5.2. SR 05-14-2007
To
Ci Council
Agenda Section
W orksession
Meeting Date
May 14, 2007
Item Number
5.2.
Prepared by
Bill Maertz, Parks and Recreation
Director '"
Reviewed by
T er Maurer, Ci
Reviewed by
Lori ohnson, Ci Administrator
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Item Description
Road Median Concepts and Streetscape Templates
Action Requested
Council is being asked two questions.
1. Which of the three road median concepts does the Council prefer?
2. Is the Council interested in adopting streetscape templates that could be applied on new
residential, commercial and industrial development?
Background/Discussion
Amy Bower from HK.Gi will present the three streetscape alternatives for Twin Lakes Parkway and the
potential streetscape templates.
Road Median Concepts
The 2007 budget included funds to develop a median landscaping plan. Twin Lakes Road was designed as
a parkway but never had the streetscape elements installed. HIZGi Landscape Architects has developed
three concepts for Twin Lakes Road. The preferred alternative could serve as the plan for future road
projects such as 193rd Avenue.
Streetscape Templates
HIZGi has taken streetscape templates used by other growing cities and adapted them to Elk River's
unique characteristics. These templates could be adopted by ordinance and be applied to new
developments in order to ensure that adequate pedestrian facilities and boulevard trees are included in the
development. If adopted, these templates provide developers clear standards, and simplify the site review
process.
Financial Impact
Road Median Concepts
Once Council has indicated a preferred alternative HIZGi will develop cost estimates. Individual items
within the plan can be priced and deleted or added as budget dictates. Typically, streetscape elements are
included in road project costs and are eligible for MSA funding and USTA funding.
C: \Documents and Settings \jmiller\Local Settings \ Temporary Internet Files \ OLK3E\Median Plans.doc
Second by _
Streetscape Templates
Costs for developers will vary. Most developments include a budget for sidewalks, streetscape, entry
features and landscaping.
Attachments
· Streetscape Concept Plans
· Potential Streetscape Templates
Action
Motion by _
Follow Up
Vote
C: \Documents and Settings \jmiller\Local Settings \ Temporary Internet Files \ OLK3E\Median Plans. doc
~ J
Twin Lakes Road
Streetscape Concepts
Concept A: Main Street
Concept B: River l
Concept C: Refined Savanna
OJ
~
'i
"F'; .,p J'o
r .~~.. "J 4.... ~
~ .. ~ "-
.i1 ......
.. IlJ
Ii!!
n ~
I!l a ~ 'i#
i1i t'
draft review May 2007
I I
PLAN
I
~
I I
SECTION
u
5: TWIN LAKES ROAD
CONCEPT A:
MAIN STREET
TYPICAL FEATURES
Pedestrian Crossing:
(colored stamped concrete)
Gateway featu re
ROW: 120ft typical
Existing Sidewalk: 6ft on
one side of street
Existing Trail: 1 Oft
bituminous, one side of
street
Special paving at median
focal ends
Lighting: add 2 decorative
lightpoles with special
paving bands between
existing 30ft shoebox.
Banner poles in median
Bou levard s hade trees
evenly spaced in existing
turf
Perennial plantings at
median focal ends
2ft Concrete maintenance
strip at plantings
Ornamental tree plantings
with shrubs at median focal
ends and mid median
accents with existing turf
between
CORRIDOR DESIGN STUDY
ELK RIVER
fig 5.2
"
o
;):J
;):J
6
o
;):J
t:J
~
~~
~"'''''
.....~~
~ - c:::
~~t:J
w~"'<
I I
~
::Q
o
~
:c:
::j
:c:
C'l
~
r-
o
:c:
C'l
8
::Q
::Q
~
u,"''''~
o~::r)(
o ~ C) ;:;;'
~~ ~~,
C)~C)=:3
~{i~~
~Ii5'O
~ a.~
. =:3
!,Q
;,~
..
tnC""o
X 0 tn
iii' t: n
!:!. (D Q
~~~
w c.. <'
o tn
;:r~~
;~~
o c. ~
~C""=
o ~ \0
x:E;:!
_tnll\
~~ 5'
rl
11\
~~ ~
::r~""
::0 .... C)
~ ~ ",
~tI.~
.... ~:!'.
~ ~ -c:
~i:
ClII>u,
?< S ~
~~,~
~::t ~,
C)~~
~
I
~~
IQ'"
Cl ~
c:: ...
~,~
~II>
.., ..,
~
~
....
a
w
~
!:l
!"\
t:II\VI-;
~ "0 rl '<
c.!:lJ~"C
tn n tn -.
3~rlQ
tn 11\-
!:lJ:E::rlXl
rl -. !:lJ 0
;:r:r~~
~ q ~
-. tn !:lJ
~tnc..
5' 11\ ..
\0 tn
<
rl tn
t: ~
=+.-<:
~
~
o
);:
:c:
~
)l;
r-
~
~
")
~tI. ~
Q II> Q
~ B 5
~~ ~
~~ :~
~
&:: C)
~~
us' Q
::r:;!
, ~ s
g [
~~
~ ~
~,
g.
:;!
Q
~
~
~
!"'
~
9
~
o
);:
:c:
~
R
~
::i
o
::Q
~
3:
~
~
r-
~
~
~
:c:
::j
:c:
f;l
!
~
r-
o
::E
'"
~
~
~
C)
~
=:3
~
.;l,
J)
~
!"'
~
~
~
~
~
~.
::s
~
R
~
::s
~
1 7STH-A'VE'
~
~
;;j
~
-<
~
)l;
~
::Q
",
C)
",
=:3
Q
~
II>
=:3
g,
~':::!I"'~
II> C) ::r II>
S ~ ~ 3
_", l:rll>
Q 5' l:r tI.
;;IQ a 0-
a ~
Q c:: Q
[~ ~
, ~::r ..,
iii'" US'
I: ~ ~ =:3
, Ii5'
=:3
,
I
~3;t33:n:EVI??"Ct::E"'tl)>
., !:lJ tn !:lJ tn .. -. "0 !:lJ "0 -. tn .
~ 11\ tn -. c. 3: .... tn C"l < = rl .,
n ~. "0 ~ iii' -. ::r !:!. ~ 5' \0 ::r ~ 3:
::r~ jij'< ~ 9-~~tn\O;:!Q ~ ~
~ \0 ~ 0 3::r :E!:lJ 11\ ~ -. -.
....-."2.. ""~!:lJ~' !:lJ~!:lJ
o t: -. .... !:lJ tn -. !:lJ '< C. VI 3 11\ ~
-.~~t:~c.~~ "0 -n
rl C. \0 ., rl iii' \0 rl -n C"" tn tn !:lJ 0
t: ~ 11\ ;-i' 5' ~ :;. re !:lJ n ;a ~ n
=+. C"" ~. 0 ~)> ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ 11\ ~
3~:r3n~ w ~~c.q~m
tn !:lJ 11\ !:lJ 0 tn !!!. .. tn tn t: ~
9:"::r3~;a \0 "CntnC""~
!:lJt:-,tnll\.. ~ 2,,011\ ..
~"Ct:;a~' ~ ~~!:lJ3
. _ C"" !:lJ tn' -. ~ !:lJ
o _ < c. ~
~ tn _
\0 ~
\0
,..--... ~1
':t..
~
-<.
....,
o
I
~
~
~ ~ ~
.~
~. ..... .....
E:: ,E::
::s ~ '~
~ '" ~
t"\ .....
~ ~$ ~
- ...~~
..... ~
~ "', .....
t"\ ~
"%: ~ ~
~
'1>0 ~ ~
?() ~. ~
~ ~
.....
a E::
~ ~
'"
~ ~
~
::s
~
!"' · .1
~
-.
~
~ ~ ~~~
~
~ ~
~. ~ J
::s ~
~ ~.
~ ::s
~
::s t"\
~ ~
-
~
I
.j
------
.
C)
~
Q
:;!
II>
=:3
g,
It
!"'
~
~
~
~
~
~.
::s
~
t"\
~
::s
~
J
"
--
~
~ ''f
~
.....
~
~
~
~
~
.....
E::
~
'"
--
-;
'<
"0
n'
~
"0
jij
~
!:!.
~
\0
!:lJ
-,
tn
!:lJ
11\
~, .
on I, "~
" ~'c-~~"
(( :~~~,
\ '- ~ ~
\\_~- ~~-
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
o
"03;:n
5=>0
zzz
n
........\lt1Tl
1T1-4"O
~;:a-4
1TI1T1>
<~..
~
o
Z
\It
w,
. .
~~
-i
.~ "-
I
_J
PLAN
I
SECTION
I
\
!
I
I
\~....\
I ·
\
I ·
\ -
I
!
\
I
\
I
I
\
I
!
\
I
\
I
\
I
I
~;::.."t,..\
" .' I
, I
~ I
I
...1
~..-!' !
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-~--"',,,,,,,,-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,,,,,,,
-+-
I
\
I
I
\
I
\
I
\
I
I
I~'
lij
!
\
I
I
\
fji'
5: TWIN LAKES ROAD
CONCEPT B:
RIVER
TYPICAL FEATURES
edestrian Crossing:
oncrete with special
scoring.
Gateway feature: plantings,
boulder sign, uplighting
ROW: 120ft typical
Existing 6ft Sidewalk: on
one side of street
Existing 10ft Trail:one side
of street
Perennial plantings and
boulders with uplighted
river birch and shrubs at
median focal ends
Concrete maintenance
bands
Lighting: decorative
Iightpoles added between
existing 30ft shoebox
Boulevard: oak trees on
berms with turf, much of
existing turf remains
Mid.Median multi.stem
river birch groupings with
shrubs. Existing turf for
most of median
CORRIDOR DESIGN STUDY
ELK RIVER
fig 5.4
8
~
~
6
o
~
t:I
~
~~
~~'"
~.~~
\11"5
t,,~,,<
"'i
~
~
I-
QJ
o
:::
n,
~
~
t:J
. .
~
~
~
n,
n,
~
5!
"'i
~
."
QJ
~
~
~
o
~
::s
~
~
~
I~
fl;
F.~
{,
~ '
I
{>~
1.11"''''~
c"l3 ::r ><
~~~g:
o ~o ::s
~~ ~~
"l3 Iii' C
~ ;;~
?< 5'
~
~
o
~
::s
~
~
~
o
~
::s
~
~
m
X
VI
.....
:J
~
W
o
;:r
~2~
g ~~.
~.~. Q
~g.;
VI c- 0
. (t) c:
.., -
3 ~
VI $1)
s,~
o 3
$1) 0
~:E
~ ::s
(t)
~~~~~nc-~c:~~c-Coo3~~
Q a <' ~ n .. 0 ~ ~ s .. @ ~ 3 :E c: ~ .
3c:(t)(t)n~~(t)-.....n::S-$1) ~(t)~
::s"'::s~-~::s~~~n~3V1-::S(t)
o~~::s.....~(t)::s::rVl(t)::r::r ~~~~
VI ~- 3''''-~''''':E(t)~(t)c:~ -
..... n n $1) c- $1) $1) ~ (t) $1) VI ::s c- (t) ~ $1)
s,~ ::r~g ~~ ~:::!J3-<' ~~VI 3 VI::S
(t):E$1)--(t)$1)O~~ ~ $1)~C-~
3~~::S~~::s::s:E~(t) ~~::s~og
(t)~::r~.., ~~~(t)~ ~$1)~(t)C:$1)
~c:_~VI~ (t)~"'c: ::r~:E"'~;
$1)..,oc::En :J~~~ .....(t)$1)~(t)_
::s ~:E - -. (t) ~ ..,. . ..... VI < .., .., a.
. ~Vl7-g.::s @ 9- ~. (t)Q..$1)VI
3::rVl ;! < (t) VI__n
.., ~ (t):E 0 ~ n
$1) c: 3 ~ -. ~ :So (t)
5' c- g. g. ~
VI VI
-a:;:t'ln
><0
zmZ
:;:t'In
.......... m
m ~
r- --,
~ P?
~
o
Z
V\
VI
::r
o
(t)
c-
o
x
to'
::r
.....
VI
~
~
$:
~
~
)lO
l-
n,
~
~
~~
!"'l
~
9
~
(j
$:
~
~
R
S1
:-:t
~
<
~
QJ
i:i
2
~
~
I-
o
~
~
~
~
i
I
~
o
~
i;
~
~~l:
-~
0;:;-
~ ";".
'" ~
::rRl
~ ~
l::r::l:l
o -.
::s ~
l::r~
Rl 0:1
~ ~
I. i; ~
~~
~::s
~
~
R)
~
~.
::s
~
t""\
~
-
~
~
~
3
R)
~
~.
::s
~
~
::s
c:
~
175THA~
~
~
r;1
~
"<
~
)lO
C!
~
n,
i>
f>
"'::!l
o
~
Rl
::!.
::s
Il:l
"l3
Rl
~
::s
::s
is
..
~
~
Iii'
::r
~
Il:l
o
::s
'"
Iii'
::s
tl
::s
~
;i
~
l:
~
a:
.:.
~
~
::l:I
~.
~
0:1
~
::r
~
-<
~.
n
~
~
5J
::s
.....
::s
~
$1)
..,
(t)
$1)
VI
;i:~~~0
/ ,'~,
, { ~" ."
\ '- ~ '"
\ \_~__~2- ~_ ~
~
~
~o
-Yo
~
~
R)
~
~.
::s
~
t""\'
~
-
--
--
;&
................. ..... -.,'
I
:t.
~
I
.-.
o
~ ~
... ...
s:: s::
~ .~
'" P:J
...
~
"...R) . \I::l
R) ~
... ...
'" R)
t""\
~ ~
~
R) "'"
~. ~
~
~ ...
a s::
~ ~
'"
~ ~ J
R)
::s
,.c:
~
~
~
3
R)
~cj.
.... ~
~ ,.
::s
~
~
::s
" · c:~
~ f
I
I
i
~
):. >,.rI',r
~
R)
~
~.
::s
~.
t""\
"~
-
t
I
t
~
~
~
3
R)
~
~.
::s
~
~
::s
c:
'."
'~
~,
I
_____-1
~ P:J
~~ \I::l ." I
iR) ~
':j.j ,~ ...
R)
~. ~
,::S
~ "'"
't""\ ~
~ ~
- ...
s::~,
~
'"
~
~
~
~
~
~
:::0
~
o
I I
I I
PLAN
I
I
~tt
r
~
I I
I I
SECTION
5: TWIN LAKES ROAD
CONCEPT C:
REFINED SAVANNA
TYPICAL FEATURES
Pedestrian Crossing:
Thermo-Print on
Bituminous
Gateway feature: plantings,
boulders
ROW: 120ft typical
Existing 6ft Sidewalk on
one side of street
Existing 10ft Trail on one
side of street
Median focal ends with
perennials, boulders and
oak tree groupings on
meadow grass berms
Lighting: existing 30ft
shoebox
Boulevard: bermed oak
groupings with meadow
grass, existing turf between
berms
Median oak groupings with
meadow grass under at mid
median lengths, existing
turf between berms
2ft concrete maintenance
strip at median plantings
CORRIDOR DESIGN STUDY
ELK RIVER
fig 5.6
n
o
~
~
-
tJ
o
~
tJ
~
~~
~~1Jo\
~.~~
V.~e
~~'"<
~ ~
c:
,...
",
~
::lQ
o
"
~
8
~
~
'"
'"
QI
~
~
~
~
~
~
il
~
C"l
::lQ
o
c:
~
~
I
~
II
i
~"
~it.
r
~.
IJ
VI........'"
o~::r><
o tl <:) i;;'
~~ ~::!.
<:) ~ <:) =:3
r.~ ~~
~ Iii' _0
!3 ;;~
?< 5'
!,l:l
i;
~-
3
l'>
tl
~
~
lEI
~
....
/l
3
<:)
~
=:3
J ~
m
X
iii'
rl
5'
lO
W
o
;::r
III
::r
o
I'D
c-
o
x
lO'
::r
rl
III
.... <:)
~ tl
~,:
);
~
....
j;j'
l'>
<:)
tl
;II(-
.!"
I
3
<:)
~
=:3
~
~
!"l
~
9
~
o
:i;
2:
~
R
~
:-:t
~
~
8
~
~
'"
'"
QI
",
::lQ
~
~
~
~
~
il
~
C"l
::lQ
o
~
:i
C"l
I I
1/
'"
~~[t]
:4~
~~
~
..,
~
.....
6"
:s
~
'3
~
~
~"
:s
"a'
~
-
~
.....
s:::
~
'"
.....1iI
~~
~
c:
t'"\
~
~
~
. ~"
a
~
3
~
":S
c:
~
.....
s:::
~
~
~
~
.....
~
~
~
~
~
.....
s:::
~
'"
~
~
?o
?()
!"\
3
~
3
~
~
~"
:s
~
R
~
:s
c:
~l
~
3
~ !"\
~
~. 3
:s ~
"a' 3~ ~. -j
t'"\
~ ~ 3
- ~
~" ~
~
:s ~"
~ :s
~ "a'
,:S t'"\
c: ~
-
175TH
<:)
tl
;II(-
lEI
d
s::
~
:;.
~
3
)(.
l'>
~
....
;::j'
l'>
<:)
tl
~
!"\
3
~
3
~
~
~"
:s
~
t'"\
~
:s
c:
tl ~.
'j
tl
:j
II'
~
3
~
~
Ci"
:s
"a'
t'"\
~
-
--
--
-l "'C;on
-<
"0 >~o
n' 0
~ z-z
"0 ,~~
ii) mC"'C N
::3 r-Vi-l (J1
rl !;2~()
::3 0
lO
~ ~>
"'" -z
I'D
~ oz (J1
III z> 0
Vi 0
"Tl
-l
:to
~
~
o
'I,
'$;"
(
I
--,
I
..J
~
~
~
.....
~
.~
~
~
~
.....
s:::
~
'"
rl lO lO -l
c:"","",-<
=4,O~"O
c-.s ~ n'
~ 5' c- ~
~lO~o:J
~!!'30
::3 :E III =-
. ;=;':E ~
::r;=;' ~
1'D::ra..
~, 0 ..
III ~ 3
::!, 7' I'D
::3 rl ~
lO""'o.
I'D 0
I'D :E
c:03nlllmo:J3~lO
"O~I'D""O::3" ::3 "0"1>
I'D 7' ~ ~ I'D lO C'I fD 0. iiJ ~
X rl 0. _. !:!. ;;'! ~ o.~ III I'D ~
iii' n:; 0 0. ~ - rl 0 III ::3 I'D
< 1_<I'DO~I'D::3o.
::!. I'D < 3 "0 0.I'D :E :E 7'!!' ;-.' ;-.'
::3lOlOI'D- ~ --
lO "'" "'" 0. ~ c- -< lQ lQ ~ jii ::3
rl 0 ~ -. ::3 0 "T1 ~ 0 n "T1
c:,E ~ ~ g,c: I'D III c: I'D 0 0
=4, .... - ~ III "0 ::3 "'" n
5' c- )> lO ~ ~ c- :::;' rl ? ~
3 lO I'D n III .., ... I'D -- -
I'D III "'" n "'" n:; "'" lO g- 3 m
9-, ..... 3 ~ ~, .. 3 0 c: I'D 0.::3
.... __ lO .::3-::3
~ n:; ~.;!? ~ S ~
III ~ rl "'" -
, 7'::r III
;)~~~~~,~.. ........
/ ('o~
/ /. \l ~a.'
r l 11 ................
\ " '........, '"
\ \_--
--
........
__ J
Cit of
E k River
Corridor Standards
DRAFT APRIL 2007
l
#-i.
.a..
Ii1
....
,~' J: ~
-.::. + .~~
t
1
~F'
-
~
\.
...
W"
'..
iOl
i1
III
~
1iI<li
>:l
~
.:: ~ DE:
'u .A i:l "
~ ('I~Il'II&'~ IJ V"
'1:1. IJ.J'IlI" lJIJ !"
iiE:i a
d"12, 0 ~u Irl
~ I1"P ,t ~ ,,, t',
fl
~p
~\j
Q fJ i",)
..,
Dill b'
13 7'(1
~1Ii
~1l1 "
I Introduction
Purpose of Study
This Study was created to assist the City of Elk River in understanding
the role and potential of public roadways in the community. With that
understanding as a basis, this study is intended to supply the City with
a set of corridor standards that can be applied to both new corridor
planning and existing corridor improvements.
Role of Corridors
Public roadways play an important role in defining the character of a
City to both residents and visitors alike. As people travel around a city,
they form an impression of the community based on what they see. If
the public spaces are well designed with both pedestrians and drivers
in mind, people will feel welcome and prefer being in these places.
The design of corridors can also help in wayfinding. Travelers use more
than just street signs to orient themselves. Landmarks, plantings, and
street amenities all clue them in to what kind of roadway they are on,
what speeds they should travel and to where it may lead.
Corridors are the means in which residents connect with their commu-
nity and "get around". Creating safe, clear and pedestrian/bike friendly
routes will encourage a more active and healthy community life.
Lastly, corridors offer a significant opportunity to improve the urban
forestry. Lowering pavement heat sinks, improving air quality, infiltrat-
ing rain water arejust a few of the measureable benefits to urban trees.
Contents of Study
Chapter I: Assessment
Chapter 2: Example Corridor features
Chapter 3: Corridor Standards
First the study assesses how selected major City roadways function
today. These corridors were evaluated based how they function in pe-
destrian movement, identity, wayfinding, safety, etc.
Next the study takes a look at what other cities have done to improve
their corridors. Through the use of example photos, important amenity
features are pointed out that could be applied to the Elk River Corridor
Standards.
1 : INTRODUCTION
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
1-1
1: INTRODUCTION
Next, the study categorizes the types of corridors within Elk River and
sets up corridor standards for each. These standards note important
characteristics of each corridor type that need to be incorporated in the
roadway design.
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
1- 2
2 Assessment
Purpose of Assessment
In this study, important City corridors are defined based on
traffic counts, visibility, pedestrian use, and connections to
important community destinations. Corridors that are regional
arterials and/or controlled by other governmental agencies
were not included in assessment.
The corridors where photographed and assessed based on the
following critera:
Community Identity
. Wayfinding
Pedestrian safety
. Traffic calming
Potential for improvements
2 : ASSESSM ENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-1
2: ASSESSMENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-2
.
Main Street
Section: Main Street downtown, Hwy 10 to Jackson
ROW: 66ft
ADT: level 3 - (6000)
Crash rate: Below average
Drive lanes: 1 each way
Parking: diagonal and parallel
Pedestrian: Existing sidewalks too narrow, no blvd- not wide
enough for cafe, sales etc. , pedestrian crossings striped.
Trail: no trail
Liqhting: yes, decorative street lights
Street trees: sparse
Other: a wide street - a lot of pavement.
Identity Potential: Improve gateway for entering and existing
downtown, Improve pedestrian amenities (wider sidewalks, trees,
etc.). Organize the variety of parking options.
Main Street
Section: Jackson to Upland
ROW: 66ft
ADT: level 3 - (4500)
Crash rate: Below average
Drive lanes: 1 each way
Parking: on street parallel?
Pedestrian: Sidewalks, wide turf blvds, pedestrian crossings,
Trail: no trail
Lighting: no
Street trees: yes
Other: wide street, over head wires
Identity Potential: Needs Identity features to enhance importance
as Main Street and connection to city hall and downtown, and to
improve way finding that consists of multiple turns.
2: ASSESSMENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-3
2 : ASSESSM ENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-4
- - - ------ - - --- ---,
School Street
Section: from Jackson to Proctor
ROW: 66ft
ADT: level 4 - (8800)
Crash rate: Above Critical rate
Drive lanes: 2 each way
Parking: No
Pedestrian: Sidewalks- south side with no blvd (no pedestrian buffer
is safety issue), striped pedestrian crossings.
Trail: on north side with large turf blvd
Lighting: no
Street trees: no
Other: over head wires,
Identity Potential: school zone should be pedestrian friendly -
need traffic calming elements. Need separation between walk and
street to improve safety. Pedestrian scaled lighting would improve
safety and image.
Proctor Avenue
Section: from Hwy 10 to School St
ROW: 66ft
ADT: level 4 - (9800)
Crash rate: Below average
Drive lanes: 2 each way
Parking: no
Pedestrian: Sidewalks-east side only, narrow blvd, pedestrian cross-
ings,
Trail: no
Lighting: no
Street trees: no
Other: over head wires
Identity Potential: Should have gateway feature off Hwy 10 to
identify the importance of the corridor in community linking. Needs
better pedestrian amenities to support existing pedestrian use. (Im-
proved pedestrian lighting, pedestrian comfort (blvd trees, walk on
west side, etc.)
2: ASSESSMENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2- 5
2 : ASSESSM ENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-6
Jackson Avenue
Section: from Hwy 10 to School St
ROW: 66ft to 83ft
ADT: 3 - (2500)
Crash rate: Below average
Drive lanes: 1 each way, with turn lanes, striped shoulders
Parking: on street parallel?
Pedestrian: Sidewalks-both sides no blvd, pedestrian crossings,
Trail: no
Lighting: no, just at intersections?
Street trees: no
Other: wide street, over head wires
Identity Potential: Should have gateway features off Hwy 10 and
169 to identify the importance of the corridor in community
linking. Better pedestrian amenities to support existing pedestrian
use. (walk separation from street, blvd trees, lighting, etc.)
Highland Drive
Section: from Proctor to Jackson
ROW: 80ft
ADT: no rating
Crash rate: no rating
Drive lanes: 1 each way
Parking: no
Pedestrian: 6ft Sidewalks north side, with turf blvd, pedestrian
crossings,
Trail: 10ft trail south side, with turf blvd
Lighting: yes, ornamental
Street trees: no
Other: narrow, winding, traffic calming design
Identity Potential: Needs gateway feature to identify as commu-
nity connector at entries off Proctor and Jackson. Has great traffic
calming character in its narrowness of pavement. Offers great
pedestrian accommodations. Street lighting helps identify as
collector street. Street trees would improve image and offer many
additional benefits such as shade for pedestrians and pavement,
improved neighborhood image, etc.
2 : ASSESSM ENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-7
2 : ASSESSMENT
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
2-8
3 Example Street
Features
Purpose of Visual Examples
By reviewing visual examples of other communities corridor
amenities, a dialogue can occur about what features may be
appropriate for Elk River and how they could be modified to
fit in this community.
Initial investment, long term maintenance, safety, long term
benefits, most "impact for the buck", and suitability for loca-
tions are all important beginning discussion points in review-
ing these images.
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-1
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Planted Blvd:
Perennials
Wide sidewalk for
Pedestrian use,
seating, etc.
Parallel parking
Decorative street
Lights with hanging
planters
Diagonal Parking with
pedestrian bump-outs
Street trees in front
of buildings
Decorative street
lighting w/banners
Tree planting areas
seating
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-2
Northfield, MN
Savage, MN
51. Lous Park, MN
51. Lous Park, MN
Richfield, MN
'~
51. Lous Park, MN
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Planted Median:
Perennials
Decorative Street
Lights: custom color,
18ft height
Banner poles
Bollards: Traffic
calming, pedestrian
zone
Median trees
Decorative wall
barriers with
landscaping
Wide planted
medians: trees, turf,
perennials, annuals
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-3
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Gateway features:
Arbors, signs,
plantings
City signs with
landscaping
Special amenities at
main intersections:
plantings, crosswalk,
signage,pedestrian
area seat wall
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-4
-I
, I
I
S1. Lous Park, MN
~~t
-~t
Hopkins/Minnetonka, MN
Little Canada, MN
Bloomington, MN
1lIl'--_~'~
- '#lM
J
. .1
~"1?~'~"i",,,,
'It ......, ~~~ "''''''. .
-'~'; -.'
Mound, MN
Mound, MN
Hopkins/Minnetonka, MN
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Pedestrian comfort/
safety:
separated sidewalk
planted boulevard
special material
crosswalks
bollards
decorative street
lights -lower heights
(12-18ft)
Boulevard of different
materials
Street trees,
separation and shade
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-5
Boulevard Trees
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Residential features:
Narrow, winding
streets: traffic
calming
Elk River, MN
Sidewalks and trail
connections
Residential gateways:
plantings, signage,
lighting
-------, M N
Hudson, WI
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-6
~
'"
...~
Ramsey, MN
Ohio
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
Residential Entry
Residential Street
Trees
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-7
3 : EXAMPLE STREET
FEA TURES
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
3-8
4 Corridor Standards
Definition of Corridor Types
Corridor types defined in this study are generally based on the 2004
Transportation study and its roadway categories. Categories in this
study are based on city wide circulation function, intended traffic vol-
umes, and context (neighborhood, urban etc.) . The Corridors map (fig.
1), identifies the Study's categorization of corridor types. Only corri-
dors that the city has juridiction over are given standards.
Corridor Tvpes with defined standards include:
Local Street: Urban Residential & Cluster
Collector Residential: Urban & Cluster
Collector Minor: Urban
Collector Major: Urban
Cul-De-Sac with Internal island
Main Street
Local Street: Rural Residential
Collector Residential: Rural
Use of Corridor Standard Templates
Corridor Standards have been developed for each Corridor Type. These
standards are illustrated using a typical design template for each type.
Each template includes a typical street plan and section, a list of critical
design features labeled, and design dimensions given when appropiate.
These templates are designed to be used by City staff to understand
the important features of each type of corridor in Elk River. These tem-
plate can be used to guide future roadway designs and future roadway
improvements.
4: CORRIDOR STANDARDS
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
4-1
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
4-2
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
~ ~lli~~II~.Jliiii~~I.~d ~~lili~J I ~~H~dlll~J~u..~H.~d~liilll.i. HI.~__
o
II:
w
:II::
j
:s
w
:: IN URBAN SERVICE AREA:
:: LOCAL STREET: URBAN
-- RESIDENTIAL AND CLUSTER
:: Fig. 4.2
-- I,;=-=';" ...:.-=-==- - ...=.=-==--_- =
:: COLLECTOR RESIDENTIAL:
-- URBAN
:: Fig. 4.3
....... COLLECTOR MINOR: URBAN
:: Fig. 4.4
:: C.OLLECTOR MAJOR: URBAN
-- Fig. 4.5
,
\
-- MAl N STREET
:: Fig. 4.6
VIKING BLVD--
13 :: OUT OF URBAN SERVICE
-- AREA:
-- LOCAL STREET: RURAL
~ -- RESIDENTIAL
Fig. 4.7
---:- ':....- -:- _ _-.=..= =-=-=-==---=-----.J
RESIDENTAL COLLECTOR:
RURAL
. Fig. 4.8
TREE SPECIES STANDARDS
Fig. 4.9
.. 11111 DASHED LINE FOR HYPOTHETICAL FUTURE
ALIGNMENT FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
(FROM 2004 TRANSPORTATION PLAN)
D URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY 2002
~ SCHOOL
LIGHTING PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
Fig. 4.10
- PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - STATElCOUNlY
NOTE:
NOT ALL CORRIDORS ARE HIGHLIGHTED
~
El~4
River
CORRIDORS HAVE URBAN CHARACTER
WITHIN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND RURAL
CHARACTER OUTSIDE URBAN SERVICE AREA.
JIIilID ..~., I~ 114 ..':
.... ~
II
~ ,--
J '.-'"
I ~ --
i ,~,~ --
I. i~~~~~~~~Hln
Ii!iilll
DRAFT 4/2007
CORRIDOR DESIGN STUDY
ELK RIVER
fig 4. 1
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
LOCAL STREET:
URBAN
RESIDENTIAL &
CLUSTER
I
Pedestrian Crossing:
marked
ROW: 60ft
Lighting: decorative 15ft ht.
(see lighting standards)
I :
I I
I
! I
I
I
Roadway Width: 32ft
Parking: parallel on street
Sidewalk: 6ft concrete, both
sides of street
Trail: none required
Boulevard: 6-12ft turf
Street Trees: minimum one
per 40ft. Equally spaced
desired. (see tree species
standards)
Small Utilities Easement:
10ft
PLAN
SECTION
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.2
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
COLLECTOR
RESIDENTIAL:
URBAN & CLUSTER
Pedestrian Crossing:
Marked
--~..............
. .
I ....
I .
I I
Gateway Feature: special
plantings/sign at
intersection and/or in
center median
ROW: 80ft
Roadway Width: 32ft
Lighting: decorative 15ft ht.
(see lighting standards)
Parking: none
Sidewalk: 6ft concrete, one
side of street
Trail: 10ft bituminous, one
side of street
Boulevard: 6-12ft turf
Street Trees: minimum one
tree per 40ft. (see tree
species standards)
Small Utility Easement: 10ft
SECTION
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.3
+- - -t-
I I
~: t :
I I
j ~ j
~
H-
~~
SECTION
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
COLLECTOR MINOR:
URBAN
Pedestrian Crossing:
Enhanced (thermo-print,
pavers, color concrete)
Gateway Feature: special
plantings/sign at intersection
and/or in center median
ROW: 100ft
Roadway Width: varies
Parking: none
Sidewalk: 6ft concrete, one
side of street
Trail: lOft bituminous, one
side of street
Boulevard: 6-1 2ft turf
Street Trees: Groupings
20ft o.c., gaps of 50ft. (see
tree species standards)
Lighting: (See lighting
standards)
Planted Center Median or
Shared Turn Lane
Small Utility Easement: 1 Oft
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.4
~
- -,- - :~
i~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I I
~,
I I
-
I
i
~ Ll
..-.....- - - - - t
__J.
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
COLLECTOR MAJOR:
URBAN
Pedestrian Crossing:
Enhanced
Gateway Feature: special
plantings, signage
ROW: 120ft
Roadway Width: 68ft
Parking: none
Sidewalk: 6ft concrete, one
side of street
Trail: 10ft bituminous, one
s ide of street
Boulevard: 6-12ft turf
Street Trees: groupings at
20ft O.c., gaps 40-S0ft, (see
tree species standards)
Median: Special pavement
and plantings (irrigated)
Lighting: (see lighting
standands)
Small Utilities Easement:
10ft
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.5
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
MAIN STREET-
URBAN
Pedestrian Crossing:
Enhanced (thermo-print,
pavers, color concrete)
ROW: varies
Roadway width: varies
Parking: parallel or angled
Boulevard: paved with
planting or street furniture
Street trees: 20-30ft o.c.,
see Tree Species Standards
Sidewalk: 12ft concrete,
both sides of street,
bump-outs for street
crossing
Lighting: see Lighting
Standards
Gateway feature: for
identity and wayfinding
Trail: none
Traffic Calming features:
narrow street, street trees,
on-street parking
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.6
-t-I-
-+-
I I
~
!J
SECTION
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
LOCAL STREET:
RURAL RESIDENTIAL
~
~
-FI-
-+-
Roadway Width: 32ft
ROW: 60ft
Parking: paralled, on street
Boulevard: 6-12ft turf
Street Trees: In groupings,
minimum one per 125ft
frontage. Placed at ROW
line. (see tree species
standards)
I I
Sidewalk: none
Trail: none (unless called
for in Park and Trail Plan)
I I
Lighting: (see lighting
standards)
Small Utility Easement: 1 Oft
I I
I
i
i
I,
I 'l,I~i
"~ I.. l.r
, I~'
"h ~ . ~
~....,., 1./
.~ ~~> ::a-=--={j
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.7
--~...'. ..... --
'. +
I
I I
I
PLAN
SECTION
- -,--- -~'
I '
i - +
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
~.;.
l!
~
~ ;'1
~ ",1)
.~ -/'
! ~
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
COLLECTOR
RESIDENTAL -
RURAL
It--
I I
I I
Pedestrian Crossing:
Enhanced (thermo-print,
pavers, color concrete)
Gateway Featu re:
Plantings/sign at
intersection or center
median
ROW: 80ft
Roadway Width: 32ft
Lighting: (see lighting
standards)
I I
Parking: none
Sidewalk: none
Trail: 10ft bituminous, one
side of street
Boulevard: 6-12ft turf or
native grasses
Street Trees: in groupings
minimum one per SOLF
frontage. (see tree species
standards)
Small Utilities Easement:
10ft
DRAFT APRIL 2007 CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.8
Surmountable concrete
curbing shall start at the
cul-de-sac curve
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
CUL-DE-SAC WITH
INTERNAL ISLAND
5'
LI'\
~
c..
o
0:::
@Jo
0:::
~~
:EJ-
All dimensions are to back of curb,
unless noted otherwise
Street width shall note be less than
32'-0" at any location
All curbs are to be surmountable
concrete curbs
The first twelve (12) feet of island
behind back of curb shall not exceed 2
% slope
Signage, on island side of street, shall
be provided stating "no parking
anytime"
Refer to Local Street Urban or Local
Street Rural for tree, walk, trail, lighting
standards
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.9
local Residential - Urban
Residential Collector - Urbann
local Residential - Rural
Residential Collector - Rural
Typical Conditions:
Minimal salt used, sandy/ drought/ no irrigation
Species:
Oak Species: Swamp White Oak, Northern Pin Oak, Bur Oak
Acer Freemanii species (silver and red hybrid maples)
Hackberry
Honeylocust
Elm (newer disease resistant varieties available)
Serviceberry
Hawthorn
Minor Collector - Urban
Major Collector - Urban
Typical Conditions:
Salt used, sandy/ drought/ use of irrigation varies
Species:
Oaks species: Swamp White Oak, Bur Oak
Acer Freemanii species (silver and red hybrid maples)
Honeylocust
Elm (newer disease resistant varieties available)
Serviceberry
Hawthorn
if irriqated additional options include:
Acer Freemanii species (silver and red hybrid maples)
River Birch
Main Street - Urban
Typical Conditions:
Salt used, compacted soils, small root growth area
Species:
Oaks species: Swamp White Oak, Bur Oak
Acer Freemanii species (silver and red hybrid maples)
Honeylocust
Elm (newer disease resistant varieties available)
Serviceberry
Hawthorn
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS
:TREE SPECIES STANDARDS
~
Elm
Honeylocust
Oak
NOTE: Other tree species shall be considered if they can demonstrate that
they meet site constraints and requirements
DRAFT 4/2007
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4.10
Local Residential - Urban
Local Residential - Rural
Decorative 15ft height at approx. 1 50 ft spacing
(achieve .3-.8 footcandles at 6/1 ave/min. uniformity)
Residential Collector - Urban
Residental Collector - Rural
Decorative 15ft height at approx. 1 SO ft spacing
(achieve .4-1.1 footcandles at 4/1 ave/min. uniformity)
Minor Collector - Urban
Major Collector - Urban
Decorative 15ft height at 75-120 ft spacing or 30ft fixture at 200-500ft
(achieve .4-1.1 footcandles at 4/1 ave/min. uniformity - spacing depends
on lamps and heights used)
Main Steet - Urban
Decorative 15ft height at 30-50ft spacing
(achieve .6-1 .6 footcandles at 3/1 ave/min. uniformity)
*NOTE: Place light poles at intersection and pedestrian and trail
crossings for each corridor type to acheive footcandles at the high
end of each acceptable range.
4:CORRIDOR STANDARDS:
LIGHTING PERFORMANCE
c::J
(;
~ r.a
shoebox Decorative
light light
DRAFT 4/2007
CORRIDOR STANDARDS
ELK RIVER
Fig. 4. 11