suggestions as to issues requiring further attention.
In order to identify important issues and review previous study efforts the following
steps were conducted:
. Field observations at both locations during the a.m. and p.m. peak: hour time
periods
. Review of materials obtained from HCRRA including preliminary analysis,
design drawings, and a traffic impact report prepared by BRW, Inc.
. Review of City of Hopkins Comprehensive Plan and issues raised by City of
Hopkins staff
. Review of Benshoof & Associates' CSAH 3 Corridor Study and Southeast
Hopkins-Minnetonka Transportation Study
Based on these observations and review, issues needing further study have been
identified. The remainder of this memorandum will further detail our basis for the
identification of issues and provide our recommendations for further study.
.
Mr. Tom Harmening -2- December 19, 1990
. IDENTIFICATION OF TRAFFIC ISSUES
Field Observations
Field observations were conducted in the area surrounding the proposed stations during
the expected a.m. (7-9 a.m.) and p.m. (3-5 p.m.) peak hour time periods. These
observations centered on the identification of traffic and design issues related to
individual station sites. Specifically, conditions observed included the following:
. Traffic operations and turning movement patterns at all adjacent intersections
. The potential for vehicle stacking and conflict relative to relationships between
proposed site access JX>ints and adjacent intersections
. The potential impact on and provisions for pedestrian access at each proposed
site
Information from HCRRA
A careful review of materials provided by HCRRA was completed in terms of traffic-
related issues associated with the proposed stations. Preliminary design analyses and
drawings were reviewed to gain knowledge concerning the physical layouts proposed
and to identify provisions for effective site-related vehicle and pedestrian movements
. to, from, and within each station. In addition, an attempt was made to determine if a
relationship had been established between the demand for on-site parking and the
proposed parking provisions. Any problems with undersized lots may cause undue
parking pressures on-street and in residential neighborhood areas.
A report conducted by BRW, Inc. regarding traffic operations was reviewed to
determine trip generation and distribution characteristics associated with the station sites
and to identify any level of service or capacity concerns at nearby and adjacent
intersections. The report did not indicate the particular basis for trip generation or
distribution projections. The report addressed the T.H. 169 Station, but not the North
Blake Road Station.
Other Related Materials
Materials provided by the City of Hopkins, including the Comprehensive Plan and a
summary of staff concerns, further assisted us in the identification of important issues.
Finally, the content of Benshoof & Associates' materials involving the CSAH 3
Corridor Study and the Southeast Hopkins-Minnetonka Transportation Study was
reviewed to determine any additional pertinent concerns.
.
Mr. Tom Harmening -3- December 19, 1990
. Traffic Issues Warranting Further Study for T.H. 169 Station
Traffic issues at the T.H. 169 station which need further study are shown in Figure 1.
One important issue regarding the T.H. 169 station involves the proposed new at-grade
railroad crossing that would connect the station with CSAH 3 at the west ramp
intersection. This crossing would be just 850 feet east of the existing 5th Ave. crossing
and just 1750 feet west of the CSAH 3 crossing. In addition to the existing crossings,
two new crossings are being considered in the CSAH 3 corridor study - east ramp
intersection and Jackson St. From a traffic safety standpoint, it is important to limit the
number of at-grade railroad crossings. A need exists to address access for the T.H.
169 station and other properties in the area in a roadway system context. The objective
is to develop a plan for roadway connections and at-grade railroad crossings that will
meet several important criteria, including: capacity, safety, and accessibility.
, An issue relating to the above railroad crossing concern pertains to access to the
Hennepin County site on the south side of 3rd Street. When this site is redeveloped in
the future, its access needs may be greater than at present. A pertinent question is: If
a new at-grade crossing and traffic connection are provided to CSAH 3 at the west
ramp intersection, should this connection be extended south to 3rd Street to serve the
County site and other properties in the area?
Another issue warranting further study involves traffic operations at intersections
adjacent to the T.H. 169 site. Information provided by the HCRRA indicates that work
. has begun to address traffic implications at nearby intersections, but more study of such
effects is needed. Five particular limitations of information provided by the HCRRA
that need to be resolved through further study are:
. 1985 traffic counts were used as a basis for the analysis
. The particular basis for trip generation and trip distribution projections was not
expressed
. Trips approaching the T.H. 169 station from the south and southwest were not
addressed
. The analysis did not account for redevelopment of the Hennepin County
property, nor the anticipated expansion of Super Valu
. The intersections of Third Street with 5th Ave. and Washington Ave. were not
addressed
The question of stacking, particularly near the intersection of Fifth Ave. and Third S1.,
should be examined. The large number of semi-trailer trucks and other vehicles
utilizing this intersection during the am and pm peak periods may result in queues
which would cause conflicts and reduce the capacity of the two southwesterly
driveways for the T.H. 169 station.
.
. >0
"
TRAFFIC IMPACTS AT
WEST AND EAST T.H. 169 RAMPS
, . -iI-
TRAFFIC IMPACTS AT
--
-- -- --
--- -- -- --
- ::::::::-=- -
SITE DISTANCE
AT DRIVEWAY
LOCATION OF DRIVEWAYS
RELATIVE TO EXISTING AND
FUTURE ACCESS ON SOUTH
r SIDE OF 3rd ST.
TRAFFIC IMPACTS AT
IMPLICATIONS REGARDING 3rd ST./WASHINGTON AVE.
DEVELOPMENT OF HENNEPIN INTERSECTroN
SCALE COUNTY PARCEL AND EXPANSION
I I OF SUPERVALU OPERATIONS
0' 200'
DESIGN MAP OBTAINED FROM LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS
CITY OF HOPKINS FIGURE 1
HOPKINS LRT TRAFFIC ISSUES AT
W STATION STUDY T.H. 169 STATION
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES. INC.
TRANSPORTATION ANOLANO use CONSULTANTS
Mr. Tom Harmening -4- December 19, 1990
. Traffic Issues Warranting Further Study for North Blake Road Station
Figure 2 illustrates issues at the North Blake Road station which we believe need
further study.
An issue of pedestrian traffic arises in regards to proposed plans for the North Blake
Road station. Plans call for an at-grade pedestrian crossing of the Soo Line tracks.
Further, the subject of access provisions for pedestrians north of Second St. need
further consideration. There are currently no sidewalks on the north or south sides of
Second St. to accommodate pedestrians to and from the residential area to the north.
Another pedestrian issue involves access for persons along Blake Road south of the
railroad tracks. A direct pedestrian connection to the LRT station is needed from Blake
Rd. south of the tracks. Without such a connection, users would have to walk a much
greater distance north to Second St., west on Second St. to the station, and then south
through the station I s parking lot.
The number and location of driveways on Second St. is another issue that needs to be
addressed. The proposal to provide four driveways along the 320 foot frontage of the
site may cause undue conflicts for traffic on Second St.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURmER STUDY
T.H. 169 Station
. The question of an access to this station from the west TH 169 ramp deserves careful
attention. The number of at-grade railroad crossings along CSAH 3 is a matter that
will significantly affect the efficiency and safety of travel along the corridor. We
would recommend that a traffic analysis addressing the.need for and desirability of this
access be conducted following a three step process:
. Identification of Alternative Roadway Network and Access Plans
. Traffic Forecasts for Identified Alternatives
. Traffic Analysis to Identify Preferred Plan
Identification of Alternative Roadway Network and Access Plans - The central issue
in the identification of alternatives for this access involve providing safe and efficient
traffic operations for the LRT station and other nearby properties. All reasonable
options for achieving this goal should be considered. Three possible options are:
. The traffic plan as presented in preliminary design drawings. (With all
driveways including the at-grade railroad crossing at the west TH 169 ramp)
. A concept without the at-grade crossing at the west TH 169 ramp but instead
featuring a frontage road design. This frontage road would begin o'n Third St.
just east of the Fifth Ave.lThird St. intersection and terminate on CSAH 3 at
. the east TH 169 ramp. (fhis plan would entail an at-grade railroad crossing at
the east TH 169 ramp)
. According to the traffic plan presented in preliminary design drawings but
including a connection through the LRT site from CSAH 3 to Third St.
.
? .
J POSSIBILITY OF SIDEWALK NEED FORIDE!;IRABILlTY ACCESS IMPLICATIONS FOR
CONSTRUCTION ON 2nd ST. OF RESTRIPING ON 2nd ST. RESIDENTIAL AREA TO NORTH
(-
I
I
LOCATION OF.DRIVEWAYS 0
NUMBER OF ACCESS RELATIVE TO EXISTING
POINTS ON 2nd ST. PARKING LOT ACCESS ON
NORTH SIDE OF 2nd ST.
. (;
__.-J -- -- -...... L__ --
--
....
j iN?;1ii r-- --
... --
- -- --
-- ... - i;;~~: __ ...-- - -
-
-
-- --
IMPLICATIONS OF AT-GRADE
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
ACCESS TOIFROM N. BLAKE RD.
ON SOUTH SIDE OF RAILROAD TRACKS
r [J
~a n
SCALE I
I
0' 200'
DESIGN MAP OBTAINED FROM LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS
FIGURE 2
CITY OF HOPKINS TRAFFIC ISSUES AT
HOPKINS LRT NORTH BLAKE ROAD
STATION STUDY LRT STATION
W BENSHOOF &ASSOCIATES,INC.
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
.
Mr. Tom Harmening -5- December 19, 1990
.
Traffic Forecasts - Traffic forecasts would then be developed as a basis for analyzing
each alternative. This analysis would focus on the ability of the roadway network to
safely and efficiently accommodate traffic associated with the LRT station and nearby
properties.
To develop these forecasts, we would propose that 1989 traffic counts for the west TH
169 Ramp/CSAH 3 and Fifth Ave.lCSAH 3 intersections, available from Hennepin
County, and 1990 counts observed at the Fifth Ave.lThird St. and Washington
Ave.lThird St. intersections, observed as part of the CSAH 3 Corridor Study, be
utilized to provide baseline traffic volumes. An appropriate growth factor would be
established and applied to baseline volumes to reflect expected 1995 traffic projections.
A sound basis for station-related trip generation and distribution would also be
established.
Trip generation figures for the LRT station would be added to the 1995 projected
volumes. In addition, the redevelopment of the Hennepin County property to the south
of Third St. and the proposed expansion of the Super Valu operations should be taken
into account. Expected traffic from these two sources would also be added to the 1995
projections. The addition of traffic relating both to the LRT station and other nearby
development will provide a more accurate picture of expected future conditions. In
conjunction with an appropriate trip distribution pattern, these trip generation figures
would be assigned to the local traffic network. This assignment, to the point of
. specific turn movements at all affected intersections, would be based on the most
efficient and convenient travel routes and on characteristics of the individual traffic
plan under review.
Analysis of Alternatives - As noted, the analysis of particular alternative traffic plans
would be conducted regarding the ability of the roadway network to adequately
accommodate traffic associated with both the LRT station and nearby properties. To
this end, the merits of each alternative would be judged on the basis of its resulting
effects on roadway and intersection capacity, delay, and safety. Thorough analysis of
each plan would culminate in the identification of a single preferred plan which best
addresses these concerns. It is important to note that the resultant traffic plan needs to
be fully coordinated with objectives and strategies developed in the CSAH 3 Corridor
Study. Such careful coordination would help to ensure the consistent application of
sound traffic operation throughout the area.
North Blake Road Station
Issues regarding the North Blake Road Station fall into two major categories:
. Vehicle operations on Second Street
. Pedestrian access from areas both south and north of the station
.
,
Mr. Tom Harmening ~6- Dccember 19, 1990
. Vehicle Operations on Second Street - One issue concerning the number and location
of proposed driveways serving this site should be examined. Specifically, we believe
that four individual access points along the 320 foot frontage likely would not be
needed. While recognizing a desire to separate bus traffic from other vehicles, we
would suggest that alternatives be examined to reduce the number of site driveways.
One option to accomplish this improvement would involve two site driveways. Both
buses and automobiles would access and exit the site using the same driveways.
However the buses, upon entering the site, would be quickly routed to the outside edge
of the parcel and separated from automobile traffic at this point. They would then
continue in an exclusive bus lane around the periphery of the site to allow unrestricted
loading and unloading. The bus operations would occur in a counter-clockwise
direction, instead of the clockwise pattern shown on the current plans. Finally, the
buses would merge with automobile traffic before exiting from a shared driveway.
This should prove an efficient and effective means for limiting the number of access
points required on Second St. while allowing a separated circulation pattern within the
site. This concept and, possibly, other options should be analyzed in order to
determine a preferred plan.
An additional issue which deserves consideration is general traffic operations on Second
St. Recognizing the need for left turn movements by westbound vehicles entering the
station and eastbound vehicles entering the parking lot on the north side of Second St.,
an alternative lane assignment may be appropriate. We suggest an examination to
determine the desirability of operating Second St. under a three lane design. One lane
. would be provided for eastbound and westbound through movements while the center
lane would be a two-way left turn lane.
Pedestrian Access - An important issue to be addressed concerning this station involves
provisions for pedestrian access. Residential areas north of Second Street and the south
of the LRT station will be poorly served given proposed design plans and existing
conditions. In addition, the proposed at-grade pedestrian crossing of the Soo Line
tracks at this statIOn may be undesirable.
To serve residential areas north of Second Street, we recommend that possibilities for
providing sidewalks along Second Sf. and a crosswalk adjacent to the station be
examined. The possibility of a sidewalk on the south side of the railroad tracks
connecting the LRT station with an existing sidewalk on the west side of North Blake
Road also should be closely considered. This walkway would allow for safe and more
convenient access for pedestrians to and from areas south of the LRT station.
We further recommend that the desirability of an at-grade pedestrian crossing of the
Soo Line tracks be carefully examined relative to the potential merits for a grade
separated crossing. We believe that the implications of this crossing in terms of safety
considerations would be significant and warrant additional study.
..
-~