The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2019-10-23 Planning Commission PacketAg enda Planning Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota City H all, Council Cham ber s Wednesday, October 23, 2019 7:00 PM I.Ca ll To Ord er II.Roll Ca ll III.Approva l Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approva l Of Meeting Min u tes A.Min u tes: Pla n n ing Com m ission Sep tem b er 25, 2019 B.Min u tes: Pla n n ing Com m ission October 2, 2019 V.Com m u n ity Com m ent During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. 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. G enerally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for consideration at a future meeting. VI.Pu b lic Hea rings A.Va ria n ce req u est B-19-17, 6804 In d ia n Hills Roa d B.Va ria n ce Req u est B-19-16, 6700 In d ia n Hills Roa d C.Va ria n ce Req u est B-19-18, 6401-6405 Fra n ce Avenue, M Hea lth Fairview Sou thda le D.Prelim ina ry Rezon ing from PID, Planned In d u stria l District to PUD, Pla n n ed Un it Develop m ent a n d Prelim in ary Developm en t Plan at 4100 W est 76th Street for Aeon VII.Rep orts/Recom m en d ation s VIII.Corresp onden ce And Petitions IX.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents X.Sta8 Com m ents XI.Adjournm en t 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 ampli;cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommis s ion S eptember 25, 2019 Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: P lease approve the S eptember 25, 2019, P lanning Commission M eeting M inutes. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Minutes , September 25, 2019 Planning Commis s ion Meeting Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 1 of 4 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers September 25, 2019 I. Call To Order Vice Chair Nemerov called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Douglas, Lee, Bennett, Strauss, Thorsen, Berube, Miranda, and Vice Chair Nemerov. Staff Present: Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner, Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioners Olsen, Melton, and Velavuli. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the September 25, 2019, agenda. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, August 14, 2019 Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the August 14, 2019, meeting minutes. Commissioner Douglas seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. Minutes: Planning Commission, August 28, 2019 Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the August 28, 2019, meeting minutes. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Commissioner Nemerov offered up 3 amendments: Change wording on page 4, Item 7 to read, “land.” Change wording on page 3, 4th full bullet point to read “whether there was an engineering or aesthetic purpose for the retaining wall” and Section 9, Chair and Member comments, he intended his comment to read “Commissioners expressed interest in working on a ready response when applicants state that cost is driving submissions.” Motion carried as amended. V. Community Comment None. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 2 of 4 VI. Public Hearings A. Preliminary Plat for Southdale Office Center – 6600 France Avenue Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request of Southdale Office Center for a Preliminary Plat. Aaker stated the subject property is 22 acres in size and is relatively flat. The property contains an office building, bank, and the Tavern on France Restaurant. Approval is subject to a park dedication fee of $159,537 which shall be paid at the time the City releases the final plat. Assistant Planner Aaker concluded Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Southdale Office Center, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Discussion/Comments/Questions • A Commissioner asked if this request is for a subdivision. Aaker indicated this will be subdividing the property into two lots. • A Commissioner asked if this will have two different owners or will the same owner hold both properties. Aaker indicated it will probably affect future ownership because it will probably be sold off. Currently it is remaining with the same owner. • A Commissioner asked if the drive-thru within lot one. Aaker indicated it encompasses the area of the bank. • A Commissioner asked if the Commission will see anything come forward for a proposed project for lot one. Aaker indicated she did not know that. • A Commissioner asked if the entire lot is all subject to a PUD as part of the initial plan and would that affect or prevent a split of the property now. Aaker explained it would not affect this at all. She noted it is zoned PUD and the bank is not changing. There are not any changes being proposed to the buildings. It is platting property off and the bank will have a separate parcel. Appearing for the Applicant Scott Smith, 3919 Morningside Road, Windemere Capital Management, introduced himself and explained this is really an administrative matter and when the ground lease was done with Bank of America, it was built into the lease to eventually cut the piece off from the bank property for a separate tax parcel. This will actually give some relief to the tenants in the office building. He indicated there were not any plans to sell the property at this time. He answered questions. Discussion/Comments/Questions • A Commissioner asked if the Bank of America leased land from Windemere Capital Management. Mr. Smith indicated that was correct, it is a ground lease and the bank funded all of the improvements to the building. • A Commissioner asked as part of the development, was the Bank of America lot changing as a part of that development or was that staying the same. Mr. Smith stated it would be staying the same. All of the rest of the study is being done on the middle of the property. • A Commissioner asked how the park dedication fee relates to this parcel. Aaker indicated currently it is a registered land survey, has never been platted, and has always been on separate parcel where no park dedication fee was collected. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 3 of 4 Public Hearing None. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Preliminary Plat for Southdale Office Center at 6600 France Avenue as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. B. Preliminary Plat for Lifetime Fitness and Southdale – 200 Southdale Center Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request of Lifetime Fitness and Southdale for a Preliminary Plat. Aaker indicated the property is 2.43 acres in size, is relatively flat, and contains Lifetime Fitness, multi- tenant retail, and office space. These buildings are currently under construction. A park dedication fee of $17,253 shall be paid at the time of release of the final plat. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Lifetime Fitness and Southdale, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Appearing for the Applicant The applicant did not come forward to make comment. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. • A Commissioner pointed out when thinking about the Greater Southdale Plan, a key portion of it was this mall and questioned why the plan did not address how the mall might be broken up into components. There was always the assumption that the mall would remain intact as the mall. Now, there are private businesses carving up the mall and allowing lots that are not around any circulation grid that ties into it. In some ways, it was problematic the city was not able to engage the property owner of the mall in those discussions. • A Commissioner thought maybe the city should have put some assumptions in the plan for businesses to consider when coming forward with plans. • A Commissioner indicated this is a positive thing and a way to break the mall into different uses and components. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 4 of 4 Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Preliminary Plat for Lifetime Fitness and Southdale at 200 Southdale Center as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Miranda the motion. The motion carried unanimously. VII. Reports/Recommendations None VIII. Correspondence and Petitions None. IX. Chair and Member Comments None. X. Staff Comments None. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the September 25, 2019, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 7:27 PM. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: I V.B. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommis s ion O c tober 2, 2019 Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: P lease approve the October 2, 2019, P lanning Commission M eeting M inutes. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Minutes : Planning Commis s ion October 2, 2019 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers October 2, 2019 I. Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Berube, Thorsen, Strauss, Velavuli, Nemerov, Lee, Douglas and Chair Olsen. Staff Present: Emily Bodeker, Assistant Planner, Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Miranda, Bennett, and Melton. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the October 2, 2019, agenda. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. IV. Community Comment None. V. Public Hearing A. Sign Variance – 3821 Gallagher Drive Assistant Planner Bodeker presented the request of Sign Variance for a sign at 3821 Gallagher Drive. Staff recommends approval of the Sign Variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Discussion/Comments/Questions • A Commissioner asked if there were any other sign variances on the building so it would not be an exception for that site. Assistant Planner Bodeker indicated there were not any other sign variances on this site. She noted this sign is a free-standing sign and not a building sign. • A Commissioner asked if there would be any issue with this sign and also the sign on the stone marquee. It appeared the Container Store had a sign there and will the sign be moved, or will it be blocked. Assistant Planner Bodeker indicated to her knowledge the sign would not be moved. The retailer itself is allowed additional signage related to the retail store. She indicated the photo Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 2 of 3 on page 4 of the presentation is treated as the area identification sign so the second Centennial Shops sign would be allowed. • A Commissioner asked if the only issue would be the height clearance. Assistant Planner Bodeker indicated that was correct. She explained the sign is under what is allowed square footage wise, the height is the only issue. Appearing For the Applicant Mr. Eric Toshack, Spectrum Signs Systems, Inc. introduced himself and read a letter from RBT Realty, Owner of the property and indicated Ms. Emily Dakota was not able to be at the meeting due to a conflict. Mr. Toshack explained he was at the meeting to answer questions. He noted there was confusion on who can us the parking which is the reason why the sign is being installed. He thought it will improve the flow of traffic and dispel any confusion there may currently be. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Discussion/Comments/Questions • A Commissioner indicated the use of this center frequently and the parking has always been a little confusing. Logistically there are probably issues with the parking be so close to the entry drive off Gallagher. There should be something done in order to publicize the parking before people enter the site. Might even encourage using a large “P” sign on the building to indicate parking in the future. • A Commissioner indicated no issue with the variance request. Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Sign Variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. VI. Reports/Recommendations None. VII. Correspondence and Petitions None. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Page 3 of 3 VIII. Chair and Member Comments Commissioner Lee indicated there was a Worksession about the City Commission Workplans and wondered if Chair Olson would provide an update. Chair Olson updated the Commissioners and public regarding the Planning Commission Worksession. She thought everything was really tied together this year and inspiring. She saw a lot of opportunity for the Commission to keep that going and keep the communications with all of the Commissions open. Student Commissioner Velavuli introduced himself to the Planning Commission and public. IX. Staff Comments None. X. Adjournment Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the October 2, 2019, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 7:25 PM. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker, Assistant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e reques t B-19-17, 6804 Indian Hills R oad Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Deny the 25.1 foot front yard setback variance request. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 6804 I ndian H ills Road, is approximately 60,730 square feet in area and is located in the north east corner of the intersection of M argaret’s L ane and I ndian H ills Road. T he existing two-story home with an attached two car garage and an in-ground pool backs up to Arrowhead Lake. T he need for a variance was identified when a building permit was submitted last spring and reviewed by city staff for a detached garage and pool cabana. It was determined that the proposed out-building did not conform to the required setback from Margaret’s Lane. T he ordinance stipulates, setback from the street frontage is dictated by the front yard setback of adjacent homes on a corner lot. T he setback required from M argret’s L ane is established by the front yard setback of the adjacent home at 6808 Margaret’s Lane. T he structure does not meet the required 57.9 foot setback, (front yard setback of 6808 Margaret’s Lane). T he out building is to be located 25.1 feet from the side street/front yard lot line along M argaret’s L ane. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report with attachments Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e R eques t B-19-16, 6700 Indian Hills R oad Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve the 4 foot 5 inch height variance for the proposed home at 6700 Indian Hills R oad. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 6700 I ndian H ills Road, is approximately 71,257 square feet (2.34 acres) and is located on the north side of Indian Hills R oad, south of Arrowhead Lake. T he existing home on the lot has been demolished and is proposed to be replaced with a new two-story home. T he applicant is proposing the new two-story home be 34 feet 5 inches in height. S ingle dwelling units are allowed to be 2 ½ stories and 30 feet. Lots that exceed 75 feet in width, the maximum height shall be 35 feet plus one inch for each foot that the lot exceeds 75 feet, but in no event shall the maximum height exceed 40 feet. T he zoning ordinance defines lot with as, “the horizontal distance between side lot lines, measured at right angles to the line establishing the lot depth at a point of 50 feet from the front lot line.” T he lot width at 6700 I ndian H ills Road is 60 feet. A lot that is 60 feet wide is allowed a maximum height of 30 feet. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Aerial Map Applicant Submittal Engineering Memo October 23, 2019 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-19-12, A 4 foot 5 inch variance to allow a 34 foot 5 inch building height at 6700 Indian Hills Road Information / Background: The subject property, 6700 Indian Hills Road, is approximately 71,257 square feet (2.34 acres) and is located on the north side of Indian Hills Road, south of Arrowhead Lake. The existing home on the lot has been demolished and is proposed to be replaced with a new two-story home. The applicant is proposing the new two-story home be 34 feet 5 inches in height. Single dwelling units are allowed to be 2 ½ stories and 30 feet. Lots that exceed 75 feet in width, the maximum height shall be 35 feet plus one inch for each foot that the lot exceeds 75 feet, but in no event shall the maximum height exceed 40 feet. The zoning ordinance defines lot with as, “the horizontal distance between side lot lines, measured at right angles to the line establishing the lot depth at a point of 50 feet from the front lot line.” The lot width at 6700 Indian Hills Road is 60 feet. A lot that is 60 feet wide is allowed a maximum height of 30 feet. The subject property is unique in shape and is over 200 feet wide where the proposed house is to be located. If lot width was measured where the proposed house was to be located, the house would be allowed to be up to 40 feet in height. With the exception of the height, the proposed home meets all other zoning requirements. 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. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features 6700 Indian Hills Road is 71,257 square foot lot (2.34 acres) and is located on the north side of Indian Hills Road, south of Arrowhead Lake. The existing home has been demolished and the applicant is proposing to replace it with a new two-story home. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage Proposed drainage paths are similar to existing drainage paths on the lot. The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in a memorandum. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side – East Side - South– West Side – 75 feet from OHW 12 feet total with no less than 5 feet on one side 138.8 feet 12 feet total with no less than 5 feet on one side 187.3 feet 53.58 feet ~250 feet 27.33 feet Building Coverage 25% 8.9 % Building Height 30 feet 34 feet 5 inches* *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed variance justified? Minnesota Statues and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance 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. The practical difficulty is the irregular shaped lot. The majority of the lot is well over 100 feet wide. If the lot width was measured where the home is proposed to be located, the proposed height would be permitted. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? There are circumstances that are unique to this property and are generally uncommon. The majority of the lot is well over 100 feet wide. The unique circumstance is the narrow portion of the lot that allows access to Indian Hills Road and is not self-created by the property owner. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The Indian Hills neighborhood has unique lots that vary greatly in size, width, depth, and elevation. The proposed height of the home will not alter the character of the neighborhoods and is similar to other homes within the neighborhood. Recommended Action: Approve a 4 foot 5 inch height variance for the proposed home at 6700 Indian Hills Road. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested, subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: • Survey date stamped September 9, 2019 • Elevations and building plans date stamped September 9, 2019. • Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer’s memo. Edina, Hennepin, MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates 2013, © WSB & Associates 2013 6700 Indian Hills Road October 18, 2019 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates 1 in = 200 ft / 9/09/2019 6700 Indian Hills Road — Residence for Eric and Tanya Staal MAKING THE CASE FOR THE GRANT OF A VARIANCE PLANNING DEPARTMENT( SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDINA General Information: Eric and Tanya Staal own the property at 6700 Indian Hills Road. At 71,257 square feet the property is one of the larger sized lots within its neighborhood. The property has an existing deteriorated single- family structure that will be demolished and replaced with a new two-story home of brick, stone and shingles. Although the lot is over 200 feet wide at the proposed building location; due to a long access drive configuration it's width at the street is only 60' wide. Based on the lot width at the street; City of Edina zoning code section 36-438 only allows for a building height of 30 feet. It should be noted that almost all property owners within the neighborhood would be allowed to build to at least a 35-foot building height. The applicant is seeking relief from the zoning requirements to construct a home that at its highest gable is 34 feet, 5 inches. While seeking relief the applicant has also taken care to design a home that is architecturally significant and of quality construction, appropriately scaled for its lot, and complementary with the neighborhood patterns. The City of Edina Variance Application requires that four questions be addressed: 1. The Proposed Variance will relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. a. The practical difficulty is caused by it's pre-existing lot shape — an estate sized lot with a narrow access drive to the street. It is this unique lot configuration that creates an allowable building height of only 30 feet. b. A structure of 40 feet in height would be allowable for the lot's predominant width of 200 feet. The applicant is only seeking relief up to 34 feet, 5 inches. c. Neighboring properties would not be bound to a 30 feet height restriction. These could be built to 35 feet or more even though they are typically on smaller lots. d. The proposed structure is of a scale that is appropriate to its lot size and otherwise complies with all other zoning requirements. e. The applicant is only seeking relief for a portion of the structure. The main east to west gable form which houses bedrooms on the upper level. The structure steps down significantly in height to its neighbors on all three sides (east, south and west). 2. The Proposed Variance will correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. a. The narrow lot width at the long access drive creates the extraordinary circumstance that applies to this property but not others in the vicinity. b. Typical properties within the neighborhood would not be restricted to the 30 feet building height. A review of the Hennepin County Property Map indicates typical vicinity lot widths (per Edina definition) that exceed 75 feet; which would allow a building height of 35 feet and greater up to 40 feet. 3. The Proposed Variance will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. a. The proposed construction of a high-quality single-family residence is consistent with the R-1 districts primary intended use. b. The proposed design is consistent with Edina Draft Comprehensive Plan Housing Goal # 3 which states: "continue to support high quality design of residences ... in a way that furthers sustainability, character and livability, and maintains long term investment". 4. The Proposed Variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. a. The neighborhood context consists of a mix of newer substantial residences along with a variety of older homes in a mix of architectural styles and sizes; all within a mature wooded setting. A recent pattern of existing homes being demolished and replaced with higher quality design and construction should be expected to continue based on property values. Therefore, the proposed construction of a new high quality, architecturally significant, single family residence that is appropriately scaled for its lot will be complementary with the essential character of the locality. Significant buffering from neighbors exists (in the form of distance and mature landscape screening); which minimizes any visual impact to the neighbors. b. Sun studies indicate that the proposed structure will not deny neighbors of access to daylight. c. The construction of a new high quality, architecturally significant home will have a positive impact on established property values in the surrounding area. NIX 226 Any/tIe street east, suite 1 stinlyatex, mn 55082 waw.tookennerazdiltects.com 651.342.1270 Rwre.d.r. ria Pee . OescrOm COVER SHEET AND ROOF PLAN A1.0 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A2.1 A2.2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A2.3 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.2 BUILDING SECTIONS A4.I ARTISTS CONCEPT IMAGE ONLY- DO NOT RELY UPON FOR CONSTRUCTION PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 ?019 CITY OF EDINA ron brenner architects PLAN NOTES: Sheet List GENERAL FRAMING INFORMATION ALL WOOD FRAMING TO COMPLY WITH AP PLIABLE STATE AND LOCAL BUILDING CODES AND THE NATIO(ML DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR WOOD CONSTRUCTION PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL FOREST PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION (NFPA). THESE PLANS INDICATED CONCEPTUAL TRUSS CONFIGURATIONS AND LOADING CONDITIONS. ALL FLOOR AND ROOF TRUSSES INDICATED ON THESE PLANS ARE TORE DESIGNED A110 ENGINEERED BY THE MANUFACTURER LICENSED TO PRACTICE WITHIN THE STATE OF THIS PROJECT. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTOR VERFY ALL POINT LOAD AND BEARING CONDITIONS AND COORDOIME POSTS AND BEARING REQUIREMENTS WITH THE BULDER. NOTIFY ARCHITECT/ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES FROM THESE PLANS. FOLLOW MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR AND FURNISH ALL BLOCMIG, STIFFENERS, BRACING, FASTMERS, HARDWARE, ETC. NECESSARY FOR INSTALLATION. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE; EXTERIOR WALLS (FIC LU DWG GARAGE WALLS) TYPICALLY TO I3E2X6 CONSTRUCTION, INTERIOR WALLS TYPICALLY TO BE 2X4, INTERIOR WALLS LYNN POCKET DOORS TOM 2X6 CONSTRUCTION. POCKET DOORS TO BE CUSTOM FABRICATED WITH MIABERSTRAND ENGINEERED FRAMING'. CABINET WALLS AND BALLOON FAMED WALLS SHALL BE FRAMED WITH 70ABERSTRAND.. PIM DIMENSIONS ARE TYPICALLY TAKEN TO OUTSIDE OF WALL SHEATHING AT EXTERIOR WALLS MD TO CENTER LINES OR FACE OF STUD AT INTERIOR WALLS. COLUMN SEES SHALL NOT EXCEED CRUSHING STRENGTH OF THE PLATES THEY BEAR ON- SEE AS REQUIRED, MEE SQUASH BLOCKING OR BEAR DIRECTLY ON FOUNDATION. USE PRESERVATIVE TREATED COLUMNS, BEAMS, PLATES, MISC. FRAMING MEMBERS AS REQUIRED BY CODE AND AS CALLED OUT IN PLANS. WHERE WOOD HAMM SIZES ARE INDICATED. MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY GRADE AND SPACING REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM L/480 DEFLECTION. ALL FLOOR BEAMS TO BE SET FLUSH WITH FLOOR FRAMING UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ALL ROOF BEAMS TO BE DROPPED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE DROPPED FLOOR BEAMS OR ROOF BEAMS SHALL BE 17 MAXIMUIA DEPTH UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE St1PLATES SHALL BE 2X6 MINIMUM. ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE VC MIN. DIAMETER (UAW.) CAST IN PUCE WITH 7. EMBED. ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL HAVE 7 DIAMETER X 0.125' THICK WASHERS TIGHTENED AND COUNTERSUNK1A4' INTO THE TOP OF THE SRL PLATE SPACING SHAD. BE IF O.C. MINA MINIMUM OF TWO BOLTS PER PIECE WITH BOLT LOCATED NO MORE THAN 17 OR LESS THAN 4' FROM EACH ENO OF EACH PIECE AT TEED FLOOR AREAS USE LIUDSET METHOD AND DEPRESS FLOOR SHEATHING SO IT IS FLUSH OATH TOP OF FLOOR FRAMING (SHEATNG IN BETWEEN FRAMING MEMBERS). VANDOW DESIGNATIONS ON PLANS INDICATE FRAME WIDTH X HEIGHT PI INCHES. VERIFY ROUGH OPENING SIZES WITH WINDOW MANUFACTURER. SHEATHWG: ALL EXTERIOR WALLS TO HAVE CONTINUOUS PLYWOOD WALL SHEATHING. EACH PANEL OF SHEATHING SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH THE APPROPRIATE GRADE-TRADEMARK OF THE AMERICAN PLYWOOD ASSOCIATION. PRCMDE Ur SPACE AT EDGES AND ENDS OF EACH SHEET OR AS REQUIRED BY THE MANUFACTURER. GRADE AND TYPE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: ROOF SHEATNPIG,40/20 APA RATED SHEATHING EXPOSURE 1 EXTERIOR WALL: 24/16 APA RATED SHEATHING EXPOSURE 1 FLOORS:4524MA RATED SHEATHING EXPOSURE 1(TIG) WALL SHEATHING TO BEATTACHED WITH 0.117 DIAMETER IMES AT 6.0.C.; EDGE, 12' OC. FIELD. ROOF SHEATHING TO BE ATTACHED WITH 0.117 DIAMETER HARSAT 6' 0 C.-, EDGE. 170C. FIELD. PROVIDED FA O.C. NAILING TO ALL MEMBERS PI LINE WITH SHEAR WALLS. EDGE FASTENERS SHOULD BE RACED 3AF FROM PANEL EDGES AND ENDS OR AS REOREOUIRED BY THE MANUFACTURER Sheet Number Sheet Name FLOOR SHEATHING TO BE GLUED AND ATTACHED WITH 0.117 DIAMETER NABS ®6' 00. EDGE,17 ao. FIELD. SPLICE ALL SHEATHING ON A COMMON MEMBER SO AS TO PROPERLY TRANSFER SHEAR FORCES. ALL SHEATHING MMHG TO BE COMMON V5RE OR GALVANIZED NAILS. CONCRETE WORK: DO NOT BEGIN CONCRETE WORK UNTIL ALL LOADING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY GENERAL CONTRACTOR. FOUNDATION WALLS: USE 4500 PSI CONCRETE AND GRADE NO REINFORCING STEEL ALL CONCRETE MORK SHALL COMPLY WITH STATE MD LOCAL BUEDING CODES AND ORDWAKES. CONCRETE CONTRACTOR SHALL FREY ALL REQUIREMENTS. FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMEN( TYPICALLY' THICK CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE. REINFORCE WITH 64S VERTICAL AT 2-0'O C. AND (3)64S HORIZONTAL PROVIDE 3' COVER FROM INS/ DE FACE OF WALL TO BAR. DOWEL FOUNDATION WALLS TO FOOTINGS AT FA O.C. TYPICAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY REINFORCING REQUIREMENTS PER SPECIAL POINT LOAD CONDMONS. ROOF PLAN NOTES: -ON.(OVERHANG) DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN INDICATE DIMENSION FROM EXTERIOR FACE OF WALL FRAMING TO EXTERIOR FACE OF 2X SUB-FASCIA -TRUSS SUPPLER TO VERIFY HEEL AND OVERHANG DIMENSIONS PER PARALLEL CHORD CONDITIONS AND TO ACHIEVE DESIRED AUGMENTS. - TYPICAL ROOFING SYSTEM SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: ASPHALT ROOF SHINGLES, ROOFING FELT /SELF ADHERED ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT OVER ROOF SHEATHING. -STANDING SEAM PETAL ROOF SYSTEM SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS PREFORMED STANDING SEAM METAL PANELS, RED ROSIN PAPER, ROOFING FELT/SELF ADHERED ROOFING UNDERIAYMENT OVER ROOF SHEATHING. -METAL PANS INHERE INDICATED SHALL BE FLAT SOLDERED SEAMED COPPER OVER W.R.GRACUULTRM SELF ADHERED ROOFING UNDEMAYMENT. IF FIELD SEAWNG IS PERFORMED PLACE 2 DYERS ROOFING FELT UNDER SEMI LOCATIONS TO PROTECT UNDERLAYMENT. ROOFING FELT SHALL BE UL RATED 30 LB ASPHALT SATURATED ORGANIC FELT. 0.1991019 FOOTING SCHEDULE: USE 5,000 PSI CONCRETE AND GRADE 60 REINFORCING STEEL OFT CONTINUOUS 20. X 10. WALL FOOTING MITH 2 14T CONT. BOTTOM WF2 CONTINUOUS 2=10' WALL FOOTING WITH 2145 CONT. BOTTOM WF3 CONTINUOUS 367117 WALL FOOTING MTH 3145 CONT. BOTTOM WF4 CONTNUCLIS 42'XIT WALL FOOTING KITH 4 !45 CONT. BOTTOM WES CONDNUOUS2MX17 WALL FOOTING WITH 255N CONT. BOTTOM WF6 CONTINUOUS 32XI7 WALL FOOTING WITH 3 IIES CONT. BOTTOM F1 30' X 3Cf X17 W/4545 EACH WAY BOTTOM (12500 LB MAX) F2 36. X 36.X 171/0564S EACH WAY BOT1011(16,000 LB MAX) F3 47 X 47 X17 WI 6 AS EACH WAY BOTTOM (24.500 LB MAX) F4 48' X 4r X 17 W/ 61145 EACH WAY B077011(32,000 LB MAX) F5 Fr X 64' X 17 W/ 4945 EACH WAY BOTTOM (22,500 LB MAX) F6 NY X 77 X 17 WI 4 SFS EACH WAY BOTTOM (30,000 LB MAX) SUBNOTE MAINTAIN 3' CLEAR COVER TO REINFORCING PER SCHEDULE USE 4,000 PSI CONCRETE AND GRADE 60 REINFORCING STEEL MAINTAIN 6F MINOAN FROST DEPTH FOR ALL EXTERIOR PIERS PI IF SOUARE POURED CONCRETE PIER WITH 4 SYS VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) AND 14 TES AT 17 0.C. P2 IF X 36' POURED CONCRETE PER WITH 4 ASS VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) AND 64 TES AT 120.0. P3 16' X 60' POURED CONCRETE PIER WIN 4 45-S VERTICAL (AT CORNERS) AND 04 TES AT 170.0. P4 17 DIAMETER CONCRETE PER WITH 3845 VERTICAL ALL FOOTING AND PIER SEES ABOVE BASED ON AN ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE OF 2,090 PSF. THIS VALUE TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR. NOTIFY ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER IF QUESTIONABLE SONS ENCOUNTERED. - TYPICAL SELF ADHERED ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT SHALL BE VAR GRACE 'ICE AND WATER SHIELD'. INSTALL AT FOLLOWAM L OCATIONS,1) ALONG EAVES EXTENDING A MINIMUM OF 36. HORIZONTALLY UP ROOF BEYOND THE INSULATED WALL LINE 2)36* SHEET WIDTH ALONG GABLE (RAKE) ENDS, 3) 36' SHEET IMOTH ATVALLEYS, 4) 36. SHEET WIDTH AT ROOFAVALL INTERSECTIONS, MALL AROUND CHIMNEYS, SKYLIGHTS AND OTHER ROOF PENETRATIONS, 6) COMPLETELY AT ALL ROOFS LESS THAN 4:12 FITCH, 036. SHEET AT ROOF PITCH TRANSMONS,8) OTHER AREAS AS REQUIRED BY CODE - INSTALL PREFINISHED METAL DRP FLASHING ALONG ALL EAVES AND RAKE ENDS TO NAVE MINIMUM 6' FLANGE ONTO ROOF SURFACE. • INSTALL PRUE/1511ED METAL VALLEY FLASHING WITH 1. V•CRPAP, 17 MINIMUM UP EACH SIDE OF VALLEYS OR WEAVE SHINGLES AT VALLEYS - INSTALL PREF WISHED METAL FLASHING AT ROOF PITCH TRANSMONS. - INSTALL PREFINISHED METAL STEP FLASHING ALONG ROOF /WALL INTERSECTIONS AFIO ALONG ROOF / CH IA NEY INTERSECTIONS. - CONFORM PATH EMACIIM ARCHITECTURAL SHEET METAL MANUAL, ATEST EDITION FOR ALL METAL ROOFING, FIASHING AND ROOF PENETRATION SYSTEMS - RIDGE VENTS TO BE MGR PROFILE, PLASTIC TYPE, SHINGLE OVER VENT SYSTEM (COR.AMENT V•600 SERIES OR EQUAL). INSTALL CONTINOUSLY ALONG RIDGES. - INSTALL ROOF TO WALL VEIITS (COR-ANENT ROOF-2-WALL VENT CR EQUAL) MERE INDICATED ON DRAWINGS. - NOT ALL ROOF PENETRATIONS ARE INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. COORDINATE FLUES. DRYER VENTS, PLUMBING STACKS, ETC. AND PROVIDE ACCESSORIES AND INSTALLATION AS REQUIRED. ALL PENETRATIONS SHOULD BE PLACE ON REAR SIDE OF ROOF IF POSSIBLE REVIEW ALL PENETRATION LOCATIONS IN FIELD PATH OWNER. Prt,:11.2 PantS.Reisknca Lemma, EAS 1.et4 cent, v-zItharbn. orP.1 Ira F.F.,,b1 ,a nry rpr.;t SupErv...in end 1 an ddy ke. a-CT./UM-St. 121.1 Ire SI:, Of MAYS. Mm RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL .5,1Tee COVER SHEET AND ROOF PLAN Progress Set A oo Roof Plan - roll brenner architects /"N 111 226 mynk meet east, suite 1 stillwater, ma 55082 WWVArOnbremleramhiteCIS.COM 651-342-1278 Ster.iss-s 682* Ilescr,Sos I,ste 092019 050W 0,p1Stast 8*04408 I hereby onla I tans 024 44444.440,4. errepat yeas .0040280 RSIS.red by ma or rssrlrest 081671 5 aly tamed amt.. undo' Pe bss di... of Wines. RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA T STAAL 5.111. LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Progress Set A2.1 7 21 0 0. 800804 1-6 0.06.0 ci : 8-00 6001.01 2.8 0-0 1 24-61/41 Et[LF SI,UTOR 4001 2-626-0 whir 0-0 war 0 P4 2-6 PAO T MDTAVATIM 101 - 01 0.1 3 S _J Vir IMF —EF —4— 41 0 242448081 IK 1TI1 A4.1 ING DEPARTMEI EP 0 9 7019 TY OF EDN _J BM1A024 4 PLANt C Lower Level VC 4 1.-M 124-0 r. L EAPACE L L - 24' EA 2T 22. a 15, 15. 0 I 0 92. IC, CLOSET 0501TO EPLOA SAI.P.00 BEDROOM UI PATIO areacatar AI 5-0 5-0 a• KOP00.1 PA 5+ k;5001 U c/ pa pa 0 O PLANNING DEPARTMENT 5E? 0 9 2019 ron brenner architects ' • 126 myrtle street east, suite 1 saltwater, mn 55082 www.ronbrennerarchilects.com 651-342-1278 R0500 /0 IVA 000550512 050240 P. A Etas10saerce Paan By EAR 11000 0510 0000045 0Ass:00, orresst •Ps 0,ane5 unix I. Crest StCarnAllt-IernadAr Wanted 201,0000.x.1.0.104 re E00 wresc0 1.05104 — 07305400 RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL 555.1-5. MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Progress Set A202 L 11 -0 3/4• 12-11 1/41 op L_ J L 0,1111AX.1 14- 5 1/, 05EN 10.53-1.0r1 13* /15 5.see O Vir 6001-10 o• 12 -63/4 F3,50041 2-6 LLCrar 226 myrtle stleet east, suite 1 sdilwater, nm 55082 www.ronbrennerarchitects.com 651-342-1278 Hone rialdr. Flertairs ron brenner architects I IN UK 2.3111.1. o• PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 21:11q - CITY OF EDINA C Second Floor 1.2 3 1 AI =1'-0- Oda. 11S7:119 Nzied I. Pan... fieseence Cram1B, FAB ..e5y ceity e3g eta plan. spec:65e., or* les 3300 ty mea un5e, ,roam syxruane1341.5 cIJI, !cern. archIad LA.,. ...slat Ira SOL C6 6treeescrta RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL e/xxI SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Progress Set A2.3 MTIG 5113.1e as. - O. Truss Bearing TALLEST ROOF FEIDIT fOR GItt 1,-..1-ADICA • DMA TO SIMMS SECULD110.4.1 SEPARATE ATDOIMPA. 1T°2?r2d1?15'WS T i,F±7 4 Flo or n 1 U Av1.5.f. WM* 69IDD MGM Of P0.0POSED Pate 113.D.,100) 226 myrtle street east, suite I 'Ulla-net, nut 55082 www.ronbreanerarchiteas.com 651-542-1278 Hare 8.6,es- rTOP Of Iffer POOP FZIK -E L L ! ron brenner architects a — \ N \\ CT% - CTr Front Elevation 100'-a"g Floorr /S TA7 1 F 8 oun,p1:1): Lt4 z ai O4 0 0 PLANNING DEPARTM ite.wens 1.2 D. NT *erld;I- T.O. First Floor_ - — - e'it'3•F-17;/2- e4,f-rOVV° - Lower,,31;.IL SEP 0 9 20111 Oc D.019 CITY OF EN,.,.A Cram Ery FAS fwct. I reetrycerty pan. Of re(Ort .S PePired q= Izt um my are= SupaVTin V. 1 wi 6.4.ani-ed a-tlItectunbs law d.Sets of 1.1.1rese. P.ect Dant RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL SD.T. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Progress Set A301 Left Side Elevation -I o.asmts Prged PI. Cit. Ream. Carn E/t EAS I tereby Daffy ittel.flan. Frepered try re on.rder try Nee sverramenf 1.1 I ern a WI pad. nrt*. orre cl License* — ... RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL 5.el EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Progress Set /t Second Floor , — i Lower Level _ ron brenner architects 226 myrtle street east, suite 1 s6llwater, um 55082 wim.ronbrennerarthitects.com 651-342-1278 Hone 11...r- CITY OF EDINA T27- Bearing 1 1 !_tT171,231111-1-& ,I. K1eas — Ic2?'1F3'9/7 S T.O. First Floor x+ae, 1 T.O. 14 ri;:lVf =1 111n 1 17-7_1 i 111 1=- R , T-ep of Foc1. 111E11E111 11= -1 1 =1 11=111 11=11 1=111=111= '1— 1 11=/ 11=-1i1=1 r1=1 i 1=111=1, aa - 1 3 /4 —111—III 1111=111E• =1 E =•--r .1117.EIIH1111 ,=1 ,,; z :=W=. =1 11=1 i1=i111 1 11 ;1; .1,— - —1 =111=1111=H -11 r[=-. 1=111= 11=111-111=111=111=111=111=111= = 1=M= 1TIM=-1-T11111 T1=11-111=11T=t=III=M=1 T.c 1 ) :1 FaIrst47);_:if; Main _Floor 'f'a!'475-& 110;'1";7/5& T.047unglif.,,!! n1=11 11=-1112- _L—i 1tower Level 1-=1111 j 89- 3 3/4 11-= Of Footle IH1111-111-EIIII----_-111-7_111_1111 1- _HI 11E111-1TrEl-11=11_11E111-=i1F_III-E1 lEllIE111=-1111111' 111=11 1 -11-11 1-1 —111-111-1 • 11-111-111-111-11 ron brenner architects 226 myrtle street east, suite 1 stillwater, mn 55082 wwwronbrenamarchitects.mm 651-3421278 rwe Crzr.By. FAB I nerePprertql. erts ccrepot was pp...Lyme.' veer my.. and..911.0.yricelsed arr.c1 unastre izas of 51.01 L.lanse - RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL s,1 BUILDING SECTIONS Progress Set A401 0.0f 1,101516041 AT 6RA1IO11 31.0Leuegla:lf,H4s, 111--E___,111==7111: 1=11 —111—f , 1 AVIV. K.. E010£11 —11 I--TeTTE TEi I 1-: ""As b''' 111----1 ,Elll'±IH -1 IP:HF=111 -111: I 1 111 I 1_,: 1 1=1 I I ft-1-=-1 -Lower 1-:;:! s . h----dll=iilll!L111-111,---111-ili--= _HrEili_=fli_limit--unliotEll- 1117 -111-1=„il- 11 ,-S T• - 1 Hr_r7,-5 —88.- 11 3/4° ,,,.— 1,L. r .F Fsoth, 4,, 7=111EHIII!----111=11ffill=ir IEHE----Iii-_-7,111_---HEIlmiEliE--_-Iii-J-111 -111_-_-_-111-_,„,i _,,,=11 1_7_n ,---,ii-Hri=drw_IF--ili=ill--=!N= ---1,1mEiH-E-17111=--llEwEiii=lii-IF_Iii,-_IIK: ,ili-1I -1 -4 -=1 -1 I =i1 1-1 irr11 -1 1-= ,m = - 111-1 HirmllE11=lEll11.111E1IL111-111.E - -1_- -- 14 1 1FIIM [. —li FTrMaL111=1=ill 11F11 Hi1H111=A=11 111 -1!F111=11_11Ei—=11FI= i—lliEiHii=11-1 il — it i i liA, 14711 1 ±11 1_1 it i tlEVALIL1 [11 il 411_Hi 1 i111 1 1igTsL4-lii1 114 Section 1 Section 6 1/4.=1,0. nc2 r2c11F31.: T.O.F o l 4 retF:7 e r 1 0 1 OCj.1- 1- 81F1W: 1.0; Foundation 4 1 111—H1 HI=j111=111=11H11=111=111=11 11=111-=1-11=11H11-= E111-111E111E 1111E11., 11 I -111-111111_=111E111-Eill-E-i11.=71111F111_--11E111_=1 T-111117111E 1 Illi 111111911111111lli111111111111111 PLANNING DEPARTMEN- SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDINA Section 5 Section 7 114.= N \ 20" MAPLE 8E:2 x90 x903.3 -76"OAK 22"OAK / / / / z A 896.2/ // / x89.9 / / x899.8 22"OAK x9007, \\ \ If/ \ N \ 9 \\ )99(.4 \ /\ N., N x901.7 \ \7,/ \ \ - \\ f N\ N\ , \ \ \ \ / N \ \ \\ N./ \ \\ \ x903.2 / \ A6 \ \ \ / \\ \ x89.1 \ \ \\ \ / N\ \\ \\ \ / ‘ i-,„_>-' \ \ \ N \ \ X ''‘. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ x.892.2 \ \ X N \ \ X x89/2,9 / / / , xp.9 16/ x893.7Ary0 / x892.9 / / / CV / / / / i / / / // / / / / x893.8e / / 1 , I ) / / I / / 903.8 bit,..r x900.9/ .--- r4F - „. %.....i 906"--906. _,.."`. FTIC ILEANOUT q° )4 o (307,2 ,,)08.11, PLANNING DEPARTMENT • SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDINA / 10" SH x903,7 / :- 7 / i /4 .<.--,0-6., y, #8700 INDIAN HILLS RD. / / PROPOSED HOUSE, ''/ PER MAIN FLOOR NAN ---)-- C'n FIRST• FLOOR...008.9) l it?.// \I T-,;k4, 0 ,A P c O E F FI F . ND ucir lD4.2 0 ;;;;,7 3). EMENT FLOOR.-(89 /I, 06 4i4air 898 Fa4 '147: / 44, 909.4 898. 114 'V \ N N \ N \ \ 905;'1 x903.0 x901 8 1 MAPL 16"OAK 0.5 14"\ \ BIRCH x893.8 90h8-- x905.1 893.3 9°2 x903,2 k A (' /•" A IV Pri-TPIG 1/V / / / / / / i 1 I /\ / / ' / / 1 1 L..) L _ y .... / I / X9g / 9.5 / / / r 1 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , / 892.6 / / 1 / / / .k:.., ' / x876 / / / / 14 / / / / / )1 / / / / ' I C / I x892,8 / x 910.4: - I citik I I I \7 r i .040,1 x909.7 909.9 910.0 9„., DeoRATik/L WALL ITU OUS -/ 909.2 / x903.7 x903.4 / 30"OAK 14" CHERRY x906.91 bit'sNY1* Ps* / , aiSTIM (0tVIDE t's °'x9° ° FMW1- ' 10101'-o5t1) HO StTh m 0 \ iNeDivi NtA tYnewier' Nattlitad'S 3 'OAK 1 7.6 / 00 7. ? 901.3 47j73 - - 901.7 \ tis,. "go4 8"OAK 006.0, POE / N\ x899)I- 36"OAK diet x901.1 901.9 EXISTING ELEVATIONS' I EN L. B L. r\ I,' \I v Is n I A N I L/ I En I \ I n L. S../ EXISTING IOT COVERAGE CALCULATION: Lot Area to OHW = 71,257 SF COVERAGE. House = 3,047 SF Dock = 430 SF Patio = 195 SF ALLOWANCES. Deck/Patio Allowance = -150 SF Total 3,525 SF PROPOSED IOT COVERAGE ch CULATION. Lot Area to OHW - 71,257 SF COVERAGE House = 5.225 SF Covered Porch = 272 SF Front Entry = 74 SF Front Patio .= 70 SF Screen Porch 395 SF Deck = 321 SF Balcony = 91 SF Pool Deck = 688 SF ALLOWANCES. Covered Porch = -50 SF Entry x. -50 SF Deck/Patio = -150 SF 4' Pool Deck Perimeter = -544 SF Total - 6,342 SF = 8.9% 25% Maximum Allowable Lot Coverage DATREN 08-21-2019 W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 4.030 Cone Avssus so., Sums 223. BLoorossiora, MN 55425 Bur (052.) 054.4055 FAX (052) 554.42041 EMAIL: WBLANDSURVEYOAOL.COM f ;16.5 77A 1,7 EXISTING ELEVATIONS Front Entry = 913.3 Garage Floor = 909.4 Nano V2 Jl N PROM, UNE OF INTUNIN01.13 589'55'27 'W 60.00 PLAT SITE PLAN FOR: CATES FINE HOMES LEGEND Fence • Septic Cleanout O Manhole O Power Pole x900.0 Existing Elevation x900 OTW Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Proposed Contour x(900.0) Proposed Elevation Proposed Retaining Wall Set Nail on Property Line Found Iron Monument Set Iron Monument Inscribed R.L.S 15230 /5 00 a. ARROWHEAD LAKE LAKE ELEVATION 875.5 MARCH 08, 2017 1.67.-MEA8,,,,,t. • .., 7-........._ ;,,,„„... IV .,.. \ ....) -..... \ / ,E.D \ \ \ Ant 0 \ .0.011 l 1 l \ / 1....„....s. { \ .160.5 , i „\ , \ \ \ -. lroex \\.\ \ 5„r i \ it-011.) /,,,,,, \ \ \ \ \ A \ L \ \ \ \ U 1\1 P L. Ii T T a.. MONT ENtlitga r- L_ . •.- ri/A5/1 IW . tt at Failt OnON.0111.01 WV, 01, AinvieC1Ill WAS 01033wAtOte) eozoolt ncon.../coa-d) —NU k A I", • A I I 101 1., L EC011/11 wML ----TriViUNE Or I001E1 j INDIAN HILLS' ROAD DRAWN SITE ADDRESS 6700 Indian Rilla Rd. Edina, MN 65439 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot I. McCauley Hale. Pleat Addition, Hennepin County. Ilinneeate. BENCHMARK T.N.H. at the RE Corner a( Indian RI I l• Rd. and Arrowhead rm. Elevation le 1177.73. REFERENCE EXIST: 35-17 150/28 SHEET 1 of 1 SCALE 1" = 20 ' JOB NO. 219-19 BOOK/PAGE 00a- z 2 vJ 171 7.73 NOTE, -All eeia<Ing building i lizglop o s un a d r: „ ;easured to the finished siding and rat the -No search was made for any easements. -The location of all utilities shown are from either observed evidence In the field and/or from plans furnished by the utility companies and ore approximate. Utility companies should be notified for exact location before doing any excavation. c'grtr,;..va„ H L. L 0 20 40 80 SCALE IN FEET I hereby certify that this survey. plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I are a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. W000nowA. Morn.. R.L.S. MN REG 15230 RAIN GARDEN #3 CONSTRUCTION RAIN GARDEN #1 CONSTRUCTION RAIN GARDEN #5 CONSTRUCTION BASIN DATA GENERAL GRADING NOTES Event 1.1• ••• I 2Year 1 10Year 1 100year CATES FINE HOMES 1. 11ESEREOCIAJO1ATIONSARELMELICNDERE.511750FECRE10 2. CONSTRUCT RETA00113197/1 BEFORE TERMI DARDEN 1. POE RECOMUENDAIDIS ARE BASED ON 11E RESULTS OF WRING 3AND 4. INEBOTTOUCE RAIN WR011151ISATEIEVADON5954.111ESOLATP1SEIEVADONISDPECTEDTOBECLASSEEDA3 SP WITION ASSUMED NFILTRADDIIRAlE °FOR NCHESPERHOUR ONINENEST END OF INERASHIliE 50604 THE EAST END OF1NEBASNISLSSUITABLEF111MTERW-ISC)/NONATURALLYOCOJERINGSANDYLENICIAY(0-1 ECAVATEALL SCAND CL VAIERVLTOADEPNOFATL002TSBLONDREPIACEYFMSP SOIL MD FILTER UEDA (SEE MORA 1 OYER EXCAVATE 111ESP SOLE /91111EBASN A IRWIN OF 1r (Ir FREFERRED)0.40 REPIACE WITHELTRADON VEDA 1TPEBCCI4973TING 0011154%1XXISIRUCDONSMO AVASHED) AN115.30%00LP3STROOT8RODE PU94731931 HIYE AHIGIERSURWVALRATENTH APIGHER PERCEVIAGE OF CONFOST A.13 13. DEPTH. TIVLEWASNO DORM TAXER NTRIS5ASK RISRECOVIAMEDIRATMIAllO)TONAL 60Rf630R1ESTPITBE COUPLEIED717195 AREA MIR TO DIPISTRUCDON TO VEREY THEID3STEICE OF GRANU1.411 SOL VIUNCUITIAY 1E9979 1. YEREYP11.7111113COMX0N5 ANO NUN LOCADDHSPR/ORTOE(CAVADOWCONSIRUCTION. IFANTOISCREPANCES OR UWE/a IRIDES AREFIX/153111AT RPADTEIESIGN OR WAR CONSTRUCTIONMEEKINEER AND OMER SKI= BERREEDATELYNOTIMINSINCLUCESINVES11GATIONIT SUBStElfACE SOL9T0A0071NAIR7E7BELOW HAM 507011W1711 A HMO AUGER 7DVERFY IHATTIEREARENORESTRXTNE SOIL LAYER.5114ATKOU1PREVENT THE SAS7IFROIIPINFORIANGAS DESIGNED. Rain Garden Overflow Elevation Volume. Cubic Feet Bottom Elevation High Water Level 1 DEBOTTOUOFRAN GAIDelf3 73 AT ELEVADON 903.0.THISISABOVE INESOSIBIGGRACE AROVETHEALUACENT RASEUD1T. TIEEOSTILISOCATIN9SLOCATICNI51/NODCUILENTED FIL1CLASSEED AS Sit PARD7U1N2 CARE MEDS TORE TAM TDVEREY MU THE EMSTIND MIXES NOT LORTAI1 CIATCRSETLEFSES W1f01 COULD MEET IELTRA1EDWATERTOWARDS7HEBASELENT. CONSDERAI1ONSHOULD BE GWEN TO CONSTRUCTING AVERDCAL CLAY BARRIER CUTOFF WNI.BEIVIEDITIE 5.99.117ATON 04541 PAO DEMME D1EBOTTOUOF RAH 6.471191151SAT ELEVATION 1E10 111.9 ISAPPROXWATIY7 BELOW E0.51/40 GRADE 115ASSME MAINE SOLATITISIOCATON ISREATNEY IRIDOTURREOPADIS DCPECTED70 BE CLASSFEDASSWAITH AN ASSUIAID DiflIAATION RATE OF OAS NOES PERHOUR. 61 895.00 897.50 454 896.2 896.9 897.5 897.7 H.2 901.00 902.25 127 901.13 902.3 902.3 902.3 2 AVOID COWACTONDF SOIL IIRANGARDENSBY RESTRICT/MAL CONSIRUC701710.790ANDUATERIAL STORAGE 70 TIE GREATEST EGER, fF6999 ERIRCOCHOUTCONSTRCT1N.F SUSG97DE SOL &ECCLES COUPAC1333. DECOUPACT BY RIMING SOL TO A DEMI OF AT LEAST 17. 2000 INDUSTRIAL BLVD, STILLWATER, MN 55082 03 906.00 907.50 206 906.8 907.3 907.3 907.3 OVER EXCAVATEDEBASII A 1111170.1 OF12.03.PREFERREDIOAID RITLACEIVID1FLTRADONIAMATYPE II CONSISTING OF7045% CONSTRUCDCN 00ASHEDIA713 1543% COUPOSTDREOT GRN:E11 PLANTS WEL HAVEAlfGHER SUM& RA11151111A INNER PERCINIAGE OFCCLIPOSTAND DEPTH. 04 905.00 906.25 147 906.1 906.3 906.3 906.3 EASED ONIHEIXIDERLY510 502.911E (05)000 MUTATION RATE FORITISBASDI 01145 VIDEO PER 1101.111. 3. DONOT CONSTRUCT RAH GARDEMUNILAU.IRSTREAFISURFACES IREFULLY STABLEED. tI5 897.00 300 898.50 898.3 898.3 898.4 898.4 06 883.00 884.70 1719 883.4 884.3 884.4 884.5 FITERUEDIAMLY WEDSTOIATE1731SABOVEL159150770/4 ABOVEINATEIEVADONBASNSVESLOFE951441.80 RESTORMYRDIA1150171110Fr 01.1AUITTOPECtMll 500. 5. OVEREXCAVATETHERASN A 1470.,Ull Of 1r TORRICNESOIS APACTED UNDUE CONSTRUCDDR. RP THE 00515)6 SCCONAD01110NAL12.5U00111BUT DONOTRECOLEPACT.711TOFROPOSEDSA5919011141E4EVADON MATH FURADON UEDNIYPES CONS1919,0 OF 70855 CONSIRUCTIONSAND7NASHEDIA110 1540% CCIROST (4P1307119ADE RAJA E40DIS511,41 BE 0:749TRUCTEDDURINGPER003 Of DRY WEATHER. 50N0787PAT CONSTRUCTONURESS WORXRCLUDNO FINAL STARLDADONCAN OCCUR BEFORE THE tfal 71011EVENT. Total 2953 PROJECT A S. ALL BICAVA1)3N1,9171411R0N GARDEN SHALL BE ACCOMJSKED BY HMO ORWITI11.0W SPACT1RACKEDEOURIERf THATIMPARtSTIELEASTPOSSELE LOADING. TO DE WENT FEASIKE 710 USE OEM EXCAVATOR CfERATIND OUTSEE OF TE RAW GARDBI S REGIME/MEI. • Volume at overflow or 1.5' depth •• 1.1" in 1 hour RAIN GARDEN #4 CONSTRUCTION RAIN GARDEN #6 CONSTRUCTION RAIN GARDEN #2 CONSTRUCTION fl FURATKINIMEINASW1LBEINSIAUEDERIAI0E OVERFLOW ELEVA71119 70 THERECOILIENDEDDEPDtlIE SUBGRADE SHALLEECOMTRUCIED TOA1:1 SICEE MO THE SURFACETO A 31 SIDFE1HE BOTTOU OF RE BARN SHAD. BE HAT WITH AMUR/ME OF 4.099 T. CON3TCOUPACTFLTRADONUMA 6 INSTNJ.5777779 FLTER LOG AT PERNETER Of WIN UPON 19 40,u7NT OF FLIER ItEDSATO 0711IEEP017-NTIN. CONIMIRIAlltft REINIVE WHENRASIN SCE SIPES ARE ST/SLUED (SOD HAS TAKB4R000 11 MERV DEMI EIFLTRATC1YRATESUPONCCAPIETION711931/111111EUSECIFADOUSLERNOINFL71924/ETERTEST. IA SEE SPE-Ci9C CONSTRUCDON NOIES ON TIRSSHEET FOR EACNRAPI GAMER. 11. SEESHEETC202 OR EROSION AND SEDRUIT CONFROIRECANIOZEN13. Major Subcatchment Peak Runoff Rate (CPS) North - Existing 0.37 0.56 1.78 5.50 STAAL RESIDENCE 6700 INDIAN HILLS EDINA, MINNESOTA TRESERECONUOIDADOKSAREBASED ONTHERESULTS OFBOREIG 7. 1. hERE NO DORM MOEN IN THS EIA551. IT IS RECUR/ENDED 71111010 MOM& DORMS ORTESTP1T5 EE COLWEIEUN THIS AREA PRIOR TO CONSITLICDCN TO VERIFY INEEOSTOCEOF GIDNULAR 00L54111011711AY North-Proposed 1. 2. 0.00 0.23 1.43 5.37 111ESERECOVIENDAllONSMEBASED ON THE RESULTS OF ROMIG& f. Change -0.37 -0.33 -0.35 -0.13 INEROTIDUCERPRIC.001AIIS ATOEVADON 9320. THEg00ATTMSOEVAllONS EXPECTEDTORE LENSES. 1.511CONE 0E0FILMPROXIIARIYISRELEN/hE5ASNIS ACIAYEY SNA LAYER TWT DUST BE REIJOVED IN RS 0411RETY.111EUDAVATIONSHOIADBEBACIMEDT0Ir130.0WINEEASNE11311011111111SPLIATERVLSNCETHE UNDERLTINGUATERIAL SIMEASSUIIED 114711.TRAMN RAIEIS 0.45NCIEESPERHOUR. DIEBOTTOU OFRAIN GARDENK MAT HEYATON501.111HESOLAT THSELEVADONIS MECTED TORE CIASSIEEDAS 511YRTMAR AMI ED INFITRADON RATE OF 045 INCHES PER HOUR. South - Existing 2.07 1.48 2.58 5.42 2 PIE BOTTOM OF RAN GARCeiki OAT ELEVADON5310 THISIS APPROXIVATELYMELOYIEOSTING WADERS ASSULIETNAT IRE 501 ATTK0 lOCADONIEREIADYELY U7111511)RBED715115 EQECTED TO BE OASSFEDASSUN1TH RIMMED REIL1AATION RATE OF OASINCFESPSIMUR South - Proposed 0.00 0.08 1.81 5.31 OVER E(CJIVA1E17E SASH A U11110110E IS (1r PREFERRED)AND REP...ZENON FLTRA00111EDAMEBCONSIST740 OF7945%CONSIRUCDON SND (WASHED)010315.3911C01770670POOTGRAOE 21 PLAWISWIJJAVE A ROMER SURVIVAL RATE YffINA HOER PERCENTAGE OFCCUPOST AND DEPTH. -2.07 -1.40 Change -0.77 -0.11 3. BRING 11IERASIN TOFINALGRVEHTINFAIRA7)1011EDIAlYPER CONSISTING OF 7045% CONSTRUCTIONSAND OVA51ED1119:115.30%COLP3ST(0DOTGRADE11 1 OVER MCAVAIEDEBAS*1 A106111.10F 11. (1r PREFERREOJIN0RMACEVINFIIRADONIEDIAIYPERCON9ST540 OF71345% CONSTRUCTION SW (WA9110)N.015-3014 COUPOS1110,00t G9.7DE11 SAKES HU HAVE A MIER SURVIVALRATEVATHA MUER PERCENTAGEOF CCIROSTAND 1r DEPTH. 4. FLIER LEDA PLY FEEDS TO 13019,5111. MOVE BA.5715077047 ABWEDIAT ELEVA7)3NEASiNSDE SLC0ESS/1,11BE RESUMED MTH A IRIARAIllf 6' GUAM TCPSOE.N70 SOD SHEET INDEX PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 09/09/19 ISSUE DATE MISTING DEUVEWAY TO REJANN NEW CONCRETE APRON - SLOPETO DRAIN TO RGIN -RAN GARDEN IS .11/0VERFLOW 891125 6 OVERFLOW 897.50 RAM WWI 11I O CC CID a 65425 DESIGN sm.. 901 N 3rd STREET, SUITE 120 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 p 613160.7930 f 612.5603990 www PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDINA CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATION I hereby canary Mathis plan was plena,e4 by me. wander my *.a supervision. and that I am a duly Licensed Professkmal Engineer Lode, the Mrs MR.. state at MINNESOTA. ( Elephant& Walston REGISTRATION NO. 111914 DATE 09....1019 SHEET GRADING PLAN 811 C-201 0 GRADING PLAN r =20 20 60 Know what's below. Call before you dig. I SCALE IN FEET PROJECT NO. CFI-119003 TREE PROTECTOR FENCE (THP) CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE OVERFLOW INSTALL FILTER LOG AROUND RAIN GARDEN MIER RURAL GRADING. MAINTAIN UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED N PAIN GARDEN AND UPSTREAM SLOPES. OVERFLOW 45712 FRONT ENTRTe894.9 LOT 3 s OM/BLE ROW OF SILT FENCE INSTALL FILTER LOG AROUND RAIN GARDEN AFTER INfTiAL GRADING. UNMAN UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED IN RAN GARDEN AND UPSTREAM SLOPES. OVERFLOW SIT FENCE TREE PROTECTION / CONSTRUCTION FENCE 0YR1 LOT 2 LOT BLOCK 1 INDIAN HILLS INSTALL FILTER LOG AROUND RAIN GARDEN AFTER INITIAL GRAD/NG. MAINTAIN UNTIL VEGETAllON IS ESTABLISHED N RAIN GARDEN AND UPSTREAM SLOPES. _ (11 LEGEND X TREE PROTECTION / CONSTRUCTION FENCE 11661 X Lei 11 111. SILT FENCE FILTER LOG RAN GARDEN FLAMING SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN RESTORATION WAIN SOD AND PLANTING ** #6620 GARAGE FLOOR-901.8 TREE PROTECTION FENCE M?) SILT FENCE (TYR) 0 0 Cl) 0 PLANNING DEPT -V;i„tiLi'4 SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF Fr_)!!`\!A ARROWHEAD LAKE U N P L A T T E D 811 20 60 1"= 20' 0 EROSION CONTROL PLAN Know what's below. Call before you dig. E SCALE IN FEET CATES FINE HOMES 2000 INDUSTRIAL BLVD, STILLWATER, MN 55082 PROJECT STAAL RESIDENCE 6700 INDIAN HILLS EDINA, MINNESOTA SHEET INDEX PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 09/09/19 ISSUE DATE Stephen It a REGISTRATION No 16914 DATE 09.1)52019 DES IGN 901 N 3rd STREET, SUITE 120 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 es'I'el'2er1:79171 www.elanlab.com CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that 111N peen was prepared by me. or under ray died supervision, and Mal I am a duN Licensed Professional Engineer under Me laws date state al MINNESOTA. is SHEET EROSION CONTROL PLAN C-202 PROJECT NO. CFH19003 CATES FINE HOMES 2000 INDUSTRIAL BLVD, STILLWATER, MN 55082 NOTES: 6-FT. HIGH TEMPORARY ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE SHALL BE PLACED AT THE DRPLINECf THE TREE TO BE SAVED. FENCE SHALL COMPLETELY ENCIRCLE THE TREE(S1 INSTALL FENCE POSTS USING PIER BLOCKS ONLY. AVOID DRAM POSTS OR STAKES MO MAJOR ROOTS. FOR ROOTS OVER I.EN DIA. THAT ARE DAMAGED WRING CONSTRUCTION, MARE A CLEAN, STRAIGHT CUT TO REMOVE THE DAMAGED PORTION. ALL EXPOSED ROOTS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY COVERED WITH DAMP BURLAP TO PREVENT DRYING, ANO SHALL BE COVERED WITH SOIL AS SOMAS POSSIBLE. WORX WITHN PROTECTION FENCE SHALL BE DONE MANUALLY. NO STOCKPILING OF MATERIALS, VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, OR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT OR MACHINERY SHALL BE AllOWF_D WITHIN THE LIMIT OF THE M=0. 0 NOTES 0 0 ISSUE DATE ED TREE PROTECTION / CONSTRUCTION FENCE t. SCALE 1. DNA WV TRENCH ALONG THE WENDED Fe. UtE 2. DRIVE AU.POSTS DM TIE GROUP) AT DE 01.1.11 S. Of TEETREla. 3. LAT OUTSET FENCE ON DEUR. SZE NG. DE FENCE Ur. MORA. FAL 4. SPACES.. POSTS DP TO SWART TO SUPPORT TIE FERN. 5. ROME SET1uaN AFTERDAF LS ESTABLISHED. -----z-zw----g; v- ...xtweltitt. * -40firestzew 1 ' ;?.---,w-----: -A. 4-FT MF r'iora t. MN DRIPUNE 30 DEGREES MAX. CONTOURS JI - CATMENT AREA <025 ACRES R=15 JAR -CATCHMENT AREA'S/5 ACRES D=16 R=25 UP-GRACVENT SILT FENCE AND J-HOOK ARE ONE CONTINUOUS UNE START DOAN-GRADIENT SIT FENCE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE UPGRADIENTI-HOOK SHEET INDEX PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 09/09/19 or 1-HOOK SILT FENCE NO SCALE SILT FENCE NO SCALE PROJECT STAAL RESIDENCE 6700 INDIAN HILLS EDINA, MINNESOTA 1010" N ig i 1111111.11111 1 ii ri M11111111.11111U U U 0.111111101101111111.111111111111MIIIIIIIIIIIIIII U SII 11 il II H iiiimminimiriiiiiiiiiirmimiiiiiiimmimiliiiiiiiiiii EIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIMIIMMN H H U MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM=IIIMIIINIMMI HENNIIIMEMENNIMEN 11111111111111.111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIII HIIIIIIIIIMMIMBIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIN IIIIIIIIINININSIIIIIIIIIIIIMNIIIIIIIIIIM I 4"013 Beam 311 schedule 40 pipe RUMBLE RACKS For Side By Side Installations (i.e. (2) mats wide at the entrance, use short-strops to connect mats as shown in diagram. Contact your distributor or FODS with any additional questions. ALTERNATE FODS MAT CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NO SCALE 0 C60 Stephen M. •ohnston REGISTRATION NO. 18914 DATE 03092519 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e. A TOP Of HANK A B VARER-SEE SARONG PLM SECTION A-A RAIN GARDEN OVERFLOW NO SCALE 0 FIBERSIMUET MERU. DTHER SDE — OF OVERRUN DRE.Do, op CREATE FERN WITH TOPS.. FAD SOD FLOW FREW MST. LAE. SUARBADD MORON& SEED • SEE M.G. PLAN SECTION B-B RAIN GAROEN fEETEhD SCOUR STOP f PAST BEM MEDI PRO16011011 Ma'SCOURSTOP MAT W. BULLET ANCHOR EMT:NO. PER VAT) ASHES SEE D GRADS. MN 10 TOP OF RAW 77/.77 OE RAN WADER 901 N 3rd STREET, SUITE 120 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 p 612.260.7980 .512 6 , m f 612.260.7990 I www CERTIFICATION hereby certify that Sc, plan was prepared by me, or under my died super..., and Mat lam a dub. Licensed Professional Eng..- under the Laws of the stale of MRE/ESOTA. SHEET DETAILS C-501 PROJECT NO. CFH19003 e'-Il . MEN LOG SECEVENT CONTROL USE 8/811.9 POUPROFTLENETUDES FOR TEMPORARY IMITAUATIOS OR ARE OR BURLAP WHEY DUREDNACel RI FLEE IS M.D. FILTER LOG SEDIMENT CONTROL NO SCALE 7/29(16. LC. WOOD. SINES AT MAX./114 WRONG. PEREmE SPACE. IN 1./1 RCM. SINES SHALL BE DILNEN THROUGH TEE BAC( HALF OF THE MERU:GAT ON AIME OF 4511811111. TCP OF THE STAKE PONDPMESTREML z LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FIRSHED GRADING AND POSITIVE SURFACE DRUNAGE IN ALL UVIDSCAPEAREAS LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE MAT THE FINAL GRADES ARE MET AS SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN. IF ANT DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY UNDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR RESOLUTICN. ,za -zg;.1 RIP RAP EASTING TREE CANOPY EDGING (SEE LANDSCAPE NOM) PUNTING SOL (SEE IfiNDSCAPE ROIE51 HAKE CADGER ARC./ FINDS FROVIDERAIMB 'rid/MOP/MANOR MEW (SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES) MOOR TOMMIE. RELIOVEALI.POTMONIPLAST/C SEARFYSOES MO BOTTOM LOOSEN ROOTS PRIOR TO PIANTIND NO SCARE O SHRUB PLANTING DATE ISSUE EM 5 AM 9 RH RAIN GARDEN ft EP (D RAIN GARDEN #1 0 RAIN GARDEN #2 & #3 1-=TO LANDSCAPE NOTES 1. VEFUFY ALL REID CONDMONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO ECAVATTON/CONSIRUC110/1. IF/1NY DISCRF_PANCIES OR %MOWN MIMES ARE FOUND THAT REACT DESIGN OR WPAIR CONSTRUCTION, THE LANO.SCAPE ARCHITECT AND OWNER SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY NONFED. ALL PLANT SIATERMLS ARE TO CONFORM WITH STATE & LOCAL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND THE CURRENT ADOMON OF 111E AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN STANDARDS. All PLANT MATERIALS ARE TOM HEALTHY, HARDY STOCK, AND FREE FROSI ANY DISEASES, DAMAGE. AND DISFIGURATION. 4. QUANTITIES OF PLANTS LISTED °NINEPIN ARE TO GOVERN ANY DISCREPANCY BEMEEN THE OUANTMES SHOWN ON THERM' SCI4EWLE AND PLAN. RACE RANTS IN PROPER SPACING FOLLOWING LAYOUT FIGURES. 5. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO MINIM PIANTS AND SOD IN REALM COMMON THROUGHOUT TWO YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. INE WARRANTY PERIOD SNAIL BE BEGIN UPON INSPECNON AND ACCEPTANCE BY CITY STAFF. PLANT SCHEDULE KEY MAW. COMMON NAME SCIDITIFIC NAME SIZE ROOT COND.SIZE MATURE 40 Ac COLUMBINE AQUI.EGA CANADENS1S 3.5' PLUG 1.514215W 54 Al SWAMP MILKWEED ASCLEPIAS INCARNATA 35' PLUG 411 1.5VI 34 AM AUTUMN MAGIC AROMA MELONOCARPA 5 GAL POT 411X3W BIACK CHOKEBERRY CS CARDINAL CORNUS SERICEA 7 GAL POT 411X3W DOGWOOD 'CARDINAL' 52 CV FOX SEDGE CARE( VULPINMEA I GAL POT 3}IX 1.5W 31 CNA 'MOONBEAM COREOPSIS VEMICIATA 35' PLUG 211 X2Y1 COREOPSIS IMAM 71 EP PURPLE CONFLOWER ECHINACEA PURPUREA PLUG 3315 15W 79 EM JOE POE WEED EUPATIOFWM PLUG 41i 525W MACIAATUM IS 1113 BLUEANGEL MOSTA HERTA SLUE ANGEL' 1 GAL POT MN X 3.5501 65 BLUE FLAG IRS VERSICOLOR 3.5' PLUG 21152W RLS 74 LP PRAIRIE BLAZINGSTAR LIAINIA PYCNOSTACHYA 3S PLUG 411 X 1.5W 74 LS GREAT BLUE LOBELIA SIPHILMCA 35' PLUG 31152W LOBELIA 30 OS SENSMVE FERN INIOCLEA SENSIBLUS I GAL POT 2.51151.55/ 47 PV SHENANDOAH MICH PANICUM VIRGATUM 1 GAL POT 39IX 2V1 GRASS 'SHENANDOAH 31 13/1 RACK EYED RUDBECRA HIRTA 3.5' PLUG 2115 1SW SUSAN 16 VT COMPACT CRANBERRY VIRBIJRNUM TRILMUM 5 GAL POT 51156W BUSH 'BAILEY COMPACT 51 W CULVER'S ROOT VF_RONICASMUM JS PLUG 411215W VIRGINICM1 SUBSITRRIONS: FANYSUBSTITUTIONSAREREQUIRED, SUBMIT WRITTEN DOCUMENTS AND PROPOSED SUBS/TIM/IS TO lANDSCAPEARCISTECT FOR APPROVAL 5 DAYS PRIOR TO PURCHASE AMOR INSTALLATION. PLANNING DEPARTT,IELEFND SEP 0 9 20111 ¨11. Bm'ER piTy OF EDIT,LA 8N BOA 7 PV 7 CVM 10 5 VT 121V PV 13 EP CS 0 RAIN GARDEN #6 1'= 10' CATES FINE HOMES 2000 INDUSTRIAL BLVD, STILLWATER, MN 550E12 PROJECT STAAL RESIDENCE 6700 INDIAN HILLS EDINA, MINNESOTA SHEET INDEX PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 09/09/19 SHEET LANDSCAPE PLAN L-101 PROJECT NO. CFH19003 DATE 03.0912019 PResinee Sarathong REGISTRATION NO. 45059 901 N 3rd STREET, SUITE 120 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 p 012.260.7960 I .elanlab m f 612.260.7990 www CERTIFICATION I hereby catty Mg this plan was prepared by me, or under my drect superviskm. and Nall am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under Me laws of the state of MINNESOTA. 0 RAIN GARDEN #4 & #5 i". RAIN GARDEN NOTES 1. AVOID COMPACTING SOILS Pi RAW GARDEN. 2. APPLY MCI (2) INCH DPW OF CLEAN, NONDTED. DOUBLE.SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (HO BARK) IN RAN GARDEN AREA. 1 RACE AND BURY 16' .36' BOULDERS AS SHOWN ON PLAN TO A DEPTH OF APPROMMATELY 1130F OVERALL ST& RACER, 17 RIP RAP AS IN ME AREAS INDICATED ON PLAN. TYPE AND COLOR OF BOULDERS AND RIP RAP TO MATCH ARCRITECTURAL MATERIALS. 4. MARTAIN RAIN GARDEN FREE FROM WEF_DS AND OMER IWASIVE RANT MATERIALS. 5. MONITOR MOISTURE IN RAIN GARDEN FOR ONE FULL YEAR SUPPLE1AENT WATER IF THERE IS INSUFFRIENT RAINFALL PER WEEK (ONE INCH PER WEEX). S. AFTER FIRST GROWING SEASON REMOVE ALL DEAD PUNT DEBRIS FROM PREVIOUS GROWING UPSON AND PRUNE SHRUBS AS NECESSARY TO }AMAIN ACCEPTABLE APPEARANCE OF RAIN GARDEN. Know what's below. 10 30 Cali before you dig, SCAL E IN FEET 841. Fence Catch Basin Monhole Power Pole Stone Retaining Wall Existing Elevation Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Set Nall on Property Line Found Iron Monument Set Iran Monument Inscribed RA-5 15230 80 x000 0 x900.07W • 0 a! iD ARROWHEAD LAKE LAKE ELEVATION = 875.5 MARCH 08, 2017 a. O 0 GE or WATER 00.02o - " E ------ 7O-.7 — 61.61 g1170.3" $.,870.2 ,077.1 A , IO,A1 A. \ „aBo.o I ("N L. V I A78.9 0.5 'OA 909.1 79 yrs ,ses.3 e70.6 ,„ QM ;:) A -r- L. IS Lu 000 L 0 T z ,800 4 qPt ROL o56 \ ltoa AA 39 01 0 003, 903.0 99016 90..0 93.3 010 Ila 03 0 (." tt ,n"enF 0.9 ti A-et° 0018 07. it to 2 , 2", A I I I iv i v. v CO V L 7' orA, L- I 57 ri sire. / 000. 8010 03 911.1 911.6 M3 5 ld T 01 V V 91 ) •6'.> e. 14, ,99 20 I A N I V I 21 IN ey•Vii:N;ii- A 5N0 At O 04 J.a A z 13 f S AI 880/ '1684,9,4 NAIL ON PROPERTY UNE ans.s OF BITUMINOUS 20 80 803 SITE ADDRESS 6700 Indian Hills Rd. Edina, Mal 65439 I hereby certity that thin ouryey. plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot 1, McCauley Helen. Fleet Addition. Hennepin County, Minnesota. BENCHMARK t T.9.11. the NC Corner of Indian III lin Rd. end Arrowhead Pane. El evat ion - 077.75. JOB NO. SCALE 1" = 20 ' Il k ..,,`". W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. ... w 8030 CEDAR AVENUE SO., SUITE 228. BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 B Buw (952)854-4055 FAx: (9521 8544268 CmAn, WBLANDSURVEYWAOLCOM 35-17 DRAWN CEN BOOK/PAGE 150/28 REFERENCE SHEET 1 of 1 EXISTING CONDITION SURVEY FOR: TC HOMBUILDERS LEGEND L. V /670 OT P.OVERAAE CALEUI ancq• Lot Area to OhlW = 71,257 SF COVERAGE: House = 3,047 SF Deck = 430 SF Patio = 198 SF ALLOWANCES: Deck/Patio Allowance = —150 SF Total = N; ; 5 SF 250 Maximum Allowable Lot Coverage NOTES. —All exletlng n bjld , I47 b d t, lze in llo i nz n ez ro m n oasured to the finished olding end —No search was made for any easements, —The location of all utilities shown are from either observed evidence in the field end/or from pions furnished by the utility companies and are approximate. Utility companies should be notified for exact location before doing any excavation. 0 C 40 SCALE IN FEET 669'66.27'W. 60.00 PLAT aENTEAutt or NM. INDIAN HILLS ROAD °Igntr_AL, 1304013: 00-14-2017 PROW A. BROWN, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 /—• Proposed House DRONE VIEW FROM FRONT RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS 6708 Arrowhead Pass Ian Hill ii cle PLANNING DEPAP SEP 0 9 ?ON CITY OF Er1NA n 6704 Indian Hills Road *- EYE LEVEL VIEW FROM FRONT 3 RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 ZON CITY OF EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDINA DRONE VIEW FROM FRONT 3 RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT Proposed House EYE LEVEL VIEW FROM FRONT SEP 09 ?OltJ CITY OF EDINA RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS 6708 Arrowhead Pass Proposed House EYE LEVEL VIEW FROM FRONT 2 RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS PLANNING DEPART/it-7;j SEP 0 9 ?019 CITY OF EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEP 0 9 2019 CITY OF EDNA DRONE VIEW FROM FRONT 2 r Proposed House 6708 Arrowhead Pass ills Circle RESIDENCE FOR ERIC AND TANYA STAAL EXTERIOR CONTEXT IMAGES 9/9/2019 COPYRIGHT 2019, RON BRENNER ARCHITECTS DATE: October 9, 2019 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Zuleyka Marquez, Graduate Engineer RE: 6700 Indian Hills Road - Variance Review 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. Plans reviewed include the existing condition survey, site plan, grading plan, and erosion control plan. Grading and Drainage The proposed plan includes full redevelopment of the property. Site drains to Arrowhead Lake, a landlocked basin, private property, and Indian Hill Road. Proposed drainage is similar to existing lot. Stormwater Mitigation Applicant proposes stormwater mitigation via five rain gardens with a combine volume of 2,953 cubic feet. Impervious surface calculations and hydroCAD will be required at building permit review to confirm storage volume meets requirement. The two southwest rain gardens may be concentrating drainage to private property; revisions may be required during the building permit review. Stormwater was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP-003 standards. Floodplain Development The lowest floor elevation must be a minimum of two feet above the 1% annual chance base flood elevation. In this case, 879.9’’ plus 2’ is 881.9’. All principal and accessory structures shall maintain a minimum setback of 75 feet from the ordinary high water level. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP-002. Street and Curb Cut A new driveway apron is proposed. A curb cut permit will be required. Applicant proposes sloping apron towards rain garden. Stormwater runoff along Indian Hills Road shall be maintained in the street. Public Utilities Water is served from Indian Hills Road. A one-inch water service line from the curb stop to the dwelling is required per the City’s policy SP-024. Sanitary is served from Arrowhead Pass. O ther Items A final Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit will be required. A well may be located onsite. Thus, coordination with Minnesota Department of Health will be required. Inactive wells must be sealed prior to construction, and a well sealing record must be submitted. A decorative wall and retaining wall are proposed. Retaining wall permit may be required if the height is greater than 4’. Retaining walls must have a low flood damage potential and not obstruct flows. Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.C . To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e R eques t B-19-18, 6401-6405 F ranc e Avenue, M Health F airview S outhdale Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve the sign variances as requested, subject to the findings and conditions outlined in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he applicant is requesting sign variances for multiple signs at 6401-6405 F rance Avenue South, M Health F airview S outhdale H ospital. 6401-6405 F rance Avenue South is located at the southeast corner of France Avenue and H W Y 62. T he applicant is asking for three different sign variances. T he first variance is a variance to allow for a 123 square foot wall sign on the north elevation of the hospital building. A variance was granted in 2001 to allow for the current “M Heartcare” sign that is on the building. T his sign will be removed and replaced with the proposed sign. T here is currently another Fairview Southdale Hospital sign on the west elevation of the hospital. T he applicant has noted that this existing sign will be removed. T he second proposed variance is for a 75 square foot wall sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp. T here are currently no permitted signs on the south parking garage. Existing banners that are currently on the parking garage are non-conforming. T he third proposed variance is a second sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp. T he proposed “E M E R G E N C Y” sign is 37.5 square feet. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Aerial Map Applicant Submittal The applicant is requesting sign variances for multiple signs at 6401-6405 France Avenue South, M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital. 6401-6405 France Avenue South is located at the southeast corner of France Avenue and HWY 62. The applicant is asking for three different sign variances. The first variance is a variance to allow for a 123 square foot wall sign on the north elevation of the hospital building. A variance was granted in 2001 to allow for the current “M Heartcare” sign that is on the building. This sign will be removed and replaced with the proposed sign. There is currently another Fairview Southdale Hospital sign on the west elevation of the hospital. The applicant has noted that this existing sign will be removed. The second proposed variance is for a 75 square foot wall sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp. There are currently no permitted signs on the south parking garage. Existing banners that are currently on the parking garage are non-conforming. The third proposed variance is a second sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp. The proposed “EMERGENCY” sign is 37.5 square feet. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: HWY 62 and single family homes Southerly: Southdale Medical Center, RMD, Regional Medical District Easterly: PRD-4, Planned Residence District Westerly: West Parking Ramp for Fairview Southdale Hospital October 23, 2019 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-19-18, Sign variances to allow a 123 square foot wall sign on the north elevation of the hospital; a 75 square foot wall sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp; and a 37.5 foot wall sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp at 6401-6405 France Avenue South Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features 6401-6405 France Avenue South is roughly 13 acres in size and is the site of the newly rebranded M Health Fairview Southdale Campus. Planning Guide Plan designation: RM, Regional Medical Zoning: RMD, Regional Medical District Compliance Table *Requires a variance Sign Standards in RMD (Buildings 4 stories or less) Sign Standards in RMD (Buildings more than four stories) Proposed Sign #1 (Wall sign on North elevation) Proposed Sign #2 (Wall sign on east parking ramp) Proposed Sign #3 (Emergency Wall sign on East Parking Ramp) Setback – Number of Signs- Square footage - Height– 20 feet to the traveled portion of the street One wall sign per building frontage and one freestanding sign per frontage 86 square feet total between the two signs with no individual sign being greater than 50 square feet 8 feet 20 feet to the traveled portion of the street One wall sign per building per frontage and one freestanding sign per frontage 120 square feet total between the two signs, with no individual sign being greater than 80 square feet 8 feet N/A-the proposed signs are building signs There is more than one sign existing on the North elevation (Previous variances have been granted for signage) 123 square feet* N/A proposed signs are building signs N/A-the proposed signs are building signs Proposed sign #2 & #3 are on the same elevation of the east parking garage* 75 square feet* N/A proposed signs are building signs N/A-the proposed signs are building signs Proposed sign #2 & #3 are on the same elevation of the east parking garage* 37.5 square feet* N/A proposed signs are building signs STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed variance justified? Yes, Staff believes the requested sign variances are justified. The hospital is a unique use and has different signage needs than other uses zoned Regional Medical District. The proposed signage will help with wayfinding and identifying where the hospital is located. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances required that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. 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 that all three variances relieve practical difficulties. The proposed wall sign on the north elevation will serve as identification for the hospital. The applicant is taking down two wall signs and replacing the two signs with the one proposed sign on the north elevation. The two proposed signs on the east parking garage will help with wayfinding. The signs will help direct visitors to emergency services, the 6363 Building, and the east parking ramp. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The circumstances are unique for this site. This is the only hospital in Edina and is unique for the regional medical district. The proposed signage will help with wayfinding. Properly identifying the hospital and emergency room is important for patients, visitors, and healthcare providers visiting the site. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No, the proposed sign variances do not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed signage fits in with the commercial/medical district. It is a benefit to have people find the hospital, and to navigate the M Health Fairview Southdale medical campus. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Staff Recommendation Approve the requested variances to allow a 123 square foot wall sign on the north elevation of the hospital building, a 75 square foot wall sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp and a 37.5 square foot “Emergency” sign on the south elevation of the east parking ramp at 6401-6405 France Avenue South based on the following findings: 1. The proposed signs comply with zoning standards, with exception of the size and number. 2. The proposed signs will help with identifying the hospital and wayfinding within the site. 3. The practical difficulty is the layout and scale of the site. Smaller wall signs on the hospital building would be more difficult to see. Without wayfinding, the site would be difficult to navigate, which is especially important in emergency situations. 4. The proposed sign fits the character of the medical district. The proposed signs are appropriate and will help with wayfinding. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: • Sign plans and elevations date stamped September 20, 2019. Edina, Hennepin, MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates 2013, © WSB & Associates 2013 6401-6405 France Ave October 18, 2019 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates 1 in = 250 ft / VARIANCE INFORMATION – QUESTIONS Property: Southdale Hospital 6405 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 Sign: Wall sign on North Elevation The proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. The proposed wall sign will replace the existing ‘M Heart Care’ wall sign on the North Elevation and will serve as landmark identification for the hospital that can be viewed from both Crosstown Highway 62 and France Avenue. In addition, the ‘Fairview Southdale Hospital’ sign will be removed from the West elevation. We are proposing to remove two signs and install one. Code allows for one wall sign per building per frontage not exceeding 80 square feet. The proposed wall sign is 123 square feet. The sign as designed at 80 square feet would be difficult to read clearly. The sign as proposed would correct the practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. This use is reasonable. 2) Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The Southdale Hospital is a Regional Medical Center, classified as a Level III Trauma Center, and is a destination for 200,000 plus people per year. Properly landmarking the facility and guiding patients and visitors to their correct destination in a safe and efficient manner is important and can define life or death in Emergency Situations. The sign as proposed would correct the extraordinary circumstances applicable to the use of this property as a Regional Medical Center, but not applicable to other non- medical commercial or residential property in the vicinity. 3) Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The proposed variance to install one wall sign to replace an existing wall sign on one elevation is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. 4) Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new sign will continue to identify the hospital. VARIANCE INFORMATION – QUESTIONS Property: Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 Sign: Wall sign on East Parking Ramp The proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. The proposed wall sign identifies and provides wayfinding for three important entities on this hospital property: Emergency services, the 6363 Building and the East Parking ramp. Code allows for one wall sign per building per frontage not exceeding 50 square feet. The proposed wall sign is 75 square feet. The sign as designed at 50 square feet would be difficult to read clearly given three locations noted on the sign. The sign as proposed would relieve the practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. This use is reasonable. 2) Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The proposed sign not only landmarks the property, but is also directional and needed to properly guide patients, visitors, and medical service drivers to their correct destinations in a safe and efficient manner, especially important in life or death Emergency situations. This sign would not have a direct site line from 65th Street; therefore, as patients turn North into the drive lane, the visibility of this sign is important in confirming their arrival at the correct destination. The increase in sign size is necessary to support character heights that are clearly visible for the elderly, patients under duress, new patients and visitors not familiar with the hospital. The sign as proposed would correct the extraordinary circumstances applicable to the use of this property as a Regional Medical Center, but not applicable to other non-medical commercial or residential properties in the vicinity. 3) Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The proposed variance to install one wall sign on one elevation of the parking ramp is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. 4) Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new sign will provide needed direction to guests and medical service drivers seeking the entrance to Emergency services, the East parking ramp or the 6363 building. VARIANCE INFORMATION – QUESTIONS Property: Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 Sign: Emergency Wall sign on East Parking Ramp The proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. The proposed wall sign provides additional wayfinding for the Emergency center at a point in the drive lane in which the Emergency Center is not yet in view. Code allows for one wall sign per building per frontage not exceeding 50 square feet. The proposed wall sign is within the square foot allowance at 37.5 square feet; however, it would be an additional wall sign on the same frontage as the larger proposed wall sign, when code only allows one per frontage. The sign as proposed would relieve the practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. This use is reasonable. 2) Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The proposed sign provides additional wayfinding for the Emergency Center to properly guide patients, visitors, and medical service drivers to their correct destination in a safe and efficient manner, especially important in life or death Emergency situations. This sign would provide additional confirmation and wayfinding, would be approximately 100 feet back from the larger directional sign, and is needed because the Emergency Center is not yet in view at that point in the drive lane. The sign as proposed would correct the extraordinary circumstances applicable to the use of this property as a Regional Medical Center, but not applicable to other non-medical commercial or residential properties in the vicinity. 3) Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The proposed variance to install one wall sign on one elevation of the parking ramp is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. 4) Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new sign will provide needed additional direction to guests and medical service drivers seeking the entrance to Emergency services. Furnish and Install (1) 4’-2” x 17’-9” LED Face Illuminated Leer Set Aached to (1) 6’-0” x 20’-6” Aluminum Pan Backer A. 3” Deep Aluminum Pan Backer Painted PMS: #137C Gold and White B. 5” Deep Face Illuminated Channel Leers • ‘M’ Logo: - 1” Burgundy Trim Cap - 5” Deep Aluminum Returns - Burgundy - 3/16” #7328 White Acrylic Face with First Surface Trans. Burgundy Vinyl (3630-49) - White LED Illumination • ‘HEALTH FAIRVIEW’ & ‘SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL’ Leers: - 1” Black Trim Cap - 5” Deep Aluminum Returns - Black - 3/16” #7328 White Acrylic Face with First Surface Perf. Black Vinyl (3635-222) - White LED Illumination C. Power Supplies Mounted on Interior of Building for Service D. Aluminum Angle Frame with Titen Wall Anchors For Aachment of Aluminum Pan to Building E. Wall Background Existing North Elevation Leer Set to be Removed Proposed North Elevation PMS: #137C White Finish Colors Black Perf. Film (3635-222) Burgundy Vinyl (3630-49) Night View 123 Square Feet 2. MH - 001.1 - Southdale Hospital 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. 20'-6" 1'-10 5/8" 1'-0 5/8" 6 5/8" 1'-0 5/8" 17'-9" 6'-0"4'-2" A B C D E Existing West Elevation Leer Set to be Removed 3. MH - 001.1 - Southdale Hospital 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. France AveHwy 6 2 N 2 MH - 001.1-2 Southdale Hospital - Emergency 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. 1 2 1 2 Emergency Directional Exit Only PMS: #137C Finish Colors BlackPMS: #202CPMS: #1797Existing East Parking Ramp South Elevation Banners to be Removed Proposed East Parking Ramp South Elevation Furnish and Install (1) 4’-0” x 18’-9“ S/F LED Illuminated Wall Mount Cabinet A. 1 1/2” Retainer Painted Satin Black B. White Flex Face Material with First Surface Translucent Digitally Printed Graphics C. High Intensity White LEDs - Electrical Placement TBV D. Titen Wall Anchors E. Existing Wall 11. MH - 001.1 - Southdale Hospital 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. 75 Square Feet Night View A B D E C 18'-9" 4'-0" 6 7/8" 1 MH - 001.1-2 Southdale Hospital - Emergency 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. Exit Only * Sign 1 - Furnish and Install (1) 2’-6” x 15’-0” S/F LED Illuminated Wall Mount Sign A. 1 1/2” Retainer and Aluminum Cabinet Painted Satin Black B. Flat White Polycarbonate Face with First Surface Translucent Red Vinyl (3630-33) * Existing Banner to be Removed * Sign 2 - Reface, Repaint and Retroﬁt (1) 2’-0” x 12’-0” S/F LED Illuminated Wall Mount Sign C. Sand, Prime and Repaint Existing Cabinet and Retainer Satin Black D. Flat White Polycarbonate Face with First Surface Translucent Red Vinyl (3630-33) Black Vinyl (220-12) * Retroﬁt Existing Cabinet with White LEDs Sign 1 Sign 2 2'-6" 15'-0" 2'-0" 12'-0" 6 7/8" Existing South Elevation of East Ramp Proposed South Elevation of East Ramp A B C D 1 MH - 001.1 - Southdale Hospital 8786 W. 35W Service Drive Blaine, MN 55449 763-432-7447 | www.spectrum-signs.com Customer Approval Date This drawing is the exclusive property of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. It is not to be produced or duplicated without the written consent of Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. Distribution of this drawing for the purpose of constructing the sign by anyone other than Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc., is stricly prohibited. If such an event occurs Spectrum Sign Systems Inc., will be reimbursed $1,000.00 per occurence. 245’-0” 15’-0” South Elevation of East Parking Ramp Date: O c tober 23, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director Item Activity: Subject:P reliminary R ezoning from P I D, P lanned Industrial Dis tric t to P UD, P lanned Unit Development and P reliminary Development P lan at 4100 West 76th S treet for Aeon Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: R ecommend the C ity C ouncil approve the P reliminary R ezoning and P reliminary D evelopment P lan, subject to the findings and conditions in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he P lanning Commission is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to tear down the existing vacant 17,235 square foot recording studio on the site and build a 4-story, 70 unit affordable housing project. T he project would contain underground and surface parking stalls. T his development would be 100% affordable and serve primarily families. O ver half of the units would be affordable at 50% Area Median Income (AM I), making it affordable to a family of 4 with an annual income at or below $50,000. T he remaining units will be at or below 60% AM I. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Engineering Memo Fire Mars hal & Building Official Memo Proposed Plans Applicant Narrative Building Elevation Traffic and Parking Study Traffic and Parking Appendices Photographs of Exis ting Site Site Location Sketch Plan Memo from Architecture Field Office (AFO) Ordinance Amendment - PUD-19 Pages from the Des ign Experience Guidelines Sustainability Questionnaire October 23, 2019 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Preliminary Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Development Plan at 4100 West 76th Street for Aeon Information / Background: The Planning Commission is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to tear down the existing vacant 17,235 square foot recording studio at 4100 West 76th Street and build a 4-story, 70 unit affordable housing project. The project would contain underground and surface parking stalls. This development would be 100% affordable and serve primarily families. Over half of the units would be affordable at 50% Area Median Income (AMI), making it affordable to a family of 4 with an annual income at or below $50,000. The remaining units will be at or below 60% AMI. In November of 2018, the City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density on this site to allow 40 units per acre. That amendment was approved by the Met Council. At that time a sketch plan review was considered for the project. Changes that have occurred to the site plan include establishing an18-foot easement along the east lot line for the north-south ped/bike path; enhanced landscaping; opportunity for public art along the sidewalks; and number of units reduced from 80 to 70. The property is 2 acres in size. This site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as OR, Office Residential, with a maximum density of 40 units per acre. (See portions of the Small Area Plan attached.) The proposed density is 35 units per acre, therefore, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has designed the site plan using the Southdale Design Experience Guidelines and Southdale District Plan. (See the attached applicant narrative.) Mic Johnson, AFO, has reviewed the proposed plans and has suggested some revisions to the site plan that would rearrange the proposed elements of the plan, including the building, parking area and driveway. (See the AFO review memo attached.) STAFF REPORT Page 2 The site is currently zoned PID, Planned Industrial District. The request requires the following: 1. A Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; and 2. Preliminary Development Plan. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: High Density Residential Housing; Zoned Planned Residential District 4, and guided Office Residential. Easterly: Office; Zoned PID, Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential. Southerly: LA Fitness; Zoned PID, Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential. Westerly: Office; Zoned PID, Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 2 acres in size, is relatively flat and contains a vacant recording studio. Planning Guide Plan designation: OR, Office Residential (10-40 units per acre) Zoning: PID, Planned Industrial District PUD Rezoning The applicant is requesting a rezoning of this site to PUD, Planned Unit Development District to allow affordable housing on the site and flexibility in setbacks, parking, and floor area ratio. (See attached draft PUD Ordinance.) Within a PUD District, the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent of the PUD. Below is a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed new building would comply with the existing PID Standards on the lot. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Compliance Table City Standard (PID) Proposed Lot line Building Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – east Side – west Rear Parking Lot Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – west 50 feet 50 feet 50 feet 50 feet 20 feet 5 feet 75 feet 29 feet* 15 feet* 80 feet 20 feet 15 feet Building Height 4-stories & 48 feet 4 stories and 42 feet Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 1.3* Parking 1.25 spaces enclosed (100 required) and .75 spaces exposed (60 required) per dwelling unit 64 spaces enclosed* 12 surface (12 proof of parking stalls)* = 88 total *Flexibility Requested through the PUD Per Chapter 36 of the City Code the following are the regulations for a PUD: 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; STAFF REPORT Page 4 d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. The project would be a vast improvement over the existing conditions of the site; it would improve pedestrian movement in the area and provide a portion of the future north-south bike and pedestrian path along the east lot line from the Southdale Design Experience Guidelines. (See attached.) Most notably, the project provides 70 units or 100% of the development for affordable housing. The PUD Ordinance is the tool that allows the City to maintain affordable housing on the site. 2. Applicability/Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in this Title shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which suggests this site for office and residential uses. The Zoning Ordinance amendment (PUD Rezoning), lists the uses that would be allowed on this site. Housing is an allowed use in the Greater Southdale District Plan. Spack Consulting did a parking and traffic analysis as part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The study concludes that there would be minimal impact to the roads, and the proposed parking would support the development. (See the attached traffic and parking study.) The study contemplated 80 units, and the proposal is for 70 units. The number of parking stalls proposed is the same as previously proposed despite the decrease in the number of units. No roadway improvements would be required. b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all STAFF REPORT Page 5 the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The proposal would not include a mixture of land uses. However, it would include affordable housing. The project would help the City meet its affordable housing goals established with the Metropolitan Council of 1,220 new affordable housing units by the year 2030. ii. any PUD which involves a single land use type or housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; As mentioned above, the proposed uses would be for housing that is all affordable. Providing affordable housing and sustainable development are goals within the Comprehensive Plan that this project would accomplish. Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives include: • Encourage the development and maintenance of a range of housing options affordable to residents at all income levels and life stages. • Support the development of a wide range of housing options to meet the diverse needs and preferences of the current and future Edina community. • A pedestrian-friendly environment. • Improve connectivity, both externally & internally. • Ensure that public realm corridor design is contextual, respectful of community character, supportive of commercial and mixed-use development, promoting community identity and orientation, and creating high quality experiences for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. • Support continued livability and high quality of life for all city residents by balancing goals and priorities for development, especially as the community responds to changes over time. • Encourage infill and redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure, complement community context and character, and respond to needs at all stages of life. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and The proposed building density would be 35 units per acre and consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan and the Greater Southdale Area Study. The site has adequate utilities capacity; would provide affordable housing; and would take advantage of Metro Transit Availability. Staff believes the density is appropriate for this site. iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively STAFF REPORT Page 6 appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1 above. The proposed project does require variances from the already established standards in the PID District. Flexibility is requested regarding setbacks, FAR and parking spaces. For the reasons stated above, staff believes the purpose and intend of the PUD Ordinance is met; most importantly the provision of 70 affordable housing units. Access/Site Circulation Vehicular access to the site would be from 76th Street. Per the Southdale Design Experience Guidelines, a north-south sidewalk is proposed in this area. (See Attached) The applicant is proposing to construct it along the east lot line and dedicate an 18-foot wide easement. This would be the first segment of this trail. A Boulevard sidewalk would be constructed along 76th. Traffic & Parking Study Spack Consulting did a parking and traffic analysis as part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The study concludes that there would be minimal impact to the roads, and the proposed parking would support the development. (See the attached traffic and parking study.) The study contemplated 80 units, and the proposal is for 70 units. The number of parking stalls proposed is the same as previously proposed. No roadway improvements would be required. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, the applicant is required to have 31 over story trees and a full complement of under story shrubs. The applicant is proposing 39 existing and proposed over story trees. They would include a mixture of Maple, Linden, Spruce, Pine and Crabapple. A full complement of understory landscaping is proposed around the buildings. Living Streets/Multi-Modal Consideration Sec. 36-1274. - Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the City and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (1) It is the policy of the City to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the City. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the City's sidewalk and trail plan; and STAFF REPORT Page 7 b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. As mentioned above a bike and pedestrian path would be constructed along 76th and along the east lot line to provide the first segment of a north walk sidewalk system. An 18-foot easement would be provided over the north-south trail. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be generally acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in the attached review memo. Drainage would be directed to the south to an underground vault beneath the parking field. (See attached grading plan.) A Site Improvement Performance Agreement would be required for the construction of the proposed sidewalks, utilities and any other public improvements. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The applicant is proposing the building to be made of norman face brick, burnished block, fiber cement panels, and metal panels. (See attached renderings.) STAFF REPORT Page 8 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed Rezoning to PUD reasonable to develop this site? Yes. The proposed plans are reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposal is consistent with the Greater Southdale District Plan. Elements of the Design Experience Guidelines have been address. Significant public realm is proposed including the bike/pedestrian sidewalk along the east lot line to move people through the site, the boulevard sidewalk along 76th and a public plaza in front with an opportunity to provide public art; potentially a sculpture that would pay homage to the previous Flyte Time Studio that was located on the site. 2. The proposed project with 70 units, would help the City meet its affordable housing goals established with the Metropolitan Council of 1,220 new affordable housing units by the year 2030. 3. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. In summary the PUD zoning would: a. Provide 70 units of affordable housing. b. Provide below grade parking. c. Enhanced landscaping and green space. d. Provide significant public realm including a north-south sidewalk along the east lot line and along 76th Street; and a plaza along 76th Street with connections to the sidewalks. e. Ensures that the buildings proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. f. Improved pedestrian connections. 4. Project could be a catalyst for further development in this area, and the development of the north-south bike/pedestrian path. 5. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Spack Associates conducted a traffic impact study and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and the proposed parking. 6. The proposal would be a vast improvement over the existing vacant structure on the site. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. STAFF REPORT Page 9 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. Affordable housing is identified as a need in the Comprehensive Plan; and the proposed amendment would assist the City in meeting its established affordable housing goal with the Met Council of providing 1,220 new affordable housing units by the year 2030. This project would include 70 new affordable housing units toward that goal. 2. The proposed land use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria for a PUD. 3. The proposed density of 35 units per acre is reasonable, and within the density range suggested in the Comprehensive Plan of between 10-40 units per acre. 4. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Spack Associates conducted a traffic impact study and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and the proposed parking. 5. Project would meet the following additional Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives: a) Encourage the development and maintenance of a range of housing options affordable to residents at all income levels and life stages. b) Support the development of a wide range of housing options to meet the diverse needs and preferences of the current and future Edina community. c) A pedestrian-friendly environment. d) Improve connectivity, both externally & internally. e) Ensure that public realm corridor design is contextual, respectful of community character, supportive of commercial and mixed-use development, promoting community identity and orientation, and creating high quality experiences for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. f) Support continued livability and high quality of life for all city residents by balancing goals and priorities for development, especially as the community responds to changes over time. g) Encourage infill and redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure, complement community context and character, and respond to needs at all stages of life. Preliminary approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final Development Plan must be generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plans dated August 30, 2019. 2. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s memo dated October 15, 2019. 3. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the fire marshal and building official memo dated October 2, 2019. STAFF REPORT Page 10 4. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Final Rezoning is subject to approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment establishing the PUD-19, Planned Unit Development-19 District on this site. 7. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit prior to issuance of a building permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 8. A Site Improvement Performance Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 9. Compliance with the Spack Traffic Study recommendations. 10. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of the first building permit. 11. Dedication of the 18-foot easement over the pedestrian sidewalk prior to certificate of occupancy for the building. 12. The north-south bike/pedestrian path shall be 8 feet wide. 13. Consideration of the changes recommended by Mic Johnson, AFO for inclusion in the Final Development Plans. 14. Consideration of the sustainability recommendations of the City’s sustainability manager prior to Final Development Plan. Deadline for a city decision: December 17, 2019 DATE: TO: October 15, 2019 Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Zuleyka Marquez, Graduate Engineer Chad Milner, Director of Engineering RE: 4100 West 76th Street – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, and storm water. Plans reviewed were dated 8/30/2019. Review Comment Required For General 1. Deliver as-built records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. Certificate of Occupancy Survey 2. An existing and proposed site condition survey is required. Grading/Building Permit 2.1 Show all existing and proposed public and private easements. Grading/Building Permit 2.2 Public utility easements completed and executed. 2.3 Provide public sidewalk easement for east-west sidewalk adjacent to 76th Street Certificate of Occupancy Living Streets 3. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 4. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit 5. Design bike path with 8’ width; provide 15’ easement for future expansion Grading/Building Permit Traffic and Street 6. Curb cut permit may be required if entrance is reconstructed. Prior to Reconstructing Entrance 7. Road patching shall conform to Edina Standard Plates 540-545. Certificate of Occupancy 8. Traffic and construction staging plans required. Grading/Building Permit 9. Work with Metro Transit to determine appropriate location of adjacent transit stop and associated concrete pad Grading/Building Permit 10. Consider upgraded amenities at adjacent transit stop on 76th Street 11. Indicate location, style and spacing of on-site bicycle rack (consider following Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ Bicycle Parking Guidelines) Grading/Building Permit 12. Consider indoor bicycle storage facilities to discourage use of single-occupancy vehicles Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations. Grading/Building Permit 14. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 15. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 16. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with public works. Prior to Starting Utility Work 16.1 Meter required for building service line and combined lines. No meter required for fire only service line. Grading/Building Permit 16.2 Public works to determine acceptable installation methods. Grading/Building Permit 17. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. Utility Permit 18. A SAC determination will be required by the Metropolitan Council. The SAC determination will be used by the city to calculate sewer and water connection charges Grading/Building Permit 19. Single connection from main for fire and domestic, split after main connection unless required based on building heights, watermain pressure or watermain flows. Coordination with the Engineering, Public Works and Fire Departments. Grading/Building Permit Storm Water Utility 20. Provide geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 21. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and state construction site permit requirements. Grading/Building Permit 22. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading/Building Permit Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 23. A SWPPP consistent with the state general construction site stormwater permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Constructability and Safety 24. Construction staging, traffic control, and pedestrian access plans will be required. Grading/Building Permit Other Agency Coordination 25. Copies of Hennepin County, MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. Grading/Building Permit 26. Nine Mile Creek Watershed Districts permit is required. Grading/Building Permit October 2, 2019 Cary Teague, Community Development Director David Fisher, Chief Building Official, Rick Hammerschmidt, Fire Marshal Proposed Aeon rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review to build a 70 unit, 4-story affordable housing apartment at 4100 West 76th Street. Information / Background: This is a new 4-story, 70-unit, affordable apartment building with one level of underground parking. - Verify the building address numbers for identification for the site. - All new R-2 apartment buildings are required to have a fire sprinkler system installed to meet NFPA. - NFPA 72 fire alarm systems are required per the Building and Fire Code. - All new buildings are required to meet the State building code for accessibility. Verify meet required number of accessible parking space and access isles in the underground parking. - Verify there is adequate support for the ladder fire trucks that have an 80,000 point load. - Verify there is a fire hydrant within 300 feet. If a new water line is installed, the City policy is to provide a hydrant within 100 feet. - Verify there is adequate Fire Department access. - All retaining walls over 4-feet in height are required to be designed by a Minnesota licensed P.E. - Meet with City staff for the 30, 60, & 90 percent development for construction plans. - A complete building code analysis will be required with the building plans. CONTACTS NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: DEVELOPER/CLIENT 612.746.0537 AGOULD@AEON.ORG 901 N 3RD STREET, SUITE 150 MINNEAPOLIS, MN AEON AUBRIE GOULD NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: CONTRACTOR 651.225.1105 MHENNESSEY@FLANNERYCONSTRUCTION.COM 1375 ST. ANTHONY AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN FLANNERY CONSTRUCTION MARK HENNESSEY NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: ARCHITECT 612.455.3100 MBARNETT@URBAN-WORKS.COM 901 N 3RD ST. SUITE 145 MINNEAPOLIS, MN URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC MARY BARNETT NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: CIVIL ENGINEER 651.643.0453 TOM.LINCOLN@KIMLEY-HORN.COM LAURA.CLARENS@KIMLEY-HORN.COM 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN KIMLEY-HORN TOM LINCOLN LAURA CLARENS NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 612.326.9512 CHUCK.STEWART@KIMLEY-HORN.COM 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN KIMLEY-HORN CHUCK STEWART NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 763.843.0474 JTIMM@BKBM.COM 6120 EARLE BROWN DRIVE, SUITE 700 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55430 BKBM ENGINEERS JOHN TIMM NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: MECHANICAL ENGINEER 763.585.6742 KURTSM@STEENENG.COM 5430 DOUGLAS DRIVE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55429-3106 STEEN ENGINEERING INC. KURT SMITH NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: PLUMBING ENGINEER 763.585.6742 5430 DOUGLAS DRIVE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55429-3106 STEEN ENGINEERING INC.NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: ELECTRAICAL ENGINEER 763.585.6742 STEVEY@STEENENG.COM 5430 DOUGLAS DRIVE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55429-3106 STEEN ENGINEERING INC. STEVE YOUNGS NAME: CONTACT: ADDRESS: PHONE No.: EMAIL: INTERIOR DESIGNER 612.455.3100 SDOHERTY@URBAN-WORKS.COM 901 N 3RD ST. SUITE 145 MINNEAPOLIS, MN URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC SARAH DOHERTY GENERAL NOTES 1.DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. 2.SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL VISIT THE JOB SITE AND SHALL REVIEW THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS TO FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE SCOPE OF THE WORK PRIOR COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REPORTED TO GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR CLARIFICATION. N SITE EDINA, MN FRANCE AVE SW 76TH ST H W Y 4 9 4 PENN AVE S35WHWY 100NORTH ROOM NAME ROOM NAME # REV MATL FIN BASE MOULD SUBFLR FLRFIN NO. SHT. REF. NO. SHT. REF. 24 1 SHT# 3 NO. SHT. REF. - - - - SYMBOLS Section identification SECTION MARKER Cut construction Sheet where elevation appears Elevation identification ELEVATION MARKER Sheet where section appears Cut construction Detail identification Sheet where detail appears DETAIL MARKER Detail identification PRIMARY ELEVATION MARKER Sheet where detail appears Isolates detail area DETAIL MARKER SECONDARY ELEVATION MARKER REVISION MARKER (top of parapet, sill, etc.) DOOR MARKER NORTH MARKER KEYNOTE ROOM TAG CEILING TAG Wall Base Wall Material Wall Finish Subfloor Material Floor Finish Wall Moulding WALL FINISH TAG FLOOR FINISH TAG WINDOW MARKER DOOR# MATERIAL KEYNOTE WDW KEY KEY KEY/ xxx xxx Subfloor Material 1 FLOOR TRANSITION TAG Subfloor Material 2 HEIGHT - MAT'L CRPADCARD READER TAG AUTOMATIC DOOR OPERATOR BUTTON © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:41:49 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB TITLE SHEET G0014100 APARTMENTSKEY PLAN VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 4100 APARTMENTS August 30, 2019 LAND USE APPLICATION STALL TYPE SUBLEVEL PARKING SURFACE PARKING PROOF OF PARKING TOTAL Compact Parking Stall 2 0 0 Double HC Parking Stall 2 0 0 HC Single Parking Stall 0 1 0 Standard Parking Stall 60 11 12 TOTAL STALL COUNT 64 12 12 PARKING STALLS UNIT TYPE LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 1BR - B 5 3 3 3 1BR - C 0 1 1 1 2BR - B 2 2 2 2 2BR - C 4 4 4 4 2BR - D 1 1 1 1 2BR - E 1 1 1 1 2BR - F 0 1 1 1 3BR - B 3 4 4 4 3BR - C 0 1 1 1 TOTAL COUNT 16 18 18 18 UNIT COUNTAREA SUMMARY *REFER TO SITE PLAN AL100 FOR PROOF OF PARKING AREA, 12 STALLS 88 2 2 1 83 Area Schedule (Code Plan Information) Level Name Area SUBLEVEL 1 GROUP S2 22,505 SF 22,505 SF LEVEL 1 GROUP R2 22,332 SF 22,332 SF LEVEL 2 GROUP R2 22,308 SF 22,308 SF LEVEL 3 GROUP R2 22,308 SF 22,308 SF LEVEL 4 GROUP R2 22,308 SF 22,308 SF 111,760 SF © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 12:37:44 PMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB SHEET INDEX G0024100 APARTMENTSSHEET INDEX CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS - x.xx.20xxDESIGN DEVELOPMENT- x.xx.20xxSCHEMATIC DESIGN - 8.30.2019LAND USE - 8.30.2019CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS - x.xx.20xxDESIGN DEVELOPMENT- x.xx.20xxSCHEMATIC DESIGN - 8.30.2019LAND USE - 8.30.2019CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS - x.xx.20xxDESIGN DEVELOPMENT- x.xx.20xxSCHEMATIC DESIGN - 8.30.2019LAND USE - 8.30.2019CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS - x.xx.20xxDESIGN DEVELOPMENT- x.xx.20xxSCHEMATIC DESIGN - 8.30.2019LAND USE - 8.30.2019● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ARCHITECTURAL / CIVIL / LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL / CIVIL / LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX (CONT.)STRUCTURAL SHEET INDEX MECHANICAL/PLUMBING/ELECTRICAL SHEET INDEX G001 TITLE SHEET G002 SHEET INDEX G003 BUILDING SYSTEMS R000 LIFE SAFETY ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION R001 LIFE SAFETY REFERENCE PLAN R101 LIFE SAFETY REFERENCE PLAN R102 LIFE SAFETY REFERENCE PLAN R901 CODE REQUIRED SIGNAGE SURVEY ALTA SURVEY C000 COVER SHEET C100 GENERAL NOTES C200 DEMO PLAN C300 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 1 C301 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 2 C302 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS C400 SITE PLAN C500 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C501 STORMWATER DETAILS C600 UTILITY PLAN C700 CIVIL DETAILS C701 CIVIL DETAILS C702 CIVIL DETAILS AL101 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN L100 LANDSCAPE PLAN L101 LANDSCAPE DETAILS A001.0 SUBLEVEL 1 - OVERALL PLAN A101.0 LEVEL 1 PLAN - OVERALL A102.0 LEVEL 2 PLAN - OVERALL A103.0 LEVEL 3 PLAN - OVERALL A104.0 LEVEL 4 PLAN - OVERALL A151 ENLARGED UNIT PLANS A152 ENLARGED UNIT PLANS A153 ENLARGED UNIT PLANS A171 ENLARGED COMMON AREA PLANS A172 ENLARGED COMMON AREA PLANS A201 ROOF PLAN - OVERALL A291 ROOF DETAILS A301 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A302 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A303 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A304 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A305 BUILDING ENTRY A401 BUILDING SECTIONS A495 SECTION DETAILS A691 WINDOW DETAILS A780 LEVEL 1 FURNITURE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY A781 LEVEL 2 FURNITURE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY A782 LEVEL 3 FURNITURE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY A783 LEVEL 4 FURNITURE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY A784 ENLARGED FURNITURE PLANS - FOR REFERENCE ONLY 3 13 3 6 9 191 3 VICINITY MAP LEGEND FOUND IRON PIPE AUTO SPRINKLER BOLLARD LIGHT POLE SIGN HANDICAP PARKING STALL BUILDING SETBACK LINE TELEPHONE BOX TELEVISION BOX OVERHEAD UTILITY UNDERGROUND TELEVISION TRANSFORMER GUY WIRE POWER POLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC GAS METER GAS VALVE GATE VALVE HYDRANT SOIL BORING FENCE CATCH BASIN BITUMINOUS SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE VAULT DRAWN BY DATE REVISIONS 0FH 100101 A. 1011 TDEOH A IWHP CAD FILE 4P.GZJ PROJECT NO. 400 FILE NO. 1104 SHEET 1 OF 1 1. The bearing system is based on the South line of Tract J, RLS No. 1129, which is assumed to bear North 89 degrees 52 minutes 29 seconds West. 2. Field work was completed on 09/27/2018. SURVEY NOTES Description from title commitment: Tract J, Registered Land Survey No. 1129, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Property Referencing Title Commitment No. 54403 First Supplemental, issued 09/19/2018, dated 09/04/2018, that Commercial Partners Title, LLC, as agent for Chicago Title Insurance Company, has provided us, the following comments on easements etc., that the property is subject to in Schedule B, Part II thereof using the same numbering system as in said Schedule B, Part II. Items 1-8, and 11-17 are not Survey related items and therefor are not listed below. 9. Easement for transmission lines, in favor of Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, as created in documents dated January 7, 1965, filed January 11, 1965, as Document No. 797300. The easement is shown on the survey. 10. Easement for transmission lines, in favor of Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, as created in documents dated January 23, 1978, filed January 27, 1978, as Document No. 1257909. The easement is shown on the survey. SURVEYED PROPERTY 1. Monuments have been placed at all corners of the boundary of the property, unless already marked or referenced by existing monuments or witnesses in close proximity to the corner, as shown on the survey. 2. The subject property address is 4100 76th Street West, and its property identification number is 31.028.24.41.0010. 3. The subject property lies within Flood Plain Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood plain ) per Federal Insurance Rate Map No. 27053C0452F dated 11/04/2016. 4. The gross area of the surveyed property is 2.00 Acres or 87,120 Square Feet. 5. The vertical datum is NAVD88. Benchmark #1 Top nut of hydrant at southeast corner of property. Elevation: 833.58 6. A zoning report or letter has not been provided to the surveyor. a) Per City of Edina Zoning Map, the current zoning classification of the surveyed property is PID (Planned Industrial District). Building Setbacks Front: 50 ft. Max. Bldg. Height: 48 ft or 4 stories Rear: 50 ft. Max. Floor Space Area Ratio: 0.5 Side: 20 ft. b) Setback requirements are shown on the survey. 7. a) The building and exterior dimensions of the outside wall at ground level are shown on the survey. It may not be the foundation wall. b) Square footage of the existing building is shown on the survey. c) Measured height of the the building above grade is shown on the survey. 8. Substantial features observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork are shown on the survey. 9. The parking areas and striping on the surveyed property are shown. There are 2 handicap parking stalls and there are 66 regular parking stalls for a total of 68 parking stalls. 11. Underground utilities are shown per: Gopher State One Call, Ticket No. 182632491. Survey prepared by Harry S. Johnson, Inc. dated March 12, 2004. A Gopher State One Call (GSOC) request was placed on 09/20/2018 for utility locates on this site. Source information from plans and markings has been combined with observed evidence of utilities to to develop a view of underground utilities. However, lacking excavation, the exact location of underground features cannot be accurately, completely, and reliably depicted. In addition, some utility locate requests from surveyors may be ignored or result in an incomplete response. The surveyor has compiled the markings made on the ground, the maps provided, and the observed evidence to show utilities hereon. Where additional or more detailed information is required, the client is advised that excavation and/or a private utility locate request may be necessary. Pursuant to MS 216.D contact Gopher State One Call at 651-454-0002 prior to any excavation. 13. The names, address and property identification numbers of adjoining owners according to current public records are shown on the survey. 16. There is no evidence of current earth moving work, building construction or building additions. 17. There are no proposed changes in street right of way lines, per City of Edina website. There is no observed evidence of recent street or sidewalk construction or repairs. 18. No wetland delineation markers were observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork. 19. Plottable offsite easements disclosed in documents provided to the surveyor are shown on the survey. "TABLE A" NOTES To Aeon; Land Bank Twin Cities, Inc.; LB 4100 WEST 76 LLC; Bridgewater Bank; Commercial Partners Title, LLC; and Chicago Title Insurance Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(a), 6(b), 7(a), 7(b)(1), 7(c), 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 of Table A thereof. The fieldwork was completed on September 27, 2018. Date of Plat or Map: October 1, 2018 James R. Hill, Inc. Marcus F. Hampton, Land Surveyor, MN License No. 47481 CERTIFICATION 4100 76TH STREET WESTEDINA 0INNESOTAALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYFORAEON01 NORTH RD STREET S8ITE 10 0INNEAPOLIS 0N 40100 WEST C.R. 4 S8ITE 10 B8RNSVILLE 0N 7PHONE .0.6044 PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.NOT TO SCALE PARKING STALL COUNT# 100 SITE 77TH ST W FRANCE AVE S76TH ST W PARKLAWN AVE 494 * B. 1101 8WLOLW\ IQIR C. 0701 LDQGVFDSLQJTUHHV UNDERGROUND SANITARY UNDERGROUND STORM UNDERGROUND WATER ELECTRIC MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE LANDSCAPE MATERIAL SHRUB DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE W 76TH ST PARKLAWN AVE FRANCE AVE© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C0-COVER SHEET.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:04pmNORTH VICINITY N.T.S. SITE EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM THAT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR THE SITE MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS INCLUDED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. IF REPRODUCED, THE SCALES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED ON A (42.00 x 30.00 INCHES) SHEET. 3. ALL NECESSARY INSPECTIONS AND/OR CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY CODES AND/OR UTILITY SERVICES COMPANIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO ANNOUNCED BUILDING POSSESSION AND THE FINAL CONNECTION OF SERVICES. 4. ALL GENERAL CONTRACTOR WORK TO BE COMPLETED (EARTHWORK, FINAL UTILITIES, AND FINAL GRADING) BY THE MILESTONE DATE IN PROJECT DOCUMENTS. NOTES: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CHARLES R. STEWART 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN 55114 TELEPHONE (651) 645-4197 PROJECT TEAM: SURVEYOR MARCUS F. HAMPTON JAMES J. HILL, INC. 2500 WEST C.R. 42, SUITE 120 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 TELEPHONE: (952) 890-6044 ENGINEER KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. PREPARED BY: THOMAS J. LINCOLN 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100 ST. PAUL, MN 55114 TELEPHONE (651) 645-4197 OWNER / DEVELOPER AEON 901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 150 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 TELEPHONE: (612) 341-3148 AEON EDINA SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 28N, RANGE 24W FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS Know what'sbelow. before you dig.Call ARCHITECT URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE, LLC MARY BARNETT 901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 TELEPHONE: (612) 455-3100 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER STEVEN D. GERBER NORTHERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC 6160 CARMEN AVE. EAST INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, MN 55076 TELEPHONE: (651) 389-4191 DRAWING INDEX SHEET NO.SHEET TITLE C000 COVER SHEET C100 GENERAL NOTES C200 DEMO PLAN C300 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 1 C301 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 2 C302 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS C400 SITE PLAN C500 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C501 STORMWATER DETAILS C600 UTILITY PLAN C700 CIVIL DETAILS C701 CIVIL DETAILS C702 CIVIL DETAILS L100 LANDSCAPE PLAN L101 LANDSCAPE DETAILS COVER SHEET C000 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C1-GENERAL NOTES.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:04pmGENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. THE CONTRACTOR AND SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE MN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" (LATEST EDITION) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENTS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK, AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM AS APPLICABLE TO THESE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FURNISHING ALL MATERIAL AND LABOR TO CONSTRUCT THE FACILITY AS SHOWN AND DESCRIBED IN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE APPROVING AUTHORITIES, SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAR AND GRUB ALL AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, REMOVING TREES, STUMPS, ROOTS, MUCK, EXISTING PAVEMENT AND ALL OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIAL. 3. THE EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS QUALITY LEVEL "D" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ACSE 38/02, ENTITLED STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF SUBSURFACE QUALITY DATA BY THE FHA. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE LOCATED ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER AT THE TIME OF THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND HAVE NOT BEEN INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED BY THE OWNER OR THE ENGINEER. GUARANTEE IS NOT MADE THAT ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN OR THAT THE LOCATION OF THOSE SHOWN ARE ENTIRELY ACCURATE. FINDING THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF ANY EXISTING UTILITIES IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY AND SHALL BE DONE BEFORE COMMENCING ANY WORK IN THE VICINITY. FURTHERMORE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES DUE TO THE CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. THE OWNER OR ENGINEER WILL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES SUSTAINED OR COST INCURRED BECAUSE OF THE OPERATIONS IN THE VICINITY OF EXISTING UTILITIES OR STRUCTURES, NOR FOR TEMPORARY BRACING AND SHORING OF SAME. IF IT IS NECESSARY TO SHORE, BRACE, SWING OR RELOCATE A UTILITY, THE UTILITY COMPANY OR DEPARTMENT AFFECTED SHALL BE CONTACTED AND THEIR PERMISSION OBTAINED REGARDING THE METHOD TO USE FOR SUCH WORK. 4. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES WHICH MAY HAVE BURIED OR AERIAL UTILITIES WITHIN OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION AREA BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 48 HOURS MINIMUM NOTICE TO ALL UTILITY COMPANIES PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND BONDS IF REQUIRED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES ONE COPY OF THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS INCLUDING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND COPIES OF ANY REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION PERMITS. 7. ANY DISCREPANCIES ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OWNER AND ENGINEER BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. NO FIELD CHANGES OR DEVIATIONS FROM DESIGN ARE TO BE MADE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE OWNER AND NOTIFICATION TO THE ENGINEER. 8. ALL COPIES OF COMPACTION, CONCRETE AND OTHER REQUIRED TEST RESULTS ARE TO BE SENT TO THE OWNER DIRECTLY FROM THE TESTING AGENCY. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DOCUMENTING AND MAINTAINING AS-BUILT INFORMATION WHICH SHALL BE RECORDED AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES OR AT THE COMPLETION OF APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION INTERVALS AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AS-BUILT DRAWINGS TO THE OWNER FOR THE PURPOSE OF CERTIFICATION TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES AS REQUIRED. ALL AS-BUILT DATA SHALL BE COLLECTED BY A STATE OF MN PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR WHOSE SERVICES ARE ENGAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 10. ANY WELLS DISCOVERED ON SITE THAT WILL HAVE NO USE MUST BE PLUGGED BY A LICENSED WELL DRILLING CONTRACTOR IN A MANNER APPROVED BY ALL JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ANY WELL ABANDONMENT PERMITS REQUIRED. 11. ANY WELL DISCOVERED DURING EARTH MOVING OR EXCAVATION SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE APPROPRIATE JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER DISCOVERY IS MADE. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THAT THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH ANY KNOWN EXISTING OR OTHER PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. IF ANY CONFLICTS ARE DISCOVERED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PORTION OF THE SITE WORK THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED. FAILURE TO NOTIFY OWNER OF AN IDENTIFIABLE CONFLICT PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH INSTALLATION RELIEVES OWNER OF ANY OBLIGATION TO PAY FOR A RELATED CHANGE ORDER. 13. SHOULD CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTER ANY DEBRIS LADEN SOIL, STRUCTURES NOT IDENTIFIED IN THE DOCUMENTS, OR OTHER SOURCE OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION, THEY SHALL IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE ENGINEER AND OWNER. TYPICAL OWNER/ENGINEER OBSERVATIONS CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER AND/OR ENGINEER 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES: - PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING, SUBGRADE PREPARATION, BASE INSTALLATION ASPHALT INSTALLATION, UNDERGROUND PIPING AND UTILITIES INSTALLATION, INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES, CHECK VALVES, HYDRANTS, METERS, ETC., SIDEWALK INSTALLATION, CONNECTIONS TO WATER AND SEWER MAINS, TESTS OF UTILITIES 3RD PARTY TEST REPORTS REQ'D TEST REPORTS REQUIRED FOR CLOSE OUT INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: - DENSITY TEST REPORTS - BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTS OF WATER SYSTEM - PRESSURE TEST OF WATER/SEWER - LEAK TESTS ON SEWER SYSTEM AND GREASE TRAPS - ANY OTHER TESTING REQUIRED BY THE AGENCY/MUNICIPALITY WATER STORM SEWER & SANITARY SEWER NOTES 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT GRAVITY SEWER LATERALS, MANHOLES, GRAVITY SEWER LINES, AND DOMESTIC WATER AND FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, MACHINERY, TOOLS, MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND LABOR NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE WORK IN FULL AND COMPLETE ACCORDANCE WITH THE SHOWN, DESCRIBED AND REASONABLY INTENDED REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. IN THE EVENT THAT THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND THE JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT, THE MOST STRINGENT SHALL GOVERN. 2. ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR UTILITY LOCATION AND COORDINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NOTES CONTAINED IN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SECTION OF THIS SHEET. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL DISTURBED VEGETATION IN KIND, UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. 4. DEFLECTION OF PIPE JOINTS AND CURVATURE OF PIPE SHALL NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. SECURELY CLOSE ALL OPEN ENDS OF PIPE AND FITTINGS WITH A WATERTIGHT PLUG WHEN WORK IS NOT IN PROGRESS. THE INTERIOR OF ALL PIPES SHALL BE CLEAN AND JOINT SURFACES WIPED CLEAN AND DRY AFTER THE PIPE HAS BEEN LOWERED INTO THE TRENCH. VALVES SHALL BE PLUMB AND LOCATED ACCORDING TO THE PLANS. 5. ALL PIPE AND FITTINGS SHALL BE CAREFULLY STORED FOLLOWING MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THE COATING OR LINING IN ANY D.I. PIPE FITTINGS. ANY PIPE OR FITTING WHICH IS DAMAGED OR WHICH HAS FLAWS OR IMPERFECTIONS WHICH, IN THE OPINION OF THE ENGINEER OR OWNER, RENDERS IT UNFIT FOR USE, SHALL NOT BE USED. ANY PIPE NOT SATISFACTORY FOR USE SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED AND IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM THE JOB SITE, AND SHALL BE REPLACED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 6. WATER FOR FIRE FIGHTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO COMBUSTIBLES BEING BROUGHT ON SITE. 7. ALL UTILITY AND STORM DRAIN TRENCHES LOCATED UNDER AREAS TO RECEIVE PAVING SHALL BE COMPLETELY BACK FILLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNING JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY'S SPECIFICATIONS. IN THE EVENT THAT THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND THE JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT, THE MOST STRINGENT SHALL GOVERN. 8. UNDERGROUND LINES SHALL BE SURVEYED BY A STATE OF MN PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR PRIOR TO BACK FILLING. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM, AT HIS OWN EXPENSE, ANY AND ALL TESTS REQUIRED BY THE SPECIFICATIONS AND/OR ANY AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION. THESE TESTS MAY INCLUDE, BUT MAY NOT BE LIMITED TO, INFILTRATION AND EXFILTRATION, TELEVISION INSPECTION AND A MANDREL TEST ON GRAVITY SEWER. A COPY OF THE TEST RESULTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE UTILITY PROVIDER, OWNER AND JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY AS REQUIRED. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOR A MINIMUM HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE OF 10' AND A VERTICAL CLEARANCE OF 18" BETWEEN WATER AND SANITARY SEWER MANHOLES AND LINES. 11. IF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES TO REMAIN ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS NECESSARY TO RETURN IT TO EXISTING CONDITIONS OR BETTER. 12. ALL STORM PIPE ENTERING STRUCTURES SHALL BE GROUTED TO ASSURE CONNECTION AT STRUCTURE IS WATERTIGHT UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED BY CITY AND STATE DESIGN STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 13. UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN CITY AND STATE DESIGN STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, ALL STORM SEWER MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE FLUSH WITH PAVEMENT, AND SHALL HAVE TRAFFIC BEARING RING & COVERS. MANHOLES IN UNPAVED AREAS SHALL BE 6" ABOVE FINISH GRADE. LIDS SHALL BE LABELED "STORM SEWER". EXISTING CASTINGS AND STRUCTURES WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THESE CONDITIONS AND THE PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE. 14. TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY LAND SURVEYORS. IF THE CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, THEN THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY, AT THEIR EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW. 15. CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNING CODES AND BE CONSTRUCTED TO SAME. 16. ALL STORM STRUCTURES SHALL HAVE A SMOOTH UNIFORM POURED MORTAR FROM INVERT IN TO INVERT OUT. 17. ROOF DRAINS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO STORM SEWER BY PREFABRICATED WYES OR AT STORM STRUCTURES. ROOF DRAINS AND TRUCK WELL DRAIN SHALL RUN AT A MINIMUM 1% SLOPE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, AND TIE IN AT THE CENTERLINE OF THE STORM MAIN. 18. ALL ROOF AND SANITARY SEWER DRAINS SHALL BE INSULATED IF 7' OF COVER CANNOT BE PROVIDED. 19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THAT ARE TO REMAIN FROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. 20. THE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES, STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AND OTHER ABOVE AND BELOW-GRADE IMPROVEMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE AS SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION, SIZE AND INVERT ELEVATIONS OF EACH PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 21. A MINIMUM OF 5' SEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN UTILITIES AND TREES UNLESS A ROOT BARRIER IS UTILIZED. 22. GAS, PHONE AND ELECTRIC SERVICES SHOWN FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. DRY UTILITY COMPANIES MAY ALTER THE DESIGN LAYOUT DURING THEIR REVIEW. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE FINAL DESIGN AND INSTALLATION WITH UTILITY COMPANIES. 23. COORDINATE UTILITY INSTALLATION WITH IRRIGATION DESIGN AND INSTALLATION. 24. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FLOW LINE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PERIMETER WALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO INSIDE WALL FACE. REFERENCE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT WALL WIDTH AND SPECIFICATIONS. 25. REFERENCE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS (BY OTHERS). FOR EXACT BUILDING DIMENSIONS, AND MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS. 26. REFERENCE M.E.P. PLANS (BY OTHERS) FOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT DIMENSIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 27. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE STRUCTURAL PLANS (BY OTHERS) FOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT DIMENSIONS AND PAD PREPARATION SPECIFICATIONS. 28. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE M.E.P PLANS (BY OTHERS) FOR LIGHT POLE WIRING. GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES 1. GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS INCLUDING GRADES AND DIMENSIONS BEFORE START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE THE SITE TO THE ELEVATIONS INDICATED AND SHALL ADJUST BMP'S AS NECESSARY AND REGRADE WASHOUTS WHERE THEY OCCUR AFTER EVERY RAINFALL UNTIL A GRASS STAND IS WELL ESTABLISHED OR ADEQUATE STABILIZATION OCCURS. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THERE IS POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS SO THAT SURFACE RUNOFF WILL DRAIN BY GRAVITY TO NEW OR EXISTING DRAINAGE OUTLETS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE NO PONDING OCCURS IN PAVED AREAS AND SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IF ANY GRADING DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND IN THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED GRADES PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PAVEMENT OR UTILITIES. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL MANHOLE COVERS, VALVE COVERS, VAULT LIDS, FIRE HYDRANTS, POWER POLES, GUY WIRES, AND TELEPHONE BOXES THAT ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE AND UNDISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION. EXISTING CASTINGS AND STRUCTURES TO REMAIN SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MATCH THE PROPOSED FINISHED GRADES. 5. BACKFILL FOR UTILITY LINES SHALL BE PLACED PER DETAILS, STANDARDS, AND SPECIFICATIONS SO THAT THE UTILITY WILL BE STABLE. WHERE UTILITY LINES CROSS THE PARKING LOT, THE TOP 6 INCHES SHALL BE COMPACTED SIMILARLY TO THE REMAINDER OF THE LOT. UTILITY DITCHES SHALL BE VISUALLY INSPECTED DURING THE EXCAVATION PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT UNDESIRABLE FILL IS NOT USED. 6. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF 4" OF TOPSOIL AT COMPLETION OF WORK. ALL UNPAVED AREAS IN EXISTING RIGHTS-OF-WAY DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE REGRADED AND SODDED. 7. AFTER PLACEMENT OF SUBGRADE AND PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PAVEMENT, CONTRACTOR SHALL TEST AND OBSERVE PAVEMENT AREAS FOR EVIDENCE OF PONDING. ALL AREAS SHALL ADEQUATELY DRAIN TOWARDS THE INTENDED STRUCTURE TO CONVEY STORM RUNOFF. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY OWNER AND ENGINEER IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE DISCOVERED. 8. WHERE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS INDICATED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SAW CUT FULL DEPTH FOR A SMOOTH AND STRAIGHT JOINT AND REPLACE THE PAVEMENT WITH THE SAME TYPE AND DEPTH OF MATERIAL AS EXISTING OR AS INDICATED. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL PROTECTION OVER ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT BY THE OWNER. ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES SHALL BE CLEANED OF DEBRIS AS REQUIRED DURING AND AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION TO PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE FLOWS. 10. IF DEWATERING IS REQUIRED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ANY APPLICABLE REQUIRED PERMITS. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER AND THE DESIGN ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. 11. FIELD DENSITY TESTS SHALL BE TAKEN AT INTERVALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY OR TO MN/DOT STANDARDS. IN THE EVENT THAT THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND THE JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT, THE MOST STRINGENT SHALL GOVERN. 12. ALL SLOPES AND AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE GRADED AS PER PLANS. THE AREAS SHALL THEN BE SODDED OR SEEDED AS SPECIFIED IN THE PLANS, FERTILIZED, MULCHED, WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL HARDY GRASS GROWTH IS ESTABLISHED IN ALL AREAS. ANY AREAS DISTURBED FOR ANY REASON PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE JOB SHALL BE CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. ALL EARTHEN AREAS WILL BE SODDED OR SEEDED AND MULCHED AS SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTROL OF DUST AND DIRT RISING AND SCATTERING IN THE AIR DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL PROVIDE WATER SPRINKLING OR OTHER SUITABLE METHODS OF CONTROL. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL GOVERNING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. 14. SOD, WHERE CALLED FOR, MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED ON EXPOSED SLOPES WITHIN 48 HOURS OF COMPLETING FINAL GRADING, AND AT ANY OTHER TIME AS NECESSARY, TO PREVENT EROSION, SEDIMENTATION OR TURBID DISCHARGES. 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT LANDSCAPE ISLAND PLANTING AREAS AND OTHER PLANTING AREAS ARE NOT COMPACTED AND DO NOT CONTAIN ROAD BASE MATERIALS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO EXCAVATE AND REMOVE ALL UNDESIRABLE MATERIAL FROM ALL AREAS ON THE SITE TO BE PLANTED AND PROPERLY DISPOSED OF IN A LEGAL MANNER. 16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL UNDERGROUND STORM WATER PIPING PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND MN/DOT SPECIFICATION. 17. ALL CONCRETE/ASPHALT SHALL BE INSTALLED PER GEOTECH REPORT, CITY OF EDINA AND MN/DOT SPECIFICATIONS. 18. SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FLOWLINE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 19. LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION ARE TO THE PROPERTY LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON THE PLAN. 20. IMMEDIATELY REPORT TO THE OWNER ANY DISCREPANCIES FOUND BETWEEN ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. 21. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING AND PROTECTING EXISTING UTILITIES, AND SHALL REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO EXISTING UTILITIES THAT OCCUR DURING CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT COMPENSATION. 22. BLEND NEW EARTHWORK SMOOTHLY TO TRANSITION BACK TO EXISTING GRADE. 23. ALL PROPOSED GRADES ONSITE SHALL BE 3:1 OR FLATTER UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE PLANS. ANY SLOPES STEEPER THAN 4:1 REQUIRE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BLANKET. 24. ADHERE TO ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS NECESSARY IN THE GENERAL N.P.D.E.S. PERMIT AND STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN FOR STORMWATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. 25. ADJUST AND/OR CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT AS NECESSARY TO ASSURE A SMOOTH FIT AND CONTINUOUS GRADE. 26. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE MINIMUM GRADES ARE MET WITHIN PAVED AREAS, 1.2% FOR ASPHALT PAVING AND 0.6% FOR CONCRETE PAVING. EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN ("SWPPP") IS COMPRISED OF THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN, THE STANDARD DETAILS, THE PLAN NARRATIVE, ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SWPPP, PLUS THE PERMIT AND ALL SUBSEQUENT REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS. 2. ALL CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN AND THE STATE OF MN NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT (NPDES PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THEIR CONTENTS. 3. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AND CONTROLS SHALL CONFORM TO FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS OR MANUAL OF PRACTICE, AS APPLICABLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL CONTROLS AS DIRECTED BY THE PERMITTING AGENCY OR OWNER. 4. SITE ENTRY AND EXIT LOCATIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION THAT WILL PREVENT THE TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADWAYS. ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. WHEN WASHING IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT PRIOR TO ENTRANCE ONTO A PUBLIC ROADWAY, IT SHALL BE DONE IN AN AREA STABILIZED WITH CRUSHED STONE WHICH DRAINS INTO AN APPROVED SEDIMENT BASIN. ALL FINES IMPOSED FOR DISCHARGING SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC AREAS SHALL BE PAID BY THE CONTRACTOR. 5. TEMPORARY SEEDING OR OTHER APPROVED METHODS OF STABILIZATION SHALL BE INITIATED WITHIN 7 DAYS OF THE LAST DISTURBANCE ON ANY AREA OF THE SITE. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE CLEARING TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL OR AS REQUIRED BY THE GENERAL PERMIT. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL DENOTE ON PLAN THE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA WHICH SHALL ALSO BE USED AS THE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND CLEANING AREA, EMPLOYEE PARKING AREA, AND AREA FOR LOCATING PORTABLE FACILITIES, OFFICE TRAILERS, AND TOILET FACILITIES. 8. ALL WASH WATER (CONCRETE TRUCKS, VEHICLE CLEANING, EQUIPMENT CLEANING, ETC.) SHALL BE DETAINED AND PROPERLY TREATED OR DISPOSED. 9. SUFFICIENT OIL AND GREASE ABSORBING MATERIALS AND FLOTATION BOOMS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE OR READILY AVAILABLE TO CONTAIN AND CLEAN-UP FUEL OR CHEMICAL SPILLS AND LEAKS. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DUST CONTROL ON SITE. THE USE OF MOTOR OILS AND OTHER PETROLEUM BASED OR TOXIC LIQUIDS FOR DUST SUPPRESSION OPERATIONS IS PROHIBITED. 11. RUBBISH, TRASH, GARBAGE, LITTER, OR OTHER SUCH MATERIALS SHALL BE DEPOSITED INTO SEALED CONTAINERS. MATERIALS SHALL BE PREVENTED FROM LEAVING THE PREMISES THROUGH THE ACTION OF WIND OR STORM WATER DISCHARGE INTO DRAINAGE DITCHES OR WATERS OF THE STATE. 12. ALL STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES PRESENTED ON THE PLAN SHALL BE INITIATED AS SOON AS IS PRACTICABLE. 13. ALL STAGING AREAS, STOCKPILES, SPOILS, ETC. SHALL BE LOCATED SUCH THAT THEY WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT STORM WATER QUALITY. OTHERWISE, COVERING OR ENCIRCLING THESE AREAS WITH SOME PROTECTIVE MEASURE WILL BE NECESSARY. 14. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RE-ESTABLISHING ANY EROSION CONTROL DEVICE WHICH THEY DISTURB. EACH CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE ESTABLISHED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES THAT MAY LEAD TO UNAUTHORIZED DISCHARGE OR STORM WATER POLLUTION, SEDIMENTATION, OR OTHER POLLUTANTS. UNAUTHORIZED POLLUTANTS INCLUDE (BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO) EXCESS CONCRETE DUMPING OR CONCRETE RESIDUE, PAINTS, SOLVENTS, GREASES, FUEL AND LUBRICANT OIL, PESTICIDES, AND ANY SOLID WASTE MATERIALS. 15. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE START OF LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ON THE PROJECT. 16. ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT. CHANGES ARE TO BE APPROVED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BY THE DESIGN ENGINEER AND THE CITY OF EDINA ENGINEERING DIVISION. 17. IF THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AS APPROVED CANNOT CONTROL EROSION AND OFF-SITE SEDIMENTATION FROM THE PROJECT, THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN WILL HAVE TO BE REVISED AND/OR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES WILL BE REQUIRED ON SITE. ANY REVISIONS TO THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN MADE BY THE CONTRACTOR MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE ALL MEASURES STATED ON THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN, AND IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN, SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN FULLY FUNCTIONAL CONDITION AS REQUIRED BY ALL JURISDICTIONS UNTIL NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETED PHASE OF WORK OR FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE CHECKED BY A CERTIFIED PERSON AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 7 CALENDAR DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS OF THE END OF A 0.5" RAINFALL EVENT, AND CLEANED AND REPAIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING: INLET PROTECTION DEVICES AND BARRIERS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED IF THEY SHOW SIGNS OF UNDERMINING, OR DETERIORATION. 1. ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE CHECKED REGULARLY TO SEE THAT A GOOD STAND IS MAINTAINED. AREAS SHOULD BE FERTILIZED, WATERED AND RESEEDED AS NEEDED. FOR MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS REFER TO THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 2. SILT FENCES SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONS IF DAMAGED. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SILT FENCES WHEN IT REACHES ONE-THIRD THE HEIGHT OF THE SILT FENCE. 3. THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE(S) SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING OF THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AS CONDITIONS DEMAND. 4. THE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA SHALL BE KEPT IN GOOD CONDITION (SUITABLE FOR PARKING AND STORAGE). THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING OF THE TEMPORARY PARKING AS CONDITIONS DEMAND. 5. ALL MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER BUT IN NO CASE LATER THAN 2 CALENDAR DAYS FOLLOWING THE INSPECTION. PAVING AND STRIPING NOTES 1. ALL PAVING, CONSTRUCTION, MATERIALS, AND WORKMANSHIP WITHIN JURISDICTION'S RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL OR COUNTY SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (LATEST EDITION) OR MN/DOT SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (LATEST EDITION) IF NOT COVERED BY LOCAL OR COUNTY REGULATIONS. 2. ALL SIGNS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND OTHER TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (M.U.T.C.D) AND CITY STANDARDS. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS FOR FIRE LANES, ROADWAY LANES, PARKING STALLS, ACCESSIBLE PARKING SYMBOLS, ACCESS AISLES, STOP BARS AND SIGNS, AND MISCELLANEOUS STRIPING WITHIN THE PARKING LOT AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 4. ALL EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL EXTEND THROUGH THE CURB. 5. THE MINIMUM LENGTH OF OFFSET JOINTS AT RADIUS POINTS SHALL BE 2 FEET. 6. ALL JOINTS, INCLUDING EXPANSION JOINTS WITH REMOVABLE TACK STRIPS, SHALL BE SEALED WITH JOINT SEALANT. 7. THE MATERIALS AND PROPERTIES OF ALL CONCRETE SHALL MEET THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN THE A.C.I. (AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE) MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY A SECOND COATING OVER ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY OWNER FOLLOWED BY A COAT OF GLASS BEADS AS APPLICABLE PER THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS. 9. ANY EXISTING PAVEMENT, CURBS AND/OR SIDEWALKS DAMAGED OR REMOVED WILL BE REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT HIS EXPENSE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER AND OWNER. 10. BEFORE PLACING PAVEMENT, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SUITABLE ACCESSIBLE ROUTES (PER A.D.A). GRADING FOR ALL SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES INCLUDING CROSSING DRIVEWAYS SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT ADA STATE/NATIONAL STANDARDS. IN NO CASE SHALL ACCESSIBLE RAMP SLOPES EXCEED 1 VERTICAL TO 12 HORIZONTAL. IN NO CASE SHALL SIDEWALK CROSS SLOPES EXCEED 2% . IN NO CASE SHALL LONGITUDINAL SIDEWALK SLOPES EXCEED 5%. IN NO CASE SHALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS OR AISLES EXCEED 2% (1.5% TARGET) IN ALL DIRECTIONS. SIDEWALK ACCESS TO EXTERNAL BUILDING DOORS AND GATES SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF ADA CRITERIA CANNOT BE MET IN ANY LOCATION PRIOR TO PAVING. NO CONTRACTOR CHANGE ORDERS WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR A.D.A COMPLIANCE ISSUES. 11. MAXIMUM JOINT SPACING IS TWICE THE DEPTH OF THE CONCRETE PAVEMENT IN FEET. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT NO. 18.MSP06275.000 NTI NORTHERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 6160 CARMEN AVE. EAST INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, MN 55076 DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 GENERAL NOTES C100 REMOVE EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER REMOVE EXISTING MONUMENT SIGN REMOVE "PRIVATE DRIVE" SIGN REMOVE ADA SIGN (TYP.) REMOVE EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER REMOVE EXISTING TRANSFORMER REMOVE GAS METER PROTECT EXISTING POWER POLE (TYP.) REMOVE CURB PROTECT 12" EXISTING STORM PROTECT EXISTING VAULT PROTECT EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX PROTECT EXISTING GAS PROTECT EXISTING 12" DIP WATER MAIN PROTECT EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC REMOVE "PRIVATE DRIVE" SIGN PROTECT EXISTING LIGHT POLE (TYP.) PROTECT EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE PROTECT EXISTING SANITARY REMOVE TREES/SHRUBS (TYP.) PROTECT EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROTECT EXISTING GAS VALVE REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE PROTECT EXISTING TREE REMOVE EXISTING BOLLARD REMOVE EXISTING BOLLARD REMOVE EXISTING WATER SERVICEREMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SERVICE TO THE PROPERTY LINE PROTECT EXISTING STORM SEWER REMOVE LANDSCAPING REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING, FOOTINGS, FOUNDATIONS, AND ALL UTILITY SERVICES LIMITS OF GRADING AND REMOVALS LIMITS OF GRADING AND REMOVALS PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN PROTECT EXISTING TELEVISION BOX PROTECT EXISTING ELECTRIC MANHOLE REMOVE EXISTING FENCE REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C2-DEMO PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pm1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEMOLITION, REMOVAL, AND DISPOSAL (IN A LOCATION APPROVED BY ALL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES) ALL STRUCTURES, PADS, WALLS, FLUMES, FOUNDATIONS, PARKING, DRIVES, DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, UTILITIES, ETC. SUCH THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PLANS CAN BE CONSTRUCTED. ALL FACILITIES TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE UNDERCUT TO SUITABLE MATERIAL AND BROUGHT TO GRADE WITH SUITABLE COMPACTED FILL MATERIAL PER THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING ALL DEBRIS FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSING THE DEBRIS IN A LAWFUL MANNER. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE COPIES OF THE PERMIT AND RECEIPTS OF DISPOSAL OF MATERIALS TO THE OWNER AND OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ALL UTILITY SERVICES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AT ALL TIMES. UTILITY SERVICES SHALL NOT BE INTERRUPTED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND COORDINATION WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND/OR THE CITY. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY CONCERNING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY THE UTILITY COMPANY'S FORCES AND ANY FEES WHICH ARE TO BE PAID TO THE UTILITY COMPANY FOR THEIR SERVICES. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING ALL FEES AND CHARGES. 5. THE LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN HAVE BEEN DETERMINED FROM THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE AND ARE GIVEN FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE CONTRACTOR. THE ENGINEER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACCURACY. PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY DEMOLITION ACTIVITY, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE UTILITY COMPANIES FOR LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN ALL AREAS OF PROPOSED WORK. 6. ALL EXISTING SEWERS, PIPING AND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE NOT TO BE INTERPRETED AS THE EXACT LOCATION, OR AS ANY OBSTACLES THAT MAY OCCUR ON THE SITE. VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROCEED WITH CAUTION AROUND ANY ANTICIPATED FEATURES. GIVE NOTICE TO ALL UTILITY COMPANIES REGARDING DESTRUCTION AND REMOVAL OF ALL SERVICE LINES AND CAP ALL LINES BEFORE PRECEDING WITH THE WORK. 7. ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE, CABLE, WATER, FIBER OPTIC, AND/OR GAS LINES NEEDING TO BE REMOVED OR RELOCATED SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE AFFECTED UTILITY COMPANY. ADEQUATE TIME SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR RELOCATION AND CLOSE COORDINATION WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY IS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A SMOOTH TRANSITION IN UTILITY SERVICE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN ANY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY DURING CONSTRUCTION. 8. CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES WITH FENCING, BARRICADES, ENCLOSURES, ETC. (AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES) AS APPROVED BY THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE COORDINATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY AND MN/DOT. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ACCESS TO ALL ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTIES IF ACCESS WILL BE INTERRUPTED OR ALTERED AT ANY TIME DURING CONSTRUCTION. 10. PRIOR TO DEMOLITION OCCURRING, ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES ARE TO BE INSTALLED. 11. CONTRACTOR MAY LIMIT SAW-CUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL TO ONLY THOSE AREAS WHERE IT IS REQUIRED AS SHOWN ON THESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS BUT IF ANY DAMAGE IS INCURRED ON ANY OF THE SURROUNDING PAVEMENT, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS REMOVAL AND REPAIR. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WATER MAIN WORK WITH THE FIRE DEPT. AND THE CITY WATER DEPARTMENT TO PLAN PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND TO ENSURE ADEQUATE FIRE PROTECTION IS CONSTANTLY AVAILABLE TO THE SITE THROUGHOUT THIS SPECIFIC WORK AND THROUGH ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ARRANGING/PROVIDING ANY REQUIRED WATER MAIN SHUT OFFS WITH THE CITY OF EDINA DURING CONSTRUCTION. ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH WATER MAIN SHUT OFFS WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND NO EXTRA COMPENSATION WILL BE PROVIDED. 13. REFER TO SURVEY FOR ALL EXISTING INVERT AND RIM ELEVATIONS. 14. ALL UTILITIES SHOWN ARE EXISTING UTILITIES. 15. IN THE EVENT A WELL IS FOUND, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER AND OWNER IMMEDIATELY. ALL WELLS SHALL BE SEALED BY A LICENSED WELL CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE OF MN REQUIREMENTS. 16. IN THE EVENT THAT UNKNOWN CONTAINERS OR TANKS ARE ENCOUNTERED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE OWNER AND/OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY. ALL CONTAINERS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT A PERMITTED LANDFILL PER THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS. 17. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IF ANY EXISTING DRAINTILE IS ENCOUNTERED ON SITE. NO ACTIVE DRAINTILE SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE ENGINEER. DEMOLITION PLAN NOTES NORTH LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION REMOVE BITUMINOUS SURFACE REMOVE CONCRETE SURFACE REMOVE BUILDING REMOVE TREE/SHRUB REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER PROPERTY LINE EXISTING ELECTRIC LINE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING GAS MAIN EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING SIGN EXISTING STORM MANHOLE EXISTING STORM CATCHBASIN EXISTING GAS METER EXISTING GATE VALVE EXISTING HYDRANT EXISTING ELECTRICAL METER EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE EXISTINGTELEVISION BOX EXISTING GUY WIRE EXISTING POWER POLE EXISTING LIGHT POLE EXISTING TREE CLEARING & GRUBBING EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREAS EXISTING TREE LINE EXISTING CURB & GUTTER LEGEND FULL DEPTH SAWCUT T V EXISTING ELECTRICAL VAULT EXISTING AUTO SPRINKLER EXISTING GAS VALVE EXISTING TRANSFORMER TV REMOVE UTILITY LINES CLEARING & GRUBBING DEMO PLAN C200 76TH STREET WEST76TH STREET WEST 840 8368 3 6 83 7 838 839 841 842 835 833 834 836 832 8 3 6 83 5 8358318 3 2 833 834 A D B B B B EE E C 3.66%0. 5 0 %0.51%5.12%2.19%4.71%1.02%0.87%1.20%8.09%8.35%4.65%2.70% 8.02% 2. 1 1 % F F CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INLET PROTECTION TO STRUCTURES WITHIN 100 FEET DOWNSTREAM OF SITE F STORMWATER OUTFLOW: DRAINAGE AREA DISCHARGES TO EXISTING STORMSEWER.ULTIMATE RECEIVING WATERBODY IS CITY OF EDINA POND LOCATED 0.25 MILES TO THE W. THIS POND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C3-EROS PH1 PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pmNORTH EROSION CONTROL PLAN NOTES 1. ALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BASINS PRIOR TO SITE GRADING. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL CATCH BASIN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. 4. WITHIN TWO WEEKS (14 DAYS) OF SITE GRADING, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH SEED, SOD, OR ROCK BASE. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR MATERIALS. 5. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY, STATE, AND WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF SILT IN FRONT OF SILT FENCES DURING THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. 7. ANY EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 8. REMOVAL ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO EXISTING STREETS AND PAVED AREAS AND SHALL SWEEP ADJACENT STREETS AS NECESSARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. 10. IF BLOWING DUST BECOMES A NUISANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY WATER FROM A TANK TRUCK TO ALL CONSTRUCTION AREAS. UPON IMPLEMENTATION AND INSTALLATION OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS: TRAILER, PARKING, LAYDOWN, PORTA-POTTY, WHEEL WASH, CONCRETE WASHOUT, FUEL AND MATERIAL STORAGE CONTAINERS, SOLID WASTE CONTAINERS, ETC., IMMEDIATELY DENOTE THEM ON THE SITE MAPS AND NOTE ANY CHANGES IN LOCATION AS THEY OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. BMP AND EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION SEQUENCE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: 1. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AT EXISTING STORMWATER CULVERTS. 2. CONSTRUCT STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (1), CONCRETE WASHOUT PIT (1) AND INSTALL SILT FENCE. 3. PREPARE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA. 4. CONSTRUCT AND STABILIZE DIVERSIONS AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS. 5. PERFORM CLEARING AND GRUBBING OF THE SITE. PERFORM MASS GRADING. ROUGH GRADE TO ESTABLISH PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERNS. 6. START CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING PAD AND STRUCTURES. 7. TEMPORARILY SEED WITH PURE LIVE SEED, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION, DISTURBED AREAS THAT WILL BE INACTIVE FOR 14 DAYS OR MORE OR AS REQUIRED BY NPDES AND/OR CITY OF EDINA GRADING PERMIT. SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION: ROCK ENTRANCE INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SAFETY FENCE BIO ROLL LEGEND EROSION CONTROL BLANKET BMP QUANTITIES BMP UNIT QUANTITY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA.1 ROCK LOG LF 204 SILT FENCE LF 1,040 INLET PROTECTION EA.2 SAFETY FENCE LF 1,051 LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 84,183 SF (1.93 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA 87,118 SF (2.00 AC) PRE-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 38,574 SF (0.88 AC) PRE-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 45,609 SF (1.05 AC) POST-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 43,143 SF (0.99 AC) POST-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 41,070 SF (0.94 AC) KEYNOTE LEGEND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE BIO ROLL, OFFSET FROM FROM BACK OF CURB/PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY INLET PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION SAFETY FENCE SILT FENCE, OFFSET FROM PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY A B C D E F URBAN LAND UDORTHENTS, WET SUBSTRATUM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES SOIL BOUNDARY URBAN LAND-UDIPSAMMENTS (CUT AND FILL LAND) COMPLEX, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 1 C300 MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FFE: 836.0 GARAGE LEVEL: 825.0 836836837838839 835835 835 833 833 834 834 836 836836 830 831 83 2 8 3 3 831 832 833831831832830 826 827 828 829 831 832 833 835835 83 2 833 834 835836 D D5.88% 7.24%10.23%15.29%9.05% A D B B B B D D D D D D E E E C 5.03%5.15%2.19% 6.91% 11.08%6.99%3.74%D C 39.00%36.56%3.29%F F F F 16.20% CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INLET PROTECTION TO STRUCTURES WITHIN 100 FEET DOWNSTREAM OF SITE STORMWATER OUTFLOW: DRAINAGE AREA DISCHARGES TO EXISTING STORMSEWER. UTILMATE RECEIVING WATERBODY IS CITY OF EDINA POND LOCATED 0.25 MILES TO THE W. THIS POND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY D D © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C3-EROS PH2 PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pmEROSION CONTROL PLAN NOTES 1. ALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BASINS PRIOR TO SITE GRADING. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL CATCH BASIN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. 4. WITHIN TWO WEEKS (14 DAYS) OF SITE GRADING, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH SEED, SOD, OR ROCK BASE. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR MATERIALS. 5. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY, STATE, AND WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF SILT IN FRONT OF SILT FENCES DURING THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. 7. ANY EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 8. REMOVAL ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO EXISTING STREETS AND PAVED AREAS AND SHALL SWEEP ADJACENT STREETS AS NECESSARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. 10. IF BLOWING DUST BECOMES A NUISANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY WATER FROM A TANK TRUCK TO ALL CONSTRUCTION AREAS. UPON IMPLEMENTATION AND INSTALLATION OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS: TRAILER, PARKING, LAYDOWN, PORTA-POTTY, WHEEL WASH, CONCRETE WASHOUT, FUEL AND MATERIAL STORAGE CONTAINERS, SOLID WASTE CONTAINERS, ETC., IMMEDIATELY DENOTE THEM ON THE SITE MAPS AND NOTE ANY CHANGES IN LOCATION AS THEY OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. BMP AND EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION SEQUENCE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: 1. TEMPORARILY SEED, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION, DENUDED AREAS THAT WILL BE INACTIVE FOR 7 DAYS OR MORE. 2. INSTALL UTILITIES, UNDERDRAINS, STORM SEWERS, UNDERGROUND SYSTEM, CURBS AND GUTTERS. 3. INSTALL APPROPRIATE INLET PROTECTION AT ALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURES AS EACH INLET STRUCTURE IS INSTALLED. 4. PERMANENTLY STABILIZE AREAS TO BE VEGETATED AS THEY ARE BROUGHT TO FINAL GRADE. 5. PREPARE SITE FOR PAVING. 6. PAVE SITE AND INSTALL STRIPING. 7. INSTALL APPROPRIATE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES FOR PAVED AREAS AS WORK PROGRESSES. 8. COMPLETE GRADING AND INSTALLATION OF PERMANENT STABILIZATION OVER ALL AREAS. 9. OBTAIN CONCURRENCE WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT THAT THE SITE HAS BEEN FULLY STABILIZED THEN: 1. REMOVE ALL REMAINING TEMPORARY EROSION ADN SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES 2. STABILIZE ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL OF BMPS. SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION: ROCK ENTRANCE INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SAFETY FENCE LEGEND EROSION CONTROL BLANKET BIO ROLL BMP QUANTITIES BMP UNIT QUANTITY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA.1 ROCK LOG LF 67 SILT FENCE LF 1,177 INLET PROTECTION EA.12 SAFETY FENCE LF 1,051 LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 84,183 SF (1.93 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA 87,118 SF (2.00 AC) PRE-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 38,574 SF (0.88 AC) PRE-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 45,609 SF (1.05 AC) POST-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 43,143 SF (0.99 AC) POST-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 41,070 SF (0.94 AC) KEYNOTE LEGEND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE BIO ROLL, OFFSET FROM FROM BACK OF CURB/PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY INLET PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION SAFETY FENCE SILT FENCE, OFFSET FROM PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY A B C D E F NORTH EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PHASE 2 C301 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 3' LEVEL (MIN.) 4" OVERLAP FOLD UNDER 6" 1' SPACING ON STAPLES EROSION CONTROL BLANKET MATERIAL PER MNDOT SPEC SECTION 3885.2 30" 24"© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 ©This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C3-EROS DETAILS.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pmCOPY OF CONSTRUCTION SITE NOTICE COPY OF WATERSHED PERMIT AUTHORIZATION COPY OF LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT SWPPP INFORMATION COPY OF GENERAL CONTRACTOR NOI SECTION PLAN NTS NOTES: 1. ALL MATERIAL TO MEET FILTREXX© SPECIFICATIONS. 2. FILTER MEDIA© FILL TO MEET APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. 3. COMPOST MATERIAL TO BE DISPERSED ON SITE, AS DETERMINED BY ENGINEER. 4. EQUAL PRODUCT MAY BE SUBMITTED TO ENGINEER BY CONTRACTOR FOR USE. FILTREXX® BIO ROLL SEDIMENT CONTROL NTS FILTREXX® SOXX™ (12" TYPICAL) BLOWN/PLACED FILTER MEDIA™ AREA TO BE PROTECTEDWORK AREA WORK AREA AREA TO BE PROTECTED FILTREXX® SOXX™ (12" TYPICAL) WATER FLOW EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS C302 MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FFE: 836.0 GARAGE LEVEL: 825.0 A A A A C C C E F G H H I I I I I L L L O I I BIKE PATHPLAY AREA PATIO B P PROPOSED STEPS PROPOSED STEPS TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 1257909 TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 797300 TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 797300 C A A A A N PROPOSED STEPS PROPOSED STEPS PROPOSED STEPS PROPOSED STEPS 15' BUILDING SETBACK 20' BUILDING SETBACK 15' BUILDING SETBACK 40' BUILDING SETBACK I I I PROPOSED STEPS Q PROOF-OF-PARKING (10 STALLS) R R R T S PRESERVE EXISTING COTTONWOOD TREE 24.0' K B K UU M M L L 29.47'4.0'4.0'4.0'4.0'4.0'4.0'6.0'4.0'8.5'18.0'6.3'8.0' 8.0' 16.4' 15.00' 10.0'6.0'23.8'6.0' 5.0' 8.5'5.0'5.0' 8.0' 15.00' PROPOSED SWALE; SEE SHEET C500 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PROPOSED SWALE; SEE SHEET C500 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN J J J M J PRESERVE EXISTING TREES APPROX. DRIPLINE OF EXISTING COTTONWOOD81.62'29.47'75.00'6.0'6.0'6.0'6.0' 6.0'81.17'179.12'75.46'161.5'62.85'121.35'92.67' 62.85' NORTHING: 127516.34 EASTING: 513355.00 NORTHING: 127516.66 EASTING: 513417.86 NORTHING: 127418.50 EASTING: 513511.02 NORTHING: 127237.49 EASTING: 513511.93 NORTHING: 127237.17 EASTING: 513449.08 NORTHING: 127358.52 EASTING: 513448.46 NORTHING: 127354.86 EASTING: 513355.82 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 ©This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C4-SITE PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pmBUILDING DATA SUMMARY AREAS PROPOSED PROPERTY ±87,120 SF (2.0 AC) BUILDING AREA ±23,200 SF (26.6% OF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA) PARKING PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING 12 SPACES SURFACE ADA STALLS PROVIDED 1 SPACE PROPERTY SUMMARY AEON EDINA TOTAL PROPERTY AREA ±87,120 SF (2.0 AC) PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 41,070 SF (0.94 AC) PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA 43,143 SF (0.99 AC) TOTAL DISTURBED AREA 84,183 SF (1.93 AC) ZONING SUMMARY EXISTING ZONING PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (PID) PROPOSED ZONING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PARKING SETBACKS SIDE/REAR = 10' ROAD =20' BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT = 50' SIDE YARD= 15' REAR YARD= 20' PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED FENCE SETBACK LINE RETAINING WALL PROPOSED STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PROPOSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK LEGEND KEYNOTE LEGEND CONCRETE SIDEWALK RETAINING WALL MATCH EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT/ CURB & GUTTER ACCESSIBLE CURB RAMP ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA STRIPED WITH 4" SYSL @ 45° 2' O.C. STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT LANDSCAPE AREA - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS BOLLARD LIGHTING FENCE B612 CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) TRANSITION CURB FLUSH CURB COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY APRON TRANSFORMER STOP SIGN (R1-1) LIGHT POLE PLAYGROUND - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS PLAYGROUND BENCH PEDESTRIAN RAMP A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U PROPOSED SWALE NORTH SITE PLAN C400 MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FFE: 836.0 GARAGE LEVEL: 825.0 835 831 832 8 3 3 83 4 831 832 835 833834836 840 83 7 838 839 841 8368 3 6 837 830832833 830 831 830 826 826 827 828 829 831 8 3 1 83 2 832 833 8 3 3 835 832833 834 1.25%1.56%1.89% 1.78%3.42%3.14% 1.21% 1. 7 3 %2.90%1.55%5.80%3.22%4.90%8 3 5 8358358 3 5 840 8 3 4 834836 8 3 6 836837838839 8358358358318318328328 3 3 835 835835 833 833 834 834 THREE - 6.5" STEPS THREE - 7" STEPS TWO - 6" STEPS ONE - 6" STEPS THREE - 7" STEPS THREE - 6" STEPS PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 48" PERFORATED HDPE TOTAL VOLUME: 11,769 CF WATER QUALITY VOLUME: 3,876 CF TOP OF STONE: 829.50 TOP OF PIPE: 829.00 100 YR HWL: 829.82 WATER QUALITY ELEVATION: 826.70 PIPE IE: 825.00 0.50%2.09%0.68%0.51%1.56%4.80%0.50%1.59%9.21%15.66% PROTECT EXISTING TREES TWO - 5" STEPS D DSTRM 105 48" STORM CB RE:835.29 IE:827.61 E IE:827.61 S STRM 104 48" STORM CB RE:832.99 IE:826.90 N IE:829.84 E IE:826.90 S STRM 102 30" RISER RE:832.61 IE:825.25 NW STRM 201 AREA DRAIN RE:831.68 IE:828.04 N IE:828.04 W STRM 100 30" RISER OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE RE:831.33 IE:826.70 S STRM 101 30" RISER CATCH BASIN RE:831.09 STRM 107 AREA DRAIN RE:833.15 IE:828.72 W STRM 103 AREA DRAIN RE:830.68 IE:825.54 N IE:825.54 SE ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION RE:830.47 IE:829.90 W EXISTING STORM MH RE:829.50 IE:825.80 N IE: 825.80 S 50 LF - 12" HDPE @ 3.92% 78 LF - 12" HDPE @ 3.57% 86 LF - 12" HDPE @ 0.75% 94 LF - 12" HDPE @ 0.75% 0 LF - 12" HDPE@ 0.00% 137 LF - 15" HDPE @ 1.00% 36 LF - 12" RCP @ 2.52% PROTECT EXISTING TREES 29 LF - 15" HDPE @ 1.00% 63 LF - 12" HDPE @ 0.75% PROTECT EXISTING TREES STRM 106 48" STORM CB RE:831.91 IE:828.25 E IE:828.25 W STRM 203 TRENCH DRAIN RIM: 825.50 IE: 823.00 N PROVIDE 8" CONNECTION TO SUMP, COORD. W/ MEP TS:835.95 BS:834.30 TS:835.95 BS:834.95 TS:835.95 BS:835.40 835.99 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 826.00 FFE: 826.00 FFE: 835.99 831.12 ME:829.28 ME:829.50 835.27 835.30 835.32 835.42 835.23 835.19 835.34 835.26 834.91 834.83 834.96 834.93 834.19 834.23 834.28 834.27 833.92 833.98 834.00 834.04 835.61 835.84 835.36 835.40 831.22830.92 829.92 829.95 832.22 832.30 833.57 833.71833.03 832.78 ME:840.52ME:840.51 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00 FFE: 836.00FFE: 836.00 831.73 831.27 835.65 835.82 835.76 835.70 836.28 835.29 836.41 TW:831.50 BW:830.90 TW:834.00 BW:826.50 BW:826.50 TW:834.15 BW:833.47 TW:834.15 LP:831.09 TS:835.86 BS:834.31 TC/BC:833.90 TC/BC:833.86 LP:831.10 TS:835.93 BS:834.45 TS:835.95 BS:834.20 831.01 831.13 832.16 833.17 832.94 835.42 835.34 TS:835.92 BS:835.08 PROPOSED INFILTRATION LANDSCAPE AREA 835 833834ME:830.95 832.16 D12.77%5.00%833.67 833.94 1.74%3.61%3.15 % 2.20% 4.6 9 %4.86%1.01%834.50 834.21 833.73 PROPOSED SWALE, PROVIDE MINIMUM 2% SLOPE TOWARD STRM 107 PROPOSED SWALE, PROVIDE MINIMUM 2% SLOPE TOWARD STRM 103 3.84%3.38%3.31%1 . 7 1% STRM 200 30" RISER RE:831.59 IE:825.25 E 3:14:14:17:1 9:1 5:1 5:1 835832 833834 PROPOSED STANDPIPE OUTLET RIM: 831.5 8.22%831.17 831.07 831.13 831.25 1.89%5.88% 9.87% 1.25% 831.00 833.00 STRM 202 ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION IE:830.00 S 5 LF - 6" DIP @ 2.00% 3 LF - 6" HDPE @ 2.00%© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 ©This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C5-GRADING PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:05pmNORTH GRADING PLAN NOTES 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF EDINA, SPECIFICATIONS AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. 2. CONTRACTOR TO CALL GOPHER STATE CALL ONE @ <1-800-252-1166> AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS. 3. STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: RCP PER ASTM C-76 HDPE: 0" - 10" PER AASHTO M-252 HDPE: 12" OR GREATER PER ASTM F-2306 PVC SCH. 40 PER ASTM D-3034 STORM SEWER FITTINGS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: RCP PER ASTM C-76, JOINTS PER ASTM C-361, C-990, AND C-443 HDPE PER ASTM 3212 PVC PER ASTM D-3034, JOINTS PER ASTM D-3212 4. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OR EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO THE START OF SITE GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE PROJECT ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS. 5. SUBGRADE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXCAVATION TO HELP OFFSET ANY STABILITY PROBLEMS DUE TO WATER SEEPAGE OR STEEP SLOPES. WHEN PLACING NEW SURFACE MATERIAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING PAVEMENT, THE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED PROMPTLY TO AVOID UNDERMINING OF EXISTING PAVEMENT. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE DRAINAGE TRENCHES TO FOLLOW PROPOSED STORM SEWER ALIGNMENTS. 8. GRADES SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADES. CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH GRADE TO SUBGRADE ELEVATION AND LEAVE STREET READY FOR SUBBASE. 9. ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, BITUMINOUS SURFACING, CONCRETE ITEMS, ANY ABANDONED UTILITY ITEMS, AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIALS SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. 10. REFER TO THE UTILITY PLAN FOR SANITARY SEWER MAIN, WATER MAIN SERVICE LAYOUT AND ELEVATIONS AND CASTING / STRUCTURE NOTATION. 11. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PAVEMENTS AND CURB AND GUTTER WITH SMOOTH UNIFORM SLOPES TO PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. 12. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF <4" CLASS 5> AGGREGATE BASE UNDER CURB AND GUTTER AND CONCRETE SIDEWALKS. 13. UPON COMPLETION OF EXCAVATION AND FILLING, CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL STREETS AND DISTURBED AREAS ON SITE. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RE-VEGETATED WITH A MINIMUM OF <4" OF TOPSOIL>. 14. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS/CONTOURS ARE TO GUTTER / FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 15. GRADING FOR ALL SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES INCLUDING CROSSING DRIVEWAYS SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT ADA STATE/NATIONAL STANDARDS. IN NO CASE SHALL ACCESSIBLE RAMP SLOPES EXCEED 1 VERTICAL TO 12 HORIZONTAL. IN NO CASE SHALL SIDEWALK CROSS SLOPES EXCEED 2% . IN NO CASE SHALL LONGITUDINAL SIDEWALK SLOPES EXCEED 5%. IN NO CASE SHALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS OR AISLES EXCEED 2% (1.5% TARGET) IN ALL DIRECTIONS. SIDEWALK ACCESS TO EXTERNAL BUILDING DOORS AND GATES SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF ADA CRITERIA CANNOT BE MET IN ANY LOCATION PRIOR TO PAVING. NO CONTRACTOR CHANGE ORDERS WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR A.D.A COMPLIANCE ISSUES. 16. MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 0.5% GUTTER SLOPE TOWARDS LOW POINTS. 17. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 3" INSULATION BY 5' WIDE CENTERED ON STORM PIPE IF LESS THAN 4' OF COVER IN PAVEMENT AREAS AND LESS THAN 3' OF COVER IN LANDSCAPE AREAS. 18. ROOF DRAIN INVERT CONNECTIONS AT THE BUILDING SHALL BE AT ELEVATION <XXX.XX> OR LOWER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. REFERENCE MEP PLANS FOR ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION. 19. ALL STORM SEWER CONNECTIONS SHALL BE GASKETED AND WATER TIGHT INCLUDING MANHOLE CONNECTIONS. 20. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE AIR TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT PLUMBING CODE. 21. MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 1.25% SLOPE IN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT AREAS, 0.5% SLOPE IN CONCRETE PAVEMENT AREAS. 22. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT "INFALL CURB" WHERE PAVEMENT DRAINS TOWARD GUTTER, AND "OUTFALL" CURB WHERE PAVEMENT DRAINS AWAY FROM GUTTER. PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPERTY LINE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR925 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION100.00 LEGEND PROPOSED HIGH POINT ELEVATION HP:0.0 PROPOSED LOW POINT ELEVATION PROPOSED TOP/BOTTOM OF CURB ELEVATION FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION LP:0.0 TC/BC:0.00 FFE:0.0 0.0%PROPOSED DRAINAGE DIRECTION ME:0.0 MATCH EXISTING ELEVATION PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE (SOLID CASTING) PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE (ROUND INLET CASTING) PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE/ CATCH BASIN (CURB INLET CASTING) D TW:0.0 TOP OF WALL ELEVATION BW:0.0 BOTTOM OF WALL ELEVATION TS:0.0 TOP OF STAIR ELEVATION BS:0.0 BOTTOM OF STAIR ELEVATION GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C500 UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE (2) DOUBLE RING INFILTROMETER TESTS WITHIN THE UNDERGROUND SYSTEM EXCAVATION PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE RESULTS TO THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EXCAVATE ALL FILL/URBAN FILL TO A ELEVATION OF APPROXIMATELY 826.00. EXCAVATION SHALL BE REPLACED WITH SUITABLE ENGINEERED FILL MEETING THE MNDOT SPECIFICATION FOR COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE PER SECTION 3149.2H. DEPTHS OF FILL/URBAN FILL EXPECTED TO VARY, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY DEPTHS OF EXCAVATION AND PERFORM INFILTROMETER TESTS PRIOR TO INSTALLING UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. 3. IF NATIVE SUBGRADE SOILS BELOW FILL/URBAN FILL ARE DETERMINED TO NOT BE CONDUCIVE TO THE DESIGN INFILTRATION REQUIREMENTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND REPLACE THE POORLY INFILTRATING SOILS TO A DEPTH WHERE THE EXISTING NATIVE SUBGRADE SOILS MEET OR EXCEED THE DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE AS REVIEWED BY THE ENGINEER. 4. UPON COMPLETION OF THE STORMWATER BMP AND FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREA, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION THE BMP AFTER A SIGNIFICAT RAIN EVENT THAT SHOWS THE BMPS DRAWS DOWN WITHIN 48 HOURS. 5. NO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SHALL TRAVEL WITHIN THE UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM AREA. USE EXCAVATOR WITH TOOTHED BUCKET FOR INFILTRATION BASIN EXCAVATION TO AVOID COMPACTING OR SMEARING OF SOILS. 6. FINAL EXCAVATION OF UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM AREA AND INSTALLATION OF OF ENGINEERED SOIL MUST OCCUR IN DRY SOIL CONDITIONS TO PREVENT SMEARING AND COMPACTION. DO NOT WORK IN INFILTRATION SYSTEM AREA IF SOIL CONDITIONS ARE WET. 7. IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION, THE EXCAVATION FOR THE TRENCH SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY BACKFILLED WITH APPROVED BACKFILL MATERIAL PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATION, OR THE EXCAVATION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH SILT FENCE AND OR BIO-ROLLS SUCH THAT ON-SITE SOILS DO NOT ENTER THE TRENCH EXCAVATION AND CLOG UP THE BOTTOM/SIDES OF THE TRENCH LIMITING THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. 8. IF ANY SOILS ENTER THE TRENCH PRIOR TO BACKFILLING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SOILS AND CONFIRM THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE NATIVE SUBGRADE SOILS IS MET WITH INFILTROMETER TESTS. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND COMPLETE CERTIFIED AS-BUILT PLANS DEMONSTRATING ALL CONSTRUCTED STORMWATER CONVEYANCE STRUCTURES, AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES (INCLUDING AS-BUILT VOLUMES) CONFORM TO DESIGN AND/OR PLANS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY. © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 ©This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C5-STORMWATER DETAILS.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pmSTORMWATER DETAILS C501 2' SPACING TYP. 1.5" WASHED, NON-CARBONIC ANGULAR COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE WITH 40% VOIDS 48" PERFORATED HDPE PIPE UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM DETAILS NOT TO SCALE EXISTING SUBGRADE STONE BASE / PIPE IE 825.0 1' END STONE TYP. ON ALL SIDES STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT SECTIONVARIES, SEEGRADING PLAN1' MIN.SEE GRADING PLAN FOR GROUND ELEVATION NOTES: 1. ALL HDPE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITH WATERTIGHT MATERIALS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CARE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM CLOGGING THE PORE SPACE IN THE COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE. A A SECTION A-A SYSTEM IE 825.0 TOP OF PIPE 829.0 829.0 OUTFLOW 12" RCP IE = 826.7 3' ENGINEERED SAND, MNDOT SECTION 3149.2J "FINE FILTER AGGREGATE" 1.5" WASHED, NON-CARBONIC, ANGULAR COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE WITH 40% VOIDS EXISTING SUBGRADE 48" PERFORATED HDPE PIPE INFLOW 15" HDPE IE = 825.25 INFLOW 12" HDPE IE 825.25 TOP OF STONE 829.5 829.5 NEENAH R-4996 A8 - HEAVY DUTY TRENCH FRAMES WITH GRATED COVER OR APPROVED EQUAL 1" (TYP.) 2.00%2.00% TRENCH DRAIN SECTION #4@12 OR WWF W14 6"x 6" (MIN As=0.2 IN /FT) 2" CLR. 2" CLR. PERMISSIBLE CONSTRUCTION JOINT - TYP. 6" 4" 18" MAX. 1.0" 8"MAX. 3 16" GAP 6" TRENCH DRAIN @ B612 CURB TRENCH DRAIN SLOPED @ 0.5% TRENCH DRAIN GRATE SEE SECTION 6" DIP PIPE TRENCH DRAIN @ PIPE OPENING B612 CURB B612 CURB FINISHED GRADE TRENCH DRAIN PROFILE TRENCH DRAIN @ B612 CURB TRENCH DRAIN SLOPED @ 0.5% MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FFE: 836.0 GARAGE LEVEL: 825.0 D DD 5 LF - 6" DIP @ 2.00% CONNECT TO EXISTING 12" DIP WATERMAIN WITH WET TAP TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 1257909 TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 797300 TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT PER DOC. 797300 126 LF - 6" PVC @ 2.00% 6" FIRE SERVICE IE: 828.50 74 LF - 6" DIP WATERMAIN 6" SANITARY SERVICE IE: 822.60 CONSTRUCTION OFFSET FOR MIN 18" SEPARATION STORM/SAN CROSSING, MAINTAIN 18" SEPARATION 2" DOMESTIC WATER IE: 828.50PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SEE SHEET C500 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN RIM: 825.50 SUMP LOCATION, REFERENCE MEP PLANS ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION IE:829.90 4" FIRE RISER CONSTRUCTION OFFSET FOR MIN 18" SEPARATION CONNECTION INTO EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED TRANSFORMER PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE; REF. MEP PLANS FOR ENTRY AT BUILDING PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE; REF. MEP PLANS FOR ENTRY AT BUILDING ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION IE: 830.00 PROPOSED SANITARY CLEAN OUT IE: 822.50 12" EXISTING STORM EXISTING SANITARY EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MH RE: 830.09 IE: 819.99 N © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C6-UTILITY PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pmUTILITY PLAN NOTES 1. ALL FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE IN PLACE, AND COMPACTED BEFORE INSTALLATION OF PROPOSED UTILITIES. 2. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: 8" PVC SDR35 PER ASTM D-3034, FOR PIPES LESS THAN 12' DEEP 8" PVC SDR26 PER ASTM D-3034, FOR PIPES MORE THAN 12' DEEP 6" PVC SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D-3034 DUCTILE IRON PIPE PER AWWA C150 3. WATER LINES SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: 6" AND LARGER, PVC C-900 PER ASTM D 2241 CLASS 200 UNDER COUNTY ROADS, OTHERWISE CLASS 150 4" AND LARGER DUCTILE IRON PIPE PER AWWA C150 SMALLER THAN 3" PIPING SHALL BE COPPER TUBE TYPE "K" PER ANSI 816.22 OR PVC, 200 P.S.I., PER ASTM D1784 AND D2241. 4. MINIMUM TRENCH WIDTH SHALL BE 2 FEET. 5. ALL WATER JOINTS ARE TO BE MECHANICAL JOINTS WITH RESTRAINTS SUCH AS THRUST BLOCKING, WITH STAINLESS STEEL OR COBALT BLUE BOLTS, OR AS INDICATED IN THE CITY SPECIFICATIONS AND PROJECT DOCUMENTS. 6. ALL UTILITIES SHOULD BE KEPT TEN (10') APART (PARALLEL) OR WHEN CROSSING 18" VERTICAL CLEARANCE (OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE OR STRUCTURE). 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 7'-5" COVER ON ALL WATERLINES. 8.IN THE EVENT OF A VERTICAL CONFLICT BETWEEN WATER LINES, SANITARY LINES, STORM LINES AND GAS LINES, OR ANY OBSTRUCTION (EXISTING AND PROPOSED), THE SANITARY LINE SHALL BE SCH. 40 OR C900 WITH MECHANICAL JOINTS AT LEAST 10 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CENTER LINE OF THE CROSSING. THE WATER LINE SHALL HAVE MECHANICAL JOINTS WITH APPROPRIATE FASTENERS AS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION. MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A21.10 OR ANSI 21.11 (AWWA C-151) (CLASS 50). 9. LINES UNDERGROUND SHALL BE INSTALLED, INSPECTED AND APPROVED BEFORE BACKFILLING. 10. TOPS OF MANHOLES SHALL BE RAISED AS NECESSARY TO BE FLUSH WITH PROPOSED PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS, AND TO BE ONE FOOT ABOVE FINISHED GROUND ELEVATIONS, IN GREEN AREAS, WITH WATERTIGHT LIDS. 11. ALL CONCRETE FOR ENCASEMENTS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 28 DAY COMPRESSION STRENGTH AT 3000 P.S.I. 12. EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED IN FIELD PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY NEW LINES. 13. REFER TO INTERIOR PLUMBING DRAWINGS FOR TIE-IN OF ALL UTILITIES. 14. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF EDINA AND/OR STATE OF MN WITH REGARDS TO MATERIALS AND INSTALLATION OF THE WATER AND SEWER LINES. 15. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES, AND WHERE POSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 72 HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 16. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL NECESSARY INSPECTIONS AND/OR CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY CODES AND/OR UTILITY SERVICE COMPANIES. 17. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE ARCH / MEP PLANS FOR SITE LIGHTING AND ELECTRICAL PLAN. 19. BACKFLOW DEVICES (DDCV AND PRZ ASSEMBLIES) AND METERS ARE LOCATED IN THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. REF. ARCH / MEP PLANS. 20. ALL ONSITE WATERMAINS AND SANITARY SEWERS SHALL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED. 21. ALL WATERMAIN STUBOUTS SHALL BE MECHANICALLY RESTRAINED WITH REACTION BLOCKING. SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN GATE VALVE HYDRANT TEE REDUCER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC TELEPHONE GAS MAIN LEGEND CO SANITARY CLEANOUTCO EXISTING PROPOSED NORTH UTILITY PLAN C600 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C7-CIVIL DETAILS.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pm13" 6"6" 7" 8"12" 3/8" CIVIL DETAILS C700 PAVEMENT SECTIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ALL PAVEMENT, SUBGRADE PREPERATION, AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS. COMPACT TOP 3' OF SUBGRADE TO A MINIMUM OF 98% OF STANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY WITH MOISTURE CONTENT WITHIN -2% TO +3% OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT. BITUMINOUS TACK COAT (MN/DOT 2357) 2" BIT. TYPE WEARING COURSE MN/DOT SPEC 2360, TYPE SP (SPWEA240C) 10" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (100% CRUSHED) OR CLASS 7 AGGREGATE BASE (MnDOT SPEC. 3138 A2) 2- 12 " BIT. TYPE NON-WEARING COURSE MN/DOT SPEC 2360, TYPE SPNWB330C OR SPNWB230C 1 ASPHALT PAVEMENT INSET A NOTE: AN ADEQUATE NUMBER OF LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE CONTROL JOINTS SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE PAVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI AND OR AASHTO REQUIREMENTS. EXPANSION JOINTS MUST BE FULL DEPTH AND SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE FIXED OBJECTS ABUTTING OR WITHIN THE PAVED AREA. COMPACT TOP 3' OF SUBGRADE TO A MINIMUM OF 98% OF STANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY WITH MOISTURE CONTENT WITHIN -2% TO +3% OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT. 4" CONCRETE, 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 4,000 PSI) 4" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (100% CRUSHED) OR CLASS 7 AGGREGATE BASE (MnDOT SPEC. 3138 A2) 3 CONCRETE SIDEWALK INSET C 7° 3 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH VARIES CAP BLOCK FENCE OR RAILING (DESIGNED BY OTHERS) SLEEVE AND NON-SHRINK GROUT AROUND POST SLEEVE INSTALLED DURING WALL CONSTRUCTION GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT 12" (MIN) OF FREE- DRAINING AGGREGATE DIAMOND PRO® BLOCK 6" MIN. COMPACTED GRANULAR-BASE LEVELING PAD NATIVE SOIL NATIVE SOIL 2'-0" 6" MINIMUM C O M P A C T E D GRANULAR-B A S E LEVELING PA D APPR O X I M A T E L I M I T S O F E X C A V A T I O N LEVE L I N G P A D TREN C H INSIDE CURVE WALL FACE TOP OUTSIDE CURVE 1.ALWAYS START CAPPING WALL FROM THE LOWEST ELEVATION. 2.LAYOUT CAPS PRIOR TO USING ADHESIVE. 3.CUT CAPS TO FIT. VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF LONG AND SHORT CAP FACES WILL BE NECESSARY FOR RADII GREATER THAN THE MINIMUM. 4.ALTERNATE SHORT AND LONG CAP FACES EVERY OTHER CAP TO ACHIEVE A STRAIGHT ROW OF CAPS. 5.USE EXTERIOR-GRADE CONSTRUCTION ADHESIVE TO SECURE CAPS. SAW CUT AS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT 90 DEGREE MITERED CORNER SPLIT FACE AND END 11" MIN. 11" MINIMUM EXTEND GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT TO WITHIN 1" OF THE LOWER BLOCK FACE GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT 7° 12" (MIN) OF FREE- DRAINING AGGREGATE 2'-0" 6" FINISHED GRADE H E GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCEMENT CAP BLOCK DIAMOND PRO® BLOCK 6" MINIMUM COMPACTED GRANULAR-BASE LEVELING PAD 4"Ø MIN DRAIN PIPE (ELEVATION VARIES)© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C7-CIVIL DETAILS.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pm2 STANDARD CONCRETE PAVEMENT INSET B CIVIL DETAILS C701 4" CL. 5 AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT SPEC 3138 (100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE) 4" CONCRETE PAVEMENT PER MNDOT SPEC 2301 **APPROVED SUBGRADE PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 6" 6"© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\C7-CIVIL DETAILS.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pmCIVIL DETAILS C702 A301 2 A302 A302 A301 1 2 1 76TH STREET WESTTRANSFORMERBIKE PATH BIKE PATH 1 - STORY OFFICE 1 1/2 - STORY OFFICE PARKING EXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN EXISTING LIGHT POLE TO REMAIN EXISTING OFF-SITE LIGHT POLE TO REMAIN A303 2 A303 1 A3041 A304 2 PROOF OF PARKING - 12 STALLS DRIVE DOWN TO SUBLEVEL PARKING TRENCH DRAINPROPOSED 4 STORY APARTMENTS 8'-0"18'-0"8'-6" 14 %PROOF OF PARKINGPROOF OF PARKING181'-0 1/4"62'-10 1/4"121'-11"92'-8"103'-6"62'-10 1/4"30'-1 7/8"74'-1 7/8" 73'-10 3/8"107'-2 1/8"14'-9 3/4"15'-2 7/8"82'-3 7/8" 82'-0 3/8"122'-1 1/8"29'-8 1/4"180'-7 3/8" 191'-7 1/8" PLAYGROUND PATIO STORMWATER BELOW PARKING WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT WALK-UP UNIT PARKING:GENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:31:09 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN AL1014100 APARTMENTS1/16" = 1'-0"AL101 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN1 STALL TYPE SUBLEVEL PARKING SURFACE PARKING PROOF OF PARKING TOTAL Compact Parking Stall 2 0 0 Double HC Parking Stall 2 0 0 HC Single Parking Stall 0 1 0 Standard Parking Stall 60 11 12 TOTAL STALL COUNT 64 12 12 88 2 2 1 83 N LANDSCAPE LEGEND EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE (TYP.) EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE (TYP.) EXISTING SHRUB (TYP.) EDGER (TYP.) ROCK MULCH MAINTENANCE STRIP (TYP.) A LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES EDGER (TYP.) ROCK MULCH MAINTENANCE STRIP (TYP.) SOD (TYP.) A B C 28 - LBS 35 - PCF 24 - WTH 31 - PCF 23 - LBS13 - IBC 8 - BCC 87 - CFS 27 - BFI 16 - CJP 9 - IBC 8 - BCC 12 - DBH 20 - SMW 10 - DBH TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE AGM 3 ACER RUBRUM `AUTUMN GLORY`AUTUMN GLORY MAPLE B & B 2.5" CAL. BDL 3 TILIA AMERICANA `BOULEVARD`BOULEVARD LINDEN B & B 2.5" CAL. KCT 3 GYMNOCLADUS DIOICA `ESPRESSO`KENTUCKY COFFEETREE B & B 2.5" CAL. CONIFEROUS TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE BHS 1 PICEA GLAUCA `DENSATA`BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B & B 7` HT. PWP 4 PINUS STROBUS `FASTIGIATA`PYRAMIDAL WHITE PINE B & B 7` HT. ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE PFC 7 MALUS X `PRAIRIFIRE`PRAIRIFIRE CRAB APPLE B & B 2.5" CAL. RBR 3 BETULA NIGRA MULTI-TRUNK RIVER BIRCH B & B 7` HT. WFT 3 CHIONANTHUS VIRGINICUS WHITE FRINGETREE B & B, CLUMP 6` MULTI-TRUNK SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE BCC 19 VIBURNUM TRILOBUM `BAILEY COMPACT`BAILEY`S COMPACT HIGHBUSH CRANBERRY #5 CONT. BMV 3 VIBURNUM DENTATUM `CHRISTOM`BLUE MUFFIN VIBURNUM #5 CONT. DBH 23 DIERVILLA LONICERA DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE #5 CONT. DKL 33 SYRINGA MEYERI `PALIBIN`DWARF KOREAN LILAC #5 CONT. IBC 24 ARONIA MELANOCARPA `IROQUOIS BEAUTY` TM IROQUOIS BEAUTY BLACK CHOKEBERRY #5 CONT. TGA 8 THUJA OCCIDENTALIS `TECHNY GLOBE`TECHNY GLOBE ARBORVITAE #5 CONT. PERENNIALS QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE BFI 27 IRIS VERSICOLOR BLUE FLAG IRIS #1 CONT. CFS 90 CAREX VULPINOIDEA FOX SEDGE #1 CONT. CJP 22 EUPATORIUM MACULATUM `PURPLE BUSH` COMPACT JOE-PYE WEED #1 CONT. LBS 51 SCHIZACHYRIUM SCOPARIUM LITTLE BLUESTEM GRASS #1 CONT. PCF 66 ECHINACEA ANGUSTIFOLIA PURPLE CONEFLOWER #1 CONT. SMW 20 ASCLEPIAS INCARNATA SWAMP MILKWEED #1 CONT. WTH 24 CHELONE GLABRA WHITE TURTLEHEAD #1 CONT. PLANT SCHEDULE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FFE: 836.0 GARAGE LEVEL: 825.0 1 - BHS 3 - KCT 3 - AGM 3 - PFC 4 - PWP 4 - PFC 3 - DKL 8 - DKL 7 - DKL 8 - DKL 7 - DKL 3 - RBR 3 - BDL 3 - WFT 3 - BMV 8 - TGA SEE STORMWATER TREATMENT ENLARGEMENT © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\L1-LANDSCAPE PLAN.dwg August 30, 2019 - 12:06pm1. VERIFY ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WITH REMOVALS AND SITE WORK. 2. ALL DISTURBED LANDSCAPED AREAS, NOT INDICATED AS PLANTING BEDS, ARE TO BE SEEDED, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. SEEDING TO BE PER MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STARDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, 2000 EDITION AND PER 2007 SEEDING MANUAL. SOD IS TO BE PRIMARILY KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS, FREE OF LAWN GRASS WEEDS. MATCH INTO EXISTING, AS APPLICABLE. ANCHOR SOD ON SLOPED OR POTENTIAL EROSION AREAS, OR AS REQUIRED. 3. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PLANTS REQUIRED AS REFLECTED ON PLAN, NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF PLAN AND SCHEDULE DO NOT MATCH. ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO ADHERE TO THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, LATEST VERSION. ADD FERTILIZER, HERBACIDE, AND PESTICIDE AS NECESSARY FOR OPTIMUM GROWTH. 4. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 4" TOPSOIL IN LAWN AREAS AND 12" TOPSOIL IN LANDSCAPE BEDS. ADD SOIL AMENDMENTS FOR OPTIMUM PLANT GROWTH. ALL PARKING ISLAND GRADES SHALL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT CROWN. 5. ALL PLANTING BEDS TO BE EDGED WITH COMMERCIAL GRADE VINYL EDGING, "EDG-KING" BY OLY-OLA, OR APPROVED EQUAL, ANCHORED 4' O.C. WITH METAL SPIKES. 6. DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH SHALL BE COLORED, RED CANYON BY SYLVA, OR APPROVED EQUAL, AND AT A MINIMUM 4" DEPTH, FREE OF ALL DELETERIOUS MATERIAL. ROCK MULCH TO BE BYRAN RED ROCK, 1 1/2" - 3" DIAMETER, AND AT A MINIMUM 3" DEPTH. ROCK MULCH TO BE ON COMMERCIAL GRADE LANDSCAPE FILTER FABRIC, WITH 4" OVERLAP AND ANCHORED. OWNER TO APPROVE OF MULCH. 7. SINGLE TREE AND SHRUB PLANTINGS SHALL HAVE A 4" DEPTH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH RING AROUND EACH BASE. DECIDUOUS PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 3' DIAMETER RING, EVERGREEN PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A RING TO THE DRIP LINE. 8. EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS, THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY, SHALL BE PRUNED TO REMOVE DEAD OR UNDESIRABLE LIMBS AND TO SHAPE PLANT FOR DESIRABLE APPEARANCE AND COMPLETED BY A QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL. CONTRACTOR TO CLEAR AND GRUB EXISTING VEGETATION AND DISPOSE OF ALL REMOVALS OFF-SITE PER PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS. 9. CONTRACTOR TO WATER PLANT MATERIAL DURING INSTALLATION AND DURING ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD. VOLUME OF WATER TO BE PER PLANT REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT AND NORMAL GROWTH. 10. CONTRACTOR TO WARRANTY NEW PLANT MATERIAL FOR ONE-YEAR UPON PROJECT COMPLETION AND OWNER'S ACCEPTANCE. 11. PROPERTY SHALL HAVE AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE IRRIGATED. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT APPROVAL. SYSTEM SHALL BE WINTERIZED(BLOWN-OUT) AFTER THE FIRST OPERATIONAL SEASON AND SHALL PROVIDE STARTUP THE FOLLOWING SPRING. IRRIGATION SHALL HAVE TWO-YEAR WARRANTY ON PARTS AND LABOR FOLLOWING INSTALLATION APPROVAL BY OWNER. PROVIDE BACKFLOW DEVICE, WATER METER, BOOSTER PUMP, CONTROLLER, RAIN SENSOR, WIRES, VALVE BOXES, SLEEVING, VALVES, ROTORS, SPRAYS, AND OTHER ACCESSORIES FOR A COMPLETE SYSTEM. 12. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUAL LOTS TO BE ADDRESSED AT BUILDING DEVELOPMENT. LANDSCAPE NOTESSTORMWATER TREATMENT ENLARGEMENT OVERSTORY TREE REQUIREMENT TREES REQUIRED:1,272 / 40 LF = 31.8 = 32 TREES [ LOT PERIMETER / 40 ] TREES PROVIDED:22 TREES EXISTING TREE CREDIT: 10 EXISTING COTTONWOOD TREES OF SIGNIFICANT DBH TOTAL OVERSTORY TREES: 32 TREES SHRUBS REQUIRED: NO MINIMUM SPECIFIED SHRUBS PROVIDED: 115 SHRUBS PROTECTED TREE REMOVAL A PROTECTED TREE IS ANY HEALTHY DECIDUOUS TREE AT LEAST 8" DBH OR EVERGREEN AT LEAST 20'-TALL (EXCEPT THE LISTED UNDESIRABLE SPECIES). PROPOSED PROTECTED TREE REMOVALS:5 TREES [REMOVE 1 PROTECTED TREE, REPLACE WITH 1 TREE OF SIMILAR SPECIES] TREES PROVIDED:5 TREES TOTAL TREE COUNT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN: 10 TREES TOTAL PROPOSED TREES: 22 TREES LANDSCAPE SUMMARY NORTH LANDSCAPE PLAN L100 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD LEC/BAW TJL 2019 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.K:\TWC_LDEV\UrbanWorks\AEON EDINA\CAD\PlanSheets\L1-LANDSCAPE DETAILS.DWG August 30, 2019 - 12:06pmDOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH NOTES: 2X ROOT BALL WIDTH SOD 4" TOPSOIL PREPARED PLANTING BED AND BACKFILL SOIL (THOROUGHLY LOOSENED) NOTES: 1. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. 2. PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING OF TOP AND ROOT. 3. REMOVE CONTAINER AND SCORE OUTSIDE OF SOIL MASS TO REDIRECT AND PREVENT CIRCLING FIBROUS ROOTS. REMOVE OR CORRECT STEM GIRDLING ROOTS. 4. PLUMB AND BACKFILL WITH PLANTING SOIL. 5. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL VOIDS. 6. BACK FILL VOIDS AND WATER SECOND TIME. 7. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 8. MIX IN 3-4" OF ORGANIC COMPOST. 1. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. 2. PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING. 3. SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL OR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED PLANTING SOIL. INSTALL PLANT SO THE ROOT FLARE IS AT OR UP TO 2" ABOVE THE FINISHED GRADE WITH BURLAP AND WIRE BASKET, (IF USED), INTACT. 4. SLIT REMAINING TREATED BURLAP AT 6" INTERVALS. 5. BACKFILL TO WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12" OF THE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL, THEN WATER PLANT. REMOVE THE TOP 1/3 OF THE BASKET OR THE TOP TWO HORIZONTAL RINGS WHICHEVER IS GREATER. REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND NAILS FROM THE TOP 1/3 OF THE BALL. REMOVE ALL TWINE. REMOVE OR CORRECT STEM GIRDLING ROOTS. 6. PLUMB AND BACKFILL WITH PLANTING SOIL. 7. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL VOIDS. 8. BACK FILL VOIDS AND WATER SECOND TIME. 9. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 10. FINAL LOCATION OF TREE TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER. PLANTING SOIL ON CENTER SPACINGAS STATED ON PLAN. EXTEND HOLE EXCAVATION WIDTHA MINIMUM OF 6" BEYONDTHE PLANTS ROOT SYSTEM. FINISHED GRADE EDGER, AS SPECIFIED TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: N.T.S.L1011 SHRUB / PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: N.T.S.L1012 MULCH 3/16" X 4" STEEL EDGER 12" STEEL EDGER SPIKE TURF/SOD SUBGRADE 12" STEEL EDGER SPIKE 3/16" X 4" STEEL EDGER4'MULCH TURF/SOD TOP OF EDGER TO BE FLUSH WITH SOD PLANSECTION STEEL EDGER DETAIL SCALE: N.T.S.L1013 BUILDING, EXTERIOR WALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDING SPECIFIED ROCK MULCH 2' MAINTENANCE STRIP EDGER, AS SPECIFIED SOIL MIX TO BE MINIMUM OF 4" BELOW EDGING TOP TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE LIP FOR MULCH. SPECIFIED SOIL MIX FINISH GRADE FOR LAWN MAINTENANCE STRIP DETAIL SCALE: 1-1/2"=1'L10144"1"LANDSCAPE DETAILS L101 GENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU KEYNOTES: A D B C E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 114.5 D.8 F.1 6.6 140 SF STAIR B 030 296 SF TRASH TERMINATION ROOM 056 106 SF ELEVATOR LOBBY 058 206 SF ELECTRICAL 051 281 SF WATER HEATER/ MAINTENANCE 052 209 SF WATER SERVICE 054 140 SF STAIR A 120 2 A401 1 A401 A501 6 A502 1 DRIVE DOWN TO SUBLEVEL PARKING TRENCH DRAINOVERHEAD DOOR056058B051030052020054TRENCH DRAIN SUMP A30 A31 A30 A32 123456789101112131415 16 17 C 18 C 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748495051525354555657 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 ELEVATOR PIT SUMP A07A07A07 A07 A07 A07 A07 A07 A07A07 24'-0" CLEAR DRIVE AISLE8'-6" TYP 18'-0" TYP8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"7'-6" RETAINING WALL 20831 SF PARKING 050 058A PARKING:© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:30:28 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB SUBLEVEL 1 - OVERALL PLAN A001.04100 APARTMENTSA07 FLOOR DRAIN A30 HANDICAP PARKING SIGN. CENTER ON STALL. HEIGHT AT BOTTOM OF SIGN AT 60-66" ABOVE PARKING SURFACE A31 HANDICAP ACCESS AISLE. PROVIDE NO PARKING SIGNAGE A32 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE w/ MAX 1:20 SLOPE & MAX 1:48 CROSS-SLOPE 1/8" = 1'-0"A001.0 SUBLEVEL PLAN1 STALL TYPE SUBLEVEL PARKING SURFACE PARKING PROOF OF PARKING TOTAL Compact Parking Stall 2 0 0 Double HC Parking Stall 2 0 0 HC Single Parking Stall 0 1 0 Standard Parking Stall 60 11 12 TOTAL STALL COUNT 64 12 12 88 2 2 1 83 N DW DWDWDW DW DW DW DW DWDWDWDW DW DWDW DWGENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU AA DD BB CC EE F GG HH 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 4.5 4.5 D.8D.8 F.1F.1 6.6 6.6 682 SF 1BR - B 108 1230 SF 3BR - B 106 1230 SF 3BR - B 104 949 SF 2BR - C 102 949 SF 2BR - C 101 1230 SF 3BR - B 105 961 SF 2BR - B 103 377 SF KID ZONE 156 1006 SF CLUB ROOM 154 227 SF COMPUTER/ CONFERENCE 155 996 SF 2BR - D 111 944 SF 2BR - E 109 682 SF 1BR - B 113 682 SF 1BR - B 115 961 SF 2BR - B 117 949 SF 2BR - C 118 949 SF 2BR - C 116 682 SF 1BR - B 114 682 SF 1BR - B 112 715 SF LOBBY 150 903 SF CORRIDOR 388 212 SF PACKAGE/STORAGE 157 74 SF MECH 161 293 SF BIKE STORAGE 162 2 A401 1 A401 1 A401 A171 1 14 % A501 1 A502 3 U1130U1U1U1U1U1162161U1 U1155A 154B 157 158A U1U1U1120U1U1U1U1208 SF STAIR B 130 208 SF STAIR A 120 130EX158EX244 SF OFFICE 153 A784 1 A771 1 53 SF RESTROOM 159 153477 SF FITNESS 158 154A 454 SF CORRIDOR 382 120EX46 SF TRASH 160 U1DRIVE DOWN TO SUBLEVEL V4 A 1 W6 A 1 R6 A 2 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 R6 A 2 V4 A 1 R6 A 2 R6 A 2 S4 23'-7"27'-6"27'-6"27'-6"12'-1"15'-5 1/8"28'-2"17'-1 3/4"20'-3 7/8"27'-6"27'-6"23'-8 1/4"18'-0"24'-8 3/4"18'-0"26'-1 5/8"23'-9 5/8"3'-8 3/8"21'-0 3/8"18'-0"160'-9 1/4"61'-9"179'-11"61'-9"92'-8"92'-8"© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:51:37 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB LEVEL 1 PLAN - OVERALL A101.04100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A101.0 LEVEL 1 PLAN1 N DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DWDWDW DW DWDWDWDWDW DW DWGENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU KEYNOTES: AA DD BB CC EE FF GG HH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4.5 D.8D.8 F.1F.1 6.6 1348 SF 3BR - C 208 1230 SF 3BR - B 206 1230 SF 3BR - B 204 949 SF 2BR - C 202 949 SF 2BR - C 201961 SF 2BR - B 203 1230 SF 3BR - B 205 1230 SF 3BR - B 210 996 SF 2BR - D 211 944 SF 2BR - E 209 681 SF 1BR - B 213682 SF 1BR - B 215 961 SF 2BR - B 217 949 SF 2BR - C 218 949 SF 2BR - C 216 682 SF 1BR - B 214 936 SF 2BR - F 212 683 SF 1BR - C 207 388 SF AMENITY STORAGE 253 208 SF STAIR B 230 468 SF LAUNDRY 258 2 A401 1 A401 A501 2 A502 4 A172 1 A772 1 A785 1 208 SF STAIR A 220 377 SF LOBBY 250 89 SF TRASH 260 53 SF ELEC 255 53 SF MECH 257U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1U1230250 258 253 255 257220260U1R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 W6 A 1R6 A 2 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 S4 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 R6 A 2 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 R6 A 2 V4 A 1 S8 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:51:55 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB LEVEL 2 PLAN - OVERALL A102.04100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A102.0 LEVEL 2 PLAN1 N DW DW DW DWDW DW DW DW DWDWDW DWDWDW DWDW DW DWGENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU KEYNOTES: AA DD BB CC EE FF GG HH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4.5 D.8D.8 F.1F.1 6.6 2 A401 1 A401 1348 SF 3BR - C 308 1230 SF 3BR - B 306 1230 SF 3BR - B 304 949 SF 2BR - C 302 949 SF 2BR - C 301 1230 SF 3BR - B 305 961 SF 2BR - B 303 1230 SF 3BR - B 310 996 SF 2BR - D 311 944 SF 2BR - E 309 681 SF 1BR - B 313 682 SF 1BR - B 315961 SF 2BR - B 317 949 SF 2BR - C 318 949 SF 2BR - C 316 682 SF 1BR - B 314 936 SF 2BR - F 312 683 SF 1BR - C 307 388 SF AMENITY / STORAGE 353 208 SF STAIR B 330 468 SF LAUNDRY 358 A501 3 A502 5 A172 2 A772 2 A785 2 248 SF LOUNGE 352 89 SF TRASH 360 120 SF LOBBY 350 53 SF ELEC 355 53 SF MECH 357 U1U1U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1U1U1 U1U1320354355 353 358 350 352 360330208 SF STAIR A 320 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 W6 A 1R6 A 2 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 S4 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 R6 A 2 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 R6 A 2 V4 A 1 S8 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:52:12 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB LEVEL 3 PLAN - OVERALL A103.04100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A103.0 LEVEL 3 PLAN1 N DW DW DW DWDW DW DW DW DWDWDW DW DWDWDWDW DW DWGENERAL NOTES: 1.DIMENSIONS AT EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF SHEATHING 2.DIMENSIONS AT INTERIOR WALLS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALL 3.DIMENSIONS AT UNIT DEMISING ARE TO CENTERLINE OF WALLS 4.EXTEND ALL SHAFTS TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING OR TOP OF ROOF PENETRATIONS WHERE APPLICABLE 5.ALL RESIDENTIAL DEMISING WALLS ARE TYPE V3, V3A, AND V6 1HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING 6.TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CORRIDOR WALLS ARE TYPE W6, 1 HR FIRE RATING, WITH ACOUSTIC RATING. PROVIDE TYPE W8 AT PLUMBING WALL LOCATIONS AS NECESSARY - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 7.ALL UNITS ARE TYPE B ACCESSIBLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 8.MAINTAIN 8'-2" MINIMUM CLEAR HEIGHT IN GARAGE FROM POINT OF ENTRY TO HANDICAP STALLS, ALL OTHER PARKING AREAS SHALL PROVIDE 7'-2" MIN. CLEAR HEIGHT 9.DIMENSIONS @ CMU ARE TO FACE OF CMU KEYNOTES: AA DD BB CC EE FF GG HH 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 4.5 4.5 D.8D.8 F.1F.1 6.6 6.6 2 A401 1 A401 1348 SF 3BR - C 408 1230 SF 3BR - B 406 1230 SF 3BR - B 404 949 SF 2BR - C 402 949 SF 2BR - C 401 1230 SF 3BR - B 405 961 SF 2BR - B 403 1230 SF 3BR - B 410 996 SF 2BR - D 411 944 SF 2BR - E 409 682 SF 1BR - B 413 682 SF 1BR - B 415961 SF 2BR - B 417 949 SF 2BR - C 418 949 SF 2BR - C 416 682 SF 1BR - B 414 936 SF 2BR - F 412 683 SF 1BR - C 407 388 SF AMENITY/ STORAGE 453 208 SF STAIR B 430 468 SF RETREAT ROOM 458 A501 4 A502 6 A172 3 A772 3 A785 3 248 SF LOUNGE 45289 SF TRASH 460 120 SF LOBBY 450 U1U1U1U1U1U1U1U1U1 U1 U1 U1U1U1U1U1U1U153 SF ELEC 455 53 SF MECH 457 420457455 453 458 450 452 460430208 SF STAIR A 420 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 W6 A 1R6 A 2 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 S4 W6 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 V4 A 1 W6 A 1 R6 A 2 R6 A 2 S4 V4 A 1 R6 A 2 V4 A 1 S8 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:52:30 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB LEVEL 4 PLAN - OVERALL A104.04100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A104.0 LEVEL 4 PLAN1 N AA DD BB CC EE FF GG HH 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 4.5 4.5 6.6 6.6 2 A401 1 A401 A11 A12 A12 A14 A13 A13 A14 A14 A13 A13A14 A13 A14 A13 A14 A15 A15 A15 KEYNOTES:© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:30:37 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB ROOF PLAN - OVERALL A2014100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A201 OVERALL ROOF PLAN1 A11 ELEVATOR OVERRUN; REFER TO A291 FOR DETAILS A12 TRASH CHUTE VENT; REFER TO A291 FOR DETAILS A13 PRIMARY ROOF DRAIN A14 OVERFLOW ROOF DRAIN A15 METAL PARAPET CAP N GENERAL NOTES: 1.REFER TO SPEC EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FOR MATERIAL DETAILS KEYNOTES: LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" ADBCEFGHD.8F.1 10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"9'-0 1/8"1'-10"40'-6 1/8"E9 E4 E3 E8E5E7E9 E7E7E8E8E3E3E4E7 E6 E1E7E8E8E1E7E8 E2 LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 12345678910114.56.6 1'-10"9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"E3 E4 E5E7E8E8 E7E3E5E7E4E3E8E8E9E5E7E8E8E3E3 E12 E7E5E1 E8E8E11E12E7E5E7E1E8E12E7E7E12E7E2E19E19E19E19 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:54:42 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING ELEVATIONS A3014100 APARTMENTSE1 NORMAN FACE BRICK; 1/3 RUNNING BOND; MANGANESE IRON SPOT E2 BURNISHED BLOCK AT EXPOSED FOUNDATION AREAS, CHARCOAL E3 5/8" FIBER CEMENT PANELS; METALLIC SERIES AND ILLUMINATION SERIES, CUSTOM PAINTED WHITE FINISH ON BOTH PANELS, VERTICAL INSTALLATION E4 METAL PARAPET CAP, CHARCOAL E5 MECHANICAL LOUVER; FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING; REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATIONS E6 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT; BLACK ANODIZED FINISH E7 COMPOSITE FIBERGLASS WINDOW; BLACK E8 METAL REVEAL JOINT E9 EXTRUDED WOOD LOOK TRIM CLADDING, PROVIDE FLAT PANEL BACK-UP WALL PAINTED BLACK; BACKING/FURRING WITH INSECT SCREEN E10 E11 INSULATED HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING E12 INSULATED SWING PATIO DOOR, ANDERSEN E-SERIES E14 ALUMINUM BUILDING SIGNAGE E15 SUNSHADE; TYPE 1 E16 SUNSHADE; TYPE 2 E17 SUNSHADE; TYPE 3 E19 CAST IN PLACE STAIR E20 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E22 MODULAR RETAINING WALL; REFER TO LANDSCAPE FOR DESIGN INTENT 1/8" = 1'-0"A301 NORTH1 1/8" = 1'-0"A301 EAST2 GENERAL NOTES: 1.REFER TO SPEC EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FOR MATERIAL DETAILS KEYNOTES: LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" A DBC E F G HD.8 F.1 E9 E1 E7E6 E20 E8E8E1E14 E3 E4 E5E8E8E7 E9 E17 E15 E16 E9E4E5 E7 E16 E3E7E15E4E4 E22 1'-10"9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"11'-4"40'-6 1/8"LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 114.5 6.6 1'-10"9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"11'-4"1 1 /2 " / 1 2 " 1 4 % S L O P E D D R I V E T O L O W E R L E V E L 29'-7" TO PROPERTY LINE - NO LIMIT ON OPENINGS - 32% OPEN E4 E8 E3 E11 E1 E5E7 E5E4 E1 E5 E8 E9E3E8E8E7E7 E7 E8E8 E17E15E16 E22 E19E19 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:55:28 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING ELEVATIONS A3024100 APARTMENTSE1 NORMAN FACE BRICK; 1/3 RUNNING BOND; MANGANESE IRON SPOT E2 BURNISHED BLOCK AT EXPOSED FOUNDATION AREAS, CHARCOAL E3 5/8" FIBER CEMENT PANELS; METALLIC SERIES AND ILLUMINATION SERIES, CUSTOM PAINTED WHITE FINISH ON BOTH PANELS, VERTICAL INSTALLATION E4 METAL PARAPET CAP, CHARCOAL E5 MECHANICAL LOUVER; FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING; REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATIONS E6 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT; BLACK ANODIZED FINISH E7 COMPOSITE FIBERGLASS WINDOW; BLACK E8 METAL REVEAL JOINT E9 EXTRUDED WOOD LOOK TRIM CLADDING, PROVIDE FLAT PANEL BACK-UP WALL PAINTED BLACK; BACKING/FURRING WITH INSECT SCREEN E10 E11 INSULATED HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING E12 INSULATED SWING PATIO DOOR, ANDERSEN E-SERIES E14 ALUMINUM BUILDING SIGNAGE E15 SUNSHADE; TYPE 1 E16 SUNSHADE; TYPE 2 E17 SUNSHADE; TYPE 3 E19 CAST IN PLACE STAIR E20 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E22 MODULAR RETAINING WALL; REFER TO LANDSCAPE FOR DESIGN INTENT 1/8" = 1'-0"A302 SOUTH1 1/8" = 1'-0"A302 WEST2 GENERAL NOTES: 1.REFER TO SPEC EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FOR MATERIAL DETAILS KEYNOTES: LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 2 A401 E9 E4 E3 E8 E6 E1E7 E5 E7 E9 E7 E8E8 E7 E8E8E3E3 E1 E7E8 E4 E7 10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"9'-0 1/8"1'-10"LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 1 A401 E3 E4 E5E7 E12 E7E5E1 E8 E5 E7E4 E3 E5 E7 E1 15'-4" TO PROPERTY LINE - 45% ALLOWABLE OPENINGS - 31% OPEN E8E8 E8E8E9E5E7E8E8 E8 E8 E11E12E7E12E7E7E12E7 E3E3 E7E3 1'-10"9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:30:54 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING ELEVATIONS A3034100 APARTMENTSE1 NORMAN FACE BRICK; 1/3 RUNNING BOND; MANGANESE IRON SPOT E2 BURNISHED BLOCK AT EXPOSED FOUNDATION AREAS, CHARCOAL E3 5/8" FIBER CEMENT PANELS; METALLIC SERIES AND ILLUMINATION SERIES, CUSTOM PAINTED WHITE FINISH ON BOTH PANELS, VERTICAL INSTALLATION E4 METAL PARAPET CAP, CHARCOAL E5 MECHANICAL LOUVER; FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING; REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATIONS E6 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT; BLACK ANODIZED FINISH E7 COMPOSITE FIBERGLASS WINDOW; BLACK E8 METAL REVEAL JOINT E9 EXTRUDED WOOD LOOK TRIM CLADDING, PROVIDE FLAT PANEL BACK-UP WALL PAINTED BLACK; BACKING/FURRING WITH INSECT SCREEN E10 E11 INSULATED HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING E12 INSULATED SWING PATIO DOOR, ANDERSEN E-SERIES E14 ALUMINUM BUILDING SIGNAGE E15 SUNSHADE; TYPE 1 E16 SUNSHADE; TYPE 2 E17 SUNSHADE; TYPE 3 E19 CAST IN PLACE STAIR E20 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E22 MODULAR RETAINING WALL; REFER TO LANDSCAPE FOR DESIGN INTENT 1/8" = 1'-0"A303 NORTH COLOR1 1/8" = 1'-0"A303 EAST COLOR2 GENERAL NOTES: 1.REFER TO SPEC EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FOR MATERIAL DETAILS KEYNOTES: LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 2 A401 E3 E4 E5 E9E4E5 E9 E1 E7E6 E8E8E7 E9 E20 E8E8 E7 E16 E3 E1 E14 E17 E15 E16 E15E7 9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"11'-4"E4E4 LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 836' - 0" 1 A401 S L O P E D D R I V E T O L O W E R L E V E L E4 E8 E3 E11 E1 E5E7 E5E4 E1 E5 29'-7" TO PROPERTY LINE - NO LIMIT ON OPENINGS - 32% OPEN E8 E9E3E8E8E7E7 E7 E8E8 E17E15E16 9'-0 1/8"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"11'-4"E4 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:31:05 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING ELEVATIONS A3044100 APARTMENTSE1 NORMAN FACE BRICK; 1/3 RUNNING BOND; MANGANESE IRON SPOT E2 BURNISHED BLOCK AT EXPOSED FOUNDATION AREAS, CHARCOAL E3 5/8" FIBER CEMENT PANELS; METALLIC SERIES AND ILLUMINATION SERIES, CUSTOM PAINTED WHITE FINISH ON BOTH PANELS, VERTICAL INSTALLATION E4 METAL PARAPET CAP, CHARCOAL E5 MECHANICAL LOUVER; FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING; REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATIONS E6 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT; BLACK ANODIZED FINISH E7 COMPOSITE FIBERGLASS WINDOW; BLACK E8 METAL REVEAL JOINT E9 EXTRUDED WOOD LOOK TRIM CLADDING, PROVIDE FLAT PANEL BACK-UP WALL PAINTED BLACK; BACKING/FURRING WITH INSECT SCREEN E10 E11 INSULATED HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING E12 INSULATED SWING PATIO DOOR, ANDERSEN E-SERIES E14 ALUMINUM BUILDING SIGNAGE E15 SUNSHADE; TYPE 1 E16 SUNSHADE; TYPE 2 E17 SUNSHADE; TYPE 3 E19 CAST IN PLACE STAIR E20 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E22 MODULAR RETAINING WALL; REFER TO LANDSCAPE FOR DESIGN INTENT 1/8" = 1'-0"A304 SOUTH COLOR1 1/8" = 1'-0"A304 WEST COLOR2 LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" GENERAL NOTES: 1.REFER TO SPEC EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FOR MATERIAL DETAILS KEYNOTES:© URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:31:06 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING ENTRY A3054100 APARTMENTSE1 NORMAN FACE BRICK; 1/3 RUNNING BOND; MANGANESE IRON SPOT E2 BURNISHED BLOCK AT EXPOSED FOUNDATION AREAS, CHARCOAL E3 5/8" FIBER CEMENT PANELS; METALLIC SERIES AND ILLUMINATION SERIES, CUSTOM PAINTED WHITE FINISH ON BOTH PANELS, VERTICAL INSTALLATION E4 METAL PARAPET CAP, CHARCOAL E5 MECHANICAL LOUVER; FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING; REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATIONS E6 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT; BLACK ANODIZED FINISH E7 COMPOSITE FIBERGLASS WINDOW; BLACK E8 METAL REVEAL JOINT E9 EXTRUDED WOOD LOOK TRIM CLADDING, PROVIDE FLAT PANEL BACK-UP WALL PAINTED BLACK; BACKING/FURRING WITH INSECT SCREEN E10 E11 INSULATED HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SIDING E12 INSULATED SWING PATIO DOOR, ANDERSEN E-SERIES E14 ALUMINUM BUILDING SIGNAGE E15 SUNSHADE; TYPE 1 E16 SUNSHADE; TYPE 2 E17 SUNSHADE; TYPE 3 E19 CAST IN PLACE STAIR E20 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E22 MODULAR RETAINING WALL; REFER TO LANDSCAPE FOR DESIGN INTENT A305 MAIN BUILDING ENTRY1 LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" ADBCEFGH 2 A401 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 1230 SF 3BR - B 20831 SF PARKING903 SFCORRIDOR1753 SFCORRIDOR1753 SFCORRIDOR1753 SFCORRIDORDRIVE DOWN TO SUBLEVEL 24'-0" CLEAR DRIVE AISLE PCF-1 WJF-1 WJR-1 WTF-1 SOG-1 WD-T1 WD-T2 CMUF-1 CMUF-1 FDS-1 FDS-1 RETAINING WALL LEVEL 1 836' -0" LEVEL 2 846' -6" ROOF 876' -6 1/8" SUBLEVEL 1 824' -8" LEVEL 3 857' -0" LEVEL 4 867' -6" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 114.5 6.6 1 A401 1753 SF CORRIDOR 1753 SF CORRIDOR 1753 SF CORRIDOR 597 SF CIRCULATION 20831 SF PARKING 944 SF 2BR - E 944 SF 2BR - E 944 SF 2BR - E 944 SF 2BR - E 949 SF 2BR - C 949 SF 2BR - C 949 SF 2BR - C 949 SF 2BR - C 454 SF CORRIDOR DRIVE DOWN TO SUBLEVEL OVERHEAD DOORTRENCH DRAIN WD-T1 WD-T2 WJR-1 WTF-1 PCF-1 WD-T2 WD-T1 WJF-1 WTF-1 FDS-1 FDS-1 WJF-1 WJF-1 WD-T2 WD-T2 RETAINING WALL WTF-1 WTF-1 PCF-1 WD-T2 WD-T2 WTF-1 WTF-1 WJR-1 PCF-1 SOG-1SOG-1 © URBANWORKS ARCHITECTURE LLC, 2018901 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 145, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONSULTANT PRELIMINARY REVISIONS DATE PROJECT # PHASE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LAND USE APPLICATION 08.30.2019 8/30/2019 11:31:08 AMC:\!Revit Project Files\18-0015 A19 Central_mary.barnett.rvt4100 76th ST W EDINA08/30/2019 18-0015 SD MEB MEB BUILDING SECTIONS A4014100 APARTMENTS1/8" = 1'-0"A401 BUILDING SECTION EAST-WEST1 1/8" = 1'-0"A401 BUILDING SECTION NORTH - SOUTH2 EDINA, MN / 08.30.2019 / 18-0015 Aeon - 4100 W 76th St I hereby certify this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: _________________________ Max Moreland, P.E. License No. 52665 Date: __October 1, 2018________ Traffic Impact Study 4100 76TH STREET WEST EDINA, MINNESOTA Traffic Impact Study i 4100 76th Street West Executive Summary Background: An apartment building with affordable housing units is proposed at 4100 76th Street West in Edina, Minnesota . The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development on the study roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated. Results: The principal findings of this study are: • The proposed development is expected to generate 352 new trips during an average weekday, 25 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 34 new trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed development is expected to generate less traffic compared to the potential use of the site. A 26,000 square foot medical -dental office building would be expected to generate 864 daily, 67 a.m. peak hour and 115 p.m. peak hour trips. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable queues and delays based on the capacity analysis. • The amount of vehicle parking to be provided on site is anticipated to accommodate parking demand . • There are no bicycle facilities adjacent to the site and the pedestrian facilities are minimal. Recommendations: The following items are recommended based on the analyses contained in this study: • Include a bicycle maintenance station near bicycle parking to encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. • Tie the proposed sidewalks on the south side of the development into the existing sidewalks along 76th Street. • Make the southbound site access approach stop controlled at the intersection with 76th Street. • Encourage all loading and truck activity to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.). • Include this area of 76th Street in the City’s plans to improve pedestrian facilities. • Work with Metro Transit to upgrade the b us stop facilities near the site. • Consider other non-infrastructure methods to reduce vehicle travel, increase carpooling and non-motorized travel, and reduce travel during the peak hours. • Consider a mid-block pedestrian crossing on 76 th Street near transi t stops. This study is based upon a concept development plan dated August 23, 2018. Assuming the general characteristics of the p roposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study. Traffic Impact Study ii 4100 76th Street West TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 2. Existing Conditions ................................................................................... 2 3. Forecasted Traffic ..................................................................................... 4 4. Analyses ..................................................................................................... 6 5. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................... 14 6. Appendix ................................................................................................... 15 LIST OF TABLES & CHARTS Table 1 – Study Corridor Characteristics .............................................................................. 2 Table 2 – New Trip Generation ................................................................................................. 4 Table 3 – Maximum Trip Generation Comparison ............................................................... 5 Chart 1 – Study Corridor Volume to Capacity ...................................................................... 6 Chart 2 – A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections ................................ 7 Chart 3 – P.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections ................................ 8 Chart 4 – A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections . 9 Chart 5 – P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections . 9 Traffic Impact Study 1 4100 76th Street West 1. Introduction a. Proposed Development An apartment building with affordable housing units is proposed at 4100 76 th Street West in Edina, Minnesota. Following are the proposal’s key attributes: i. Vehicular access to the site will be provided via an existing curb cut on 76th Street per the concept development plan shown in the Appendix. ii. The proposed development will include 80 apartment units across four levels. iii. The development is expected to be fully occupied by 20 20 for the purposes of this study. iv. 83 vehicle parking stalls are proposed for the site; 72 in a below grade ramp and 11 in a surface parking lot. An additional 10 surface parking stalls could be added if necessary. v. A drop-off lane will be included on the north side of 76 th Street. b. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to d etermine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development. The traffic impacts are studied on the roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated, and improvements are recommended where mitigation is needed. For those not familiar with the general concepts and terms associated with traffic engineering, The Language of Traffic Engineering guide is included in the Appendix. c. Study Objectives The objectives of this study are: i. Document how the study intersections and roadways currently operate. ii. Forecast the amount of traffic expected to/from the proposed development. iii. Determine how the study intersections and roadways will operate in the future with and without the proposed development. iv. Recommend appropriate mitigation measures if poor operations are identified. v. Review multi -modal facilities surrounding the site. vi. Review the proposed parking supply for the site. The roadways corridors studied in this document include those surrounding the proposed site, which are: • France Avenue • 76th Street • Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street For the purposes of this traffic study, the study intersections closest to the proposed development and where the greatest impact is expected were chosen for review and include: • France Avenue & 76th Street • Parklawn Avenue & 77 th Street • Site Access & 76th Street This study does not account for the existing roadway conditions such as pavement quality or appropriate drainage. Traffic Impact Study 2 4100 76th Street West 2. Existing Conditions a. Corri dor Characteristics The proposed site is located on the north side of 76th Street west of France Avenue . Table 1 shows the characteristics of the key roadway corridors around this site and within the study area. Table 1 – Study Corridor Characteristics Name Designation1 Classification2 Speed Limit Lanes3 Fixed Route Transit4 Peds/ Bicycles3 France Avenue Hennepin CSAH 17 A Minor Reliever 40 mph 6 divided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks both sides 76th Street Edina MSAS 136 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 4 undivided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks both sides Parklawn Avenue Edina MSAS 136 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 4 undivided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks west side 77th Street Edina MSAS 136/171 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 5 undivided 2 Routes 3 Buses Sidewalks south side 1 CSAH = County State Aid Highway, MSA S = Municipal State Aid Street. 2 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Map . 376th Street west of France Avenue, Parklawn Avenue south of 76 th Street, 77th Street west of Parklawn Avenue. 4 Number of routes around the proposed site followed by the frequency of transit ser vice during the peak hours . b. Traffic Volumes Intersection video was collected at the two existing study intersections under normal weekday conditions in August 2018. Using these videos, 24-hour turning movement counts were obtained at the study intersections. The average weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours were found to be: • 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at France Avenue/76 th Street • 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. at Parklawn Avenue/77 th Street To reflect the standard commuter peak hours for the area, which will also be common with the proposed development, the volumes from the a.m. peak hour of 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 p.m. and the individual p.m. peak hour volumes for each intersection were used for analysis. The turning movement count data from the counts are contained in 15-minute intervals in the Appendix. Based on the turning movement volumes, the current daily traffic volumes on each study corridor are: i. 32,800 vehicles per day on France Avenue north of 76th Street ii. 33,900 vehicles per day on France Avenue south of 76th Street Traffic Impact Study 3 4100 76th Street West iii. 12,300 vehicles per day on 76th Street west of France Avenue iv. 12,800 vehicles per day on 76th Street east of France Avenue v. 9,500 vehicles per day on Parklawn Avenue north of 77th Street vi. 15,900 vehicles per day on 77th Street west of Parklawn Avenue vii. 7,900 vehicles per day on 77th Street east of Parklawn Avenue Traffic Impact Study 4 4100 76th Street West 3. Forecasted Traffic a. Site Traffic Forecasting A trip generation analysis was performed for the development site based on the methods published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Trip generation rates are provided by the ITE manual as well as local data collected by Spack Consulting . The ITE manual compiles studies from across the country to provide a national average traffic for various land uses. Spack Consulting collects current average traffic volumes for various land uses in the Twin Cities regional area for use in our studies. Local data is considered more relevant than the ITE national data as it is generally newer and accounts for our area’s specific characteristics. Per the procedure in the Trip Generation Manual , local trip generation data is used when possible and supplemented with national ITE data when local data is not available. The resultant new trips generated by the proposed development are shown in Table 2 based on both the ITE data and Spack Consulting data. A detailed trip generation table showing the exact breakdowns is provided in the Appendix. Table 2 – New Trip Generation Land Use Code – Source1 Description & Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out In Out In Out 221 - ITE Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) (80 dwelling units) 218 218 7 21 21 14 Local Apartment (80 dwelling units) 176 176 4 21 23 11 1 Local = Trip generation data collected by Spack Consulting in this regional area. As shown in Table 2, the trip generation forecasts based on both ITE and Spack Consulting data are relatively close. Since it is better to use local data when available, the trip generation based on local rates is used in the analysis. It is noted that the proposed development will include affordable housing units as opposed to market rate units. The trip generation rates used to determine the forecast trip generation from Table 2 are based on market rate housing locations. It is therefore possible that the actual trip generation seen at the development could be lower than forecasted here due to potential differences in vehicle ownership rates. To present a conservative analysis, the lo cally based trip generation rates from Table 2 are used in this study without any reductions that could account for the differences between the apartment uses . For comparison purposes, Table 3 shows the trip generation for the site assuming a different development for the site. With the PID (Planned Industrial District) zoning of the site, instead of the proposed development, a 26,000 square foot medical- Traffic Impact Study 5 4100 76th Street West dental office building could be developed instead. As shown in Table 3, the proposed development generates well less than half of the daily vehicle traffic than what could be put on the site. Table 3 – Maximum Trip Generation Comparison Land Use Code – Source1 Description & Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out In Out In Out Local Medical-Dental Office Building (26,000 square feet) 432 432 43 24 39 76 Local Proposed Development 176 176 4 21 23 11 1 Local = Trip generation data collected by Spack Consulting in this regional area. A trip distribution pattern was developed for the generated traffi c going to and from the proposed development. This pattern is based on the existing traffic volumes, site access and access to the regional transportation system. The general trip distribution pattern for this study is: • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the north on France Avenue • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the south on France Avenue • 15% of the generated traffic to/from the east on 76th Street • 15% of the generated traffic to/from the west on 77th Street Traffic generated by the site development was assigned to the area roadways per this distribution pattern. b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting To forecast future traffic volumes for the future build -out year of 2020 in the study area outside of the proposed development’s traffic, general growth in traf fic was added. Using MnDOT’s provided AADT volume history, the past roadway volumes along the study intersection were examined. These volumes show relatively stable volumes with recent increases along France Avenue with some of the side streets showing a mix of increases and decreases. From this information, as well as comparing to the forecasts from the 2016 Southdale Area Transportation Study from WSB, a 1.0% annual growth rate was applied to the existing volumes to generate the forecast year 2020 traffic volumes (2% growth total). This growth was applied to all existing movements in the study network to establish the No -Build forecasts. c. Total Traffic Traffic forecasts were developed for the 20 20 Build scenarios by adding the traffic generated by the proposed residential development to the No -Build forecast volumes. Peak hour forecasts are shown in the Appendix. Traffic Impact Study 6 4100 76th Street West 4. Analyses a. Corridor Vehicular Analysis While many factors contribute to a road feeling congested , the two biggest factors are volume, how many vehicles are using the road, and capacity, how many vehicles the road can accommodate a day. Transportation professionals use these pieces of information to create a ratio of volume to capacity. For example, a road with a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0, where the traffic demand is nearly equal to the traffic supply, will feel congested to motorists. Below is a rough guide of the daily traffic volumes different types of roads can accommodate based on Exhibits 16 -16 and 12-39 of the Highway Capacity Manua l, 6th Edition. If the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on a roadway is below the threshold, then it is considered un-congested. If the daily volume falls inside the range, the road is almost congested, and if the daily volume is over the threshold the road is congested. • 2-Lane (one in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), undivided street, are considered congested with a volume between 8,900 to 18,300 vehicles per day. • 4-Lane, undivided street (two in each di rection with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), – 18,600 to 36,800 vehicles per day. • 6-Lane, divided street (three in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), – 29,100 to 55,300 vehicles per day. To provide an initial planning level screening, Chart 1 provides volume to capacity ratios of the study corridors during each of the study years to determine if any of the roadway corridors are candidates for additional through lanes . As shown, on a planning-level analysis, the study roadways can accommodate the expected increase in traffic. Chart 1 – Study Corridor Volume to Capacity Congested: volume/capacity of 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 France Ave north of 76th St France Ave south of 76th St 76th St east of France Ave Parklawn Ave north of 77th St 77th St west of Parklawn Ave 77th St east of Parklawn AveVolume to Capacity RatioExisting 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 7 4100 76th Street West b. Intersection Vehicular Analysis Individual intersections can perform poorly during peak periods while the overall roadway corridor is operating with an uncongested daily volume to capacity ratio lower than 1.0. Therefore, capacity analyses are performed for the study intersections to determine if they need improvements such as turn lanes or an upgrade in traffic control. The existing and forecasted turning movement volumes along with the existing intersection configurations and traffic control were used to develop the average delay per intersection in each study scenario. The delay calculations were done in accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual , 6th Edition using the Vistro software package. The full calculations for each study scenario, including Level of Service (LOS) grades and queue lengths, are included in the Appendix. Also, included in the Appendix i s a guide explaining the Level of Service grade concept. Chart 2 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 3 (p.m. peak hour) show the average peak hour delay per traffic signal-controlled intersection for each study scenario. The LOS D/E boundary of 55 seconds of delay per vehicle is considered the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable traffic signal operation in Minnesota. The signal timing was provided by the City of Edina and Hennepin County. Chart 2 – A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections Congested at LOS D/E Boundary (55 seconds) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 France Ave & 76th St Parklawn Ave & 77th StAverage Delay (seconds)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 8 4100 76th Street West Chart 3 – P.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections Chart 4 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 5 (p.m. peak hour) show the 95th percentile queue lengths on the busiest stop sign controlled approach at intersections with side street stop sign control. Average delays are not considered a quality metric for intersections with side street stop sign control because the vast majority of vehicles going through the intersection are on the main roadway and have zero delay, which leads to low overall ave rage delays. At side street stop sign controlled approaches to busy roadways, the average delay for all the vehicles on the approach often exceeds 60 seconds. This can be the case for a few vehicles waiting at the stop sign where improvements would not be justified for the low traffic volume. Based on our experience, improvements are not warranted at these types of intersections until the 95th percentile queue at a stop sign is in the five to ten vehicle range. Congested at LOS D/E Boundary (55 seconds) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 France Ave & 76th St Parklawn Ave & 77th StAverage Delay (seconds)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 9 4100 76th Street West Chart 4 – A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections Chart 5 – P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections Per the above analyses, all the study intersections and corridors will operate acceptably throughout the study scenarios. Traffic from the proposed development is forecast to have little impact to the surrounding intersections. No additional intersection modifications are needed to accommodate traffic from the development. Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue (5 Vehicles) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Site Access at 76th St - SB95th Percentile Queues (vehicles)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue (5 Vehicles) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Site Access at 76th St - SB95th Percentile Queues (vehicles)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 10 4100 76th Street West c. Automobile Parking Forecasting & Analysis Parking to be Provided On Site A total of 83 automobile parking stalls will be provided on site with 72 stalls being in a below grade ramp and 11 stalls being at grade. An additional 10 surface parking stalls could be added if needed. Parking Required by Edina Per the City of Edina’s Code of Ordinances, at least two parking stalls are required per residential unit. Using the proposed development’s 80 dwelling units, at least 160 vehicle parking stalls would be needed. The current plan of 83 stalls, a rate of 1.04 stalls per dwelling unit, is short of what is laid out in the City ordinances. Expected Parking Demand The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has put together a document, ITE Parking Generation, 4 th Edition, that compiled parking demand data from different land uses. For a low to mid rise apartment building in a suburban area, this ITE manual lists that the average peak parking demand is 1.23 stalls per dwelling unit. That translates to 98 parking stalls at an 80 dwelling unit building. This expected demand i s higher than the proposed 83 vehicle stalls to be provided. Similar to ITE, Spack Consulting has also collected parking demand data for various land uses around the Twin Cities. Based on that collected local data, the average peak parking demand for an apartment building is 0.68 vehicle stalls per dwelling unit. This demand translates to 54 parking stalls, which is within the proposed parking supply. This site is located in an area with sufficient transit and non-motorized facilities to allow for travel without the need for a car. These characteristics suggest residents may not have the same parking demand as one completely dependent upon vehicle travel. Encouraging multi -modal travel to and from the proposed site would help ensure these facilities are used and the overall vehicle parking demand is reduced. As previously mentioned, this development is expected to provide affordable housing units. Affordable housing is likely to have a lower number of owned vehicles per dwelling unit than a standard market rate apartment building. While the City code and ITE expected demand is higher than the proposed supply, local data and the characteristics of the proposed development and the surrounding study area suggest a lower parking demand. Based on the lower par king demand more consistent with the proposed development and site, i t is anticipated the proposed parking supply is sufficient to accommodate the peak parking demand. Because of this, the additio nal 10 surface parking stalls do not need to be constructed at this time. The parking demand for the site should be monitored with the stalls being added as needed. Traffic Impact Study 11 4100 76th Street West d. Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking encourages multi -modal transport and helps to accommodate all users to the site. The City of Edina does not have bicycle parking requirements for residential developments. However, it is recommended to have as many spaces on site as possible to allow for bicycle travel. Bicycle parking spaces for long-term (overnight) resident use will be available in a bike room on the east side of the building on the first level. Short-term parking for visitors to the site , will be located at bike racks in front of the main entrance to the building. A bicycle maintenance sta tion is recommended either in the bike room or near the exterior bicycle parking to further encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. e. Concept Site Plan & Multi-Modal Review This property is on the edge of the Greater Southda le District. The following aspirations for the area are taken from the September 2018 Draft of the Greater Southdale District Small Area Plan: Aspiration #8: Build (or plan for) a street network encouraging pedestrian movement across and through the district where: • Walkable block lengths are the baseline framework for development. • Enhanced and more frequent street crossings facilitates pedestrian movement. • Wide landscaped boulevards encourage pedestrian activity and create a distinct district signature. • Community corridors within and extending well beyond the district enhance bicycle and pedestrian access while accommodating vehicle traffic on pedestrian terms. Aspiration #9: Imagine transportation in the district where: • Cars are not the focus and streets accommodate more than vehicles. • Major streets balance access and mobility. • Some streets serve as community corridors, linking to other community destinations with features that allow for movement in addition to cars. • Transit is a baseline service, both wi thin the district and to non -Edina locations. • Transportation recognizes trends, including autonomous vehicles and a time when parking structures aren’t needed for public parking Keeping these concepts in mind, the concept site plan contained in the Append ix was reviewed to determine if the plan meets C ity requirements, provides appropriate circulation, and minimizes conflicts. Following are key transportation elements of the concept site plan: Traffic Impact Study 12 4100 76th Street West i. Vehicle Circulation: The site uses one external access point on 76th Street, at the location of an existing curb cut. No additional accesses are proposed as a part of this development. The access on 76th Street will allow vehicle travel to both the at-grade surface parking as well as the below-grade ramp parking. No significant or unusual conflicts are anticipated with the access layout. The site access should be stop controlled at the intersection with 76 th Street. Per the capacity analyses, the queues for vehicles exiting the development are forecast to be low, suggesting no congestion or issues entering or exiting the proposed parking areas . Drop-offs and pick-ups at the building can be accommodated in the drop-off lane on the north side of 76th Street i n front of the building. It is noted that the drop-off lane shown in the site plan is also the location of a Metr o Transit bus stop. It will need to be communicated to Metro Transit that the drop-off lane is for use at this development and not for use as a bus stop. ii. Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure : The site plan shows sidewalks near the surface parking lot leading to the building entrance as well as sidewalks leading to different units around the building . The sidewalk shown on the south side of the site in the site plan will need to tie i nto the existing si dewalk along 76th Street. The France Avenue/76th Street intersection has received pedestrian facility upgrades in recent years, however those improvements do not extend much beyond the intersection on the west side. The sidewalks along 76th Street in front of the site are narrow and, other than the curb, do not provide a b uffer between pedestrians and vehicles. This can make it challenging for pedestrians with disabilities to access the site. It is recommended the City of Edina include this area in its plans for improving the City’s pedestrian facility network. The only marked pedestrian crossing of 76 th Street is at the France Avenue intersection. Having a mid -block crossing across 76th Street would further encourage pedestrian activity in the area. This crossing could be placed near the transit stops adjacent to the site to further encourage transit use in the area as well. With 76th Street being a straight, flat road in this segment, there would not be any anticipated sight distance issues. The mid-block crossing would need to include ADA -compliant curb ramps, pavement ma rkings and signage and may potentially have the need for push-button controlled flashers. There are currently no bicycle facilities adjacent to the proposed development. The City of Edina’s Draft Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan has 76th Street, Parklawn A venue and 77th Street marked as a segment for a Traffic Impact Study 13 4100 76th Street West planned on-street bikeway and France Avenue south of 76 th Street as a segment for a planned off-street bikeway. Other non-infrastructure methods are available to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel as well as carpooling and travel outside of the peak hours. These methods, if implemented, will lower the total number of vehicles accessing the site, reducing peak hour queuing and improving overall operations. These methods can include disseminating informati on on multi - modal transportation options to residents, setting up a carpool system for residents and aiding residents in obtaining transit passes. iii. Transit: Transit stops exist near the proposed development on 76 th Street that serve Metro Transit Route 6. This route gives access from Edina to Downtown Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota. A number of other bus stops in this area of Edina are also available for other routes, many of them express routes. The bus stops on 76th Street near the proposed development currently do not have shelters to provide protection from the weather and only one has a bench. Since this development could have a significant number of its residents using transit, it is recommended that the City of Edina work with Metro Transit to upgrade the bus stop facilities near this site. iv. Loading : Loading could occur in the drop-off lane on 76th Street. To avoid having trash collection vehicles navigate the parking areas , the property manager could coordinate moving the trash containers to be collected to the drop-off lane. It is recommended that all loading on site be encouraged to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) to reduce potential conflicts. Traffic Impact Study 14 4100 76th Street West 5. Conclusions and Recommendations The traffic impacts of the proposed development were studied and the principal f indings are: • The proposed development is expected to generate 352 new trips during an average weekday, 25 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 34 new trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed development is expected to generate less traffic compare d to the potential use of the site. A 26,000 square foot medical-dental office building would be expected to generate 864 daily, 67 a.m. peak hour and 115 p.m. peak hour trips. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable queues and delays based on the capacity analysis. • The amount of vehicle parking to be provided on site is anticipated to accommodate parking demand. • There are no bicycle facilities adjacent to the site and the pedestrian facilities are minimal. The following recommendations are made ba sed on the above findings: • Include a bicycle maintenance station near bicycle parking to encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. • Tie the proposed sidewalks on the south side of the development into the existing sidewalks along 76th Street. • Make the southbound site access approach stop controlled at the intersection with 76th Street. • Encourage all loading and truck activity to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.). • Include this area of 76th Street in the City’s plans to improve pedestrian facilities . • Work with Metro Transit to upgrade the b us stop facilities near the site. • Consider other non-infrastructure methods to reduce vehicle travel, increase carpooling and non-motorized travel, and reduce travel during the peak hours. • Consider a mid-block pedestrian crossing on 76 th Street near transi t stops. This study is based upon a concept development plan dated August 23, 2018. Assuming the general characteristics of the proposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study Traffic Impact Study 15 4100 76th Street West 6. Appendix A. Site Plan B. The Language of Traffic Engineering C. Traffic Counts D. Trip Generation Table E. Level of Service (LOS) F. Capacity Analysis Backup • AM Existing • PM Existing • AM 2020 No -Build • PM 2020 No -Build • AM 2020 Build • PM 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study A1 4100 76th St W Appendix A - Site Plan Traffic Impact Study A2 4100 76th St W Appendix A - Site Plan Research Brief — Volume No. 15 The Language of Traffic Engineering Traffic Engineering, and Traffic Engineers, often use technical terms or jargon that may be confusing or tough to understand even within the context of a sentence. Key terms and acronyms that can generally be found in all types of traffic studies are defined in this document. Types of Studies Access Management – The practice of government agencies limiting the amount of intersections (both public roadway crossings and private driveways) along a roadway corridor based on the function of the roadway to improve safety and mobility while streamlining access. Corridor Study – A transportation review and analysis of the existing and future traffic operations of a roadway segment. Varies in length from a couple blocks to a few miles and typically covers all modes of travel. Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Report – A document that examines and determines the most appropriate type of control (stop sign, signal, roundabout, or other) at one or more intersections. Safety Study – An examination of crash records to identify potential trends, issues, and problem intersections/ corridors. Usually includes potential mitigation options expected to decrease crash rates in the future. Speed Study – A review of existing travel speeds and the corridor characteristics to determine if speeding is an issue, the appropriate speed to post as the limit, and/or areas to provide reduced speed warnings. Traffic Impact Study (TIS) – A document that addresses the expected traffic impacts of a development and, if necessary, mitigation options that will reduce or eliminate negative impacts. Also referred to as a Traffic Impact Analysis. Transportation Plan – A document developed by a government agency to take inventory of their transportation network, identify concerns or issues and lay out the path for improvement of the system. Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) – A plan that documents the existing infrastructure around a site, including transit and non-motorized vehicle options, and develops measures to be implemented to encourage those alternative modes of travel. Warrant Evaluation – Review of traffic volumes and other characteristics at an intersection against thresholds to determine if a traffic signal or other traffic control option is needed/warranted. Key Organizations AASHTO – American Association of State Highway andTransportation Officials. A nonprofit, nonpartisan association representing transportation departments with a primary goal of fostering the development, operation, and maintenance of an integrated national transportation system. DOT – Department of Transportation. Government organizationswithin federal and state agencies dedicated to servingthe transportation needs of the community and typically responsible for study, design, operation, and maintenance of all facets of transportation. FHWA – Federal Highway Administration. An agency within the US Department of Transportation that supports State and local governments in the design, construction, and maintenance of the highway system. ITE – Institute of Transportation Engineers. An international educational and scientific association of transportation professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs. Traffic Engineering is a branch of civil engineering that focuses on the safe and efficient movement of people and vehicles. It is part science and part art, requiring not only technical skills for analysis but an understanding of motivations in choosing travel routes. Source: ETH Zurich Appendix B - The Language of Traffic EngineeringAppendix B - Language of Traffic Engineering Traffic Impact Study B1 4100 76th St W Resources MUTCD, 2009 Edition, published by FHWA Highway Capacity Manual, HCM2010 Highway Safety Manual, HSM About This Brief Spack Consulting prepared this brief as part of our company’s vision to significantly improve the practice of traffic engineering and transportation planning. Transportation professionals from around the world have assisted us in developing this document. We are providing this brief under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Feel free to use-modify-share this guide, but please give us some credit in your document. To request our whole series of Design Briefs and to be included on our distribution list for new materials, please email mspack@spackconsulting.com. And please reach out if you have any comments or questions related to this Design Brief. Research Brief — Volume No. 15 Important Manuals/Guides HCM – Highway Capacity Manual (released by the Transportation Research Board, or TRB). The guide for engineers and planners to assess traffic and environmental effects of highway projects. This manual presents the foundation of traffic analysis procedures in the US. MUTCD – Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. A document that sets minimum standards and provides guidance to ensure uniformity of traffic control devices (such as messages, location, size, shapes, and colors) across the nation. All roads are subject to its jurisdiction. HSM – Highway Safety Manual (released by AASHTO). A guide that presents a variety of methods for quantitatively estimating crash frequency or severity. Results 85th Percentile Speed – Speed at which 85 percent of drivers are traveling at or below. Speed limits are typically set at the 85th percentile speed. 95th Percentile Queue – The distance, generally measured in feet or number of vehicles, which will be exceeded in a lane, typically at an intersection, only five percent of the time. Usually used to help determine intersection turn lane lengths. Control Delay – The total amount of time a motorist takes to get through a road segment or intersection minus the time it would take without stopping due to traffic controls (like stop signs or traffic signals). Control delay includes decelerating and accelerating back to full driving speed. Functional Classification – the grouping of streets and highways into categories according to their characteristics and emphasis on mobility or access. Generally, categories include arterials (emphasizing mobility and fast travel), local roads (emphasizing access to adjoining properties), and collector roads (emphasizing a balance between the two and usually connecting arterials to local roads). Intersection Delay – The average amount of time, usually expressed in seconds, experienced by any vehicle traveling through an intersection. Level of Service (LOS) – Qualitative measure of traffic operations related to the amount of average delay experienced. Expressed in letter grades with LOS A representing the best operations with little to no delay and LOS F representing the worst operations with excessive delays and congestion. Measures of Effectiveness – Performance measures that define how well traffic is moving along a corridor or thru an intersection. The common MOEs are travel time, corridor speed, delay, and queues. Mitigation – Measures intended to reduce the impact of a development or improve an identified traffic issue by either improving capacity (like adding lanes) or reducing demand (like encouraging carpooling). Queue – Length of line of cars waiting at an intersection or at a bottleneck in a corridor, typically measured for each individual lane of traffic in feet or number of vehicles. Volume to Capacity (v/c) ratio – the number of vehicles through an intersection or roadway segment in a specific amount of time divided by the expected capacity of the road. Less than 1.0 indicates available capacity and above 1.0 indicates more vehicles than can be accommodated. Typically, a v/c ratio above 0.85 suggests operational issues. Trip Generation – The amount of vehicle traffic generated by a land use. One trip is equal to one vehicle traveling from an origin to a destination (traveling to and from work equals two trips). Warrants – Criteria based on volumes and other Measures of Effectiveness for determining when all way stop signs, roundabouts, traffic signals, or other type of control should be installed. Appendix B - The Language of Traffic EngineeringAppendix B - Language of Traffic Engineering Traffic Impact Study B2 4100 76th St W Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 12:00 AM 0 0 17 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 13 2 0 0 2 6 13 0 57 12:15 AM 0 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 2 8 1 0 0 3 1 4 1 33 12:30 AM 0 1 10 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 1 6 1 0 0 1 3 2 0 30 12:45 AM 0 0 10 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 Hourly Total 0 1 47 0 0 0 7 2 4 0 1 3 34 4 0 0 6 11 20 1 140 1:00 AM 0 1 6 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 2 9 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 26 1:15 AM 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1:30 AM 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 5 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 17 1:45 AM 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 12 Hourly Total 1 2 16 1 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 5 21 2 0 0 1 1 5 2 62 2:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 2:15 AM 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2:30 AM 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 8 2:45 AM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 12 Hourly Total 0 1 13 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 13 1 0 0 0 1 3 0 36 3:00 AM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 8 3:15 AM 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 13 3:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 3:45 AM 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 17 Hourly Total 0 1 15 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 17 0 1 0 3 0 4 0 46 4:00 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 15 4:15 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 14 4:30 AM 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 1 14 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 34 4:45 AM 0 0 11 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 15 17 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 51 Hourly Total 0 0 24 1 0 0 6 5 1 0 0 20 42 7 0 0 1 1 6 0 114 5:00 AM 0 1 12 5 0 0 1 5 1 0 0 13 13 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 54 5:15 AM 1 2 14 10 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 8 19 2 0 0 2 1 1 0 71 5:30 AM 1 1 15 4 0 0 5 6 2 0 0 24 47 8 0 0 0 1 1 0 115 5:45 AM 0 3 21 3 0 0 6 16 1 0 0 30 55 9 0 0 4 3 6 0 157 Hourly Total 2 7 62 22 0 0 15 35 4 0 0 75 134 20 0 0 7 5 9 0 397 6:00 AM 0 2 32 10 0 0 12 9 2 0 0 20 61 8 0 0 3 5 6 0 170 6:15 AM 2 5 35 9 0 0 10 20 3 0 0 30 90 13 0 1 8 6 7 1 239 6:30 AM 4 4 45 10 0 0 25 22 6 0 0 28 111 9 0 0 6 16 14 0 300 6:45 AM 0 13 55 19 0 0 27 44 3 0 0 49 160 9 0 0 13 18 14 0 424 Hourly Total 6 24 167 48 0 0 74 95 14 0 0 127 422 39 0 1 30 45 41 1 1133 7:00 AM 1 11 73 20 0 0 38 57 9 0 1 56 126 12 0 0 11 24 16 1 455 7:15 AM 0 19 113 24 0 0 36 69 13 0 1 51 142 23 0 0 12 32 12 0 547 7:30 AM 1 37 151 32 0 0 54 99 15 1 1 41 165 13 1 0 18 32 13 1 672 7:45 AM 4 46 146 34 0 0 69 140 31 0 0 48 156 13 1 0 25 28 17 3 757 Hourly Total 6 113 483 110 0 0 197 365 68 1 3 196 589 61 2 0 66 116 58 5 2431 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound France Avenue W 76th Street France Avenue W 76th Street TOTAL 1 - W 76th Street & France Avenue Edina, MN 8.28.2018 Traffic Impact Study C1 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 8:00 AM 3 48 124 30 0 0 81 148 26 4 0 32 150 25 0 0 21 39 12 0 739 8:15 AM 5 55 150 30 0 0 61 151 34 4 2 38 147 12 0 0 26 50 9 2 770 8:30 AM 2 31 142 35 0 0 48 98 34 0 3 32 172 28 0 1 28 38 10 0 702 8:45 AM 2 37 146 37 0 0 54 75 24 0 4 47 187 17 0 0 23 35 19 0 707 Hourly Total 12 171 562 132 0 0 244 472 118 8 9 149 656 82 0 1 98 162 50 2 2918 9:00 AM 3 34 172 37 0 0 40 55 24 0 4 41 186 21 0 0 25 38 20 2 700 9:15 AM 3 47 150 22 0 0 35 35 21 0 1 41 206 19 0 0 19 34 13 0 646 9:30 AM 2 16 145 30 0 0 35 21 23 0 3 27 201 29 0 0 28 39 13 1 612 9:45 AM 2 28 129 26 1 0 25 28 32 0 5 39 212 25 0 0 33 28 15 0 627 Hourly Total 10 125 596 115 1 0 135 139 100 0 13 148 805 94 0 0 105 139 61 3 2585 10:00 AM 1 27 180 29 0 0 44 23 24 0 0 27 224 18 1 0 30 22 28 0 677 10:15 AM 2 31 162 27 0 0 46 29 25 0 1 25 204 17 0 0 39 23 24 0 655 10:30 AM 2 27 183 24 0 0 34 24 12 0 1 40 210 15 1 0 42 39 22 0 675 10:45 AM 5 28 181 24 1 0 31 26 36 0 3 23 225 17 1 0 37 33 32 0 701 Hourly Total 10 113 706 104 1 0 155 102 97 0 5 115 863 67 3 0 148 117 106 0 2708 11:00 AM 4 33 179 26 0 0 39 28 29 0 2 28 238 32 0 0 49 29 24 0 740 11:15 AM 5 33 240 24 1 1 55 22 22 0 1 30 273 29 0 0 55 32 21 1 843 11:30 AM 4 25 198 30 0 0 49 31 30 0 0 19 257 24 0 1 53 44 27 0 792 11:45 AM 5 42 251 35 0 1 39 34 21 0 2 17 339 39 0 0 56 39 16 0 936 Hourly Total 18 133 868 115 1 2 182 115 102 0 5 94 1107 124 0 1 213 144 88 1 3311 12:00 PM 2 29 205 29 0 1 34 41 30 1 4 18 290 22 1 0 54 45 33 0 837 12:15 PM 4 28 238 35 0 0 50 55 34 0 1 25 288 24 0 0 51 29 29 1 891 12:30 PM 2 25 228 38 0 0 53 44 26 0 1 29 280 32 0 1 39 43 36 0 877 12:45 PM 2 27 229 37 0 0 47 53 34 0 4 29 322 29 0 0 38 40 27 0 918 Hourly Total 10 109 900 139 0 1 184 193 124 1 10 101 1180 107 1 1 182 157 125 1 3523 1:00 PM 3 28 279 32 0 0 49 49 25 0 4 23 273 28 0 0 39 29 31 1 892 1:15 PM 5 18 251 33 0 0 59 33 29 0 1 17 289 33 0 0 28 35 28 0 859 1:30 PM 1 28 257 35 0 0 53 26 35 0 4 25 268 28 0 0 26 30 17 0 833 1:45 PM 1 28 274 28 0 0 59 30 23 0 3 30 237 27 0 0 30 27 22 0 819 Hourly Total 10 102 1061 128 0 0 220 138 112 0 12 95 1067 116 0 0 123 121 98 1 3403 2:00 PM 3 30 215 31 0 0 56 36 28 0 2 13 209 27 0 0 43 24 26 0 743 2:15 PM 1 27 247 26 0 0 45 36 18 0 5 19 230 25 0 0 33 24 29 0 765 2:30 PM 1 25 219 16 0 1 49 33 21 0 2 21 233 25 0 0 25 30 32 0 733 2:45 PM 2 30 266 16 0 1 47 34 27 1 3 20 213 23 0 0 27 30 31 0 770 Hourly Total 7 112 947 89 0 2 197 139 94 1 12 73 885 100 0 0 128 108 118 0 3011 3:00 PM 2 22 267 31 0 0 56 31 33 0 3 31 258 28 0 0 40 38 36 0 876 3:15 PM 1 14 225 30 0 0 44 22 41 0 3 19 213 27 0 0 44 58 25 0 766 3:30 PM 1 41 285 28 0 0 31 33 36 0 2 16 253 24 0 0 40 68 47 0 905 3:45 PM 1 33 245 25 0 0 54 35 27 0 1 28 239 29 0 0 52 98 29 0 896 Hourly Total 5 110 1022 114 0 0 185 121 137 0 9 94 963 108 0 0 176 262 137 0 3443 TOTALFrance Avenue W 76th Street Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 1 - W 76th Street & France Avenue Edina, MN 8.28.2018 France Avenue W 76th Street Traffic Impact Study C2 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 4:00 PM 2 36 236 23 0 0 47 46 30 0 1 25 231 36 0 0 72 121 52 0 958 4:15 PM 0 31 239 22 0 0 63 48 37 0 2 26 279 40 0 0 46 113 53 0 999 4:30 PM 0 29 252 30 0 0 71 60 37 0 1 22 253 34 0 0 62 131 48 0 1030 4:45 PM 0 24 206 23 0 0 57 68 50 0 4 27 319 47 0 0 57 148 46 0 1076 Hourly Total 2 120 933 98 0 0 238 222 154 0 8 100 1082 157 0 0 237 513 199 0 4063 5:00 PM 0 51 261 29 2 1 81 50 44 0 3 25 310 44 0 0 93 122 26 0 1140 5:15 PM 1 19 234 22 2 0 59 51 52 5 4 29 276 42 2 0 71 110 41 0 1011 5:30 PM 1 24 231 21 0 0 55 49 42 0 3 38 315 27 0 0 45 67 46 0 964 5:45 PM 2 33 207 19 0 1 60 54 27 0 2 16 253 34 0 0 46 79 30 0 863 Hourly Total 4 127 933 91 4 2 255 204 165 5 12 108 1154 147 2 0 255 378 143 0 3978 6:00 PM 3 23 196 16 1 0 34 44 20 1 2 16 265 22 1 0 43 60 31 0 775 6:15 PM 4 22 246 18 4 0 44 36 27 0 1 28 268 25 0 1 24 36 26 0 806 6:30 PM 3 21 191 19 1 0 46 36 23 0 2 20 208 28 0 0 32 33 34 0 696 6:45 PM 4 25 201 13 0 0 50 25 16 1 3 29 224 23 0 0 22 32 29 0 696 Hourly Total 14 91 834 66 6 0 174 141 86 2 8 93 965 98 1 1 121 161 120 0 2973 7:00 PM 3 18 182 17 1 0 37 25 14 0 3 11 176 20 0 0 20 24 41 0 591 7:15 PM 4 13 193 18 0 0 41 17 11 0 2 12 188 20 0 0 21 17 25 0 582 7:30 PM 2 19 174 11 0 1 33 7 11 1 2 16 128 28 0 0 18 11 16 1 477 7:45 PM 3 12 190 11 2 0 29 18 17 0 4 16 156 19 1 0 18 17 13 0 523 Hourly Total 12 62 739 57 3 1 140 67 53 1 11 55 648 87 1 0 77 69 95 1 2173 8:00 PM 2 17 167 15 0 0 33 10 14 0 1 11 136 20 0 0 19 26 22 0 493 8:15 PM 1 14 168 7 0 0 38 13 9 0 1 11 121 20 0 0 9 13 22 0 447 8:30 PM 1 8 146 10 0 0 37 14 11 0 1 12 105 13 0 0 8 14 19 0 399 8:45 PM 1 7 137 4 0 1 13 7 7 0 1 9 84 11 0 0 7 10 12 0 311 Hourly Total 5 46 618 36 0 1 121 44 41 0 4 43 446 64 0 0 43 63 75 0 1650 9:00 PM 0 6 152 13 0 0 21 13 7 0 0 16 83 7 0 0 9 5 9 1 341 9:15 PM 0 5 90 4 0 0 24 8 4 0 1 2 83 6 0 0 9 4 10 0 250 9:30 PM 1 2 85 12 0 0 15 6 12 0 1 8 68 9 0 0 14 5 13 0 251 9:45 PM 0 5 89 1 0 0 7 4 6 0 1 11 57 2 0 0 11 7 14 0 215 Hourly Total 1 18 416 30 0 0 67 31 29 0 3 37 291 24 0 0 43 21 46 1 1057 10:00 PM 0 4 62 3 0 0 13 3 3 0 3 10 41 4 0 0 5 2 12 0 165 10:15 PM 0 2 50 7 0 0 3 4 3 0 0 5 34 6 0 0 6 3 9 0 132 10:30 PM 0 1 36 1 0 0 7 7 1 0 0 6 32 1 0 0 9 7 7 0 115 10:45 PM 0 2 30 2 0 0 6 5 2 0 0 10 31 7 0 0 7 2 8 0 112 Hourly Total 0 9 178 13 0 0 29 19 9 0 3 31 138 18 0 0 27 14 36 0 524 11:00 PM 0 2 32 1 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 2 11 3 0 0 3 3 11 0 75 11:15 PM 0 3 14 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 20 4 0 0 4 5 5 0 60 11:30 PM 0 2 26 2 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 12 1 0 0 4 3 5 0 62 11:45 PM 0 2 21 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 5 24 1 0 0 3 2 3 0 65 Hourly Total 0 9 93 3 0 0 13 5 3 0 0 9 67 9 0 0 14 13 24 0 262 DAILY TOTAL 135 1606 12233 1512 16 9 2843 2656 1518 20 128 1778 13589 1536 11 5 2104 2622 1667 19 45941 Cars 133 1594 12031 1503 15 9 2805 2592 1499 20 128 1761 13428 1512 11 5 2089 2604 1647 15 45340 Heavy Vehicles 2 12 202 9 1 0 38 64 19 0 0 17 161 24 0 0 15 18 20 4 601 Heavy Vehicle %1.48%0.75%1.65%0.60%6.25%0.00%1.34%2.41%1.25%0.00%0.00%0.96%1.18%1.56%0.00%0.00%0.71%0.69%1.20%21.05%1.31% 8.28.2018 1 - W 76th Street & France Avenue Edina, MN Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound TOTALFrance Avenue W 76th Street France Avenue W 76th Street Traffic Impact Study C3 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 11:00 AM 4 33 179 26 0 0 39 28 29 0 2 28 238 32 0 0 49 29 24 0 740 11:15 AM 5 33 240 24 1 1 55 22 22 0 1 30 273 29 0 0 55 32 21 1 843 11:30 AM 4 25 198 30 0 0 49 31 30 0 0 19 257 24 0 1 53 44 27 0 792 11:45 AM 5 42 251 35 0 1 39 34 21 0 2 17 339 39 0 0 56 39 16 0 936 Peak Hour Total 18 133 868 115 1 2 182 115 102 0 5 94 1107 124 0 1 213 144 88 1 3311 PHF 0.900 0.792 0.865 0.821 0.250 0.500 0.827 0.846 0.850 0.000 0.625 0.783 0.816 0.795 0.000 0.250 0.951 0.818 0.815 0.250 0.884 Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 4:30 PM 0 29 252 30 0 0 71 60 37 0 1 22 253 34 0 0 62 131 48 0 1030 4:45 PM 0 24 206 23 0 0 57 68 50 0 4 27 319 47 0 0 57 148 46 0 1076 5:00 PM 0 51 261 29 2 1 81 50 44 0 3 25 310 44 0 0 93 122 26 0 1140 5:15 PM 1 19 234 22 2 0 59 51 52 5 4 29 276 42 2 0 71 110 41 0 1011 Peak Hour Total 1 123 953 104 4 1 268 229 183 5 12 103 1158 167 2 0 283 511 161 0 4257 PHF 0.250 0.603 0.913 0.867 0.500 0.250 0.827 0.842 0.880 0.250 0.750 0.888 0.908 0.888 0.250 0.000 0.761 0.863 0.839 0.000 0.934 15486 17346 Cars 1503 12031 1594 133 15 Heavy 9 202 12 2 1 Total 1512 12233 1606 135 16 Cars Heavy Total Cars Heavy Total 15 4 19 1499 19 1518 6398 5 0 5 2592 64 2656 7026 2089 15 2104 2805 38 2843 2604 18 2622 9 0 9 5951 1647 20 1667 20 0 20 5773 Cars 11 128 1761 13428 1512 Heavy 0 0 17 161 24 Total 11 128 1778 13589 1536 17031 16871 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound AM Peak Hour 8.28.2018 PM Peak Hour Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound TOTAL TOTAL 1 - W 76th Street & France Avenue Edina, MN Northbound Daily Volumes Total Vehicles on Leg EastboundWestboundSouthbound Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection 12349 33902Total Vehicles On Leg Total Vehicles On Leg 32832 Total Vehicles on Leg 12799 Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Traffic Impact Study C4 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 12:00 AM 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 9 12:15 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 9 12:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 5 12:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 Hourly Total 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 0 0 27 1:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 1:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Hourly Total 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 6 2:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 6 2:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 Hourly Total 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 11 3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 3:15 AM 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 3:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 3:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 Hourly Total 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 12 4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 4 4:15 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 4:30 AM 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 8 4:45 AM 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 0 0 13 Hourly Total 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 0 0 29 5:00 AM 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 14 5:15 AM 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 8 0 0 27 5:30 AM 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 11 0 0 32 5:45 AM 0 1 1 11 0 0 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 11 0 0 51 Hourly Total 0 1 1 23 0 0 0 23 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 33 0 0 124 6:00 AM 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 19 0 0 64 6:15 AM 0 1 0 25 0 0 0 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 31 0 0 100 6:30 AM 0 1 0 25 0 0 0 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 40 0 0 123 6:45 AM 0 5 0 35 0 0 0 30 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 56 0 0 183 Hourly Total 0 7 0 99 0 0 0 73 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 146 0 0 470 7:00 AM 0 5 0 42 1 0 0 30 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 77 0 1 215 7:15 AM 0 4 1 63 0 0 0 41 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 90 0 0 271 7:30 AM 0 5 0 108 0 0 0 37 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 103 0 0 348 7:45 AM 0 5 0 146 0 0 0 65 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 128 0 0 469 Hourly Total 0 19 1 359 1 0 0 173 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 324 398 0 1 1303 1 - W 77th Street & Parklawn Avenue Edina, MN 8.28.2018 TOTAL Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Parking Lot Access W 77th Street Parklawn Avenue W 77th Street Traffic Impact Study C5 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 8:00 AM 0 6 1 146 0 0 0 41 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 127 0 0 430 8:15 AM 0 15 0 152 0 0 0 62 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 108 0 1 438 8:30 AM 0 6 0 122 0 0 0 50 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 103 0 0 370 8:45 AM 0 5 1 91 0 0 0 42 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 124 0 0 338 Hourly Total 0 32 2 511 0 0 0 195 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 351 462 0 1 1576 9:00 AM 0 4 0 72 0 0 0 32 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 81 121 0 0 316 9:15 AM 0 6 0 52 0 0 0 30 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 76 79 0 0 250 9:30 AM 0 3 1 48 0 0 0 27 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 75 77 0 0 235 9:45 AM 0 7 1 49 1 0 0 22 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 93 1 0 256 Hourly Total 0 20 2 221 1 0 0 111 18 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 311 370 1 0 1057 10:00 AM 0 5 0 44 0 0 0 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 74 0 1 214 10:15 AM 0 3 1 40 0 0 0 24 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 58 0 0 206 10:30 AM 1 4 1 39 0 0 0 19 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 76 0 0 219 10:45 AM 0 6 0 58 0 0 0 28 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 41 1 0 212 Hourly Total 1 18 2 181 0 0 0 96 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 274 249 1 1 851 11:00 AM 0 8 0 36 1 0 0 34 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 61 58 0 0 204 11:15 AM 0 5 0 60 0 0 0 24 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 66 0 0 237 11:30 AM 0 9 0 53 0 0 0 43 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 73 0 0 264 11:45 AM 0 10 0 73 0 0 0 40 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 94 72 0 1 293 Hourly Total 0 32 0 222 1 0 0 141 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 309 269 0 1 998 12:00 PM 0 7 0 63 0 0 1 35 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 59 0 0 250 12:15 PM 0 3 1 81 0 0 0 47 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 58 1 0 276 12:30 PM 0 6 0 89 0 0 0 41 7 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 69 60 0 2 273 12:45 PM 0 4 0 87 0 0 0 41 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 67 1 0 285 Hourly Total 0 20 1 320 0 0 1 164 34 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 297 244 2 2 1084 1:00 PM 0 5 1 72 1 0 0 42 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 49 0 0 234 1:15 PM 0 5 0 68 0 0 0 32 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 60 45 0 0 219 1:30 PM 0 5 0 47 0 0 0 26 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 42 1 0 184 1:45 PM 0 4 0 47 0 0 0 41 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 56 1 0 203 Hourly Total 0 19 1 234 1 0 0 141 24 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 227 192 2 0 840 2:00 PM 0 8 0 59 0 0 0 39 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 49 0 0 215 2:15 PM 0 5 0 58 0 0 0 44 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 48 1 0 199 2:30 PM 0 6 0 55 0 0 0 38 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 44 1 1 212 2:45 PM 0 4 0 62 0 0 0 44 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 68 0 0 252 Hourly Total 0 23 0 234 0 0 0 165 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 209 2 1 878 3:00 PM 0 9 0 67 0 0 0 62 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 59 58 3 0 261 3:15 PM 0 4 0 60 0 0 0 41 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 86 77 0 0 271 3:30 PM 0 8 0 87 0 0 0 80 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 104 0 0 397 3:45 PM 0 8 1 65 0 0 0 69 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 137 126 0 0 414 Hourly Total 0 29 1 279 0 0 0 252 17 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 395 365 3 0 1343 Parklawn Avenue W 77th Street 1 - W 77th Street & Parklawn Avenue Edina, MN 8.28.2018 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound TOTALParking Lot Access W 77th Street Traffic Impact Study C6 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 4:00 PM 0 3 0 91 0 0 0 94 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 163 141 2 0 503 4:15 PM 0 11 0 91 0 0 0 87 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 172 129 1 0 503 4:30 PM 0 18 0 126 0 0 0 106 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 156 0 1 571 4:45 PM 0 8 0 109 0 0 0 114 12 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 190 169 1 2 604 Hourly Total 0 40 0 417 0 0 0 401 40 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 682 595 4 3 2181 5:00 PM 0 11 0 124 0 0 0 106 8 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 201 151 0 3 603 5:15 PM 0 18 1 95 0 0 0 85 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 124 0 0 497 5:30 PM 0 8 0 95 2 0 0 82 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 106 0 0 421 5:45 PM 0 10 0 69 0 0 0 70 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 102 88 1 0 345 Hourly Total 0 47 1 383 2 0 0 343 32 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 587 469 1 3 1866 6:00 PM 0 6 0 88 0 0 0 56 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 50 1 0 281 6:15 PM 0 10 0 55 0 0 1 51 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 45 0 0 215 6:30 PM 0 5 0 55 0 1 0 46 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 44 1 1 207 6:45 PM 0 4 0 52 0 0 0 41 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 48 25 0 1 174 Hourly Total 0 25 0 250 0 1 1 194 18 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 222 164 2 2 877 7:00 PM 0 5 0 40 1 0 0 30 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 27 29 0 1 134 7:15 PM 0 3 0 31 0 0 0 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 29 24 0 0 109 7:30 PM 0 2 0 20 0 0 0 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 17 0 0 77 7:45 PM 0 1 0 19 0 0 0 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 24 1 0 93 Hourly Total 0 11 0 110 1 0 0 81 12 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 104 94 1 1 413 8:00 PM 0 2 0 23 0 0 0 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 28 0 0 100 8:15 PM 0 4 0 20 0 0 0 11 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 18 1 1 78 8:30 PM 0 2 0 21 0 0 0 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 13 0 0 74 8:45 PM 0 1 0 16 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14 14 0 0 53 Hourly Total 0 9 0 80 0 0 0 52 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 79 73 1 1 305 9:00 PM 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 52 9:15 PM 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 18 0 0 48 9:30 PM 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 7 0 0 49 9:45 PM 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 10 0 0 37 Hourly Total 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 31 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 49 46 0 0 186 10:00 PM 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 6 0 0 32 10:15 PM 0 0 0 12 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 30 0 0 58 10:30 PM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 15 0 0 28 10:45 PM 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 0 0 27 Hourly Total 0 0 0 30 1 0 0 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 59 0 0 145 11:00 PM 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 14 11:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 0 14 11:30 PM 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 18 11:45 PM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 12 Hourly Total 0 1 0 11 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 25 0 0 58 DAILY TOTAL 1 353 12 4044 8 1 2 2657 358 1 0 4 1 6 18 5 4692 4484 20 17 16640 Cars 1 341 12 3997 7 1 2 2599 347 0 0 4 1 6 18 5 4656 4420 19 16 16411 Heavy Vehicles 0 12 0 47 1 0 0 58 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 64 1 1 229 Heavy Vehicle %0.00%3.40%0.00%1.16%12.50%0.00%0.00%2.18%3.07%100.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.77%1.43%5.00%5.88%1.38% TOTALParking Lot Access W 77th Street Parklawn Avenue W 77th Street Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound 1 - W 77th Street & Parklawn Avenue Edina, MN 8.28.2018 Traffic Impact Study C7 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 7:45 AM 0 5 0 146 0 0 0 65 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 128 0 0 469 8:00 AM 0 6 1 146 0 0 0 41 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 127 0 0 430 8:15 AM 0 15 0 152 0 0 0 62 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 108 0 1 438 8:30 AM 0 6 0 122 0 0 0 50 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 103 0 0 370 Peak Hour Total 0 32 1 566 0 0 0 218 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 396 466 0 1 1707 PHF 0.000 0.533 0.250 0.931 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.838 0.778 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.846 0.910 0.000 0.250 0.910 Time U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles U Turns Left Turns Straight Through Right Turns Peds/ Bicycles 4:15 PM 0 11 0 91 0 0 0 87 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 172 129 1 0 503 4:30 PM 0 18 0 126 0 0 0 106 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 156 0 1 571 4:45 PM 0 8 0 109 0 0 0 114 12 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 190 169 1 2 604 5:00 PM 0 11 0 124 0 0 0 106 8 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 201 151 0 3 603 Peak Hour Total 0 48 0 450 0 0 0 413 40 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 720 605 2 6 2281 PHF 0.000 0.667 0.000 0.893 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.906 0.833 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.000 0.896 0.895 0.500 0.500 0.944 4410 5052 Cars 3997 12 341 1 7 Heavy 47 0 12 0 1 Total 4044 12 353 1 8 Cars Heavy Total Cars Heavy Total 16 1 17 347 11 358 9201 5 0 5 2599 58 2657 3018 4656 36 4692 2 0 2 4420 64 4484 1 0 1 6710 19 1 20 0 1 1 4844 Cars 18 0 4 1 6 Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 Total 18 0 4 1 6 11 34 15911 45Total Vehicles On Leg Total Vehicles On Leg 9462 Total Vehicles on Leg 7862 Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering Intersection Vehicles Exiting Intersection Vehicles Entering IntersectionTotal Vehicles on Leg EastboundWestboundSouthbound Northbound Daily Volumes 1 - W 77th Street & Parklawn Avenue Edina, MN PM Peak Hour Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound TOTAL TOTAL Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound AM Peak Hour 8.28.2018 Traffic Impact Study C8 4100 76th St W Appendix C - Traffic Counts Weekday Daily Volumes DAILY ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)ITE 221 Dwelling Units 80.00 5.44 50%50%0%0 0%0 218 218 Weekday AM Peak Hour AM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)ITE 221 Dwelling Units 80.00 0.36 26%74%0%0 0%0 7 21 Weekday PM Peak Hour PM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)ITE 221 Dwelling Units 80.00 0.44 61%39%0%0 0%0 21 14 Weekday Daily Volumes DAILY ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Apartment Local Dwelling Units 80.00 4.40 50%50%0%0 0%0 176 176 Weekday AM Peak Hour AM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Apartment Local Dwelling Units 80.00 0.31 15%85%0%0 0%0 4 21 Weekday PM Peak Hour PM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBY RATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXIT Apartment Local Dwelling Units 80.00 0.43 68%32%0%0 0%0 23 11 ITE Data Local Data NEW TRIPS LAND USE SOURCE CODE DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY NEW TRIPS LAND USE SOURCE CODE DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY NEW TRIPS NEW TRIPS LAND USE SOURCE CODE LAND USE SOURCE CODE DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY NEW TRIPS DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY NEW TRIPS LAND USE SOURCE CODE DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY LAND USE SOURCE CODE DEVELOPMENT UNITS QUANTITY Traffic Impact Study D1 4100 76th St W Appendix D - Trip Generation Table Research Brief — Volume No. 3 Level of Service (LOS) Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative description, similar to typical school grades, that traffic engineers use to communi-cate how good or bad traffic operations are on a corridor, intersection, or interchange. Common Factors Traffic can be a hard thing to quantify as everyone has a different tolerance for congestion. What seems excessively long to one person may seem good enough for another. These differences are readily apparent when comparing small towns or rural areas, where five cars an hour can be the norm, to big cities or downtowns, where less than hundred cars an hour, even in the middle of night, is rare. To combat this issue and provide a consistent measuring tool for traffic studies, a “Level of Service” rating was developed. Level of Service ratings are based on the roadway or intersection characteristics and the amount of traffic. Just like grade school, LOS A represents the best traffic operations, where traffic flows freely. LOS F, on the other hand, represents failing operations, where the road or intersection is congested and running beyond maximum capacity. LOS E is typically considered “at capacity” which means the amount of traffic is right at the level the roadway or intersection can adequately accommodate. Using Level of Service letter grades provides an easy way to convey road operations to the general public and has been adopted across the United States. Level of Service criteria have been developed for multiple types of traffic operations including: • Intersections • Urban Corridors • Freeways • Transit Service • Bicycle Operations • Pedestrian Operations The most common LOS criteria used is for car operations at intersections; both signalized and unsignalized. For an intersection Level of Service analysis, average delay for cars travelling through the intersection is used to determine the appropriate grade. A high delay results in a poor LOS rating and equates to poor operations. Similarly, low delay results in a good LOS rating and equates to good or great operations. LOS can be determined for the intersection as a whole, or for individual movements. It is common during peak periods in major population areas for an intersection to have an acceptable overall LOS rating, but fail to achieve a good grade for individual movements. Common Factors Impacting Level of Service • Number of Lanes. • Traffic Volumes. • Intersection Control (stop sign, signal, roundabout,interchange.) • Amount of access on a corridor. • Percentage of turning traffic. • Traffic signal cycle length (green time devoted to eachapproach) and phasing (one green for all approach movements or separate green arrows.) • Percentage of heavy trucks. • Roadway Grades. • Distribution of traffic within a peak hour as well as over thecourse of a day. • Pedestrian activity. • Bicycle activity. Appendix F - Level of Service (LOS)Appendix E - Level of Service Traffic Impact Study E1 4100 76th St W Resources • Highway Capacity Manual, fifth edition • Nation Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 616; Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets • http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_616. pdf • Florida Department of Transportation Quality/Level of Service Handbook • http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/ los/pdfs/2009FDOTQLOS_Handbook.pdf Although a Level of Service rating of A represents the best traffic operations, it is not always the most desirable. Providing LOS A for all corridors and all operations at all times would require a significant amount of land to be devoted to the road infrastructure, which makes it extremely costly to build and maintain. During non-peak times, like overnight, much of that infrastructure would sit unused. On the opposite side of the spectrum, a Level of Service rating of E and F represent traffic operations close to breaking down, or that already have. These ratings mean high delays, long queues, and slow speeds, not to mention driver frustration. Instead of trying to achieve one or the other, government agencies try to strike a balance between providing acceptable operations, neither falling nor flowing too freely. Because of this, LOS D is typically considered the lowest LOS acceptable by government agencies and is reflective of a balanced approach between cost and benefit. About This Brief Spack Consulting prepared this brief as part of our company’s vision to significantly improve the practice of traffic engineering and transportation planning. Transportation professionals from around the world have assisted us in developing this document. We are providing this brief under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Feel free to use-modify-share this guide, but please give us some credit in your document. To request our whole series of Design Briefs and to be included on our distribution list for new materials, please email mspack@spackconsulting.com. And please reach out if you have any comments or questions related to this Design Brief. There are many tools and guidelines used to determine a roads Level of Service rating. Simple tools like generalized roadway capacities allow for planning-level efforts. While inexpensive and quick to complete, they are not as accurate as other options. More complicated tools, such as mi- cro-simulations, provide more accurate results, but cost more and take more time. It is important to understand the trade-offs between the analysis types as well as the purpose of the study. Research Brief — Volume No. 3 Source: Florida Deptarment of Transportation LOS A LOS C LOS D = Acceptable LOS F = Unacceptable Source: City of San Jose, CA. Appendix F - Level of Service (LOS)Appendix E - Level of Service Traffic Impact Study E2 4100 76th St W Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\1 - AM Existing.pdf Scenario 1 AM ExistingVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. B11.10.327EB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D37.50.581WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F1 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.581Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 37.5Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0185v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 8501v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 985592703716110510158520260650161Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 24140679402625146501516340Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.9610Peak Hour Factor 94537259361551019756219458625155Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 3100120032002000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1255372594815510112956219478625155Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F2 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 110Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F3 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 64.83214.60221.2327.4459.9145.7358.69150.88176.76117.87109.21142.4895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.598.588.851.102.401.832.356.047.074.714.375.7095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 36.02123.48122.9015.2533.2825.4032.6183.8298.2065.4860.6779.1650th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.444.944.920.611.331.021.303.353.932.622.433.1750th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoYesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group CCFCCDCCDCCDLane Group LOS 23.9630.42120.6129.1529.8238.2020.6929.7239.1423.3823.0140.11d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.250.811.170.160.300.520.210.870.820.380.380.79X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.412.8187.690.370.382.560.223.796.560.490.176.58d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 23.5527.6132.9328.7829.4435.6420.4725.9332.5822.8922.8533.53d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3886902312365352004746692474851398205c, Capacity [veh/h] 157428001500157035603459158922441781176950941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.060.200.180.020.050.030.060.260.110.100.100.09(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.250.250.150.150.150.060.300.300.140.270.270.11g / C, Green / Cycle 1919121212423231121219g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 787878787878787878787878C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F4 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]40.11 23.08 23.38 39.14 29.72 20.69 38.20 29.82 29.15 120.61 30.42 23.96 Movement LOS D C C D C C D C C F C C d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]26.25 30.84 32.64 56.01 Approach LOS C C C E d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]37.49 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.581 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]2241.88 1610.27 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]44.55 44.55 44.55 44.55 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.055 3.165 2.783 2.843 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]809 682 264 300 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]19.50 23.89 41.46 39.74 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.457 3.825 2.063 2.594 Bicycle LOS C D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F5 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.327Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 11.1Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0100Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 3124000512435622135000Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8600012810915509000Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 2821800466396566132000Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 2821800466396566132000Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F6 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F7 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 50.3451.710.00119.1286.7563.3313.900.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.012.070.004.763.472.530.560.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 27.9628.730.0066.1848.1935.187.720.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.121.150.002.651.931.410.310.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group BBAABABALane Group LOS 15.6515.580.008.1616.957.0116.650.00d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.310.300.000.520.530.420.090.00X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.490.460.000.670.700.180.090.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 15.1515.130.007.4916.256.8316.560.00d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42945219778171499422417c, Capacity [veh/h] 17751870178118483459281315031870s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.080.070.000.280.130.220.020.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.240.240.000.530.240.530.180.18g / C, Green / Cycle 1212026112699g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4949494949494949C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F8 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]0.00 0.00 0.00 16.65 16.65 7.01 16.95 8.16 8.16 0.00 15.61 15.65 Movement LOS A A A B B A B A A A B B d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]0.00 7.54 12.20 15.61 Approach LOS A A B B d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]11.06 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.327 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.521 2.655 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B B F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.03 38.03 6.27 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.560 3.946 4.346 1.783 Bicycle LOS A D E A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F9 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F10 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Base Volume 4100 76th St Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F11 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\2 - PM Existing.pdf Scenario 2 PM ExistingVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. B12.70.383NB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D36.90.721WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F12 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.721Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 36.9Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 4250v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 5042v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 1472452881305473038410201331341240123Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 376172321377621255333331031Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.9340Peak Hour Factor 137229269121511283789531241251158115Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 4600400026004200Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1832292691615112831049531241671158115Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F13 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 136Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F14 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 139.77110.26209.82126.37283.86163.8750.87289.30147.80241.26231.92136.9695th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 5.594.418.395.0511.356.552.0311.575.919.659.285.4895th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 77.6561.25117.2570.21175.3091.0428.26179.4582.11143.15136.2276.0950th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 3.112.454.692.817.013.641.137.183.285.735.453.0450th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoYesNoNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group DCFDDDBCDCCDLane Group LOS 36.1934.0282.3337.7750.3846.2018.6132.2349.7723.0022.5649.97d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.520.381.050.510.960.820.140.940.800.530.530.78X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.740.4441.611.9211.485.370.104.688.320.650.228.25d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 34.4533.5840.7235.8638.9040.8318.5127.5541.4622.3622.3441.72d1, Uniform Delay [s] 28564827425457237061610871676691945157c, Capacity [veh/h] 156635602137158435603459158928051781175250941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.090.070.130.080.150.090.050.360.070.200.200.07(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.180.180.130.160.160.110.390.390.090.380.380.09g / C, Green / Cycle 1717121515103636936368g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 939393939393939393939393C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F15 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]49.97 22.64 23.00 49.77 32.23 18.61 46.20 50.38 37.77 82.33 34.02 36.19 Movement LOS D C C D C B D D D F C D d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]24.91 33.19 47.41 54.95 Approach LOS C C D D d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]36.91 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.721 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]4661.97 1054.74 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]57.44 57.44 57.44 57.44 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.295 3.339 2.879 2.899 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]654 551 213 243 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]30.78 35.67 54.27 52.50 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.724 4.014 2.645 2.402 Bicycle LOS D D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F16 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.383Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 12.7Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0502Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 4243802641763477051002Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1110901160191119013001Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.9440Peak Hour Factor 4041302605720450048002Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 4041302605720450048002Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F17 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F18 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 112.38115.840.00144.67161.8746.3424.050.9895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 4.504.630.005.796.471.850.960.0495th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 62.4364.350.0080.3789.9325.7413.360.5550th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.502.570.003.213.601.030.530.0250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoCritical Lane Group BBAABACCLane Group LOS 19.9619.850.007.2916.386.1020.5622.78d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.580.580.000.580.680.300.140.01X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.611.510.000.740.920.100.170.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 18.3618.340.006.5515.476.0020.3922.78d1, Uniform Delay [s] 4054220110711301596366242c, Capacity [veh/h] 1791187017811846345928131678778s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.130.130.000.350.220.170.030.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.230.230.000.600.330.570.140.14g / C, Green / Cycle 1212032173077g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5353535353535353C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F19 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]22.78 22.78 22.78 20.56 20.56 6.10 16.38 7.29 7.29 0.00 19.90 19.96 Movement LOS C C C C C A B A A A B B d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]22.78 7.50 12.22 19.90 Approach LOS C A B B d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]12.73 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.383 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.562 2.758 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B C F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.06 38.03 6.28 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.563 3.731 5.104 1.956 Bicycle LOS A D F A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F20 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F21 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Base Volume Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F22 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\3 - AM 2020 No-Build.pdf Scenario 3 AM 2020 No-BuildVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. B11.10.333EB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D39.20.592WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F23 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.592Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 39.2Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0185v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 8501v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 1005702753916410710359620662664164Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 251436910412726149521616641Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.9610Peak Hour Factor 96548264371581039957319860638158Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 3200120033002000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1255372594815510112956219478625155Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F24 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 110Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F25 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 67.47223.15240.8429.4162.0247.3160.29155.69182.53121.58112.80146.8495th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.708.939.631.182.481.892.416.237.304.864.515.8795th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 37.48129.75133.8016.3434.4626.2833.5086.49101.4067.5462.6781.5850th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.505.195.350.651.381.051.343.464.062.702.513.2650th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoYesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group CCFCCDCCDCCDLane Group LOS 24.4631.61135.6229.6330.2938.7820.6929.9039.5023.4423.0740.44d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.260.841.200.170.310.540.210.880.820.380.380.79X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.433.33102.250.400.402.700.223.836.630.490.176.60d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 24.0328.2733.3729.2329.8936.0820.4726.0732.8822.9522.9133.85d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3846832292345301994816792514921419208c, Capacity [veh/h] 157428001500157035603459158922441781176850941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.060.200.180.020.050.030.060.270.120.110.110.09(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.240.240.150.150.150.060.300.300.140.280.280.12g / C, Green / Cycle 1919121212524241122229g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 797979797979797979797979C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F26 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]40.44 23.14 23.44 39.50 29.90 20.69 38.78 30.29 29.63 135.62 31.61 24.46 Movement LOS D C C D C C D C C F C C d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]26.35 31.04 33.14 61.12 Approach LOS C C C E d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]39.20 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.592 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]2236.69 1606.83 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]44.55 44.55 44.55 44.55 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.061 3.172 2.787 2.848 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]809 682 264 300 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]19.50 23.89 41.46 39.74 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.465 3.835 2.069 2.609 Bicycle LOS C D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F27 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.333Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 11.1Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0100Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 3224400522444634136000Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8610013011115909000Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 2922200475404577133000Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 2821800466396566132000Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F28 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F29 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 52.1153.550.00123.6889.3065.0514.430.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.082.140.004.953.572.600.580.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 28.9529.750.0068.7149.6136.148.020.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.161.190.002.751.981.450.320.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group BBAABABALane Group LOS 15.8915.820.008.2617.007.0116.760.00d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.320.310.000.530.540.420.090.00X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.520.470.000.690.700.190.090.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 15.3715.340.007.5716.306.8216.670.00d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42644919798281509422419c, Capacity [veh/h] 17741870178118483459281315021870s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.080.070.000.280.130.230.020.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.240.240.000.530.240.540.180.18g / C, Green / Cycle 1212026122699g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4949494949494949C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F30 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]0.00 0.00 0.00 16.76 16.76 7.01 17.00 8.26 8.26 0.00 15.85 15.89 Movement LOS A A A B B A B A A A B B d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]0.00 7.55 12.28 15.85 Approach LOS A A B B d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]11.13 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.333 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.526 2.662 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B B F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.03 38.03 6.27 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.560 3.967 4.378 1.787 Bicycle LOS A D E A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F31 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F32 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Scenario 3: 3 AM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F33 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\4 - PM 2020 No-Build.pdf Scenario 4 PM 2020 No-BuildVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. B12.90.390NB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D38.80.735WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F34 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.735Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 38.8Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 4250v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 5042v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 1502512931325583098510411351361264125Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 376373331397721260343431631Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.9340Peak Hour Factor 140234274123521289799721261271181117Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 4700410027004300Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1832292691615112831049531241671158115Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F35 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 136Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F36 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 145.34114.96225.44130.59304.43171.5251.74299.46151.46246.65237.17140.4095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 5.814.609.025.2212.186.862.0711.986.069.879.495.6295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 80.7463.87126.7472.55191.0895.2928.75187.2584.14147.17140.1178.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 3.232.555.072.907.643.811.157.493.375.895.603.1250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoYesNoNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group DCFDEDBCDCCDLane Group LOS 36.9834.6693.2938.5256.2547.8718.5633.0050.0723.0322.5950.20d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.530.391.080.530.990.840.140.950.800.530.530.78X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.880.4752.042.0516.596.380.105.218.220.650.228.09d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 35.0934.1941.2536.4739.6641.4918.4727.7941.8622.3822.3742.11d1, Uniform Delay [s] 28264027125156536662310991706771968160c, Capacity [veh/h] 156635602137158335603459158928051781175350941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.100.070.140.080.160.090.050.370.080.200.200.07(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.180.180.130.160.160.110.390.390.090.390.390.09g / C, Green / Cycle 1717121515103737936368g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 949494949494949494949494C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F37 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]50.20 22.67 23.03 50.07 33.00 18.56 47.87 56.25 38.52 93.29 34.66 36.98 Movement LOS D C C D C B D E D F C D d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]24.96 33.86 51.31 59.92 Approach LOS C C D E d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]38.76 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.735 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]4646.38 1050.15 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]57.44 57.44 57.44 57.44 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.306 3.349 2.885 2.905 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]654 551 213 243 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]30.78 35.67 54.27 52.50 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.736 4.028 2.661 2.415 Bicycle LOS D D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F38 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.390Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 12.9Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0502Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 4344602654778486052002Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1111101163194122013001Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.9440Peak Hour Factor 4142102617734459049002Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 4041302605720450048002Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F39 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F40 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 116.97120.600.00150.69166.6247.4024.811.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 4.684.820.006.036.661.900.990.0495th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 64.9867.000.0083.7292.5726.3313.780.5550th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.602.680.003.353.701.050.550.0250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoCritical Lane Group CCAABACCLane Group LOS 20.4320.300.007.3916.426.0720.7422.98d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.600.590.000.590.680.300.140.01X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.741.630.000.770.920.100.180.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 18.6918.670.006.6215.505.9620.5622.97d1, Uniform Delay [s] 4014180111011461608365242c, Capacity [veh/h] 1791187017811846345928131677780s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.130.130.000.360.220.170.030.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.220.220.000.600.330.570.140.14g / C, Green / Cycle 1212032183177g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5454545454545454C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F41 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]22.98 22.98 22.98 20.74 20.74 6.07 16.42 7.39 7.39 0.00 20.36 20.43 Movement LOS C C C C C A B A A A C C d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]22.98 7.48 12.29 20.36 Approach LOS C A B C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]12.85 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.390 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.567 2.767 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B C F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.06 38.03 6.28 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.563 3.748 5.150 1.963 Bicycle LOS A D F A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F42 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F43 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Scenario 4: 4 PM 2020 No-Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F44 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\5 - AM 2020 Build.pdf Scenario 5 AM 2020 BuildVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. C21.00.071SB LeftHCM 6th EditionTwo-way stopSite Access & 76th St3 B11.10.334EB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D39.30.595WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F45 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.595Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 39.3Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0185v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 8501v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 1005712754416811410459620662664165Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 251436911422926149521616641Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.96100.9610Peak Hour Factor 965492644216111010057319860638159Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 3200140033002000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 010737100001Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1255372594815510112956219478625155Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F46 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 110Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F47 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 67.70224.41241.7033.3763.7250.7061.04155.98182.84121.66112.88147.9195th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.718.989.671.332.552.032.446.247.314.874.525.9295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 37.61130.67134.2818.5435.4028.1733.9186.65101.5867.5962.7182.1750th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.505.235.370.741.421.131.363.474.062.702.513.2950th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoYesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group CCFCCDCCDCCDLane Group LOS 24.5631.85136.4129.8330.3739.1120.7429.9539.5623.4423.0740.46d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.260.841.200.190.320.560.220.880.820.380.380.79X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.433.46102.980.460.412.960.223.846.640.490.176.59d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 24.1228.4033.4329.3629.9636.1520.5226.1132.9322.9522.9033.87d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3826802282345312024816792504931422209c, Capacity [veh/h] 157428001500157035603459158922441781176850941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.060.200.180.030.050.030.070.270.120.110.110.09(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.240.240.150.150.150.060.300.300.140.280.280.12g / C, Green / Cycle 1919121212524241122229g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 797979797979797979797979C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F48 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]40.46 23.14 23.44 39.56 29.95 20.74 39.11 30.37 29.83 136.41 31.85 24.56 Movement LOS D C C D C C D C C F C C d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]26.37 31.08 33.35 61.48 Approach LOS C C C E d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]39.32 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.595 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]2223.70 1606.83 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]44.55 44.55 44.55 44.55 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.062 3.173 2.792 2.849 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]809 682 264 300 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]19.50 23.89 41.46 39.74 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.465 3.836 2.084 2.610 Bicycle LOS C D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F49 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.334Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 11.1Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0100Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 3224400522445637137000Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8610013011115909000Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 2922200475405580134000Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000001301000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 2821800466396566132000Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F50 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F51 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 52.2553.700.00123.9889.6365.4514.850.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.092.150.004.963.592.620.590.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 29.0329.830.0068.8849.8036.368.250.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.161.190.002.761.991.450.330.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoNoYesNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group BBAABABALane Group LOS 15.9215.860.008.2717.017.0116.780.00d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.320.310.000.530.540.420.090.00X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.520.480.000.690.700.190.090.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 15.4115.380.007.5816.316.8216.690.00d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42544819798301510422419c, Capacity [veh/h] 17741870178118483459281315011870s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.080.070.000.280.130.230.030.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.240.240.000.530.240.540.180.18g / C, Green / Cycle 1212026122699g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4949494949494949C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F52 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]0.00 0.00 0.00 16.78 16.78 7.01 17.01 8.27 8.27 0.00 15.89 15.92 Movement LOS A A A B B A B A A A B B d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]0.00 7.56 12.29 15.89 Approach LOS A A B B d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]11.14 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.334 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.527 2.662 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B B F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.03 38.03 6.27 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.560 3.974 4.379 1.787 Bicycle LOS A D E A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F53 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.071Volume to Capacity (v/c): CLevel Of Service: 21.0Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 3: Site Access & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach 76th St76th StSite AccessName Intersection Setup 000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 38373101417Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 120978014Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 38373101417Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 3001417Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.021.021.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0821304000Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StSite AccessName Volumes Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F54 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup CIntersection LOS 0.36d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] AACApproach LOS 0.000.0319.38d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.000.000.050.096.246.2495th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.000.000.000.000.250.2595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAABCMovement LOS 0.000.000.009.5612.3021.05d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.000.000.010.07V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme Intersection Settings Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F55 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F56 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Scenario 5: 5 AM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F57 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Intersection Analysis Summary 9/27/2018Report File: C:\...\6 - PM 2020 Build.pdf Scenario 6 PM 2020 BuildVistro File: C:\...\4100 76th St Vistro.vistro 4100 76th St V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. C19.70.036SB LeftHCM 6th EditionTwo-way stopSite Access & 76th St3 B12.90.391NB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedParklawn Ave & 77th St2 D39.60.740WB LeftHCM 6th EditionSignalizedFrance Ave & 76th St1 LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F58 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.740Volume to Capacity (v/c): DLevel Of Service: 39.6Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 1: France Ave & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesYesCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0040.0040.00Speed [mph] 50.00100.00125.00125.00100.00100.00250.00100.00425.00100.00100.00900.00Pocket Length [ft] 102102101001No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 4250v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 5042v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 1502542931345603149110411351361264133Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 376373331407823260343431633Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.93400.9340Peak Hour Factor 140237274125523293859721261271181124Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 4700420029004300Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 030324800007Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1832292691615112831049531241671158115Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StFrance AveFrance AveName Volumes Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F59 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.53.5l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 03110031001800240Pedestrian Clearance [s] 075070070070Walk [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 02217020150432305030Split [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.00.01.52.00.01.52.0All red [s] 0.03.53.50.03.53.50.04.03.50.04.03.5Amber [s] 01712015100381804525Maximum Green [s] 0105010501050105Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 047083025061Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern IsolatedCoordination Type 136Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F60 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 146.92117.69229.58134.25313.23177.9556.26302.73152.76246.78237.38149.9995th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 5.884.719.185.3712.537.122.2512.116.119.879.506.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 81.6265.38129.2574.58197.8898.8631.26189.7784.87147.27140.2683.3350th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 3.262.625.172.987.923.951.257.593.395.895.613.3350th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoYesNoNoYesNoNoNoYesCritical Lane Group DDFDEDBCDCCDLane Group LOS 37.4035.0896.6139.0659.1149.2918.8533.5150.4622.8922.4650.16d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.540.401.090.541.000.860.150.950.800.530.520.79X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.930.4955.002.1619.027.350.115.418.280.630.217.99d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.130.130.130.130.110.110.110.110.110.11k, delay calibration 35.4734.5941.6036.9040.0941.9418.7428.1042.1822.2622.2442.17d1, Uniform Delay [s] 28063626924956136362110961696841988168c, Capacity [veh/h] 156535602137158335603459158928051781175350941781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.100.070.140.080.160.090.060.370.080.200.200.07(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.180.180.130.160.160.110.390.390.090.390.390.09g / C, Green / Cycle 1717121515103737937379g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 3.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.503.50l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 5.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.505.50L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 959595959595959595959595C, Cycle Length [s] RCLRCLRCLCCLLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F61 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]50.16 22.53 22.89 50.46 33.51 18.85 49.29 59.11 39.06 96.61 35.08 37.40 Movement LOS D C C D C B D E D F D D d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]24.96 34.26 53.38 61.44 Approach LOS C C D E d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]39.58 Intersection LOS D Intersection V/C 0.740 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]4630.78 1050.15 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]57.44 57.44 57.44 57.44 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 3.308 3.354 2.890 2.906 Crosswalk LOS C C C C s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]654 551 213 243 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]30.78 35.67 54.27 52.50 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.740 4.032 2.669 2.417 Bicycle LOS D D B B ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8765Ring 2 ------------4321Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F62 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.391Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 12.9Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Parklawn Ave & 77th St Intersection Level Of Service Report NoYesYesNoCrosswalk YesYesYesYesCurb Present 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.0075.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00175.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 001001001000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Intersection Setup 0502Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 300300000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking 4444602654781488052002Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1111101163195122013001Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 0.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.94400.9440Peak Hour Factor 4242102617737461049002Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 100003200000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.021.02Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 4041302605720450048002Base Volume Input [veh/h] 77th St77th StParklawn AveDrivewayName Volumes Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F63 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0Pedestrian Walk [s] 0Pedestrian Signal Group Exclusive Pedestrian Phase 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft] 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall NoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall 0.04.02.50.02.53.53.53.00.00.03.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk 0210021002100210Pedestrian Clearance [s] 070070070070Walk [s] 0.03.52.00.04.23.73.73.00.00.02.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0401506540401500150Split [s] 0.01.51.00.01.01.01.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s] 0.04.53.50.03.54.54.54.00.00.04.00.0Amber [s] 0351006035351000100Maximum Green [s] 0126010101060060Minimum Green [s] --Lead--Lag------Lead / Lag 4,5Auxiliary Signal Groups 061025540080Signal group PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 0.00Lost time [s] SingleBandPermissive Mode LeadGreenOffset Reference 0.0Offset [s] Fully actuatedActuation Type Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type 95Cycle Length [s] -Signal Coordination Group NoLocated in CBD Intersection Settings Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F64 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 117.67121.380.00150.98167.5947.6324.871.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 4.714.860.006.046.701.910.990.0495th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 65.3767.430.0083.8893.1126.4613.820.5550th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 2.612.700.003.363.721.060.550.0250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoYesNoYesNoCritical Lane Group CCAABACCLane Group LOS 20.5220.390.007.3916.436.0620.7723.01d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 0.600.600.000.590.680.300.140.01X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio 0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 1.761.650.000.770.920.100.180.00d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor 0.130.130.040.170.140.110.110.04k, delay calibration 18.7618.740.006.6215.515.9520.6023.01d1, Uniform Delay [s] 4004180111111491610365242c, Capacity [veh/h] 1790187017811846345928131676781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 0.130.130.000.360.230.170.030.00(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.220.220.000.600.330.570.140.14g / C, Green / Cycle 1212032183177g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4.004.002.502.503.500.003.003.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.000.000.000.000.000.002.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 6.006.004.504.505.505.005.005.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5454545454545454C, Cycle Length [s] CCLCLRCCLane Group Lane Group Calculations Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F65 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]23.01 23.01 23.01 20.77 20.77 6.06 16.43 7.39 7.39 0.00 20.45 20.52 Movement LOS C C C C C A B A A A C C d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]23.01 7.48 12.30 20.45 Approach LOS C A B C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]12.87 Intersection LOS B Intersection V/C 0.391 Other Modes g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]0.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]0.00 37.14 37.14 0.00 I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 2.568 2.768 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F B C F s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]211 211 1274 716 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]38.06 38.03 6.28 19.58 I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.563 3.751 5.155 1.964 Bicycle LOS A D F A ----------------Ring 4 ----------------Ring 3 ------------8-65Ring 2 ------------4-21Ring 1 Sequence Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F66 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 0.036Volume to Capacity (v/c): CLevel Of Service: 19.7Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 3: Site Access & 76th St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach 76th St76th StSite AccessName Intersection Setup 000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 18457974429Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 5114244112Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 18457974429Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 1800429Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.021.021.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0448955000Base Volume Input [veh/h] 76th St76th StSite AccessName Volumes Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F67 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup CIntersection LOS 0.16d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] AACApproach LOS 0.000.0318.01d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.000.000.140.282.972.9795th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.000.000.010.010.120.1295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAABCMovement LOS 0.000.000.008.3410.2119.74d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.000.010.000.000.04V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme Intersection Settings Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F68 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F69 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Scenario 6: 6 PM 2020 Build 4100 76th St Version 6.00-02 Generated with Traffic Impact Study F70 4100 76th St W Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup 4100 Apartments Photographs Front of site fronting 76th Street – South Side of Parcel ````` 4100 Apartments Photographs East Side of Parcel ````` 4100 Apartments Photographs Green space in the back that will be preserved – North Side of Parcel ````` 4100 Apartments Photographs West Side of Parcel ````` 4100 Apartments Photographs Front of site looking towards France Avenue – Southwest Side of Parcel ````` XI. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Site Entryway View of site from the north N S WE XI-1Survey Date: March 2019 View of site from the northeast N S WE View of site from the east N S WE XI-2Survey Date: March 2019 View of site from the southeast N S WE View of site from the south N S WE XI-3Survey Date: March 2019 View of site from the southwest N S WE View of site from the west N S WE XI-4Survey Date: March 2019 View of site from the northwest N S WE North view from site N S WE XI-5Survey Date: March 2019 Northeast view from site N S WE East view from site N S WE XI-6Survey Date: March 2019 Southeast view from site N S WE South view from site N S WE XI-7Survey Date: March 2019 Southwest view from site N S WE West view from site N S WE XI-8Survey Date: March 2019 Northwest view from site N S WE Streetscape: East view of West 76th Street XI-9Survey Date: March 2019 Streetscape: West view of West 76th Street XI-10Survey Date: March 2019 2200 Zane Ave N | Minneapolis, MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.com Cary: At your request, we reviewed Aeon’s submission for the proposed development at 4100 W. 76th Street based on our experience working with the Greater Southdale Work Group to craft a physical vision for how their guiding principles may translate to the built environment. The resulting vision for development in the district is to create an enhanced human experience along existing major and new connector streets, with overall experience shaped via landscape setbacks, building step backs, a hierarchy of street typologies, transparency at street level, minimizing the impact of the car, and managing storm water as an amenity. The outcome of our collaborations with the Work Group is described in the urban design chapter of the Greater Southdale District Plan and resulted in the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. The proposed project is a 4-story, 70-unit multifamily development composed of 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units. The 100% affordable development is an important addition to both the Southdale District and the City of Edina. We believe many aspects of this plan align with the planning and design ideas set forth in the Greater Southdale Experience Guidelines. However, we also believe there are some important elements of the plan that do not follow the guidelines and within this memo we are making suggestions on a few opportunities that the development could consider to better align with the broader vision for the district. Positive attributes of the proposal include: • A four story building is generally in alignment with the scale in this part of district although additional height up to 60 feet would also be in alignment with the guidelines. • Below grade parking and limited on-grade parking. • The integration of outdoor public space. • Ground floor apartments with direct access to walkways and community space. • Building amenities that strengthen community. • Appropriate transparency at the street level. To City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date October 17, 2019 Elements of the plan not in alignment Experience Guidelines The Design Experience Guidelines offers guidance in 3 areas that pertain to this particular project. As noted above, there are areas where the proposal does not adhere to the Design Experience Guidelines.  The proposal locates on-grade parking within the primary public realm along 76th Street. This reinforces the car-centric past of the district. • Page 31 of the Design Experience Guidelines calls for a setback on West 76th Street of 30 feet. However, the proposed plan calls for an approximately 80 foot setback. Given the length of the site (well over 200 feet) and other existing residential setback s on 76th at approximately 50 feet, we would recommend a setback of no greater than 50 feet to better support the goal of creating a “street room” along 76th Street. • The Design Guidelines state: “Along all major corridors, seventy five percent (75%) of face of building walls need to be at the setback line to support the creation of a ‘street room.’” Further, page 31 of the Guidelines, focused on Typology 4 – Primary East-West Streets provides additional detail: “Building podiums along these streets need to maintain as closely as possible the 60-foot height limit while still adhering to the guidance of 75% of building face at the setback line to create the fundamental experience of the street room .” Currently, none of the proposed building walls are at the setback line, nor does the building meet the 60’ height. As noted previously, a 4-story building is generally in alignment and while we are comfortable with the proposed height, would encourage the developer to consider an additional floor. • Page 16 of the Guidelines states: “All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use natural materials facing the public realm.” The proposal as currently designed uses brick at the base of the buildings on all sides, with metal panel above. To better meet the guidelines, we would suggest moving all brick to the public -facing sides of the building and using metal panel or an alternate cladding material on the faces of the building that do not front on the public realm. • Proposed units are close to the west and east property lines with limited landscaping space. The potential also exists for future construction of facing buildings directly across the property line within 30 feet. Creating spaces such as front yards along the “street rooms ,” courtyards, play areas and gardens between buildings with housing units facing into these amenities is an import aspect of the district plan. Other opportunities for consideration by the developer: • Because of the number of units and the size of the roof area it would seem to be possible to introduce solar panels that could reduce the overall energy costs of the building. • Because of the length of the site (~400’), significant land could be dedicated to daylighting stormwater retention, thereby decreasing the development’s impact on existing city infrastructure and supporting the creation of a district wide water-based amenity as noted in the Experience Guidelines. Based upon the above comments, following are some thoughts on how components of the proposed development could be reconfigured to better align with and support desired physical and experiential outcomes that are outlined in Design Experience Guidelines. Current Plan Configuration Existing grove of trees Building Components 1, 2 and 3 (referred to on diagram on following page). Plan does not meet the 30 foot building setback required (line shown is at 50 feet). Guidelines call 75% of the face of the building to be at the setback line. All parking should be below grade or hidden from the public realm. Reconfigured Plan Option It is important to note that the diagram below ‘deconstructs’ the building blocks of the proposed development and reassembles them in a fashion that better aligns with the goals for new development within the Southdale District. It is our belief that this does not substantially change the building’s program or functionality. There are many different options that could work; the following diagram is only one option and is not meant to be solution. Again, it is important to note that the diagram above is only one of many potential ways the proposed development could better align with the Design Experience Guidelines. We look forward to discussing these ideas and others at our meeting with Aeon on October 21st. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have questions. Mic Storm water management area designed as wet lands. Pathways for walking and kids on bikes and around and through the landscape . The pathway also connects to West 76th Street. Indigenous plantings create habitat for birds and animals as well as pollinators. Row of trees protect the west façade of the building from the summer sun and provide for a shaded play area. East and West yards create more privacy for building residents provides a yard space for play, outdoor gathering or gardening. It creates an exterior sense of place for residents, with views of that place from the inside. Vehicular Access through the porte-cochere leads to both Guest Parking (on grade) and the ramp to below grade parking 50 foot setback designed as more formal front yard with a consistent row of street trees along 76th Street. Existing grove of trees Children’s play area. North-South pedestrian and bikeway DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION NOVEMBER 6, 2019 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE PUD-19, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-18 ZONING DISTRICT The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Chapter 36, Article VIII, Division 4 is hereby amended to add the following: Sec. 36-507 Planned Unit Development District-19 (PUD-19) – 4100 76TH Apartements (a) Legal description: Tract J, Registered Land Survey No. 1129 (b) Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the re-development plans, dated ______ except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2019-__ on file in the Office of the Planning Department. (c) Principal Uses: Multi-family Apartments/Townhomes/Condos. (d) Accessory Uses: All accessory uses allowed in the PCD-1 Zoning District. (e) Conditional Uses: None (f) Signs shall be regulated per the PCD Zoning District. (g) Income levels for all dwelling units shall be limited such that the average household income is 60% or less of the Area Median Income for a minimum of 40 years from the date of the Certificate of Occupancy. (h) Development Standards. In addition to the development standards per the PID Zoning District, the following shall apply: 2 Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest: Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk City Standard Building Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – east Side – west Rear Parking Lot Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – west 75 feet 28 feet 15 feet 80 feet 20 feet 15 feet Building Height 4 stories & 48 feet Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.5 Parking 88 stalls total (64 enclosed-12 proof of parking stalls) Development Questionnaire Over What this is: A brief questionnaire to help community decision makers understand how this development aligns with key focus area of sustainability that ensures both developers and the community long-term value. Why? Through the 2014 Visioning process, environmental stewardship is one of seven strategic focus areas. Vision Edina’s Environmental Stewardship states: “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.” Questions Answers Sustainable Design & Energy Have you utilized Xcel Energy’s Energy Design Assistance and/or Centerpoint Energy’s Builder and Developer programs for this development? Yes (1) Will the buildings meet SB2030 energy goals and/or will they be Energy Star certified? If not, please share the steps you are taking to support energy conservation. No (2) Will you be optimizing the roof by installing a green roof? No (3) Will there be any renewable energy generation on site? No (4) Will there be purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs)? No Comments: (1) Project will engage the Xcel EDA program. (2) The project will comply with the 2015 Green Communities program as amended by MN Housing, which requires a 15% reduction in energy beyond ASHRAE 2010. The Green Communities criteria also will follow the Energy (3) The project will install an Energy Star compliant roofing membrane, which has a higher solar reflectance to reduce the heat island effect. (4) The project will be preparing for photo voltaic panels on the roof by installing a conduit to the roof and sizing the roof structure for the additional dead load and drift loading. Managing Water What percent of the property is pervious surface before the redevelopment? What is the percent post development? Pre-Pervious: 0.88 acres; Pre-Impervious: 1.05 acres Post-Pervious: 0.99 acres Post-Impervious: 0.94 acres What new services will be pervious? (i.e. Sidewalks, driveways, overflow parking) Impervious surfaces include sidewalks, driveways, and surface parking. Pervious surfaces include lawn area, playground surface, Development Questionnaire Over infiltration garden, and landscape plantings. How will the landscaping support the natural ecosystem? (i.e. Rain gardens, % native plants, % bee friendly pollinator plants) The infiltration garden will boost on-site volume reduction in addition to providing pollinator plants. Comments: Managing Tree Canopy What percent of the property is covered by tree canopy before redevelopment? What is the percent post development? Existing: 27% Post: 20%* Will you be replanting/replacing trees at least four to five inches in diameter to positively impact the tree canopy (ordinance requirement is only 2.5 inches in diameter)? No. Comments: *26 trees proposed on site in addition to preserving 11 on- site mature trees. Proposed canopy coverage at installation will be 20%. Proposed canopy coverage at maturity of new plantings will exceed 35% tree canopy coverage post development Managing Waste Will a recycling service be provided to all businesses on site? Yes, recycling will be made available to all the tenants via a chute on each floor. Will an organic (i.e. food waste) recycling service be provided to all businesses on site? Comments: Sustainable Transportation Will there be bike parking near main entrance for guests? Yes. Do you have EV Charging Stations for owners or guests to use? Will there be parking spaces provided for car-sharing vehicles to reduce the overall number of cars? Comments: