The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-02-25 Planning Commission PacketsAGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS FEBRUARY 25, 2015 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA T IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Edina Planning Commission February 11, 2015 V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Planning Commission will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission or which aren't slated for future considgration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on this mornings agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments today. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan — Continue Public Hearing to March 11, 2015 B. Variance. Gary Gosewisgh. 4141 West 44th Street, Edina, MN C. Variance. Ion Beleniuc. 4214 Scott Terrace, Edina, MN D. Subdivision. Frank Berman. 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road, Edina, MN VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Vision Edina B. Planning in the Greater Southdale Area VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Council Update and Attendance IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS X. STAFF COMMENT XI. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting. Next Meeting of the Edina Plannin¢ Commission March 11, 2015 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Kris Aaker February 25, 2015 B-15-04 Assistant Planner Recommended Action: Approve the 1.2 foot front yard setback and a 9.4 foot rear yard setback variance as requested for property located at 4141 West 40 Street, for owner Gary Gosewisch, Project Description A 1.2 foot front yard and a 9.4 foot rear yard setback variance to add a small front entry porch and additions to a home that is located on the south side of West 44th Street. The owner is requesting variances to allow a small open front entry porch addition slightly beyond the front wall of the house and home additions to be at the same nonconforming rear yard setback as existing. The project is a remodel with addition to an existing nonconforming single family home. Improvements to the main portion of the home will match the existing rear yard setback. The front yard setback will have a small front entry porch encroachment that is an exception to the front yard setback as long as it is no closer than 20 feet to the front lot line. The existing home is slightly less than 19 feet from the front lot line. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the south side of West 44th Street consisting of a one story home with an attached two car garage built in 1956. The lot is 7,891 square feet in area. The owner is proposing additions and improvements to be setback from the front lot line slightly closer than allowed for a front porch encroachment and additions that will match the existing nonconforming rear yard setback. The property is part of an old street car right of way and was subdivided for residential development after the street car line was no longer in use. The configuration of lots along the south side of West 44th Street that were part of the street car subdivision are very substandard in depth at a little over 65 feet. The minimum lot depth required for a residential lot in Edina is 120 feet. The allowed footprint for a conforming home on the subject lot given required setbacks is approximately 21 feet deep, with the existing home still quite shallow at a little over 29 feet deep into the lot, (existing nonconforming). Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district and guided residential. EasterlyMesterly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district and guided residential. Southerly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district and guided resid6ntial. Existing Site Features The subject property is a 7,891 square foot lot with a one story home that has a two car garage built in 1956. There have been few improvements to the home since construction. An in ground swimming pool and pool decking on the west side of the property has been removed by the current owner and replaced with lawn area. Planning Guide Plan designation: Single Dwelling Unit Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Grading and Drainage The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments in the attached memo. The memo indicates that Engineering has no concerns with the plans submitted. The applicant has removed an in ground swimming pool and pool decking significantly reducing the amount of impervious surfaces on site. The Engineer is requesting that the owner allow for an inspection of their existing sump pump discharge line to verify that it is not discharging into the sanitary sewer. 2 Compliance Table * Variance Required **The current survey illustrates the project is over the allowed lot coverage limit of 2,250 square feet. The applicant submitted an e-mail and diagram revising his plan to meet the coverage requirements, (see attached e-mail). Staff indicated that a coverage variance would not be supported and would not likely be approved. There is no coverage variance requested so all plans must comply with the coverage requirement. Any variance approval would be conditioned on revised plans and survey verifying coverage compliance. The owner did not want to go to the expense of having the plans and survey re -done if additional changes would be required based on variance review by the Planning Commission. Primary Issue: Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit Zoning District and complies with all requirements with the exception of setback from front and rear. 2. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot. The improvements will enhance the property and not detract from the neighborhood. The lot is extremely shallow and had been part of a street car right of way. Shallow lot depth makes it extremely difficult to comply with setback requirements. 3. The improvements will provide a reasonable use of a rather shallow lot that is heavily impacted given the current front and rear yard setback requirements. 4. The additions simply match the existing nonconforming rear yard setback that has been in place since 1956. The required front yard setback 3 City Standard Proposed Front - 20 feet *18.8 feet Side- 10+ height, (living) 20/20 feet Rear- 25 feet *15.6 feet Building Height 2 1/2 stories 1 story, 38.75 feet to the ridge, 24.5 feet to the ridge Lot coverage 2,250 square feet **2,250 square feet * Variance Required **The current survey illustrates the project is over the allowed lot coverage limit of 2,250 square feet. The applicant submitted an e-mail and diagram revising his plan to meet the coverage requirements, (see attached e-mail). Staff indicated that a coverage variance would not be supported and would not likely be approved. There is no coverage variance requested so all plans must comply with the coverage requirement. Any variance approval would be conditioned on revised plans and survey verifying coverage compliance. The owner did not want to go to the expense of having the plans and survey re -done if additional changes would be required based on variance review by the Planning Commission. Primary Issue: Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit Zoning District and complies with all requirements with the exception of setback from front and rear. 2. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot. The improvements will enhance the property and not detract from the neighborhood. The lot is extremely shallow and had been part of a street car right of way. Shallow lot depth makes it extremely difficult to comply with setback requirements. 3. The improvements will provide a reasonable use of a rather shallow lot that is heavily impacted given the current front and rear yard setback requirements. 4. The additions simply match the existing nonconforming rear yard setback that has been in place since 1956. The required front yard setback 3 reduces the buildable area of the lot severely impacting the ability to add a small entry porch. • Is the proposed variance justified? Yes. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: Section 850.0.Subd., requires the following findings for approval of a variance: Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. The additions will match the existing nonconforming setbacks of the existing home on the property which have been located on the property since 1956. The practical difficulties in complying with the ordinances are created by the shallow lot depth and required setbacks. Staff believes the proposed variances are reasonable given that the required front and rear yard setback renders much of the lot unbuildable. The practical difficulty is therefore, caused by the lot depth and required setbacks. There is generous spacing between the subject home and the adjacent homes to the east and west. The purpose behind the ordinance is to maintain an established front yard sight line and street scape. The ordinance is meant to prevent a continual erosion of the established front yard setback pattern in an existing neighborhood by holding all new construction to the existing neighborhood standard and to avoid new structure build -out well beyond existing conditions. The new front porch 4 and rear yard setbacks of the existing home will not compromise the intent of the ordinance to maintain adequate spacing of the structure from lot lines. The new additions to the existing home will maintain the existing pattern of setback. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self- created? Yes. The unique circumstances are that the existing lot is subjected to front yard and rear setbacks that cut deep into the lot and within the location of the existing home. The required setbacks reduce the buildable area dramatically creating a nonconforming situation. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed additions will be consistent with the location of the existing home and will not change the street scape. The character of the neighborhood consists of a variety of housing styles. The applicant is asking to preserve a setback pattern along the block and in the rear yard that has included the nonconforming setback of the subject property. Staff Recommendation Approve the requested variance based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a) The practical difficult is caused by shallow lot depth. b) The encroachment into the setbacks continues an existing nonconforming setback that was established when the original home was built in 1956. c) The request is reasonable given the location of the existing home. Approval of the variance is subject to the following condition: 1. The home must be constructed as per proposed with a revised survey to be submitted at permit application to confirm compliance with lot coverage requirements. 2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo dated February 18, 2015 including city inspection of the sump pump discharge line. Deadline for a City decision: April 9, 2015. DATE- February 18, 2015 T4: Cary Teague - Planning Director CC: David Fisher — Building Official [toss Bintner P.E. - Environmental Engineer FROM: Charles Gerk EIT — Engineering Technician RE: 4214 Scott Terrace - Special Review CUP The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department, a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Summary of.Review Engineering has no problems with the plans as submitted and is in support of raising the low floor elevation to remove the risk of flooding. The proposed plan is for the demolition of an existing single family home and the construction of a new single family home on the existing foundation. The applicant is proposing to ralse the first floor elevation of the home by 1.33 -feet, .33 -feet over the allowed I foot by city ordinance. This request is being made due to the need to increase the low floor elevation to at least 87 LT to be 2 -feet above the FEMA flood elevation of 869.2'. The current low floor elevation is 870,65', and will be raised to 871.23'. There is very little grading proposed and the net increase of 12.5 SF of impervious space is negligible, neighboring private property will not be affected. There is currently a public drainage easement running through the property, a private drainage line from the property to the north connects to the public manhole just northwest of the home. There are currently issues with this line back flowing in high water events. Public works and engineering are working on resolving the issue. This issue is not connected with the redevelopment of this property. Grading and Drainage The proposed plans show a very minimal amount of grading on the lot and will closely mimic existing conditions. The two areas that are being graded will not change existing drainage patters or alter the flood plain. The applicant is only proposing an increase in impervious space of 12.5 SF, which is negligible. Neighboring private property will not be affected. Erasion and Sediment Control Meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. Street and Curb Cut No Comments Water and Sanitary Utilities There is currently a public drainage easement running through the property, a private drainage line from the property to the north connects to the public manhole just northwest of the home. There are currently Issues with this line back flowing in high water events. Public works and engineering are currently working on resolving the issue. This Issue is not connected with the redevelopment of this property. ENGMEEMG DEPARTMBN7i' 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 WwwmnaW.gov a 952-826.0371 r Fax 952-826-0392 Charlie Gerk From: Charlie Gerk Sent: Friday, January 30, 201511:03 AM Ta. 'info.iconhomes@gmail.com' Cc: Laura Adler;'bwisnerOminnehahacreek.org'; Ross Bintner, Kris Aaker Subject: 4214 Scott Terrace - Engineering Review Attachments: Section3111.pdf, topographic work map pdf Ion, The lot for 4214 Scott Terrace is located In a FEMA flood plain with a recently revised 100 -year flood elevation of 869.2'. Per section 3.1.1.1 of the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan: All lowest floor elevations and otherpermanend fixtures including beading and air conditioning ventitation sy+stens should meet the following: a. Bea nrinirnrun of two feet above the 100 year flood elevation for Basins nNs pipe outlets or watemVa . In accordance with this policy, your low floor elevation will need to be no lower than 871.2' before we can approve the building permit. Also in accordance with the FEMA flood plain, no fill can be placed at any elevation lower than 869.2. Please revise your plans and resubmit hard copies to the building department for review. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at the number below. 0 Charlie Gerk, Eli', Engineering Technician - Water Resources 4,a -asst 1 Fax ss2 a2ez I www.EdinaMN.-wY ...For Living, Learning, Ralsing Families & Doing Business 3.9.9.1 Minimum Building Elevations To prevent flooding of buildings, it is recommended that the City adopt the following design standards: 1. All lowest floor elevations and other permanent fixtures including heating and air conditioning ventilation systems should meet the following: a. Bea minimum of two feet above the 100 -year flood elevation for basins with pipe outlets or waterways. Until an outlet is installed for landlocked basins with no low level piped outlet, the minimum building elevation should be the greater of either two feet above the level resulting from two concurrent 100 -year, single event rainfall event or two feet above the 100 -year 10 -day snowmelt, whichever is higher. In either case, the starting elevation of the basin/waterbody prior to the runoff event should be established by one of the following: i. Existing Ordinary High Water level established by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; ii. Annual water balance calculation approved by the City; iii. Local observation well records, as approved by the City; or iv. Mottled soil. Note: The 100 -year landlocked basin flood elevation may be lowered by excavating an overflow swale or constructing an outlet pipe at an overflow point. 2. The lowest entry elevations (i.e., windows, window wells, walkout elevations) for buildings adjacent to overflow swales and/or conveyance channels should be at least two feet above the 100 -year flow elevation of the swale or channel at the point where the swale or channel is closest to the building. 3.1.1.2 Stormwater Management Design Standards The City adopts the following design standards for all new stormwater management systems (i.e., basins, storm sewers, etc.): 1. All ponding basins and basin outlet pipes should be designed to collectively detain and convey the flows from the critical 100 -year frequency storm (100 -year level of protection). The critical storm represents a storm of a given runoff duration that produces the greatest discharge or detention storage volume, as appropriate. Detention basins should be designed to contain the flows from the 100 -year frequency storm without overtopping. 2. All lateral storm sewer systems, including catch basin grates, should be designed to convey flows from the 10 -year frequency, %2 -hour storm (10 -year level of service). Barr Engineering Company 3-3 PAMpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update\WorkFiles\Report\December 15 2011 FINAL DRAFT\Edina SWMP FINAL vl.docx r !(Zone A, Augt Revisedto ♦,.� • „r 3 r. 1 .s ` r it City Bounciarj� Edina Topography 10 Foot Conth tg - � y e� `�L�: *" 4 � # �w�ys, � �i��` � �Ir 4. j � I� h7 �`+} � ♦_� i' .�:.. � �9�ti� �g �� ., fi'� .?� '� i .�( �' �, --yy,��rr✓' 4L 4 a a .� a ^+ ....& +sem ,�`�.,. ,�-..fir . �+@i■a�` � .a i%� --; �,,,. k X �... ' i � `� ) ,,:} -C. „y,."'',,,."`�% IN NZ A °4 st;.M r.,..irfP£ t "� t <♦+ rr < by T?. tom. ,r s 17 V +-T 1- 4r ' iw ML .. M /�/ r Q'. `�' '"'�7 ^mac 7s •� _ } 7'�� .r' 7 i .0 17* tr �..,_s ..{ -'_- p.i.; } t C"'.'�.. 'ice ♦ `�`TOPOGRAPHII Edina MI � i #`-� � - u .�•`+� was .. _ �:,',ay� �...�sei' � ef.-?c ' t f cj,#"�,y � � �: � ..: i .r 4 .o' ,✓.�i.� February 9, 2015 Board of Examiners City of Edina Planning Department 4801 west Fiftieth Sheet Edina MN 55424 RE: Request for Variance — Increase first floor elevation Location: 4214 Scott terrace Edina MAI 55416 Dear Sirs: We are requesting a variance from the Board's rules for construction of a new single family home to increase first floor elevation by six inches over the maximum allowed elevation. Subject to section 36- 434(9). The lot for 4214 Scott Terrace is located in a FEMA flood plain with a recently revised 100 -year flood elevation of 869.2'. Per section 3.1.1.1 of the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan: All lowest floor elevations and other permanent fixtures including heating and air conditioning ventilation systems should meet the following: a, Be a tdahnum of hvo feet above the IOU year flood elevation for basins with pipe outlets or waterways. In accordance with this policy, low floor elevation will need to be no lower than 871.2' before building permit can be approved. Also in accordance with the FEMA flood plain, no fill can be placed at any elevation lower than 869.2'. Details: Please see attached drawings and plans for details to this variance Reason for Seeking the Variance: We are seeking a variance from Rule,.. {Subject to section 36434 (9) to increase the first floor elevation from allowed 879.93 to 880.43, which will allow to build a walk out basement with a minimum of 8 feet 0 inches ceiling height, to make additional living space in a house. The Plan: Max allowed elevation first floor 879.93. Install 3 inches of 3/4 gravel per code on the existing basement floor for installation of radon system, install needed plastic to block radon gas, pour 3,5 inches of concrete total of 6.6 inches over the existing elevation. New proposed floor elevation -871.2. Floor system TH joists 14 inches. Install 14 inches of additional block on the existing foundation to increase basement ceiling height to 8 feet. New Proposed top first floor elevation 880.43. Please feel free to contact me, if you Board of Examiners Meet% infoJeonhomes@gmaiLcom J Sincerely, Ion Beleniuc additional information. I will be available to attend the M contact information is: 763-639-9 or 1 February.9.2015 Board of Examiners City of Edina Planning Department 4801 west Fiftieth Street Edina MN 55424 Dear Division: This letter authorizes Ion Beleniuc, to act as agent for 4214 Scott terrace Edina MN, to request a variance from the Board of Examiners City of Edina Planning Department Sincerely, Dan Mccabe M214 Scott Terrace L,lc Jackie Hoogenakker From: deborah lantz <deblantz@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:32 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Case file B-15-05 i allow the purposed 4 inch variance on 4213 Scott terr. Debbi Lantz 4213 Scott Terr Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Page 1 of 1 http://gis.hennepin.usIPropertylprintldefault.aspx?C=473 861.155804129,4974791.7521697... 2/19/2015 Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Page 1 of 1 http://gis.hennepin.usIPropertylptintldefault.aspx?C--473859.0920500015,4974794.37155... 2/19/2015 a � oIII � $ .�.. fill fill �aM I la I I I I flit a °�a d I � I I f fi z. y$$ boo ♦ ( I *'f LL $t As �° a aOvrraIlk ,� d ally �Fp��. 4 7iYp 4 j � i 1710 �.. ll 1 72 Y y. r 1 ��' �{ ✓ 0 1 1 , 1 ' a # g ..- gyp ,�}- � Lo `3 _moo R8�0 7$ 't N \ rIV 1 aeo Ilk r ------------- a Aal SMU W66 HIVON pid 00*W0 Proposed Site Plan Survey For: ICON HOMES. INC. 7. Towarbip 2%R -P 24. J� PraPOWAM= 4214SCM'r m:,, r Y� Ediow.i�afB yn.ync 1, _ 604.67 ,N 89°5 r 66a'' t 'w , { i =1 =rte,. No. -4R12 0.9 Aw 1 -5t -Frame � , � 1 r fiaraaa�sr4•Gsidwr ®w I ¢+ r �I l r >e r ,i , r I 1 r ,r f , + r OR i 1 r Cru -.9 fkP ecs. fs . INVOICE NO, 0397 FANO. — --_ 1070-07 SCALE: 1" = 2a DNi0t0a FolaM 4m AIpMA1Nt11 �,.,-� 6 OMNWAK fp11..�.1a1M41roa1t ��.., O naamaaa YYaeQaRbr Nn way I � �ti_� OaawosCaelams r _ I / �\....0wwwamaordom mn ' -,? laala flr / .. 9A5 � ' � bp�ags it � 0 nonan eataa�p nlmaon 0000 tlsnaasloam 1 a 'a � . � _. a; � QanMsSyagarOr�aaape an. NDTE: r14naxwaWewe nmaoaalwol nnnmtaoeaaadd-.k, Wa .keaWw e ford aaa„ EWsft Fh*Floor an awrny ora 5; 01241 Elwadon*=.1 a+dgm a�m�aaom� 00.61 I k�� .,.:. m6Cv by ±j t ,MOM naa*ra-Fk*PiW L1# r � � 13�+ 678.'73 P1oo9asa TppafObak q+a+agl .. � �(1j1i �$ �aAokeaaJaarol A3IM }k a�ewv�ascFmorD+ w! Fun 6ax neat wakoi;t o `The Gregory Group, Inc. Lm V dbl. 6±6 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY Eswanshad in 1962 n so LAND SURVEYORS REQ5TERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE of XM44ESGTA M 7374>rema YM& (78)m0am _�--� lr�gonn'teeaawusla2n e�arm.sea-9s�2 0 *itritry-ars tertifirtttr itu any eawnwb Owm ne from pills of mord or WWWOoo L R.c >,"`; piovidod by slknL rb+* an r7 1rMitldrOw, »ornP4R+atvnPradh'meor. In ,* „ wIdw "N dredsupmWon NW 0* 1 am a dWf» d lwW n»•r'� auneyortowtaW"arMsBaaarmwomm $u111eyed #0 iODl day of DaWnb, 2014. i areaary ,mv. .Rae•.Mo.. ma Pz-18-14 aleraacns auatimey 212-18 devatiorr� I 2.5-15 IStflow ao *9 Alda. g• ��°,.: 7i No.4214' lit-FtaRi4 ' r 3VP A q ti k ra toAm� � amss 1 6 1 tn a` 35- W 200. 198.700 plat0 rheas A 1 1 \ = 1$2 sq j = 157sq&;t 1287-150aUomme) O et 00 - 50 aRoWa *4 -e-, c 7 - //. : u a< �r Lot30,MORNINGSME H—epin Conary, W - -oft a� G6 •o e>•4.a 1u Roar 661»6 W1.4 ft- No. 4216 J � a -677— F.4.-.. -676 ^ 661 .n �. �wh•w.auw t � wa -ain base +• t•r.I ' z•.•+1ru��..i�j �77NDI+Q p� IIVH O p, P 1/�Plu .yccc W 0I7 N•JISHQ S.I-dv j s�s� -ass iM iIFB4 NW•ap71IL 7 w .11 t Hiij +iii x}i o � mILT% DESIGN ALC _ ___ 46 .w w++w�aa w•wro p fii44 NIt '•N1 • •r.ae:•w ai •• as n aa...lal Raaf iKY 4- •aK All PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Kris Aaker, February 25, 2015 B-15-05 Assistant Planner Recommended Action: Approve a variance to allow the construction of a new home on an existing foundation that will be more than one foot above (1.33 feet total above) the existing first floor elevation of the previous home located at 4214 Scott Terrace. Project Description: Ion Beleniuc has submitted a variance application on behalf of the property owners to increase the first floor elevation 1.33 feet higher than the current first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 4214 Scott Terrace on the existing foundation. This property is located on the west side of Scott Terrace within the Morningside neighborhood with a portion of the property located in the floodplain. The zonin'Y ordinance allows for a maximum 1 foot increase in height of an existing 1s floor. The applicant is asking for a .33 foot, (4 inch), variance to increase 1st floor height by 1.33 feet to allow an 8 foot ceiling height in the basement. The building permit plan set submitted to the City for review conformed to the zoning ordinance requirements, however, upon review by the Engineering Department it was discovered that the back yard has floodplain requiring an increase in the existing basement elevation. Initially the plan was to leave the existing walkout basement floor, however, after review it was determined that the applicant is required to increase the basement floor to be 2 feet above the flood elevation. The redesign has included changing floor trusses to mitigate the additional increase in new first floor height, however, in order to achieve 8 foot basement ceilings, a minimal 4 inch variance is requested. INFORMATION & BACKGROUND A variance is required to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. The current home located at 4214 Scott Terrace has a first floor elevation at 879.1 feet above sea level. This neighborhood in Edina has property located in a floodplain area, and the currently established floodplain elevation is 869.2. The existing basement floor elevation is at 870.6. The City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan requires the lowest floor to be a minimum of 2 feet above the Flood Elevation. The Engineering Department considers the entire basement of the existing home to be in the floodplain because it is lower than an elevation 2 feet above the flood elevation and now must be elevated because the project is deemed new construction. The home has been removed down to the "floor -cap" or foundation. A demolition permit for the house preceded the building permit application with all but the foundation torn down. The project is considered new construction since more than 50% of the exterior walls were removed so it now must conform to floodplain rules and all zoning ordinance requirements, (or receive a variance). Since the project is not a remodel and is considered new construction, it allows an opportunity for the city to correct an existing nonconforming and undesirable basement elevation condition. Eligibility Requirements for Variances from the 1 foot maximum increase in 1St floor height. City Code allows for the issuance of a variance to increase the first floor elevation of a new home over one foot above the existing home under one of the following circumstances: 1) To elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, as established by FEMA; 2) To elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to protect from groundwater intrusion; 3) To elevate the first floor elevation to the extent necessary to meet the state building code, city code, or statutory requirements; Furthermore, a variance may only be issued if the proposed project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass. This property is situated at an elevation that is currently just above the floodplain. Therefore, the applicant is seeking to establish low floor elevation at 871.23 feet, which would be 2 feet above the established floodplain. City code requires a 2 foot separation between floodplain and lowest floor elevations. Furthermore, the building code now requires increased minimum ceiling height in basements and a minimum of 12 inch floor trusses. The applicant is requesting the minimal variance to allow 8 foot ceiling height in the basement. In staff's analysis, the proposed home fits the character of the neighborhood with regard to height, scale, and massing. There have been several teardown/re- builds within this neighborhood. Therefore, the first floor elevation request meets the eligibility requirements for consideration of a variance from the one foot 1St floor rule. OA Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The existing 19,861 square foot lot is located on the west side of Scott Terrace and has a one-story home with a two car garage on the property. The site slopes lower to the back corners in the rear of the lot. There is floodplain located behind the house. Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Grading & Drainage Low -Density Residential R-1, Single -Dwelling District The grading must not impact adjacent neighbors. The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments in the attached memo. The memorandum states that Engineering has no problems with the plans as submitted and is in support of raising the low floor elevation to remove it from the risk of flooding. The proposed plans show a very minimal amount of grading on the lot and will closely mimic existing conditions. The applicant is only proposing an increase in impervious space of 12.5 SF, which is negligible. According to the Engineering memo, the neighboring private property will not be affected by the proposed grading and drainage plans for the redevelopment project. Compliance Table *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Does the proposed new home meet the criteria for approval of a variance with a first floor elevation 1.33 feet higher than the existing home? Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first floor elevation 1.33 feet higher than the existing home for the following four reasons: 1) The proposed home design elevates the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two feet above the 100 -year flood elevation. 2) The proposed home design elevates the first floor elevation to the extent necessary to meet the state building code with regard to minimum ceiling heights and minimum floor truss size; 3) The proposed home design project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass; 4) The request meets the criteria for approval of a variance given the following findings: 4 City Standard ; . Proposed Front — 40.45 feet 41.5 feet North Side - 10 feet 15 feet Rear— 25 feet 117 feet Side — 10 feet + Height 10.9/14.9 feet Building Coverage 25% 10.10% 1st Floor Elevation 1 foot/879.1 *1.33 feet/880.43 Building Height 37 feet 30.5 feet *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Does the proposed new home meet the criteria for approval of a variance with a first floor elevation 1.33 feet higher than the existing home? Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first floor elevation 1.33 feet higher than the existing home for the following four reasons: 1) The proposed home design elevates the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two feet above the 100 -year flood elevation. 2) The proposed home design elevates the first floor elevation to the extent necessary to meet the state building code with regard to minimum ceiling heights and minimum floor truss size; 3) The proposed home design project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass; 4) The request meets the criteria for approval of a variance given the following findings: 4 a. The proposal meets the conditions for variance. b. The proposal meets all other applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. c. The proposal fits the character with this neighborhood. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: Survey date stamped February 10, 2015. Building plans and elevations date stamped February 10, 2015. 2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo dated February 18, 2015. Deadline for a city decision: April 10, 2015. DATE: February 18, 2015 TO: Cary Teague — Planning Director CC: David Fisher — Building Official Ross Bintner RE - Environmental Engineer FROM: Charles Gerk EIT — Engineering Technician RE: 4141 44th St West - Special Review of Variance Application The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Summary of .review Engineering has no concerns with the plans as submitted. An existing and a proposed site survey will be sufficient for review and construction purposes. The proposed plan appears to be multiple small additions to the east, west and south sides of the home. There are only minor proposed grading changes that will match the existing grade to the new additions. The lot will have significantly reduced impervious surfaces and neighboring private properties will not be negatively affected. The property owner will need to allow for an inspection of their sump discharge line to verify it is not discharging into the sanitary line. If it is found to be doing so, it will need to be brought up to current code and inspected. Grading and Drainage The proposed plans show a net decrease of 1549 SF in impervious space. This decrease includes 389 SF in additional new impervious surfaces, a large net reduction in impervious space of 1250 SF from a previous permit and 688 SF from the proposed variance. Erosion and Sediment Control Meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements, if required. Street and Curb Cut No concerns Water and Sanitary Utilities There is a note in the property file that the home was one of the few homes that was unable to have their sump discharge to be inspected back in the early 2000's. Engineering will require that as part of this variance the current home owner allow an inspection of their sump discharge to verify that it isn't discharging into the sanitary line. If it is found to be doing so, it will need to be brought up to current code and inspected. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaMN.gov. 952-826-037'1. Fax 952-826-0392 Kris Aaker MENNEEN From: GARY GOSEWISCH <gosewisch@comcast.net> Sent: Friday, February 13, 201511:18 AM To: Kris Aaker Subject: Re: Variance application Attachments: GOSEWISCH variance reductions 021315.pdf Kris, I just spoke with Jeff Tritch the architect.,Atto d is s +drawing of tho t '$tab,,$ niiamed to be 10compliamm Wth the hardcover regWmimra, iia hove settled On UkIts 4., Sq f# iPg°+off of *f of step/parvh.. Do you want me to come by this morning and yellow them in as suggested or is his attached revised drawing sufficient? Thanks. Gary On 2/11/15, 2:53 PM, "Kris Aaker" <KAaker@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: Dear Gary, To move your application forward, please see Cary's suggestion about highlighting the areas to be cut back and by how much. M i' ,,":F ti, N Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-04611 Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 RAakerMclinaMN.mw I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planidng ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Cary Teague Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:47 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: RE: Variance application You could have the applicant draw on the survey where the buildings would be cut back? Cary Teague, Community Development Director 9s2-826.0460 I Fax 952-826-0389 i cell 952-826-0236 4801 W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 daaeue(aaEdinaMN.aov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning<hUo://www.EdinaMN.aov/Planning>...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Kris Aaker Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:28 PM To: Cary Teague Subject: FW: Variance application 14" ro11 9,7 sq/ft = GARAGE 14 -f0 12,8 sq/ft = FRONT PORCH 12 sq/ft : MaStER BATH/CLO, Cary, I know the PC are sticklers, so what do you think? They usually base it on plans presented. ((pry 5 P. 4 'F./ .-, ` * Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-04611 Fax 952.826-0389 4801W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 KAakerCalEdinaMN.¢ov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning<http://www.EdinaMN.Rov/Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Gary Gosewisch [mailto:eosewisch@comcast.net] Sent. Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:26 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: Re: Variance application Kris, I have been working with the architect and will be scaling back the plan. Can I give you a letter stating that, signed by both myself (and the architect if needed) or do the drawing all have to be redone for the variance request? At minimum I will reduce the garage addition by 2 inches which will gain back 4.9 sq ft. I will have the porch reduced by 30 sq ft or have the addition on the bedroom reduced or a combination of the two to reduce the hardcover back to 2250 sq ft. I can get you a copy of the final drawings for your approval if the variance is approved. I am trying to save the cost of having the drawing for the variance redone for a third time if the planning commission requires other changes. Gary Sent from my Wad On Feb 11, 2015, at 9:04 AM, Kris Aaker <gAaker(a EdinaMN.ov> wrote: Dear Gary, Public hearing notices for February 25th Planning Commission meeting will need to go out on Friday. In order for your project to be put on the agenda, we will need to have the lot coverage of your project addressed. Are you planning on requesting a variance from the coverage requirements or will you be scaling back the plan to conform? If you plan on adding that to your request, you will need to address it in your application and narrative and will need to be part of the notification. Thanks, Kris <image001.gif> Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-04611 Fax 952.826-0389 4801W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 KAaker@EdInaMN.¢ov 1 www.EdlnaMN.gov/Planning<htto://www.EdinaMN.zov/Plannine>...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Kris Aaker Sent: Thursday, February 05, 20151:42 PM Kris Aaker From: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 11:56 AM To: 'GARY GOSEWISCH' Subject: RE: Variance application Dear Gary, I was reviewing your variance application in more detail and one of the submitted surveys indicates a total proposed house footprint of 2,254 square feet. The maximum allowed coverage is 2,250 square feet. It also doesn't look like the surveyor put the front portico on the survey. So I doubt that was included in the proposed footprint amount. Would you please check with the surveyor regarding the front portico and coverage amounts. It would appear that you will need a lot coverage variance so you will need to address that variance once the amount over 2,250 square feet is identified by the surveyor. A lot coverage variance is not a variance that City Staff can support. Thank you, Kris Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner /> 952-826-04611 Fax 952-826-0389 L( ! 4801 W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 KAakerAEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Plannin-Q °~ ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families &. Doing Business From: Kris Aaker Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 2:54 PM To: 'GARY GOSEWISCH' Subject: RE: Variance application Dear Gary, + You will need to have the building coverage indicated on the survey by the surveyor, ( building areas and % of lot area). + Under submission requirements on page 3 of the application you will need to provide a rendering of your home and the homes on either side, since the "look" of your home will be changing. • You will need to specify the variances that you are granting in number form. So if the required rear setback is 25 feet and your new back wall will be 20 feet from the rear lot line, then a 5 foot variance from the 25 foot requirement is being requested. Thanks, Kris Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner r{ 952-826-04611 Fax 952-826-0389 t(� 4801 W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 KAakeraEdlnaMN.gov I www. EdinaMN.gov/Planning °-For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: GARY GOSEWISCH [mailto:gosewisch comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 10:33 AM To: Kris Aaker Subject: Variance application VARIANCE APPLICATION CASE NUMBERJj DATE �• FEE PAID • 'DO City of Edina Planning Department * www.cltvofedina.com 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424* (952) 826-0369 fax (952) 826-0389 FEE: RES - $350.00 NON -RES - $600.00' APPLICANT: NAME: bAV 6-05EWt 56ndl (Signature required on back ADDRESS: 4141 N( • Ob S7' r WNA.r Af PHONE: EMAIL: Gb$W 1 S t%(JI i\ �P61 1 MCI - PROPERTY OWNER/:l � A ,+ t n NAME: lif' 6M 1 �J(. (Signature required on back page) ADDRESS: 4141 W. 44 PHONE:612' 11q.6.50? LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (written and electronic form): **You must provide a full legal description. if more space is needed, please use a separate sheet. Note: The County may not accept the resolution approving your project If the legal description does not match their records. This may delay your project R PROPERTY ADDRESS:, 1.07'W3 5 LDC� C07-- A i PRESENT ZONING: S t��Ni� IAL- P.I.D.# EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: I Ai Q IN VPS ANtf, 70 ADD hA/ ME MAE t)F TSP— ft59 (Use reverse side or additional pages if necessary) ARCHITECT: NAME: �'FFr -MICA PHONE: 7"z• Z EMAIL: 1 TATC8 0,061,&A SURVEYOR: NAME: BWATfflkys PHONE: Iz' 1 !• PBZ. EMAIL: 60AAI QgLD +NOW K CbMT; ill! Flue 'DTZ K��vW R( IVwgwl. COO tel Ifo Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. Please fully explain your answers using additional sheets of paper as necessary. The Proposed Variance will: $ AjWAfjj YES NO Relieve practical difficulties in complying M%" . with the zoning ordinance and that the use Is reasonable Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property In the vicinity or zoning district Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood a ❑ 2 Page 2 Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable: The lot is 120 It wide by 66 ft deep. The bumped out portion of the back wall of the house currently is 17 ft from the property line. I would like to build out a portion of the back wall to fill in on both sides of the bump out, but not going any closer to the rear lot line. In addition I would like to add a porch to the front of the house which is approximately 1 ft closer to the front property Iine. Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable: The ordinance requires 25 ft setbacks from the front and rear property lines. For my house to comply with this ordinance it would be 16 ft deep. I am not encroaching on the rear property line any further than what is currently present. The front property line would be encroached by 1 foot where a post would go. Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance: I believe the intent is to keep as much green space as possible and not infringe upon neighboring property. Unfortunately this is a very small and uniquely shaped lot. I will not however be infringing on the neighboring property to the rear more than what is already in place. Not alter the essential character of the neighborhood: The addition will add only 389 total sq ft to the entire dwelling. l believe the "facelift " will fit into the neighborhood well by taking a nearly 60 year old home and making it look consistent with those around it as many of the neighboring homes have been updated. �QtJ Request for Variance The current residential setback requirements state: I am requesting a variance of 67 sq ft for an addition to the rear of my house. It would add an additional 89 sq ft on to the nonconforming rear bump out that currently occupies 22 sq ft. This additional space would not encroach on the rear setback anymore than the part of the house that currently sticks out on the backside. I would like to "fill in" the areas on both sides of the current bumped out area. It would add badly needed living space in the kitchen, bathroom and bedroom. In addition, the front porch will be 1 ft closer to the street but will not exceed the 80 sq ft current code. An addition to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, or an addition to a structure accessory to a single dwelling unit building with a nonconforming setback, may be constructed within the existing nonconforming setback, which is the shortest ALTERNATE SETBACKS distance from the applicable lot line to the existing structure, subject to the following limitations. 1. The addition shall no exceed the existing square footage encroachment into the nonconforming setback of two hundred (200) square feet, whichever is less; and 2. The addition may only be constructed on the same floor as the existing encroachment into the nonconforming setback. I am requesting a variance of 67 sq ft for an addition to the rear of my house. It would add an additional 89 sq ft on to the nonconforming rear bump out that currently occupies 22 sq ft. This additional space would not encroach on the rear setback anymore than the part of the house that currently sticks out on the backside. I would like to "fill in" the areas on both sides of the current bumped out area. It would add badly needed living space in the kitchen, bathroom and bedroom. In addition, the front porch will be 1 ft closer to the street but will not exceed the 80 sq ft current code. Impervious coverage: S,Quare feet House/garage 1861 Driveway/sidewalk 473 Concrete rear yard 688 (Pool/decking) removed 11/5/13 1250 Permit #ED126503 Existing impervious Proposed addition Subtotal 4272 389 Total 4661 Impervious coverage removed Pool/Decking (11/5/13) 1250 a•sa" Proposed Concrete rear yard 688 bye. `1 Total 1938 Net reduction in impervious coverage 1549 Exterior siding will be LP Smartside with Smartside/Cedar trim. Limited cultured stone accents may be used per architect recommendations. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT This application should be processed in myname, and I am the party whom the City should contact about this application. By signing this application, I certify that all fees, charges, utility bilis, taxes, special assessments and other debts or obligations due to the City by me or for this property have been paid. I further certify that I am in compliance with all ordinance requirements and conditions regarding other City approvals that have been granted to me for any matter. I have completed all of the applicable filing requirements and, to the best of my knowledge, the documents and Information I heye submitted are true and correct. 1Z.17. OWNER'S STATEMENT I am the fee'title owner of the above described property, and I agree to this application. (if a corporation or partnership is the application on behalf of the board of, Owners title holder, attach a resolution authorizing this Mors or partnership.) Data Date Note. Both signatures are required (if the owner Is different than the applicant) before we can process the application, otherwise It Is considered Incomplete. 6 I have reviewed the plans for the proposed remodel to 4141 W 44th St and have no objection to the variance. 49 &a 14 - O t d Rnan Ay Vii' ►'I iL Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Page 1 of 1 http://gis.hennepin.us/Property/print/default.aspx?C=473529.27560000075,4974225.49660... 2/19/2015 Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Page 1 of 1 http://gis.hennepin.us/Propertylprintldefault.aspx?C=473529.27560000075,4974225.49660... 2/19/2015 TOPOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY SURVEY crib of az 9 FOR: Gary Gosewisch m ^� E: ". N �MaMDUa LEGAL DESICRiPTiON: F7_y ". to m Lot 3, Block 2. Arden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Z c�v�4 dE� �, .. NOTES:. _ ... .._ " W L6 1, fie orientation of this bearingro system k based a1 the Hennepin County coordinate (NAD 83-96 Ad}). " L4 an o p Q 3 3� grid 2. The total 33 ac443® area of the property described hereon is 7.891 square feet or 0.1812 aces. 3 TRI fu iE N G C! Y e w was n m shed- to gen. Field Qe Na— Mc. for the preparation of this survey to verify the legal ti description, a the existence of any easements or encumbrances At 4. Existing utilities, services and underground structures shown 3 hereon were located based upon observed evidence. Veriflostion 0 and location of all uMi. and services should be obteMed from the owners of the respective utilities prior to any design, 0 Planning or excavation. T3 5. BENCHMARK: Top nut of hydrant at northwest caner of m 4' 4141 44th Street West (Per City of Edina website) Elevation - 908.71 feet (NM 29) : Q AREAS: Existing house footprint am = 1566 square feet; Proposed Horse addition areas - 388 square feet; Total proposed house footprint - 2254 square feet; The area of the property = 7.691 square feet; The proposed house footprint = 25.56 per cent of roperty area CERTIFICATION: `•� '" ' I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct sUpsrvislon and that i :;n,= y U -e need Land Surveyor under the laws of the State etQ. We of sbrvey. July 12, 2014. Revised this 13th day of December, 2014 to odd proposed addition. Revised this 22nd day of December, 2014 to add house areas. Brant R Peters Minnesota License No. 44123 LEGEND s .----«-�--+— 51 LT FENCE 0 SANITARY MANHOLE °—°—°— WOOD FENCE ® STORM MANHOLE s SANITARY SEWER ®CRO CATCH BASIN —S$_ STORM SEWER CATE VALVE aid OVERHEAD WiRE HYDRANT x 920.1 SPOT ELEVA71ON ® AIR CON017KNM —920 --'EXISTING Ca<dTt%1R LINE M ELECTRIC METER tt UTILITY POLE :TREE Q GAS METER t"-:"'71 NIUMINOUS DACE CORCRETE SURFACE SCALE IN FEET 0 FOUND IRON MONUMENT ® SET IRAN MONUMENT MARKED WTH UCENSE NUMBER 44123 C4 N yC 0 to 3Go m0 y a@ O L G Ul 9 Owl— TOPOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY SURVEY c.1 " 9 FOR: Gary Gosewisch Am 100 " = I .,LEGAL DESCRIPTION:` 7:77=""' Lot 3, Block Z Arden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota. c: 3 ,Or _.=NOTES:`, 1. The orientation of Oft bearing system to bond an the 0 z:w 4! 9 Hennepin County coordinate yid (MAD 83-96 Adj). glo Z 7M total was of the property described herean Is 7,891 0. 'H rd square feet or 0.1812 acres. 3. Title waft was net fArnished to E & Nowd,, km for ft preparation of this wxvey to = legal descriptim or the existence of any easements or Z 46 1 r. ww"flibrances. 16 ' i 0 CA .1 4 EAfflog utilitim services; and undwWwW vvwtLww show .j % hareem Pei located bond upon observed e0dervat. Verification and location of all utMew and services slictild be obtained from Me owners of ft respective utilities prior to any design, 4b a INSplanning or excavation. 5. BENCHMARK: Top nut of hydrant at northwest canner of 4141 44th Street Wed (Per City of Edina website) CIA *f. Elevation - 908.71 last, (NGVD 29) tA AREAS 5MIng house footprint area - IM sqtwe feet - T=7�=_7 addition arms 0�0 house footprint 2284 square feet �t The area of of Mcpartyarea a? CERTIFICATION: ... _y.. . `4t oA WOO I hereby cartify tins! this wawy wasme or wider my Q W) to and *M I am a == w LaSar 12 %.S Lawler t1w lan of the State of Minnesota. 5. W O Date of AA 10 — 0) 'b 0 0 SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED W7H LICOVSE NUMBER 44123 RevNed ;wZ y '"' ' w. 2014 to add addition. 0 v) 0) 0 %rl 0 "tit % 2014 to add Brant R Peters Owl— TOPOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY SURVEY c.1 " 9 FOR: Gary Gosewisch Am 100 " = I .,LEGAL DESCRIPTION:` 7:77=""' Lot 3, Block Z Arden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota. c: 3 ,Or _.=NOTES:`, 1. The orientation of Oft bearing system to bond an the 0 z:w 4! 9 Hennepin County coordinate yid (MAD 83-96 Adj). glo Z 7M total was of the property described herean Is 7,891 0. 'H rd square feet or 0.1812 acres. 3. Title waft was net fArnished to E & Nowd,, km for ft preparation of this wxvey to = legal descriptim or the existence of any easements or Z 46 1 r. ww"flibrances. 16 ' i 0 CA .1 4 EAfflog utilitim services; and undwWwW vvwtLww show .j % hareem Pei located bond upon observed e0dervat. Verification and location of all utMew and services slictild be obtained from Me owners of ft respective utilities prior to any design, 4b a INSplanning or excavation. 5. BENCHMARK: Top nut of hydrant at northwest canner of 4141 44th Street Wed (Per City of Edina website) CIA *f. Elevation - 908.71 last, (NGVD 29) tA AREAS 5MIng house footprint area - IM sqtwe feet - T=7�=_7 addition arms 0�0 house footprint 2284 square feet �t The area of of Mcpartyarea a? CERTIFICATION: ... _y.. . `4t oA WOO I hereby cartify tins! this wawy wasme or wider my Q W) to and *M I am a == w LaSar 12 %.S Lawler t1w lan of the State of Minnesota. 5. W O Date of AA 10 — 0) 'b 0 0 SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED W7H LICOVSE NUMBER 44123 RevNed ;wZ y '"' ' w. 2014 to add addition. 0 v) 0) 0 this 22nd day of December, 2014 to add Brant R Peters Minnesota License No. 44123 w LEGEND 0 SANITARY MANHOLE WOW FENCE STM MANHOLE 7�5- SANITARY SEWER MORS 0 CATCH BASIN GATE VALVE STORM SEVERn OVERHEAD VVE HYDRANT ,*,*I SPOT ELEVATION Alt COND170k' 0 E)0SWG CONTOUR LINE 0ELECTRIC CL METER LrnuTy POLE C -,OR MEE 2 GAS METER BITUMINOUS SURFACE �q Eli CONCRETE SURFACE - ' 163fIIi33J18 N14> 1110 3ON94i9dal HOVMSO9 rIrl, IMP I --hi i � b i i 71 rff� 1 � ' � o I l II a b t i b 9 j k � I a_ c M ; , vs k § � To: Planning Commission From: Karen M. Kurt Date: February 25, 2015 Subject: Vision Edina Agenda Item #: VILA Action 0 Discussion Information Action Requested: Review draft Strategic Vision and Framework Report and share feedback with City Council. Information I Background: Vision Edina is a broad-based and inclusive community visioning process. The Vision Edina initiative worked with local residents, organizations and businesses to explore: • What is unique and important about living in Edina? • Where is there opportunity or need to evolve or change? • How can we continue to progress to keep the city relevant and attractive to current and future residents and businesses? What is our competitive edge? Vision Edina will serve as an important foundation for other strategic efforts, such as the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. When finished, Vision Edina will replace Edina Vision 20/20, which was developed in 2000 and updated In 2003. The City Council is seeking feedback from Board and Commission members prior to their work session on April 21. Members can share feedback 1) individually using Speak Up Edina or email at mail _edinamn.gov or 2) as a group by submitting comments or meeting minutes to the Assistant City Manager. The goal is to approve the draft Strategic Vision and Framework Report during the month of May. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. ! Edina, MN 55424 r� w l ki r k a t T VISION EDINA CITY OF EDINA DRAFT STRATEGIC VISION and FRAMEWORK January 2015 CITY OF EDINA DRAFT STRATEGIC VISION AND FRAMEWORK ' VISION EDINA This vision and framework is an outcome of the broad-based community engagement and visioning process, conducted between September and December 2014. January 2015 futu reL> i Q PARTNERS VISION EDINA Vision Edina represents a fresh look at the future for the City of Edina. This work builds on the previous Edina Vision 20/20 planning work that was undertaken 15 years ago. Since that time, the world has changed. We are subject to stronger external trends and forces, and we face renewed pressures with increasing population and developmental growth. The future we face is one filled with greater uncertainty, more rapid pace of change and emerging new opportunities. Vision Edina allows us to step back and look again at the big picture, and decide how we continue to evolve to remain a relevant, competitive and progressive city. Vision Edina is a long-term strategic framework that helps our community understand and guide the Important decision-making that will impact the City's future. This framework lays out the key issues Identified by our community, which we need to be focusing our attention and resources on, over the coming years. The Vision Edina work and publications have been developed through a broad-based and Inclusive community visioning process conducted in 2014. It is proposed that the current City of Edina mission statement remains unchanged. This is a potent and relevant mission statement that has, and continues to, serve the City well. "Our mission is to provide effective and valued public services, maintain a sound public Infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all In a manner that sustains and Improves the uncommonly high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses." Vision Edna = DRAFT SWe& Vision Frarnework— January 2015 EDINNS VISION STATEMENT Edina holds a well-earned reputation as a city of choice. it is the model of a successful, mature, and progressive urban community, which remains relevant in a modern and evolving world. We maintain our heritage and attractiveness, and afford our residents the highest quality of life, while actively embracing the future. Within the context of North America and the Twin Cities, Edina Is known as a distinguished location that provides the Ideal environment to raise families, run businesses and simply enjoy life. The features that define our future community include: inclusive and Connected • Our community embraces diversity and cherishes the contributions of all residents and stakeholders, whatever their background, age or interests. • The community offers an enticing mix of residential development that retains and builds upon our strong foundation of single-family housing, but also includes a dimension of higher density multi- family options, especially for the young and the old. • Edina strives to promote a healthy demographic mix that builds on the tradition of multi -generational families, and also provides entry opportunities for new people seeking to raise families, start businesses, and join our quality community. • Transportation options of all kinds are available, allowing residents to be connected via a network of transportation modes that fosters mobility for people and connects the community together. • Our cohesive neighborhoods are able to retain their unique Individual character, while being linked seamlessly together into the broader fabric of our city, and beyond to the larger metropolitan area. Built -to -Scale Development • The community has worked hard to create an innovative and long-term comprehensive development policy, which strikes the right balance between renewal and progress, and protection and preservation. This has allowed the City to navigate the period of intense redevelopment and create a richer more vibrant city, without losing our historic neighborhoods. • Our development policy promotes and encourages Innovative ideas, and we have formed a working partnership between the community and the developers where creative solutions are found to create the best long-term outcome from new developments. • our community's commercial and retail base has been significantly enhanced through the creation of more mixed-use locations, sympathetically woven throughout our neighborhoods. These small nodes enhance our neighborhood feel and quality of life, and provide important community gathering points. Vision Edina— DRAFr Strategic Vision Ream" ak —January 2015 • We have proactively developed planning procedures and policies that allow the character of our neighborhoods to be protected and enhanced, and that local development reflects the aspirations of the neighborhood associations and residents. Sustainable Environment • Edina has taken its responsibility for the environment seriously. Asa community we have focused and Invested in world-class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental sustainability. • We have implemented sophisticated systems, including recycling, energy efficiency and management of water, to the point where we have substantially reduced our overall environmental impact and significantly increased the efficiency in our resource use. • Our planning has integrated the best -proven standards of sustainable building and environmental stewardship into all aspects of our city planning and building codes. We are regarded as a leader in the Integration of environmental management into city management and function. • Our community continues to treasure and protect our public spaces and parks, and these have been further enhanced to build blodiversity and natural ecosystems, which in turn support and purify our natural environment. A Community of Learning • Edina has continued to evolve as a highly engaged community, where residents share the responsibility for decision making and working collectively toward the common vision. • We recognize and appreciate the significant value of our education system, and we continue to work and invest to strengthen and grow this key community asset. • As technology and society has evolved, so has our prized education system. We have a high quality, future orientated education system, which undeniably prepares our students to thrive in an Increasingly competitive and globalized world. • As residents, we never tire in our pursuit of knowledge and understanding. We collectively promote the value of engagement and education, and we ensure that we have the capacity as a community to understand and remain agile in a fast changing and complex world. Future -Oriented • As a community, we continually look forward and are always working to remain competitive, relevant and innovative, We stand on the foundation of our traditions, but are not afraid to adapt and change as the city evolves. • Our city leaders and organizations are actively engaged In regional leadership and in ensuring the Interests of Edina are represented at the level of the Twin Cities metropolis, but also beyond. Our City's priorities and interests are fundamentally integrated into the broader regional planning. • Edina is willing to use Its privileged position, resources, and expertise to apply new ideas and technology, and we actively invest ourselves in finding and creating Innovative solutions to the emerging challenges of living in a major city. vision Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework — January 2015 STRATEGIC FOCUS AREA, ISSUES AND ACTIONS Eight key strategic focus areas have emerged through the Vision Edina process. These areas are built from the key drivers and issues identified early In the Vision Edina process, and have carried through the extensive community and stakeholder engagement process. These focus areas, and the attendant issues and actions, represent emerging priority areas that can both leverage and guide the future evolution of our city. This is not Intended to be an exhaustive list, and in no way displaces the underlying foundational work that continues on our key areas of infrastructure, community services, governance, and fiscal management Rather, these strategic focus areas represent key emerging priorities, and reflect the core drivers of our future that can be summarized in the categories of 'Balancing Edina's Redevelopment, and 'Enhancing Our Community Fabric and Character. Vision Edina - DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework - January 2015 1. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX The Issue of residential property development has been repeatedly raised throughout the Vision Edina process. The City has been faced with a number of redevelopment pressures and challenges across numerous areas of the city. Residents strongly favor a continued focus on the single-family housing nature of the majority of the city neighborhoods, but there is increasing concern about the trend and Impact of so-called 'teardowns' on the community. There is also recognition of some need to develop more multi -family options In order to serve the needs of young professionals and our senior citizens, and create some diversity in housing affordability. ISSUES • Residential neighborhoods continue to serve as the defining characteristic of the city, and there is a high desire to protect and enhance such neighborhoods. • Residents take a great deal of pride In their homes, and express concern about the escalating redevelopment pressures facing some neighborhood areas. • Edina continues to face competition from neighboring communities that claim to offer a similar quality of life while also offering more available land for development. • The community must balance the needs of the families that have defined its character, with an aging population that desires to 'age in place; STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Further encourage the development of the neighborhood associations and the overall neighborhood concept. Define the unique character and brand of each of the well-established neighborhoods, and explore innovative planning guidelines to allow preservation and enhancement of the desired neighborhood visual appeal. • Pursue further planning and development options that protect and locate key amenities, such as parks and community facilities, within the neighborhood framework to allow neighborhood centers and focus points to further evolve. • Continue to explore options and opportunities for new multi -family development, opportunities in the Southdale, Pentagon Park. and Grandview areas, and on the appropriate fringes of other mixed-use areas and public spaces. Vision Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vision framework- January 2015 Z. TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Participants in the Vision Edina process expressed a strong desire to continue to expand a variety of transportation options to both reduce the dependency on automobiles, but also to enhance the community's ease of connectivity. Access to a variety of biking and walking trail options Is a key amenity that helps residents feel connected to their community, and improve the overall quality of life. A diversity of transportation options is also highly preferred among younger residents. However, such options have met resistance In some areas, largely in response to concerns about immediate local Impacts. The larger community sentiment of support should be highlighted to advance policies and developments deemed to be in the larger public good. ISSUES • The community's infrastructure continues to age and be stressed by increasing traffic volume. • The majority of Edina's employed population works outside of the City and Is therefore reliant on the connectivity and maintenance of the roadway system for their livelihood. • The community overall is highly supportive of increased diversity and integration of transportation and local access options, but has a lesser appetite for a transit -forward strategy. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Undertake community education and promotion, to highlight the broad support and benefits of more diverse transport options, and particularly to highlight the support expressed across multiple age demographics. • Continue to work actively with Metro Transit to expand transit options to Edina, and ensure that Edina residents do not become further isolated from the larger transit infrastructure. • Continue to develop an integrated long-term plan that lays out a future orientated and ambitious transport network that covers multiple modes of transport and takes into account potential impacts of future technology on transport modes and corridors. • Continue to promote and develop the sidewalk, trail and bike lane networks to improve accessibility and connectivity throughout the City, and beyond. 181 Vision Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vislon framework —January 2015 3. .COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MIX Edina has traditionally embraced commercial development along a relatively narrow corridor along France Avenue, and originally anchored by Southdale Mall. While this practice has been successful and has led to additional growth along France Avenue and elsewhere, Vision Edina participants have expressed a desire for easier and more proximal access to small retail options and other amenities. Many participants of the engagement process highlighted the unique and appealing experience of the 50th and France precinct. New development opportunities can build upon this example to develop neighborhood nodes of an appropriate scale, in other locations across the City. ISSUES • Edina has historically favored large-scale commercial development. Best practice and community desire has moved towards also Including smaller -scale models. • Some residents currently feel somewhat disconnected from common amenities, including banking, dry cleaning, groceries, and pharmacies - and this is an issue likely to be exacerbated with an aging population. • The community has a significant once -off redevelopment opportunity in Pentagon Park and other areas key areas, but as of yet, there appears to be no clear community consensus as to the best and most appropriate uses and ultimate outcome. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • In light of the escalating developmental pressures facing the Council and City, the City should as a priority renew its broader land use plan. This plan should examine and consider the future broad fabric of the community, and begin to define key nodes of higher density mixed use, and potential nodes of small-scale commercial opportunity, embedded in more of a neighborhood context. • More consideration of scale and appropriate mixed use could be used in the review of new commercial development proposals, especially to take Into account the compounding impact of numerous developments in close proximity, and the concerns about this overall impact on streetscape, environmental aspects, transportation and utilities and services. • The community should further examine and consider the viability of developing small neighborhood - based business nodes, to provide a range of local amenities and services. • Edina should continue to explore strategies that promote the continued vitality of existing core retail zones around Southdale Mali, and also actively pursue economic development strategies targeting specific professional services clusters. These approaches could enhance the core economic underpinning of the local economy. Vision Edina - DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework -January 2015 9 4. LIVE AND WORK Edina's community has a large number of high wage earners, most of who commute to areas outside the city for work. Therefore, Edina is highly dependent on the vitality of the regional economy to maintain prosperity. At the same time, the community also recognizes a growing desire, especially among young professionals to both live and work in the same location. There is evidence to suggest this represents part of a larger societal trend, and could have important implications to the future location appeal of Edina. The City currently offers limited opportunities to do so, as a mismatch exists between the wage-earning potential of many of the employment opportunities in the community and the relatively high cost of quality housing. However, the City is very well endowed with recreation facilities, which offers excellent outdoor and sporting amenities. ISSUES • Many of the city's residents commute outside of the city for work. This creates a disincentive to young professionals who may aspire to live and work in Edina. • The community does not possess significant spaces for collaborating, start-ups or telecommuting. • Many key staff in organizations across Edina cannot afford to live in the community, creating a potential service disconnect. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Edina should support the development of a start-up or entrepreneurial climate in the city, and bring together key stakeholders to develop an integrated economic development strategy. • The community should consider the inclusion of incubators or co -working spaces in any new redevelopment projects and in mixed-use proposals. • The City should promote the development of a mix of commercial amenities, including restaurants and cultural amenities, which are attractive to young families and professionals and can further act as connection points or hubs within the fabric of neighborhoods and development areas. 10 Vision Edina - DRAFT &rateg(o Vision Framework - January 2015 S. EDUCATIONAL FOCUS Edina Public Schools are recognized as one of the principal assets of the community. The school district and its institutions are routinely recognized as among the best in the state and nation. Participants in the Vision Edina process routinely singled out quality education as one of the defining characteristics of their preferred future. However, respondents also expressed a desire for the greater use of technology in the classroom, expansion of cultural and 'globally -focused' learning opportunities, and the promotion of lifelong learning. ISSUES • Education policy and funding are largely the responsibility of other entities, placing the City in an advocacy and partnership role. • Respondents desire an educational system that maintains high quality while also embracing new techniques and technologies. • While Edina Public Schools and other local institutions adeptly provide K-12 education, the community Is largely responsible for providing lifelong learning and other cultural education opportunities. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • The community should promote a culture of learning among all of Its residents, and continue to find ways to explore, understand and present best practice across a range of topics. In particular, it is Important to expand the scope beyond regional expertise and explore best practice and emerging trends on a global scale. • The City should continue to foster their productive working partnership with Edina Public Schools. These two entities represent some of the key leverage points in the City, and combining their Influence could accelerate the progress on key initiatives. • The City and school district should continue to explore future opportunities for expanded partnerships between the school and existing employment opportunities within the city, thereby helping develop career paths and local workforce development. Vision Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework — January 2015 11 6. POPULATION MIX The demographics of the Twin Cities are constantly changing as new residents are attracted by strong regional employment prospects, economic tailwinds and quality cultural and public amenities. Edina Is well positioned to attract many of these new residents because of Its high quality of life. Edina's population is also undergoing a generational transformation as its population continues to age, creating a new group of active retirement senior citizens with different housing and amenity needs. Developing an effective balance in each of these areas is critical to ensuring future sustainable growth. ISSUES • The perception of an 'Edina Bubble' carries with it the stigma of being an exclusive and exclusionary community. • The relatively high cost of housing Is also viewed as a perceived barrier to entry into the community, especially for younger families. • The needs of an aging population are often in conflict with the preferences of the younger residents the community seeks to attract. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Edina Public Schools should continue to expose students, and parents, to a variety of cultural experiences. This will serve to foster a global mindset, while also cementing the education system as a key population draw. • Edina's civic organizations should promote a welcoming Image of the city. These efforts should be equally directed towards new residents and new businesses. These organizations should also take a lead role In publicizing the City's cultural amenities. • The City should continue to prioritize amenities that meet the needs of residents of all ages. The City should continue discussions about the effects of an aging population, as referenced In the Vision 20/20 process, Similar efforts should be used to engage young adults, including high school students. 12 Vision Edna — DRAFT Strategic Won Framework — January 2015 7. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP There is a growing awareness of the impact that the built environment has on the natural environment, and the individual and collective responsibility we all have towards good environmental stewardship. Community residents and stakeholders believe that Edina can take an active and ambitious internal and regional leadership role in promoting more comprehensive recycling, smart building, and energy efficiency practices. These themes couple well with the parallel benefits in smarter urban planning, increased transportation options, and application of technology. ISSUES • Residential and commercial developers have little incentive to balance environmentally friendly building practices with market pressures, or in fact to provide leading edge examples of energy efficient and environmentally sensitive construction. • Currently, residential waste removal and other environmental services are poorly coordinated, and In some cases resulting in multiple providers serving the same streets, contributing to noise, environmental Impact and inefficiencies. • The need for green spaces is well recognized, but the use of these areas currently follows more traditional 'green lawn' approaches rather than integrated habitat zones. • Developmental pressures are likely to continue to place increased demands on the City's infrastructure and contribute to concerns about decline in environmental quality in the city. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • Develop a comprehensive citywide environmental management plan, that explores and includes best practice in terms of water management, biodiversity, green space management, street scape preservation and waste management. • Partner with energy and utility service providers to educate residents on the importance of energy efficiency in their daily living, and promote energy efficiency and smart building practices at all City - owned properties. This could include well established practices such as publishing data on the carbon emission, waste levels and recycling levels. • Identify a series of environmental flagship pilot projects to bring stakeholders together and begin exploring creative solutions. Examples could include: waste collection and management across the city; recycling and green waste management; environmental overlays on development projects such as Pentagon Park; and, utilization of available areas such as Fred Richards Park as community gardens and biodiversity spaces. • Develop incentives for individual households to take an active part In the overall city responsibility to environmental management, Including reducing nutrient loads in run-off, local recycling and efficient resource usage. Vision Edina - DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework — January 2015 13 " 8. REGIONAL LEADERSHIP Edina has long been recognized as one of the premier communities in the Twin Cities. It has also historically assumed a leadership role as it served as the home to many influential Individuals. The City has also been historically viewed as somewhat progressive in its policies and practices. Recently, this reputation has somewhat faded as other neighboring communities have jumped to the fore, and Edina has approached a 'fully built out' phase. The existing phase of redevelopment, and the expanding pressures from the surrounding metropolis offer the need and opportunity for Edina to once again emerge as an innovator, seeking and implementing creative solutions to local and regional issues. ISSUES • City leadership has generally focused on local issues, in large part driven by community needs and expectations and the trend towards conservatism that comes with an aging population. • The city's size limits its relative influence when compared to larger neighboring communities. This fully built nature constrains the city to Internal redevelopment and forces it to deal with new issues, previously not encountered. • The community has regional economic importance, but its cultural importance has been somewhat more limited. However, there is potential for Edina to have some destination value, beyond just as a residential abode. STRATEGIC ACTIONS • City leaders should actively advocate for Edina's interests in the Metropolitan Council and other regional bodies. in addition, the City should form particularly close functional connections with the Immediately neighboring cities, as they share many aspects and challenges. • City leaders should continue to Inform residents on the impact of issues of regional importance, and work to better integrate an understanding of the importance of being an active participant, and leader, in the larger regional system • City leaders and residents should collaborate to discover, develop and apply new best practices In environmental sustainability, aging in place, educational quality, and other broad areas of consensus. These efforts will ensure that Edina builds the future intelligence capacity to retain a future -focused worldview, and act as an example and role model to other cities In North America. 14 Visbn Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework — January 2015 CONCLUSION The Vision Edina process has presented an opportunity for the community to come together and explore the longer-term future. The current period of Intense redevelopment, which Is occurring within Edina, represents an important juncture in the community's history and evolution. This is coupled with a more gradual generational shift, as the predominant Baby Boom generation moves through the demographic tiers. The resultant situation is where Edina stands poised before some significant choices about future trajectory and outcomes. This has been well articulated in the Vision Edina process. The community has chosen a path forward that represents some significant change and reinvention, but without losing touch with the important family values and rationale that has always defined Edina as a community. The path ahead is not without its challenges and will require careful balancing of differing priorities, aspirations and desires. The collective decision making process required to move forward will set Edina apart as an intelligent, engaged, thoughtful and forward looking city. It will require maturity and patience on behalf of the citizens and leadership, and recognition that the complex resident mix, which makes Edina interesting, also brings with it differing opinions and perspectives. Understanding the importance of the common good over personal self -interests will be critical to build alignment around Important future shaping decisions and actions. The population and leadership of Edina possess and exhibit more than sufficient knowledge and experience to guide the City toward the vibrant and balanced future desired by the residents and stakeholders. Vision Edina — DRAFT Strategic Vision Framework — January 2015 15 FOR MORE INFORMATION VISION EDINA The Vision Edina initiative has aimed to define a shared vision for the City of Edina. The vision and strategic framework is an outcome of a broad-based and inclusive community visioning process. The engagement portion of this Important planning process ran from September to December 2014. and gathered significant community input. From a strategic planning perspective, Vision Edina examines the issues that have been Identified as having the highest priority within the community. The initiative examined future trends in cities across North America and the world, and how generational values are changing. This was also linked to local aspirations, values and desires for the future. This process enables a clearer understanding of what people might be looking for in Edina in 2030 and beyond. Vision Edina has represented an opportunity for all residents to have a say and contribute to creating the shared future vision. Vision Edina is part of the overall community process to update the long-term vision for the City of Edina, and will also serve as an important foundation for other strategic efforts, such as the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plans. The City of Edina partnered with Future IQ Partners, an international consultancy company, to design and facilitate the process. For more Information on the Vision Edina project and the City of Edina, please contact: 4P IN A, Kurt, Assistant City Manager - el, City of Edina r j Tei: + 1 952.826-0415 Yeo .ay KKurt®EcfinaMN.gov www.EdinaMN.gov ase s�N VISION future-)iQ EDINA PARTNERS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague February 25, 2015 VI.D. Community Development Director INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Frank Berman is proposing to combine and subdivide his four properties at 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road seven lots. (See property location on pages Al A3.) The existing home at 5331 Evanswood Lane would remain, and the home at 5324 Blake Road would be removed. The other two parcels are vacant. The applicant proposes to construct a 24 -foot vide cul-de-sac off Blake Road within a 40 -foot right-of-way. Two lots would access of Evanswood Lane, and the remaining five off the new road. The applicant has attempted to minimize tree loss and address drainage issues in the area by locating the roadway along the north lot line, and the stormwater retension areas along the street. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4—A22a.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. Preliminary Plat. All seven of the proposed lots meet the City's minimum lot size requirements. Minimum lot size, width and depth is determined by the median of all lots within 500 feet of the subject property. Based on the surveyors calculation of the medians, the minimum lot size is 21,842 s.f. in size; 166.4 feet in depth; and 120.8 feet in width. (See attached median calculations on pages A22—A22a) Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the subject properties are single-family homes, zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The site is 4.31 acres in size, and contains two single-family homes. The site contains some gradual slopes and mature trees. (See pages A2 -A3.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single -dwelling residential R-1, Single -dwelling district The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. (See median calculations done by a licensed surveyor on pages A22-A22a.) Grading/Drainage and Utilities Rather than constructing a traditional stormwater pond within the subdivision, in an effort to save additional trees on the site, the applicant is proposing to manage stormwater through rain gardens on each lot. (See grading plan on page A11a.) FA Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 21,842 s.f. 120.8 feet 166.4 feet Lot 1 21,842 s.f. 126.89 feet 169.31 feet Lot 2 21,910 s.f. 129.00 feet 169.86 feet Lot 3 21,842 s.f. 124.70 feet 170.72 feet Lot 4 22,328 s.f. 120.88 feet 166.64 feet Lot 5 24,822 s.f. 121.83 feet 166.80 feet Lot 6 30,033 s.f. 191.4 feet 190 feet Lot 7 21,901 s.f. 128.16 feet 184.18 feet The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. (See median calculations done by a licensed surveyor on pages A22-A22a.) Grading/Drainage and Utilities Rather than constructing a traditional stormwater pond within the subdivision, in an effort to save additional trees on the site, the applicant is proposing to manage stormwater through rain gardens on each lot. (See grading plan on page A11a.) FA The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and does have some concern given the existing drainage issues in this neighborhood. (See the engineering memo on pages A33 -A34.) The stormwater system downstream is over capacity. The applicant will be required to meet all minimum Minnehaha Creek Watershed district standards, as they are the regulatory authority in Edina in regard to grading and drainage. There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. At the time of this report, the issues raised by engineering in their review memo have not been met. The applicant is working on the plans to satisfy engineering's requirements. If the applicant has not addressed the issues by the time of the meeting, staff would recommend continuing action on this request to the next Planning Commission meeting. Ross Bintner, from the engineering department will be at the Planning Commission meeting to discuss any revised plan that is submitted, and the issues regarding the proposal. Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all the lot lines. A general building pad would be graded at the time the roadway is constructed. Each -lot would be custom graded at the time of building permit. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. Any approval of the proposed plat would be subject to meeting all the conditions required by engineering in their review memo dated February 19, 2015. (See pages A33 - A34.) Street Construction/Sidewalk — Traffic & Safety The applicant is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac off Blake Road. Five of the proposed lots would access off the cul-de-sac, and two off of Evanswood Lane. (See page A8.) The street would be located generally in the same location as the two existing curb cuts for two homes that are removed. (See page A9.) The cul-de-sac would have a center island that would serve as a rain garden. Both the fire marshal and public works director believe that the center island would be acceptable, as fire trucks and snow plows will be able to adequately access the street and homes on the street. WSB conducted a traffic study and concluded that the proposed street and additional homes in the area would not have a negative impact on the existing streets in the area. The level of service on the existing streets would not change as a result of the proposal. (See traffic study on pages A23 -A31.) WSB examined the existing intersections and spacing along Blake Road, and found that while not ideal, the proposed spacing of the intersections is not a safety concern. The proposed development would generate 58 additional daily trips, 5 in the peak am, and 6 in the peak pm hours. (See page A28.) With the reduction in the width of the roadway to 24 feet, the applicant shall be required to post one side of the street and the entire cul-de-sac for no parking for a fire lane; additionally residential fire sprinkler protection shall be required for each home subject to approval of the fire marshal. (See memo from the fire marshal dated February 18, 2015 on page A32.) Per the city's living streets policy, the engineering department is also recommending a 5 -foot sidewalk with a 5 -foot boulevard to be located within the right-of-way on the south side of the street. (See engineering memo on pages A33 -A34, and the living streets sidewalk map and policy on pages A35 -A40.) This sidewalk would connect to the existing sidewalk on the east side of Blake Road. (See page A35.) Tree Removal With the layout of the subdivision there would be 38 trees removed to accommodate the public street and stormwater retention areas. (See page A13.) The generic building pads would result in an additional 75 trees removed. (See page Al2.) Based on the new tree ordinance adopted by the City Council, these trees would not have to be replaced. Any tree outside of these areas would be required for replacement per the new ordinance. Each lot would be reviewed individually at the time of building permit application to determine compliance with the city's new tree ordinance. Park Dedication As with all subdivision proposals, park dedication is required. Edina City Code requires a park dedication fee of $5,000 for each additional lot created. Therefore a park dedication fee of $15,000 would be required for the three additional lots. Primary Issue Is the proposed subdivision reasonable for the site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. As such, the applicant is entitled to subdivide the property, similar to how other large properties in this area were able to subdivide in the past. 4 2. The applicant has designed a grading and drainage plan in an attempt to save more trees on the site. 3. The applicant has designed a 24 -foot wide street, rather than the traditional 27 -foot wide street, to reduce impervious surface. 4. Upon compliance with all city and watershed district requirements for grading and drainage, the proposed subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Staff Recommendation Because the proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning Ordinance requirements, recommend that the City Council approve the proposed seven lot subdivision. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has reduced the width of the road, and minimized the stormwater ponding on the site in an attempt to minimize tree loss. 3. In meeting all city and watershed district requirements for drainage the proposed subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Approval is subject to the following conditions: The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. Final plat shall include a complete grading and drainage plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 2. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into a Developers Agreement with the City. The Developers Agreement shall include the requirement for construction of the street as proposed, and a sidewalk on the south side of the street as recommended in the engineering memo dated February 19, 2015. The agreement shall also include the conditions of approval. 3. Prior to release of the final plat, the following items must be submitted: a. Park dedication fee of $15,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. b. A construction management plan will be required for the overall development of the site. C. Submit evidence of a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. b. Individual homes must comply with the overall grading plan for the site. Each individual building permit will be reviewed for compliance with the overall grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. C. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. d. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. e. All homes must be constructed with fire sprinkler protection in accordance to NFPA 13d or IRC 2904. Signage stating "No Parking Fire Lane" along one side of the roadway the entire length of the road, and within the cul-de-sac. 5. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated February 19, 2015. 6. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the fire marshal's memo dated February 18, 2015. 7. A stop sign is required to be installed on the new street approaching Blake Road. Clear sight lines shall be maintained from the intersection. 8. Compliance with the city's newly adopted tree ordinance. 9. Compliance with the city's living streets policy. M The above recommendation assumes that the applicant has satisfied the concerns raised by our engineering department. If they have not, staff would recommend the issued be tabled so the applicant can revised the plans as requested. Staff will provide an update on the status of the grading and drainage issue at the Planning Commission meeting. Deadline for a City Decision: May 20, 2015 7 5152 t 5125 5124 5137 5123 m�0 5200 5151 5200 5201 6232 62201 6212 5204 ""� 62 0 5209 6231 ; - A 101 FOX LAlNE� 6112 . . t 6000 62231 52241 ""622511 5216 to .24 �a 5217 t � 5220 5225 5224 5221 5224 .5224 }� __. _ .. 6300 ] 6304 „d` 6308 5228 5225 w..5304 5225 5228 5232 5236�5240 + 5301 5300 ..-ju . ". 5404 6400 '^, 6312 5304 i 5308 J-, 5307 5300 5301 5239 6301 6305 NSWOOD LANE i 3 I i _ 523115235 4 X309 5304 6401 f 31 532 311 5316 5315 } 5308 5305 ja , x6008 ` 1 5313 6309 `631� ' 1 5309 I A" 660121 �. (5312 ES1`VR 00�CUiiT 53]7 5312 5320 5324 15313160241 5316 6328 6324 6320 INE GR E Rf3AD '6020;11 a 1 l 6212 i 6208 M 6204 6200 5401 5400 1 1 1 i 1 6029 602550216017 ' 6220 62161 13.6005 6400 6228 6224 ! 1 PARKWOODROAD5405 1 — 5A04_ 540J540V5415541?'5421 l 6209 �= 6205 201 54D9 $., 5423 [ 1x 6213 1 5413 5408. ` 1 i X216217 6248, 6200 5417 °5412y 54245424.54285432 62 i 6401 f 62296225 t"' ` 6212 ,6216 6112 6220 - 6108 6104 610D 6020 601616+012 6000, ! E 5504 16232 6228 622411, ANO p ,6213 6209�6520�620V � IDYL%V0Qp DRIVE �. \6217 ._ 161131109; 6021,. 5508 , 6225 6221 52326228 6224 i . _.._� _ [. j_.M 5513,, " X6233.16229 6236 ` t �,1 ;16112 6024'60126008600 Eil)Q0 Parcel A T-B: Map Scale: I" z 400 ft. N ID: Print Date: 2/11/2015 llbi- -W- Owner Market Name: Total: 1 Parcel Tax Address: Total: Property Sale Type: Price: This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or Home- Sale Stead j Dal, implied, including fitness of any particular Il purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Parcel Sale COPYRIGHT 0HENNEPIN COUNTY 205 Area: Code: A Tutt Gnmw' E B TjIpf)1I ('-,wi, f. N41 , (°l�'v( BLAKE WOODS 6:111:1 • Edina, MN APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT January 23, 2014 L A N D F O R M From Site to Finish � # INTRODUCTION On behalf of Frank Berman, Landform is pleased to submit this preliminary plat application to create seven residential lots from four existing lots at Blake Road and Evanswood Lane. We are excited about this environmentally sensitive design and anticipate that it will be a great addtion to the neighborhood. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Frank Berman is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four lots (PID #30-11-72-144- 0053, #3011721440052, #30-11-72-144-0008, #30-11-72-144-0009) to create seven lots. Mr. Berman plans to sell the lots for future construction of single-family detached residential dwelling units. There were three homes on these four parcels. One home was removed and two homes—including Mr. Berman's home—remain. The proposed subdivision is located in the R-1 Zoning District and is guided low-density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. The design team has worked to ensure that plans are consistent with City's zoning standards. The proposed subdivision will help the city achieve its goals of supporting redevelopment opportunities that complement the neighborhood and optimize use of the City's infrastructure. Lot standards: Section 36-438 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet in the R-1 District, but requires that the minimum lot area be calculated by averaging the median lot area, lot width and lot depth of the lots in the surrounding neighborhood. The average median parcel area for surrounding lots is 21,842 sq. ft., the average median lot width is 120.8 ft and the average median lot depth is 166.4 ft. Lot standards for the proposed subdivision comply with the lot standards as defined in Chapter 36 and referenced in Section 32-73. Transportation: We are proposing a 24 foot road in a 40 foot wide right-of-way that will provide access to the proposed lots, connect with existing infrastructure, and minimize tree loss. This new road will replace the two existing curb cuts (one for the existing home and one for the driveway easement for the home that %Ks removed). It is anticipated that the additional seven lots will generate minimal traffic on surroundinytfoads. The subdivision application requires that a traffic analysis be performed. We request that the stay be initiated to fulfill this requirement. ZZZ14317 L A N D F O R M �Sanuary 23, 2015 Project Narrative 2 AT Tree preservation: The landowners plan to remain in their home, so preserving trees is a priority for them. The proposed lots have been designed to maximize the preservation of trees on the site. The tree survey shows that 82.6% of trees have been saved. The proposed street was aligned along the north edge of proposed Lots 1-5, where the fewest number of trees would be removed. This is the location of the existing driveway easement that served the previous home on the site. Building area and driveway placement are sited to meet setback standards and to remove the fewest number of trees. Trees coverage will remain largely intact along the southern edge of proposed Lots 1-5. Stormwater management: Stormwater management is a critical part of the proposed design. In order to preserve as many trees as possible, stormwater will be managed using rain gardens on each lot. Each lot will provide easement access to the rain garden and homeowners will be required to maintain the rain gardens using appropriate plantings and best management strategies. SUMMARY We respectfully request approval of a preliminary plat application for the creation of seven lots and associated infrastructure at Blake Road and Evanswood Lane in Edina, MN. We look forward to receiving feedback on the proposed design from the neighborhood on February 3, 2015 and presenting plans to both the Planning Commission on February 25, 2015 and to the City Council on March 17, 2015. CONTACT INFORMATION This document was prepared by: Mary Matze, Planner Landform 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55330 Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Reid Schulz at h rschulzt7a.landform.net or 612.638.0245. 77714317 Project Narrative L A N D F O R M AG January 23, 2015 3 BbKm .W. F-y�y-4 uY w �, aamuws ay s z i- an"waoar° ui sn � 1w wieeea NNn Nan �.. a1.s aM Nsarr pryraeylly�p4�1t•11 el�F rwM�1 W V� YMc. 141Moaf4a (� wal craw jj(}. lwsomxlel wt a.alra a.i•eao war a aer>*aa71 auk O �, aasw �.� 1bu11 a...a aad�ar- alar rar awaFs+sew —�1 minR reu11a r111 aaplp swee llr. e�om.s�ws.w M 11MrM a-e�.rs=-+. —"— +aipc nM BSO r1lSN►alCas �. rwarlrM —u-- ranlsar alrw asnMr►ma�s aoamm �. � w Pk u1Nl ran. [r-== wamral/ a wa[/D a101lrY :s, 1111i11a W!l nmis srnww ]IS Vr a M aA111S .,..�.� wO e1Y 1Y111arIaRlpr �rPOM��. IOIN IarIfDMI i' anw lal paWMM}�. NNpM foY01RFi 10 ar aIN !1S NS P 10•+a1r1 a a1YQ rn1 �i Mr11aP111al1arl ab ISM. � 04 a isn: Nircll wua --aun---- xNrraa --lrr-�- wrlw,isuisnw s arw ^-rrv�-«._ uwaeu.s arsem F-y�y-4 uY w �, aamuws ay s z i- an"waoar° ui sn � 1w wieeea NNn Nan �.. a1.s aM Nsarr pryraeylly�p4�1t•11 el�F rwM�1 W V� YMc. 141Moaf4a (� wal craw jj(}. lwsomxlel wt a.alra a.i•eao war a aer>*aa71 auk •11 EDINA, MN ...ra cslran �, aamuws ay s z i- an"waoar° ui sn �. nlrrrra arr YAnM111111 [a1411I fM01 an r lrin:aai � n1 a11t. O4�if�RyOy1R 11trtlP'F r�i r��rmWw tors n M wiaasn wgr+nryss r �~INWaanaa�i� as fl6f[tOneMar raomr Mr �wwra rlrlww qll♦rat r1r11 rr1a arm �»,rn1a1 Mrlr �, aamuws ay s z i- an"waoar° ui sn YAnM111111 [a1411I fM01 an r lrin:aai � n1 a11t. O4�if�RyOy1R 11trtlP'F pryraeylly�p4�1t•11 el�F rwM�1 W V� YMc. 141Moaf4a qw� r. r�r 1'�1 mow. www►am w. wtaao•ww1/ Ian � wsrwn.«r. a aer>*aa71 auk FRANK SERMAN w"V vok"m oiloo- PRE.IMINARY PLAT MOM L A N g F 0 AM mwlMawrrl k aga11F1 a+wa, NN SWOMM Mmg1KM1Mm W* riWwrM. rupw R11Q,1111M4 o VA 15 d �. sit Y aZ ..Z .. co 00 W is usaighm 1-9-111 lei plum ._i slat 11 2 51 RJ OVOU W ..o-00 — — — — — — — — — — — ------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----j ----------- — — — — — — — L — — — — — — — — EVArqS%V000 LAME 'A 'M 1"p -7 Xz. + PJiM GROVE ROAD A J I FRANK BERMAN mm. rnsmrm® BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION EOINA. MN lawall ON PRELIMINARY PLAT L A N ; F 0 R M s9. s,5. rae nxaezan NORTH Gnaw when Below. CWbolowyoucag. 0 90 80 QZZ ' cam» t o6� m>ill t .ti lot ill I i fly 111.1o apt lipI rig I It, Ell pw r a � .� ♦ ti+ a a r e se G' 06 I " f M2 �c•r.r r. • hY . � y �I 00° wMill-- !� , W. xY! �j tt !i � X01 1litit111 ! Ni z y7: 1 $ 4 LL t:1 EO W $—g—i8g$ E log c?> p( r y r } ] ] e 11 1 t Q� r w too nt'" " swo-Mo I I I rl I I I I 1 I � I I ------------------ 4 ---------- I I a I I I I I f I FRANK BERMAN 411 N%16NVOULVE YLT EdW�� I Z W4.Y ,N%b. IRbI mIAT. %ptxb bfl �Gll'H. lIMYNf OWIICY tE% �TRG,aI`� aHm 10 P4,�^il. l�`0su4[t W %, T° ,M V XOR i�..%Y,•,��•XY�.m�.mPR%.aR%a,m,. o lW awv Ods ��nM� �%etn�i uta �eaaRte`�ws�ic usmrf a 'mmX�`M4 �u a x�wl% 6°PMf. � � as Arc � minim to WiRwt^`� b MOmTo Yn�w' M 1H5 ' -- — Q CGN � oN%°�mbTf• w� awX iit@1!n`�61N O�t�wJtia m� •LR]�i`Vwa'LIEMO R%GfM0 ,0 _ 0. RN/L4YM IWgC%S bV•1 P^bm%vn•m To �veM I�tu�R0.NMul i ,K_RbX�R, ®%Y° b•/pWp' tW'uIC v/11. fN u l �rmT ctA i Orm MOM= tiIINICIPAL1iY .11:t1� _3 KOJECT ;: f�c/✓ C lf��l?l �� G� l(�_; i ��> - %I .. �� .� %.m %�,•.•m�•%Y%.,Y —co— PAD DETAIL,, / ' ".!�. ''' '' �7'� .�//{• 1 ��':'� 1 n ( ( ./ ruiE aRavE ROADPRELIMINARY PLAT oirnats 1 /J L A N D F O R M II. -}r• II II � I `V•' Pa �,`3 .1 rm„:nron.la ° ° ° 103EtubPlb^v,• Ta onsnrom I I I i�`3 •r..', i bwsn Fa 1xxR.Pfi II I 1 •• I � �� I � w••mu.tw%>.a1 wet lonmb•%.a I I .. 1 I I• xs I � ® alr_xwE mo�T s i i i It' � I ' I P�erxn I rs,ux f I I I I ✓ NORTH I I 1 I _— i I rnbvwnmh B6IOW.� . Caileea.yau ft o 40 8D �. TIsft BRM fNaN At MY W M AM .I4 VAR 4T -=CT t A+ K r,►_ Iwo le~ lasso lows lento Isb" rase Mems 0~ WA" foo" les." loose 4•Mnr•iwil1W601PNMfi/NIIY�f�NIWMri. FRANK BERMAN a n...r awroir, b sir :won mar•0 ogmnh �ww: nr••or war wsr uma r ry wam BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION �1 '• PMUMINARY PLAT ' • • fflo s L A,.N O F O R M A +swnwa.. x "Sam= •wre w urre�m ler•ur,rauu ra ►.w�.r � is nciae.. a®n wa•erru amwr NOW" G�wrraray bnsv�A4ffR�01N � x0 o so a© Qp w r sit ca w gh, _ •6 mC1)W t t ,a a r�eriat�� • .. ONION m tM1W4wav 0 i stamm." S70RMSHIBtCAiCMBASMMAN"OLl ASPIMIT PAVEMWW.%WMTM 0 NMOMCM NDf WE 2rCOMCMMMMCM " ".6. lot FRANK SERMAN �rmlommomm BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION mmml".do.M" PREUMINAAlf PL mennnx t A N 0 F 0 R m ftwoor.*6 .. . 0 mv�nmk— ut .aa Ift woom M..Mkw� wft ftwft� Moft cmmm womom Amm TAGS Ow (M7 COMMONNAMa REMDVEa MWD =7 15 A7b—.. x PRESERVED TREE TREETABLE 9522 10 SI.d OIRN x mi? 23 whlNWk x 8208 12 Anadmn Fan X Sam iD —Amfta. % 8523 9 &xd6ir X 8600 23 Whlte Wk x 0106 i6 Blllttnathickory x INDS 12 M Mtm X 0524 ?0 0"Chary X OW9 8 Bbrx Ch" x NW 12 WBINSpum x .4t0 . ArbavlNa % 8525 0 Om*br X SSW 12 White Wk X 8108 7 Am.dbn Ek,, x it W Arb.rv1. X 8526 4 emdda x 8611 B SLkCheng x 8209 36 Red Oak X 8112 1s ArbeWIN. x 8527 9 WhINWk x mu 19 W.Itim X 8310 22 Wldte Wk X 5121 14 R.,dda x 8528 10 PdaeMtae X a613 N Bb*Cherry X 9]11 23 White Space x 8123 14 Badder x R529 7 Ow Merry x 4614 14 .la*eherty x 8312 7 —tithakn x m10 16 Whk.Olk X MD 15 WhmMI, x 8615 9 BIad CMny x 6213 9 WhIN5pruce % S035 15 &.dtlpr X 9531 39 Red Oak % SON 19 MIND* x 8214 8 Arba - x WA 14 &alder X 8532 7 Mp..VtHkhory X 8617 7 —.it x s215 7MOMNe X 8437 11 Whae Wk x 8533 11 xi.ck Chary x 8638 26 Red Oak x 8226 6 A -I- % 8428 6 ftN,W r X 0534 8 xNd Chary x 8619 23 Whlm Oak X 8217 20 Sues M*b x 8129 33 Bled Wllbw x 8535 8 and M.Vb % 0620 6 Whit.Ook x fins 6 Arb-T % 0130 7 MI.Na X 8536M WxkUary x 8621 8 6Nck Chevy X am 7 Al.orvkm x Milt 9 Bareba X 0537 13 a—dIr x R621 6 BNd Chary X 4120 a prb.WBa. % 0432 11 BlxkUttry X 453. a Mad Chary X 8673 29 WHlti Oak X 8331 18 White Spm- x U33 9 M*"` .ckMary X 0839 W C.immua.d % 96M 11 Bled Cherry X b222 is WhkeSPmw x 8434 2. White Oak X SAO ] Whtt.Spruce % 9625 36 WMm Oak x 8244 - 14 White Spruce X 8435 9 elxk Uelry X 8511 B White SPnee % ABN u White Od, x 8b15 6 -aids, x 9436 a6 White Od X 8511 8 WhINSprum X 5627 ZO White Oak x 5317 11 Papa Bitch % .997 6 Mxk Vary x 8543 6 &xaNir x SOM ii SA.. NwPb X 8318 12 White Sprvce X am >8 M1.0.1,x 8541 i6 &mlda x 8629 T Sgarwpk % M119 LZ Whi[e Spruce x 8439 0 S IdIr x 8545 9 &,a., x MR 17 MxkCMmy x 8320 12 White Spruce X am 6 MxkCMnT X 8555 6 .imide, x 8631 9 Blxk Me7ry X 8521 24 MR.0.k % .441 26 Whlt.Oak X 8556 29 MM Od X Be 13 WhINWk % 9322 26 W1,11.0.1,x 9442 Z6 Whltc Wk X 8557 B Mxk Chary % 9633 a 9.,ddcr X .423 i9 Whlta Oak x 8443 11 al.* C" X 055. 9 01.ka ny x B634 I3 Mxk Mary % 8324 25 SrprMaPle x.414 W WhINOak % SEES 6 Meek ClnnT % 9635 Badder x am 26 WhRe Oak % B445 a 1a—Ut Hkk.ry % 8560 4 Mad, Chary x 5636 17 White Oak % 0318 1J Whlt.Oak % 8046 6 8ltbimN HkkaT x 9561 13 MMny xk O x 869] 24 White Oak x am WlIld,lp— X .1 t0 .e,c4Nr X SN` 5 81.1,Ch- X 4634 T Makc " % .331 ] Eastern Rad Cctlar x 8440 ]0 e-.kkr x 8563 1 Mxk Ucrty x 8639 36 WhIN Wk % 8335 9 ExNlll Red C.tlar x 9449 9Boxdder X .564 II MR.O* X 860 5 31 .ktanut Hkkiry % M36 1S 5usarm.1k X 40.50 10 B.add.r x allm 6 Mxk Cherry X 8616 30 O'd, h:ny % 8337 20 Sua.r Mapb % 8451 9 aal.kbr % 9566 a Mxk Marti % 864! i skiny X W39 22 543'r Ylvi. % 9452 W B..dder x 8567 17 WNWOak % 8648 9 Owd McOy x 8310 26 WNN,0* x 8483 11 Aspen x 8569 a Mxk Chanty X 8649 12 BR ka,.Ry X W41 II Wha.0* x S.4 a BexdMr x 8569 12 Rd Wk x 8653 16 WhiteO* X 8313 7 MR, 5ptci x mB5 8 e.,ddtr x nil 9 peak Chary x .654 16 Whiti Oak X 9314 16 Whim&k x 8486 N Cabral W5 x 5572 9 Mxk M.rtT X 9855 19 Wh Oak X 8345 20 White Wk x 8487 6SIM—Mkk.ry x 8573 a Sbck Cherry X Brig 7 d k & Oa x 9371 26 Whk.Wk x 8499 U A ,.. Or. X 9511 >D R.mkbr x 8120 21 WhIN Wk 1t 24 —,.n Cl.Sin x amt 29 Md.* X .525 7 BexeWir x .121 36 M! Oak x 5373 6 MD. Sp,— x 8490 24 Whim Oak X Ran 11 Whim Od x a— 26 WNNOak % M74 26 Wta.Oak X .191 WBIm O.k X 8577 6 —H. x 8737 30 Green -d WhkcM % 8375 >Z 11mid.r x 8192 33 Whkc Oak X851. 6 ab*Mary X 8738 W R.d Wk x .316 11 &x.kkx x 8493 11 Wh&Oak x esl9 DS WNtc O.k x 873914 11 Wk X m7a i3 Ab --X 8494 22 Red Wk x 8580 21 MR. Wk X 8740 14 Red Oak X 83]8 M eex.kffi x 9195 M MiNWk x as.ID Whm Wk x 8024 14 8-4d,, x Sin w SVSar Mable x MN 6 abd Oxrry x 8592 30 VJh6.Wk x SB25 7 Gm -..d Whkc Ash % 93DS 6 9p.r MVI. % m9714 &d0ak x 9563 9 al Cherry X 8856 . WNtc SPmc. % ON 19 8b*W.In.t % able w .bd CJnrty X8584 9 Mxk Chary x si 8 WNNSp-e x 8314 13 Mkkd.r X 8499 10 Gmn-d White Ash X rigs 11 Mack U.ny x 8858 14 Whac Spruce x 8385 6 fthk ry x a501 . Arb.MN. x 8586 22 White Oak x Sam WN m RpnNe X am 12 NnttlNlltlm % W02 17 AmttbnBm X ww 6 Colemda Spruce X 800] 7 N WNSp— % 03.7 0 IMbttvRm X 8543 B Arb m- X 8588 31 Wha. Spurn X SR97 B M -id., x 6388 ]0 Arb.Mcte % 8500 11 U -d X a— B White SPluce X 8.98 8 .hick Uttry % am a WhR.5Pr.m x Otis 20 Red Wk x 8590 i6 Rod N.rw %. x SR99 14 ab*U.ny x 1390 a Whit.SPr.ci % 8506 SI Slxk Mttry x 8591 13 R.d Naw&PAW X ORDS 7 whim SPmm x .391a A,bb .rva x 8507 14 Mad Char,, x 5592 14 R.d N.—PlIA x —1 6WN-P.- x t 8392 S Ad 1 x am 14 tud, ow, X 8593 ]0 B.xekk. x SNS 1a Mp, M.Pw l'%1'�• 8383 16 ArbiMNe X 8509 t1 BkkA a— % 16 ASP- x Mia, 34 Mxk Ch n m 6 ArbW.. % 8510 7 ebkO— x 8595 8 e.,altltt x .934 1B 91xk6rom x a3% N ArbaXlbe x 8511 ) Arbtt9Rai % 8596 11 —ft x 8991 W &mkb X win ]B MRematHkkiry x 8512 23 WNN Wk x W97 6 M.ri—ala, x 0932 7 Gr -nand WRMA,h X 8397 9 ...dd. X asu 12 At x 8598 16 Sadder X R933 27 WNNOak x 8]99 6 Arba,,N,X 8514 17 ASP- X 5999 17 AmaksnOm x 0934 W Arledc-Ebn % 5399 N Whlta Col,x SSSS 10 wh&SPmrc % .60 10 &111 X 8935 33 MIDS x 8400 ]0 White 5— X 4516 20 Whlm— x 8601 6 el&.der % R9m 33 Red Wk X —1 20 ffli x 8517 II wldh, k x 8602 31 Wh&Wk X 8997 29 aid Wk X —2 9 M%.Sp-. % asu 9 Mxk Mary x 160' 24 WWk hlm X ams, 8 .m.kbr x 9404 17 aRNmut aft.—HIM, x Sit, 9 d M.Ch-y X .4 24 NTlle Oak x SSW 6 BpmMer % 9405 9 NbiMNe x M. T MxtU"" X 8605 3d WhINWk % 89W 16 OaeW.r x am is Arb.MNe x .521 7 &alder x 8606 z0 WNNO.k x FRANK BERMAN aHETAaaTO.e W%: mlWS W asm y.11:R1� +T a, PiOJECT R, 4 o X. PRELIMINARY PLAT 01=015 L A N D F O R M Rm SNbRaW . v . B 1459.upiehAw-e Tet 412deiiM1 615x699 Fxc 412v4ami Y1Ne.xY,MXR51M W.k 1Mda.4m11m TREE P RESERVATIO N TABLE L1.2 wr----- ----- f--T------------! 1 1 (��+r♦wsrrra rasrwllMOSAwr � a♦wa♦wMa.anw�ra�rarala�wwva�a«.. . w.v.wat,aaa..,�,r ♦..W YUY wtlfrM `p��w,��NW.�MO G�AYNY�O.rIf�i W0f114 >Mla10w a IHaiUaU �mlr/MMIMT YR11p��MrW MUG rewaraaaa+w♦rwwaw �a� } m].a rrmr'llrga r..a arwa ♦.acorn. ��rewruaF 6060 1q�wsa w�['ab wawa 4r RMt /w�c q1 °' .°1Mrnr � � r arm m • aunt tv: arawe�� G iM�w�L�'Mt�mM aallM fe»wlnmailYWNM O.IMr r ♦t w.. w RI rYm M'w}Yt m 6060 14IYa♦0. v: � er' Ili�NwaiwrMu am aawuww wa a �. ��°r..e.�ain�i raswws w♦♦rais-��c�' w w.waa�i �i°iaw ...a +. w.ao%aoa �rrw�aM{f.q0;� rw Im i♦eatl Ir /laarmwl N IerIiAL U 11MMR IlafwO♦NarOMYf701Y111a0liwi U �. ..ra.a er ar�rwrra r an psn °i ♦}°wG"'i..s cam♦ ♦w.iai as i �iwww v�r.�aa�e w anawa M♦IO11Y�a'wlli aaas gy[wp �@i�wa4wrRSMMaappa{a�rMmww��M�Mw •aaK w W��py . w�MP♦ Iw A�M�w� NUr� tsar r.ar.ra.rmroaa wanws wane .wnw as °wms+�aaw'�r `F� s w a5'a�rru'"w%eiw. r3`aa+ar +w ��R�N-p+a-+� a♦a,a e♦.an lam rws ao wwr s FRANK BERMAN BLAKE WCiODS SUBDIVISION mou.rrs,.. m" oot �" n PRELIMINARY PLAT Maws 66 ,� L A. N R wMdmY4s14 ... O R a .air.w. w aua. 0060 ac euman go rwra,wasa as wrrr waawamv at moilTTi 0 0. a W ENLARGED PLAN- RAIN GARDEN'E' NOSGUE ENLARGED PLAN -RAIN GARDEN'C' NascuE ENLARGED PLAN -RAIN GARDEN'D' NOSCAIE 1 ENLARGED PLAN- RAIN GARDEN'B' NO SLUE ENLARGED PLAN- RAIN GARDEN'A' NO SONE Nwrt w aMaaN w nNr (am —".p "I-- � tmom t- ar:er u.n veopOa io°wrwi'a ama a ram wan aacaam Lme awavc:,mrmi �ar�Nc aoc mz' SHRUB PLANTING NO SCNE _ m aNw#amw ager nwa 4 awar uq somlc lxa awr cau p110Pa.ac%He� �f0`em atmrm nnmwa o �w�wPmw. umMA1O. at ar sa �Paarwa .mtwr acraoac tro. prt avamearoml PERENNIAL PLANTING NOSOYE osmmn�arwomm"Nice i a (rr✓J aeN.,, r aNON.rem, lr, Nam ray am�a arwaaaa aw. aaa, tom; � aP � eaamm� � � a�am aaai tvl raw � arc arvtxaaa, aeo (ae arven+am, r a r a z.• ww m.m xr.r xaA vm�w ioeO�Oi< aPaa a Nzc tlQ1t0i m u� air�ieeuaaer. tea Naw Nae Nrnmi Maaowf 11a vram. as aretserraa xmN �e•-a rN: aae NOSCAE a vaa'/w'mNc � a" w ttra.l iw n. �' moo inw mJ rum � R MT�c^Ortm�D aYt �Ma "� ran la', Nam aaacao rwmroo awe nru wturm'�ro.' a�rua'� Ua 4aa1 rWn'�vmJ"w v in aw r at' m oea`more"� tam cacncN roma nm ww, l� a'o�nraraiol,neo) u u�a Naaa,��a�.�awaea��aTM �Nm� Iraaam amcauc aam"asmr wrcTm. �NNm.m �a,.m�Nro ro �a a,� araNa wm — m.maaNrNremAw,. CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING r SME 114 mawvv�ea`aaa +i. awc ' h aa. tse aveaparaNl EDGING AT PLANTING BED .M.,..,. FRANK BERMAN ml R.0 -D Lw eAa.maaam aaaaarm e BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION EOINA, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT L ASN D F O R M rmmsmmNNm: � o a tas snswalwwa Ts mxaaamm maaan rme olzuzson sannmxm,awss.et w� mwromcmL LANJSCAP=AILS L7.1 J 5x 3W 4gR�'pl{F�•9=•OnM ,Irri ow X41 4wft I : ca alas 4N IC AAM OVOOUW 4NV SIVU OBJ? MA OMNV�S ').W sdWW MA"O un � Ad+xe�aaV v ,�et1tl1U�f1S LGl rOe- 9'Lbf�. 0`-..'.•:F'c7"''Tc"7' IFT•i-� �ii.�i�WYIA.Jrr�icYl.rJ.Wi �;�Cus`��G�Zr-.�tt`'��.1��!-��® OEM .� K m ootm® ®L�L'.'7�E..r, . �%r^'�ii:ii'SYTi i�..�� . • •�'ic'+', Or"'.�r..�Q'aS��l�'`.��u'i��7W�' �' ��.'�' j��is'i TT ^ri',�i"' ,'.t'd"1""►'t�t6T'-.�[�':isE1L74..��.�.�4_.__'►El:3�El`'1�� `�.. �i�� L:::7G�1�..i �'-'R-r:t��;r1^—.rrtc., r-ir>•��L�:.: '�ss#E�i�®.3]��C� —�.:��""' 1�"...y".'^'tt<'�T" .7'C'FP"-"7:I)•!=T' 0 r --- M, IMM KV TO N r�T 33'�..��•.:��. �,"Ri7f7K—rU , r,7j -7 Wim "ZI�dW:Tii.: KA 0 F VV X �--T m r -- T 10 SMILLM r TTTa.•7T"'Sr�iriF7EF�!ai'.T"F�1�,'P7�"i'Tr"'r' ...� �-►�� EL:1�®Q� l.'�':��'.''.. �" Or'rI' 3:'r?'—. iP'[TZ. T�1'�,:1 �•`I'T"^.:'i ®�u..iL�t......� '�i 3WLi.4.. •• • MA � ��`^•• . �, lM LE C Z L Ij 0 mii ��•�•� 7S9T'�w iii W3ii0 m� ►i"�t't'Ttg"i..� 3L�L i tlr a al'�,C`�' ®�--.","-7 r MILE l.�t� u'1 E:Q22 m r r r - ^, �E. �L )� r.TTrtrrr rt'r >• cry ►zap MJZAlLt:!('u UI VA;usa� '��"'"t.,t'7�.��'..'*F`'F91"'i ITF?".St'F'�.i;,'>i�'..„�IS"-'if7'i"'a�.tS��L'� L�iw•.J:7�:.�:��.'3 —E.::i� T �.1L�C..}•�E' it �<ai3�tT7E�w�If�ir....i.�Ei7 �La1�Si�� _.>=.irirrEi�, ,.:.r.►,at , r.rttii.r c�,�ir! .L' .a,ez, zIE'tti:�K6..+. �a ism � � t%i� � ,rte ice.; �Y:•� 0 ��0�-.;r-.,,•�...::-'® rssr , :,.�� r-^•�. Fe.�u�� ''+ "a C�ii�t:ii�wtl.r�:.ilE:s.�.G.,.ir�Ly1 —C..7 �: � i""Jf7T'f':"_'-TT` .y7itiC'""'^':':7�7 t'.� n 1��t11S�6inr.5�l EJy.T•t�i� i"'r ,rraa ,iri�ra. ^`{�7.4'�.�C'.....,_7„ ►��OLL4,+��i..[�s.�® ,®cio Eillt3.�:a,iklW.r�t' r�rILI RUZELrdall ��I.�.r'��I-��r�� '�"r�*r� I'•- �"Fi;.7�E.'...�-a�0 'Ei.GI.''c�'LTirs..L:�O ®0� •c �.��`�� r,t"-,r ,i �a�:17�.7EL�L�]6r:i., �ti� �L:JL."4 MCLUMi-S 1LTi'?''Sr''TliTrk7 .Yii'u��r11�.i. �•S,�Tr.-�t .,, .>r�L.�r_ �a `a 'J� L.•r..l:%F.r.L+... ��Ei • � � �OI1Jtriii,T%c-u'^n�t-;.�,,-�,� r. S..�i ..CL,.+:.sTii.3�5'i:13�%E�±,.�i�..ir7''..�i:�� •. . r�iiT-irf:.T��k�1T'.iI_f�r1'a��WML.iJ iiYlu.iii�i REEMPTTI= SOC".'',.T4�,'i�.•�;�� W.Um LQQ ma riz, Uj Ky-, �Tt tmczjm t 4 IS'�iLii� OYYtlLLa� � i— L!r'�..�•..i"�.1!T'��=��+•��il�w:�i��iln�ll�ri^�•,'�tl�W�(: I—��I�!Far7I;T�•. SI—©Q i:4]i�_.. )lrta`i,�'�i�,{Ia�il�', —�� • Tfr ��y��T�C�a�RJ•.t•L�W)i��t��.�:��O —®�.''I �'a'l�atcf-'^'FRS ` ��6i .,�3�{��rTa�MWt�!•JIYv.'�.i`i �+i —00" .,. r. r •., ��i1�4.1♦iA:_ii Wlt-,•a�3wiii �pp� rr,r-x;I ,r^� �r>•�-rr�nsi�Fal .r:••�-Fr�� r-:T� �ra�`7""'srr„41a��r�®E�7��Ci �GIE:� r�r.�-*.-•.�'.�r"_ +s'z3i,7��L.'.�®t�i7��:iitT30 �� E�S.7 ,4 • „4n��y--;:te�l+i!-i��[L�+:r.]7��cst.1:�"�0 —CaL:� `-7�r•+r(•: kr' L ' ,r91 fiir.i i�L•Jri��YrY�.^•�WYQ Ej •. ��+�. .•.rr ..tf'� ...14,._'fTi�(.ir.-a�i,G.i S�SnsW�rniu��'yc��s�'� •:. :lj� '`1 ,I��f 741f �i �EM10= `.��}� ,��y�ET SO aEU,:.�smtm T —mm—," � -T i 'S :I ..� :Stl7 .SI. YJi® Ka MEMM �GJG1 •r ter? *�KEN M WT 770 0� g7® �L]E1 ,,. .. �!`n�%: rrn->_�i�.7 m"._�e'��3�[ia7r r►:�,rls#�i�® �0 ,�et1tl1U�f1S LGl rOe- 9'Lbf�. 'saumoq Allmq leugls naaa (9) xts pasod(ud oql jol uotigiouall dtu .moq Vaod Nid pue moq dead WV ` Itep jeioi ail smogs alggi aq,L •aoillpg �;6 'tnlruvN uottwmaq Ota saaautSug uolisuodsueiyp mr4psul aqi ut palnaumoop se sash pall m1pis .ratio Sol skamns amsuawo uo pasgq st atgstl alis aqi alumpsa of pasn sallm aorigtauaS dui aqy *i aiggy ut nmolaq unaogs st luautdolanap pasodoad aip umoq untlsrauaS drat palututlsa aq L uolop—ouag '*(L ans! •tuWs dempeoa ivaaefpg aql uo aneq Mipw luatudolanap pasodozd aqi slagduq 4a3es pus otl q pa1ediailae pug sts�Sleue aqi iaaumaop uodat srgl jo suopoos Smnaollo3 oU .Z "Raw uo umogs $l usid ails pasodwd aqy •ouwl pooMsugng uo sseaou aneq IItM autoq Am auo pus autoq Sugstxo auo aU piao *31olS ruog notiaauuoa laatis ogs-op-lna mau s ttt� aq II!m samoq aqi jo (g) anti of ssaaad 'satuoq nnau (9) xts ja aoport4suoo aqi pug atnoq im3 m alp gututultipm Suipnlam samoq jStivaptsat Apmj alSnts (L) uanas jo luaurdoleAep sopnlotq ueld airs uotstnipgns pasodaxd aU ainglA uo uMogs sruotigool joafoad ail, 'auaZ pooM AH of ssaaae lira icuu lgqueprsat Alt alms auo sapnlaut alis Sutistxa OU •pgo*l allelg Jo JJo auwl pooMsma pus peod an ozo aura uaannlaq `anuoAV ao=Ajo quos palgaol sl alis aU •mmsAs v*peoxluamfpg aqi uo seq ugld uotstntpgns luguaptsat spooM a)lalg agi3o ivamdolanap pasodotd all sioudvapCiojus pus *glum leuuaiod atli amuaaalap of st Rptgs slgl jo asodmd ate, putfo sivow F9 - 9091 'oAt taaf J f 9SM Jvm `eulpmfo 40 Maw 3Lffa1,L nolS141pinSlvlivaplsaySPOON ajlvltl -av WO:i d `*M°d ` DY01X saliutD Mo2rd PUMP fin J0Pa rlQ luatudolaeaQ 4Ju01uu 03 taif2rras XGnJ� JM : p� Slot `S1 &vwgaj .Wva NtlPUVJOtl am oait-Eits M IXY21 ooep-W sot .N1 Stites Wo' UM �■r ootwts 4iws osATpr iL �60t twpot4suoo r 8uiuueld r 6upaaujSty ■ ainpnu$eitul T Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 2 of 6 Table I - Estimated Site Trip Generation Use Size ADT AM Peak PM Peak Total In Out Total In Out Total In out Single Family Residential 6 Units 58 29 29 5 1 4 6 4 2 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition Traffic Operations Analysis In order to determine a base line condition, existing traffic counts were conducted on the adjacent streets the week of February 9'h, 2015. Based on these counts the following traffic conditions currently exist on these streets. Blake Road south of Parkwood Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2,600 AM Peak Hour 208 PM Peak Hour 211 Blake Road north of Pine Grove Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2050 AM Peak Hour 186 PM Peak Hour 208 Blake Road north of Evanswood Lane Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 1950 AM Peak Hour 176 PM Peak Hour 199 Evanswood Lane west of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 280 AM Peak Hour 34 PM Peak Hour 39 Pine Grove Road east of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 440 AM Peak Hour 34 PM Peak Hour 36 Parkwood Road west of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 340 AM Peak Hour 33 PM Peak Hour 36 AAq Blake Woods Subdivision Trak Review Ci[y of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 3 of 6 Blake Road is a north/south streetproviding local access to 'Vernon. Avenue and Inter`lachen Boulevard. This type of higher functioning street will carry slightly larger traffic than a typical local City street such as Evanswood Lanes Pine Grove Road or Packwood Road. Typical local City streets will have traffic volumes ranging from 200 to 2000 vehicles per day (vpd) depending on the density of the area and its connection to other higher functioning streets (Le collectors or arterials) The tragic operations analysis was conducted using established methodologies documented in the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations. The analysis techniques defined in the HCM are different for roadway segments and intersections. Roadway segment analysis focuses on the average daily volume to capacity ratio, while intersection analysis focuses on delay caused by the AM or PM peak hour critical movements. It is therefore possible to have an efficient intersection located along a poorly operating roadway segment, or a poorly operating intersection along an otherwise free -.flowing roadway. Roadway segments or intersections are given a. Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" as defined in the HCM. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay along a roadway segment or at an intersection LOS. E represents the condition where the roadway segment or intersection is at capacity. IAS F represents a condition where, there is more traffic than can be handled by the roadway segment or intersection. At a stop sign - controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through - street intersection. For purposes of this review, the roadway segment analysis was conducted at a planning level. The analysis consists of comparing the average daily flow rates on a roadway segments to the ADT roadway segment traffic capacity threshold volumes. A two-lane urban street with driveway and street access has a capacity threshold of 2000 vpd at LOS A and 4000 vpd at LOS E/F. The existing and anticipated (with the development) roadway segment traffic operations are displayed on Table Z. As shown on the table, all roadway segments are operating at LOS A or B as they exist today and with the proposed development traffic included. Table 2 —Roadway Seginenf 21ra, f e Analysis Street Location EDujg AA LOS ProAA )tied LOS Blake Road South ofPar'kwood Road 2600 B 2650 B Blake Road North of Pine Grove Road 2050 B 2100 B Blake Road North of Evanswood Lane 1950 A 1970 A Evanswood Lane West of Blake Road 280 A 290 A Pine Grove Road East of Blake Road 440 A 450 A Parkwood Road West of Blake Road 340 A 350 A mm Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 7015 Page 4 of 6 The LOS ranges for both signalized and un -signalized intersections are shown in Table 3. The threshold LOS values for un -signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. Ibis variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. Table 3 - Intersecllon Level of Service Measures Source. Highway Capacity Manual The existing and anticipated (with the development) intersection operations were evaluated for both the AM and PM peak hours. Synchro/SimTraffic microsimulation software was utilized to model die area intersections with the peak hour counts, lane geometry, and traffic control. The results of this analysis are illustrated on Table 4. Table 4 -- Intersection Traffic Analysis Control Delay (Seconds) Signauxed Uu-Signalized A :5 10 :510 B 10-20 10--15 C 20-35 15-25 D 35-55 25-35 E 55-80 35-50 F > 80 >501 Source. Highway Capacity Manual The existing and anticipated (with the development) intersection operations were evaluated for both the AM and PM peak hours. Synchro/SimTraffic microsimulation software was utilized to model die area intersections with the peak hour counts, lane geometry, and traffic control. The results of this analysis are illustrated on Table 4. Table 4 -- Intersection Traffic Analysis Delay at LOS = Worst case intersection movement Results of the intersection traffic analysis shown in the above table indicate that the existing intersections in the area are operating at an acceptable LOS and would continue to operate at acceptable levels with the proposed development. 0 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing - Projected Existing Projected Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS (sec) (sec) (Sec) (see) Blake Road at Evanswood Lane 4.7 A 4.9 A 5.2 A 5.4 A Blake Road at New Street A NA NA 2.3 A NA NA 2-7 A Blake Road at Pine Grove Road 7.6 A 7.8 A 8.4 A 8.7 A Blake Road at Parkwood Road 8.5 A 8.7 A 9.2 A 9.4 A Delay at LOS = Worst case intersection movement Results of the intersection traffic analysis shown in the above table indicate that the existing intersections in the area are operating at an acceptable LOS and would continue to operate at acceptable levels with the proposed development. 0 Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 5 of 1 y'afJic Safety Review In addition to the traffic operations analysis a traffic safety review was also conducted. This included reviewing the crash history in the area, reviewing the sight distance required at the new street intersection to Blake Road and reviewing the site plata for safety issues or concerns. Crash History: Crash data provided from Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS) records from the past 10 years was reviewed for the area. Based on that review two (2) crashes have occurred on Blake Road between Evanswood Lane and Parkwood Road. One (l) rear end property damage crash with a parked car northbound around the Evanswood Lane intersection in 2005 and, one (1) right angle personnel injury crash just north of the Pine Grove Road intersection (at a driveway) in 2007. Sight Distance Analysis: As -built plans for Blake Road were reviewed to determine if sight, distance would be a concern with the construction of a new intersection from the proposed Blake Woods Subdivisions between Pine Grove Road and Evanswood Lane. The analysis included review both the horizontal and vertical profile of the existing roadway in relationship to the new intersection location and the speed of traffic on Blake Road. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines were used for the analysis. Two primary conditions were analyzed - 1. The sight distance required for a stopped vehicle at the new street intersection to safely pull out onto Blake Road. For most practical purposes, providing a 10 -second decision time, from the initial detection point to the location of the critical feature, based on design speed, is adequate. Based on these criteria a sight line of approximately 440 feet from the intersection looking north or south. on Blake Road should be provided where possible. The new intersection is located between Evanswood Lane and Pine Grove Road. The intersection of Evanswood Lane is approximately 200 feet north of the new;street intersection. The intersections of Pine Grove Road and Parkwood Road are approximately 200 feet and 400 feet south of the new street intersection, respectively. Based on the review of the horizontal and vertical conditions and assuming that no trees or vegetation are restricting views, there would be sufficient sight lines to see any oncoming vehicle including vehicles turning from the adjacent intersections. 2. The sight distance required to stop fore vehicle in the street turning from Blake Road onto the new street. Based on the guideline a sight distance of 200 feet should be provided to see a vehicle or other object in the street to safely stop traveling at 30mph. Based on the review of the roadway conditions, a vehicle traveling either northbound or southbound on Blake Road would have sufficient distance to safely stop for a vehicle turning into the new street intersection. 0 Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 6 of 6 Site Plan Review — The site plan was reviewed with respect to the street alignment and configuration. No issues were identified however, the following should be considered: 1. A stop sign should be placed on the new street approaching Blake Road. 2. Provide a clear sight line from the intersection in both directions, keep it clear of trees or other landscaping that would be in the line of vision. 3. Clear the trees and vegetation in the right of way to provide a clear sight line at the Evanswood Lane intersection looking south. Conclusions l Recommendation Based on the traffic review documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: • The proposed development will generate 58 daily trips, five (5) AM peak hour trips and six (6) PM peak hour trips. • Based on the traffic operations analysis the intersections and roadway segments on Blake Road will operate at satisfactory (IAS A or B) with the proposed site developed. • Only two crashes have occurred in the area adjacent to the site in the past 10 years. ■ Sufficient sight lines exist for traffic exiting or entering the proposed new street intersection on Blake Road • Safety would be improved with the installation of a stop sign for the new street approaching Blake Road and providing a clear sight line from the intersection. • At the intersection ofEvanwood Lane the safety would be improved with clearing the sight line looking south from the intersection. r '3AY; uaurr�� ( // ?%/c (" YCN[Da '3A0 x •3AY~> a 3aoNY'Is .3ptl Y n3HaY J % r w a 3 dWAM1VO,N1 n!! YANG--^' ^ iL. $ A $ JAY OOOAtH3NS • '3AY r+ MUM�3i 8�c� •�, Pr "" a r ul 3AY n Ou C1 300E r vr"i L AY Wkk JAY 7+NVN �c V j J # L� r da ,iOn 3AY DODO .c'� AY '3 t AV r WY M Yl d M A0 NVaa ; 0a DaYN a s a z '• w r OiJO! 3BAYM Y1llA �; 57x3, '3AY 31VO u z "dn u Ia�J V n0a0lXOnr ui0 d ? 'DkD SNYN 0a M35NYN �# w u O DrVaaNi104s4 QIV �"F--F---r-m-F-----f-- r I3q y j N3DaYJ SO AV MOW 4 Sc ► ul = w 1N3�S '!10 �0 ie N3NaV 0131N1 dO11iJ 'Y7 YA09 NO5NN0Ca w Q 1e J � S �,,� 4 ,{r�i" ti� 1YM r +� llats3ll AY 2 AaYH3 R 'r N x v AA < ttiaV�y379 ,: w `n 3AVav "3AY 3 itivniS ; AxNYNa{ ,E y� AV y�( C•�� 1 Q S� a XY Yala N 3c u '�� K a o r �y1� + be o r a N C10 at Q ��s o 330 w y DODAMR NDI Q .13Ac LNYSY3H 2 a 4 P -q+ 'Oa XY18 ®Y 76 4 t 0 Al � � � 2l3�13YNaS vii 'Yl ya 3t� Xvo� M3IA,� o vAlk d o V7 9 R 3 Qd N3i3VN, O ' a37tY c p kJ►'Bl °� 0 •— ;r�Q� dbN3gQ" ."� po `' �� 3111n3o z# Y1 � P 0a� VXN3Ni1NOJ yiP � � C N3 Sr9 '0a 300I!! +u o YOdO� a i!lOdM3N AVM C tt 3DkggHpl j 3AY 3Vt3VWY1 aUaaa o dl 3 °4'SWilY! 13w icy`. 'ata S nN1YMhrt > NJ® rl a Q'id X3iS3 113M 7 '' `� 1D (� '83 A * a F OOOM1taVd t 1 w Wd ' ' lYttgYH 0 aaJjNO n3TMas0 +yta p co a N OaNt 'i 'la CO i 0 4.23 Tmfi"ic Review Figure 3 a Blake Woods Subdivision Existing (2015) ''~ City of Edina, Minnesota Daily Traffic Volumes a N MEFCSt M^:i{ iK' U., ci 280 x Ln e ` eq 440 Piet* G�'Gv= Pd . Fi.,p Gc+nm P� 340_ Q 4+t}hwoy d Of w Parkv=d Rd a c. tdl�`II Q u wyiweod Gr «� a Tmfi"ic Review Figure 3 a Blake Woods Subdivision Existing (2015) ''~ City of Edina, Minnesota Daily Traffic Volumes Cary Teague From: Jeff Siems Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 12:40 PM To: Cary Teague Cc: Brian Olson Subject: Blake woods housing project Hello Cary, Per our discussion today regarding the Blake Woods housing project the fire department recommends the following: 1) Road width of 24' is below fire code minimums. Residential fire sprinkler system (13D or IRC 2904) required for any building regardless of square footage. 2) Fire hydrants should be located in two areas; at the corner of Blake road and Blake woods and at the beginning of the turn -a -round along the North side. 3) No Parking Fire Lane signage to be installed along the North side of Blake Woods road and around the turn -a -round on the outside radius. Jeff Siems, Fire Marshal Edina Fire Department 952-826-0337 1 JSiemsP Edina MN.Rov 3 DATE: February 19, 2014 TO: Cary Teague -- Community Development Director CC: Chad Millner PE -- City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner PE — Environmental Engineer Charlie Gerk EIT— Engineering Technician RE: Berman Subdivision - Preliminary Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject development for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. General Comments 1. All rain gardens will need to be on private property and covered by a private maintenance agreement in favor of the local Watershed District. Provide an inspection and maintenance plan that ensures future functionality. 2. A development agreement will be required for the creation of public road and utilities. 3. All maintenance for the landscaping, -retaining walls and other related items located within the proposed public right-of-ways and easements will be the responsibility of the subdivisions home owners association or Individual property owners. Survey% Plat 4. Datum for any future surveys will need to be NAVD 1929, S. Recorded easements will be required for all public infrastructures not already in platted drainage and utility easement. Traffic and Street 6. A traffic study will need to be completed for the Impact of an entrance at Blake Rd vs. C�swood Ln. 7. B618 curb and gutter only and standard residential driveway entrances as described in city standard plate 411 and found at the following link: http:lledinamn.gov/lnde�plsection=construction standards 8. Provide 5 -foot wide ADA compliant sidewalks with 5 -foot boulevards. 9. 24 -foot wide streets will be allowed only if a. The City of Edina's largest fire truck is able to navigate the road and cul-de-sac. b. Parldng is limited to one side only. Sanitary and Water Utilities 10. Describe sewer and water services and proposed abandonments of existing utilities. 11. A looped 6" DiP from Blake Rd through to the southeast corner of lot 6 north along the property line to Evmswood Ln. 12. Copper lines must be used to the curb stop, 13. Wet tap will need to be completed at night, with an approved closure plan by public works for Blake Rd. 14. Water main to cross northeast at Blake Rd. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 w"VinaMN.gov • 952-826-0372 • Fax 952-836-0392 Storm Water Utility 15. Applicant may review local drainage features at the following links: Vis://maps.barrcom/edina/ and hUpd/edinamn gov/IndmphP?section=engineering water resource 16. A complete stormwater management plan will need to be completed for the site. a. Stormwater system downstream of sub -watershed MD 29 is over capacity. On site extended detention will be required to control peak rate to the downstream storm system. Provide downstream analysis. b. No increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. 17. Describe and show downstream connection to public storm sewer system. Connection must remain in public drainage and utility easement on Parkwood Knolls 3nd Addition or public right of way on Shafer Road. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control I& Provide information for grading staging between the land development and individual building permits. 19. A State construction site permit and SWPPP will be required: Other Agency Coordination 20. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit will be required, along with other agency permits such as MNDH, MPCA, MCES, and a grading permit from the City of Edina Building Department ENGINEERING DEPARTMIINT 7456 Maw Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 WWW -Edina MN.VW t 952-826-0371: Fax 952-826-0392 A,3.f Legend -Uslinq. •- Future .... Future .... Future .. Fulure Sidewalk - Stale -Aid Sidewalk Active Rowles City Sidewalk Mne lisle Creek To School Sidewalk Regional Tran a+ w+�g�s E City of Edina i77 2008 Comprehensive Pian Update_ Sidewalk Facilities m'+ `' 3)— Living Streets Policy Introduction Living streets balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The Living Streets Policy defines Edina's vision for Living Streets and the principles and plans that will guide implementation. The Living Street Policyties directlyto key community goals outlined in the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include safe walking, bicycling and driving, reduced storm water runoff, reduced energy consumption, and promoting health. The Living Streets Policy also compliments voluntary City initiatives such as the "do.town" effort related to community health, and the Tree City USA and the Green Step Cities programs related to sustainability. In other cases, the Living Street Policy will assist the City in meeting mandatory requirements set byother agencies. For example, the Living Streets Policy will supportthe City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan which addresses mandates established under the Clean Water Act. The Living Streets Policy provides the framework for a Living Streets Plan. The Living Streets Plan will address how the Policy will be implemented by providing more detailed information on street design, traffic calming, bike facilities, landscaping and lighting, as well as best practices for community engagement during the design process. Lastly, existing and future supporting plans such as the Bicycle Plan, Active Routes to Schools, Sidewalk Priority Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan will help to identify which projects are priorities with respect to this Policy. Living Streets Vision Edina is a place where... • Transportation utilizing all modes is equally safe and accessible; • Residents and families regularly choose to walk or bike; • Streets enhance neighborhood character and community identity; • Streets are safe, inviting places that encourage human interaction and physical activity; • Public policy strives to promote sustainability through balanced infrastructure investments; • Environmental stewardship and reduced energy consumption are pursued in public and private sectors alike; and • Streets support vibrant commerce and add to the value of adjacent land uses. Living Streets Principles The following principles will guide implementation of the Living Streets Policy. The City will incorporate these principles when planning for and designing the local transportation network and when making public and private land use decisions. A3(, All Users and All Modes The City will plan, design, and build high quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users (pedestrians, cyclists, children, elderly, and disabled) while enhancing safety and convenience for all users, and providing access and mobility for ail modes. Connectivity • The City will design, operate, and maintain a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel. • The City will seek opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation. This includes preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way, and adding new rights-of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. • The City will prioritize non -motorized improvements to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas. �• The City will require new developments to provide Interconnected street and sidewalk . networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development. • Projects will Include consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, In order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. .Awlication • The City will apply this Living Streets Policy to all street projects including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation, or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also Includes privately built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails. • The City will act as an advocate for living Street principles when a local transportation or land use decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency, • living Streets may be achieved through single projects or incrementally through a series of smaller improvements or maintenance activities over time. • The City will draw on all sources of transportation funding to implement this Policy and actively pursue grants, cost sharing opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable. • All City departments will support the vision and principles outlined In the Policy in their work. Exceptions Living Streets principles will be Included in all street construction, reconstructlon, repaving, and rehabilitation projects, except under one or more of the conditions listed below. City staff will document proposed exceptions as part of the project proposal. M Exceptions: • A project involves only ordinary maintenance activities designed to keep assets in serviceable condition, such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repair, concrete joint repair, or pothole filling, or when interim measures are implemented on a temporary detour. Such maintenance activities, however, shall consider and meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. • The City exempts a project due to an excessively disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, walkway, or transit enhancement as part of a project. • The City determines that the construction is not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants or native vegetation, wetlands, or other critical areas. Desien The City will develop and adopt guidelines as part of the Living Streets Plan to direct the planning, funding, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of new and modified streets, sidewalks, paths and trails. The guidelines will allow for context -sensitive designs. The City's design guidelines will: • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared -use pathways on all arterial and collector streets and on local connector streets as determined by context. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid -block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. The design guidelines in the Living Streets Plan will be incorporated into other City plans, manuals, rules, regulations, and programs as appropriate. As new and better, practices evolve, the City will update the Living Streets Plan. Context Sensitivity Although many streets look more or less the same, every street is a unique combination of its neighborhood, adjacent land uses, natural features, street design, users, and modes. To accommodate these differences, the City will: • Seek input from stakeholders; • Design streets with a strong sense of place; • Be mindful of preserving and protecting natural features, such as waterways, trees, slopes, and ravines; • Be mindful of existing land uses and neighborhood character, and A3'� • Coordinate with business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts. Benchmarks and Performance Measures The City will monitor and measure its performance relative to this Policy. Benchmarks demonstrating success include: • Every street and neighborhood is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling; • Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely; • Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably; • An active way of life is available to all; • There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries; • No unfiltered street water flows into local waterways; storm water volume is reduced; and • Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. The City will draw on the following data to measure performance. Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy Is implemented. • Number of crashes or transportation -related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post -project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Speed statistics of vehicles on local streets. Implementation The goal of this Policy Is to define and guide the Implementation of Living Streets principles. Several steps still need to be taken to reach this goal. The first step will be to develop a Living Streets Plan to guide the implementation of the Policy. The Plan will: • Identify and Implement standards or guidelines for street and intersection design, universal pedestrian access, transit accommodations, and pedestrian crossings; • Identify and implement standards or guidelines for streetscape ecosystems, including street water management, urban forestry, street furniture, and utilities; • Identify regulatory demands and their relationship to this Policy (ADA/PROWAG, MPCA, MNMUTCD, MnDOT state aid, watershed districts); • Define the process by which residents participate in street design and request Living Streets Improvements; and • Define standards for bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to ensure access to key public, private and regional destinations. 4 Additional implementation steps include: • Communicate this Policy to residents and other stakeholders; educate and engage on an ongoing basis; • Update City ordinances, engineering standards, policies and guidelines to agree with this Policy; • Inventory building and zoning codes to bring these into agreement with Living Streets principles as established by this Policy; • Update and document maintenance policies and practices to support Policy goals; • Update and document enforcement policies and practices to ensure safe streets for all modes; • Incorporate Living Streets concepts in the next circulation of the City's general plans (Comprehensive Plan, Bicycle Plan, Active Routes to School Plan, etc.); • Incorporate Living Streets as a criteria when evaluating transportation priorities in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); • Review and update funding policies to ensure funding sources for Living Streets projects; and • Coordinate with partner jurisdictions to achieve goals in this Policy. E x+9 0 Cary Teague From: Joan Bonello <joanbonello@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:30 AM To: Cary Teague; Edina Mail Subject: Blake Woods Subdivision Mr. Teague, I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed Blake Woods Subdivision project. My husband and I live on Westwood Court (6312). Our backyard abuts the Berman property on the northwest corner. am concerned about the effects of development on the water table in the neighborhood. We recently completed a fairly large and expensive landscaping project in our back yard which included removal of large mounts of buckthorn and replacement with more desirable species. During periods of ground saturation, as we saw last summer with large rainfalls, the south portion of our yard becomes flooded. Our neighbors south of us also experienced flooding and water in their basement last summer. The water table is very high already and building on seven new lots and the addition of a new street will create significant run off of storm water. I attended the meeting with Landform on February 3rd at Highlands Elementary School. Reid Schulz presented the project to neighbors and answered questions. I know there are some plans for water management put forth by Landform, however I would like to make sure the city is also looking at this issue and has done due diligence to ensure the plans for water management are adequate. I would like to know how the city is planning on ensuring that this new development will not create problems with flooding and groundwater issues for the existing neighbors. Will the neighbors have support from the city to resolve any water management issues that may arise post development? Please consider the existing ground water issues in our neighborhood and the effect this new development will have on existing water table levels. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joan and Robert Bonello 6312 Westwood Court Edina, MN 55436 952-926-9057 Cary Teague From: charlesj.gits@ubs.com Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:21 AM To: Ross Bintner Cc: Cary Teague; Charlie Gerk Subject: 5311 Evanswood Ln/ Blake Woods Subdivision —resending my 1/29 email here in better format Attachments: Legal Disclaimer.txt Ross Thanks again for spending the time answering some of my questions about the impact on our home at 5311 Evanswood Ln from the proposed sub division. I'm sending you this email and copying Mr. Gerk and Mr. Teague at your suggestion. I will briefly recall our conversation here. We built and moved into our house 15 yrs. ago in Aug 1999. At that time there was an existing water culvert next to the telephone pole running underneath the gravel road on the southeast part of our yard. In spring 2000 we laid sod and created a small rocky dry pond catch area in the south end of our yard and repaired our side of the culvert. Upon seeing the culvert Frank and Toby Berman plugged it up on their side and sent us a letter telling us we were diverting water onto their property. At that time I called and spoke with an Edina city engineer. He replied although there was an existing culvert before we built our home, there was nothing we/he could do and suggested we pump water up to Evanswood Ln. We then installed a sump pump in the dry pond with an underground hose that runs north and empties onto Evanswood Ln. (water then flows east, crosses street and runs south to Blake Rd sewer) I also have an active basement sump pump that is drain tiled into the dry pond and then this water is also pumped north to street. Every Spring melt, and after heavy rains our backyard floods, often with 20' x 60' pools that stretch into Berman's lot. (Similar to your attached screen shot area) Idle water pools are also created on the other side of the gravel road. The water appears to run west from Blake road and east from Berman's house and south from Evanswood Ln. So in addition to the sump pump running, I also roll out a 200 ft 4" hose with an extra pump to clear the water from our yard and runoff from Berman's side lot at these times. Sometimes it takes days to empty with two pumps. I have done this for 15 years. The water on the south side of the back lane (Berman 5320 and 5324) sits idle till evaporated. (Last spring green algae formed on the Evanswood Ln curb because we moved a lot of water) Our lower level is completely furnished with hardwood floors. It has never flooded, and the grass and trees survive after we move the water. However, as I explained to you, I am very concerned about the existing proposal. The displaced water from any house built on 5321 (west lot) will be more than we can tolerate. I can show you photos and I have plenty of history. Please keep me involved and informed about possible solutions and the project. As I told you, the first time we had heard anything about the project was when we received a 1/21/15 letter from developer Landforms about an open house. i Thanks, Charlie Gits 952-933-5845 h 952-921-7920 w Charlie Gits Senior Vice President -Wealth Management UBS Financial Services Inc. 8500 Normandale Lk Blvd. #210 Bloomington MN 55437 (952) 921-7920 (877) 894-2418 toll free direct (877) 540-0597 toll free fax charles.i.glts@ubs.com http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/team/`gitsoldendorf/