Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-05-22 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Packet
Ag enda Planning Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota City Council Cham ber s Wednesday, May 22, 2024 7:00 PM Watch the m eeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeeting s or Facebook.com /EdinaMN. Participate in Public H ear ing(s): Call 312-535-8110 E nter access code 2631 711 5389 Password is 5454 Press *3 on your telephone keypad when you would like to g et in the queue to speak A sta8 m em ber will unmute you when it is your turn 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.Ap ril 11, 2024 Sp ecia l W ork Session and Ma y 8, 2024 Regu la r Meeting Min u tes 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.B-24-04 Fron t y ard setba ck va ria n ce req u est for 4619 Townes Circle B.PUBLIC HE ARING: Prelim in ary Rezonin g, Overa ll Develop m ent Plan, Site Pla n a n d Subdivision – 7235 France Aven u e VII.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents VIII.Sta= Com m ents IX.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: May 22, 2024 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, P lanning Adminis trative S upport S pec ialis t Item Activity: Subject:April 11, 2024 S pec ial Work S es s ion and May 8, 2024 R egular Meeting Minutes 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 both sets of minutes. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Draft Minutes from April 11, 2024 Special Work Ses s ion Draft Minutes from May 8, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 1 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Special Work Session April 11, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 5:04 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Miranda, Padilla, Smith, Felt, and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Addison Lewis, Community Development Coordinator and Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Commissioner Daye arrived at 5:06 PM, Commissioner Hahneman at 5:12 PM, and Commissioner Bornstein at 5:15 PM. Absent from the roll call: Commissioners Hu and Schultze. III. Zoning Ordinance Audit Discussion Community Development Coordinator Lewis explained the current zoning code has not been comprehensively updated since the 1970’s. The City has contracted with HKGi to complete an audit of the zoning code. This will provide a tool for identifying and clarifying code issues, opportunities for improvements, and prioritizing future code updates. He introduced the representatives from HKGi. Ms. Beth Richmond and Mr. Jeff Miller, HKGi made a presentation to the Planning Commission on the Zoning Ordinance and asked for feedback on their preliminary analysis. The Commission asked questions and provided feedback. The work session can be reviewed in the official City meeting audio. IV. Adjournment The April 11, 2024 work session was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers May 8, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. A. How to Participate in Public Hearing(s) II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Bornstein, Daye, Padilla, Hahneman, Felt, Schultze and Chair Bennett. Planning Commissioners Miranda and Smith arrived at 7:06 PM. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Addison Lewis, Community Development Coordinator, Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner, and Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Hu. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Padilla moved to approve the May 8, 2024, agenda. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, April 11, 2024 Commissioner Daye moved to approve the April 11, 2024, regular meeting minutes. Commissioner Bornstein seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. V. Special Recognitions and Presentations A. University of Minnesota Resilient Communities Project Study Report Chair Bennett welcomed the University of Minnesota Resilient Communities team. Community Development Coordinator Lewis introduced the University of Minnesota Resilient Communities team and project to the Planning Commission. Planning Commissioners Miranda and Smith arrived at 7:06 PM Holly Leaf, Greg Olberding, Johnny Menhennet, Kenton Briggs, Jem Thompson, Yuping W, University of Minnesota students on the Resilient Communities team introduced themselves. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 2 of 3 A presentation was given to the Planning Commission. Chair Bennett thanked the students for the presentation. The Commissioners asked questions of the University of Minnesota student team. VI. Community Comment None. VII. Public Hearings A. B-24-03 Variance Request for 5416 Grove Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request of 5416 Grove Street for a variance request. Staff recommended approval of the variance request, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Tom Budzynski, TJB Homes, answered Commission questions. Mr. Nelson Sequeira, homeowner at 5416 Grove, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing None. Chair Benett indicated the City did receive feedback from Better Together Edina and most was positive. Commissioner Miranda moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the variance request. Motion Commissioner Felt moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance for 5416 Grove as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Ayes: Alkire, Bennett, Felt, Hahneman, Miranda, Padilla, Schultze, and Smith Nays: Bornstein and Daye Motion carried 7-2. The meeting can be viewed on the official City website. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 3 of 3 VII. Reports/Recommendations A. Lincoln and Londonderry Small Area Plan Working Group Chair Selection Community Development Coordinator Lewis explained the Commission is asked to formally select a Chair of the Lincoln and Londonderry Small Area Plan Working Group. The Commission discussed this item amongst themselves and chose a Chair. Motion Commissioner Padilla moved to appoint Commissioner Miranda as Chair of the Lincoln and Londonderry Small Area Plan Working Group. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. IX. Chair and Member Comments Received. X. Staff Comments None. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Alkire moved to adjourn the May 8, 2024, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 9:44 PM. Commissioner Daye seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Date: May 22, 2024 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker Assistant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-24-04 F ront yard setback varianc e reques t for 4619 Townes C ircle 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 a 17.5-foot front yard setback variance request at 4619 Townes C ircle subject to conditions set out in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N: Jace and S arah Wagner wish to replace their undersized garage with an attached garage with a recreation room above, located at 4619 Townes R oad. T he plan includes a new mudroom, a garage with breezeway connection and bonus living area with a ¾ bath above the garage. T he Request is for the front/ N ortheast setback, (average cul-de-sac setback), of 35.7 feet, reduced to 20 feet for a front yard setback variance of 17.5 feet. B etter Together E dina P ublic Input AT TAC HME N T S: Description Site location Staff Report Engineering memo Applicant Narrative Surveys, plans and renderings Storm Water plan Tree preservation plan Letters of support Staff Pres entation Better Together Public Input Report (0 comments ) STAFF REPORT Date: To: From: May 22, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Subject: B-24-04, A 17.5-foot front yard setback variance from the required 35.7 feet for a 20-foot front yard setback from the cul-de-sac at 4619 Townes Circle. Information / Background: The subject property, 4619 Townes Circle, is approximately 18,604 square feet in area and is located south of Townes Circle cul-de-sac. The existing structure is a two-story home built in 1939 with an attached under sized 23.4'x 18.2' garage. The current home does not meet the required front yard setback in today's code from the north and east front/side street. The existing home is nonconforming and will be added to and remodeled to include additions while maintaining the existing nonconforming setback and increasing the nonconforming setback to the cul-de-sac. The applicant is requesting a I7.5-foot front yard setback variance to the N/E lot line. The required setback is 35.7 feet with the current setback to the N/E garage corner of 21.7 feet. Setback will be reduced to 20 feet from the N/E corner of the new garage. The additions proposed include a breezeway connection to a two-car garage with living space above. The following is the current front yard setback requirement in the zoning ordinance: Sec. 36-439. - Special requirements. a. Established front street setback. When more than 25 percent of the lots on one side of a street between street intersections, on one side of a street that ends in a cul-de-sac, or on one side of a dead-end street, are occupied by dwelling units, the front street setback for any lot shall be determined as follows: 2. If there are existing dwelling units on abutting lots on both sides of the lot that both have a front street setback on the same street, the front street setback shall be the average of the front street setbacks of the dwelling units on the two abutting lots on the same street; or the front street setback shall be the average front street setback of all other dwelling units on the same side of that street, between intersections. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The subject property consists of a two-story home built in 1939 with an attached undersized garage. The current home does not meet the setbacks required in today's code from the front yard. The existing setback on the north front yard property line is 21.7 feet instead of today's required average front yard setback between the two adjacent neighbors of 35.7 feet. The property slopes approximately 30 ft from front to back. The east side yard area is adjacent to an extension of the street ending in a cul-de-sac. The property has front yard setback required all along the street frontages of Townes Road/Townes Circle. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side — East Side - South — West Side — 35.7 feet 10 feet 25 feet I 0 feet 20 feet *121.7 feet existing 11.52 feet 35+ feet 13.2 feet Building Coverage Surface coverage Building Height 25% 50% 2 1/2 stories 21.08% 41.53% 2 stories *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Are the proposed variances 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: I) 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. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the existing nonconforming north front yard setback. The practical difficulties are caused by the topography of the lot, existing location of the home, the required average front yard setback from the ROW and the curvature of the cul-de-sac. The topography along the back wall of the structure (South), combined with the larger setback requirements (average abutting structures at cul-de-sacs) presents a practical difficulty. The neighbor to the west is setback 21.8', the neighbor to the east is setback 49.6'. The average setback between the two puts the existing home in nonconformance requiring the variance request. The cul-de-sac setback limits opportunity to locate the garage with a 20-foot setback which is the minimum setback for for a garage to a side street. A "side street" opposed to a "front street" does not have an adjacent home facing the street with no front yard along the side street. Setbacks are closer along a side street. 2) Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The proposed addition is reasonable due to the existing home's non-conforming setback and topography of the lot. The home will be remodeled and modified with existing/proposed setbacks consistent with a typical corner lot that allows a 20-foot setback from a side street to a garage opening. The property slopes up from the front of the lot to the rear lot line by approximately 28/30 feet. The garage will be built into the hill with finished grade along the back wall of the garage 11.5 ft higher than the garage front. Moving the garage to another location is impractical, causing more grade disturbance and possible tree removals. 3) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The existing house has a non-conforming setback and was built prior to the current ordinance requirements. There have been no variances grated for original construction of the home, so it conformed to at the time it was constructed in 1938. The proposed additions will conform to all other zoning standards. STAFF REPORT Page 4 The topography at the rear (South) side of the property, "pushes" the usable yard North/Northwest (toward the cul-de-sac setback). Had this been a typical side yard, it wouldn't have required a variance, but with the larger setback requirements (average abutting at cul-de-sacs), the buildable area is limited. The average setback helps to negate a proposed structure from encroaching on an abutting neighbor's front yard. In this case, the neighbor to the west would be minimally impacted if at all, as their structure is off-set from the proposed addition. The neighbor to the East is set back further, with the proposed addition screened by trees and vegetation. 4) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The additions will match the existing home's setback on the north side and provide a typical garage setback from the cul-de-sac. All other aspects of the home will conform to the ordinance requirements. The garage is of a similar design to the house and with matching materials used. Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval of a 17.5-foot front yard setback variance for property at 4619 Townes Circle. Approval is subject to the findings listed in the staff report above and following findings: I) The practical difficulty is caused by the required average front yard setback requirement, cul-de-sac setback, and existing elevation change on the lot. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the subject property. Those unique circumstances include the elevation change on the lot and having a street frontage with a cul-de-sac affecting the buildable area on the east side of the lot. 3) Had this been a typical side yard like similarly zoned property, it would not have required a variance, but with the larger setback requirements (average abutting at cul-de-sacs), the available space isn't available on the lot. 4) The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The garage is of a similar design to the house and with matching materials used. The additions will match the existing home's setback on the north side and provide a typical garage setback from the cul-de-sac. Approval is subject to the following conditions: • Subject to the survey and plans date stamped May 3, 2024. • Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo. • Compliance with the tree ordinance. Deadline for a city decision: July 3, 2024. DATE: 5/13/2024 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Ben Jore, PE – Senior Project Engineer RE: 4619 Townes Circle - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, stormwater, 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 included the survey and drainage plan dated 4/30/2024 and 4/22/2024 respectively. Summary of Work The applicant proposes to construct an addition. The request is for a variance to reduce the front yard setback. Easements N.A. Grading and Drainage Site drains to a landlocked wetland. It does not appear that any additional impervious will drain to private property. Stormwater Mitigation The project increases the impervious surfaces by approximately 2,577sf and drains to a landlocked basin. Stormwater mitigation is required. The project currently is proposing an underground chamber to provide volume control. The stormwater report will need to show that there is no increase in 100yr HWL of the landlocked basin. Floodplain Development The site is not within the local 100yr floodplain. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan will need to be submitted. Street and Driveway Entrance A driveway entrance permit will need to be applied for if the curb is being disturbed. Public Utilities N.A. Miscellaneous A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit is required or documentation that one is not required. A well is likely located onsite as the property. Applicant must seal the well prior to the permit being issued. MURPHY &CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Client: Jase & Sarah Wagner Project: 23-138h Wagner Residence Project Address: 4619 Townes Circle Edina, MN 55424 VARIANCE NARRATIVE / CONDITIONS Project description: The owners wish to replace their grossly undersized garage with a modest attached garage...a garage that is actually large enough to house both of their vehicles. This garage/breezeway addition would be finished with the same traditional exterior white lap siding/trim as the remainder of existing home. Ensuring these upgrades are fitting for the property, neighbors, and neighborhood is our primary goal. Without the requested variance, the unique site and average cul-de-sac setbacks make this addition unfeasible. Please find additional insight into the practical difficulties/extraordinary circumstances/harmony/character in the questions and explanations below. Requested variance: Reduction of the front Northeast setback (average cul-de-sac setback) of 35.7' to 20'. 811 GLENWOOD AVENUE, SUITE 250, MINNEAPOLIS MN 55405 MURPHYCODESIGN.COM 612 470-5511 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY &CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- The Proposed variance will: Yes No 3 Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable The homeowners currently have a grossly undersized garage that doesn't even accommodate their two vehicles. They are proposing a very modest garage addition and breezeway. Unfortunately, the extreme topography against the entire rear of the structure (South), combined with the larger setback requirements (average abutting structures at cul-de-sacs) presents a clear and defined practical difficulty. Although the neighbor to south is setback only 21.8', another neighbor has a lot that allowed his structure to be setback 49.6'. The resulting average setback becomes quite large, thus forcing the variance request. With a variance setback request of 20' (similar to most neighbors...and typical sideyard setback), we feel this becomes a reasonable variance request. 3 Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property, but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district This gorgeous, but unique property, prohibits most typical building pad locations. The extreme topography at the rear (South) side of the property, "pushes" the useable yard North/Northwest (toward the cul-de-sac setback). Had this just been a typical sideyard, it wouldn't present a problem, but with the larger setback requirements (average abutting at cul-de-sacs), the available space just doesn't exist. Also unique to this property, is that the extreme topography is ascending, vs. falling off (descending) on the other properties nearby. When these two unique items are combined, it really becomes an extraordinary circumstance to overcome. 3 Be in Harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning district The idea and use of the average setback is fantastic and helps to negate a proposed structure from blocking an abutting neighbor's view of a lake, street, etc. It's cases like this, where the variance procedure can identify instances where the goal can still be met, while the neighbors and neighborhood remain protected, and the general purpose and intent of the zoning district is still in harmony. In this case, the neighbor to the West wouldn't be impacted at all, as their structure can't even see the proposed addition. The neighbor to the East is set back further, but the proposed addition is completely screened by trees and vegetation. 3 Not alter the essential character of a neighborhood The neighborhood and the existing house already have tons of character and charm. The modest proposed garage and breezeway addition have been designed to build on that charm and character. Massing, proportions, and thoughtful detailing have been the top priority during the entire process. The addition is very anchored and carefully and intentionally "connected" to the existing structure, to help it feel like it has been there, as one, since the beginning. Ultimately enhancing the essential character of the neighborhood. 811 GLENWOOD AVENUE, SUITE 250, MINNEAPOLIS MN 55405 MURPHYCODESIGN.COM 612 470-5511 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. Please fully explain your answers using additional sheets of paper as necessary. The Proposed Variance will: YES NO Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood 2 X X X X Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY &CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department 1111111t in Ell I Ei In III 1111 111 1111 MIN .NMI 11111111 alit UM Ill.. NM MINI 11.111 MUM MURPHY &CO -DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department *0: 111111 111111s 1111 • '12.• • .-°17 :04r 4-› •-4:g '74* , 41111.11,-77-7- MURPHY &CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department A-- 1111% -RP rr 11111 1111 11111 M ------- 111111 UV MN VII NMI Ellif WU UN UN UV In 111111 UN UN NO 111 MURPHY y CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department t,' )1hilwam, MURPHY &CO —DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE— Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department INENNIMINOMMINF# /// I I n MURPHY & CO -DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department I I MURPHY & CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY &CO - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY &CO VIEW FROM 4 6 1 7 TOWNES CIRCLE - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department • •41V •`' 4, • .14 . ' . ::,.. ,‘,:11:9_i, 7,., - k .-4:;:' ...,, .,„, ' - 1 ....4,,'.;.,,,"; !Pk -•,' .2-- .,J,.....' ' '':- r . 1,, i. i 4 - ' 4 ''''. ' -''' ' W - :,, _,..' :''' , ...,,4%.r.I.,.. ., 'L . . . /' S-,. . .. ' '''',;_: - • --. "c - s - -^( ,, c,' •It‘:1:, , . , i ,, r ,.,• ' , r , - c . r • .,, ,,. r., . • , ..-,4 ; — . .4 r., .., ' • \ %._. ... .• \ I . ;t....- Ck, ' ..4 t ' ''. _, 1 . • 1. , - .1 ' `, 4 ' • ..t.,_ MURPHY &CO VIEW FROM 4 6 1 5 TOWNES CIRCLE - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE - Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY &CO VIEW FROM 4 6 1 1 TOWNES CIRCLE - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MURPHY & CO VIEW FROM 4609 TOWNES CIRCLE - DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE- Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department MIA/ EXISTITC 11.1COVE. TOTH. AREA OF PROPERTY PIORCENTAM OF 101110101 (3054 SO Fr. / 146015K rr.) 36148 11... 10 20 30 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: Jase and Sarah Wagner Rem/so. 25 n • Ile6Ron MM. INNetle I n AA., inn* 33 II • V. Feel Nan 515... 73 R es mom. 00 Imei fr. Me 6201 Ix • meamen x 40 R. Be.. 2 X RN. 140 M max. W. eeir. WAIN q••• dolt W 5• INAL ,: qa za N'• V.7rtt CERTIFICATION: reo > x501 me reperee by ma in end U. i m • 4, Dona meer Ma Ism el ::: N ScaleSVre4r. SS.1013 C.5eLVDee, Logi2Ti'd1.1 Lleenre 31 NA 60 110.0...m m eern TOWNES CIRCLE • Ned-INLI NI.871100,ON EXISTING HARDCOVER DETAIL Si ei Cr 99.10 t N MONANt.-.1 Al 2 2,E 4140 5'0/ 0,1.7 EXISTING HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS LISS SOM. FEET NOOSE Nal OTAIXIIARGARAGE: CONCRETE 9.1 OF RAIL. .1 CP Ea. PA.IS 443 31156: 687 SOJARE MET 331 KOPPE FEET - 1630 .0.1. FEET - NUMBER ?.. A4 ,g"... LANDSCAPE SURFACES WERE NOT PlelUDEO 111 COSTING HARM.. CALCIMATIONS -M9958 5514 140.00 NY/Cr. 4,01 NNE ONS APIND OMNI MOAK ANSIN NA:ELLA Nit NI-VM-21-11-(1112 LOT 2.3 PAGE FIELD BOOK DATE NO. 475 Old Highway 8 NW. Suite 200 NIEFN New Brighton, Minnesota 55112 PHONE: (612) 466.3300 WWW.EFNSURVEY.COM Egan, Field & Nowak. Inc. MIAMI* 2023 By ECM RELIT A HOTINC TIC. lonci surveyors since 5572 DESCRIPTION Add building setback information Add proposed hardcover colculollons DRAWING NAME: 41634 CERTA. DRAWN BY: DAV CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY JOB NO. 41634 CHECKED BY: S FILE NO. 3779 1 OF .1 01-07-2011 03-IS-2021 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: IN II. ItiaOcis swea.m Me. 311. 1445. CeNIR NOTES: 1 MA erhntel.e Ws twee, eyrtm b M. m qe Nem. Canly anile 14 MAD X3-2011 AN). DR 1. sea el Noptely MwLN A..m 10 1004 Nucee N.l cs 030. mem 1 THe nol l f4 O. • Nottelt. Inc Ihr 2.. pm.. el III1.7 IC MO Vie 1.410014. 0 ue erealeme el my 11.401101. t=rIP:; •-•‘ta.7.t" •"‘tr.=2.d,t1V-aft.:=.". trIt= ulX11.• prier le my 4110 0.12 er Areeeporly N.M. IMO*. Bel ea. INN Zola TXT (ee. of 0MM6 11.1 heAml) P. 4001 Mamma Rola Yap RA 2706% 0367 F. 4.56 4,, NONNI Imme. 2X0of MA lel ema N. MawAnp.lPa. 50X Si Me Ix sea GOPHER STATE ONE CALL NOTE: IN1 of Cep. Slele Ni. CM 20.1 Ile 23262]613 OCERR OF A.M. - C110.N FILER CR. OTT ILF 13.A OW Cr EDNA SANTART SERER CENTER PONT E.. Erd.r" K MEM. CNN MEL VOW SETBACK INFORMATION: Ace.. le O. ply B MR (I) 10.21 N IR..3. SN.N IN MIL FiraVe:ISZNn4":::.,7ePoraZr=ni Xr:erneS4SL:r1r==:17.:1"' =ICS! IAA NNW MO A110 ONES KAMM 510•01 M.. RR ICJ 18-{11-21-11-0A SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT „ SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED MDI LICENSE NUMBER 60082 REVISIONS PROPOSED HARDCOVER DETAIL MST. HO. NO CAPN. P.O. ADM. PROPOSED COM., DR.. SUR OF .1. .1 OF OF. PA.. NO STEP. SWINE FEET SCHARF FEET SCUri.e TETT SOJAPO FEET SCRAPE MET ?IL PROPOSED HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS INF =7 MIRCOIRAM 611400 I (6256 ss PT. / I4604 52. FL) 6.44 SOU/FE FEET 604 SMINtE FEET 41.03 X HAFCCORDI LANOSCAPE SURFACES WERE NOT INCLUOMIN PROPOSED .ROCOVER CALCOLATIONS PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE CALCULATIONS E031710 ROME NO CIJO.C. 1.335 SOME FEET 6 MM. - 1231 SW. FEET TOT. RAID. sAssovae 3.3S7 MOIRE FEST TOTAL AREA Ni FROMMT 16.604 MUNE FEET PORLENT. Ni INROCONTR (I.737 SO. / 10.004 SO. FT) - 21.60 R 10.0001 LEGEND: • BENOLVARN OCO MEAN OUT • SANITARY YA2n1CLE Os MINN (INLET) • GATE VALVE el. HYDRANT O STOP BOX LEI RR CCNO1801.11R 22 unure PARE 113 ELEC1R1C PETER LI CAS METER 31(- Lon- IVICO FENCE -X- SANITARY SEMI -32- STOLL .1. OVERHEAD ME UNDEROR0110 CAS BOUM ...0( UNE e mat SPOT ELEVAIION DOMING CONTOUR UNE Ge°* TREE I Emmaus SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE Rima, SURFACE NALL FIELDWORK CHIEF: 111 SURVEY FOR: Jase and Sarah Wagner PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4619 Townes Circle Edina, Minnesota 55424 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department EXIST. KITCHEN • te• Ig Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H EXIST. GARAGE EXIST. DINING ROOM • 1,3• Ag SR EXIST. FAMILY ROOM EXIST. MUD ROOM • ,3•dg RU MURPHY & CO DISTINCITVI REVIDENTIAL AMIITICTUNI MURPHY A CO, DESIGN 235 tAKE ST EAST, SUITE 301, WAYZATA 0.1A 55391 612-470 5511 r ISSUE DATES N EXISTING MAIN LEVEL PLAN SCALE: Y.,* = 1,0' 0 2 4 8 12 GRAPHIC SCALE (SCALE IN FEETI It= IMAYMPINO 1•4.10.11.1111M11901•1•014.1.111•11.10 Rill•ffrIACOMWIC•101,MMI.IMOILIMMICIF•rt 61111W(1102NAMM" NC. 0001011.1.110f10111.1AM 111.191.0:101likPIMMIMINIAMMIIIIMI.1131.1WIRTIM 0:16.110.1.11.W.01.1110.10,NC. SHEET IIIEE Existing Main Level Floor Plan SHEET NUMBER A101 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department I M. MUD ROOM Lx, 2 nr BREEZEWAY EXIST. KITCHEN OP dg F3, Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H EXIST. DINING 000/0 • HY POR lXT FAMILY ROOM BREAKFAST NOOK • 11P-3•dg MURPHY & C 0 DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE MURPHY b CO. DESIGN URE ST FAST, SUITE 301, WAYZATA MN SSITI 61E410 SS. COMONC•110/0.0101,111.111•11110141111131.111•VM IIIWIttl11031.11.700.1"NCHON11013CLUMPIOILTYCI WVIANKOMANYCOGFOCIIII11000JUINTIMNOTIONWO14 MI01.00111.1•30.1.1.1"1.7,11OUTIMOMMINWITel COMMTOPYLEM•111411W/0111101,1C ISSUE MIES L : SHEET THEE Main Level Floor Plan SHEET NUMBER A103 MAIN LEVEL PLAN SCARE: = ro' 0 2 4 8 12 GRAPHIC SCALE (SCALE IN FEET) Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department UPPER LEVEL PLAN SCALD Y.' = N 0 2 4 8 12 GRAPHIC SCALE (SCALE IN FEETI //////,,,A, EXIST. BEDROOM PI . 01' o'clg L Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H MURPHY & CO DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL ASCHITICTURI MAIM( A CO. DESIGN a3S LAKE ST EAST, SUITE 301, WAYZATA PAN SS301 612-170•SSII EXIST. UPPER. r, STAIR HALL • 113.11,1s he E launiry INAA 4 EXIST. BEDROOM #2 • 311-13,1001 11=1131014.11,11010031043.11440•111•11110111•1.0111Y1111111.11 NTIA.11111T• COLITAXT 010AM1160•11•01/1011KTKOI 1,11.11.01101,0,WI01103µ111C. 111101C00.1.311NTITOTTO 1011,00. .11.0100301103MIANNNIYICENNAII,WnTIOUTIT•110SMIWITIlli 4101.1TOIMITTIY1103041,110111201, HC ISSUE DATES SHEET TITLE Upper Level Floor Plan Sinn 51,111 It A104 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department INN Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H MURPHY &CO ointNcnvi RESIDENMI ARCHRECTUILE ,ILLILL E O. ILIALLLAI 234 LAKE SI IASI, SE III 301, WAWA, AIN 55,1 470-5511 T1.011.141.1101010.1101•14.11•11/1101=01.1.11•Mo 110.1.11.¢11.1rt MBA 11CMINATIIIMILIMINSIMS(01. KEW •COIMIlf =MAC 1111.001•111MMOT10•114.4 P•10011000•1.:0111*.110.111"WriliCalrlle omiliVarmi ....TOFWENtilICOVOWIONIOK NC ISSUE DAZES r 1 SHEET MU Exterior Elevations NORTH ELEVATION SHE El NUMBER SCALE:y'=I-U' A201 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department SCALE:%'_1-0 SHEET NUMBER IT EAST ELEVATION SCALE:M. = F-A Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H MURPHY & C 0 ownmcnve RESIDENTIAL ARCHITICTURS MURPHY A CO. DESIGN TM TAKE ST FAST, SUITE TOT. WAYZATA MN SMTI MT 110.5511 .11111,11.014.1111112CATM HAMM 1110MONUTHINWIO I11.11111.031 SfI .111=1" MONO. MUM 1117=rt 1311101.9. 000.11.1..• 110f10.411.114 IMAM° Et llEIVM.101/ <MN M.:4 WIM111.11.1M111 *ATM 112.1.111,11•14M11031.11.1•111" ISSUE DATES SIRET TITLE Exterior Elevations BUILDING SECTION A202 x r 1—, GARAGE 1-1 el la IT Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department I I 0 CD BUILDING SECTION SCALE: V.• . Wagner Residence 4619 Townes Circle Edina MN 55424 23-138H MURPHY & CO DISTINCTIVE RESIDE/TM. AACHITICTURI MURPHY 6 CO. ENSIGN 235 LAKE ST EAST, SUITE 301. WAYZATA MN 55391 612.170-SSI1 TIM DVIIVNOMO MICITAIIMI.11111111 /10111•011.11TWYM 14•111111COMMIT [MK 061.111MINOWIT OP 1.141.0:11.1VOISCK 1113.03/M1111.• NOTION WM, MICOYEIORUM, MICU OR DI 114[0.1110,11111CMNIMITIVI 0:11.1.Nr01.,MONIVIII0PO, NG ISSUE DATES XE SOUTH ELEVATION ScAte = 0 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE:Ye 1,0' SHEET TITLE Exterior Elevations 61 111 I NUMBER A203 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department r-PROOSED( M MDIR AD OC WRETENDOV/ DE IRC AREA ow M) IND / • r-PRCPOSED MIORAST CAW/ How (ssr ormi) AUDITOR S lOr 11 FsTsa •VILIGIREV LOT 11 ..EVezra+— I 119 I Ifo EXISTING DRAINAGE MAP TOWNES CIRCLE PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP TOWNES CIRCLE SUBDIVISION — — del ow ------- bl 212 41, -------- --- • tit .2IFErlife.1000 NUMBER .filrgratti. NUMBER too to nr • - 01. zz 1.0113 100-YEAR 3,659 3,659 STORMWATER RUNOFF VOLUME SUMMARY - TO STREET STORM EVENT EXISTING VOLUME (CF)(TES) PROPOSED VOLUME (CF)(TPR) *NOTES: 1. RESULTS ARE DERIVED FROM HYDROCAD MODELING SOFTWARE UTILIZING ATLAS 14 STORM DATA. 2. TYPE A SOILS PER WEB SOILS SURVEY. 3. PROPOSED BMP WILL DRAW DOWN WITHIN 48 HOURS. A °: 12' NOS AREA DRAIN PVC SOR35 0 2.05 ROOF DRAIN OUTLET NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision Number 319, Hennepin County, Minnesota. SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: 1. All survey data, such as elevations, building location, building dimensions, setbacks and various other information was provided to us and is based on EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. certificate of survey, dated March IS, 2024 (REV.). 2. All design aspects of the proposed stonnwater management and erosion control plans are based off of the provided site plan and survey information, It is assumed that all provided site plan and survey data is correct. 3. We did not perform any survey work related to this project and have not verified the provided survey data. 4. Elevations shown are based on the datum shown on the provided survey and relate to the benchmark listed on said survey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey when determining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning constmetion. 5. Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines are as shown on the provided survey by EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC.. STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS - RUNOFF TO STREET 1. VOLUME CONTROL — ONSITE RETENTION OF MIDS 1.1—INCH STORM EVENT OVER PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA = 1,842 SQUARE FEET REQUIRED VOLUME TO RETAIN = 1,842 X (1.1/12) = 169 CUBIC FEET VOLUME OF RETENTION PROVIDED (UNDERGROUND RET. AREA) = 629 CUBIC FEET 2. NO INCREASE IN STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE & VOLUME FOR THE ATLAS 14, 100—YEAR STORM EVENT. REFER TO STORMWATER RUNOFF VOLUME SUMMARY TABLE. STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE SUMMARY - TO STREET STORM EVENT PROPOSED DISCHARGE (CFS)(TPR) EXISTING DISCHARGE (CFS)(TER) 100-YEAR 1.57 1.49 1 1/2' WASHED ROLL" 1" HOPE LYEAN oar— NTH 4/EIAL CAP FLUSH HMI 0/01,EWA Nr, I FABRIC LINED LINED TRENCH (WORE LAYER LW mr) (NON-WOVEN) —CAP END 12" PVC SlANDARO ORAE R/41=892. 0 IfiX7S1 170N (WASS) 04A- " NYLOPLAST DRAIN BASIN 44\ (.5)VGYRCA 77ONV NSTALL PER 4/ANUFACTORERS STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS - RUNOFF TO WEST (NEIGHBOR) 1. RATE & VOLUME CONTROL — NO NET INCREASE IN RUNOFF RATE TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FROM EXISTING TO PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS FOR THE ATLAS 14, 10—YEAR STORM EVENT. REFER TO STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE SUMMARY TABLE. STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE SUMMARY EXISTING DISCHARGE (CFS)(E2) PROPOSED DISCHARGE (CFS)(P2) 10-YEAR 0.16 STORM EVENT 0.16 CAP ENO - —10' HOPE (FROM NKOPLAST L3) 20.0' \—/AIV=6885 SCAR/Fr /2' BEZOW--/ '-AR /ER FABRIC kW( SECI76W LINED TRENCH (NON-WOVEN) STORMWATER RE7EN170N/INFILTRA770N AREA NO SCALE 8" HOPE SOL/0 P/P SNIP INV=81385--, "6" BAST ACCRECA1E (GLASS NYLOPLAST Mill DETAIL NO SCALE LEGEND EXIS1ING CONTOUR EX/SONG SPOT BMW/ PROPOSED COV7OUR MANAGE ARROW - PLOW SET FENCE/ PO ROLL 5551150 DRNNAGE AREA ID PROPOSED DRAINAIE AREA ID L *NOTES: 1. RESULTS ARE DERIVED FROM HYDROCAD MODELING SOFTWARE UTILIZING ATLAS 14 STORM DATA. 2. TYPE A SOILS PER WEB SOILS SURVEY. 883 X 883.5 -RRJ El P1 DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 17917 Highway 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952)474-7964 Web: www.advsur.com DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE 1 INCH = 20 FEET 0 20' 40' CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESS JASE & SARA WAGNER 4619 TOWNES CIRCLE EDINA, MN I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM DULY UCENSEO PROFESSIONAL ENGINE Srj1DER THE F THE STATE OF MINN LICENSE 50. APRIL 22, 2024 DATE DATE SURVEYED: OCT. 2, 2023 SURVEYED BY: EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. DATE DRAFTED: APRIL 22, 2024 SHEET TITLE PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET SIZE 22"X34" SHEET NO. ST1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. DRAWING NUMBER 240403 JR Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department suaorosiply '77 ///// Doing Raiz' — NUMBER TOWNES CIRCLE ..A.DAIMMO SOME ITN 9.212 SOME FEET •LINIE FEET 924.11RE FEET I.332 1.1130 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL NOTE: UN of ORM NONA m ORM SM• M OA 1001 212•23122. CO/CAST OTY OF VAN MIER CITY OF Ma SWIM/ ERR CNC OF ION 310101 032 OF NAN NECTRO SETBACK INFORMATION: at, M[.4.. Ns IMMI MM. NM MANNIN 34-12.. Innis mann* arnaa ann. mann*. .40 an n. MAN* 404 WM ••••• mrs Mn ymont N• Mc as ens Mc of • wiroN Mmon sno ON 0144174 Nth • o•-•-r or es an el • Core-ml NM. ie l. by MINg 12/4 MA NM wr:I=t4rg: """"" r.rt= er No INA olml Mlbsob WA So M Norm MA NroN NM. of s• •My MNIZMI• • M mum M. of 9•1 dm{ MINN Mao. 004/mlnoort ICR NN/oortle 23 II Iferknon NAN IA/ Imotss IA SAMN 1400 M ft 1.M. NA NI NM •••••• 73 fk • romm1 NM Mu No Owl ata 10 IL IMilm X *a 114101 omm1 ••••• •••• •••• ••• MA M MM. •• 41 NIAnc NAMIN MX of M tros Hvl mfarylmmlarA MX NM ••• 011. OF IDNA ILER CAM COMM UL LE ONNIN PONT D N ann .31IETCCAP NIL DONN r LA...EN...WM NOT PALMED 9 COSTING MROCOVER CALMAT.. PROPOSED HARDCOVER DETAIL PROPOSED HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS DEMO NOISE NO CARACIO PROPOS9 MINIM PROPOSED OXIMETE 3U14 OF .112 NAI Cf NOM P.M IAD MEM TIM == PERCONAN • 10/122.34 Nal so / tan. en FL) 475 Old Highway 8 NW, Suite 200 HERS' New Brighton, Minnesota 55112 PHONE: (612) 466-3300 WWW.EFNSURVEY.COM Egan, Field & Nowak, Inc. mention* 2023 By ERNE fIELO NOM( NC. land S01024015 Since 1072 X — ----- .41=M1417.-1I. -•-"" -N89505'W 140.00 LOT 22 Aolons 4A0 *Dr Dua r ADA0 AAIAD 411 no-am-24-$1-oaA: LOT 23 .4\ Cr.-. V.... 12irl NM Of PROP003 • .31 MINE nmr • 11.01 SOUNIE NET rinmortran Or WOOS. (rota an no /11•31 93 Fr) XLN X HMCO. 0 20 30 SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT • SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED WITH LICENSE NUMBER 60082 FIELD BOOK PAGE FIELDWORK CHIEF: REVISIONS DATE 02-07-2094 03-16-2021 0,30-2021 DESCRIPTION Add bolding setback Information Add proposed hardcover ooloolatloos Add Tree removal table DRAWN BY: DAY CHECKED BY: DRAWING NAME: 411334 CERT.dwa JOB NO. 4)834 FILE NO. 3779 NO. 2 10N. MAO. IINNINOC TOTAIL AREA Cf PRINER2( 7- UM 30.10E PIDICINTAN Cf HAMMER MAYO Art. /14.4101. n FE) - MAO X HAMM. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: Jase and Sarah Wagner LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LM It. 00and•••••91. Ns* 3111. IMAM ModA Mr* NOTES: I. TN NUMMI of Ns MM. in•Im sn Hang. ORAN man. 011 000s3-4R1 AN). M cm el 11. promrty Mat. Nrcat 9 1.04 o•Nr• Not cr 0.I. arm 3. TM sort ses M 199.44 II Len MIC • MN 140 • M N Afra N .64 M MM., • M M mmnN N ma.rwmom A EANI• NORM anion •••••211 MN* ••• Isom Nos IS. No• MAIN nards NM lo m by rool•• MANN rr by loosNass NM. by pp. pin Cm yor X• AM. liamtr. NAM en•Men. M loos. of Mom.. Mum send immr•IM armlney M Mabry CoMML Nom WARM or 101 MAW Nom., Is M N MOM •• so* my b• mom, 011or •• ronlor my b.. yrms1 •11 MINA. ald en • •• ull/M M 44•14. MAIM 401M•1 Nan M mown d nmoda NAM p01.,,.145 MIMI • MANNA 0. 114promly am. Moe in MN Eked MN Y Ones 11161+1 fM Namf) m Frem M OM F. 404 DA**, 2/0100100 Top Rd A MO 00 Mt 0 M *NEM of envoy • Ifs anord MO., EMMA • 01.090 CERTIFICATION: N, •••• N Merl ymon• by No Myr my •Nl mon., M NA an My 066m2 Mmor MN No Ws of M 6f OM of •osmb WAN A ram. Ons of ARM= WAN. N 2023 PRELIMINARY lom IL NNW M.* Mom M 002111 Mfbab•Munomm EXISTING HARDCOVER DETAIL TREE REMOVAL TABLE TREE SPECIES DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT HACKBERRY 13 in HACKBERRY 11 in BOX ELDER 11 in CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY SOLVE FEET 1171 42PE. FEET 11.23 X 10720•19 LANDSCAPE SURFACEMERE NON... • PROPOSEMIARMOVER CMCIA.AnCM PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE CALCULATIONS MInfla WAD HO VADAGe MINE 11. PROPOSED /NOM 1932 SOME FEET LEGEND: * DERMINIM 002 NEON OUT • SANITARY 4401114.E 00 ORM ONE° • CAN VILSE 1121•ANT O STOP BOX Ito AIR CCM.. 19 MV POLE 01 NEM NE. GI CAS INTER * UNIT -s- SAN/TAR4 0771 -SS- MOM SERER 0.1.0 NRE -C- 1.110.014MNO OM M- .- BUXOM SETBACK LINE 0 taw SPOT NEVATON ENVY. CONTOUR UNE ROE TO BE ROYOVE0 OMINOUS SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE MOM SURFACE 12211 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4619 Townes Circle Edina, Minnesota 55424 SURVEY FOR: Jase and Sarah Wagner Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department TER TOTA XISTI RUNG' F TO STRE Uncontrolled Runoff to West Neighboring Property Uncontrolled Runoff North to Street Routing Diagram for Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering, Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 2-yr Rainfall=2.86" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment El: Uncontrolled Runoff North to Street Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth= 0.21" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 2-yr Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 6,693 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,968 98 Impervious Area 9,661 57 Weighted Average 6,693 69.28% Pervious Area 2,968 30.72% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.2 40 0.0500 3.35 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 4.5 90 Total Summary for Subcatchment E2: Uncontrolled Runoff to West Neighboring Property Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.003 af, Depth= 0.21" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 2-yr Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 4,857 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A * 2,086 98 Impervious Area 6,943 57 Weighted Average 4,857 69.96% Pervious Area 2,086 30.04% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.4 57 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 4.7 107 Total Summary for Link TER: TOTAL EXISTING RUNOFF TO STREET Inflow Area = 0.381 ac, 30.44% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.21" for 2-yr event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af Primary = 0.05 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 2-yr Rainfall=2.86" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 10-yr Rainfall=4.28" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment El: Uncontrolled Runoff North to Street Runoff = 0.22 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.014 af, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 10-yr Rainfall=4.28" Area (sf) CN Description 6,693 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A * 2,968 98 Impervious Area 9,661 57 Weighted Average 6,693 69.28% Pervious Area 2,968 30.72% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.2 40 0.0500 3.35 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 4.5 90 Total Summary for Subcatchment E2: Uncontrolled Runoff to West Neighboring Property Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 10-yr Rainfall=4.28" Area (sf) CN Description 4,857 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A * 2,086 98 Impervious Area 6,943 57 Weighted Average 4,857 69.96% Pervious Area 2,086 30.04% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.4 57 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 4.7 107 Total Summary for Link TER: TOTAL EXISTING RUNOFF TO STREET Inflow Area = 0.381 ac, 30.44% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.74" for 10-yr event Inflow = 0.38 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af Primary = 0.38 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 10-yr Rainfall=4.28" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 100-yr Rainfall=7.49" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2 024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment El: Uncontrolled Runoff North to Street Runoff = 0.92 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.049 af, Depth= 2.65" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 100-yr Rainfall=7.49" Area (sf) CN Description 6,693 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A * 2,968 98 Impervious Area 9,661 57 Weighted Average 6,693 69.28% Pervious Area 2,968 30.72% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.2 40 0.0500 3.35 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 4.5 90 Total Summary for Subcatchment E2: Uncontrolled Runoff to West Neighboring Property Runoff = 0.65 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Depth= 2.65" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Atlas 14 24-hr SO 100-yr Rainfall=7.49" Area (sf) CN Description 4,857 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A * 2,086 98 Impervious Area 6,943 57 Weighted Average 4,857 69.96% Pervious Area 2,086 30.04% Impervious Area Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) Velocity Capacity (ft/sec) (cfs) Description 4.3 50 0.3300 0.20 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.86" 0.4 57 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 4.7 107 Total Summary for Link TER: TOTAL EXISTING RUNOFF TO STREET Inflow Area = 0.381 ac, 30.44% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.65" for 100-yr event Inflow = 1.57 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.084 af Primary = 1.57 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.084 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Existing Conditions - 4619 Townes Circle Edina Atlas 14 24-hr SO 100-yr Rainfall=7.49" Prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Printed 4/22/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-16 s/n 09367 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-50.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Residential Tree Protection Plan Escrow Calculation Worksheet Applicant completes Blue boxes Table A: EXISTING TREES STAFF ONLY, OK Tree Species: Quantity, D/C (deciduous or conifer), Species Diameter at Breast Height (dbh) (in) or Height (ft) -Removed: Not Protected, Protected, Heritage. -Preserved. -Transplanted. Tree I.D. # (From Tree Plan) 1, D, Hackberry 9" Preserved. 1, D, Box Elder 12" Preserved. 1, C, Spruce 8" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 18" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 6" Preserved. 1, D, Birch 6" Preserved. 1, D, Apple 14" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 13" Preserved. 1, D, Ash 11" Preserved. 1, D, Oak 11" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 16" Preserved. 1, D, Ash 6" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 10" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 10" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 13" Preserved. 1, D, Maple 14" Preserved 1, D, Elm 18" Preserved 1, D, Maple 19" Preserved 1, D, Hackberry 8" Preserved 1, D, Ash 8" Preserved 1, D, Oak 22" Preserved 1, D, Box Elder 14" Preserved 1, D, Hackberry 11" Removed: Protected 1, D, Hackberry 13" Removed: Protected 1, D, Box Elder 11" Removed: Not Protected Total size removed (in/ft): Not Protected 11" Total size removed (in/ft): Protected 24" Total size removed (in/ft): Heritage 0" Total size Preserved (in/ft) 266" Total size Transplanted (in/ft) 0" I: \Building\ SafetyPoliciesInfonnation \Edina Website Server\Docx's\Website Word Doc Materials\ WEBSITE SDI9 RESIDENTIAL TREE PROTECTION ESCROW WORKSHEET TABLE A.docx Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Residential Tree Protection Plan Escrow Calculation Worksheet Applicant completes Blue boxes Table B: ESCROW CALCULATION STAFF ONLY Table cells, Ordinance 2022-10 Item. 1. In + Ft = Total to be removed, preserved, transplanted (from Table A) Required replacement percentage (%) 2. In + Ft = Amount of required replacement trees Replacement failure fee ($) 3. Total potential fee ($) Forester Final Approval Date Total size removed (in/ft): Not Protected, 2b 11" X 0.00% NONE X $0.00 NONE a. Total size removed (in/ft): Protected, 4f. 24" X 75.00% 18" X $300 $5,400.00 b. Total size removed (in/ft): Heritage, 5f. 0" X 100.00% 0" X $500 $0.00 c. Total size (in/ft): Preserved, 6, 7 266" X 0.00% NONE X $0.00 NONE d. Total size (in/ft): Transplanted, 10 0" X 100.00% 0" X $0.00 NONE e. Total Potential Fee B.3.a. + B.3.b., 4f, 5f $5,400.00 f. Total Escrow owed = B.3.e. X 110%, 12a. $5,940.00 I: \Building\ SafetyPoliciesInfonnation \ Edina Website Server\Docx's\Website Word Doc Materials\ WEBSITE SD20 RESIDENTIAL TREE PROTECTION ESCROW WORKSHEET TABLE B.docx Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department STAFF ONLY, OK Table C: NEW REPLACEMENT TREES, ORDINANCE 2022-10 ITEM 11 B.2.a. B.2.b. Insert values from Table B: Per Table 11, Lot Size less than 1 acre, Y/N Tree Species: Quantity, D/C (deciduous or conifer), Species TBD dbh (in) or Height (ft) Protected, Heritage, Transplant Total replacement Protected trees (in/ft): Total replacement Heritage trees (in/ft): Total size Transplanted trees (in/ft): Residential Tree Protection Plan Escrow Calculation Worksheet Applicant completes Blue boxes I: \BuildineSafetyPoliciesInfonnation \Edina Website Server\Docx's\Website Word Doc Materials\ WEBSITE SD21 RESIDENTIAL TREE PROTECTION ESCROW WORKSHEET TABLE C.docx Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department April 11, 2024 Scott & Liz Clemente 4700 Townes Rd. Edina, MN 55424 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to the proposed project at Wagner residence on Townes Circle in Edina. My wife and I have reviewed the proposed project and would like to voice our support for it. We moved into the neighborhood in 2022 after a 6 month search for a new home. When we saw our current home we knew it was the one we had to have-- not just because we loved the home but because we loved the neighborhood. The White Oaks neighborhood was one of the only ones we found that still had a majority of older homes still standing and the feeling and character they provide. It did not strike us as a "knock down" neighborhood where in 10 years, the street would be populated with generic looking new builds. The neighborhood had character. To maintain that character, I believe allowances should be made for home owners who are attempting to update their homes and not knock them down. This is the case with the Wagner residence. Their addition will be a net positive to the neighborhood- increasing home values while maintaining the character that makes the neighborhood so attractive. Please feel free to reach out to me at the contact information below with any questions. Best Regards, Scott Clemente Email:scottclemente@gmail.com ph: 612-217-2018 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Patrick and Heidi Judge 4707 Townes Road Edina, MN 55424 763-221-7966 heidi.a.judge@gmail.com 12th April 2024 To Whom it May Concern, We are writing this letter in support of the variance being reviewed for approval at 4619 Townes Circle. After looking over the building plans, we find this addition to the Wagner residence would not only improve the look and functionality of their home, but is aesthetically in line with the White Oaks neighborhood. We know that we along with many others would like to see it approved. Sincerely, Heidi and Patrick Judge Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department April 22, 2024 Dan Demeules Murphy & Co. 235 Lake St. East Suite 301 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dan@murphycodesign.com Re: 4619 Townes Circle, Edina Dear Dan, We are writing to express our support for Sarah and Jase Wagner's request for a variance for their new garage. We live at 4611 Townes Circle which is across the street from the Wagners. Sarah and Jase have shown us a drawing of their project and we understand that they need a variance of about 15' for the setback of the garage. We are very glad to see that the design of the new garage is consistent with the original house and that this plan allows them to preserve the character of the original house and of the neighborhood. Given this, we think their request for a set back variance is reasonable and we support it. Sincerely, Tom Schnettler and Cheryl Appeldorn 4611 Townes Circle Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department Dan Demeules From: Bennett, Frank <FBennett@fredlaw.com > Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2024 7:02 PM To: jhovland@hovlandrasmus.com Subject: Jase and Sarah Wagner Residence. Variance Request. Jim, Good evening. I hope this finds you well. Writing tonight in support of a neighbor's variance request in our small neighborhood of White Oaks. You might recall that Carol and I have lived on White Oaks Road for over 30 years. We are one of two small "top of the hill" cul-de-sacs in White Oaks. I am writing in support of a variance request by our Neighbors on Town's circle, Jase and Sarah Wagner. We have gotten to know the Wagners over the years, and we are now at the point that the Wagner children help water flowers in our yard , a small but simple tradition of close knit families in close knit neighborhoods. The Wagners have made improvements to their home over the years to accommodate their growing family of 3 children. As with most growing families, one or two cars are ending up in the street or the driveway as the garage is now home to bikes, lawn equipment and sports gear. The Wagners have proposed a thoughtful and tasteful expansion plan for their home that does require a variance. That being said, the variance will help preserve the aesthetics and characteristics of the neighborhood. If the Wagners were to proceed without the variance, their addition would actually be more intrusive to their neighbors' views. The variance allows the addition to blend more into the hillside behind and adjacent to their home and actually will help to preserve the views of the neighbors. I know that variance requests are given careful consideration by the City as you all do your best to balance the interests of all neighbors and the integrity of our zoning requirements. In the instant case, and as an interested neighbor, I strongly believe the requested variance is the best outcome for all concerned. This is also a situation in which a variance will encourage neighbors like Jase and Sarah Wagner to continue to invest in their home and our neighborhood. This is much preferable to some of the tear down projects we are starting to see in White Oaks. Thank you for your consideration. Do not hesitate to call with any questions. Regards Frank Frank B. Bennett Attorney I Co-chair Private Equity Group Fredrikson & Byron, P.A. Fredrikson 60 South Sixth Street, Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612-492-7377 (office) 612-751-4059 (mobile) fbennett@fredlaw.com 1 Submitted 5/3/24 Planning Department EdinaMN.govVariance RequestA 15.7-foot front yard setback variance at 4619 Townes Circle Site Location Compliance Table Partial existing main level Partial main level plan Partial loft plan North elevation Building elevation and section Building section South elevation Grade retained in the back yard Project Repor t 30 January 2019 - 21 May 2024 Bet ter Together Edina 4619 Townes Circle, Front Yard Setback Variance Highlights TOTAL VISITS 35 MAX VISITORS PER DAY 6 NEW REGISTRATI ONS 0 ENGAGED VISITORS 0 INFORMED VISITORS 10 AWARE VISITORS 28 Aware Participants 28 Aware Actions Performed Participants Visited a Project or Tool Page 28 Informed Participants 10 Informed Actions Performed Participants Viewed a video 0 Viewed a photo 0 Downloaded a document 8 Visited the Key Dates page 3 Visited an FAQ list Page 0 Visited Instagram Page 0 Visited Multiple Project Pages 8 Contributed to a tool (engaged)0 Engaged Participants 0 Engaged Actions Performed Registered Unverified Anonymous Contributed on Forums 0 0 0 Participated in Surveys 0 0 0 Contributed to Newsfeeds 0 0 0 Participated in Quick Polls 0 0 0 Posted on Guestbooks 0 0 0 Contributed to Stories 0 0 0 Asked Questions 0 0 0 Placed Pins on Places 0 0 0 Contributed to Ideas 0 0 0 Visitors Summar y Pageviews Visitors 13 May '24 20 May '24 10 20 Tool Type Engagement Tool Name Tool Status Visitors Registered Unverified Anonymous Contributors Qanda Questions Published 2 0 0 0 Guest Book Public Input- 4619 Townes Circle Archived 3 0 0 0 Better Together Edina : Summary Report for 30 January 2019 to 21 May 2024 ENGAGEMENT TOOLS SUMMARY 0 FORUM TOPICS 0 SURVEYS 0 NEWS FEEDS 0 QUICK POLLS 1 GUEST BOOKS 0 STORIES 1 Q&A S 0 PLACES Page 2 of 3 Widget Type Engagement Tool Name Visitors Views/Downloads Document Surveys, Plans, and Renderings.pdf 6 6 Document Applicant Narrative.pdf 6 7 Key Dates Key Date 3 3 Better Together Edina : Summary Report for 30 January 2019 to 21 May 2024 INFORMATION WIDGET SUMMARY 2 DOCUMENTS 0 PHOTOS 0 VIDEOS 0 FAQS 0 KEY DATES Page 3 of 3 Date: May 22, 2024 Agenda Item #: VI.B. 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 UBLI C HEAR I NG : P reliminary R ezoning, O verall Development P lan, S ite P lan and S ubdivision – 7235 F ranc e Avenue 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 requests, subject to the findings and conditions outlined in the staff memo. I N TR O D U C TI O N: Enclave Companies are proposing to redevelop the M acy’s Furniture store site at 7235 France Avenue. T he proposal is to tear down the existing structure and build the following: ] S outhwest P arcel. An 11-story (155-foot tall) mixed use building containing 47,236 square feet of office, 49 senior condominiums, 9,549 square feet of retail/restaurant and a 280-stall parking garage. Northwest P arcel. A 7-story (85-foot tall) mixed use building containing 20,825 square feet of office/lobby/conference, 124 apartment units and 7,594 square feet of retail, and a 318-stall parking garage. Northeast P arcel. A 7-story (82-foot tall) apartment with 223 units and a 346-stall parking garage. S outheast P arcel. A 7-story (82-foot tall) apartment with 176 units and 4,141 square feet of retail/restaurant and a 380-stall parking garage. (See attached narrative and plans.) T he applicant proposes to include affordable housing units within the project to meet the C ity’s affordable housing policy. Ten percent (10%) of the rental units would be available to those at 50% AM I (53 units) and ten percent (10%) of the for-sale condos would be available to those persons at 80% AM I (5 units). T he applicant intends to meet the C ity’s S ustainable Buildings P olicy. (S ee page 9 of the applicant narrative. Also, 45% of the project would be dedicated as public realm; this would include areas on all sides of all four buildings. T he applicant has requested the following: P reliminary R ezoning from P C D-3 to P U D -25, which would include an overall development plan. T he P U D would ensure that affordable housing is included within the project, that the S ustainable Buildings P olicy is met, and land is dedicated for public use. In return, the applicant is requesting flexibility to the underlying P C D-3 standards including building height, building material, building transparency, first floor ceiling height, building setbacks, building setback from single-family homes, floor area ratio and building coverage. P reliminary S ite P lan and S ubdivision/P reliminary P lat. Better Together Edina P ublic I nput AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Site Location, Zoning & Comp. Plan Traffic and Parking Study EAW Engineering Memo Memo from cheif building official and fire mars hal Memo from Parks & Rec Sketch Plan Comments from Mic Johns on, AFO Applicant's Narrative and Cover Letters Plans and Renderings 1 of 3 Plans and Renderings 2 of 3 Plans and Renderings 3 of 3 Civil Plans 1 of 2 Civil Plans 2 of 2 Building Materials Calculations Greater Southdale Area Des ign Experience Guidelines Pyramid of Discretion in the Land Use Proces s Applicant Pres entation Staff Pres entation Enclave Companies are proposing to redevelop the Macy’s Furniture store site at 7235 France Avenue. The proposal is to tear down the existing 89,782 square foot structure and build the following: Southwest Parcel. An 11-story (155-foot tall) mixed use building containing 47,236 square feet of office, 49 senior condominiums, 9,549 square feet of retail/restaurant and a 280-stall parking garage. Northwest Parcel. A 7-story (85-foot tall) mixed use building containing 20,825 square feet of office/lobby/conference, 124 apartment units and 7,594 square feet of retail, and a 318-stall parking garage. Northeast Parcel. A 7-story (82-foot tall) apartment with 223 units and a 346-stall parking garage. Southeast Parcel. A 7-story (82-foot tall) apartment with 176 units and 4,141 square feet of retail/restaurant and a 380-stall parking garage. (See attached narrative and plans.) The applicant proposes to include affordable housing units within the project to meet the City’s affordable housing policy. Ten percent (10%) of the rental units would be available to those at 50% AMI (53 units) and ten percent (10%) of the for-sale condos would be available to those persons at 80% AMI (5 units). The applicant intends to meet the City’s Sustainable Buildings Policy. (See page 9 of the applicant narrative. Also, 45% of the project would be dedicated as public realm; this would include areas on all sides of all four buildings. The applicant has requested the following: Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD-25, which would include an overall development plan. The PUD would ensure that affordable housing is included May 22, 2023 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Preliminary Rezoning, Overall Development Plan, Site Plan and Subdivision – 7235 France Avenue Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 within the project, that the Sustainable Buildings Policy is met, and land is dedicated for public use. In return, the applicant is requesting flexibility to the underlying PCD-3 standards including building height, building material, building transparency, first floor ceiling height, building setbacks, building setback from single-family homes, floor area ratio and building coverage. Preliminary Site Plan and Subdivision/Preliminary Plat. The table on the page 13 of this report demonstrates how the proposed new building would comply with the existing PCD-3 Standards on the lot. The applicant went through the sketch plan process; based on the feedback received, they have made the following revisions to the plans (See more detail on the revisions within the applicant narrative attached): Increased building setbacks. East side from the Promenade increased from 15 to 35 feet. The south side setbacks increased from 50-100 feet to 50 to 130 feet. Added a restaurant adjacent to the Promenade in the SE building. Widened the 9-mile Creek Trail along the south lot line from 10 feet to 15 feet. (Subject formal approval from the watershed district.) Shifted the 11-story building from the NW lot to the SW lot. The height still does not meet the setback requirement from R-1 zoned property. The above ground garage in the NW building has been reduced from 4 levels to 1 level. General public parking has been added to all four buildings. Parking ramps have been designed to be convertible. “Green” coverage has been added on building walls. Public Art has been added. Plans now can accommodate either an underpass or bridge across France Avenue. Enhanced and increased landscaping and green space. (See page 6 of the applicant narrative.) Project will meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy. 5% of the parking stalls will have EV charging stations; 10% will include electrical conduit for 10% of the stalls to have EV charging stations. Rooftop solar panels will be installed on the two eastern buildings. Affordable housing (10% of the units) will be included within the project, including 10% of the condominiums. Reduced the amount of office space and increased the retail and housing. Attached is the city attorney’s “pyramid of discretion.” This project is within the “green” zone, meaning this is a legislative decision in which the City has complete discretion when reviewing this application. STAFF REPORT Page 3 SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: 71 France; Retail/apartments Mixed Use Development Project; zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development and guided CAC, Community Activity Center. Easterly: The Promenade and York Plaza Apartments; zoned PRD-4, Planned Residential District and guided Greater Southdale District Residential. Southerly: Pinstripes and Parking Ramp; zoned MDD-6, Mixed Development District 6 and guided CAC, Community Activity Center. Westerly: Vacant Site (7200-7250 France); zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development and guided OR, Office Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 7.97 acres in size and contains an existing furniture store and a large, underutilized surface parking lot. Planning Guide Plan designation: CAC, Community Activity Center. Zoning: PC-3, Planned Commercial District 3 Comprehensive Plan This site is guided CAC, Community Activity Center. (See attached Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map) Below is the CAC land use category and description. The proposed uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As stated withing the Greater Southdale District Plan “The commercial core of the Greater Southdale District, including the Southdale and Galleria malls and commercial areas to the east and south, is a designated Community Activity Center (CAC). This is the city’s most intense district in terms of uses, height and coverage. Primary uses include retail, office, lodging, entertainment, and multifamily residential uses, with mixed uses being generally preferred. Secondary uses include institutional and recreational uses.” Categories Description, Land Uses Development Character and Guidelines Density and Intensity Guidance CAC Community Activity Center Contains larger scale uses, height and coverage. Primary uses: Retail, office, lodging, entertainment, and residential uses, combined or in separate buildings. Secondary uses: Institutional and recreational. Mixed-use should be encouraged and may be required on larger sites. Design standards for building placement, massing and street-level treatment. Where applicable, refer to small area plan for more detailed design guidance. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings may “step down" at boundaries with lower-density districts and upper stories “step back" from street. More stringent design standards for larger buildings. Emphasize pedestrian circulation; re-introduce finer-grained circulation patterns where feasible. 90 – 150 residential dwelling units/acre 50%/50% estimated residential/commercial mixed-use STAFF REPORT Page 4 The Greater Southdale Work Group spent over two years working on the Greater Southdale District Plan for the Comprehensive Plan and the Design Experience Guidelines. Page 47 of the Greater Southdale District Plan states: “The Greater Southdale Work Group’s deliberations culminated in an urban design strategy that is operationalized in a flexible decision-making framework that stimulates continuous adaptive activity rather than a fixed set of rules that defy challenge. The urban design strategy is intended to inspire creative interaction between development blocks and the public realm, with the public realm serving as a pivotal organizational element. The Work Group’s over-arching objective is to maximize pedestrian activity throughout the District, with the public realm as the connective tissue that gives the District its unique identity and sets the stage for a remarkable daily experience for those who live, work, play within the Greater Southdale District.” The PUD zoning option was created with this in mind. A PUD offers the ability to vary from conventional Zoning. The proposed development does not fit into conventional zoning and does not meet some of the recommended design experience guidelines. However, the project does very much meet the over-arching objective to maximize pedestrian activity throughout the District, with the public realm as the connective tissue that gives the District its unique identity and sets the stage for a remarkable daily experience for those who live, work, play within the Greater Southdale District. The centerpiece of this project is the public realm designed to maximize pedestrian traffic through the site and enable future connection west across France Avenue. Site STAFF REPORT Page 5 Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines - City Goals The applicant has responded to the comments from AFO at Sketch Plan and the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. (See pages 13-14 within the applicant narrative, and the AFO review memo from Sketch Plan.) The proposed plans follow several fundamental guidelines: 1) Dividing larger parcels into smaller ones and creating public spaces between the buildings, and move pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles through the site; 2) Inclusion of liner buildings to screen parking ramps; 3) Eliminating surface parking; 4) Activating the ground level with commercial uses and residential units. Parking Based on the proposal, 572 residential units, 21,281square feet of restaurant/retail uses, and 68,061 square feet of office space; 1,117 parking stalls are required. The applicant is proposing 1,339 spaces within the underground parking garages plus 10 surface parking stalls. Within each building 5% of the parking stalls would be installed with electric vehicle charging stations, and an additional 10% would be wired for the possibility future EV charging stations. WSB Consulting provided a parking study, which concludes that the proposed development requires 1,041 parking spaces. Site Circulation/Traffic Vehicular access to the site would be in two locations off of France Avenue that exist today. One on the north lot line that is shared with the 71 France project to the north, and the other on the south lot line that is shared with the development to the south. There would be a north south drive that would connect to the north and south parcels as they are connected today. Access to parking to all four buildings would be from this north-south road. Public shared access easements would be established. WSB also conducted a traffic study, reviewing the EAW that was previously done for this site/development. The study concludes that no roadway improvements are needed at this time. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, 61 overstory trees would be required. The proposed plans show that 39 trees would be removed, and 11 trees would remain. The applicant is proposing to plant 142 new trees that would equate to 414 new caliper inches of trees. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. (See attached landscape plans.) The applicant would also be asked to meet the City’s tree preservation ordinance at the time of building permit application. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in their review memo. (See attached memo dated May 16, 2024.) STAFF REPORT Page 6 A developer’s agreement would be required for the construction of the proposed sidewalks, drive lanes and utilities. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The building materials would be a combination of brick, stone metal panel, fiber cement, and glass. Brick/stone and glass would primarily be located at the base of the buildings. (See attached renderings.) The applicant is requesting flexibility through the PUD rezoning under the following provisions of the City Code. Per Section 36-579 (3), the following building design is required in the POD Zoning District: 3) Building design and construction. In addition to other restrictions of this section and article III of chapter 10, the use, construction, alteration or enlargement of any building or structure within the Planned Office District shall meet the following standards: a. All new front building facades in the district that face the public realm must have 75 percent transparency (ability to see inside the building) at the ground level. b. All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use natural materials (brick, stone) facing the public realm (streets, parks, sidewalks). c. No building facade shall be longer than 200 feet without changing direction by a minimum of 90 degrees. d. Ground level first floors must have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 20 feet. e. All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings constructed after the erection of an original building shall be constructed of the same materials as the original building and shall be designed in a manner conforming to the original architectural design and general appearance. The applicant is proposing a 15-20 foot tall first floors. The applicant is further requesting flexibility regarding brick material on the first 60 feet in height, and the 75% transparency requirement. The percentage of proposed brick/stone in the first 60 feet varies between 20- 72%. (See attached plans showing brick percentages.) Excluding the structured parking area, the ground level transparency is 61% around the perimeter of the NE Building, 75% around the NW building, 65% around the SE building and 65% around the SW building. Mechanical Equipment No mechanical equipment has been shown on the plans. Any rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Final Plans must include location of mechanical equipment and the means of screening. No ground level mechanical equipment shall be located within the front yard of the development. Signage The signage allowed on the site would correspond to the use. The residential use would be subject to the sign regulations in Section 36-1712 planned residential districts; the retail uses would be subject to sign regulations of commercial districts, Section 36-1714, PCD-2 District. This would be written in the PUD Ordinance if approved. The public park sign would not meet STAFF REPORT Page 7 the sign ordinance. Park signage should also be subject to compliance with the sign ordinance, to be determined at the time of building permit. 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 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. The applicant would be installing sidewalks along the streets and around all the buildings. There would be indoor long-term bicycle parking stalls within the buildings for residents. Provision of code compliant exterior bike racks (5% of parking stalls) for the commercial use near the building entrances would be required at the time of permitting. See the attached memo from engineering regarding the city’s Living Streets Policy & TDM Management. Some of the highlights and recommendations include: STAFF REPORT Page 8 Design the sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Public sidewalk to be a minimum 8 feet in width with an 8-foot boulevard. Provide a TDM plan as required by the City’s Travel Demand Management Policy. Provide directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and ride-sharing services. Provide a bike repair station on-site, located adjacent to bike parking/storage or the bicycle access points. Subsidize Metro Transit passes for tenants and employees. Connections to the Promenade The City’s parks and recreation department has reviewed the proposed plans and connections to the Promenade and have offered several recommendations. (See the complete list in the attached memo). These shall be made a condition of approval of the project. Some of the recommendations are as follows: Property line- Do not utilize City of Edina property. Keep landscape, trees, hardscape, seating wall, etc. off City of Edina property. Connections- Reduce access points to the Promenade Trail. Perhaps provide a collector trail on Macy’s property that leads to reductions in Promenade access points. Trail connections should be safe, easily accessible and ADA compliant. Don’t change the grade of City of Edina property. Parks and recreation does not want to provide public access to a private dog park or have it near Promenade Trail. Maintenance agreement- Develop a maintenance agreement with property owners to ensure both parties understand and agree on maintenance of area. Subdivision The applicant is proposing to divide the parcel into four lots so that each building is located on its own lot. There is no minimum lot size in the PCD-3 Zoning District. For setback purposes, per Section 36-618 (2) the interior lot lines are not considered, only the perimeter or zoning district boundary. The proposed structures do not meet the required setbacks as noted on page 13. The City is authorized by statute to collect park dedication fees to support the additional demand for parks created by new development when property is subdivided. The City has studied this demand and concluded that new projects generally create additional park demand of approximately $7,1000 per buildable acre (43,560 square feet) of retail and office and $5,000 per unit for residential. There would be no dedication for the office/retail square footage as there currently is an 89,782 square foot building on the site that would be removed and 89,342 square feet of retail added. For the residential dedication, $2,860,000.00 is required. Staff has reviewed this individual project and believes this project will generate similar types and quantities of new demand as assumed in the City’s study. Staff does not believe there needs to be any adjustment made to the amount of park dedication fees. These fees would be due at the time of building permit. STAFF REPORT Page 9 Planned Unit Development (PUD) As stated in the Greater Southdale District Plan, (page 63) “the Planned Unit Development process is used to encourage innovation in project design that cannot be achieved through traditional zoning, particularly where that innovation benefits the community or the context of the proposed project. This process involves discretionary review characterized by negotiation and collaboration.” An argument can be made for and against the proposed development. As mentioned, this is a proposal in which the City has complete discretion to approve or deny. The recommendation section of this report will outline a case both for and against this proposed project. Staff believes the proposal would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD, as most of the criteria below would be met. Per Section 36-253 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; The site is located within the CAC land use category in the Comprehensive Plan. This is the area that is anticipated for the most intense development within the City. The area in between France and York Avenues is seen as the area that would support the most building density. The Work Group for the Greater Southdale District prepared a Vision Statement as well as their Aspirations for transforming the Greater Southdale District with expanded public parks and publicly-accessible gathering opportunities, community services and facilities, cultural and entertainment venues, a well-designed mix of housing types and affordability-choices, and expanded employment and shopping opportunities. The Vision Statement and Aspirations state: “This is what we want.” The key organizing statements of the Work Group’s Vision Statement are: We envision a vibrant, forward-looking and people-filled Greater Southdale District, organized around dynamic streets, engaging parks and public spaces, and well-conceived and enduring buildings. We welcome change on our terms. We envision innovation leading to extraordinary places and experiences. STAFF REPORT Page 10 We’re embarking on 50 years of well-paced steps, with each one more clearly blazing the path toward the future of the district. Increased density would help create a “people-filled” Greater Southdale District. The focus of the development is moving pedestrians and bicycles through the site to connect to the Promenade; forty-five percent (45%) of the development would be dedicated as public realm. Additionally, this project could enable a future much safer crossing of France Avenue opening up a better bicycle and pedestrian connection for the Cornelia area into the Promenade and Centennial Lakes. The project also maintains and enhances the vehicular connections between the properties to the north and south. By introducing more residential uses, more restaurant and retail options as well as office space the project would enhance and vitalize the existing businesses and increase pedestrian movement in the area. 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; The proposal would create a much more efficient and creative use of the property than existing on the site. There would be no surface parking on the site, pedestrian movement around the site would be significantly improved, providing additional connections to the Promenade from France Avenue, enable the possibility for connection across France. The Three Rivers Park bike trail can be upgraded (subject to their approval). As mentioned, adding more residents in the area could enhance the economic viability in the district. 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; Variations to land use regulations are requested to offset the significant costs for the provision of the following city goals within the project: Provision of affordable housing within the project, including 53 rental units available to those at 50% AMI and 5 for sale condos available to those persons at 80% AMI. Project would meet the City’s sustainable building policy. (See page 9 in the applicant’s narrative) Parking would be underground/structured (no surface parking included) STAFF REPORT Page 11 Addition of a significant amount public realm on all sides of the development. The total land area with public access easements over them would be 3.57 acres of the site, or 45% of the entire site area. Landscaping. The proposed plans show that 39 trees would be removed, and 11 trees would remain. The applicant is proposing to plant 142 new trees that would equate to 414 new caliper inches of trees. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. (See attached landscape plans.) d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; The proposed building would be stone/brick, glass, metal panel and fiber cement. The building would be constructed to meet the Sustainable Buildings Policy which increases the quality (and cost) of the design. e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; The project would maintain and improve the efficiency of public streets. A clearer vehicular connection would be made from the property to the south to the property to the north. f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; The existing site is primarily paved parking with the retail building. There would be trees removed from the site (39), however, they would be replaced with many more (142 new trees totaling 414 new caliper inches of trees), and higher quality trees, including trees and landscaping around the entire site which would enhance the pedestrian experience. g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; The project provides a mixture of uses on the site, including housing, retail, restaurants, office and public realm. h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and As mentioned, the project would provide 10% (58) of the units for affordable housing to help the City achieve its affordable housing goals. i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. As mentioned, this site is located in an area anticipated for high density development. It would create an enhanced and more welcoming connection from the Promenade to the west. STAFF REPORT Page 12 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 Chapter shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed uses are all consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The site is designated as Community Activity Center. Uses contemplated within that area include: Primary uses: Retail, office, lodging, entertainment, and residential uses, combined or in separate buildings. Secondary uses: Institutional and recreational. Mixed use should be encouraged and may be required on larger sites. 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 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 site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as Mixed-Use Center; the proposal includes mixed uses with residential, retail and office. 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; This project would include a mixture of land uses. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and As mentioned, the uses allowed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The densities allowed would be specifically stated in the PUD Ordinance. As a truly mixed-use project, the density proposed is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. iv. 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 described in #1 above. STAFF REPORT Page 13 The table on the following page shows how the proposed new building would comply with the PCD-3 Zoning Ordinance Standards. As described above, to accomplish the purpose and intent above, include 58 for affordable housing, dedicate 45% of the land area for public use, and meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy, the applicant is requesting large departures from the standard zoning requirements of the PCD-3 District. Compliance Table City Standard (PCD-3) (Setback measured from the front building line to the curb) Proposed (Setback measured from the front building line to the curb) Building Setbacks Front – France Avenue Side – North Side – South Rear – Promenade Setback to R-1 Property 50 feet 50 feet or building height (85’ NW) & 82 feet NE) 50 feet or building height (155’ SW) & 82 feet SE) 50 feet or building height (82 feet) 7-story building – 328 feet 11 story building – 930 feet 50 feet 36 feet (NW building)* 20 feet (NE building)* 131 feet (SW building)* 49 feet (SE building)* 34 feet (NE building)* 35 feet (SE building)* 685 feet 798 feet* Building Height 8 stories & 96 feet 7-11 stories and 155 feet* Density Up to 150 units per acre (mixed use) 572 total units = 72 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) .50% 2.2%* Parking Office – 68,061 s.f. = 234 spaces Retail/Restaurant – 21,281 s.f. = 164 spaces Residential – 572 units = 719 enclosed spaces 1,117 spaces total required 1,324 spaces total proposed First Floor Building Height 20 feet 15 feet* Transparency at Ground Level 75% 60%* (excluding parking structures) STAFF REPORT Page 14 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposal reasonable to justify PUD rezoning for this site? Yes. Staff does support the PUD rezoning, and believes the PUD criteria is met for the following reasons: 1. The project meets the over-arching objective of the Southdale District Plan to “maximize pedestrian activity throughout the District, with the public realm as the connective tissue that gives the District its unique identity and sets the stage for a remarkable daily experience for those who live, work, play within the Greater Southdale District.” The PUD rezoning tool that was envisioned to achieve this strategy for the District. The project follows several key goals of the Greater Southdale Design Experience Guidelines, most notably: Dividing the 8-acre parcel into 4 parcels with public realm dedicated on all sides of each building which enables pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles to move through the site. The public realm area totals 45% of the entire parcel. There are no surface parking lots and liner buildings screen structured parking. 2. The proposed project would meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy, which would require the building to exceed typical building code requirements. (See page 9 in the applicant’s narrative) Including 5% of the parking stalls including EV charging stations with the possibility of expanding another 10%; and rooftop solar systems on two easterly buildings. 3. The project would provide 58 affordable housing units, including 5 that would be owner occupied. These units would help the City of Edina achieve its goal with the Met Council of creating 1,804 units by the year 2030. 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. The evolution of the Greater Southdale District into a more inclusive, functional, urban, active and livable mixed-use area, unified through an enhanced pedestrian- oriented public realm, harmoniously integrating new development with existing built and landscape context with compatible transitions to adjacent neighborhoods. b. Higher-intensity, compact development patterns, and clustered destinations to (1) achieve a high level of quality services and amenities, (2) make access by walking, wheelchair, transit, and bicycle more practical, (3) reduce the amount of driving needed to get to services, and (4) to encourage social interaction and healthy living c. A Pedestrian-Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented design pattern present in much of the city will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. STAFF REPORT Page 15 i. Provide visual screening and privacy to buffer cars from people, provide visual relief and allow stormwater infiltration in parking lots. ii. Evaluate current parking standards in order to encourage shared parking and minimize the visual impact of surface parking. iii. Landscaping is essential to screen parking areas, buffer adjacent residential uses and create a pedestrian-friendly environment along streets. d. Ensure that public realm design respects community character, supports commercial and mixed-use development, promotes community identity, and creates high quality experiences for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and motorists. Focus on the public realm and pedestrian-scale experiences as the foundation for high quality and artful site and building design, highlighted human activity, and enhanced economic vibrancy. e. Encourage the creation of distinctive public and private spaces, including green streets, parks and plazas, highlighted gateways, and especially public gathering spaces, as a means of establishing an overall District identity. Enhance crossing of major streets at intervals reasonable to pedestrians. Enhance links between activity centers and transit in ways that expand the use of alternatives to cars. Anchor these links with green urban spaces. f. Require that all site spaces are well-considered, that no “leftover” spaces result from development, and that pedestrian experiences are considered first in the design of new introductions to the District g. Encourage successful mixed-use development. Promote well-balanced aggregations of “come to” and stay at” on each block, in each neighborhood, and within the District as a whole so that an active, linked and engaging public realm results. h. Create and maintain housing options that serve a diverse range of ages, household types, and economic situations. i. Multifamily. Multifamily developments are concentrated primarily along the main traffic arteries and are generally located toward the edges of the city, often in proximity to retail business establishments. Concentrations of multifamily developments are found along York Avenue, France Avenue, Vernon Avenue, Lincoln Drive, and Cahill Road. j. “Mixed-use development allows for a savings in time and convenience for residents who choose to live in closer proximity to where they work and shop. Community interest is served by this type of development, as the city is able to integrate additional residences and businesses more efficiently within existing city infrastructure. Pedestrian amenities and proximity of uses encourage more trips to be made by foot or bike, reducing the increase of congestion that can otherwise result from conventional development of separated land uses.” STAFF REPORT Page 16 k. “Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto-oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. • Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. • Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. l. “Support the development of mixed-use districts that provide a variety of living opportunities within a walkable and livable area.” 5. In exchange for flexibility from conventional zoning the community benefits the City would achieve through the PUD with this project include: a. Fifty-eight (58) affordable housing units, five (5) owner-occupied. b. Structures that meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy. c. Forty-five percent (45%) of the project land area dedicated for public use. d. Significant pedestrian connections through the site. e. Enhanced landscaping. f. Ability for a future safe pedestrian and bike connection over or under France Avenue. Staff Recommendation Options for Consideration & Recommendation A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below are options for the planning commission and city council to consider for denial and approval: Denial Recommend the City Council deny the request for Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD, including the overall development plan and the Subdivision. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed height and density are not reasonable for the site to justify a PUD. The maximum height for the property is eight stories and 96 feet. The proposed buildings are up to 3 stories and over 50 feet taller than allowed by Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal does not meet the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The requested flexibility from the underlying City Code provisions are too much in this instance to justify a PUD. 3. The flexibility requested through the PUD regarding building material, building height, building coverage, floor area ratio, density, and setbacks are not reasonable for this site. The proposal does not meet the purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: STAFF REPORT Page 17 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; 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. 3. The proposed plan has not adequately addressed the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. Approval Recommend the City Council approve the request for Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD, including the overall development plan and the Preliminary Plat. The PUD would ensure that the affordable housing is included within the project, and the building would meet the sustainability policy. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses, and density are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the existing Zoning on the site. 2. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The PUD zoning would: a. 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. STAFF REPORT Page 18 Desired design elements 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. d. Project is of high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. e. Maintains the efficiency of public streets and utilities. f. Provides a mixture of land uses within the development. g. Project would meet the City’s affordable housing policy. 3. The PUD would ensure that the development proposed would be the only buildings that would be allowed on the site unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 4. The PUD would ensure 10% of the units within the building would be for affordable housing. 5. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. The evolution of the Greater Southdale District into a more inclusive, functional, urban, active and livable mixed-use area, unified through an enhanced pedestrian- oriented public realm, harmoniously integrating new development with existing built and landscape context with compatible transitions to adjacent neighborhoods. b. Higher-intensity, compact development patterns, and clustered destinations to (1) achieve a high level of quality services and amenities, (2) make access by walking, wheelchair, transit, and bicycle more practical, (3) reduce the amount of driving needed to get to services, and (4) to encourage social interaction and healthy living c. A Pedestrian-Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented design pattern present in much of the city will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. i. Provide visual screening and privacy to buffer cars from people, provide visual relief and allow stormwater infiltration in parking lots. ii. Evaluate current parking standards in order to encourage shared parking and minimize the visual impact of surface parking. iii. Landscaping is essential to screen parking areas, buffer adjacent residential uses and create a pedestrian-friendly environment along streets. d. Ensure that public realm design respects community character, supports commercial and mixed-use development, promotes community identity, and creates high quality experiences for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and motorists. Focus on the public realm and pedestrian-scale experiences as the foundation for high quality and artful site and building design, highlighted human activity, and enhanced economic vibrancy. STAFF REPORT Page 19 e. Encourage the creation of distinctive public and private spaces, including green streets, parks and plazas, highlighted gateways, and especially public gathering spaces, as a means of establishing an overall District identity. Enhance crossing of major streets at intervals reasonable to pedestrians. Enhance links between activity centers and transit in ways that expand the use of alternatives to cars. Anchor these links with green urban spaces. f. Require that all site spaces are well-considered, that no “leftover” spaces result from development, and that pedestrian experiences are considered first in the design of new introductions to the District g. Encourage successful mixed-use development. Promote well-balanced aggregations of “come to” and stay at” on each block, in each neighborhood, and within the District as a whole so that an active, linked and engaging public realm results. h. Create and maintain housing options that serve a diverse range of ages, household types, and economic situations. i. Multifamily. Multifamily developments are concentrated primarily along the main traffic arteries and are generally located toward the edges of the city, often in proximity to retail business establishments. Concentrations of multifamily developments are found along York Avenue, France Avenue, Vernon Avenue, Lincoln Drive, and Cahill Road. j. “Mixed-use development allows for a savings in time and convenience for residents who choose to live in closer proximity to where they work and shop. Community interest is served by this type of development, as the city is able to integrate additional residences and businesses more efficiently within existing city infrastructure. Pedestrian amenities and proximity of uses encourage more trips to be made by foot or bike, reducing the increase of congestion that can otherwise result from conventional development of separated land uses.” k. “Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto-oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. • Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. • Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. l. “Support the development of mixed-use districts that provide a variety of living opportunities within a walkable and livable area.” 6. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. WSB Consulting conducted a traffic and parking impact study and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. STAFF REPORT Page 20 7. The proposed height of eleven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing within this project, the additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units and to build the building to meet the City’s sustainability policy. 8. The proposed uses and site plan would be an upgrade to the current development on the site. 9. In exchange for flexibility from conventional zoning the community benefits the City would achieve through the PUD with this project include: a. Fifty-eight (58) affordable housing units, five (5) owner-occupied. b. Structures that meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy. c. Forty-five percent (45%) of the project land area dedicated for public use. d. Significant pedestrian connections through the site. e. Enhanced landscaping. f. Ability for a future safe pedestrian and bike connection over or under France Avenue. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated April 26, 2024. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. 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 any building permit. 3. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 4. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 5. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 6. A Developer’s Agreement/Site Improvement Plan Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 7. The project must conform to the City’s affordable housing policy. The project shall provide 10% of the rental units (53 units) within the building for affordable housing for persons/families earning 50% the area median income (AMI) for the Twin Cities, and 10% of the for-sale condos for families/persons earning 80% of the area median income (AMI) for the Twin Cities. STAFF REPORT Page 21 8. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment approving the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. 9. Dedication of public access easements on all sidewalks, drive lanes, and public areas on all four sides of each building. 10. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,860,000.00 shall be due prior to issuance of the building permits. 11. Submittal of a construction management plan subject to review and approval of city staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The plan must demonstrate minimal impact to pedestrian and vehicle movement. 12. Hours of construction must be consistent with City Code. 13. Maintenance of sidewalks and public space shall be responsibility of property owner. 14. Provision of code compliant bike racks near building entrances and within the parking areas would be required at the time of permitting. 15. Compliance with the City’s tree preservation ordinance. 16. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s memo dated May 16, 2024. 17. Compliance with the WSB Consulting Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 18. Compliance with all the recommendation outlined from the parks and recreation department memo/email dated May 1, 2024. 19. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the fire marshal and building official’s memo dated May 16, 2024. 20. Compliance with City’s affordable housing policy and sustainable buildings policy. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requests subject to the findings and conditions listed above. Deadline for a City decision: August 20, 2024 EdinaMN.gov 2 Site EdinaMN.gov 3 Site EdinaMN.gov 4 Site EdinaMN.gov 5 Site EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota May 14, 2024 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE CERTIFICATION WSB PROJECT NO. R-25487-000 CITY OF EDINA CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Mallori Fitzpatrick, P.E. Date: May 14, 2024 Reg. No. 58640 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Table of Contents Background / Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 3 A. Roadway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 3 B. Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................... 3 C. Crash History ............................................................................................................................... 4 Traffic Projections ......................................................................................................................................... 7 A. Background (Non-Site) Traffic Growth ..................................................................................... 7 B. Traffic Generation ....................................................................................................................... 7 C. Traffic Distribution ...................................................................................................................... 8 D. Projected Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... 8 Traffic Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 12 A. Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 12 B. Existing Conditions Analysis ................................................................................................... 13 C. Forecasted Conditions Analysis ............................................................................................. 13 D. Vehicle Queuing Analysis ........................................................................................................ 16 Multi Modal Review / Analysis..................................................................................................................... 16 Parking Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 20 Travel Demand Management ..................................................................................................................... 21 Conclusions / Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 22 List of Figures Figure 1 - Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 - Existing Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................................ 5 Figure 3 - Development Site Plan ................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4 - 2025 No-Build Traffic Conditions .................................................................................................. 9 Figure 5 - 2025 Build Traffic Conditions ...................................................................................................... 10 Figure 6 - 2030 Build Traffic Conditions ...................................................................................................... 11 Figure 7 - Level of Service Ranges for ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 8 - Proposed Sidewalk Facilities ...................................................................................................... 18 Figure 9 - Proposed Bike Facilities ............................................................................................................. 19 List of Tables Table 1 - Crash Data Summary .................................................................................................................... 4 Table 2 - Crash Rate Summary .................................................................................................................... 4 Table 3 – Original Estimated Site Trip Generation ....................................................................................... 7 Table 4 – Updated Estimated Site Trip Generation ...................................................................................... 7 Table 5 - 2023 Existing Conditions Summary ............................................................................................. 13 Table 6 - 2025 No Build Condition Summary .............................................................................................. 14 Table 7 - 2025 Build Conditions .................................................................................................................. 15 Table 8 - 2030 Build Condition Summary ................................................................................................... 15 Table 9 - Parking Required per City Code .................................................................................................. 20 Table 10 - Site Parking Demand per ITE .................................................................................................... 20 Table 11 - TDM Strategies .......................................................................................................................... 21 Appendices APPENDIX A – Existing Traffic Counts APPENDIX B – Traffic Operations Analysis Worksheets MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 1 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Background / Introduction The purpose of this study is to determine the potential transportation impacts the updated proposed redevelopment of the former Macy’s Furniture Store site has on the area traffic operations, site traffic circulation, pedestrian safety, and circulation and parking demand. The original study was completed in 2023, but the development has changed in land use intensity and an updated study is required. The site is located on the east side of France Avenue (County State Aid Highway (CSAH 17)) between 72nd Street and Gallagher Drive. The project location is shown in Figure 1. The existing 80,000 square foot building will be demolished. The original redevelopment of the site included will include four buildings with a total of 300,000 square feet of office/mixed use, 460 multi-family residential units, and parking. The updated proposed redevelopment includes 70,011 square feet of office space, 52 senior condos, 523 multi-family residential units, 21,660 square feet of commercial/restaurant, and parking. Access to the site will remain at the original locations from France Avenue at two existing locations, one at Gallagher Drive and the other from the existing business access. The traffic impacts of the existing and anticipated site redevelopment were evaluated at each site driveway as well as the primary impacted intersections on France Avenue (CSAH 17). The parking demand was determined based on the City Code and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) guidelines. The following sections of this report document the traffic and parking analysis and the anticipated impacts the updated proposed site redevelopment has on the adjacent transportation system. LEGEND Project Location Figure 1 – Project Location Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN 900 1 inch = 500 feet MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 3 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Existing Conditions The existing conditions for the updated proposed site redevelopment were re-evaluated at the following intersections: • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Road • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Business Access • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Drive • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Avenue A. Roadway Characteristics France Avenue is a north/south Minor Arterial roadway within Hennepin County. Within the study area, France Avenue is a six-lane divided roadway and has a speed limit of 40 mph. Hazelton Road is an east/west Major Collector roadway east of the intersection with France Avenue. Within the study area, Hazelton Road is a two-lane roadway and has a speed limit of 25 mph. 72nd Street is a two-lane local roadway with a speed limit of 25 mph. Gallagher Drive is a two -lane Major Collector roadway with a speed limit of 25 mph within the study area. Parklawn Avenue is an east/west Major Collector roadway with a speed limit of 30 mph. Parklawn Avenue is a two-lane undivided roadway west of France Avenue, and a four-lane divided roadway east of France Avenue. The lane configurations at each of the study area intersection are as follows: France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Road – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/through, two through, one left • EB Hazelton Rd – one right/through, one left • NB France Ave – one right, three through, one left • WB Hazelton Rd – one right, one through, one left France Avenue (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street – Side Street Stop Control • SB France Ave – one right/through, two through • EB 72nd St – one right • NB France Ave – three through, one left France Ave (CSAH 17) at Business Access – Side Street Yield Control • SB France Ave – three through • WB 72nd St – one right • NB France Ave – one right, three through France Ave (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Drive – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/through, two through, one left • EB Gallagher Dr – one right/through, one left • NB France Ave – one right/through, two through, one left • WB Gallagher Dr – one right/through, one left France Ave (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Avenue – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/through, two through, one left • EB Gallagher Dr – one right, one through, one left • NB France Ave – one right, three through, one left • WB Gallagher Dr – one right, one through, one left B. Traffic Volumes Peak hour turning movement counts and daily counts were conducted during the week of April 10, 2023. These counts were used as the existing baseline conditions for the area. The data identified the weekday AM peak hour from 8:00 to 9:00 AM and PM peak hour from 4:30 to 5:30 PM. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 4 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 2 shows the existing intersections that were analyzed as part of the study, with the existing adjusted 2023 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and weekday AM and PM peak hours. The raw traffic count data is included in Appendix A. C. Crash History The crash data presented is for a 5-year period from 2019-2023. Existing crash data included with this study was obtained using the Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT 2) developed by MnDOT. The database includes crashes reported to MnDOT by local law enforcement agencies. Crashes that resulted in property damage under $1000 are not included in the database results. A summary of the existing crash data is shown in Table 1. Table 1 - Crash Data Summary The data shows that the intersections have calculated crash rates that are below MnDOT Metro and Statewide average rates. A Crash Rate Summary is shown in Table 2. Table 2 - Crash Rate Summary Intersection crash rates are expressed in crashes per million entering vehicles ** Average for specific traffic control using MnDOT 2022 green sheets *** Critical crash rates are expressed in crashes per million entering vehicles with 0.995 confidence level Location Crashes 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Crashes PD PI PD PI PD PI PD PI PD PI France Ave at Hazelton Rd 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 8 France Ave at Gallagher Dr 1 0 2 1 3 1 2 0 2 1 13 France Ave at Parklawn Ave 0 1 1 3 1 0 3 2 3 2 16 Location Crashes Daily Vehicles Crash Rate* Calc Ave** Crit*** France Ave at Hazelton Rd 8 33,217 0.13 0.61 0.87 France Ave at Gallagher Dr 13 30,253 0.24 0.61 0.89 France Ave at Parklawn Ave 16 35,512 0.25 0.61 0.87 LEGEND Project Location 50 (75) AM (PM) Turning Movements 248 Turning Movement Figure 2 – Existing Traffic Volumes Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN France AveHazelton Rd W 72nd St Business Access 400 1 inch = 500 feet (77) 50 v (88) 86(1203) 677(52) 89(23) 25 , f 64 (97) x 2 4 8 24 (49) 81 (129)k s70 (42)693 (917)109 (157)i r w (126) 78 Parklawn Ave (2) 0 ,(47) 27 (79) 51 v (30) 50(1292) 729(87) 2940 (88) x 2 4 8 3 (14) 9 (75) f k 21 (93)w s69 (91)805 (981)i r(1345) 746(96) 434 8 k 55 (95)895 (1163)r (67) 25(1373) 776,(58) 9414 (22)801 (1107)2 4 i r5 (4)753 (981)107 (181)k 7 (15) 78 (183) f (14) 8 ,(11) 1 x (1175) 680(116) 81(14) 4 v 61 (137)(11) 15i r w s 2 4 8 Figure 3 – Development Site Plan Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 7 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Traffic Projections In order to analyze the lane configuration and traffic control needs , projected traffic volumes were determined for the area with the updated land use intensities. Projected 2025 and 2030 traffic volumes were determined based on the updated proposed anticipated future development land use in the area. The following sections outline the projected background traffic growth, traffic generation from the study area, as well as the traffic distribution and projected traffic volumes. A. Background (Non-Site) Traffic Growth Traffic growth in the vicinity of a proposed site will occur between existing conditions (20 23) and any given future year due to other development within the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future year traffic forecasts. To account for some background traffic growth, several factors were considered including the current City and County Transportation Plans, future traffic projections compared to the existing traffic volumes and historic traffic volumes and surrounding development that was already approved, but not yet constructed at the time of this study. Based on this review, a factor of 0.8 percent/year was used to project traffic from 2023 to the 2025 and 2030 analysis years. B. Traffic Generation The estimated trip generation from the original area development is shown below in Table 3. The updated proposed area development trip generation is shown in Table 4. The trip generation used to estimate the proposed site traffic is based on rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The table shows the Daily, AM peak and PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed site. With the updated trip generation, it is expected that a portion of trips from commercial and restaurant uses will be internal trips from the office and residential land uses. An internal trip reduction rate of 45% in the AM and 40% in the PM peak hour was used for commercial/restaurant trips. Internal trip reduction rates for mixed use developments were based on rates in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. The overall trip generation in the updated site plan is less than the original site plan, b ut more trips are now leaving the site in the AM peak hour and entering the site in the PM peak hour. Table 3 – Original Estimated Site Trip Generation Planned Use Size ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Office 300,000 sf 3,252 456 401 55 432 73 359 Multi-Family 460 units 2,088 170 39 131 179 109 70 Total New Trips 5,340 626 440 186 611 183 429 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition Table 4 – Updated Estimated Site Trip Generation Planned Use Size ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Office 70,011 sf 759 107 94 13 102 18 84 Multi-Family 523 units 2,448 219 51 168 205 127 78 Senior Condos 52 units 340 24 8 16 27 16 11 Commercial/ Restaurant 21,660 sf 1,733 121 68 53 175 97 78 Internal Trip Reduction (736) (55) (31) (24) (70) (39) (31) Total New Trips 4,544 416 190 226 439 219 220 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 8 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA C. Traffic Distribution Proposed site generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on the anticipated origins and destinations for the planned land use, existing travel patterns and engineering judgement. The original traffic distribution was used, as original land uses are similar to the updated land uses. Based on these parameters the following general traffic distribution was used to distribute the projected site traffic volumes to the area roadway network: • 37 percent to / from the north on France Avenue • 7 percent to / from the east on Hazelton Road • 2 percent to / from the west on 72nd Street • 37 percent to / from the south on France Avenue • 9 percent to / from the east on Parklawn Avenue • 8 percent to / from the west on Parklawn Avenue D. Projected Traffic Volumes Traffic forecasts were prepared for the future conditions by adding the projected annual background traffic growth to the existing traffic volumes to determine the No-Build conditions. The 2025 and 2030 Build conditions were then developed by adding the anticipated proposed site redevelopment traffic generation to the No-Build volumes. Figure 4 - Figure 6 shows the projected 2025 No-Build, 2025 Build and 2030 Build traffic volumes. LEGEND Project Location 50 (75) AM (PM) Turning Movements 248 Turning Movement Figure 4 – 2025 No-Build Traffic Volumes Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN France AveHazelton Rd W 72nd St Business Access 400 1 inch = 500 feet (78) 51 v (89) 87(1222) 688(53) 90(23) 25 , 65 (99) x 2 4 8 24 (50) i r w s f 82 (131)k 71 (43)(128) 79704 (932)111 (160)(48) 27 (80) 52 v (31) 51(1313) 741(88) 29(2) 1 , 41 (89) x 2 4 8 3 (14) i r w s f 9 (76)k 70 (93)818 (997)21 (95)(68) 25(1395) 788,(59) 96 2 4 i r14 (22)814 (1125)5 (4)765 (997)109 (184)k 7 (15) i r w s 79 (186) f (14) 4 62 (139) x 2 4 8 v (11) 15(1194) 691(118) 82(14) 8 ,(11) 1 (1367) 758(98) 444 8 r 56 (97)k 909 (1185)Parklawn Ave LEGEND Project Location 50 (75) AM (PM) Turning Movements 248 Turning Movement Figure 5 – 2025 Build Traffic Volumes France AveHazelton Rd W 72nd St Business Access 400 1 inch = 500 feet Parklawn Ave Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN v (11) 15(1275) 775(133) 98(14) 8 ,(11) 1 (14) 4 75 (154) x 2 4 8 7 (15) i r w s 79 (186) f 5 (4)835 (1078)109 (184)k (72) 30(1491) 888,(63) 100 2 4 i r14 (22)897 (1221)(1371) 763(146) 864 8 r 155 (194)k 996 (1285)(48) 27 (80) 52 v (31) 51(1361) 783(158) 90(2) 1 , 163 (208) x 2 4 8 3 (14) i r w s f 14 (80)k 70 (93)818 (997)108 (195)(96) 66 v (89) 87(1303) 758(53) 90(23) 25 , 65 (99) x 2 4 8 24 (50) i r w s f 99 (151)k 89 (61)(128) 79788 (1013)131 (180) LEGEND Project Location 50 (75) AM (PM) Turning Movements 248 Turning Movement Figure 6 – 2030 Build Traffic Volumes France AveHazelton Rd W 72nd St Parklawn Ave Business Access 400 1 inch = 500 feet Former Macy’s Site EAW Update Edina, MN v (12) 16(1323) 803(138) 102(15) 8 ,(12) 1 (15) 4 77 (160) x 2 4 8 7 (16) i r w s 82 (193) f 5 (4)866 (1118)113 (191)k (75) 31(1548) 921,(65) 103 2 4 i r15 (23)930 (1266)(1426) 794(150) 874 8 r 157 (197)k 1033 (1330)(50) 29 (84) 54 v (32) 53(1414) 813(162) 92(2) 0 , 164 (212) x 2 4 8 3 (15) i r w s f 15 (83)k 73 (96)851 (1037)109 (198)(99) 68 v (93) 91(1353) 786(55) 94(24) 26 , 68 (103) x 2 4 8 25 (52) i r w s f 103 (156)k 92 (62)(133) 82817 (1051)135 (186) MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 12 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Traffic Impact Analysis Existing and forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for the intersections and access in the Study Area. The analysis was conducted for the following scenarios. 1. Existing 2023 2. Projected 2025 No-Build 3. Projected 2025 Build (Updated) 4. Projected 2030 Build (Updated) This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations for each scenario. The traffic operation worksheets are included in Appendix B. A. Methodology The intersections in the corridor were evaluated during the weekday and weekend peak hours using Synchro/SimTraffic micro simulation software. The results are derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010. The software was used to evaluate the characteristics of the roadway network including lane geometrics, turning movement volumes, traffic control, and signal timing. In addition, the signal timing param eters for future year conditions were optimized using Synchro. This information was then transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model, to estimate average peak hour vehicle delays and queues. One of the primary measures of effectiveness used to evaluate intersection traffic operations, as defined in the HCM, is Level of Service (LOS) – a qualitative letter grade, A – F, based on seconds of vehicle delay due to a traffic control device at an intersection. By definition, LOS A conditions represent high quality operations (i.e., motorists experience very little delay or interference) and LOS F conditions represent very poor operations (i.e., extreme delay or severe congestion). Figure 7 depicts a graphical interpretation of delay times that defines level of service. The delay thresholds are lower for un-signalized intersections than signalized intersections due to the public’s perception of acceptable delays for different traffic controls as indicated in the HCM. In accordance with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) guidelines, this analysis used the LOS D/E boundary as an indicator of acceptable traffic operations. Figure 7 - Level of Service Ranges for Signalized and Un-Signalized Intersections 80 55 35 20 10 LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F Not CongestedCongested50 35 25 10 LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F Not CongestedCongested15 Signalized Intersection Unsignalized IntersectionControl Delay per Vehicle (sec.)Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.)SOURCE: Level of Service thresholds from the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 13 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA B. Existing Conditions Analysis Table 5 - 2023 Existing Conditions shown below summarizes the existing LOS at the primary intersections in the study area based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and 2023 traffic volumes. The analysis results show that all intersections are operating at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. All movements during the AM and PM peak hours are operating at LOS C or better. Table 5 - 2023 Existing Conditions Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 7 B (C) 13 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 4 A (A) 6 Thru- Yield France Ave at Business Access A (A) 2 A (A) 4 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr A (C) 7 B (C) 10 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 12 B (C) 15 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) C. Forecasted Conditions Analysis 2025 No-Build Traffic Operations Table 6 – 2025 No Build Condition Summary, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 traffic volumes, without the proposed area development. The results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better in 2025 during both the AM and PM peak hours with only the background traffic growth, with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road which would operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour. Delays would only increase slightly from the existing conditions. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 14 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Table 6 - 2025 No Build Condition Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 7 B (D) 13 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 5 A (A) 7 Thru- Yield France Ave at Business Access A (A) 2 A (A) 4 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr A (C) 6 B (C) 11 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 12 B (C) 16 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) 2025 Build Traffic Operations Table 7 – 2025 Build Conditions, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area assuming the existing lane configuration, traffic control and projected 2025 traffic volumes with the updated proposed site redevelopment. The results show that all intersections would operate at overall LOS B in 2025 during both the AM and PM peak hours with the proposed redevelopment traffic growth. All movements would also be operating at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours except the following movements during the PM peak hour: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – NB left turn • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – NB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – NB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – SB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – EB through movement MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 15 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Table 7 - 2025 Build Conditions Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 8 B (D) 11 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 5 A (A) 9 Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 3 A (A) 6 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr B (C) 11 B (D) 16 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 13 B (D) 17 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) 2030 Build Traffic Operations Table 8 – 2030 Build Conditions, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area assuming the existing lane configuration, traffic control and projected 2030 traffic volumes with the updated proposed area redevelopment. The results show that all intersections would operate at overall LOS B in 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours with the proposed redevelopment traffic growth. All movements would also be operating at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours except the following during the PM peak hour: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – NB left turn • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – NB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – NB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – SB left turn • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – EB through movement Table 8 - 2030 Build Condition Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 9 B (D) 12 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 6 A (B) 10 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 16 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 3 A (A) 6 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr B (C) 11 B (D) 17 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 13 B (D) 17 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) D. Vehicle Queuing Analysis A queuing analysis for the 2025 No Build/Build and 2030 future Build conditions was conducted, evaluating the anticipated vehicle queues with the proposed traffic conditions. The analysis was conducted using the SimTraffic simulation software. Results from the 2025 No Build indicate that the following turn lanes are expected to have maximum queues that reach beyond the existing turn lane storage: • Westbound left-turn lane on Hazelton Road at France Avenue • Westbound and eastbound left-turn lanes on Parklawn Avenue at France Avenue The results found that during both the AM and PM peak hours in 2025 and 2030 with the updated proposed site redevelopment, the only turn lane in addition to the ones listed for the 2025 No-Build condition that is expected to have a maximum queue exceeding the available turn lanes storage is the westbound left-turn lane on Gallagher Drive at France Avenue. Maximum queues on the westbound approach are expected to reach slightly over 200 feet by year 2030 in the PM peak hour. However, average westbound left-turn queues are expected to be less than 100 feet. The left-turn lane is unable to be extended without blocking access to Gallagher Drive from the parcel to the south. Queueing space along the new local road is available and will likely be used during peak hours. Multi Modal Review / Analysis A. Pedestrian/Bike System The City’s current 2040 Comprehensive Plan addresses locations of existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. The proposed Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9. The City of Edina is committed to providing a comprehensive and coordinated pedestrian network that provides transportation as well as recreational value. Currently there are several pedestrian and bike facilities that could be accessed from the proposed redevelopment site including: • Pedestrian / Bike Trail on east side of France Avenue. • Pedestrian / Bike Trail on west side of France Avenue. • Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail on south side of Gallagher Drive. • Pedestrian / Bike Trail in the Centennial Lakes Promenade east of the site. The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not identify any new pedestrian or bike facilities in the area of the site redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment site plan does however include a new east / west pedestrian plaza, expansion of the Centennial Lakes Promenade and new sidewalk connections from the site to the existing pedestrian / bike facilities. B. Transit System MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 17 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Metro Transit Route 6 provides service adjacent to the redeveloped site on France Avenue. The route provides local bus service from the U of M through downtown Minneapolis to the Southdale Transit Center down France Avenue, serving the areas on the northside of I-494 in Bloomington. The route operates during the weekdays, weekends, and holidays with 30-to-60-minute headways. Bus stops are currently provided on France Avenue at Hazelton Road, 72nd Street, Gallagher Drive and Parklawn Avenue. The nearest Park & Ride facility is at the Southdale Transit Center. The Transit Center is located southwest of the York Avenue and 66th Street intersection, on the east side of Southdale Center. The site currently includes approximately 70 surface Park & Ride parking spaces, with overflow parking for additional vehicles east of the Southdale Center ring road. Transit service is provided to the center from seven primary routes. The Transit Center is currently planned to be relocated to the north side of the Southdale Center. No changes in the existing transit service are planned with the proposed site redevelopment. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 18 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 8 - Proposed Sidewalk Facilities MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 19 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 9 - Proposed Bike Facilities MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 20 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Parking Impact Analysis The parking demand for the proposed site redevelopment was analyzed based on the anticipated uses on the site. Based on the current City Code the proposed site redevelopment would require a total of 1,117 parking spaces. The current concept site plan includes 1,322 spaces. Table 9 shows a breakdown of the parking required per City Code. Table 9 - Parking Required per City Code Use Size Rate Parking Required Parking Provided Office 70,011 sf 1/300sf 234 1,322 Multi-Family 523 units 1.25/unit 654 Senior Condos 52 units 1.25/unit 65 Commercial 12,600 sf 1/250 sf 51 Restaurant 9,060 sf 1/100 sf + 1/employee on major shift + 1/loading dock 113 estimate Source: City of Edina The parking demand was also analyzed based on industry standards. The parking generation rates used to estimate the parking demand was based on surveys of the parking generation for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition. Table 10 below shows the estimated parking generation rate and the anticipated peak parking demand on a typical weekday (Monday – Thursday) Table 10 - Site Parking Demand per ITE Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition Based on the results of the parking demand analysis , the parking stalls included in the proposed concept site plan would meet City Code requirements (1,117 parking stalls). It would also meet the guidelines based on industry standards (1,041 parking stalls). Use Size Rate Parking Required Office 70,011 sf 3.45 / 1000 sf 242 Multi-Family 523 units 1.2 / unit 628 Senior Condos 52 units 0.9/unit 47 Commercial 12,600 sf 4.7/ 1000 sf 60 Restaurant 9,060 sf 7/ 1000 sf 64 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 21 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Although a majority of the parking is located in garages, the northwest building is proposing 10 angled surface parking stalls and a drop off/ pickup area north of the building. Two surface parking stalls are also proposed east of the northwest building. The angled parking stalls north of the building could potentially cause a safety issue with the northbound free right-turning vehicles from France conflicting with vehicles backing out of the parking stalls. Travel Demand Management The City of Edina has adopted a Travel Demand Management (TDM) policy that emphasis the reduction of vehicular trips on congested roadways during peak travel times. For the proposed 7235 France Avenue site redevelopment, a Tier 1 Plan is required based on requirement “a” 50 or more residential units and “b” 100 or more automobile parking stalls required by City Code . Tier 1 TDM plan is required when any of the following are met: a. 50 or more residential units; b. 100 or more automobile parking stalls required by City Code; or c. Flexibility sought from parking required by City Code; or d. Other development/redevelopment as required by Council condition. A Tier 1 Plan requires developers to demonstrate that the proposed project is designed in ways that support TDM. This requires identifying strategies aimed at reducing employee and visitor traffic volumes during peak travel hours. Based on the policy, the following shall be included in a Tier 1 TDM Plan: Tier 1 TDM Plan shall include: a. Strategies, implementation measures and timeline. A minimum of five (5) unique strategies must be identified for implementation. b. Anticipated single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) trip reduction. c. Goals, including peak and total SOV trip reduction goals. d. Evaluation measures and process to track implementation and determine the effectiveness of the TDM strategies and progress toward achieving the SOV trip reduction goals. e. Proposed total expenditures to implement the TDM strategies. Based on these requirements Table 11 outlines some recommended TDM strategies for the site that could be implemented by the developer: Table 11 - TDM Strategies Strategy Implementation Measures Timeline Cost Providing bicycle parking spaces exceeding City requirements. • Include on site plan • With site plan approval • Construct with site improvements • TBD Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Create map or use available maps • Have available on Website • With occupancy • TBD MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 22 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA Directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. • Include on site plan • With site plan approval • Construct with site improvements • TBD Restricting freight deliveries to off peak hours to avoid traffic conflicts on adjacent roadways. • Coordination with vendors • Verification with occupancy • On-going • TBD Transit fare discount to residents, increased cost for parking spots within building. • Have information available on website • Verification with occupancy • On-going • TBD Conclusions / Recommendations Based on the analysis documented in this report, WSB offers the following conclusions and recommendations: • The existing Macy’s Furniture store located on the east side of France Avenue (CSAH 17) Between 72nd Street and Gallagher Drive is proposed to be removed. • The updated proposed site redevelopment is proposed to include 70,011 square feet of office, 523 multi-family residential units, 52 senior condos, and 21,660 square feet of commercial/restaurant. The updated site is expected to generate 4,544 daily, 416 AM peak hour and 439 PM peak hour trips. Access to the site will be maintained at the existing access locations on France Avenue at the Business Access driveway and Gallagher Drive. The current concept plan provides 1,322 parking spaces for the site. • The crash data shows that based on the past 5 years, the intersections on France Avenue have calculated crash rates that are below the MnDOT Statewide average rates. • The traffic operations analysis evaluated impacts for existing conditions and the horizon years of 2025 and 2030 for the local roadway network, specifically, the following intersections in the vicinity of the proposed site redevelopment: o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Road o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Business Access o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Drive o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Avenue • With the existing conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and existing 2023 traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections are operating at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C. • With the 2025 no-build conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 no-build traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road which would operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour. • With the 2025 and 2030 build conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 build traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with a ll movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road, MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE PAGE 23 WSB PROJECT NO. 025487-000 CITY OF EDINA northbound France Avenue left turn at Gallagher Drive, France Avenue northbound and southbound left-turns at Parklawn Avenue, and eastbound through movement at Parklawn Avenue during the PM peak hour. • Results from the 2025 No Build indicate that several turn lanes are expected to have maximum queues that reach beyond the existing turn lane storage: westbound left-turn lane on Hazelton Road at France Avenue and westbound and eastbound left-turn lanes on Parklawn Avenue at France Avenue. • The results found that during both the AM and PM peak hours in 2025 and 2030 with the updated proposed site redevelopment, the only turn lane in addition to the ones listed for the 2025 No - Build condition that is expected to have a maximum queue exceeding the available turn lanes storage is the westbound left-turn lane on Gallagher Drive at France Avenue. Maximum queues on the westbound approach are expected to reach slightly over 200 feet by year 2030 in the PM peak hour. However, average westbound left-turn queues are expected to be less than 100 feet. The left-turn lane is unable to be extended without blocking access to Gallagher Drive from the parcel to the south. Queueing space along the new local road is available and will likely be used during peak hours. Based on the above conclusions no roadway improvements are recommended at this time. • The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not identify any pedestrian or bicycle facilities in the area adjacent to the site. The pedestrian improvements identified in the concept site plan should be completed with the proposed project. • There is currently transit bus service provided directly adjacent to the site along France Avenue. In addition, the Southdale Transit Center is located north of the site. No additional Transit improvements would be required. • Based on the results of the parking demand analysis , the number of parking stalls included with the updated proposed site plan would meet City Code and industry standard requirements. No parking improvements or parking variance would be required. • The City of Edina has adopted a Travel Demand Management (TDM) Policy that requires developers to demonstrate that the proposed project is designed in ways that support TDM. This requires identifying strategies aimed at reducing employee and visitor traffic volumes during peak travel hours. The proposed redevelopment site proposal would require a Tier 1 TDM Plan. Based on the requirements, some potential TDM strategies for the site that could be implemented by the developer include: o Providing bicycle parking spaces exceeding City requirements. o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. o Restricting freight deliveries to off-peak hours to avoid traffic conflicts on adjacent roadways. o Transit fare discount to residents, increased cost for parking spots within building. MACY SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA APPENDIX A Existing Traffic Counts File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 2 26 2 0 30 1 0 4 1 6 6 37 2 0 45 1 0 2 0 3 84 06:15 AM 0 67 7 0 74 4 0 3 0 7 8 38 3 0 49 1 2 0 0 3 133 06:30 AM 0 36 4 0 40 3 0 3 0 6 2 77 0 0 79 3 0 1 0 4 129 06:45 AM 0 74 12 0 86 10 1 5 1 17 9 104 0 0 113 1 3 0 0 4 220 Total 2 203 25 0 230 18 1 15 2 36 25 256 5 0 286 6 5 3 0 14 566 07:00 AM 0 72 17 1 90 7 1 5 1 14 13 91 2 2 108 0 1 5 1 7 219 07:15 AM 0 122 17 0 139 19 4 16 0 39 17 108 1 2 128 1 2 4 1 8 314 07:30 AM 0 153 15 0 168 23 1 19 0 43 14 143 1 0 158 0 0 2 0 2 371 07:45 AM 3 185 24 0 212 22 0 19 0 41 20 137 1 0 158 0 2 3 0 5 416 Total 3 532 73 1 609 71 6 59 1 137 64 479 5 4 552 1 5 14 2 22 1320 08:00 AM 1 195 29 0 225 13 4 13 0 30 22 163 0 0 185 0 2 2 0 4 444 08:15 AM 1 177 19 0 197 17 1 16 1 35 20 168 1 1 190 1 3 1 0 5 427 08:30 AM 1 183 32 1 217 27 2 22 0 51 15 162 3 2 182 0 1 1 0 2 452 08:45 AM 2 196 27 0 225 21 0 10 0 31 24 183 11 0 218 0 2 0 0 2 476 Total 5 751 107 1 864 78 7 61 1 147 81 676 15 3 775 1 8 4 0 13 1799 03:00 PM 2 237 52 3 294 49 4 36 3 92 49 238 4 1 292 5 6 7 1 19 697 03:15 PM 2 255 39 1 297 36 4 37 0 77 42 266 2 2 312 3 4 4 0 11 697 03:30 PM 1 249 39 1 290 36 4 32 0 72 40 242 1 3 286 0 3 2 2 7 655 03:45 PM 4 196 58 0 258 51 5 28 1 85 52 240 2 3 297 3 2 3 0 8 648 Total 9 937 188 5 1139 172 17 133 4 326 183 986 9 9 1187 11 15 16 3 45 2697 04:00 PM 1 248 54 0 303 45 9 38 0 92 38 303 4 0 345 3 3 2 0 8 748 04:15 PM 3 219 34 1 257 41 4 41 1 87 31 259 3 1 294 2 2 0 2 6 644 04:30 PM 0 250 64 0 314 44 4 34 0 82 48 306 3 2 359 3 5 5 2 15 770 04:45 PM 2 251 39 2 294 36 1 37 3 77 51 317 3 0 371 4 2 6 1 13 755 Total 6 968 191 3 1168 166 18 150 4 338 168 1185 13 3 1369 12 12 13 5 42 2917 05:00 PM 2 231 45 0 278 65 6 39 2 112 49 265 3 1 318 0 4 2 0 6 714 05:15 PM 0 227 33 0 260 38 4 27 0 69 38 309 2 1 350 4 3 1 0 8 687 05:30 PM 2 202 31 0 235 42 5 45 0 92 37 275 2 0 314 0 3 4 0 7 648 05:45 PM 1 183 51 0 235 40 2 29 2 73 31 222 3 2 258 0 3 2 0 5 571 Total 5 843 160 0 1008 185 17 140 4 346 155 1071 10 4 1240 4 13 9 0 26 2620 Grand Total 30 4234 744 10 5018 690 66 558 16 1330 676 4653 57 23 5409 35 58 59 10 162 11919 Apprch %0.6 84.4 14.8 0.2 51.9 5 42 1.2 12.5 86 1.1 0.4 21.6 35.8 36.4 6.2 Total %0.3 35.5 6.2 0.1 42.1 5.8 0.6 4.7 0.1 11.2 5.7 39 0.5 0.2 45.4 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.1 1.4 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 1 195 29 0 225 13 4 13 0 30 22 163 0 0 185 0 2 2 0 4 444 08:15 AM 1 177 19 0 197 17 1 16 1 35 20 168 1 1 190 1 3 1 0 5 427 08:30 AM 1 183 32 1 217 27 2 22 0 51 15 162 3 2 182 0 1 1 0 2 452 08:45 AM 2 196 27 0 225 21 0 10 0 31 24 183 11 0 218 0 2 0 0 2 476 Total Volume 5 751 107 1 864 78 7 61 1 147 81 676 15 3 775 1 8 4 0 13 1799 % App. Total 0.6 86.9 12.4 0.1 53.1 4.8 41.5 0.7 10.5 87.2 1.9 0.4 7.7 61.5 30.8 0 PHF .625 .958 .836 .250 .960 .722 .438 .693 .250 .721 .844 .923 .341 .375 .889 .250 .667 .500 .000 .650 .945 France Ave Hazelton Rd Hazelton Rd France Ave Right 5 Thru 751 Left 107 Peds 1 InOut Total 758 864 1622 Right78 Thru7 Left61 Peds1 OutTotalIn196 147 343 Left 15 Thru 676 Right 81 Peds 3 Out TotalIn 813 775 1588 Left4 Thru8 Right1 Peds0 TotalOutIn27 13 40 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 0 250 64 0 314 44 4 34 0 82 48 306 3 2 359 3 5 5 2 15 770 04:45 PM 2 251 39 2 294 36 1 37 3 77 51 317 3 0 371 4 2 6 1 13 755 05:00 PM 2 231 45 0 278 65 6 39 2 112 49 265 3 1 318 0 4 2 0 6 714 05:15 PM 0 227 33 0 260 38 4 27 0 69 38 309 2 1 350 4 3 1 0 8 687 Total Volume 4 959 181 2 1146 183 15 137 5 340 186 1197 11 4 1398 11 14 14 3 42 2926 % App. Total 0.3 83.7 15.8 0.2 53.8 4.4 40.3 1.5 13.3 85.6 0.8 0.3 26.2 33.3 33.3 7.1 PHF .500 .955 .707 .250 .912 .704 .625 .878 .417 .759 .912 .944 .917 .500 .942 .688 .700 .583 .375 .700 .950 France Ave Hazelton Rd Hazelton Rd France Ave Right 4 Thru 959 Left 181 Peds 2 InOut Total 1394 1146 2540 Right183 Thru15 Left137 Peds5 OutTotalIn381 340 721 Left 11 Thru 1197 Right 186 Peds 4 Out TotalIn 1107 1398 2505 Left14 Thru14 Right11 Peds3 TotalOutIn30 42 72 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 29 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 34 06:15 AM 0 69 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 73 06:30 AM 0 45 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 54 06:45 AM 1 79 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 87 Total 2 222 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 1 24 248 07:00 AM 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 10 87 07:15 AM 1 139 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 12 152 07:30 AM 3 168 0 1 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 2 28 200 07:45 AM 7 202 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 33 242 Total 12 585 0 1 598 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 3 83 681 08:00 AM 2 199 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 1 23 224 08:15 AM 3 195 0 0 198 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 2 23 221 08:30 AM 2 205 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 226 08:45 AM 4 207 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 18 229 Total 11 806 0 0 817 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 0 0 4 83 900 03:00 PM 5 275 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 294 03:15 PM 6 286 0 0 292 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 298 03:30 PM 3 269 0 1 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 1 14 287 03:45 PM 6 231 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 251 Total 20 1061 0 1 1082 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 1 48 1130 04:00 PM 6 284 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 10 300 04:15 PM 2 253 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 8 28 283 04:30 PM 5 288 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 17 310 04:45 PM 9 282 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 16 307 Total 22 1107 0 0 1129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 13 71 1200 05:00 PM 1 274 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 5 24 299 05:15 PM 3 256 0 2 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 2 8 269 05:30 PM 11 227 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 2 12 250 05:45 PM 4 218 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 228 Total 19 975 0 2 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 9 50 1046 Grand Total 86 4756 0 4 4846 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 328 0 0 31 359 5205 Apprch %1.8 98.1 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91.4 0 0 8.6 Total %1.7 91.4 0 0.1 93.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.3 0 0 0.6 6.9 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 7 202 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 33 242 08:00 AM 2 199 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 1 23 224 08:15 AM 3 195 0 0 198 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 2 23 221 08:30 AM 2 205 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 226 Total Volume 14 801 0 0 815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 4 98 913 % App. Total 1.7 98.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95.9 0 0 4.1 PHF .500 .977 .000 .000 .975 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .712 .000 .000 .500 .742 .943 France Ave 72nd St 72nd St France Ave Right 14 Thru 801 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 0 815 815 Right0 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn0 0 0 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 895 0 895 Left0 Thru0 Right94 Peds4 TotalOutIn14 98 112 Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 6 284 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 10 300 04:15 PM 2 253 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 8 28 283 04:30 PM 5 288 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 17 310 04:45 PM 9 282 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 16 307 Total Volume 22 1107 0 0 1129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 13 71 1200 % App. Total 1.9 98.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81.7 0 0 18.3 PHF .611 .961 .000 .000 .963 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .725 .000 .000 .406 .634 .968 France Ave 72nd St 72nd St France Ave Right 22 Thru 1107 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 0 1129 1129 Right0 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn0 0 0 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 1165 0 1165 Left0 Thru0 Right58 Peds13 TotalOutIn22 71 93 Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 43 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 46 06:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 50 2 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 56 06:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 5 73 1 0 79 0 0 0 0 0 85 06:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 10 110 6 1 127 0 0 0 0 0 133 Total 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 20 276 9 1 306 0 0 0 0 0 320 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 8 94 11 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 121 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 4 117 12 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 144 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 11 152 23 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 197 07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 9 147 11 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 175 Total 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 38 32 510 57 0 599 0 0 0 0 0 637 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 17 11 161 13 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 202 08:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 15 0 0 2 17 8 174 8 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 208 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 13 175 1 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 196 08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 11 198 3 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 228 Total 0 0 0 1 1 55 0 0 2 57 43 708 25 0 776 0 0 0 0 0 834 03:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 1 21 21 270 6 0 297 0 0 0 0 0 318 03:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 20 23 294 12 0 329 0 0 0 0 0 349 03:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 1 13 18 265 9 1 293 0 0 0 0 0 306 03:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 31 17 276 18 0 311 0 0 0 0 0 342 Total 0 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 2 85 79 1105 45 1 1230 0 0 0 0 0 1315 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 1 22 17 311 15 0 343 0 0 0 0 0 365 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 2 26 22 275 18 0 315 0 0 0 0 0 341 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 22 23 329 7 1 360 0 0 0 0 0 382 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 3 31 18 342 21 1 382 0 0 0 0 0 413 Total 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 6 101 80 1257 61 2 1400 0 0 0 0 0 1501 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 20 23 296 19 0 338 0 0 0 0 0 358 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 1 27 32 332 20 0 384 0 0 0 0 0 411 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 21 23 288 11 0 322 0 0 0 0 0 343 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 19 236 16 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 290 Total 0 0 0 0 0 84 0 0 3 87 97 1152 66 0 1315 0 0 0 0 0 1402 Grand Total 0 0 0 1 1 369 0 0 13 382 351 5008 263 4 5626 0 0 0 0 0 6009 Apprch %0 0 0 100 96.6 0 0 3.4 6.2 89 4.7 0.1 0 0 0 0 Total %0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 0 0.2 6.4 5.8 83.3 4.4 0.1 93.6 0 0 0 0 0 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 17 11 161 13 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 202 08:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 15 0 0 2 17 8 174 8 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 208 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 13 175 1 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 196 08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 11 198 3 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 228 Total Volume 0 0 0 1 1 55 0 0 2 57 43 708 25 0 776 0 0 0 0 0 834 % App. Total 0 0 0 100 96.5 0 0 3.5 5.5 91.2 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .250 .250 .809 .000 .000 .250 .838 .827 .894 .481 .000 .915 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .914 France Ave Business Access France Ave Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 1 InOut Total 763 1 764 Right55 Thru0 Left0 Peds2 OutTotalIn43 57 100 Left 25 Thru 708 Right 43 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 776 776 Left0 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn25 0 25 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 22 23 329 7 1 360 0 0 0 0 0 382 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 3 31 18 342 21 1 382 0 0 0 0 0 413 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 20 23 296 19 0 338 0 0 0 0 0 358 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 1 27 32 332 20 0 384 0 0 0 0 0 411 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 5 100 96 1299 67 2 1464 0 0 0 0 0 1564 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 5 6.6 88.7 4.6 0.1 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .848 .000 .000 .417 .806 .750 .950 .798 .500 .953 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .947 France Ave Business Access France Ave Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 1394 0 1394 Right95 Thru0 Left0 Peds5 OutTotalIn96 100 196 Left 67 Thru 1299 Right 96 Peds 2 Out TotalIn 0 1464 1464 Left0 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn67 0 67 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 31 1 0 33 0 0 0 1 1 2 40 0 2 44 0 0 4 0 4 82 06:15 AM 1 68 3 1 73 1 0 1 0 2 1 49 0 1 51 1 0 6 0 7 133 06:30 AM 3 48 3 0 54 0 0 1 0 1 1 72 0 2 75 2 0 7 0 9 139 06:45 AM 3 81 2 1 87 0 0 6 0 6 1 110 5 3 119 3 1 18 0 22 234 Total 8 228 9 2 247 1 0 8 1 10 5 271 5 8 289 6 1 35 0 42 588 07:00 AM 6 74 4 0 84 2 1 3 0 6 1 100 5 2 108 3 1 9 0 13 211 07:15 AM 11 135 5 0 151 3 0 7 0 10 3 114 10 3 130 9 0 16 0 25 316 07:30 AM 9 178 6 0 193 0 0 7 0 7 8 161 11 3 183 11 0 27 2 40 423 07:45 AM 25 198 6 0 229 0 1 9 0 10 7 147 10 1 165 7 0 15 0 22 426 Total 51 585 21 0 657 5 2 26 0 33 19 522 36 9 586 30 1 67 2 100 1376 08:00 AM 13 198 6 0 217 4 2 16 0 22 8 172 15 3 198 10 0 13 3 26 463 08:15 AM 20 201 5 0 226 0 1 7 0 8 5 170 8 2 185 7 0 18 2 27 446 08:30 AM 16 201 4 0 221 3 0 10 0 13 9 172 10 5 196 4 0 14 1 19 449 08:45 AM 20 202 6 1 229 2 0 7 3 12 7 208 17 8 240 6 0 6 0 12 493 Total 69 802 21 1 893 9 3 40 3 55 29 722 50 18 819 27 0 51 6 84 1851 03:00 PM 22 246 19 0 287 22 1 29 1 53 17 255 8 8 288 13 2 17 1 33 661 03:15 PM 24 249 22 0 295 26 0 19 0 45 26 272 6 5 309 10 0 29 0 39 688 03:30 PM 13 239 19 0 271 13 0 25 2 40 22 265 12 6 305 8 0 10 0 18 634 03:45 PM 11 210 31 0 252 24 1 33 0 58 17 255 5 8 285 9 3 27 0 39 634 Total 70 944 91 0 1105 85 2 106 3 196 82 1047 31 27 1187 40 5 83 1 129 2617 04:00 PM 23 251 26 0 300 19 2 20 1 42 17 310 16 11 354 11 2 11 2 26 722 04:15 PM 23 220 17 0 260 20 1 23 1 45 14 279 11 12 316 15 1 24 3 43 664 04:30 PM 23 261 19 1 304 15 4 22 2 43 13 321 7 3 344 13 0 19 1 33 724 04:45 PM 20 260 24 0 304 18 5 21 1 45 30 332 8 7 377 8 0 20 1 29 755 Total 89 992 86 1 1168 72 12 86 5 175 74 1242 42 33 1391 47 3 74 7 131 2865 05:00 PM 23 241 29 0 293 24 3 17 0 44 10 305 9 23 347 12 1 16 6 35 719 05:15 PM 25 230 21 0 276 18 2 28 1 49 34 334 6 6 380 14 1 19 0 34 739 05:30 PM 20 193 16 0 229 16 4 15 0 35 36 295 9 17 357 6 2 11 0 19 640 05:45 PM 16 185 25 0 226 29 4 24 1 58 20 219 7 13 259 3 0 20 0 23 566 Total 84 849 91 0 1024 87 13 84 2 186 100 1153 31 59 1343 35 4 66 6 111 2664 Grand Total 371 4400 319 4 5094 259 32 350 14 655 309 4957 195 154 5615 185 14 376 22 597 11961 Apprch %7.3 86.4 6.3 0.1 39.5 4.9 53.4 2.1 5.5 88.3 3.5 2.7 31 2.3 63 3.7 Total %3.1 36.8 2.7 0 42.6 2.2 0.3 2.9 0.1 5.5 2.6 41.4 1.6 1.3 46.9 1.5 0.1 3.1 0.2 5 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 13 198 6 0 217 4 2 16 0 22 8 172 15 3 198 10 0 13 3 26 463 08:15 AM 20 201 5 0 226 0 1 7 0 8 5 170 8 2 185 7 0 18 2 27 446 08:30 AM 16 201 4 0 221 3 0 10 0 13 9 172 10 5 196 4 0 14 1 19 449 08:45 AM 20 202 6 1 229 2 0 7 3 12 7 208 17 8 240 6 0 6 0 12 493 Total Volume 69 802 21 1 893 9 3 40 3 55 29 722 50 18 819 27 0 51 6 84 1851 % App. Total 7.7 89.8 2.4 0.1 16.4 5.5 72.7 5.5 3.5 88.2 6.1 2.2 32.1 0 60.7 7.1 PHF .863 .993 .875 .250 .975 .563 .375 .625 .250 .625 .806 .868 .735 .563 .853 .675 .000 .708 .500 .778 .939 France Ave Gallagher Dr Gallagher Dr France Ave Right 69 Thru 802 Left 21 Peds 1 InOut Total 782 893 1675 Right9 Thru3 Left40 Peds3 OutTotalIn50 55 105 Left 50 Thru 722 Right 29 Peds 18 Out TotalIn 869 819 1688 Left51 Thru0 Right27 Peds6 TotalOutIn122 84 206 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 23 261 19 1 304 15 4 22 2 43 13 321 7 3 344 13 0 19 1 33 724 04:45 PM 20 260 24 0 304 18 5 21 1 45 30 332 8 7 377 8 0 20 1 29 755 05:00 PM 23 241 29 0 293 24 3 17 0 44 10 305 9 23 347 12 1 16 6 35 719 05:15 PM 25 230 21 0 276 18 2 28 1 49 34 334 6 6 380 14 1 19 0 34 739 Total Volume 91 992 93 1 1177 75 14 88 4 181 87 1292 30 39 1448 47 2 74 8 131 2937 % App. Total 7.7 84.3 7.9 0.1 41.4 7.7 48.6 2.2 6 89.2 2.1 2.7 35.9 1.5 56.5 6.1 PHF .910 .950 .802 .250 .968 .781 .700 .786 .500 .923 .640 .967 .833 .424 .953 .839 .500 .925 .333 .936 .973 France Ave Gallagher Dr Gallagher Dr France Ave Right 91 Thru 992 Left 93 Peds 1 InOut Total 1441 1177 2618 Right75 Thru14 Left88 Peds4 OutTotalIn182 181 363 Left 30 Thru 1292 Right 87 Peds 39 Out TotalIn 1127 1448 2575 Left74 Thru2 Right47 Peds8 TotalOutIn135 131 266 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 22 8 0 31 2 1 1 1 5 10 35 8 0 53 7 1 6 0 14 103 06:15 AM 9 42 12 0 63 3 3 1 0 7 16 45 11 0 72 6 1 2 0 9 151 06:30 AM 4 39 10 0 53 5 1 2 0 8 26 64 20 1 111 10 0 7 0 17 189 06:45 AM 11 53 20 0 84 8 3 3 0 14 35 103 23 0 161 8 5 7 1 21 280 Total 25 156 50 0 231 18 8 7 1 34 87 247 62 1 397 31 7 22 1 61 723 07:00 AM 7 51 16 0 74 9 4 4 0 17 17 90 19 0 126 11 4 4 1 20 237 07:15 AM 13 118 19 1 151 13 4 6 0 23 26 108 31 0 165 14 7 11 0 32 371 07:30 AM 15 155 21 0 191 17 3 4 0 24 22 143 22 4 191 11 4 18 0 33 439 07:45 AM 20 168 25 0 213 12 9 13 0 34 35 137 32 1 205 15 7 12 0 34 486 Total 55 492 81 1 629 51 20 27 0 98 100 478 104 5 687 51 22 45 1 119 1533 08:00 AM 13 166 37 0 216 16 6 14 0 36 24 157 25 2 208 18 10 15 1 44 504 08:15 AM 18 160 19 0 197 23 8 15 0 46 25 156 21 4 206 17 9 11 1 38 487 08:30 AM 19 171 24 0 214 24 3 14 0 41 15 150 18 3 186 19 2 11 0 32 473 08:45 AM 20 175 29 0 224 18 7 21 0 46 25 214 22 0 261 24 4 13 0 41 572 Total 70 672 109 0 851 81 24 64 0 169 89 677 86 9 861 78 25 50 2 155 2036 03:00 PM 17 240 40 0 297 30 13 36 1 80 21 231 28 4 284 26 5 13 1 45 706 03:15 PM 16 197 34 0 247 39 7 32 0 78 23 238 24 3 288 14 6 23 0 43 656 03:30 PM 16 250 27 0 293 35 9 35 0 79 22 243 33 5 303 22 5 17 0 44 719 03:45 PM 19 199 42 0 260 27 8 33 0 68 19 257 29 4 309 24 3 18 0 45 682 Total 68 886 143 0 1097 131 37 136 1 305 85 969 114 16 1184 86 19 71 1 177 2763 04:00 PM 12 216 37 0 265 38 12 38 2 90 15 265 19 2 301 38 8 16 0 62 718 04:15 PM 13 224 36 0 273 22 18 32 0 72 12 270 22 1 305 34 3 15 0 52 702 04:30 PM 11 241 41 0 293 35 10 25 0 70 18 293 18 1 330 35 9 22 1 67 760 04:45 PM 8 240 53 0 301 37 10 18 2 67 10 284 23 2 319 25 5 24 0 54 741 Total 44 921 167 0 1132 132 50 113 4 299 55 1112 82 6 1255 132 25 77 1 235 2921 05:00 PM 10 254 27 0 291 35 11 22 0 68 12 314 25 3 354 32 6 16 0 54 767 05:15 PM 14 219 26 0 259 24 10 19 1 54 12 314 19 6 351 15 7 14 0 36 700 05:30 PM 6 204 28 0 238 20 10 14 0 44 21 290 31 3 345 15 9 7 0 31 658 05:45 PM 7 173 24 0 204 20 5 17 2 44 18 265 31 6 320 19 8 9 1 37 605 Total 37 850 105 0 992 99 36 72 3 210 63 1183 106 18 1370 81 30 46 1 158 2730 Grand Total 299 3977 655 1 4932 512 175 419 9 1115 479 4666 554 55 5754 459 128 311 7 905 12706 Apprch %6.1 80.6 13.3 0 45.9 15.7 37.6 0.8 8.3 81.1 9.6 1 50.7 14.1 34.4 0.8 Total %2.4 31.3 5.2 0 38.8 4 1.4 3.3 0.1 8.8 3.8 36.7 4.4 0.4 45.3 3.6 1 2.4 0.1 7.1 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 13 166 37 0 216 16 6 14 0 36 24 157 25 2 208 18 10 15 1 44 504 08:15 AM 18 160 19 0 197 23 8 15 0 46 25 156 21 4 206 17 9 11 1 38 487 08:30 AM 19 171 24 0 214 24 3 14 0 41 15 150 18 3 186 19 2 11 0 32 473 08:45 AM 20 175 29 0 224 18 7 21 0 46 25 214 22 0 261 24 4 13 0 41 572 Total Volume 70 672 109 0 851 81 24 64 0 169 89 677 86 9 861 78 25 50 2 155 2036 % App. Total 8.2 79 12.8 0 47.9 14.2 37.9 0 10.3 78.6 10 1 50.3 16.1 32.3 1.3 PHF .875 .960 .736 .000 .950 .844 .750 .762 .000 .918 .890 .791 .860 .563 .825 .813 .625 .833 .500 .881 .890 France Ave Parklawn Ave Parklawn Ave France Ave Right 70 Thru 672 Left 109 Peds 0 InOut Total 808 851 1659 Right81 Thru24 Left64 Peds0 OutTotalIn223 169 392 Left 86 Thru 677 Right 89 Peds 9 Out TotalIn 814 861 1675 Left50 Thru25 Right78 Peds2 TotalOutIn180 155 335 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 13 224 36 0 273 22 18 32 0 72 12 270 22 1 305 34 3 15 0 52 702 04:30 PM 11 241 41 0 293 35 10 25 0 70 18 293 18 1 330 35 9 22 1 67 760 04:45 PM 8 240 53 0 301 37 10 18 2 67 10 284 23 2 319 25 5 24 0 54 741 05:00 PM 10 254 27 0 291 35 11 22 0 68 12 314 25 3 354 32 6 16 0 54 767 Total Volume 42 959 157 0 1158 129 49 97 2 277 52 1161 88 7 1308 126 23 77 1 227 2970 % App. Total 3.6 82.8 13.6 0 46.6 17.7 35 0.7 4 88.8 6.7 0.5 55.5 10.1 33.9 0.4 PHF .808 .944 .741 .000 .962 .872 .681 .758 .250 .962 .722 .924 .880 .583 .924 .900 .639 .802 .250 .847 .968 France Ave Parklawn Ave Parklawn Ave France Ave Right 42 Thru 959 Left 157 Peds 0 InOut Total 1367 1158 2525 Right129 Thru49 Left97 Peds2 OutTotalIn232 277 509 Left 88 Thru 1161 Right 52 Peds 7 Out TotalIn 1182 1308 2490 Left77 Thru23 Right126 Peds1 TotalOutIn179 227 406 Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 MACY SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA APPENDIX B Traffic Operations Analysis Worksheets SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2447 2629 2497 2477 2383 2486 Vehs Exited 2451 2591 2505 2479 2384 2480 Starting Vehs 71 65 89 68 71 69 Ending Vehs 67 103 81 66 70 76 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2121 2271 2161 2130 2052 2147 Travel Time (hr) 75.3 81.6 77.8 76.3 72.9 76.8 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 17.8 16.4 15.8 14.6 16.1 Total Stops 2118 2358 2246 2162 2034 2184 Fuel Used (gal) 70.0 75.9 72.2 70.6 67.5 71.2 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2447 2629 2497 2477 2383 2486 Vehs Exited 2451 2591 2505 2479 2384 2480 Starting Vehs 71 65 89 68 71 69 Ending Vehs 67 103 81 66 70 76 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2121 2271 2161 2130 2052 2147 Travel Time (hr) 75.3 81.6 77.8 76.3 72.9 76.8 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 17.8 16.4 15.8 14.6 16.1 Total Stops 2118 2358 2246 2162 2034 2184 Fuel Used (gal) 70.0 75.9 72.2 70.6 67.5 71.2 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.1 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.8 0.7 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.2 30.8 4.1 29.9 28.6 5.4 37.8 6.9 2.8 30.0 3.1 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.7 27.4 3.9 27.6 25.5 5.2 35.7 4.2 2.3 27.2 1.1 0.4 Total Stops 2 7 2 55 7 70 12 231 33 89 106 1 Stop/Veh 0.67 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.88 0.86 0.92 0.34 0.41 0.89 0.14 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 0.4 1.1 0.4 12.4 1.7 17.1 1.0 56.3 6.7 27.0 213.8 1.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.2 2.7 0.3 1.7 6.1 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 12 22 13 14 22 6 21 21 17 35 34 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.9 5.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.9 29.2 38.9 27.0 29.3 34.1 21.1 34.5 46.6 31.1 36.5 41.1 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 18 2 5 79 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 3 1 66 9 129 7 573 62 205 2197 6 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 1 17 0 63 5 22 301 1 Vehicles Entered 3 7 2 59 8 81 13 676 81 98 770 4 Vehicles Exited 3 7 2 58 7 80 13 681 81 98 773 4 Hourly Exit Rate 3 7 2 58 7 80 13 681 81 98 773 4 Input Volume 4 8 1 61 7 78 15 680 81 107 753 5 % of Volume 75 88 200 95 100 103 87 100 100 92 103 80 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 2 6 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 3.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.5 Stop Delay (hr) 2.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.3 Total Stops 615 Stop/Veh 0.34 Travel Dist (mi) 339.2 Travel Time (hr) 13.1 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 9.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.1 HC Emissions (g) 112 CO Emissions (g) 3260 NOx Emissions (g) 417 Vehicles Entered 1802 Vehicles Exited 1807 Hourly Exit Rate 1807 Input Volume 1800 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 995 Occupancy (veh) 13 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.1 4.4 0.2 1.0 0.5 0.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.5 2.9 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 85 13 0 0 0 98 Stop/Veh 0.98 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 22.8 1.0 31.0 71.1 1.3 127.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 0.1 0.9 2.1 0.1 4.0 Avg Speed (mph) 25 13 35 34 26 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.0 0.9 3.0 0.0 4.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 36.3 36.2 33.8 23.5 41.1 27.5 HC Emissions (g) 7 0 12 45 0 64 CO Emissions (g) 135 6 375 1917 13 2446 NOx Emissions (g) 19 1 45 161 1 226 Vehicles Entered 86 24 772 817 16 1715 Vehicles Exited 86 24 771 817 16 1714 Hourly Exit Rate 86 24 771 817 16 1714 Input Volume 94 25 777 801 14 1711 % of Volume 91 96 99 102 114 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)890 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Stops 12 0 0 0 12 Stop/Veh 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 3.4 58.3 3.8 36.3 101.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 1.7 0.2 1.1 3.2 Avg Speed (mph) 19 34 23 34 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 2.5 0.1 1.2 3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 42.0 23.1 33.2 30.0 25.9 HC Emissions (g) 1 33 2 18 53 CO Emissions (g) 17 1538 62 598 2215 NOx Emissions (g) 2 121 6 65 194 Vehicles Entered 51 745 48 903 1747 Vehicles Exited 51 744 48 904 1747 Hourly Exit Rate 51 744 48 904 1747 Input Volume 55 746 43 895 1739 % of Volume 93 100 112 101 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)809 Occupancy (veh) 0 2 0 1 3 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.3 4.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 3.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 30.7 5.4 28.0 25.0 5.2 27.5 4.6 3.1 33.9 3.6 1.8 6.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 2.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 28.5 4.8 26.0 22.5 4.9 24.0 1.7 1.3 32.4 1.9 1.4 4.0 Total Stops 45 23 32 3 8 50 115 7 18 141 16 458 Stop/Veh 0.90 0.88 0.91 0.75 0.89 0.93 0.16 0.22 0.95 0.17 0.23 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 7.9 4.1 4.5 0.5 1.1 10.7 146.4 6.3 1.4 61.6 5.4 249.9 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7 4.8 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.2 10.2 Avg Speed (mph) 11 21 10 11 20 14 31 28 6 26 22 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 5.9 0.2 0.1 1.9 0.1 9.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.2 35.3 24.4 27.0 36.8 22.5 25.0 28.6 22.0 32.8 54.1 27.0 HC Emissions (g) 2 2 1 0 0 3 84 4 0 24 1 121 CO Emissions (g) 53 37 28 3 4 197 3499 145 10 844 32 4853 NOx Emissions (g) 5 5 3 0 0 14 299 12 1 86 3 428 Vehicles Entered 50 26 35 4 9 54 738 32 19 816 71 1854 Vehicles Exited 49 26 35 4 9 53 736 32 19 816 71 1850 Hourly Exit Rate 49 26 35 4 9 53 736 32 19 816 71 1850 Input Volume 51 27 40 3 9 50 729 29 21 806 69 1834 % of Volume 96 96 88 133 100 106 101 110 90 101 103 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)863 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 10 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.7 0.1 0.8 1.8 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.0 27.5 5.3 26.6 31.5 4.8 30.8 8.7 2.5 27.3 9.2 5.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.2 25.2 4.6 24.7 28.5 5.1 27.3 5.0 2.1 23.9 5.5 3.8 Total Stops 41 24 68 56 20 75 74 239 36 95 242 31 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.95 0.86 0.87 0.34 0.38 0.87 0.34 0.44 Travel Dist (mi) 6.0 3.6 10.1 4.0 1.4 5.6 30.8 252.0 34.7 21.1 137.2 13.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.4 1.6 8.1 1.0 1.5 5.3 0.5 Avg Speed (mph) 10 10 18 6 6 15 20 31 33 14 26 26 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.9 6.9 0.9 0.8 4.7 0.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.2 25.5 34.5 20.1 21.6 44.3 33.7 36.7 38.8 25.9 29.4 30.7 HC Emissions (g) 1 2 2 1 0 1 8 79 13 5 62 8 CO Emissions (g) 24 39 53 30 5 18 227 2242 343 278 2300 282 NOx Emissions (g) 3 5 8 3 0 2 31 311 48 20 221 25 Vehicles Entered 47 28 78 63 21 87 85 689 94 107 698 70 Vehicles Exited 45 28 78 62 21 86 84 692 94 108 696 69 Hourly Exit Rate 45 28 78 62 21 86 84 692 94 108 696 69 Input Volume 50 25 78 64 24 81 86 677 89 109 694 70 % of Volume 90 112 100 97 88 106 98 102 106 99 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 8 1 1 5 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 6.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Stop Delay (hr) 4.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.4 Total Stops 1001 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 520.2 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 15.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.2 HC Emissions (g) 182 CO Emissions (g) 5839 NOx Emissions (g) 678 Vehicles Entered 2067 Vehicles Exited 2063 Hourly Exit Rate 2063 Input Volume 2047 % of Volume 101 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 800 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 22.1 Stop Delay (hr) 10.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Total Stops 2184 Stop/Veh 0.85 Travel Dist (mi) 2146.7 Travel Time (hr) 76.8 Avg Speed (mph) 28 Fuel Used (gal) 71.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.1 HC Emissions (g) 892 CO Emissions (g) 30275 NOx Emissions (g) 3236 Vehicles Entered 2486 Vehicles Exited 2480 Hourly Exit Rate 2480 Input Volume 12725 % of Volume 19 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 645 Occupancy (veh) 76 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 30 40 78 36 59 64 106 124 113 63 115 96 Average Queue (ft) 3 8 35 5 25 12 46 57 50 22 54 38 95th Queue (ft) 16 31 69 23 49 40 85 105 103 54 100 86 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 80 49 Average Queue (ft) 17 11 95th Queue (ft) 53 35 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 75 45 Average Queue (ft) 34 12 95th Queue (ft) 57 37 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 30 Average Queue (ft) 7 95th Queue (ft) 24 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 90 55 74 39 85 72 91 88 46 93 82 92 Average Queue (ft) 36 18 27 10 37 25 32 36 16 40 35 34 95th Queue (ft) 73 46 59 33 72 60 75 79 41 78 73 71 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 80 78 62 90 38 74 112 143 132 94 54 136 Average Queue (ft) 33 22 34 36 13 22 51 68 47 36 18 59 95th Queue (ft) 66 59 58 73 35 48 100 121 96 75 43 107 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 102 120 129 Average Queue (ft) 46 60 52 95th Queue (ft) 87 108 104 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3843 3875 3772 3786 3884 3831 Vehs Exited 3839 3862 3728 3776 3869 3814 Starting Vehs 121 139 93 124 116 118 Ending Vehs 125 152 137 134 131 133 Denied Entry Before 1 2 0 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 1 0 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3226 3273 3167 3190 3230 3217 Travel Time (hr) 128.6 129.8 123.3 126.3 128.7 127.3 Total Delay (hr) 37.3 37.4 34.3 35.8 36.9 36.4 Total Stops 4344 4333 4028 4162 4253 4224 Fuel Used (gal) 114.8 116.5 111.7 113.4 114.2 114.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3843 3875 3772 3786 3884 3831 Vehs Exited 3839 3862 3728 3776 3869 3814 Starting Vehs 121 139 93 124 116 118 Ending Vehs 125 152 137 134 131 133 Denied Entry Before 1 2 0 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 1 0 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3226 3273 3167 3190 3230 3217 Travel Time (hr) 128.6 129.8 123.3 126.3 128.7 127.3 Total Delay (hr) 37.3 37.4 34.3 35.8 36.9 36.4 Total Stops 4344 4333 4028 4162 4253 4224 Fuel Used (gal) 114.8 116.5 111.7 113.4 114.2 114.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.1 0.2 3.0 0.6 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 5.0 0.2 1.5 1.5 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.4 23.8 6.3 29.3 26.5 9.8 33.4 14.4 5.0 29.7 5.6 2.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 3.4 0.1 1.3 0.7 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.7 20.8 6.0 26.1 22.9 8.8 30.9 9.7 3.8 25.7 2.4 2.1 Total Stops 14 11 7 113 12 151 12 661 62 149 225 1 Stop/Veh 0.93 0.79 0.78 0.86 0.86 0.78 0.92 0.53 0.54 0.85 0.23 0.33 Travel Dist (mi) 2.3 2.1 1.4 27.4 2.9 40.4 1.0 101.7 9.4 48.0 273.4 0.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.2 0.2 2.2 0.2 7.6 0.5 2.9 8.5 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 13 20 13 14 20 7 13 18 17 32 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 1.3 0.0 3.4 0.2 1.6 7.6 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.0 28.7 35.2 25.9 28.9 31.7 22.5 29.7 39.6 30.7 36.1 39.4 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 11 0 12 0 28 2 13 90 0 CO Emissions (g) 7 9 6 267 14 301 7 901 95 446 2771 4 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 32 1 35 0 98 7 47 344 1 Vehicles Entered 15 13 9 130 14 191 13 1255 114 174 986 3 Vehicles Exited 15 14 9 129 14 191 12 1254 114 172 987 3 Hourly Exit Rate 15 14 9 129 14 191 12 1254 114 172 987 3 Input Volume 14 14 11 137 15 183 11 1246 116 181 981 4 % of Volume 107 100 82 94 93 104 109 101 98 95 101 75 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 8 1 3 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 10.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.6 Stop Delay (hr) 7.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.9 Total Stops 1418 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 511.0 Travel Time (hr) 24.8 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 15.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.0 HC Emissions (g) 158 CO Emissions (g) 4826 NOx Emissions (g) 568 Vehicles Entered 2917 Vehicles Exited 2914 Hourly Exit Rate 2914 Input Volume 2913 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 528 Occupancy (veh) 24 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.6 6.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.1 4.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 Total Stops 56 40 1 0 1 98 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 15.0 2.6 55.7 96.5 1.8 171.6 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.2 1.7 3.1 0.1 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 24 11 33 31 23 30 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 1.7 4.9 0.1 7.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 37.0 32.2 32.5 19.7 30.1 24.0 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 24 73 0 102 CO Emissions (g) 81 13 887 3385 26 4392 NOx Emissions (g) 11 2 83 256 2 354 Vehicles Entered 56 64 1384 1106 21 2631 Vehicles Exited 56 63 1383 1111 21 2634 Hourly Exit Rate 56 63 1383 1111 21 2634 Input Volume 58 67 1374 1108 22 2629 % of Volume 97 94 101 100 95 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)631 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 3.9 1.9 2.0 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 44 0 0 0 44 Stop/Veh 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 Travel Dist (mi) 6.3 105.9 7.7 46.9 166.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.4 3.6 0.4 1.3 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 16 30 21 35 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 5.7 0.3 1.4 7.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.3 18.5 24.9 32.5 21.8 HC Emissions (g) 1 82 4 21 108 CO Emissions (g) 42 3898 158 701 4799 NOx Emissions (g) 4 294 16 74 388 Vehicles Entered 94 1358 98 1165 2715 Vehicles Exited 94 1359 99 1165 2717 Hourly Exit Rate 94 1359 99 1165 2717 Input Volume 95 1350 96 1165 2706 % of Volume 99 101 103 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)450 Occupancy (veh) 0 4 0 1 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.4 0.3 3.8 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 4.3 0.3 0.7 1.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.7 25.7 5.6 27.7 25.1 9.7 28.9 11.7 10.8 32.2 4.0 2.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.1 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.3 20.4 5.0 24.9 21.4 8.5 24.6 5.8 5.9 30.1 2.2 1.6 Total Stops 67 1 41 77 12 63 29 424 35 78 185 22 Stop/Veh 0.87 1.00 0.80 0.83 0.80 0.80 0.97 0.32 0.41 0.95 0.19 0.23 Travel Dist (mi) 12.1 0.2 7.9 11.8 1.9 10.1 5.9 259.5 17.0 6.1 74.8 7.1 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.2 0.6 0.4 11.1 0.8 1.0 3.0 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 11 15 21 10 11 17 14 23 21 6 25 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 11.5 0.7 0.3 2.3 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.6 30.0 35.1 21.4 25.2 30.0 22.4 22.6 25.7 21.0 33.1 55.2 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 2 5 0 5 4 152 11 2 27 1 CO Emissions (g) 108 1 53 156 15 124 135 6503 412 69 929 33 NOx Emissions (g) 11 0 6 15 1 13 12 546 37 6 99 3 Vehicles Entered 77 1 50 92 15 78 30 1301 85 82 988 94 Vehicles Exited 75 1 50 91 15 78 29 1303 85 81 988 94 Hourly Exit Rate 75 1 50 91 15 78 29 1303 85 81 988 94 Input Volume 79 2 47 88 14 75 30 1292 87 93 981 91 % of Volume 95 50 106 103 107 104 97 101 98 87 101 103 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 11 1 1 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 8.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.4 Stop Delay (hr) 5.4 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.6 Total Stops 1034 Stop/Veh 0.36 Travel Dist (mi) 414.3 Travel Time (hr) 20.2 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 16.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.7 HC Emissions (g) 214 CO Emissions (g) 8539 NOx Emissions (g) 750 Vehicles Entered 2893 Vehicles Exited 2890 Hourly Exit Rate 2890 Input Volume 2879 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 434 Occupancy (veh) 20 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.8 4.7 0.0 1.2 3.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.0 30.4 7.4 25.9 29.1 8.7 34.4 13.8 2.9 27.0 12.6 8.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.7 2.7 0.0 1.0 2.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.9 28.1 6.6 23.7 26.1 8.7 30.1 8.1 2.6 23.0 8.0 5.3 Total Stops 67 21 102 74 38 115 76 555 25 136 403 18 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.88 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.85 0.88 0.46 0.47 0.88 0.43 0.46 Travel Dist (mi) 9.9 3.1 15.6 5.6 2.9 8.8 31.2 438.9 19.0 30.1 185.2 7.6 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.7 15.8 0.6 2.1 8.1 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 6 6 12 19 28 33 14 23 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 1.0 12.0 0.5 1.2 6.7 0.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.5 24.5 33.0 19.9 21.4 38.4 32.8 36.6 38.3 25.7 27.5 28.4 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 3 2 1 1 5 128 8 10 89 4 CO Emissions (g) 62 10 71 46 23 33 184 3696 206 456 3429 163 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 10 5 2 4 22 494 28 36 308 14 Vehicles Entered 76 24 121 87 46 136 85 1200 52 153 939 38 Vehicles Exited 77 24 120 88 45 136 84 1204 52 150 935 38 Hourly Exit Rate 77 24 120 88 45 136 84 1204 52 150 935 38 Input Volume 77 23 126 97 49 129 88 1203 52 157 918 42 % of Volume 100 104 95 91 92 105 95 100 100 96 102 90 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 16 1 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 12.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 15.0 Stop Delay (hr) 8.8 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.6 Total Stops 1630 Stop/Veh 0.55 Travel Dist (mi) 758.1 Travel Time (hr) 33.0 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 23.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.6 HC Emissions (g) 254 CO Emissions (g) 8380 NOx Emissions (g) 933 Vehicles Entered 2957 Vehicles Exited 2953 Hourly Exit Rate 2953 Input Volume 2961 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 505 Occupancy (veh) 33 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.8 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 35.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 32.5 Stop Delay (hr) 22.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 20.0 Total Stops 4224 Stop/Veh 1.07 Travel Dist (mi) 3217.2 Travel Time (hr) 127.3 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 114.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.2 HC Emissions (g) 1372 CO Emissions (g) 49725 NOx Emissions (g) 4960 Vehicles Entered 3831 Vehicles Exited 3814 Hourly Exit Rate 3814 Input Volume 19273 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 389 Occupancy (veh) 127 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 42 57 142 36 111 43 168 201 206 77 181 150 Average Queue (ft) 12 17 70 10 51 13 108 129 134 33 84 68 95th Queue (ft) 37 48 125 31 93 37 159 185 192 63 145 124 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 116 94 Average Queue (ft) 37 25 95th Queue (ft) 84 65 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 62 61 24 Average Queue (ft) 26 26 1 95th Queue (ft) 50 55 10 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 67 Average Queue (ft) 21 95th Queue (ft) 46 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 100 59 121 117 80 152 164 196 127 99 108 103 Average Queue (ft) 49 26 53 43 25 74 88 110 54 47 48 42 95th Queue (ft) 91 53 97 85 62 131 146 186 101 85 89 84 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 95 57 104 93 102 102 119 181 174 183 50 166 Average Queue (ft) 45 21 44 45 26 37 52 117 105 92 13 83 95th Queue (ft) 83 51 76 86 72 75 95 169 164 156 36 144 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 1 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 128 141 158 Average Queue (ft) 68 85 86 95th Queue (ft) 115 133 137 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 6 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2482 2550 2553 2457 2471 2502 Vehs Exited 2483 2517 2540 2436 2469 2490 Starting Vehs 66 74 71 63 78 63 Ending Vehs 65 107 84 84 80 85 Denied Entry Before 0 2 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2130 2188 2196 2106 2128 2149 Travel Time (hr) 75.9 77.8 78.9 76.2 76.7 77.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.6 16.0 16.4 16.5 16.2 16.1 Total Stops 2189 2132 2257 2190 2172 2185 Fuel Used (gal) 70.3 72.5 72.9 69.9 70.2 71.2 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2482 2550 2553 2457 2471 2502 Vehs Exited 2483 2517 2540 2436 2469 2490 Starting Vehs 66 74 71 63 78 63 Ending Vehs 65 107 84 84 80 85 Denied Entry Before 0 2 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2130 2188 2196 2106 2128 2149 Travel Time (hr) 75.9 77.8 78.9 76.2 76.7 77.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.6 16.0 16.4 16.5 16.2 16.1 Total Stops 2189 2132 2257 2190 2172 2185 Fuel Used (gal) 70.3 72.5 72.9 69.9 70.2 71.2 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.8 0.2 0.1 3.2 0.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.6 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 23.0 24.4 3.9 31.0 29.8 5.3 37.4 6.9 2.7 28.4 3.0 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 21.1 21.6 3.7 28.8 26.3 5.0 35.4 4.1 2.3 25.5 1.0 0.6 Total Stops 3 5 2 55 6 72 16 236 29 96 99 0 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.86 0.87 0.94 0.34 0.38 0.85 0.13 0.00 Travel Dist (mi) 0.5 0.8 0.3 12.5 1.6 17.5 1.4 56.8 6.3 30.9 211.0 1.1 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.2 2.8 0.3 1.8 6.0 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 14 12 21 13 14 22 6 21 21 17 35 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.1 1.6 0.1 1.0 5.8 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.3 29.9 37.8 26.8 29.5 33.5 22.2 35.1 47.0 31.1 36.7 41.3 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 2 0 8 0 18 1 9 59 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 2 1 66 6 160 7 559 56 293 1886 4 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 1 21 1 64 4 34 248 1 Vehicles Entered 3 5 2 59 7 83 17 683 76 112 761 4 Vehicles Exited 3 6 2 58 7 83 17 687 76 111 762 4 Hourly Exit Rate 3 6 2 58 7 83 17 687 76 111 762 4 Input Volume 4 8 1 62 7 79 15 691 82 109 765 5 % of Volume 75 75 200 94 100 105 113 99 93 102 100 80 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 2 6 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 3.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.6 Stop Delay (hr) 2.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.4 Total Stops 619 Stop/Veh 0.34 Travel Dist (mi) 340.8 Travel Time (hr) 13.3 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 9.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.2 HC Emissions (g) 99 CO Emissions (g) 3040 NOx Emissions (g) 381 Vehicles Entered 1812 Vehicles Exited 1816 Hourly Exit Rate 1816 Input Volume 1828 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 986 Occupancy (veh) 13 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.5 5.2 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.8 3.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 93 15 0 0 0 108 Stop/Veh 0.98 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 25.0 1.0 31.3 70.3 1.4 129.0 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.1 0.9 2.1 0.1 4.1 Avg Speed (mph) 24 12 35 34 25 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.7 0.0 0.9 2.9 0.0 4.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.9 37.8 33.6 24.2 39.5 28.1 HC Emissions (g) 5 0 12 38 0 56 CO Emissions (g) 119 6 374 1713 14 2225 NOx Emissions (g) 15 1 46 140 1 202 Vehicles Entered 94 25 779 806 16 1720 Vehicles Exited 93 25 778 808 16 1720 Hourly Exit Rate 93 25 778 808 16 1720 Input Volume 96 25 790 814 14 1739 % of Volume 97 100 98 99 114 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)871 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.7 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Stops 16 0 0 0 16 Stop/Veh 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 3.6 58.7 3.3 36.1 101.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 1.8 0.1 1.1 3.2 Avg Speed (mph) 19 33 23 33 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 2.5 0.1 1.2 3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 42.3 23.3 33.5 29.5 25.9 HC Emissions (g) 1 33 1 15 50 CO Emissions (g) 18 1534 47 556 2154 NOx Emissions (g) 2 122 4 56 184 Vehicles Entered 54 749 42 901 1746 Vehicles Exited 54 748 43 901 1746 Hourly Exit Rate 54 748 43 901 1746 Input Volume 56 758 44 910 1768 % of Volume 96 99 98 99 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)805 Occupancy (veh) 0 2 0 1 3 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.1 0.4 0.2 4.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 30.9 14.6 5.4 28.0 18.9 5.3 28.5 4.6 3.6 32.4 3.5 1.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 28.7 11.9 4.9 26.0 16.7 5.1 24.9 1.6 1.6 30.9 1.8 1.1 Total Stops 48 0 26 35 2 6 43 114 8 17 139 13 Stop/Veh 0.91 0.00 0.84 0.85 0.67 0.86 0.91 0.15 0.24 0.94 0.17 0.18 Travel Dist (mi) 8.3 0.1 4.9 5.2 0.4 0.9 9.2 146.1 6.6 1.4 61.3 5.4 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.7 4.8 0.2 0.2 2.3 0.2 Avg Speed (mph) 11 15 21 10 13 20 14 30 27 7 26 22 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 5.8 0.2 0.1 1.9 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 28.0 35.8 23.8 25.8 36.7 22.7 25.1 27.5 22.7 32.8 54.2 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 2 3 0 0 3 80 5 0 20 1 CO Emissions (g) 51 1 41 58 3 3 173 3374 172 10 793 31 NOx Emissions (g) 5 0 5 7 0 0 13 289 15 1 75 2 Vehicles Entered 52 1 31 41 3 7 46 735 33 18 812 71 Vehicles Exited 53 1 30 41 3 7 46 732 33 18 811 71 Hourly Exit Rate 53 1 30 41 3 7 46 732 33 18 811 71 Input Volume 52 1 27 41 3 9 51 741 29 21 819 70 % of Volume 102 100 111 100 100 78 90 99 114 86 99 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 3.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.2 Stop Delay (hr) 2.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.0 Total Stops 451 Stop/Veh 0.24 Travel Dist (mi) 249.6 Travel Time (hr) 10.2 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 9.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.1 HC Emissions (g) 115 CO Emissions (g) 4709 NOx Emissions (g) 413 Vehicles Entered 1850 Vehicles Exited 1846 Hourly Exit Rate 1846 Input Volume 1864 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 862 Occupancy (veh) 10 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.6 0.1 0.8 1.8 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 25.4 31.1 5.5 27.8 28.7 4.2 32.3 8.6 2.6 26.5 9.2 5.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.5 28.9 5.0 25.8 25.9 4.5 28.9 5.0 2.1 22.8 5.5 3.6 Total Stops 44 19 67 59 21 66 73 235 37 94 245 31 Stop/Veh 0.85 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.81 0.85 0.89 0.34 0.41 0.86 0.35 0.40 Travel Dist (mi) 6.7 2.8 9.9 4.3 1.7 5.1 29.6 249.9 33.2 21.1 136.9 15.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 1.6 8.0 1.0 1.4 5.3 0.6 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 18 6 6 15 19 31 33 15 26 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.9 6.8 0.8 0.8 4.7 0.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.0 25.0 34.3 19.6 21.4 45.7 33.2 36.6 39.6 25.8 29.4 31.1 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 2 1 0 1 10 79 9 6 56 5 CO Emissions (g) 34 12 43 33 7 16 266 2237 273 303 2219 232 NOx Emissions (g) 4 1 6 4 1 2 37 309 37 24 205 18 Vehicles Entered 51 21 76 68 26 78 81 685 91 108 697 77 Vehicles Exited 51 21 76 67 25 78 81 685 91 108 698 77 Hourly Exit Rate 51 21 76 67 25 78 81 685 91 108 698 77 Input Volume 51 25 79 65 24 82 87 688 90 111 705 71 % of Volume 100 84 96 103 104 95 93 100 101 97 99 108 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 8 1 1 5 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 6.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Stop Delay (hr) 4.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.5 Total Stops 991 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 516.4 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 15.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.1 HC Emissions (g) 170 CO Emissions (g) 5675 NOx Emissions (g) 647 Vehicles Entered 2059 Vehicles Exited 2058 Hourly Exit Rate 2058 Input Volume 2078 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 802 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 22.0 Stop Delay (hr) 10.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Total Stops 2185 Stop/Veh 0.85 Travel Dist (mi) 2149.4 Travel Time (hr) 77.1 Avg Speed (mph) 28 Fuel Used (gal) 71.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.2 HC Emissions (g) 826 CO Emissions (g) 29153 NOx Emissions (g) 3064 Vehicles Entered 2502 Vehicles Exited 2490 Hourly Exit Rate 2490 Input Volume 12922 % of Volume 19 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 642 Occupancy (veh) 77 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 30 36 93 40 63 50 100 114 118 64 141 90 Average Queue (ft) 3 6 38 5 26 16 50 59 52 19 60 34 95th Queue (ft) 17 27 77 23 53 41 89 104 103 50 112 74 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 64 49 Average Queue (ft) 16 11 95th Queue (ft) 45 34 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 76 55 8 Average Queue (ft) 35 14 0 95th Queue (ft) 59 42 5 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 48 Average Queue (ft) 10 95th Queue (ft) 33 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 90 64 80 35 80 68 88 106 54 93 89 92 Average Queue (ft) 39 20 30 7 34 27 32 33 15 38 32 34 95th Queue (ft) 73 50 65 28 73 58 71 79 41 77 74 74 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 85 58 63 94 48 66 117 126 129 85 57 122 Average Queue (ft) 35 18 33 38 14 20 52 65 44 33 19 58 95th Queue (ft) 73 50 57 76 38 43 92 109 90 74 46 106 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 104 126 127 Average Queue (ft) 48 60 56 95th Queue (ft) 90 110 107 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3935 3914 3845 3827 3863 3878 Vehs Exited 3901 3900 3841 3830 3823 3858 Starting Vehs 117 91 120 127 105 106 Ending Vehs 151 105 124 124 145 126 Denied Entry Before 1 3 1 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3304 3282 3233 3228 3245 3258 Travel Time (hr) 133.2 131.9 130.7 129.3 127.6 130.5 Total Delay (hr) 39.7 39.0 39.2 37.8 35.8 38.3 Total Stops 4484 4401 4388 4358 4149 4360 Fuel Used (gal) 118.4 118.3 115.0 114.7 114.3 116.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3935 3914 3845 3827 3863 3878 Vehs Exited 3901 3900 3841 3830 3823 3858 Starting Vehs 117 91 120 127 105 106 Ending Vehs 151 105 124 124 145 126 Denied Entry Before 1 3 1 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3304 3282 3233 3228 3245 3258 Travel Time (hr) 133.2 131.9 130.7 129.3 127.6 130.5 Total Delay (hr) 39.7 39.0 39.2 37.8 35.8 38.3 Total Stops 4484 4401 4388 4358 4149 4360 Fuel Used (gal) 118.4 118.3 115.0 114.7 114.3 116.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.1 0.2 3.0 0.6 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 5.3 0.2 1.6 1.5 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.6 25.0 6.2 30.5 23.8 8.9 34.8 14.9 5.1 30.0 5.3 1.4 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 3.6 0.1 1.4 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.5 22.1 5.5 27.4 20.3 8.0 32.5 10.3 3.9 25.7 2.2 0.9 Total Stops 15 9 11 127 10 140 9 676 67 164 213 1 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.82 0.92 0.88 0.77 0.77 1.00 0.53 0.58 0.85 0.21 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 2.6 1.7 1.9 30.1 2.7 37.9 0.7 102.5 9.6 52.6 274.2 1.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.4 0.2 2.0 0.1 7.9 0.5 3.2 8.5 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 13 20 13 15 20 6 13 18 17 33 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.2 0.0 3.5 0.2 1.7 7.7 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.1 29.9 32.8 25.6 29.3 31.7 21.6 29.5 40.2 30.5 35.8 38.0 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 8 0 11 0 26 2 15 101 0 CO Emissions (g) 14 7 9 224 15 283 4 838 99 499 2994 8 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 25 1 33 0 93 7 56 376 1 Vehicles Entered 17 11 12 143 13 179 9 1265 116 190 990 5 Vehicles Exited 17 11 12 143 13 181 9 1266 115 189 990 5 Hourly Exit Rate 17 11 12 143 13 181 9 1266 115 189 990 5 Input Volume 14 14 11 139 15 186 11 1266 118 184 997 4 % of Volume 121 79 109 103 87 97 82 100 97 103 99 125 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 8 1 3 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 10.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.9 Stop Delay (hr) 7.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.3 Total Stops 1442 Stop/Veh 0.49 Travel Dist (mi) 517.9 Travel Time (hr) 25.4 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 15.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.7 HC Emissions (g) 166 CO Emissions (g) 4996 NOx Emissions (g) 595 Vehicles Entered 2950 Vehicles Exited 2951 Hourly Exit Rate 2951 Input Volume 2959 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 516 Occupancy (veh) 25 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.0 6.7 0.4 1.4 1.0 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.5 5.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 59 43 0 0 0 102 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 15.8 2.6 56.0 98.0 1.9 174.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.7 0.2 1.7 3.1 0.1 5.8 Avg Speed (mph) 24 11 33 31 23 30 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 1.7 4.9 0.1 7.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 36.5 32.2 32.6 19.8 29.5 24.1 HC Emissions (g) 5 0 23 76 0 104 CO Emissions (g) 87 14 851 3461 31 4444 NOx Emissions (g) 13 2 80 263 2 359 Vehicles Entered 59 64 1392 1123 22 2660 Vehicles Exited 59 63 1390 1123 22 2657 Hourly Exit Rate 59 63 1390 1123 22 2657 Input Volume 59 68 1396 1125 22 2670 % of Volume 100 93 100 100 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)622 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 1.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.4 1.9 1.9 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 40 0 0 1 41 Stop/Veh 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 6.2 106.7 7.8 47.7 168.4 Travel Time (hr) 0.4 3.6 0.4 1.4 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 15 30 21 35 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 5.8 0.3 1.4 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.8 18.3 25.3 32.9 21.7 HC Emissions (g) 2 81 4 23 109 CO Emissions (g) 49 3940 149 730 4869 NOx Emissions (g) 5 292 14 79 390 Vehicles Entered 93 1370 100 1183 2746 Vehicles Exited 93 1368 99 1183 2743 Hourly Exit Rate 93 1368 99 1183 2743 Input Volume 97 1371 98 1185 2751 % of Volume 96 100 101 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)444 Occupancy (veh) 0 4 0 1 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.5 0.3 3.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 4.6 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.4 33.9 5.8 27.7 26.9 9.4 28.6 12.5 10.9 31.3 4.1 2.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.0 30.5 5.0 25.0 23.5 8.2 23.8 6.4 6.1 29.0 2.2 1.4 Total Stops 69 3 40 78 12 56 30 449 40 85 182 21 Stop/Veh 0.86 1.00 0.80 0.86 0.80 0.80 0.97 0.34 0.45 0.91 0.18 0.23 Travel Dist (mi) 12.4 0.5 7.8 11.7 1.9 8.9 6.2 264.2 17.4 7.0 75.7 7.0 Travel Time (hr) 1.2 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.2 0.5 0.4 11.6 0.8 1.1 3.0 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 11 12 21 10 11 17 14 23 21 7 25 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 11.8 0.7 0.3 2.4 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.7 24.6 34.8 21.5 25.0 31.2 21.1 22.4 25.3 21.5 32.1 57.2 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 2 6 0 4 5 145 9 2 30 2 CO Emissions (g) 107 4 58 166 16 103 163 6492 376 72 1048 39 NOx Emissions (g) 11 0 7 16 1 11 15 535 33 6 107 4 Vehicles Entered 79 3 50 91 15 69 31 1326 87 92 999 92 Vehicles Exited 77 3 49 89 15 69 30 1323 87 91 1000 92 Hourly Exit Rate 77 3 49 89 15 69 30 1323 87 91 1000 92 Input Volume 80 2 48 89 14 76 31 1313 88 95 997 93 % of Volume 96 150 102 100 107 91 97 101 99 96 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 12 1 1 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 8.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.9 Stop Delay (hr) 5.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.9 Total Stops 1065 Stop/Veh 0.36 Travel Dist (mi) 420.6 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 20 Fuel Used (gal) 17.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 HC Emissions (g) 209 CO Emissions (g) 8643 NOx Emissions (g) 746 Vehicles Entered 2934 Vehicles Exited 2925 Hourly Exit Rate 2925 Input Volume 2926 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 421 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.8 5.2 0.0 1.4 3.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.4 33.6 7.5 26.8 30.3 8.1 34.2 15.1 3.4 28.7 13.0 8.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.7 3.2 0.0 1.2 2.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.2 30.8 6.6 24.7 27.2 8.3 30.0 9.2 3.0 24.4 8.3 6.3 Total Stops 74 25 107 76 38 111 76 598 27 149 405 24 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.93 0.87 0.85 0.83 0.85 0.90 0.48 0.53 0.86 0.44 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 10.8 3.5 15.9 5.6 3.0 8.4 30.2 449.1 18.4 33.7 181.4 9.5 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.4 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.7 16.6 0.6 2.4 8.1 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 6 6 12 19 27 33 14 22 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.9 12.4 0.5 1.4 6.6 0.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.7 23.5 32.6 19.8 20.8 39.0 32.7 36.2 39.4 24.7 27.4 27.8 HC Emissions (g) 2 0 3 1 1 1 7 124 9 18 86 8 CO Emissions (g) 58 12 67 42 17 28 236 3674 222 638 3315 264 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 10 5 2 3 28 489 32 56 296 24 Vehicles Entered 83 27 123 88 46 130 83 1227 50 172 919 48 Vehicles Exited 82 27 123 88 46 130 83 1232 50 169 917 48 Hourly Exit Rate 82 27 123 88 46 130 83 1232 50 169 917 48 Input Volume 78 23 128 99 50 131 89 1222 53 160 932 43 % of Volume 105 117 96 89 92 99 93 101 94 106 98 112 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 17 1 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 13.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 16.0 Stop Delay (hr) 9.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Total Stops 1710 Stop/Veh 0.57 Travel Dist (mi) 769.5 Travel Time (hr) 34.3 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 23.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.3 HC Emissions (g) 261 CO Emissions (g) 8575 NOx Emissions (g) 953 Vehicles Entered 2996 Vehicles Exited 2995 Hourly Exit Rate 2995 Input Volume 3008 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 485 Occupancy (veh) 34 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.8 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 37.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 33.9 Stop Delay (hr) 23.5 Stop Del/Veh (s) 21.2 Total Stops 4360 Stop/Veh 1.09 Travel Dist (mi) 3258.4 Travel Time (hr) 130.5 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 116.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.1 HC Emissions (g) 1400 CO Emissions (g) 50601 NOx Emissions (g) 5055 Vehicles Entered 3878 Vehicles Exited 3858 Hourly Exit Rate 3858 Input Volume 19585 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 379 Occupancy (veh) 130 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 43 52 144 95 117 71 206 225 246 72 188 155 Average Queue (ft) 14 16 78 10 47 10 115 132 137 35 94 65 95th Queue (ft) 41 44 127 49 89 44 176 192 206 65 157 124 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 101 72 Average Queue (ft) 39 23 95th Queue (ft) 84 57 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 62 63 4 Average Queue (ft) 30 28 0 95th Queue (ft) 50 57 3 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 57 Average Queue (ft) 21 95th Queue (ft) 48 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 114 76 108 99 75 166 179 235 123 96 91 98 Average Queue (ft) 49 26 55 40 25 77 93 121 58 46 45 40 95th Queue (ft) 91 58 97 75 57 139 157 197 106 86 80 82 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 106 79 77 104 152 85 116 218 223 188 50 168 Average Queue (ft) 53 23 43 45 29 34 53 124 110 97 13 92 95th Queue (ft) 98 61 70 87 86 65 95 189 181 162 36 150 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 0 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0 0 1 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 170 168 166 Average Queue (ft) 71 88 88 95th Queue (ft) 125 144 152 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2908 2973 2924 2910 2811 2906 Vehs Exited 2918 2962 2911 2904 2820 2903 Starting Vehs 90 94 79 84 93 89 Ending Vehs 80 105 92 90 84 93 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 2 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2401 2465 2405 2425 2340 2407 Travel Time (hr) 93.0 95.3 92.9 94.0 89.8 93.0 Total Delay (hr) 22.8 23.2 22.5 23.0 21.4 22.6 Total Stops 3098 3021 3060 3065 2853 3018 Fuel Used (gal) 83.3 85.3 83.2 84.4 80.5 83.3 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2908 2973 2924 2910 2811 2906 Vehs Exited 2918 2962 2911 2904 2820 2903 Starting Vehs 90 94 79 84 93 89 Ending Vehs 80 105 92 90 84 93 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 2 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2401 2465 2405 2425 2340 2407 Travel Time (hr) 93.0 95.3 92.9 94.0 89.8 93.0 Total Delay (hr) 22.8 23.2 22.5 23.0 21.4 22.6 Total Stops 3098 3021 3060 3065 2853 3018 Fuel Used (gal) 83.3 85.3 83.2 84.4 80.5 83.3 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 5.0 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.8 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 25.8 28.0 5.4 25.3 23.4 5.7 27.9 8.4 3.4 26.5 3.8 1.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.0 26.0 4.8 23.2 20.8 5.5 26.2 5.4 2.7 23.4 1.4 0.6 Total Stops 2 6 1 71 6 63 13 318 50 95 137 1 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.91 0.86 0.85 0.93 0.40 0.48 0.86 0.17 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 0.4 1.1 0.2 16.3 1.4 15.6 1.1 66.0 8.6 29.6 225.9 1.5 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.1 3.5 0.4 1.7 6.6 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 12 11 19 13 14 19 8 19 20 18 34 34 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.9 6.2 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.7 26.0 37.8 26.7 28.2 32.7 24.1 32.2 42.0 32.0 36.5 41.6 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 19 2 6 69 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 4 1 117 5 100 12 723 96 238 2115 10 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 15 1 14 1 69 6 26 275 1 Vehicles Entered 2 7 1 77 7 74 14 792 103 107 815 5 Vehicles Exited 2 7 1 77 7 74 14 792 104 106 813 5 Hourly Exit Rate 2 7 1 77 7 74 14 792 104 106 813 5 Input Volume 4 8 1 75 7 79 15 775 98 109 835 5 % of Volume 50 88 100 103 100 94 93 102 106 97 97 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 2 7 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 4.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 8.1 Stop Delay (hr) 3.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.6 Total Stops 763 Stop/Veh 0.38 Travel Dist (mi) 367.6 Travel Time (hr) 14.9 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 10.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.5 HC Emissions (g) 106 CO Emissions (g) 3421 NOx Emissions (g) 407 Vehicles Entered 2004 Vehicles Exited 2002 Hourly Exit Rate 2002 Input Volume 2011 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 877 Occupancy (veh) 15 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.9 5.2 0.2 1.2 0.5 1.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.3 3.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 96 16 0 0 0 112 Stop/Veh 0.99 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 25.7 1.1 36.3 76.3 1.3 140.7 Travel Time (hr) 1.2 0.1 1.2 2.3 0.0 4.9 Avg Speed (mph) 21 12 31 33 26 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.8 0.0 1.4 3.4 0.0 5.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.1 32.5 25.1 22.4 41.3 24.8 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 18 48 0 70 CO Emissions (g) 89 7 742 2197 11 3046 NOx Emissions (g) 12 1 69 172 1 254 Vehicles Entered 96 27 908 878 15 1924 Vehicles Exited 96 27 909 878 15 1925 Hourly Exit Rate 96 27 909 878 15 1925 Input Volume 100 30 889 898 14 1931 % of Volume 96 90 102 98 107 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 740 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 2.5 2.1 2.1 0.3 1.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 40 0 0 0 40 Stop/Veh 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 Travel Dist (mi) 10.5 60.8 6.9 39.0 117.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 2.0 0.3 1.2 4.2 Avg Speed (mph) 18 30 21 33 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 3.6 0.3 1.3 5.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.4 16.9 24.1 30.2 21.4 HC Emissions (g) 3 45 5 17 70 CO Emissions (g) 95 2538 169 630 3432 NOx Emissions (g) 10 169 16 62 256 Vehicles Entered 157 775 88 972 1992 Vehicles Exited 157 777 89 973 1996 Hourly Exit Rate 157 777 89 973 1996 Input Volume 155 763 86 997 2001 % of Volume 101 102 103 98 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 614 Occupancy (veh) 1 2 0 1 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.5 0.4 0.2 3.9 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.4 0.2 0.7 1.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 20.2 17.1 4.5 20.6 19.6 5.3 30.1 10.8 8.7 24.5 6.0 3.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 18.6 15.2 4.1 18.5 17.7 4.6 25.9 5.3 5.0 22.2 3.5 2.3 Total Stops 40 1 22 124 2 8 49 314 49 95 231 22 Stop/Veh 0.80 1.00 0.79 0.79 0.67 0.80 0.92 0.39 0.52 0.91 0.29 0.31 Travel Dist (mi) 7.7 0.2 4.4 19.8 0.4 1.2 10.3 160.5 18.8 7.8 60.4 5.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.2 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.8 6.7 0.8 1.0 2.9 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 13 14 19 11 12 18 14 24 22 8 21 20 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.5 6.6 0.7 0.3 1.9 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.8 28.2 34.6 23.4 26.1 33.9 21.2 24.2 26.9 24.3 32.2 51.1 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 2 5 0 0 5 82 12 2 20 1 CO Emissions (g) 30 1 30 145 2 5 239 3805 435 70 789 37 NOx Emissions (g) 3 0 4 17 0 1 18 292 39 5 72 3 Vehicles Entered 49 1 28 154 3 10 52 811 95 103 798 70 Vehicles Exited 49 1 28 155 3 10 51 804 94 103 796 70 Hourly Exit Rate 49 1 28 155 3 10 51 804 94 103 796 70 Input Volume 52 1 27 163 3 14 51 783 90 108 819 70 % of Volume 94 100 104 95 100 71 100 103 104 95 97 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 7 1 1 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 6.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.7 Stop Delay (hr) 4.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 7.1 Total Stops 957 Stop/Veh 0.44 Travel Dist (mi) 296.8 Travel Time (hr) 15.3 Avg Speed (mph) 20 Fuel Used (gal) 11.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.0 HC Emissions (g) 129 CO Emissions (g) 5588 NOx Emissions (g) 454 Vehicles Entered 2174 Vehicles Exited 2164 Hourly Exit Rate 2164 Input Volume 2181 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 575 Occupancy (veh) 15 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7 2.2 0.1 1.2 2.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 27.2 29.6 6.3 25.1 28.3 5.5 30.9 10.2 3.1 31.8 9.8 6.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7 1.4 0.1 1.1 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 25.3 27.1 5.7 23.3 25.3 5.7 27.4 6.2 2.6 27.5 5.3 3.4 Total Stops 60 22 63 51 21 96 77 302 36 121 266 31 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.88 0.85 0.84 0.81 0.88 0.90 0.38 0.41 0.86 0.35 0.37 Travel Dist (mi) 8.8 3.2 9.6 3.9 1.7 7.0 30.6 284.3 31.6 27.6 149.9 16.5 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 1.6 9.5 1.0 2.1 6.1 0.7 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 7 6 14 19 30 33 13 25 24 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.9 7.8 0.8 1.2 5.9 0.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.2 24.2 34.0 21.1 21.5 43.7 33.1 36.4 39.1 22.4 25.5 26.7 HC Emissions (g) 1 1 2 1 0 1 11 81 13 12 76 8 CO Emissions (g) 32 28 49 21 7 25 270 2404 342 568 3361 359 NOx Emissions (g) 4 4 7 2 1 3 37 323 47 42 265 26 Vehicles Entered 68 24 74 61 26 109 84 776 87 140 757 83 Vehicles Exited 67 24 74 61 26 108 84 781 86 140 762 84 Hourly Exit Rate 67 24 74 61 26 108 84 781 86 140 762 84 Input Volume 66 25 79 65 24 99 87 758 90 131 789 89 % of Volume 102 96 94 94 108 109 97 103 96 107 97 94 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 9 1 2 6 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 8.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.7 Stop Delay (hr) 5.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.2 Total Stops 1146 Stop/Veh 0.49 Travel Dist (mi) 574.6 Travel Time (hr) 24.0 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 18.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.1 HC Emissions (g) 206 CO Emissions (g) 7466 NOx Emissions (g) 761 Vehicles Entered 2289 Vehicles Exited 2297 Hourly Exit Rate 2297 Input Volume 2302 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 693 Occupancy (veh) 24 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 22.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.5 Stop Delay (hr) 13.8 Stop Del/Veh (s) 16.6 Total Stops 3018 Stop/Veh 1.01 Travel Dist (mi) 2407.2 Travel Time (hr) 93.0 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 83.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.9 HC Emissions (g) 936 CO Emissions (g) 34976 NOx Emissions (g) 3472 Vehicles Entered 2906 Vehicles Exited 2903 Hourly Exit Rate 2903 Input Volume 14595 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 533 Occupancy (veh) 92 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 30 43 108 24 63 54 126 136 152 76 107 109 Average Queue (ft) 3 8 43 5 23 12 55 68 74 27 54 44 95th Queue (ft) 16 31 89 20 48 38 105 123 133 58 97 97 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 70 68 Average Queue (ft) 22 15 95th Queue (ft) 56 45 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 66 56 Average Queue (ft) 36 14 95th Queue (ft) 59 43 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 94 Average Queue (ft) 22 95th Queue (ft) 57 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 84 52 130 66 76 140 148 182 133 110 108 100 Average Queue (ft) 31 18 69 12 35 57 65 84 58 54 50 47 95th Queue (ft) 67 46 112 51 68 115 130 154 102 94 91 88 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 85 70 72 71 56 78 121 142 112 126 66 158 Average Queue (ft) 43 20 33 31 14 27 52 76 54 55 18 75 95th Queue (ft) 76 57 62 62 41 55 96 123 100 107 44 133 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 107 126 146 Average Queue (ft) 49 63 64 95th Queue (ft) 93 108 119 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 4372 4304 4267 4251 4377 4316 Vehs Exited 4331 4285 4266 4257 4369 4302 Starting Vehs 140 136 142 147 142 139 Ending Vehs 181 155 143 141 150 152 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 2 1 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 1 2 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3549 3520 3479 3486 3580 3523 Travel Time (hr) 148.5 149.4 145.3 147.0 152.0 148.4 Total Delay (hr) 45.4 47.2 44.3 45.8 47.5 46.0 Total Stops 5066 5187 4935 5057 5202 5089 Fuel Used (gal) 128.5 129.4 126.7 127.2 130.5 128.4 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 4372 4304 4267 4251 4377 4316 Vehs Exited 4331 4285 4266 4257 4369 4302 Starting Vehs 140 136 142 147 142 139 Ending Vehs 181 155 143 141 150 152 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 2 1 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 1 2 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3549 3520 3479 3486 3580 3523 Travel Time (hr) 148.5 149.4 145.3 147.0 152.0 148.4 Total Delay (hr) 45.4 47.2 44.3 45.8 47.5 46.0 Total Stops 5066 5187 4935 5057 5202 5089 Fuel Used (gal) 128.5 129.4 126.7 127.2 130.5 128.4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.7 0.1 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.3 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 4.4 0.2 1.4 1.8 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 18.9 16.8 7.4 25.1 22.3 10.2 37.0 11.9 5.1 27.7 5.9 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 2.7 0.1 1.2 0.7 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 17.1 14.7 6.9 22.3 19.4 9.1 34.4 7.3 3.5 23.4 2.3 0.6 Total Stops 9 10 10 138 9 139 7 586 72 160 256 1 Stop/Veh 0.69 0.62 0.77 0.85 0.75 0.76 1.00 0.44 0.53 0.86 0.24 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 1.9 2.4 2.0 33.5 2.5 38.5 0.6 108.0 11.3 50.9 298.5 1.0 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.6 0.2 2.3 0.1 7.2 0.6 3.0 9.4 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 13 14 17 13 14 18 6 15 18 18 32 34 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 3.7 0.3 1.6 8.4 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.8 28.7 31.8 25.9 29.3 30.1 22.0 29.5 37.8 31.1 35.5 39.6 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 32 3 15 100 0 CO Emissions (g) 8 10 7 233 10 237 4 1151 135 483 3174 5 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 30 1 31 0 114 9 54 379 1 Vehicles Entered 13 16 13 159 12 182 7 1329 136 184 1079 4 Vehicles Exited 13 16 12 159 12 182 7 1330 136 184 1079 4 Hourly Exit Rate 13 16 12 159 12 182 7 1330 136 184 1079 4 Input Volume 14 14 11 154 15 186 11 1347 133 184 1078 4 % of Volume 93 114 109 103 80 98 64 99 102 100 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 7 1 3 9 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 9.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.2 Stop Delay (hr) 6.5 Stop Del/Veh (s) 7.4 Total Stops 1397 Stop/Veh 0.44 Travel Dist (mi) 551.1 Travel Time (hr) 25.9 Avg Speed (mph) 22 Fuel Used (gal) 16.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.6 HC Emissions (g) 170 CO Emissions (g) 5459 NOx Emissions (g) 621 Vehicles Entered 3134 Vehicles Exited 3134 Hourly Exit Rate 3134 Input Volume 3151 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 504 Occupancy (veh) 25 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 1.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.2 8.5 0.6 1.7 1.1 1.4 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.6 6.9 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 Total Stops 63 46 2 1 1 113 Stop/Veh 0.98 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 17.0 2.7 59.1 107.1 1.9 187.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.3 2.0 3.5 0.1 6.6 Avg Speed (mph) 20 9 30 31 23 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 2.2 5.6 0.1 8.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.0 26.7 27.2 19.1 29.4 22.2 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 32 82 0 117 CO Emissions (g) 72 15 1235 3964 30 5316 NOx Emissions (g) 10 2 110 288 2 412 Vehicles Entered 64 67 1473 1229 22 2855 Vehicles Exited 63 67 1474 1229 22 2855 Hourly Exit Rate 63 67 1474 1229 22 2855 Input Volume 63 72 1493 1222 22 2872 % of Volume 100 93 99 101 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 541 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 1.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.8 3.0 3.0 0.4 2.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 Total Stops 85 1 0 0 86 Stop/Veh 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Travel Dist (mi) 12.8 105.7 11.2 52.0 181.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 4.0 0.6 1.5 7.0 Avg Speed (mph) 14 27 19 34 26 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 6.8 0.5 1.5 9.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.6 15.5 20.9 34.6 19.6 HC Emissions (g) 4 98 6 22 129 CO Emissions (g) 127 4816 240 744 5927 NOx Emissions (g) 12 360 23 74 470 Vehicles Entered 191 1358 144 1291 2984 Vehicles Exited 190 1353 144 1291 2978 Hourly Exit Rate 190 1353 144 1291 2978 Input Volume 194 1375 146 1285 3000 % of Volume 98 98 99 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 366 Occupancy (veh) 1 4 1 2 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.6 0.6 0.3 3.7 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.2 0.3 7.2 0.9 1.6 1.9 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 24.3 32.4 5.9 25.0 23.3 9.0 38.1 19.0 19.5 29.0 6.9 4.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 3.6 0.5 1.4 1.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 22.3 30.0 5.2 22.3 20.1 7.7 32.2 9.6 10.6 25.7 3.7 2.7 Total Stops 67 1 36 175 11 55 29 695 104 166 313 33 Stop/Veh 0.83 1.00 0.77 0.84 0.73 0.71 0.97 0.51 0.64 0.86 0.31 0.37 Travel Dist (mi) 12.7 0.2 7.3 26.7 1.9 9.9 5.9 268.0 32.1 14.4 76.6 6.7 Travel Time (hr) 1.2 0.0 0.4 2.8 0.2 0.6 0.5 14.2 1.9 2.1 3.9 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 12 11 19 10 11 16 12 19 17 7 20 18 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 11.8 1.3 0.7 2.5 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.8 24.7 33.1 21.6 25.5 31.0 20.0 22.7 24.3 20.7 31.1 49.4 HC Emissions (g) 2 0 2 6 0 3 4 141 15 4 27 2 CO Emissions (g) 74 1 43 219 11 71 150 6208 611 145 1011 43 NOx Emissions (g) 9 0 6 24 1 9 13 505 52 12 95 4 Vehicles Entered 80 1 46 207 15 77 29 1352 162 191 1011 89 Vehicles Exited 80 1 47 206 15 77 30 1345 161 192 1012 89 Hourly Exit Rate 80 1 47 206 15 77 30 1345 161 192 1012 89 Input Volume 80 2 48 208 14 80 31 1361 158 195 997 93 % of Volume 100 50 98 99 107 96 97 99 102 98 102 96 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 3 0 1 0 14 2 2 4 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.3 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 14.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 15.7 Stop Delay (hr) 9.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.8 Total Stops 1685 Stop/Veh 0.51 Travel Dist (mi) 462.5 Travel Time (hr) 28.1 Avg Speed (mph) 17 Fuel Used (gal) 19.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.3 HC Emissions (g) 205 CO Emissions (g) 8585 NOx Emissions (g) 729 Vehicles Entered 3260 Vehicles Exited 3255 Hourly Exit Rate 3255 Input Volume 3267 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 312 Occupancy (veh) 28 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.9 5.8 0.1 1.9 3.5 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 31.6 37.1 8.0 30.6 32.3 9.5 35.2 15.6 3.4 35.1 12.4 8.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.6 1.9 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 29.4 34.7 7.2 28.3 29.2 9.6 30.9 9.5 3.1 29.8 6.9 5.3 Total Stops 83 17 108 84 42 126 78 640 29 166 405 30 Stop/Veh 0.89 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.48 0.51 0.87 0.40 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 11.9 2.5 16.1 6.2 3.1 9.3 31.0 477.2 20.4 37.4 200.0 12.3 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.3 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.8 1.7 17.9 0.6 3.0 8.8 0.6 Avg Speed (mph) 9 8 16 6 6 11 18 27 32 12 23 22 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.0 13.3 0.5 1.7 8.3 0.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 22.8 22.7 32.4 17.9 19.6 37.1 32.6 36.0 37.8 21.4 24.2 26.5 HC Emissions (g) 2 0 5 1 0 1 10 145 9 18 107 7 CO Emissions (g) 62 9 107 41 16 29 272 4162 230 821 4718 298 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 16 4 1 3 36 553 31 61 371 23 Vehicles Entered 92 20 124 97 48 143 85 1305 56 190 1013 62 Vehicles Exited 92 19 124 98 47 143 86 1309 56 191 1010 62 Hourly Exit Rate 92 19 124 98 47 143 86 1309 56 191 1010 62 Input Volume 96 23 128 99 50 151 89 1303 53 180 1013 61 % of Volume 96 83 97 99 94 95 97 100 106 106 100 102 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 18 1 3 9 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 16.7 Stop Delay (hr) 10.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 11.8 Total Stops 1808 Stop/Veh 0.55 Travel Dist (mi) 827.4 Travel Time (hr) 37.7 Avg Speed (mph) 22 Fuel Used (gal) 27.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.5 HC Emissions (g) 306 CO Emissions (g) 10764 NOx Emissions (g) 1108 Vehicles Entered 3235 Vehicles Exited 3237 Hourly Exit Rate 3237 Input Volume 3246 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 441 Occupancy (veh) 38 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.9 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 45.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 36.5 Stop Delay (hr) 27.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 21.8 Total Stops 5089 Stop/Veh 1.14 Travel Dist (mi) 3522.9 Travel Time (hr) 148.4 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 128.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.4 HC Emissions (g) 1478 CO Emissions (g) 55270 NOx Emissions (g) 5418 Vehicles Entered 4316 Vehicles Exited 4302 Hourly Exit Rate 4302 Input Volume 21360 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 334 Occupancy (veh) 148 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 45 53 145 133 125 38 200 220 214 97 167 153 Average Queue (ft) 9 18 75 11 51 6 98 117 126 38 86 71 95th Queue (ft) 34 46 131 63 95 27 176 199 200 77 145 128 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 2 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 4 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 126 85 Average Queue (ft) 40 27 95th Queue (ft) 90 62 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 63 88 22 Average Queue (ft) 32 28 1 95th Queue (ft) 57 62 11 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB NB NB Directions Served R T T Maximum Queue (ft) 116 5 13 Average Queue (ft) 41 0 0 95th Queue (ft) 83 3 7 Link Distance (ft) 344 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 112 75 141 184 73 225 256 322 199 135 138 143 Average Queue (ft) 49 25 94 49 25 112 134 176 96 63 71 65 95th Queue (ft) 97 56 145 120 59 206 233 282 162 114 126 120 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 5 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 5 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 110 66 92 99 109 103 114 222 203 210 53 240 Average Queue (ft) 55 17 45 52 30 40 56 127 119 122 15 108 95th Queue (ft) 93 50 79 94 75 78 97 193 190 204 40 190 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 3 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0 2 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 148 173 191 Average Queue (ft) 68 90 99 95th Queue (ft) 126 156 171 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 13 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2950 3071 3056 3027 3046 3028 Vehs Exited 2924 3053 3040 3054 3048 3025 Starting Vehs 94 88 82 107 96 86 Ending Vehs 120 106 98 80 94 98 Denied Entry Before 0 1 1 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 2 0 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2450 2527 2540 2520 2522 2512 Travel Time (hr) 95.2 98.4 97.8 96.7 97.7 97.2 Total Delay (hr) 23.5 24.6 24.0 23.2 23.6 23.8 Total Stops 3134 3233 3192 3126 3125 3163 Fuel Used (gal) 85.3 88.6 87.6 87.2 87.2 87.2 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2950 3071 3056 3027 3046 3028 Vehs Exited 2924 3053 3040 3054 3048 3025 Starting Vehs 94 88 82 107 96 86 Ending Vehs 120 106 98 80 94 98 Denied Entry Before 0 1 1 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 2 0 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2450 2527 2540 2520 2522 2512 Travel Time (hr) 95.2 98.4 97.8 96.7 97.7 97.2 Total Delay (hr) 23.5 24.6 24.0 23.2 23.6 23.8 Total Stops 3134 3233 3192 3126 3125 3163 Fuel Used (gal) 85.3 88.6 87.6 87.2 87.2 87.2 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.2 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.3 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.9 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 17.9 32.4 4.9 25.9 22.1 6.2 26.0 8.5 3.6 27.1 3.8 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 16.6 30.4 4.5 23.8 19.8 5.8 24.2 5.5 2.7 24.1 1.4 0.9 Total Stops 4 7 1 65 6 71 15 319 52 97 140 1 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.90 0.86 0.84 0.94 0.40 0.49 0.87 0.16 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 0.6 1.2 0.2 15.0 1.5 17.9 1.3 67.1 8.8 30.5 240.2 0.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.1 1.0 0.2 3.6 0.5 1.8 7.0 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 13 10 19 13 15 19 8 19 19 18 34 35 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 2.1 0.2 1.0 6.6 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.6 24.9 38.9 26.7 29.2 32.2 25.2 31.9 41.9 31.9 36.3 44.6 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 20 3 9 75 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 4 0 100 6 111 11 769 114 280 2289 3 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 13 1 15 1 73 9 32 299 0 Vehicles Entered 4 7 1 72 7 85 16 805 106 110 867 2 Vehicles Exited 4 8 1 71 7 85 16 802 105 110 865 2 Hourly Exit Rate 4 8 1 71 7 85 16 802 105 110 865 2 Input Volume 4 8 1 77 7 82 16 803 102 113 866 5 % of Volume 100 100 100 92 100 104 100 100 103 97 100 40 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 2 7 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 4.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 8.1 Stop Delay (hr) 3.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.6 Total Stops 778 Stop/Veh 0.37 Travel Dist (mi) 384.9 Travel Time (hr) 15.5 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 11.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.4 HC Emissions (g) 116 CO Emissions (g) 3688 NOx Emissions (g) 442 Vehicles Entered 2082 Vehicles Exited 2076 Hourly Exit Rate 2076 Input Volume 2084 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 841 Occupancy (veh) 15 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.5 5.6 0.3 1.2 1.0 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.7 4.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 Total Stops 106 16 0 0 0 122 Stop/Veh 0.99 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 28.3 1.2 37.0 80.3 1.3 148.2 Travel Time (hr) 1.4 0.1 1.2 2.4 0.1 5.1 Avg Speed (mph) 21 11 31 33 24 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.8 0.0 1.5 3.5 0.0 5.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.4 28.2 25.2 22.9 35.5 25.2 HC Emissions (g) 5 0 21 51 0 77 CO Emissions (g) 118 12 808 2232 16 3187 NOx Emissions (g) 16 2 77 181 1 276 Vehicles Entered 106 29 925 922 15 1997 Vehicles Exited 106 29 927 924 15 2001 Hourly Exit Rate 106 29 927 924 15 2001 Input Volume 103 31 921 930 15 2000 % of Volume 103 94 101 99 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 701 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 2.8 2.1 2.2 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 45 0 0 0 45 Stop/Veh 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 Travel Dist (mi) 10.3 62.6 7.1 41.4 121.4 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 2.1 0.3 1.3 4.3 Avg Speed (mph) 17 29 20 33 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 3.8 0.3 1.4 5.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.0 16.7 23.7 29.9 21.1 HC Emissions (g) 3 53 4 19 80 CO Emissions (g) 99 2743 167 703 3711 NOx Emissions (g) 10 191 16 67 284 Vehicles Entered 153 799 91 1030 2073 Vehicles Exited 154 801 91 1032 2078 Hourly Exit Rate 154 801 91 1032 2078 Input Volume 157 796 87 1033 2073 % of Volume 98 101 105 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 588 Occupancy (veh) 1 2 0 1 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.4 0.2 3.9 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.7 0.2 0.7 1.5 0.1 7.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 21.3 4.4 20.3 17.1 5.7 29.8 11.6 8.9 23.7 6.2 3.4 10.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.3 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.1 4.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 19.5 3.8 18.1 14.8 4.8 25.6 5.8 4.7 21.3 3.6 2.6 7.2 Total Stops 46 24 137 2 10 50 331 46 92 249 28 1015 Stop/Veh 0.79 0.73 0.81 0.67 0.71 0.93 0.40 0.47 0.88 0.29 0.38 0.44 Travel Dist (mi) 9.1 5.1 21.4 0.4 1.8 10.6 163.1 19.4 7.8 64.7 5.6 309.0 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.3 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 7.0 0.9 1.0 3.1 0.3 16.2 Avg Speed (mph) 13 19 12 12 18 14 23 22 8 21 19 19 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.5 6.8 0.8 0.3 2.0 0.1 12.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.8 34.5 23.2 27.1 33.3 22.3 24.0 25.8 24.5 31.7 49.9 25.8 HC Emissions (g) 1 1 4 0 0 4 89 13 2 23 1 138 CO Emissions (g) 45 25 146 1 7 204 3996 497 71 876 30 5900 NOx Emissions (g) 5 3 17 0 1 14 311 42 5 82 2 483 Vehicles Entered 57 32 167 3 14 53 825 98 104 855 74 2282 Vehicles Exited 57 33 167 3 14 53 817 98 103 852 74 2271 Hourly Exit Rate 57 33 167 3 14 53 817 98 103 852 74 2271 Input Volume 54 29 164 3 15 53 813 92 109 852 73 2257 % of Volume 106 114 102 100 93 100 100 107 94 100 101 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 542 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 0 0 1 7 1 1 3 0 16 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7 2.4 0.1 1.2 2.2 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.3 31.7 5.7 24.9 29.8 6.0 29.9 10.8 3.1 29.4 9.8 6.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.5 0.1 1.0 1.2 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.4 29.4 5.0 23.0 26.8 6.2 26.2 6.6 2.6 25.0 5.2 3.8 Total Stops 59 26 68 53 17 102 79 324 42 123 271 39 Stop/Veh 0.86 0.90 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.89 0.40 0.46 0.86 0.33 0.40 Travel Dist (mi) 8.9 3.7 10.4 3.9 1.3 7.3 32.2 288.8 33.3 27.8 161.3 19.1 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.5 1.7 9.7 1.0 2.0 6.5 0.8 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 7 6 14 20 30 33 14 25 24 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.0 7.9 0.9 1.2 6.4 0.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 24.4 34.2 21.4 21.9 42.9 33.2 36.5 38.7 22.7 25.3 27.3 HC Emissions (g) 1 1 1 1 0 1 11 94 11 15 82 7 CO Emissions (g) 38 19 34 24 6 21 297 2643 328 629 3622 379 NOx Emissions (g) 5 2 5 3 0 2 41 360 42 48 289 26 Vehicles Entered 68 28 80 61 20 113 88 788 91 141 814 96 Vehicles Exited 68 29 80 62 20 113 88 794 91 139 816 96 Hourly Exit Rate 68 29 80 62 20 113 88 794 91 139 816 96 Input Volume 68 26 82 68 25 103 91 786 94 135 817 92 % of Volume 100 112 98 91 80 110 97 101 97 103 100 104 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 10 1 2 7 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 8.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.6 Stop Delay (hr) 6.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.0 Total Stops 1203 Stop/Veh 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 598.0 Travel Time (hr) 25.0 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 19.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.0 HC Emissions (g) 225 CO Emissions (g) 8040 NOx Emissions (g) 823 Vehicles Entered 2388 Vehicles Exited 2396 Hourly Exit Rate 2396 Input Volume 2387 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 667 Occupancy (veh) 25 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.6 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 23.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.7 Stop Delay (hr) 14.4 Stop Del/Veh (s) 16.6 Total Stops 3163 Stop/Veh 1.01 Travel Dist (mi) 2511.8 Travel Time (hr) 97.2 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 87.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.8 HC Emissions (g) 1011 CO Emissions (g) 37266 NOx Emissions (g) 3719 Vehicles Entered 3028 Vehicles Exited 3025 Hourly Exit Rate 3025 Input Volume 15120 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 510 Occupancy (veh) 97 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 34 44 86 33 71 51 118 133 149 88 133 105 Average Queue (ft) 3 8 40 5 26 14 54 66 73 32 55 45 95th Queue (ft) 19 31 77 21 53 41 103 121 126 67 103 93 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 79 66 Average Queue (ft) 23 16 95th Queue (ft) 59 47 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 79 55 Average Queue (ft) 41 15 95th Queue (ft) 68 45 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 70 Average Queue (ft) 22 95th Queue (ft) 50 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 84 43 138 104 84 126 145 205 120 108 110 118 Average Queue (ft) 35 17 73 12 37 57 67 89 56 54 53 53 95th Queue (ft) 74 43 121 55 75 113 128 167 100 93 96 104 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 98 74 69 83 44 73 109 139 136 141 51 161 Average Queue (ft) 42 24 34 33 11 27 55 75 58 61 19 76 95th Queue (ft) 82 58 60 68 33 54 96 121 110 111 43 135 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 0 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 120 144 164 Average Queue (ft) 46 65 70 95th Queue (ft) 97 122 135 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 4576 4478 4462 4405 4435 4471 Vehs Exited 4547 4476 4452 4371 4397 4448 Starting Vehs 135 147 133 128 128 132 Ending Vehs 164 149 143 162 166 155 Denied Entry Before 0 0 2 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 1 2 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3740 3675 3666 3557 3602 3648 Travel Time (hr) 160.5 156.0 156.5 153.5 152.0 155.7 Total Delay (hr) 51.7 49.3 50.0 49.3 47.0 49.5 Total Stops 5457 5354 5436 5371 5256 5371 Fuel Used (gal) 137.8 135.0 134.5 130.6 130.8 133.7 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 4576 4478 4462 4405 4435 4471 Vehs Exited 4547 4476 4452 4371 4397 4448 Starting Vehs 135 147 133 128 128 132 Ending Vehs 164 149 143 162 166 155 Denied Entry Before 0 0 2 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 1 2 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3740 3675 3666 3557 3602 3648 Travel Time (hr) 160.5 156.0 156.5 153.5 152.0 155.7 Total Delay (hr) 51.7 49.3 50.0 49.3 47.0 49.5 Total Stops 5457 5354 5436 5371 5256 5371 Fuel Used (gal) 137.8 135.0 134.5 130.6 130.8 133.7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.5 0.2 0.1 2.7 0.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.3 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 4.9 0.2 1.5 2.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 18.1 18.2 6.1 23.8 20.8 9.6 29.7 12.9 5.1 28.6 6.5 3.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.1 3.0 0.1 1.3 0.8 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 16.3 16.2 5.7 21.0 18.0 8.6 26.9 7.8 3.4 24.1 2.6 1.6 Total Stops 12 11 11 134 13 134 11 653 69 163 291 1 Stop/Veh 0.75 0.69 0.79 0.83 0.76 0.73 0.92 0.47 0.50 0.87 0.26 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 2.4 2.5 2.1 33.5 3.6 38.8 0.9 111.3 11.5 51.3 310.3 1.1 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.6 0.2 2.3 0.1 7.8 0.7 3.0 10.0 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 13 14 18 14 15 18 7 14 18 17 31 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 3.8 0.3 1.6 8.7 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.6 27.7 33.2 26.2 28.2 30.4 21.4 29.2 36.2 31.1 35.5 39.0 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 0 8 0 31 4 16 102 0 CO Emissions (g) 9 9 6 202 14 218 10 1089 149 492 3239 5 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 25 1 28 1 111 11 56 386 1 Vehicles Entered 16 16 13 158 17 183 11 1376 139 185 1120 4 Vehicles Exited 15 16 14 159 17 182 11 1365 139 186 1119 4 Hourly Exit Rate 15 16 14 159 17 182 11 1365 139 186 1119 4 Input Volume 15 15 12 160 16 193 12 1398 138 191 1118 4 % of Volume 100 107 117 99 106 94 92 98 101 97 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 8 1 3 10 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 10.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.7 Stop Delay (hr) 6.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 7.6 Total Stops 1503 Stop/Veh 0.46 Travel Dist (mi) 569.1 Travel Time (hr) 27.2 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 17.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.5 HC Emissions (g) 168 CO Emissions (g) 5443 NOx Emissions (g) 623 Vehicles Entered 3238 Vehicles Exited 3227 Hourly Exit Rate 3227 Input Volume 3272 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 480 Occupancy (veh) 27 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.0 1.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.2 10.2 0.6 1.8 1.2 1.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.6 8.6 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Total Stops 74 54 1 0 0 129 Stop/Veh 0.99 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 19.9 2.8 61.3 110.5 2.2 196.8 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.3 2.1 3.7 0.1 7.1 Avg Speed (mph) 20 9 30 30 23 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.1 2.2 5.9 0.1 8.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.7 25.7 27.6 18.7 27.9 22.1 HC Emissions (g) 3 1 32 87 1 123 CO Emissions (g) 83 28 1246 4166 36 5558 NOx Emissions (g) 12 3 111 305 3 434 Vehicles Entered 75 70 1530 1266 26 2967 Vehicles Exited 74 70 1526 1267 25 2962 Hourly Exit Rate 74 70 1526 1267 25 2962 Input Volume 65 75 1548 1267 23 2978 % of Volume 114 93 99 100 109 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 505 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 4 0 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 1.2 0.1 0.1 1.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.7 3.1 3.1 0.4 2.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 Total Stops 92 1 0 0 93 Stop/Veh 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Travel Dist (mi) 13.1 110.1 11.5 54.0 188.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 4.2 0.6 1.6 7.3 Avg Speed (mph) 14 26 19 34 26 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 7.2 0.5 1.6 9.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 29.7 15.4 21.1 33.1 19.3 HC Emissions (g) 5 93 7 23 128 CO Emissions (g) 156 4763 264 820 6004 NOx Emissions (g) 15 356 28 78 477 Vehicles Entered 196 1411 147 1340 3094 Vehicles Exited 195 1410 147 1339 3091 Hourly Exit Rate 195 1410 147 1339 3091 Input Volume 197 1431 150 1332 3110 % of Volume 99 99 98 101 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) 349 Occupancy (veh) 1 4 1 2 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.5 0.3 0.3 3.6 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2 0.3 7.9 0.9 1.7 2.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 27.1 14.0 6.3 27.0 22.2 10.7 37.8 20.3 20.1 31.9 6.8 3.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 4.0 0.5 1.6 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 25.1 12.6 5.6 24.1 19.3 9.3 31.6 10.3 11.0 28.6 3.7 2.5 Total Stops 69 1 40 170 13 61 30 745 107 175 311 33 Stop/Veh 0.83 0.50 0.75 0.80 0.76 0.75 0.94 0.53 0.65 0.89 0.30 0.35 Travel Dist (mi) 13.1 0.3 8.3 27.0 2.2 10.3 6.3 276.1 32.5 14.7 79.4 7.0 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.0 0.5 2.9 0.2 0.7 0.5 15.2 2.0 2.3 4.0 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 11 14 18 10 11 15 12 18 16 6 20 19 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.0 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.4 0.3 12.3 1.3 0.7 2.6 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.8 25.7 33.0 21.0 24.6 29.1 19.4 22.4 24.1 19.7 30.7 51.0 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 2 7 0 3 3 138 15 4 28 1 CO Emissions (g) 94 1 43 234 14 86 143 6165 622 154 1054 31 NOx Emissions (g) 11 0 6 26 1 10 11 506 53 12 99 3 Vehicles Entered 83 2 53 210 17 81 32 1387 163 195 1051 93 Vehicles Exited 82 2 52 208 17 80 31 1396 164 194 1051 93 Hourly Exit Rate 82 2 52 208 17 80 31 1396 164 194 1051 93 Input Volume 84 2 50 212 15 83 32 1414 162 198 1037 96 % of Volume 98 100 104 98 113 96 97 99 101 98 101 97 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 15 2 2 4 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.3 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Delay (hr) 15.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 16.6 Stop Delay (hr) 9.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.5 Total Stops 1755 Stop/Veh 0.52 Travel Dist (mi) 477.3 Travel Time (hr) 29.9 Avg Speed (mph) 16 Fuel Used (gal) 20.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.9 HC Emissions (g) 205 CO Emissions (g) 8641 NOx Emissions (g) 739 Vehicles Entered 3367 Vehicles Exited 3370 Hourly Exit Rate 3370 Input Volume 3385 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 293 Occupancy (veh) 30 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.8 6.2 0.1 1.8 3.9 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.9 32.0 8.6 26.7 32.2 10.4 34.1 16.6 3.4 34.4 13.2 10.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7 3.8 0.0 1.5 2.2 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.7 29.6 7.6 24.4 28.9 10.4 29.6 10.2 3.0 29.3 7.4 6.3 Total Stops 81 21 114 82 43 135 78 681 27 161 440 28 Stop/Veh 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.80 0.84 0.84 0.89 0.50 0.49 0.85 0.41 0.47 Travel Dist (mi) 12.2 3.1 17.5 6.4 3.2 10.4 31.5 488.5 19.8 36.9 211.3 11.7 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.3 1.1 1.0 0.6 1.0 1.7 18.6 0.6 2.9 9.5 0.6 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 16 6 6 11 19 26 33 13 22 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 1.0 13.5 0.5 1.7 8.6 0.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.4 24.6 31.8 19.2 19.6 35.7 32.9 36.2 38.1 21.6 24.5 25.5 HC Emissions (g) 2 0 5 1 1 1 10 134 8 16 113 5 CO Emissions (g) 64 11 114 37 20 35 256 3938 214 792 4837 254 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 17 4 2 4 35 522 28 57 391 18 Vehicles Entered 93 24 135 101 50 160 87 1336 54 187 1065 59 Vehicles Exited 94 24 134 102 51 160 87 1329 55 188 1065 59 Hourly Exit Rate 94 24 134 102 51 160 87 1329 55 188 1065 59 Input Volume 99 24 133 103 52 156 93 1353 55 186 1051 62 % of Volume 95 100 101 99 98 103 94 98 100 101 101 95 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 19 1 3 10 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 16.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 17.0 Stop Delay (hr) 11.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 11.9 Total Stops 1891 Stop/Veh 0.56 Travel Dist (mi) 852.5 Travel Time (hr) 39.3 Avg Speed (mph) 22 Fuel Used (gal) 27.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.7 HC Emissions (g) 296 CO Emissions (g) 10573 NOx Emissions (g) 1085 Vehicles Entered 3351 Vehicles Exited 3348 Hourly Exit Rate 3348 Input Volume 3367 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 423 Occupancy (veh) 39 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.9 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 48.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 38.0 Stop Delay (hr) 28.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 22.6 Total Stops 5371 Stop/Veh 1.17 Travel Dist (mi) 3647.9 Travel Time (hr) 155.7 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 133.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.3 HC Emissions (g) 1484 CO Emissions (g) 56115 NOx Emissions (g) 5494 Vehicles Entered 4471 Vehicles Exited 4448 Hourly Exit Rate 4448 Input Volume 22146 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 318 Occupancy (veh) 155 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 44 53 142 75 119 69 221 221 244 95 169 158 Average Queue (ft) 12 18 76 12 50 11 110 128 141 37 82 77 95th Queue (ft) 38 46 126 52 96 45 202 214 229 73 142 134 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 121 71 Average Queue (ft) 46 28 95th Queue (ft) 93 60 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 66 97 4 Average Queue (ft) 34 36 0 95th Queue (ft) 59 74 3 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB NB NB NB Directions Served R T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 102 11 9 4 Average Queue (ft) 41 0 0 0 95th Queue (ft) 80 8 5 3 Link Distance (ft) 344 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 104 76 144 214 76 250 273 338 187 149 142 136 Average Queue (ft) 50 29 94 58 25 122 145 192 104 63 69 67 95th Queue (ft) 89 60 147 141 59 221 249 307 167 116 122 122 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 6 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/14/2024 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 115 131 104 100 119 111 113 207 220 237 49 197 Average Queue (ft) 55 24 47 51 32 45 55 130 127 132 14 102 95th Queue (ft) 99 78 79 93 81 90 97 185 198 213 37 171 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 4 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 4 0 2 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 155 170 198 Average Queue (ft) 76 97 101 95th Queue (ft) 140 161 179 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 15 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FORMER MACY’S SITE City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota May 30, 2023 Comment period: June 6 – July 6, 2023 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 December 2022 version Environmental Assessment Worksheet This most recent Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form and guidance documents are available at the Environmental Quality Board’s website at: https://www.eqb.state.mn.us/ The EAW form provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. Guidance documents provide additional detail and links to resources for completing the EAW form. Cumulative potential effects can either be addressed under each applicable EAW Item or can be addressed collectively under EAW Item 21. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title: Former Macy’s Site 2. Proposer: Enclave 3. RGU: City of Edina Contact person: Patrick Brama Contact person: Cary Teague Title: Developer Title: Community Development Director Address: 1660S Hwy 100, Suite 530 Address: 4801 W 50th Street City, State, ZIP: Saint Louis Park, MN 55416 City, State, ZIP: Edina, MN 55424 Phone: 651-461-9977 Phone: (952) 826-0460 Fax: Fax: (952) 826-0389 Email: Patrick.Brama@enclavecompanies.com Email: cteague@EdinaMN.gov 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one) Required: Discretionary: EIS Scoping Citizen petition X Mandatory EAW RGU discretion Proposer initiated If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s): Mixed Residential and Industrial-Commercial Projects: MR 4410.4300, Subp 32 5. Project Location: a) County: Hennepin County b) City/Township: Edina c) PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): SW, NW, S: 32, T: 28N, R: 24W d) Watershed (81 major watershed scale): #20 – Mississippi River e) GPS Coordinates: 44.87148, -93.32730 f) Tax Parcel Number: 320282423004 At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW: g) County map showing the general location of the project; (see Figure 1) h) U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); (see Figure 2) i) Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Pre-construction land cover plan and post-construction site plan. (see Figure 3 and 4) j) List of data sources, models, and other resources (from the Item-by-Item Guidance: Climate Adaptation and Resilience or other) used for information about current Minnesota climate trends and how climate change is anticipated to affect the general location of the project during the life of the project (as detailed below in item 7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience). (see responses to Items 7 and 18) 6. Project Description: a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words). Enclave is proposing the redevelopment of the former Macy’s Furniture Store site into 300,000 square feet of office/mixed use space and 460 multi-family residential units. The site is located on approximately eight acres on the east side of France Avenue north of Gallagher Drive in Edina, MN. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility. Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes, 3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures, and 4) timing and duration of construction activities Enclave (the developer) is proposing the redevelopment of the former Macy’s Furniture Store (project, site) in Edina, MN (Figures 1-3). The project is located the southeast portion of the City of Edina at 7235 France Ave South. The site totals eight acres and is comprised of one parcel (PID# 320282423004). The existing 80,000 square foot building will be demolished. The redevelopment will include four buildings with a total of 300,000 square feet of office/mixed use, 460 multi-family residential units, and parking (Figure 3): • Building A & B: 5-story, 150,000 square foot office building and parking each • Building C & D: 6-story, 230 multi-family residential units and parking each The development will be constructed in two phases beginning in the spring/early summer of 2024 (Phase I commencement) and spring/early summer of 2025 (Phase II commencement). Site preparation will begin in the spring/early summer of 2024 with the demolition of the existing building. Phase I is anticipated to be completed in the spring/early summer of 2026 while Phase II is anticipated to be completed in the summer/early fall of 2027. New utility infrastructure will be included as a part of this project including gas, electric, sanitary sewer, cable/internet, storm sewer, water, stormwater management, sidewalks and trail connections, internal roads and green space. Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: USGS Map Figure 3: Concept Plan Figure 4: Existing Land Cover c. Project magnitude: Description Number Total Project Acreage 8 acres Linear project length NA Number and type of residential units 430 multi-family Residential building area (in square feet) 114,867 sf (footprint) Commercial building area (in square feet) 86,400 sf (footprint) Industrial building area (in square feet) NA Institutional building area (in square feet) NA Other uses – specify (in square feet) Structure height(s) 82-150 feet d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The project will be carried out by a private developer. The project will provide market rate and affordable housing as well as areas of employment. e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? Yes X No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes X No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience: a. Describe the climate trends in the general location of the project (see guidance: Climate Adaptation and Resilience) and how climate change is anticipated to affect that location during the life of the project. According to the MN DNR across the state, "Minnesota's climate already is changing rapidly and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Temperatures are increasing -- especially in winter -- and larger, more frequent extreme precipitation events are occurring. Substantial warming during winter and at night, increased precipitation, and heavier downpours already have affected our natural resources, and how we interact with and use them. The decades ahead will bring even warmer winters and nights, and even larger rainfalls, along with the likelihood of increased summer heat and the potential for longer dry spells."1 Projected climate change impacts to this specific site have been analyzed below, utilizing resources from the guidance document supplied by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Variables in this analysis include precipitation and temperature, storm intensity, floods, and extreme heat. Precipitation and Temperature: According to the Minnesota Climate Explorer mapping tool for Hennepin County, utilizing the mean model, the following Table demonstrates the changes expected on precipitation and temperature in the County. 1 https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/climate_change_info/climate-trends.html Table 12: Estimated future precipitation and temperature changes Recent and Projected Future for Hennepin County: January- December, Mean Model Precipitation: Mean (in) Average temperature: Mean ( ̊F) Maximum Temperature: Mean ( ̊F) Minimum Temperature : Mean ( ̊F) 1980-1999 Modeled Present 31.61 45.28 51.97 38.71 2040-2059 Mid-Century (RCP 4.5) 32.12 48.87 55.82 42.14 2080-2099 Late-Century (RCP 4.5) 32.94 51.27 57.92 44.94 2080-2099 Late- Century (RCP 8.5) 35.7 55.03 61.46 49.13 These models generally predict that the project area will see more precipitation and warmer average, maximum and minimum temperatures. The mid-century (2040-2059) calculation is more relevant to the roadway portions of the project, given the 20-year life of improvement. The late-century (2080-2099) calculation is more relevant to the life of the structures for the project, given the 50-year expected life of the project. Storm Intensity: In the Edina area, according to the EPA’s CREATE: Storms map3, the scenarios demonstrate that by 2035, there will likely be an increase in 100-year storm intensity. With the ‘not as stormy’ scenario, by 2035, there may be a 2.9% increase and by 2060, there will be a 5.6% increase in 100-year storm intensity. In the ‘stormy’ scenario, by 2035, there may be a 13.7% increase and by 2060, a 26.6% increase in 100-year storm intensity. Generally, there is an expected increase in 100-year storm intensity, per the modelling. Floods: Risk Factor: Flood Factor Tool According to the Risk Factor: Flood Factor tool from the nonprofit First Street Foundation®, the city of Edina has a Minor Flood Factor risk overall. “There are 1,484 properties in Edina that have greater than a 26% chance of being severely affected by flooding over the next 30 years. This represents 14% of all properties in Edina.”4 Within the categories, residential and social facilities have moderate risk, commercial and road has minor risk, and critical infrastructure has minimal risk. Metropolitan Council Localized Flood Mapping Per the tool, “the interactive Localized Flood Map Screening Tool is intended for community use. The data is part of the regional Climate Vulnerability Assessment project for the Twin Cities metro area. Communities may use this tool to screen for potential surface or localized flooding locations. The Localized Flood Map Screening Tool was created using the State of Minnesota’s LiDAR elevation data from 2011.” Figure 5 shows the project area with respect to flooding risk associated with climate change. On the northern and western edges of the site, there are areas that have primary flood hazard in dark blue. The western side of the project also includes areas of secondary and tertiary flood hazard in blue and lighter blue. The teal area on the east side of the project indicates a shallow flood hazard.5 2 https://arcgis.dnr.state.mn.us/ewr/climateexplorer/main/historical 3 https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=3805293158d54846a29f750d63c6890e 4 https://riskfactor.com/city/garrison-mn/2723192_fsid/flood#flood_risk_overview 5 https://metrocouncil.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=100fa3012dcc4e288a74cbf4d95027bf Figure 5: Flood Hazards from Climate Vulnerability Screening (Metropolitan Council Localized Flood Map Screening Tool) Extreme Heat EPA CREATE Map In the Edina area, the EPA’s CREATE: Extreme Heat map shows that the number of days over 100°F historically mapped. Where the project area is located, there has been one day in the project area historically over 100°F. By 2035, projections show the project area with three scenarios as follows: • in the Hot/Dry scenario, three days will be over 100°F; • in the central scenario, two days will be over 100°F; • in the warm/wet scenario, two days will be over 100°F.6 By 2060, the modeling of the scenarios show the following: • in the Hot/Dry scenario, eight days will be over 100°F; • in the central scenario, six days will be over 100°F; • in the warm/wet scenario, five days will be over 100°F.7 This indicates that the project area may see more extreme heat days in the future. University of Minnesota Heat Exposure Tool Heat Exposure mapping tools from the University of Minnesota show high composite sensitivity and moderate exposure scores for Hennepin County. These composite scores help to “visualize datasets that contribute to a community’s vulnerability, including sensitivity (i.e., demographic, socio-economic, health, and environmental variables) and exposure (i.e., temperature-related variables). Variables can be mapped individually or layered to develop a composite score.”8 High scores indicate high community vulnerability to extreme heat overall. The project area scores indicate community vulnerability to extreme heat. a. For each Resource Category in the table below: Describe how the project’s proposed activities and how the project’s design will interact with those climate trends. Describe proposed adaptations to address the project effects identified. Table 2: Proposed Activities and Climate Considerations Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate change risks and vulnerabilities Adaptations Project Design Aspects of the building architecture/materials choices and site design that may negatively affect urban heat island conditions in the area considering changing climate zones, temperature trends, and potential for extended heat waves • This site is in an area with risk of the urban heat island effect, increasing temperatures and precipitation, and increase storm intensity. The site is planned to have a buildings and paved parking • The project is proposing underground stormwater storage . The project may consider green infrastructure solutions, such as rain gardens, green roof, vegetation and vegetative buffer strips, tree trenches, cisterns, and other solutions. • The project will follow all applicable federal, state, 6 https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=3805293158d54846a29f750d63c6890e 7 https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=3805293158d54846a29f750d63c6890e 8 https://maps.umn.edu/climatehealthtool/heat_app/ surfaces. and local standards and regulations, as listed throughout this report. Land Use Any critical facilities (i.e. facilities necessary for public health and safety, those storing hazardous materials, or those with housing occupants who may be insufficiently mobile) that are proposed in floodplain areas and other areas identified as at risk for localized flooding; describe the risk potential considering changing precipitation and event intensity • Potential risk of future flooding in the project area due to increasing storm intensity. • The proposed land use is similar to the existing use (commercial) and is proposed to be commercial and residential. • The new land use will include residential and commercial structures that will use energy and create transportation needs. • The project is proposing underground stormwater storage. The project may consider green infrastructure solutions, such as rain gardens, green roof, vegetation and vegetative buffer strips, tree trenches, cisterns, and other solutions. • As practicable, the project will evaluate additional strategies beyond the BMPs described above to improve climate resiliency. • The project will follow all applicable federal, state, and local standards and regulations, as listed throughout this report. • This mixed-use project will utilize energy efficient appliances and fixtures, lighting, and efficient building practices. The apartment buildings will also consider provision of solar power on rooftops and electric vehicle charging stations. The project will also include a public trail connection on the north side of Subject property, connecting France to Centennial Lakes Promenade for non-vehicle trips. Water Resources Addressed in item 12 Contaminatio n/ Hazardous Materials/Wa stes Addressed in item 13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological Addressed in item 14. resources (rare features) 8. Cover types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Cover Types Before (acres) After (acres) Wetlands and shallow lakes (<2 meters deep) 0 0 Deep lakes (>2 meters deep) 0 0 Wooded/forest 0 0 Rivers/streams 0 0 Brush/Grassland 0 0 Cropland 0 0 Livestock rangeland/pastureland 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 1.69 1.1 Green infrastructure TOTAL (from table below*) 0 0.03 Impervious surface 6.28 6.87 Stormwater Pond (wet sedimentation basin) 0 0 Other (describe) 0 0 TOTAL 8 8 Green Infrastructure* Before (acreage) After (acreage) Constructed infiltration systems (infiltration basins/infiltration trenches/ rainwater gardens/bioretention areas without underdrains/swales with impermeable check dams) 0 0 Constructed tree trenches and tree boxes 0 0.03 Constructed wetlands 0 0 Constructed green roofs 0 0 Constructed permeable pavements 0 0 Other (describe) 0 0 TOTAL* 0 0.03 Trees Percent Number Percent tree canopy removed or number of mature trees removed during development There are approximately 25 existing trees onsite Approximately 25 existing trees (100%) will be removed Number of new trees planted Trees will be planted around the site and within the central area. The number of trees to be planted will be determined through the plan review process. 9. Permits and approvals required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals, certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410.3100. Unit of Government Type of Application Status Federal US Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit To be obtained, if needed State Pollution Control Agency NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit To be obtained Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension To be obtained Pollution Control Agency Response Action Plan/ Construction Contingency Plan review To be obtained, if needed Department of Health Watermain Extension Plan Review To be obtained Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation (Construction Dewatering) Permit To be obtained, if needed Local City of Edina Site Plan Review To be obtained City of Edina Right of Way Permit To be obtained City of Edina Demolition Permit To be obtained City of Edina Sewer & Water Connection & Repair Permit To be obtained City of Edina Grading Permit To be obtained City of Edina Conditional Use Permit To be obtained Met Council Sanitary Sewer Extension (Regional Review) To be obtained Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Watershed District Permit To be obtained Hennepin County Approval of France Avenue underpass To be obtained Cumulative potential effects may be considered and addressed in response to individual EAW Item Nos. 10-20, or the RGU can address all cumulative potential effects in response to EAW Item No.22. If addressing cumulative effect under individual items, make sure to include information requested in EAW Item No. 21. 10. Land use: a. Describe: i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks and open space, cemeteries, trails, prime or unique farmlands. Existing land use is a commercial lot containing an 80,000 square foot single story building (former Macy’s Furniture Store) that is surrounded by parking lot. France Avenue South is adjacent to on the western edge of the project site while grocery, mixed use, and retail areas are adjacent to the north and south of the project site. Open space/parkland include the Edina Promenade which is adjacent to the project site to the east, a portion of Centennial Lakes Park which is adjacent on the southeast corner of the project site and Nine Mile Creek Regional trail that runs east/west on the southern edge of the project site (Figure 6). The open space/parkland (Edina Promenade) offers trails that connect nearby Centennial Lakes Park and Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail to residential, retail, and parks in the surrounding area. Figure 6: Parks and Trails ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any other applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional, state, or federal agency. The City of Edina’s 2040 Comprehensive plan describes the site and surrounding area as a “potential change area”. This means the area has the capacity to support new growth in the form of housing and job-generating uses and has infrastructure to support this is change. The area the site is within is known as “The Greater Southdale District.” The guidelines for development in this area calls for more compact buildings, structured parking, and stronger focus on transit supportive densities. This may include some mixed- use elements compatible with residential development such as small-scale retail, services, and institutional uses. iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc. The project site is currently zoned Planned Commercial (PCD-3) and within the building height overlay district HOD-8 that specifies a maximum height of 8 stories or 96 feet, whichever is greater (Figure 7). The site is not within a FEMA floodplain or any additional special districts or overlay. iv. If any critical facilities (i.e. facilities necessary for public health and safety, those storing hazardous materials, or those with housing occupants who may be insufficiently mobile) are proposed in floodplain areas and other areas identified as at risk for localized flooding, describe the risk potential considering changing precipitation and event intensity. Not applicable Figure 7: Zoning Map b. Discuss the project’s compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 10a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects. The proposed project aligns with the land use plans, goals, and policies that are outlined in the City of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan for The Greater Southdale District. The proposed 300,000 square ft of office/mixed use space and 460 multi-family residential units provide compact buildings, structured parking, and a strong focus on transit supportive densities as described in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The project plan includes incorporating the adjacent Centennial Lakes/Edina Promenade with walk-up units, pathways, and a dedicated portion of land for an extension of the Promenade. In addition, the developer is proposing to connect France Avenue to the Promenade with a new pedestrian/bicycle connection. This area is within close proximity to grocery and shopping areas. These considerations connect the site to key destinations within walkable distances, reducing dependance on cars which is identified as an areawide goal in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential incompatibility as discussed in Item 10b above and any risk potential. The proposed project is compatible with the zoning and plans described in the City’s Comprehensive Planning document. Building heights are anticipated to be between 82 – 150 feet. Building heights that exceed 96 feet will need to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. 11. Geology, soils and topography/land forms: a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the project could have on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features. Bedrock under the project site is consolidated marine sedimentary rock known as the St. Peter Sandstone. There are no susceptible geologic features on site or nearby and no anticipated effects to geologic features expected as a part of this project. b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and after project construction to address soil limitations including stabilization, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 12.b.ii. The NCRS web soil survey maps Urban land, with 0 to 8 percent slopes as soil units on site. Urban land soils are fill material from surrounding upland, and gravel pits. The topography of the site is relatively flat with an elevation across the site of approximately 857 feet above sea level. Soil borings taken on-site reveal Urban land, or fill material, at a depth of 7-28 feet across the project site underlain with poorly graded sand-silt identified as glacial till. The new foundation will be approximately 10-25 feet below existing grade and will land on native soils or engineered fill following a soil correction. Based on existing soil boring data at the site, the correction depth could extend up to 6 feet below the proposed footings. The site is currently developed with buildings and impervious surface. Demolition of existing development will disturb soils. Erosion and sediment control BMPs would be implemented during demolition and construction as outlined in the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). BMPs may include but are not limited to erosion control blankets, silt fencing, and stormwater inlet control structures. NOTE: For silica sand projects, the EAW must include a hydrogeologic investigation assessing the potential groundwater and surface water effects and geologic conditions that could create an increased risk of potentially significant effects on groundwater and surface water. Descriptions of water resources and potential effects from the project in EAW Item 12 must be consistent with the geology, soils and topography/land forms and potential effects described in EAW Item 11. 12. Water resources: a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below. i. Surface water - lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial ditches. Include any special designations such as public waters, shoreland classification and floodway/floodplain, trout stream/lake, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lake, and outstanding resource value water. Include the presence of aquatic invasive species and the water quality impairments or special designations listed on the current MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List that are within 1 mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any. The DNR National Wetland Inventory (NWI) shows one wetland adjacent to the project area (Figure 8). It is classified as a PUBHx, Freshwater Pond that has been excavated. It is a 2.94- acre pond adjacent to the site in the southeast corner of the parcel. Both Lake Cornelia (PWI 28P), Lake Edina (PWI 29P), one unnamed public water (PWI1079P) and are located within 1 mile from the project area. Both Lake Cornelia and Lake Edina are impaired for nutrients. According to the DNR, Lake Edina has also been listed as an infested water body because it contains Eurasian watermilfoil. Figure 8: Surface Waters ii. Groundwater – aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells, including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known on site or nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this. Based on a geotechnical report for the site, groundwater is about 35-40 feet below the surface. Based on the Minnesota Hydrogeology Atlas, the depth to groundwater varies from 10 to 30 feet. Based on the Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection Web Map Viewer, the site is located in Low to Moderate Vulnerability portions of the Edina and Bloomington Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs). Based on the Minnesota Well Index, there are no wells on site, and there are two active wells (Unique Well IDs 206182 and 272558) within 150 feet of the site to the northwest across France Avenue. b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below. i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. 1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal wastewater infrastructure. Wastewater will discharge to the City of Edina sanitary sewer system for conveyance to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) regional collection and treatment system. As shown on Figure 9, there is an existing trunk sanitary sewer that crosses through the northeast corner of the site that will need to be relocated along the boundary of the site or along internal streets. In the Southeast Edina Sanitary Sewer Preliminary Engineering Report dated April 2017, the projected flows in this trunk sanitary sewer were approaching its capacity. The number of SAC units assumed in that study should be verified for agreement with this EAW, and the existing pipe slopes should be verified to ensure that the proposed realignment can maintain minimum slope and adequate capacity. Wastewater will flow via city sanitary sewers to MCES Meter 129 and Interceptor 1- RF-491 and then through the MCES regional collection system to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (Metro WWTP). The Metro WWTP has a capacity of 314 million gallons per day (MGD) and receives 177 MGD as of March 2023. No pretreatment is necessary for the proposed development. The projected wastewater flow from the proposed development is detailed below. Table 3: Projected Wastewater Flows Land Use SAC Units Unit Flow (gpd/unit) Average Flow (gpd) Peak Factor Peak Hourly Flow (gpd) Office/Mixed Use 113* 180 20,340 Multi-Family Residential 460 180 82,800 Total 103,140 4.0 412,560 *Office SAC units based on 300,000 SF and 2,650 SF/SAC. 2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS), describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site conditions for such a system. If septic systems are part of the project, describe the availability of septage disposal options within the region to handle the ongoing amounts generated as a result of the project. Consider the effects of current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated changes in rainfall frequency, intensity and amount with this discussion. Not applicable. 3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater from wastewater discharges, taking into consideration how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects. Not applicable. Figure 9 : Existing Sanitary Sewer and Water Utilities ii. Stormwater - Describe changes in surface hydrology resulting from change of land cover. Describe the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the project site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss environmental effects from stormwater discharges on receiving waters post construction including how the project will affect runoff volume, discharge rate and change in pollutants. Consider the effects of current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated changes in rainfall frequency, intensity and amount with this discussion. For projects requiring NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater permit coverage, state the total number of acres that will be disturbed by the project and describe the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), including specific best management practices to address soil erosion and sedimentation during and after project construction. Discuss permanent stormwater management plans, including methods of achieving volume reduction to restore or maintain the natural hydrology of the site using green infrastructure practices or other stormwater management practices. Identify any receiving waters that have construction-related water impairments or are classified as special as defined in the Construction Stormwater permit. Describe additional requirements for special and/or impaired waters. Existing Conditions Existing land use is a commercial lot containing an 80,000 square foot single story building (former Macy’s Furniture Store) that is surrounded by parking lot. France Avenue South is adjacent to on the western edge of the project site while grocery, mixed use, and retail areas are adjacent to the north and south of the project site. Open space/parkland (Edina Promenade) is adjacent to the project site to the east and a portion of Centennial Lakes Park is adjacent on the southeast corner of the project site. Under existing conditions, the property’s storm water is piped to the east and ultimately drains to the wetland complex and Centennial Lake. The site is primarily impervious surface without any stormwater treatment. Proposed Conditions It is estimated that the development will need approximately 93,000 cubic feet of stormwater storage to meet City and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District requirements. This is proposed to be accomplished through an underground stormwater treatment system. The site is within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMWD). NMWD rules will require the site to meet volume management control via infiltration, water quality, and rate control. The initial Geotech borings show layers of silty sand, clay and fill down to underlying poorly graded soil sands. Based on these soil types, volume management will be met through infiltration which will also allow for water quality to be met. Rate control will be met through the existing impervious coverage and lack of any on site stormwater management devices existing on site. The site does not drain to an impaired water within one mile of the site. As discussed in Item 7 of the EAW, the Edina area will likely see an increase in 100-year storm intensity associated with changing climate trends. This has the potential to increase temporary flooding in open spaces and ponding areas in the vicinity of the site. iii. Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to be used as a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal water infrastructure. Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water resources available for appropriation. Discuss how the proposed water use is resilient in the event of changes in total precipitation, large precipitation events, drought, increased temperatures, variable surface water flows and elevations, and longer growing seasons. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects from the water appropriation. Describe contingency plans should the appropriation volume increase beyond infrastructure capacity or water supply for the project diminish in quantity or quality, such as reuse of water, connections with another water source, or emergency connections. Geotechnical information for the site indicates that groundwater appears to be approximately 35-40 feet below the surface. If the construction of utilities and building foundations require dewatering, a temporary water appropriation permit for construction dewatering would be required under DNR General Permit 1997-0005. The site will connect to and receive its water supply from the City of Edina water supply system via existing 8-inch, 10-inch and 12-inch diameter watermains on the western, southern, and eastern boundaries of the site. Based on the City’s Water Supply Plan dated January 2020, the average day demand from 2012 to 2017 was 6.5 million gallons per day (MGD), and the max day demand was 14 MGD. The system’s total well capacity is 25 MGD, treatment capacity is 16 MGD, and storage capacity is 7 MG. The existing well and treatment capacity can accommodate the additional max day demand detailed below, and the existing storage capacity can accommodate the additional average day demand detailed below. Table 4: Projected water use Land Use Units Unit Demand (gpd/unit) Average Day Demand (gpd) Peak Factor Max Day Demand (gpd) Office/Mixed Use 113 225 25,425 Multi-Family Residential 460 225 103,500 Total 128,925 2.25 290,081 iv. Surface Waters a) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed, taking into consideration how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects. Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed and identify those probable locations. No wetlands are present at the site and one wetland is located on the adjacent site to the southeast of the project in Centennial Lakes Park. Direct impacts to wetlands are not expected to occur as a part of this project. Erosion and sediment control BMPs would be implemented during demolition and construction as required in the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) to prevent indirect impacts to wetlands adjacent to the site. BMPs may include but are not limited to erosion control blankets, silt fencing, and stormwater inlet control structures. b) Other surface waters- Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels, county/judicial ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging, diking, stream diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and riparian alteration. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of water features, taking into consideration how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects. Identify measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to surface water features, including in-water Best Management Practices that are proposed to avoid or minimize turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the water features. Discuss how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on any water body, including current and projected watercraft usage. No surface water features are located within the project area or adjacent to the project site. Impacts to surface waters from this project are not anticipated. 13. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes: a. Pre-project site conditions - Describe existing contamination or potential environmental hazards on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water contamination, abandoned dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks, and hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from pre- project site conditions that would be caused or exacerbated by project construction and operation. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental hazards. Include development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan. A Draft Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the site. The Draft Phase I ESA was dated February 22, 2023 and prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation. Based on the results of the Draft Phase I ESA, two sites on or adjacent to the site were identified as recognized environmental conditions (RECs) (Figure 10). The following recognized environmental conditions (RECs) were identified for the site: 1) The site was historically used as a gravel mine from approximately 1947 to 1966. The former mining activities appeared to mainly occur along the northern and southern edges of the site. Based on a review of previous environmental reports related to the adjoining property located north of the site, fill soil was present up to 30 feet and included concrete, wood, and other debris. Therefore, there is a potential for soil, groundwater, and/or soil vapor impacts at the site related to the import of fill soil from unknown sources. 2) From approximately 1947 to 1966, a gravel pit operation was located at the adjoining property located north of the site. The adjoining property has documented soil contamination and has since been redeveloped under the oversight of the MPCA’s Brownfields Program. However, it does not appear that groundwater samples were collected at the adjoining property during redevelopment. Although the adjoining property to the north has been remediated and redeveloped, there remains a potential that contamination may have caused impacts to the soil, groundwater, and/or soil vapor at the site. Based on the review of the RECs on or adjacent to the site, there is potential to encounter contaminated soil, groundwater, and/or soil vapor at the proposed project. A Phase II ESA will be completed and a Response Action Plan (RAP) and/or Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) may need to be developed for the proper management of contamination and/or regulated materials encountered during reconstruction. Figure 10: Potential Contamination Areas b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes - Describe solid wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of solid waste including source reduction and recycling. Prior to site redevelopment, the removal/demolition of site structures will occur. State and Federal law requires a pre-demolition inspection consisting of but not limited to, an asbestos survey, lead paint sampling, and a regulated materials inventory. Regulated materials will be handled appropriately and remaining general demolition debris will need to be hauled to a licensed demolition landfill. Beneficial reuse and recycling of materials should be considered to minimize demolition waste. If asbestos is encountered in the pre-demolition inspection, asbestos abatement procedures and clearance levels will follow up-to-date MPCA, MDH, and EPA guidelines. Project activities will generate wastes and debris typical of construction operations. All waste and unused materials will be properly contained and disposed of off-site in conformance with state and local standards. After construction, garbage/recycling for residential and commercial tenants will be provided through garbage services offered by the City. c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials - Describe chemicals/hazardous materials used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including method of storage. Indicate the number, location and size of any new above or below ground tanks to store petroleum or other materials. Indicate the number, location, size and age of existing tanks on the property that the project will use. Discuss potential environmental effects from accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including source reduction and recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan. Products, materials, or wastes typical of construction sites will be present during the construction of this project (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel, oil, hydraulic fluid, portable toilets, etc.). To ensure compliance with the NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater permit, products that have the potential to leach pollutants will be stored under cover; hazardous materials will be stored in sealed containers and will have secondary containment to prevent spills, solid wastes will be collected and disposed of properly, and vehicle and equipment washing will not be allowed on site. d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling The proposed project is not expected to generate any hazardous wastes during construction or operation. If hazardous wastes are generated by the contractor, it will be the responsibility of the contractor to recycle and/or dispose of the waste in accordance with local, State, and Federal regulations. 14. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features): a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site. Existing landcover within the project area is mostly comprised of existing structure and impervious surfaces (parking lot). A small number of trees are located on the east side of the parcel. These trees may serve as habitat for passerine birds and small mammals such as squirrels and raccoons but provide limited habitat in a fully developed area. Of the areas not covered in impervious surfaces are turfgrass. Centennial Lake and a park are located within 200 feet of the southern corner of this parcel. The lake was surveyed by the DNR most recently in 2011. A total of seven species were captured (black bullhead, green sunfish, hybrid sunfish, bluegill sunfish, black crappie, northern pike and pumpkinseed). This lake is stocked annually through the Fishing in the Neighborhood (FiN) Program and is managed as a “put and take” fishery to promote urban angling. b. Describe rare features such as state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, native plant communities, Minnesota Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement number (LA- ) and/or correspondence number (MCE 2023-00246) from which the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage Review letter from the DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results. The DNR has provided a Natural Heritage Review and the letter in included in Appendix A. This review indicates that Blanding’s turtles have been reported in the vicinity of the area. However, given the current land use in the project area, impacts to turtles are not anticipated. A review of the US Fish and Wildlife’s Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) indicated this parcel could potentially observe one federally endangered mammal (Northern Long-Eared Bat), one proposed endangered mammal (Tricolored Bat), one endangered insect (Rusty Patched Bumble Bee), and one candidate insect (Monarch butterfly). No critical habitats are located on this parcel. There were no Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) Sites of Biological Significance found in this project area. No DNR Native Plant Communities were found on this site. Furthermore, this project area does not include any DNR Old Growth Stands, Minnesota Prairie Conservation Plans, or Important Bird Areas. Rusty Patched Bumblebees have also been sighted within one mile of this parcel. However, existing vegetation provides little or no forage that is preferred by this insect. c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be affected by the project including how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species. This site currently contains minimal to no suitable habitat for wildlife or threatened/endangered species. The development of the site may have the potential for bird strikes with vertical walls and glass panels on the buildings. This would be more problematic during periods of migration. Removal of trees could reduce habitat for bats species. However, there is generally not suitable habitat within the site for bats. All construction machinery should be cleaned of soil and vegetation from previous job sites and should be cleaned thoroughly upon completion of work on this parcel to prevent seeds from being transported onto this site or away from it. As Minnesota climate changes, habitat that resembles southerly latitudes may make nearby habitat suitable to different species than what exist currently. d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse effects to fish, wildlife, plant communities, ecosystems, and sensitive ecological resources. Wildlife The NHIS review revealed the records of Blanding’s turtles near the site. However, there is no suitable habitat within the site. If Blanding’s turtles are found on site, they will be left undisturbed unless they are in imminent danger, at which point they will be moved to safety. Construction silt fence will be used to keep turtles and other reptiles and amphibians out of construction areas. Trenches used for utility installation will be inspected prior to backfilling to avoid animal entrapment. Fisheries: A sediment fence will need to be installed to prevent erosion of site soils into stormwater drainage. This should minimize impacts to the nearby Centennial Lake. Invasive species Project phasing of soil disturbance will be used to prevent the spread of invasive species if they exist on site. The US Department of Agriculture’s National Invasive Species Information Center, Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA), and the DNR provide information regarding BMPs to prevent the spread of noxious weeds and invasive species. Appropriate actions such as cleaning equipment, destroying existing invasive species, and limiting soil disturbance in areas of known invasive species will limit the spread and contamination of other areas of the project site. If necessary, spraying invasive species with an herbicide may be necessary for control, especially in locations of soil grading and stockpiling between project phases. 15. Historic properties: Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and 3) architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and operation. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) did not list any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in close proximity to the site (Appendix A). Additionally, review of the City of Edina’s Historic Property site map did not show any significant sites on or near the project site. 16. Visual: Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects. The project site adjoins the Centennial Lakes Park and Edina Promenade, an open space/parkland that offers access to other nearby parks, residential, and retail in the surrounding area. However, this open space/parkland is currently obscured from view by France Avenue users by the existing commercial structure on site. 17. Air: a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air pollutants, criteria pollutants. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the project’s effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary source emissions. The project will not have any stationary source emissions. b. Vehicle emissions - Describe the effect of the project’s traffic generation on air emissions. Discuss the project’s vehicle-related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures (e.g. traffic operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to minimize or mitigate vehicle-related emissions. The EPA has identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in their Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). In addition, the EPA identified seven compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers. These are acrolein, benzene, 1, 3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter, plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM), formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) considers these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and may be adjusted in consideration of future EPA rules. EPA rule requires controls that will dramatically decrease Mobile Source Air Toxin (MSAT) emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. For this EAW, the amount of MSAT emitted would be proportional to the average daily traffic (ADT). The ADT estimated for the proposed site development is higher than that for the no build condition because the project involves new development that produces additional trips. This increase in ADT means MSAT under the build scenarios would probably be higher than the no build condition in the project area. There could also be localized differences in MSAT from indirect effects of the project such as associated access traffic, emissions of evaporative MSAT (e.g., benzene) from parked cars, and emissions of diesel particulate matter from delivery trucks. Travel to other destinations would be reduced with subsequent decreases in emissions at those locations. For the proposed site development, emissions are virtually certain to be lower than present levels in the design year as a result of EPA's national control programs that are projected to reduce annual MSAT emissions by 72 percent from 1999 to 2050, as shown in the following graph. The magnitude of the EPA-projected reductions is so great (even after accounting for ADT growth) that MSAT emissions in the project area are likely to be lower in the future than they are today. NATIONAL MSAT EMISSION TRENDS 1999 - 2050 FOR VEHICLES OPERATING ON ROADWAYS USING EPA's MOBILE6.2 MODEL Note: (1) Annual emissions of polycyclic organic matter are projected to be 561 tons/yr for 1999, decreasing to 373 tons/yr for 2050. (2) Trends for specific locations may be different, depending on locally derived information representing vehicle-miles travelled, vehicle speeds, vehicle mix, fuels, emission control programs, meteorology, and other factors Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MOBILE6.2 Model run 20 August 2009. In summary, it is expected there will be slightly higher MSAT emissions in the project area with the project relative to the no build condition due to increased ADT. There also could be increases in MSAT levels in a few localized areas where ADT increases. However, the EPA's vehicle and fuel regulations will bring about lower MSAT levels in the future when compared to today. c. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of dust and odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may be discussed under item 17a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the project including nearby sensitive receptors and quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors. During construction, particulate emissions will temporarily increase due to generation of fugitive dust. Construction dust control is required to be in conformance with City ordinances and the NPDES Construction Stormwater permit. The construction and operation of the proposed site development is not anticipated to involve processes that would generate odors. 18. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint a. GHG Quantification: For all proposed projects, provide quantification and discussion of project GHG emissions. Include additional rows in the tables as necessary to provide project-specific emission sources. Describe the methods used to quantify emissions. If calculation methods are not readily available to quantify GHG emissions for a source, describe the process used to come to that conclusion and any GHG emission sources not included in the total calculation This GHG analysis took into account the existfng use and the proposed uses. Data sources included the EPA Simplified GHG Emission Calculator, US EPA Energy Star Portiolio Manager Target Finder, and other sources as noted. The analysis included energy use for the buildings, waste generatfon, and traffic and vehicles antfcipated with the project. Per the tables in Appendix B, the project’s predicted net GHG emissions are estfmated at 5,572 CO2e (metric tons per year). For purposes of this analysis, the expected improvement for the development is expected at 50 years, which gives a total 50-year CO2 (metric tons per year) of 278,600 over the life of the development. The building will likely last much longer than 50 years. More detailed analysis can be found in Appendix B. b. GHG Assessment i. Describe any mitigation considered to reduce the project’s GHG emissions. At this phase in project development the plans are in the concept level so exploratfon of potentfal mitfgatfon practfces is dependent on further development planning and design. In initfal designs, the project developers plan to include solar power on rooftops and electric vehicle charging statfons. The project will also increase housing density, with shops, restaurants and amenitfes onsite and nearby to allow for walking, biking or public transit, especially with the connectfon and expansion of the Centennial Lakes Promenade. It will also include live-work units to encourage multfple uses onsite for residents to reduce commutfng vehicle miles travelled. The project is proposing stormwater storage with an Arch Chamber System and Storm Trap. The project may consider green infrastructure solutfons, such as rain gardens, green roof, vegetatfon and vegetatfve buffer strips, tree trenches, cisterns, and other solutfons. The project will follow all applicable federal, state, and local standards and regulatfons as required, as listed throughout this report. ii. Describe and quantify reductions from selected mitigation, if proposed to reduce the project’s GHG emissions. Explain why the selected mitigation was preferred. This informatfon is not known at this phase in the project development, due to the very preliminary designs. Generally, this development will provide a mix of uses, and it is generally understood that “Mixed-use zones, which allow retail and commercial establishments near housing, allow people to drive less and thus emit fewer greenhouse gases.”9 In additfon, there will be mitfgatfon of GHG emissions from the rooftop solar. The project may consider additfonal mitfgatfon strategies as it contfnues to move through the design process. iii. Quantify the proposed projects predicted net lifetime GHG emissions (total tons/#of years) and how those predicted emissions may affect achievement of the Minnesota Next Generation Energy Act goals and/or other more stringent state or local GHG reduction goals. 9 https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/Summer22/highlight2.html Minnesota’s Next Generatfon Energy Act requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state by 80% between 2005 and 2050, while supportfng clean energy, energy efficiency, and supplementfng other renewable energy standards in Minnesota. Edina’s greenhouse gas emission goals in the City’s Climate Actfon Plan target “a reductfon in City operatfons and community-wide emissions by 45 percent below 2019 levels and achieve net zero emissions by 2050, in line with the 2015 global Paris Agreement.” Per the tables in Appendix B, the project’s predicted net GHG emissions are estfmated at 5,572 CO2e (metric tons per year). The project will increase housing density and provide a mix of uses onsite and connect to many modes of transportatfon besides single occupancy vehicle travel. In the Edina Climate Actfon Plan, this type of mixed-use development and solar energy will contribute to the Transportatfon & Land Use and Buildings & Energy strategies and related goals. This project will work to implement any applicable state or local GHG goals as required. 19. Noise Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including 1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise. Existing sources of noise are surrounding roadways including France Avenue. The area is fully developed and there are no nearby sensitive receptors. During construction, noise levels will temporarily increase and vary in intensity based on the types of construction equipment being used. To minimize the effects of this noise, construction will be limited to daytime hours consistent with the City’s construction and noise ordinances. In addition, construction equipment will be fitted with mufflers that would be maintained throughout the construction process. Table 5: Typical Roadway Construction Equipment Noise Levels at 50 Feet Equipment Type Manufacturers Sampled Total Number of Models in Sample Peak Noise Level Range Average Backhoe 5 6 74-92 83 Front Loader 5 30 75-96 85 Dozer 8 41 65-95 85 Grader 3 15 72-92 84 Scraper 2 27 76-98 87 Pile Driver N/A N/A 95-105 101 Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Highway Administration Following construction, noise in the area will be typical of a mixed-use development. Additional traffic added to surrounding roadways is not expected to generate noise to a degree with would exceed noise standards or diminish quality of life for people living or working nearby. 20. Transportation a. Describe traffic-related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes. The proposed site is located on the east side of France Avenue (County State Aid Highway [CSAH] 17) between 72nd Street and Gallagher Drive. The existing site consists of the former Macy’s Furniture Store including associated parking. The existing 80,000 square foot building and parking spaces will be demolished. The redevelopment of the site will include a total of 300,000 square feet of office/mixed use, 460 multi-family residential units, and 1,814 parking spaces. Access to the site will be provided on France Avenue at two existing locations on France Avenue at Gallagher Drive and the existing Business Access. Development of the concept plan is anticipated to generate 5,340 daily, 626 AM peak hour and 611 PM peak hour trips. The trip generation used to estimate the proposed site traffic is based on rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The table shows the Daily, AM peak and PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed site. Table 6 - Estimated Site Trip Generation Planned Use Size ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Office 300,000sf 3.252 456 401 55 432 73 359 Multi-Family 460 units 2.088 170 39 131 179 109 70 Total New Trips 5,340 626 440 186 611 183 429 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition Metro Transit Route 6 provides service adjacent to the redeveloped site on France Avenue. The route provides local bus service from the U of M through downtown Minneapolis to the Southdale Transit Center down France Avenue serving the areas on the northside of I-494 in Bloomington. b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system. If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Access Management Manual, Chapter 5 (available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html) or a similar local guidance, A traffic study was conducted for the project and is in Appendix C. The results of the existing conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and existing 2023 traffic volumes, show that all intersections are operating at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C. The background traffic in this study includes recently approved developments that have not yet been constructed. The results of the 2025 no-build conditions analysis based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 no-build traffic volumes, show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better except: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road - NB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D. The results of the 2025 build conditions analysis based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 build traffic volumes, show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better except: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – NB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – NB and SB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D The results of the 2030 build conditions analysis based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2030 build traffic volumes, show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – NB and SB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – NB and SB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – NB and SB left turn – PM peak hour – LOS D c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects. To mitigate the transportation impacts, the following measures are proposed: 1. The pedestrian improvements identified in the concept site plan should be completed with the proposed project. 2. Based on the city’s requirements some potential TDM strategies for the site that could be implemented by the developer include: • Providing bicycle parking spaces exceeding City requirements • Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities • Restricting freight deliveries to off peak hours to avoid traffic conflicts on adjacent roadways. 21. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are addressed under the applicable EAW Items) a. Describe the geographic scales and timeframes of the project related environmental effects that could combine with other environmental effects resulting in cumulative potential effects. Project work is limited to the approximately eight acre parcel. The development will be constructed in two phases beginning in the spring/early summer of 2024 (Phase I commencement) and spring/early summer of 2025 (Phase II commencement). Site preparation will begin in the spring/early summer of 2024 with the demolition of the existing building. Phase I is anticipated to be completed in the spring/early summer of 2026 while Phase II is anticipated to be completed in the summer/early fall of 2027. b. Describe any reasonably foreseeable future projects (for which a basis of expectation has been laid) that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed project within the geographic scales and timeframes identified above. As a separate future project, the City of Edina may undertake a pedestrian underpass under France Avenue to connect the proposed pedestrian plaza from the development to the 7200/7250 France Avenue parcel to the west. This would improve pedestrian access and mobility in the area as shown in Figure 11. This project would provide a multi-modal connection across France Avenue while continuing to allow traffic flow along France Avenue. Figure 11: Potential Underpass at France Avenue Additionally, the City of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan has anticipated and planned for redevelopment in the general area. Several sites have redeveloped or have received approval for redevelopment along France Avenue. This has involved redeveloping a fully developed area from commercial to commercial, multi-family residential, and office. Other projects in the area that have been approved and/or built include: • 7001 & 7025 France Avenue South: This project has been constructed and is north of the Macy’s project area in the southeast quadrant of France Avenue and 70th Street. It includes commercial, retail, offices, and apartments. The buildings are between one-story to 24 story and also include a parking ramp. • 7200 & 7250 France Avenue South: This project has been approved and is located across France Avenue to the west of the Macy’s site project area. It includes office, retail, apartments, and a hotel. • 4040 70th Street West; 4600 & 4320 77th Street West; 4660 77th Street West: Two of these projects are under construction and one has been approved. They are located north and west of the Macy’s site. They include attached senior affordable housing and apartments. c. Discuss the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects. The City’s Comprehensive plan, environmental review, and existing infrastructure studies have provided information to the City about potential impacts. The project site and surrounding area are fully developed. Redevelopment is providing opportunity to create stormwater management systems, pedestrian connectivity, more energy efficient buildings, and some green space into this currently developed area. Traffic flow and timing may shift from the current retail and commercial uses to include residential uses. However, there are not anticipated to be overall cumulative impacts that cannot be addressed through the review and permitting processes. 22. Other potential environmental effects: If the project may cause any additional environmental effects not addressed by items 1 to 19, describe the effects here, discuss the how the environment will be affected, and identify measures that will be taken to minimize and mitigate these effects. The project will not cause any additional environmental effects that have not been addressed in this document. APPENDIX A : SHPO and DNR NHIS Correspondence APPENDIX B : Detailed GHG Assessment Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Project Components Size (sq ft)Units NW block: Office building 150,000 Restaurant 12,500 Commercial 12,500 SW block: Office building 150,000 Restaurant 12,500 Commercial 12,500 Residential (without parking):230 Building C 258,527 Building D 260,102 Average sq. ft. per unit 2,255 Residential (including parking):230 Building C 357,500 Building D 375,400 Macy's furniture store 80,000 Use New uses: Uses to be removed: Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Detailed Summary Updated: 5/10/2023 Scope* Data Source Notes** Amount Units Site Energy Use Index (kBtu/sq. ft.) 3 Emission Factors GHG (tonnes) GHG (kg/sq. ft.) Percent of Total GHG 1 Mobile equipment 4 Unknown Land use conversion 4 Unknown Carbon sink 4 Unknown 1 2 2,832 ADVMT 0.44 457 0.42 7% 1 therms Restaurant 3 25,000 sq. ft. 138.4 1.38 183 7.34 Commercial 3 25,000 sq. ft. 20.3 0.20 27 1.08 Offices 3 300,000 sq. ft. 18.5 0.18 294 0.98 Dwelling units (460 units)3 732,900 sq. ft. 49.2 0.49 1,911 2.61 Subtotal 1,082,900 sq. ft.2,415 2.23 38% Combustion area (diesel, back-up generators, GHG kg/gal.)1 1 & 2 455 gallons 10.74 5 0.1% Off-site electricity, Xcel 2021 (GHG kg/sq. ft.)2 kWh Roadway lighting and signage 4 Unknown Restaurant 3 25,000 sq. ft. 153.0 44.84 321 12.85 Commercial 3 25,000 sq. ft. 35.3 10.35 74 2.96 Offices 3 300,000 sq. ft. 34.6 10.15 872 2.91 Dwelling units (460 units)3 732,900 sq. ft. 26.0 7.63 1,601 2.18 Subtotal 1,082,900 sq. ft.2,868 2.65 46% 3 2 1,783 tons of waste 559 0.64 9% Total emissions (tonnes)6,304 5.8 100% 1 2 2,377 ADVMT 0.44 383 4.79 52% 1 therms Macy's furniture store 3 80,000 sq. ft. 20.3 0.20 86 1.08 12% Off-site electricity, Xcel 2021 (kWh/sq. ft./yr.):2 kWh Roadway lighting and signage 4 Unknown Macy's furniture store 3 80,000 sq. ft. 35.3 10.35 237 2.96 Subtotal 80,000 sq. ft.237 2.96 32% 3 2 81 tons of waste 25 3% Current operational emissions, mobile equipment Combustion, stationary equipment, natural gas (therms/sq. ft./yr.): Off-site waste management Uses to be removed and current ADVMT: New uses and project average daily vehicle miles traveled (ADVMT): Emission Source Off-site waste management Combustion, stationary equipment, natural gas (therms/sq. ft./yr.): Construction: Operational emissions, mobile equipment, after project is operational Total emissions, uses to be removed (GHG tonnes)732 9.1 100% Net project totals 1,002,900 sq. ft.5,572 5.6 *Scope: ** Data Source Notes: 1 2 3 4 EPA Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator ("the Calculator"), https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator For an explanation of Emissions scopes, please reference the following: •Scope 1: “Scope 1 emissions are direct greenhouse (GHG) emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organizaCon (e.g., emissions associated with fuel combusCon in boilers, furnaces, vehicles).” (EPA, http://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-1-and-scope-2-inventory-guidance) •Scope 2: “Scope 2 emissions are indirect GHG emissions associated with the purchase of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling.” (EPA, hEp://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-1-and-scope-2- inventory-guidance) •Scope 3: “Scope 3 emissions are the result of acCviCes from assets not owned or controlled by the reporCng organizaCon, but that the organizaCon indirectly impacts in its value chain. Scope 3 emissions include all sources not within an organization’s scope 1 and 2 boundary. The scope 3 emissions for one organization are the scope 1 and 2 emissions of another organization. Scope 3 emissions, also referred to as value chain emissions, often represent the majority of an organization’s total GHG emissions.” (EPA: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-3-inventory- guidance) Source (Zip Code: 55343): US EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager Target Finder. Refer to Energy Finder sheet. https://www.energystar.gov/buildings/resources_audience/service_product_providers/commercial_new_construction/target_finder Unknown at this point in the development process. Refer to the sheet "Mobile Equipment." ADVMT = Average Daily Vehicle Miles Travelled. Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Waste Generation Data Source Amount Units Emission Factor (tonnes/ton) Waste Amounts Waste (kg per sq. ft.) Restaurant (kg @ 40.8 tonnes/yr./restaurant) 1 25,000 sq. ft. 81,600 3.3 Commercial (kg @ 0.921 kg/sq. ft./yr.) 2 25,000 sq. ft. 23,025 0.9 Offices (kg @ 0.848 kg/sq. ft./yr.) 2 300,000 sq. ft. 254,400 0.8 Dwelling units (kg @ 228 kg/unit/month) 3 518,629 sq. ft. 1,258,560 2.4 Subtotals 868,629 1,617,585 1.9 Waste (tons)1,783 Landfilled waste, 33% (tons) and emission factor 4, 5, & 6 588 0.54 318 Waste to energy, 26% (tons) and emission factor 4, 5, & 6 464 0.52 241 Subtotal emissions (tonnes)559 Macy's furniture store (kg @ 0.921 kg/sq. ft./yr.) 2 80,000 sq. ft. 73,680 0.9 Waste (tons)81 Landfilled waste, 33% (tons) and emission factor 4, 5, & 6 27 0.54 14 Waste to energy, 26% (tons) and emission factor 4, 5, & 6 21 0.52 11 Total emissions (tonnes)25 Notes: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Solid Waste Generation New uses: Uses to be removed: Source for emission factor for landfilled waste: "Documentation for Greenhouse Gas Emission and Energy Factors Used in the Waste Reduction Model (WARM), Organic Materials Chapters," Exhibit 1-10, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, February 2016. https://www.epa.gov/warm/documentation-chapters-greenhouse-gas-emission-energy-and-economic-factors-used- waste Source for emissions from the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/air/permitted-facility-air-emissions-data. Source for tons processed by the HERC: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/report-2019-score-programs US EPA "2018 Wasted Food Report" states average tons of wasted food per facility per year is 40.91 tons (37.1 tonnes). Rate is increased by 10% to account for non-food/non-recycled waste (40.8 tonnes/yr.). Source: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 11/documents/2018_wasted_food_report-11-9-20_final_.pdf Source: Table 21, "Targeted Statewide Waste Characterization Study: Waste Disposal and Diversion Findings for Selected Industry Groups , 2006. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1184 Apartments: Assumes 1.5 cu. yd. of mixed trash per unit per month. Source: https://www.wastecare.com/usefulinfo/Waste_Generated_by_Industry_Cubic_Yards.htm. At 335 lbs. per cubic yard and 2.2 pounds per kg, the average is about 228 kg per month. Source: https://www.solidwaste.com/doc/bolton-on-landfill-management-converting-cubi-0001 Waste amounts for Hennepin County (average of 2020 and 2021): "Recycling Progress Report: Adjusting to a New Normal and Building Zero Waste Habits," June 2022, Hennepin County, https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/your-government/projects- iniIaIves/documents/recycling-progress-report.pdf Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Backup Generator Fuel Consumption Size Generator Size (kW) 1 Diesel Consumption (gal.) 2 GHG (kg) NW block office building (sq. ft.) 150,000 800 98 1,050 SW block office building (sq. ft.) 150,000 800 98 1,050 NE block residential building (units) 230 1,000 130 1,391 SE block residential building (units) 230 1,000 130 1,391 Total 455 4,883 Notes: 1 2 Source: https://www.uspeglobal.com/pages/resources Building Backup generator: Assume 50 kW + 5 W per sq. ft. (source: https://woodstockpower.com/blog/how-to-size-a-generator-for-commercial-building/). Diesel consumption per hour from chart below. Monthly testing for 30 minutes (source: https://www.health.state.mn.us/facilities/regulation/engineering/docs/lscgensets.pdf) Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Average daily vehicle miles traveled (ADVMT) in the vicinity of the site ADVMT 1 GHG (kg) Current ADVMT 2,377 383,258 455 73,362 Notes: 1 Category Estimated additional ADVMT attributable to the project Source; Refer to the sources in the EAW Item 20. Transportation. Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Edina EAW Emission Factors and Conversions Data Source Unit kBtu CO2 (kg) CH4 (kg) N2O (kg)GHG (kg) A, Table 11 1 25 298 Xcel Energy, electricity: 2018 3.413 0.366 4.7E-05 6.8E-06 0.369 2020 3.413 0.271 4.7E-05 6.8E-06 0.272 2021 3.413 0.285 4.9E-05 6.8E-06 0.286 Natural gas A Therms 100.0 5.302 Gasoline A US gallon 125.0 8.78 0.01 0.02 8.81 E-10 gasoline 2 Calculated US gallon 120.9 8.51 E-85 gasoline Calculated US gallon 118.9 8.35 Diesel (distillate fuel oil #4)A US gallon 146.0 10.96 11.00 26.82 11.00 B-5 diesel 2 Calculated US gallon 142.9 10.74 Ethanol A US gallon 84.0 5.75 2.25 2.98 5.76 Aviation fuel A US gallon 135.0 10.15 10.25 23.84 10.18 D Mile 0.44 Data Source Number C 0.010 C 0.293 A B C D Notes: 1 2 GHG emissions equal 0.441 kg per vehicle mile travelled for passenger cars and other light-duty vehicles, which will be the dominant vehicle used. Source: Minnesota Infrastructure Carbon Estimator, Version 1.2, https://www.dot.state.mn.us/sustainability/ghg-analysis.html Xcel provides CO2 in tonnes/MWh. CH4 and N2O are from eGRID/MROW in lbs./kWh. CO 2e (aka GHG) is in kg/kWh. There are 0.4536 kg/lb. Source: https://www.epa.gov/egrid Since 2003, the State of Minnesota requires gasoline and diesel fuels sold in the state be oxygenated by 10% and 5% ethanol respectively. Conversion Factors Therms/kBtu kWh/kBtu "Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories," USEPA, April 2022.https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/ghg_emission_factors_hub.pdf Xcel emission factors for CO2 are for Xcel's wholly owned generating company, NSP. Report for 2022 is not yet available. https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe-responsive/Environment/Carbon/Carbon-Emission- Intensities-Info-Sheet.pdf Greenhouse Gases Equivalencies Calculator - Calculations and References, USEPA https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and- references Date Sources Link Emission Sources and Conversion Factors Global Warming Potential (100-year data) B & A, Table 6 1 kWh Business travel and employee commute, passenger cars Emission Sources and Conversion Factors APPENDIX C : Traffic Study EAW TRAFFIC STUDY MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota May 16, 2023 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY CERTIFICATION WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Charles T. Rickart, P.E. Date: May 16, 2023 Reg. No. 26082 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Table of Contents Background / Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 3 A. Roadway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 3 B. Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................... 3 C. Crash History ............................................................................................................................... 4 Traffic Projections ......................................................................................................................................... 7 A. Background (Non-Site) Traffic Growth ..................................................................................... 7 B. Traffic Generation ....................................................................................................................... 7 C. Traffic Distribution ...................................................................................................................... 7 D. Projected Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... 8 Traffic Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 12 A. Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 12 B. Existing Conditions Analysis ................................................................................................... 13 C. Forecasted Conditions Analysis ............................................................................................. 13 D. Vehicle Queuing Analysis ........................................................................................................ 16 Multi Modal Review / Analysis..................................................................................................................... 16 Parking Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 20 Travel Demand Management ..................................................................................................................... 20 Conclusions / Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 21 List of Figures Figure 1 - Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 - Existing Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................................ 5 Figure 3 - Development Site Plan ................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4 - 2025 No-Build Traffic Conditions .................................................................................................. 9 Figure 5 - 2025 Build Traffic Conditions ...................................................................................................... 10 Figure 6 - 2030 Build Traffic Conditions ...................................................................................................... 11 Figure 7 - Level of Service Ranges for ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 8 - Proposed Sidewalk Facilities ...................................................................................................... 18 Figure 9 - Proposed Bike Facilities ............................................................................................................. 19 List of Tables Table 1 - Crash Data Summary .................................................................................................................... 4 Table 2 - Crash Rate Summary .................................................................................................................... 4 Table 3 - Estimated Site Trip Generation ...................................................................................................... 7 Table 4 - 2023 Existing Conditions Summary ............................................................................................. 13 Table 5 - 2025 No Build Condition Summary .............................................................................................. 14 Table 6 - 2025 Build Conditions .................................................................................................................. 15 Table 7 - 2030 Build Condition Summary ................................................................................................... 15 Table 8 - Parking Required per City Code .................................................................................................. 20 Table 9 - Site Parking Demand per ITE ...................................................................................................... 20 Table 10 - TDM Strategies .......................................................................................................................... 21 Appendices APPENDIX A – Existing Traffic Counts APPENDIX B – Traffic Operations Analysis Worksheets MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 1 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Background / Introduction The purpose of this study is to determine the potential transportation impacts the proposed redevelopment of the former Macy’s Furniture Store site has on the area traffic operations, site traffic circulation, pedestrian safety, and circulation and parking demand. The site is located on the east side of France Avenue (County State Aid Highway (CSAH 17)) between 72nd Street and Gallagher Drive. The project location is shown in Figure 1. The existing 80,000 square foot building will be demolished. The redevelopment of the site will include four buildings with a total of 300,000 square feet of office/mixed use, 460 multi-family residential units, and parking. Access to the site will be from France Avenue at two existing locations, one at Gallagher Drive and the other from the existing business access. The traffic impacts of the existing and anticipated site redevelopment were evaluated at each site driveway as well as the primary impacted intersections on France Avenue (CSAH 17). The parking demand was determined based on the City Code and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) guidelines. The following sections of this report document the traffic and parking analysis and the anticipated impacts the proposed site redevelopment has on the adjacent transportation system. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 2 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 1 - Project Location MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 3 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Existing Conditions The existing conditions for the proposed site redevelopment were evaluated at the following intersections: • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Road • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Business Access • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Drive • France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Avenue A. Roadway Characteristics US 169 is a north/south US Highway connecting the Minnesota River valley with the Twin Cities and the Iron Range. US 169 is a Minnesota Principal Arterial. In the City of Garrison adjacent to the proposed development, US 169 is a rural 2-lane roadway with 8 feet paved shoulders. The posted speed limit on the section CSAH 69 (Old Brick Yard Road) adjacent to the site is 55 mph. The lane configurations at each of the study area intersection are as follows: France Ave (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Rd – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/thru, two thru, one left • EB Hazelton Rd – one right, one thru, one left • NB France Ave – one right, three thru, one left • WB Hazelton Rd – one right/thru, one left France Ave (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street – Side Street Stop Control • SB France Ave – one right/thru, two thru • EB 72nd St – one right • NB France Ave – three thru, one left France Ave (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street – Side Street Stop Control • SB France Ave – three thru • WB 72nd St – one right • NB France Ave – one right, three thru France Ave (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Dr – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/thru, two thru, one left • EB Gallagher Dr – one right/thru, one left • NB France Ave – one right/thru, two thru, one left • WB Gallagher Dr – one right/thru, one left France Ave (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Ave – Traffic Signal Control • SB France Ave – one right/thru, two thru, one left • EB Gallagher Dr – one right, one thru, one left • NB France Ave – one right, three thru, one left • WB Gallagher Dr – one right, one thru, one left B. Traffic Volumes Peak hour turning movement counts and daily counts were conducted during the week of April 10, 2023. These counts were used as the existing baseline conditions for the area. The data identified the weekday AM peak hour from 8:00 to 9:00 am and PM peak hour from 4:30 to 5:30 pm. Figure 2 shows the existing intersections that were analyzed as part of the study, with the existing adjusted 2023 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and weekday AM and PM peak hours. The raw traffic count data is included in Appendix A. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 4 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA C. Crash History The crash data presented is for a 5-year period from 2018-2022. Existing crash data included with this study was obtained using the Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT) developed by MnDOT. The database includes crashes reported to MnDOT by local law enforcement agencies. Crashes that resulted in damages under $1000 may not be included in the database results. A summary of the existing crash data is shown in Table 1. Table 1 - Crash Data Summary The data shows that the intersections have calculated crash rates and severity rate that are below MnDOT Metro and Statewide average rates. A Crash Rate Summary is shown in Table 2. Table 2 - Crash Rate Summary * – Intersection crash rates are expressed in crashes per million entering vehicles ** Average for specific traffic control using MnDOT 2022 green sheets *** Critical crash rates are expressed in crashes per million entering vehicles with 0.995 confidence level Location Crashes 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Crashes PD PI PD PI PD PI PD PI PD PI France Ave at Hazelton Rd 3 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 2 12 France Ave at Gallagher Dr 3 0 1 0 2 2 4 4 3 0 19 France Ave at Parklawn Ave 3 4 1 1 1 3 2 0 4 2 21 Location Crashes Daily Vehicles Crash Rate* Severity Rate Calc Ave** Crit*** Calc Ave** France Ave at Hazelton Rd 12 31,894 0.21 0.59 0.86 0.29 0.97 France Ave at Gallagher Dr 19 30,264 0.34 0.59 0.87 0.47 0.97 France Ave at Parklawn Ave 21 34,964 0.33 0.59 0.85 0.53 0.97 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 5 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 2 - Existing Traffic Conditions MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 6 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 3 - Development Site Plan MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 7 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Traffic Projections In order to analyze the lane configuration and traffic control needs projected traffic volumes were determined for the area. Projected 2025 and 2030 traffic volumes were determined based on proposed anticipated future development land use in the area. The following sections outline the projected background traffic growth, traffic generation from the study area, as well as the traffic distribution and projected traffic volumes. A. Background (Non-Site) Traffic Growth Traffic growth in the vicinity of a proposed site will occur between existing conditions (2023) and any given future year due to other development within the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future year traffic forecasts. To account for some background traffic growth, several factors were considered including the current City and County Transportation Plans, future traffic projections compared to the existing traffic volumes and historic traffic volumes and surrounding development that was already approved, but not yet constructed at the time of this study. Based on this review, a factor of 0.8 percent/year was used to project traffic from 2023 to the 2025 and 2030 analysis years. B. Traffic Generation The estimated trip generation from the proposed area development is shown below in Table 3. The trip generation used to estimate the proposed site traffic is based on rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The table shows the Daily, AM peak and PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed site. Table 3 - Estimated Site Trip Generation Planned Use Size ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Office 300,000sf 3.252 456 401 55 432 73 359 Multi-Family 460 units 2.088 170 39 131 179 109 70 Total New Trips 5,340 626 440 186 611 183 429 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition C. Traffic Distribution Proposed site generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on the anticipated origins and destinations for the planned land use, existing travel patterns and engineering judgement. Based on these parameters the following general traffic distribution was used to distribute the projected site traffic volumes to the area roadway network: • 37 percent to / from the north on France Avenue • 7 percent to / from the east on Hazelton Road • 2 percent to / from the west on 72nd Street • 37 percent to / from the south on France Avenue • 9 percent to / from the east on Parklawn Avenue • 8 percent to / from the west on Parklawn Avenue MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 8 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA D. Projected Traffic Volumes Traffic forecasts were prepared for the future conditions by adding the projected annual background traffic growth to the existing traffic volumes to determine the no-build conditions.The 2025 and 2030 build conditions were then developed by adding the anticipated proposed site redevelopment traffic generation to the no-build volumes. Figure 4 - Figure 6 shows the projected 2025 No-Build, 2025 Build and 2030 Build traffic volumes. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 9 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 4 - 2025 No-Build Traffic Conditions MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 10 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 5 - 2025 Build Traffic Conditions MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 11 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 6 - 2030 Build Traffic Conditions MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 12 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Traffic Impact Analysis Existing and forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for the intersections and access in the Study Area. The analysis was conducted for the following scenarios. 1. Existing 2023 2. Projected 2025 No-Build 3. Projected 2025 Build 4. Projected 2030 Build This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations for each scenario. The traffic operation worksheets are included in Appendix B. A. Methodology The intersections in the corridor were evaluated during the weekday and weekend peak hours using Synchro/SimTraffic micro simulation software. The results are derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010. The software was used to evaluate the characteristics of the roadway network including lane geometrics, turning movement volumes, traffic control, and signal timing. In addition, the signal timing parameters for future year conditions were optimized using Synchro. This information was then transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model, to estimate average peak hour vehicle delays and queues. One of the primary measures of effectiveness used to evaluate intersection traffic operations, as defined in the HCM, is Level of Service (LOS) – a qualitative letter grade, A – F, based on seconds of vehicle delay due to a traffic control device at an intersection. By definition, LOS A conditions represent high quality operations (i.e., motorists experience very little delay or interference) and LOS F conditions represent very poor operations (i.e., extreme delay or severe congestion). Figure 7 depicts a graphical interpretation of delay times that define level of service. The delay thresholds are lower for un-signalized intersections than signalized intersections due to the public’s perception of acceptable delays for different traffic controls as indicated in the HCM. In accordance with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) guidelines, this analysis used the LOS D/E boundary as an indicator of acceptable traffic operations. Figure 7 - Level of Service Ranges for Signalized and Un-Signalized Intersections 80 55 35 20 10 LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F Not CongestedCongested50 35 25 10 LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F Not CongestedCongested15 Signalized Intersection Unsignalized IntersectionControl Delay per Vehicle (sec.)Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.)SOURCE: Level of Service thresholds from the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 13 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA B. Existing Conditions Analysis Table 4 - 2023 Existing Conditions shown below summarizes the existing LOS at the primary intersections in the study area based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and 2023 traffic volumes. The analysis results show that all intersections are operating at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. All movements during the AM and PM peak hours are operating at LOS C. Table 4 - 2023 Existing Conditions Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 7 B (C) 13 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 4 A (A) 6 Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 2 A (A) 4 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr A (C) 7 B (C) 10 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 12 B (C) 15 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) C. Forecasted Conditions Analysis 2025 No-Build Traffic Operations Table 5 – 2025 No Build Condition Summary, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 traffic volumes, without the proposed area development. The results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better in 2025 during both the AM and PM peak hours with only the background traffic growth, with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road which would operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour. Delays would only increase slightly from the existing conditions. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 14 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Table 5 - 2025 No Build Condition Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 7 B (D) 13 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 5 A (A) 7 Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 2 A (A) 4 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr A (C) 7 B (C) 11 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 12 B (C) 16 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) 2025 Build Traffic Operations Table 6 – 2025 Build Conditions, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area assuming the existing lane configuration, traffic control and projected 2025 traffic volumes with the proposed site redevelopment. The results show that all intersections would operate at overall LOS B in 2025 during both the AM and PM peak hours with the proposed redevelopment traffic growth. All movements would also be operating at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road during the PM peak hour and the northbound and southbound France Avenue left turns at Gallagher Drive during the PM peak hour. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 15 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Table 6 - 2025 Build Conditions Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 9 B (D) 14 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 6 A (A) 7 Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 3 A (A) 7 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr B (C) 14 B (D) 19 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 13 B (C) 17 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) 2030 Build Traffic Operations Table 7 – 2030 Build Conditions, shown below, summarizes the LOS and delays at the primary intersections in the study area assuming the existing lane configuration, traffic control and projected 2030 traffic volumes with the proposed area redevelopment. The results show that all intersections would operate at overall LOS B in 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours with the proposed redevelopment traffic growth. All movements would also be operating at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours except the following: • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – NB left turn – PM peak hour. • France Avenue at Hazelton Road – SB left turn – PM peak hour. • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – NB left turn – PM peak hour. • France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – SB left turn – PM peak hour. • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – NB left turn – PM peak hour. • France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue – SB left turn – PM peak hour. Table 7 - 2030 Build Condition Summary Control Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) LOS Delay(1) (sec/veh) Signal France Ave at Hazelton Rd A (C) 9 B (D) 15 Thru- Stop France Ave at 72nd St A (A) 7 A (A) 7 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 16 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Thru- Stop France Ave at Business Access A (A) 3 A (A) 7 Signal France Ave at Gallagher Dr B (C) 14 B (D) 19 Signal France Ave at Parklawn Ave B (C) 14 B (D) 18 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS , (1) = Overall Delay (worst movement for thru-stop intersections) D. Vehicle Queuing Analysis A queuing analysis for the 2025 and 2030 future build conditions was conducted, evaluating the anticipated vehicle queues with the proposed traffic conditions. The analysis was conducted using the SimTraffic simulation software. The results found that during both the AM and PM peak hours in 2025 and 2030 with the proposed site redevelopment, the maximum queues will not exceed the available turn lanes storage. Multi Modal Review / Analysis A. Pedestrian/Bike System The City’s current 2040 Comprehensive Plan address es locations of existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities within the City. The proposed Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9. The City of Edina is committed to providing a comprehensive and coordinated pedestrian network that provides transportation as well as recreational value. Currently there are several pedestrian and bike facilities that could be accessed from the proposed redevelopment site including: • Pedestrian / Bike Trail on east side of France Avenue. • Pedestrian / Bike Trail on west side of France Avenue. • Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail on south side of Gallagher Drive. • Pedestrian / Bike Trail in the Centennial Lakes Promenade east of the site. The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not identify any new pedestrian or bike facilities in the area of the site redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment site plan does however include a new east / west pedestrian plaza, expansion of the Centennial Lakes Promenade and new sidewalk connections from the site to the existing pedestrian / bike facilities. B. Transit System Metro Transit Route 6 provides service adjacent to the redeveloped site on France Avenue. The route provides local bus service from the U of M through downtown Minneapolis to the Southdale Transit Center down France Avenue, serving the areas on the northside of I-494 in Bloomington. The route operates during the weekdays, weekends, and holidays with 30 to 60 minute headways. Bus stops are currently provided on France Avenue at Hazelton Road, 72nd Street, Gallagher Drive and Parklawn Avenue. The nearest Park & Ride facility is at the Southdale Transit Center. The Transit Center is located southwest of the York Avenue and 66th Street intersection, on the east side of Southdale Center. The site currently includes approximately 70 surface Park & Ride parking spaces, with overflow MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 17 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA parking for additional vehicles east of the Southdale Center ring road. Transit service is provided to the center from seven primary routes. The Transit Center is currently planned to be relocated to the north side of the Southdale Center. No changes in the existing transit service is planned with the proposed site redevelopment. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 18 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 8 - Proposed Sidewalk Facilities MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 19 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Figure 9 - Proposed Bike Facilities MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 20 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA Parking Impact Analysis The parking demand for the proposed site redevelopment was analyzed based on the anticipated uses on the site. Based on the current City Code the proposed site redevelopment would require a total of 1,575 parking spaces. The current concept site plan includes 1,814 spaces. Table 8 shows a breakdown of the parking required per City Code. Table 8 - Parking Required per City Code Use Size Rate Parking Required Parking Provided Office 300,000sf 1/300sf 1,000 1,240 Multi-Family 460 units 1.25/unit 575 574 Source: City of Edina The parking demand was also analyzed based on industry standards. The parking generation rates used to estimate the parking demand was based on surveys of the parking generation for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition. Table 9 below shows the estimated parking generation rate and the anticipated peak parking demand on a typical weekday (Monday – Thursday) Table 9 - Site Parking Demand per ITE Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition Based on the results of the parking demand analysis, the parking stalls included in the proposed concept site plan would meet City Code requirements. It would also meet the guidelines based on industry standards. Travel Demand Management The City of Edina has adopted a Travel Demand Management (TDM) policy that emphasis the reduction of vehicular trips on congested roadways during peak travel times. For the proposed 6016 Vernon Avenue site redevelopment, a Tier 2 Plan is required based on requirement “c” 20 or more parking stalls. Tier 2 TDM plan is required when any of the following are met: a. Over 5,000 square feet of gross floor area; b. 10 or more residential units; c. 20 or more automobile parking stalls required by City Code; or d. Other development/redevelopment as required by Council condition. Use Size Rate Parking Required Office 300,000sf 3.45 / 1000sf 1,035 Multi-Family 460 units 1.2 / unit 552 MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 21 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA A Tier 2 Plan requires developers to demonstrate that proposed project is designed in ways that support TDM. This requires identifying strategies aimed at reducing employee and visitor traffic volumes, during peak travel hours. Based on the policy, the following shall be included in a Tier 2 TDM Plan: Tier 2 TDM Plan shall include: a. Strategies, implementation measures and timeline. A minimum of three (3) unique strategies must be identified for implementation. b. Proposed total expenditures to implement the TDM strategies. Based on these requirements Table 10 outlines some recommended TDM strategies for the site that could be implemented by the developer: Table 10 - TDM Strategies Strategy Implementation Measures Timeline Cost Providing bicycle parking spaces exceeding City requirements. • Include on site plan • With site plan approval • Construct with site improvements • TBD Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Create map or use available maps • Have available on Website • With occupancy • TBD Directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. • Include on site plan • With site plan approval • Construct with site improvements • TBD Restricting freight deliveries to off peak hours to avoid traffic conflicts on adjacent roadways. • Coordination with vendors • Verification with occupancy • On-going • TBD Conclusions / Recommendations Based on the analysis documented in this report, WSB offers the following conclusions and recommendations: • The existing Macy’s Furniture store located on the east side of France Avenue (CSAH 17) Between 72nd Street and Gallagher Drive is proposed to be removed. • The proposed site redevelopment is proposed to include 300,000 sf of office and 460 multi-family residential units and expected to generate 5,340 daily, 626 AM peak hour and 611 PM peak hour trips. Access to the site will be maintained at the existing access locations on France Avenue at the Business Access driveway and Gallagher Drive. The current concept plan provides 1,814 parking spaces for the site. • The crash data shows that based on the past 5 years, the intersections on France Avenue have calculated crash rates and severity rates that are below the MnDOT Statewide average rates. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 22 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA • The traffic operations analysis evaluated impacts for existing conditions and the horizon years of 2023 and 2030 for the local roadway network, specifically, the following intersections in the vicinity of the proposed site redevelopment: o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Hazelton Road o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at 72nd Street o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Business Access o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Gallagher Drive o France Avenue (CSAH 17) at Parklawn Avenue • With the existing conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and existing 2023 traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections are operating at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C. • With the 2025 no-build conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 no-build traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road which would operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour. • With the 2025 build conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control and projected 2025 build traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except the France Avenue northbound left turn at Hazelton Road during the PM peak hour and the northbound and southbound France Avenue left turns at Gallagher Drive during the PM peak hour. • With the 2030 build conditions based on the current lane geometry, traffic control an d projected 2030 build traffic volumes, the analysis results show that all intersections will continue to operate at overall LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS C or better, except France Avenue at Hazelton Road northbound and southbound left turn, France Avenue at Gallagher Drive northbound and southbound left turn and the France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue northbound and southbound left turn during the PM peak hour. • The queuing analysis found that during both the AM and PM peak hours in 2025 and 2030 with the proposed site redevelopment, the maximum queues will not exceed the available turn lanes storage. Based on the above conclusions no roadway improvements are recommended at this time. • The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not identify any pedestrian or bicycle facilities in the area adjacent to the site. The pedestrian improvements identified in the concept site plan should be completed with the proposed project. • There is currently transit bus service provided directly adjacent to the site along France Avenue. In addition, the Southdale Transit Center is located north of the site. No additional Transit improvements would be required. • Based on the results of the parking demand analysis, the parking included with the proposed site plan would meet City Code and industry standard requirements. No parking improvements or parking variance would be required. MACY’S SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY PAGE 23 WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA • The City of Edina has adopted a Travel Demand Management (TDM) Policy that requires developers to demonstrate that the proposed project is designed in ways that support TDM. This requires identifying strategies aimed at reducing employee and visitor traffic volumes, during peak travel hours. The proposed redevelopment site proposal would require a Tier 2 TDM Plan. Based on the requirements, some potential TDM strategies for the site that could be implemented by the developer include: o Providing bicycle parking spaces exceeding City requirements. o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. o Restricting freight deliveries to off peak hours to avoid traffic conflicts on adjacent roadways. MACY SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA APPENDIX A Existing Traffic Counts File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 2 26 2 0 30 1 0 4 1 6 6 37 2 0 45 1 0 2 0 3 84 06:15 AM 0 67 7 0 74 4 0 3 0 7 8 38 3 0 49 1 2 0 0 3 133 06:30 AM 0 36 4 0 40 3 0 3 0 6 2 77 0 0 79 3 0 1 0 4 129 06:45 AM 0 74 12 0 86 10 1 5 1 17 9 104 0 0 113 1 3 0 0 4 220 Total 2 203 25 0 230 18 1 15 2 36 25 256 5 0 286 6 5 3 0 14 566 07:00 AM 0 72 17 1 90 7 1 5 1 14 13 91 2 2 108 0 1 5 1 7 219 07:15 AM 0 122 17 0 139 19 4 16 0 39 17 108 1 2 128 1 2 4 1 8 314 07:30 AM 0 153 15 0 168 23 1 19 0 43 14 143 1 0 158 0 0 2 0 2 371 07:45 AM 3 185 24 0 212 22 0 19 0 41 20 137 1 0 158 0 2 3 0 5 416 Total 3 532 73 1 609 71 6 59 1 137 64 479 5 4 552 1 5 14 2 22 1320 08:00 AM 1 195 29 0 225 13 4 13 0 30 22 163 0 0 185 0 2 2 0 4 444 08:15 AM 1 177 19 0 197 17 1 16 1 35 20 168 1 1 190 1 3 1 0 5 427 08:30 AM 1 183 32 1 217 27 2 22 0 51 15 162 3 2 182 0 1 1 0 2 452 08:45 AM 2 196 27 0 225 21 0 10 0 31 24 183 11 0 218 0 2 0 0 2 476 Total 5 751 107 1 864 78 7 61 1 147 81 676 15 3 775 1 8 4 0 13 1799 03:00 PM 2 237 52 3 294 49 4 36 3 92 49 238 4 1 292 5 6 7 1 19 697 03:15 PM 2 255 39 1 297 36 4 37 0 77 42 266 2 2 312 3 4 4 0 11 697 03:30 PM 1 249 39 1 290 36 4 32 0 72 40 242 1 3 286 0 3 2 2 7 655 03:45 PM 4 196 58 0 258 51 5 28 1 85 52 240 2 3 297 3 2 3 0 8 648 Total 9 937 188 5 1139 172 17 133 4 326 183 986 9 9 1187 11 15 16 3 45 2697 04:00 PM 1 248 54 0 303 45 9 38 0 92 38 303 4 0 345 3 3 2 0 8 748 04:15 PM 3 219 34 1 257 41 4 41 1 87 31 259 3 1 294 2 2 0 2 6 644 04:30 PM 0 250 64 0 314 44 4 34 0 82 48 306 3 2 359 3 5 5 2 15 770 04:45 PM 2 251 39 2 294 36 1 37 3 77 51 317 3 0 371 4 2 6 1 13 755 Total 6 968 191 3 1168 166 18 150 4 338 168 1185 13 3 1369 12 12 13 5 42 2917 05:00 PM 2 231 45 0 278 65 6 39 2 112 49 265 3 1 318 0 4 2 0 6 714 05:15 PM 0 227 33 0 260 38 4 27 0 69 38 309 2 1 350 4 3 1 0 8 687 05:30 PM 2 202 31 0 235 42 5 45 0 92 37 275 2 0 314 0 3 4 0 7 648 05:45 PM 1 183 51 0 235 40 2 29 2 73 31 222 3 2 258 0 3 2 0 5 571 Total 5 843 160 0 1008 185 17 140 4 346 155 1071 10 4 1240 4 13 9 0 26 2620 Grand Total 30 4234 744 10 5018 690 66 558 16 1330 676 4653 57 23 5409 35 58 59 10 162 11919 Apprch %0.6 84.4 14.8 0.2 51.9 5 42 1.2 12.5 86 1.1 0.4 21.6 35.8 36.4 6.2 Total %0.3 35.5 6.2 0.1 42.1 5.8 0.6 4.7 0.1 11.2 5.7 39 0.5 0.2 45.4 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.1 1.4 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 1 195 29 0 225 13 4 13 0 30 22 163 0 0 185 0 2 2 0 4 444 08:15 AM 1 177 19 0 197 17 1 16 1 35 20 168 1 1 190 1 3 1 0 5 427 08:30 AM 1 183 32 1 217 27 2 22 0 51 15 162 3 2 182 0 1 1 0 2 452 08:45 AM 2 196 27 0 225 21 0 10 0 31 24 183 11 0 218 0 2 0 0 2 476 Total Volume 5 751 107 1 864 78 7 61 1 147 81 676 15 3 775 1 8 4 0 13 1799 % App. Total 0.6 86.9 12.4 0.1 53.1 4.8 41.5 0.7 10.5 87.2 1.9 0.4 7.7 61.5 30.8 0 PHF .625 .958 .836 .250 .960 .722 .438 .693 .250 .721 .844 .923 .341 .375 .889 .250 .667 .500 .000 .650 .945 France Ave Hazelton Rd Hazelton Rd France Ave Right 5 Thru 751 Left 107 Peds 1 InOut Total 758 864 1622 Right78 Thru7 Left61 Peds1 OutTotalIn196 147 343 Left 15 Thru 676 Right 81 Peds 3 Out TotalIn 813 775 1588 Left4 Thru8 Right1 Peds0 TotalOutIn27 13 40 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Hazelton Rd Site Code : 1 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Hazelton Rd 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Hazelton Rd From East France Ave From South Hazelton Rd From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 0 250 64 0 314 44 4 34 0 82 48 306 3 2 359 3 5 5 2 15 770 04:45 PM 2 251 39 2 294 36 1 37 3 77 51 317 3 0 371 4 2 6 1 13 755 05:00 PM 2 231 45 0 278 65 6 39 2 112 49 265 3 1 318 0 4 2 0 6 714 05:15 PM 0 227 33 0 260 38 4 27 0 69 38 309 2 1 350 4 3 1 0 8 687 Total Volume 4 959 181 2 1146 183 15 137 5 340 186 1197 11 4 1398 11 14 14 3 42 2926 % App. Total 0.3 83.7 15.8 0.2 53.8 4.4 40.3 1.5 13.3 85.6 0.8 0.3 26.2 33.3 33.3 7.1 PHF .500 .955 .707 .250 .912 .704 .625 .878 .417 .759 .912 .944 .917 .500 .942 .688 .700 .583 .375 .700 .950 France Ave Hazelton Rd Hazelton Rd France Ave Right 4 Thru 959 Left 181 Peds 2 InOut Total 1394 1146 2540 Right183 Thru15 Left137 Peds5 OutTotalIn381 340 721 Left 11 Thru 1197 Right 186 Peds 4 Out TotalIn 1107 1398 2505 Left14 Thru14 Right11 Peds3 TotalOutIn30 42 72 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 29 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 34 06:15 AM 0 69 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 73 06:30 AM 0 45 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 54 06:45 AM 1 79 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 87 Total 2 222 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 1 24 248 07:00 AM 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 10 87 07:15 AM 1 139 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 12 152 07:30 AM 3 168 0 1 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 2 28 200 07:45 AM 7 202 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 33 242 Total 12 585 0 1 598 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 3 83 681 08:00 AM 2 199 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 1 23 224 08:15 AM 3 195 0 0 198 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 2 23 221 08:30 AM 2 205 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 226 08:45 AM 4 207 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 18 229 Total 11 806 0 0 817 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 0 0 4 83 900 03:00 PM 5 275 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 294 03:15 PM 6 286 0 0 292 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 298 03:30 PM 3 269 0 1 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 1 14 287 03:45 PM 6 231 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 251 Total 20 1061 0 1 1082 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 1 48 1130 04:00 PM 6 284 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 10 300 04:15 PM 2 253 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 8 28 283 04:30 PM 5 288 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 17 310 04:45 PM 9 282 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 16 307 Total 22 1107 0 0 1129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 13 71 1200 05:00 PM 1 274 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 5 24 299 05:15 PM 3 256 0 2 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 2 8 269 05:30 PM 11 227 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 2 12 250 05:45 PM 4 218 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 228 Total 19 975 0 2 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 9 50 1046 Grand Total 86 4756 0 4 4846 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 328 0 0 31 359 5205 Apprch %1.8 98.1 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91.4 0 0 8.6 Total %1.7 91.4 0 0.1 93.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.3 0 0 0.6 6.9 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 7 202 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 33 242 08:00 AM 2 199 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 1 23 224 08:15 AM 3 195 0 0 198 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 2 23 221 08:30 AM 2 205 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 226 Total Volume 14 801 0 0 815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 4 98 913 % App. Total 1.7 98.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95.9 0 0 4.1 PHF .500 .977 .000 .000 .975 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .712 .000 .000 .500 .742 .943 France Ave 72nd St 72nd St France Ave Right 14 Thru 801 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 0 815 815 Right0 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn0 0 0 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 895 0 895 Left0 Thru0 Right94 Peds4 TotalOutIn14 98 112 Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & 72nd St Site Code : 2 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & 72nd St 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North 72nd St From East France Ave From South 72nd St From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 6 284 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 10 300 04:15 PM 2 253 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 8 28 283 04:30 PM 5 288 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 17 310 04:45 PM 9 282 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 16 307 Total Volume 22 1107 0 0 1129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 13 71 1200 % App. Total 1.9 98.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81.7 0 0 18.3 PHF .611 .961 .000 .000 .963 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .725 .000 .000 .406 .634 .968 France Ave 72nd St 72nd St France Ave Right 22 Thru 1107 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 0 1129 1129 Right0 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn0 0 0 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 1165 0 1165 Left0 Thru0 Right58 Peds13 TotalOutIn22 71 93 Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 43 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 46 06:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 50 2 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 56 06:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 5 73 1 0 79 0 0 0 0 0 85 06:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 10 110 6 1 127 0 0 0 0 0 133 Total 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 20 276 9 1 306 0 0 0 0 0 320 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 8 94 11 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 121 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 4 117 12 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 144 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 11 152 23 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 197 07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 9 147 11 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 175 Total 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 38 32 510 57 0 599 0 0 0 0 0 637 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 17 11 161 13 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 202 08:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 15 0 0 2 17 8 174 8 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 208 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 13 175 1 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 196 08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 11 198 3 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 228 Total 0 0 0 1 1 55 0 0 2 57 43 708 25 0 776 0 0 0 0 0 834 03:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 1 21 21 270 6 0 297 0 0 0 0 0 318 03:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 20 23 294 12 0 329 0 0 0 0 0 349 03:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 1 13 18 265 9 1 293 0 0 0 0 0 306 03:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 31 17 276 18 0 311 0 0 0 0 0 342 Total 0 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 2 85 79 1105 45 1 1230 0 0 0 0 0 1315 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 1 22 17 311 15 0 343 0 0 0 0 0 365 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 2 26 22 275 18 0 315 0 0 0 0 0 341 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 22 23 329 7 1 360 0 0 0 0 0 382 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 3 31 18 342 21 1 382 0 0 0 0 0 413 Total 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 6 101 80 1257 61 2 1400 0 0 0 0 0 1501 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 20 23 296 19 0 338 0 0 0 0 0 358 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 1 27 32 332 20 0 384 0 0 0 0 0 411 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 21 23 288 11 0 322 0 0 0 0 0 343 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 19 19 236 16 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 290 Total 0 0 0 0 0 84 0 0 3 87 97 1152 66 0 1315 0 0 0 0 0 1402 Grand Total 0 0 0 1 1 369 0 0 13 382 351 5008 263 4 5626 0 0 0 0 0 6009 Apprch %0 0 0 100 96.6 0 0 3.4 6.2 89 4.7 0.1 0 0 0 0 Total %0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 0 0.2 6.4 5.8 83.3 4.4 0.1 93.6 0 0 0 0 0 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 17 11 161 13 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 202 08:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 15 0 0 2 17 8 174 8 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 208 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 13 175 1 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 196 08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 11 198 3 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 228 Total Volume 0 0 0 1 1 55 0 0 2 57 43 708 25 0 776 0 0 0 0 0 834 % App. Total 0 0 0 100 96.5 0 0 3.5 5.5 91.2 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .250 .250 .809 .000 .000 .250 .838 .827 .894 .481 .000 .915 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .914 France Ave Business Access France Ave Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 1 InOut Total 763 1 764 Right55 Thru0 Left0 Peds2 OutTotalIn43 57 100 Left 25 Thru 708 Right 43 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 776 776 Left0 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn25 0 25 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Business Access Site Code : 3 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Business Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Business Access From East France Ave From South From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 22 23 329 7 1 360 0 0 0 0 0 382 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 3 31 18 342 21 1 382 0 0 0 0 0 413 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 20 23 296 19 0 338 0 0 0 0 0 358 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 1 27 32 332 20 0 384 0 0 0 0 0 411 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 5 100 96 1299 67 2 1464 0 0 0 0 0 1564 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 5 6.6 88.7 4.6 0.1 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .848 .000 .000 .417 .806 .750 .950 .798 .500 .953 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .947 France Ave Business Access France Ave Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 0 InOut Total 1394 0 1394 Right95 Thru0 Left0 Peds5 OutTotalIn96 100 196 Left 67 Thru 1299 Right 96 Peds 2 Out TotalIn 0 1464 1464 Left0 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn67 0 67 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 31 1 0 33 0 0 0 1 1 2 40 0 2 44 0 0 4 0 4 82 06:15 AM 1 68 3 1 73 1 0 1 0 2 1 49 0 1 51 1 0 6 0 7 133 06:30 AM 3 48 3 0 54 0 0 1 0 1 1 72 0 2 75 2 0 7 0 9 139 06:45 AM 3 81 2 1 87 0 0 6 0 6 1 110 5 3 119 3 1 18 0 22 234 Total 8 228 9 2 247 1 0 8 1 10 5 271 5 8 289 6 1 35 0 42 588 07:00 AM 6 74 4 0 84 2 1 3 0 6 1 100 5 2 108 3 1 9 0 13 211 07:15 AM 11 135 5 0 151 3 0 7 0 10 3 114 10 3 130 9 0 16 0 25 316 07:30 AM 9 178 6 0 193 0 0 7 0 7 8 161 11 3 183 11 0 27 2 40 423 07:45 AM 25 198 6 0 229 0 1 9 0 10 7 147 10 1 165 7 0 15 0 22 426 Total 51 585 21 0 657 5 2 26 0 33 19 522 36 9 586 30 1 67 2 100 1376 08:00 AM 13 198 6 0 217 4 2 16 0 22 8 172 15 3 198 10 0 13 3 26 463 08:15 AM 20 201 5 0 226 0 1 7 0 8 5 170 8 2 185 7 0 18 2 27 446 08:30 AM 16 201 4 0 221 3 0 10 0 13 9 172 10 5 196 4 0 14 1 19 449 08:45 AM 20 202 6 1 229 2 0 7 3 12 7 208 17 8 240 6 0 6 0 12 493 Total 69 802 21 1 893 9 3 40 3 55 29 722 50 18 819 27 0 51 6 84 1851 03:00 PM 22 246 19 0 287 22 1 29 1 53 17 255 8 8 288 13 2 17 1 33 661 03:15 PM 24 249 22 0 295 26 0 19 0 45 26 272 6 5 309 10 0 29 0 39 688 03:30 PM 13 239 19 0 271 13 0 25 2 40 22 265 12 6 305 8 0 10 0 18 634 03:45 PM 11 210 31 0 252 24 1 33 0 58 17 255 5 8 285 9 3 27 0 39 634 Total 70 944 91 0 1105 85 2 106 3 196 82 1047 31 27 1187 40 5 83 1 129 2617 04:00 PM 23 251 26 0 300 19 2 20 1 42 17 310 16 11 354 11 2 11 2 26 722 04:15 PM 23 220 17 0 260 20 1 23 1 45 14 279 11 12 316 15 1 24 3 43 664 04:30 PM 23 261 19 1 304 15 4 22 2 43 13 321 7 3 344 13 0 19 1 33 724 04:45 PM 20 260 24 0 304 18 5 21 1 45 30 332 8 7 377 8 0 20 1 29 755 Total 89 992 86 1 1168 72 12 86 5 175 74 1242 42 33 1391 47 3 74 7 131 2865 05:00 PM 23 241 29 0 293 24 3 17 0 44 10 305 9 23 347 12 1 16 6 35 719 05:15 PM 25 230 21 0 276 18 2 28 1 49 34 334 6 6 380 14 1 19 0 34 739 05:30 PM 20 193 16 0 229 16 4 15 0 35 36 295 9 17 357 6 2 11 0 19 640 05:45 PM 16 185 25 0 226 29 4 24 1 58 20 219 7 13 259 3 0 20 0 23 566 Total 84 849 91 0 1024 87 13 84 2 186 100 1153 31 59 1343 35 4 66 6 111 2664 Grand Total 371 4400 319 4 5094 259 32 350 14 655 309 4957 195 154 5615 185 14 376 22 597 11961 Apprch %7.3 86.4 6.3 0.1 39.5 4.9 53.4 2.1 5.5 88.3 3.5 2.7 31 2.3 63 3.7 Total %3.1 36.8 2.7 0 42.6 2.2 0.3 2.9 0.1 5.5 2.6 41.4 1.6 1.3 46.9 1.5 0.1 3.1 0.2 5 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 13 198 6 0 217 4 2 16 0 22 8 172 15 3 198 10 0 13 3 26 463 08:15 AM 20 201 5 0 226 0 1 7 0 8 5 170 8 2 185 7 0 18 2 27 446 08:30 AM 16 201 4 0 221 3 0 10 0 13 9 172 10 5 196 4 0 14 1 19 449 08:45 AM 20 202 6 1 229 2 0 7 3 12 7 208 17 8 240 6 0 6 0 12 493 Total Volume 69 802 21 1 893 9 3 40 3 55 29 722 50 18 819 27 0 51 6 84 1851 % App. Total 7.7 89.8 2.4 0.1 16.4 5.5 72.7 5.5 3.5 88.2 6.1 2.2 32.1 0 60.7 7.1 PHF .863 .993 .875 .250 .975 .563 .375 .625 .250 .625 .806 .868 .735 .563 .853 .675 .000 .708 .500 .778 .939 France Ave Gallagher Dr Gallagher Dr France Ave Right 69 Thru 802 Left 21 Peds 1 InOut Total 782 893 1675 Right9 Thru3 Left40 Peds3 OutTotalIn50 55 105 Left 50 Thru 722 Right 29 Peds 18 Out TotalIn 869 819 1688 Left51 Thru0 Right27 Peds6 TotalOutIn122 84 206 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Gallagher Dr Site Code : 4 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Gallagher Dr 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Gallagher Dr From East France Ave From South Gallagher Dr From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 23 261 19 1 304 15 4 22 2 43 13 321 7 3 344 13 0 19 1 33 724 04:45 PM 20 260 24 0 304 18 5 21 1 45 30 332 8 7 377 8 0 20 1 29 755 05:00 PM 23 241 29 0 293 24 3 17 0 44 10 305 9 23 347 12 1 16 6 35 719 05:15 PM 25 230 21 0 276 18 2 28 1 49 34 334 6 6 380 14 1 19 0 34 739 Total Volume 91 992 93 1 1177 75 14 88 4 181 87 1292 30 39 1448 47 2 74 8 131 2937 % App. Total 7.7 84.3 7.9 0.1 41.4 7.7 48.6 2.2 6 89.2 2.1 2.7 35.9 1.5 56.5 6.1 PHF .910 .950 .802 .250 .968 .781 .700 .786 .500 .923 .640 .967 .833 .424 .953 .839 .500 .925 .333 .936 .973 France Ave Gallagher Dr Gallagher Dr France Ave Right 91 Thru 992 Left 93 Peds 1 InOut Total 1441 1177 2618 Right75 Thru14 Left88 Peds4 OutTotalIn182 181 363 Left 30 Thru 1292 Right 87 Peds 39 Out TotalIn 1127 1448 2575 Left74 Thru2 Right47 Peds8 TotalOutIn135 131 266 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 1 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds Groups Printed- vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 06:00 AM 1 22 8 0 31 2 1 1 1 5 10 35 8 0 53 7 1 6 0 14 103 06:15 AM 9 42 12 0 63 3 3 1 0 7 16 45 11 0 72 6 1 2 0 9 151 06:30 AM 4 39 10 0 53 5 1 2 0 8 26 64 20 1 111 10 0 7 0 17 189 06:45 AM 11 53 20 0 84 8 3 3 0 14 35 103 23 0 161 8 5 7 1 21 280 Total 25 156 50 0 231 18 8 7 1 34 87 247 62 1 397 31 7 22 1 61 723 07:00 AM 7 51 16 0 74 9 4 4 0 17 17 90 19 0 126 11 4 4 1 20 237 07:15 AM 13 118 19 1 151 13 4 6 0 23 26 108 31 0 165 14 7 11 0 32 371 07:30 AM 15 155 21 0 191 17 3 4 0 24 22 143 22 4 191 11 4 18 0 33 439 07:45 AM 20 168 25 0 213 12 9 13 0 34 35 137 32 1 205 15 7 12 0 34 486 Total 55 492 81 1 629 51 20 27 0 98 100 478 104 5 687 51 22 45 1 119 1533 08:00 AM 13 166 37 0 216 16 6 14 0 36 24 157 25 2 208 18 10 15 1 44 504 08:15 AM 18 160 19 0 197 23 8 15 0 46 25 156 21 4 206 17 9 11 1 38 487 08:30 AM 19 171 24 0 214 24 3 14 0 41 15 150 18 3 186 19 2 11 0 32 473 08:45 AM 20 175 29 0 224 18 7 21 0 46 25 214 22 0 261 24 4 13 0 41 572 Total 70 672 109 0 851 81 24 64 0 169 89 677 86 9 861 78 25 50 2 155 2036 03:00 PM 17 240 40 0 297 30 13 36 1 80 21 231 28 4 284 26 5 13 1 45 706 03:15 PM 16 197 34 0 247 39 7 32 0 78 23 238 24 3 288 14 6 23 0 43 656 03:30 PM 16 250 27 0 293 35 9 35 0 79 22 243 33 5 303 22 5 17 0 44 719 03:45 PM 19 199 42 0 260 27 8 33 0 68 19 257 29 4 309 24 3 18 0 45 682 Total 68 886 143 0 1097 131 37 136 1 305 85 969 114 16 1184 86 19 71 1 177 2763 04:00 PM 12 216 37 0 265 38 12 38 2 90 15 265 19 2 301 38 8 16 0 62 718 04:15 PM 13 224 36 0 273 22 18 32 0 72 12 270 22 1 305 34 3 15 0 52 702 04:30 PM 11 241 41 0 293 35 10 25 0 70 18 293 18 1 330 35 9 22 1 67 760 04:45 PM 8 240 53 0 301 37 10 18 2 67 10 284 23 2 319 25 5 24 0 54 741 Total 44 921 167 0 1132 132 50 113 4 299 55 1112 82 6 1255 132 25 77 1 235 2921 05:00 PM 10 254 27 0 291 35 11 22 0 68 12 314 25 3 354 32 6 16 0 54 767 05:15 PM 14 219 26 0 259 24 10 19 1 54 12 314 19 6 351 15 7 14 0 36 700 05:30 PM 6 204 28 0 238 20 10 14 0 44 21 290 31 3 345 15 9 7 0 31 658 05:45 PM 7 173 24 0 204 20 5 17 2 44 18 265 31 6 320 19 8 9 1 37 605 Total 37 850 105 0 992 99 36 72 3 210 63 1183 106 18 1370 81 30 46 1 158 2730 Grand Total 299 3977 655 1 4932 512 175 419 9 1115 479 4666 554 55 5754 459 128 311 7 905 12706 Apprch %6.1 80.6 13.3 0 45.9 15.7 37.6 0.8 8.3 81.1 9.6 1 50.7 14.1 34.4 0.8 Total %2.4 31.3 5.2 0 38.8 4 1.4 3.3 0.1 8.8 3.8 36.7 4.4 0.4 45.3 3.6 1 2.4 0.1 7.1 wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 2 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 13 166 37 0 216 16 6 14 0 36 24 157 25 2 208 18 10 15 1 44 504 08:15 AM 18 160 19 0 197 23 8 15 0 46 25 156 21 4 206 17 9 11 1 38 487 08:30 AM 19 171 24 0 214 24 3 14 0 41 15 150 18 3 186 19 2 11 0 32 473 08:45 AM 20 175 29 0 224 18 7 21 0 46 25 214 22 0 261 24 4 13 0 41 572 Total Volume 70 672 109 0 851 81 24 64 0 169 89 677 86 9 861 78 25 50 2 155 2036 % App. Total 8.2 79 12.8 0 47.9 14.2 37.9 0 10.3 78.6 10 1 50.3 16.1 32.3 1.3 PHF .875 .960 .736 .000 .950 .844 .750 .762 .000 .918 .890 .791 .860 .563 .825 .813 .625 .833 .500 .881 .890 France Ave Parklawn Ave Parklawn Ave France Ave Right 70 Thru 672 Left 109 Peds 0 InOut Total 808 851 1659 Right81 Thru24 Left64 Peds0 OutTotalIn223 169 392 Left 86 Thru 677 Right 89 Peds 9 Out TotalIn 814 861 1675 Left50 Thru25 Right78 Peds2 TotalOutIn180 155 335 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 File Name : France Ave & Parklawn Ave Site Code : 5 Start Date : 4/11/2023 Page No : 3 France Ave & Parklawn Ave 6-9am & 3-6pm vehicles & peds France Ave From North Parklawn Ave From East France Ave From South Parklawn Ave From West Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 13 224 36 0 273 22 18 32 0 72 12 270 22 1 305 34 3 15 0 52 702 04:30 PM 11 241 41 0 293 35 10 25 0 70 18 293 18 1 330 35 9 22 1 67 760 04:45 PM 8 240 53 0 301 37 10 18 2 67 10 284 23 2 319 25 5 24 0 54 741 05:00 PM 10 254 27 0 291 35 11 22 0 68 12 314 25 3 354 32 6 16 0 54 767 Total Volume 42 959 157 0 1158 129 49 97 2 277 52 1161 88 7 1308 126 23 77 1 227 2970 % App. Total 3.6 82.8 13.6 0 46.6 17.7 35 0.7 4 88.8 6.7 0.5 55.5 10.1 33.9 0.4 PHF .808 .944 .741 .000 .962 .872 .681 .758 .250 .962 .722 .924 .880 .583 .924 .900 .639 .802 .250 .847 .968 France Ave Parklawn Ave Parklawn Ave France Ave Right 42 Thru 959 Left 157 Peds 0 InOut Total 1367 1158 2525 Right129 Thru49 Left97 Peds2 OutTotalIn232 277 509 Left 88 Thru 1161 Right 52 Peds 7 Out TotalIn 1182 1308 2490 Left77 Thru23 Right126 Peds1 TotalOutIn179 227 406 Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM vehicles & peds Peak Hour Data North wsb 701 Xenia Ave S, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 MACY SITE REDEVELOPMENT EAW TRAFFIC STUDY WSB PROJECT NO. R-22453-000 CITY OF EDINA APPENDIX B Traffic Operations Analysis Worksheets SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2447 2629 2497 2477 2383 2486 Vehs Exited 2451 2591 2505 2479 2384 2480 Starting Vehs 71 65 89 68 71 69 Ending Vehs 67 103 81 66 70 76 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2121 2271 2161 2130 2052 2147 Travel Time (hr) 75.3 81.6 77.8 76.3 72.9 76.8 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 17.8 16.4 15.8 14.6 16.1 Total Stops 2118 2358 2246 2162 2034 2184 Fuel Used (gal) 70.0 75.9 72.2 70.6 67.5 71.2 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2447 2629 2497 2477 2383 2486 Vehs Exited 2451 2591 2505 2479 2384 2480 Starting Vehs 71 65 89 68 71 69 Ending Vehs 67 103 81 66 70 76 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 1 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2121 2271 2161 2130 2052 2147 Travel Time (hr) 75.3 81.6 77.8 76.3 72.9 76.8 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 17.8 16.4 15.8 14.6 16.1 Total Stops 2118 2358 2246 2162 2034 2184 Fuel Used (gal) 70.0 75.9 72.2 70.6 67.5 71.2 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.1 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.8 0.7 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.2 30.8 4.1 29.9 28.6 5.4 37.8 6.9 2.8 30.0 3.1 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.7 27.4 3.9 27.6 25.5 5.2 35.7 4.2 2.3 27.2 1.1 0.4 Total Stops 2 7 2 55 7 70 12 231 33 89 106 1 Stop/Veh 0.67 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.88 0.86 0.92 0.34 0.41 0.89 0.14 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 0.4 1.1 0.4 12.4 1.7 17.1 1.0 56.3 6.7 27.0 213.8 1.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.2 2.7 0.3 1.7 6.1 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 12 22 13 14 22 6 21 21 17 35 34 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.9 5.9 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.9 29.2 38.9 27.0 29.3 34.1 21.1 34.5 46.6 31.1 36.5 41.1 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 18 2 5 79 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 3 1 66 9 129 7 573 62 205 2197 6 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 1 17 0 63 5 22 301 1 Vehicles Entered 3 7 2 59 8 81 13 676 81 98 770 4 Vehicles Exited 3 7 2 58 7 80 13 681 81 98 773 4 Hourly Exit Rate 3 7 2 58 7 80 13 681 81 98 773 4 Input Volume 4 8 1 61 7 78 15 680 81 107 753 5 % of Volume 75 88 200 95 100 103 87 100 100 92 103 80 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 2 6 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 3.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.5 Stop Delay (hr) 2.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.3 Total Stops 615 Stop/Veh 0.34 Travel Dist (mi) 339.2 Travel Time (hr) 13.1 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 9.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.1 HC Emissions (g) 112 CO Emissions (g) 3260 NOx Emissions (g) 417 Vehicles Entered 1802 Vehicles Exited 1807 Hourly Exit Rate 1807 Input Volume 1800 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 995 Occupancy (veh) 13 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.1 4.4 0.2 1.0 0.5 0.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.5 2.9 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 85 13 0 0 0 98 Stop/Veh 0.98 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 22.8 1.0 31.0 71.1 1.3 127.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.9 0.1 0.9 2.1 0.1 4.0 Avg Speed (mph) 25 13 35 34 26 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.0 0.9 3.0 0.0 4.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 36.3 36.2 33.8 23.5 41.1 27.5 HC Emissions (g) 7 0 12 45 0 64 CO Emissions (g) 135 6 375 1917 13 2446 NOx Emissions (g) 19 1 45 161 1 226 Vehicles Entered 86 24 772 817 16 1715 Vehicles Exited 86 24 771 817 16 1714 Hourly Exit Rate 86 24 771 817 16 1714 Input Volume 94 25 777 801 14 1711 % of Volume 91 96 99 102 114 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)890 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Stops 12 0 0 0 12 Stop/Veh 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 3.4 58.3 3.8 36.3 101.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 1.7 0.2 1.1 3.2 Avg Speed (mph) 19 34 23 34 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 2.5 0.1 1.2 3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 42.0 23.1 33.2 30.0 25.9 HC Emissions (g) 1 33 2 18 53 CO Emissions (g) 17 1538 62 598 2215 NOx Emissions (g) 2 121 6 65 194 Vehicles Entered 51 745 48 903 1747 Vehicles Exited 51 744 48 904 1747 Hourly Exit Rate 51 744 48 904 1747 Input Volume 55 746 43 895 1739 % of Volume 93 100 112 101 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)809 Occupancy (veh) 0 2 0 1 3 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.3 4.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 3.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 30.7 5.4 28.0 25.0 5.2 27.5 4.6 3.1 33.9 3.6 1.8 6.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 2.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 28.5 4.8 26.0 22.5 4.9 24.0 1.7 1.3 32.4 1.9 1.4 4.0 Total Stops 45 23 32 3 8 50 115 7 18 141 16 458 Stop/Veh 0.90 0.88 0.91 0.75 0.89 0.93 0.16 0.22 0.95 0.17 0.23 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 7.9 4.1 4.5 0.5 1.1 10.7 146.4 6.3 1.4 61.6 5.4 249.9 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7 4.8 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.2 10.2 Avg Speed (mph) 11 21 10 11 20 14 31 28 6 26 22 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 5.9 0.2 0.1 1.9 0.1 9.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.2 35.3 24.4 27.0 36.8 22.5 25.0 28.6 22.0 32.8 54.1 27.0 HC Emissions (g) 2 2 1 0 0 3 84 4 0 24 1 121 CO Emissions (g) 53 37 28 3 4 197 3499 145 10 844 32 4853 NOx Emissions (g) 5 5 3 0 0 14 299 12 1 86 3 428 Vehicles Entered 50 26 35 4 9 54 738 32 19 816 71 1854 Vehicles Exited 49 26 35 4 9 53 736 32 19 816 71 1850 Hourly Exit Rate 49 26 35 4 9 53 736 32 19 816 71 1850 Input Volume 51 27 40 3 9 50 729 29 21 806 69 1834 % of Volume 96 96 88 133 100 106 101 110 90 101 103 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)863 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 10 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.7 0.1 0.8 1.8 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.0 27.5 5.3 26.6 31.5 4.8 30.8 8.7 2.5 27.3 9.2 5.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.2 25.2 4.6 24.7 28.5 5.1 27.3 5.0 2.1 23.9 5.5 3.8 Total Stops 41 24 68 56 20 75 74 239 36 95 242 31 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.95 0.86 0.87 0.34 0.38 0.87 0.34 0.44 Travel Dist (mi) 6.0 3.6 10.1 4.0 1.4 5.6 30.8 252.0 34.7 21.1 137.2 13.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.4 1.6 8.1 1.0 1.5 5.3 0.5 Avg Speed (mph) 10 10 18 6 6 15 20 31 33 14 26 26 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.9 6.9 0.9 0.8 4.7 0.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.2 25.5 34.5 20.1 21.6 44.3 33.7 36.7 38.8 25.9 29.4 30.7 HC Emissions (g) 1 2 2 1 0 1 8 79 13 5 62 8 CO Emissions (g) 24 39 53 30 5 18 227 2242 343 278 2300 282 NOx Emissions (g) 3 5 8 3 0 2 31 311 48 20 221 25 Vehicles Entered 47 28 78 63 21 87 85 689 94 107 698 70 Vehicles Exited 45 28 78 62 21 86 84 692 94 108 696 69 Hourly Exit Rate 45 28 78 62 21 86 84 692 94 108 696 69 Input Volume 50 25 78 64 24 81 86 677 89 109 694 70 % of Volume 90 112 100 97 88 106 98 102 106 99 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 8 1 1 5 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 6.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Stop Delay (hr) 4.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.4 Total Stops 1001 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 520.2 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 15.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.2 HC Emissions (g) 182 CO Emissions (g) 5839 NOx Emissions (g) 678 Vehicles Entered 2067 Vehicles Exited 2063 Hourly Exit Rate 2063 Input Volume 2047 % of Volume 101 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 800 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 22.1 Stop Delay (hr) 10.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Total Stops 2184 Stop/Veh 0.85 Travel Dist (mi) 2146.7 Travel Time (hr) 76.8 Avg Speed (mph) 28 Fuel Used (gal) 71.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.1 HC Emissions (g) 892 CO Emissions (g) 30275 NOx Emissions (g) 3236 Vehicles Entered 2486 Vehicles Exited 2480 Hourly Exit Rate 2480 Input Volume 12725 % of Volume 19 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 645 Occupancy (veh) 76 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 30 40 78 36 59 64 106 124 113 63 115 96 Average Queue (ft) 3 8 35 5 25 12 46 57 50 22 54 38 95th Queue (ft) 16 31 69 23 49 40 85 105 103 54 100 86 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 80 49 Average Queue (ft) 17 11 95th Queue (ft) 53 35 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 75 45 Average Queue (ft) 34 12 95th Queue (ft) 57 37 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 30 Average Queue (ft) 7 95th Queue (ft) 24 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 90 55 74 39 85 72 91 88 46 93 82 92 Average Queue (ft) 36 18 27 10 37 25 32 36 16 40 35 34 95th Queue (ft) 73 46 59 33 72 60 75 79 41 78 73 71 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 80 78 62 90 38 74 112 143 132 94 54 136 Average Queue (ft) 33 22 34 36 13 22 51 68 47 36 18 59 95th Queue (ft) 66 59 58 73 35 48 100 121 96 75 43 107 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 102 120 129 Average Queue (ft) 46 60 52 95th Queue (ft) 87 108 104 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3843 3875 3772 3786 3884 3831 Vehs Exited 3839 3862 3728 3776 3869 3814 Starting Vehs 121 139 93 124 116 118 Ending Vehs 125 152 137 134 131 133 Denied Entry Before 1 2 0 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 1 0 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3226 3273 3167 3190 3230 3217 Travel Time (hr) 128.6 129.8 123.3 126.3 128.7 127.3 Total Delay (hr) 37.3 37.4 34.3 35.8 36.9 36.4 Total Stops 4344 4333 4028 4162 4253 4224 Fuel Used (gal) 114.8 116.5 111.7 113.4 114.2 114.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3843 3875 3772 3786 3884 3831 Vehs Exited 3839 3862 3728 3776 3869 3814 Starting Vehs 121 139 93 124 116 118 Ending Vehs 125 152 137 134 131 133 Denied Entry Before 1 2 0 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 1 0 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3226 3273 3167 3190 3230 3217 Travel Time (hr) 128.6 129.8 123.3 126.3 128.7 127.3 Total Delay (hr) 37.3 37.4 34.3 35.8 36.9 36.4 Total Stops 4344 4333 4028 4162 4253 4224 Fuel Used (gal) 114.8 116.5 111.7 113.4 114.2 114.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.1 0.2 3.0 0.6 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 5.0 0.2 1.5 1.5 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.4 23.8 6.3 29.3 26.5 9.8 33.4 14.4 5.0 29.7 5.6 2.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 3.4 0.1 1.3 0.7 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.7 20.8 6.0 26.1 22.9 8.8 30.9 9.7 3.8 25.7 2.4 2.1 Total Stops 14 11 7 113 12 151 12 661 62 149 225 1 Stop/Veh 0.93 0.79 0.78 0.86 0.86 0.78 0.92 0.53 0.54 0.85 0.23 0.33 Travel Dist (mi) 2.3 2.1 1.4 27.4 2.9 40.4 1.0 101.7 9.4 48.0 273.4 0.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.2 0.2 2.2 0.2 7.6 0.5 2.9 8.5 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 13 20 13 14 20 7 13 18 17 32 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 1.3 0.0 3.4 0.2 1.6 7.6 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.0 28.7 35.2 25.9 28.9 31.7 22.5 29.7 39.6 30.7 36.1 39.4 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 11 0 12 0 28 2 13 90 0 CO Emissions (g) 7 9 6 267 14 301 7 901 95 446 2771 4 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 32 1 35 0 98 7 47 344 1 Vehicles Entered 15 13 9 130 14 191 13 1255 114 174 986 3 Vehicles Exited 15 14 9 129 14 191 12 1254 114 172 987 3 Hourly Exit Rate 15 14 9 129 14 191 12 1254 114 172 987 3 Input Volume 14 14 11 137 15 183 11 1246 116 181 981 4 % of Volume 107 100 82 94 93 104 109 101 98 95 101 75 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 8 1 3 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 10.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.6 Stop Delay (hr) 7.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.9 Total Stops 1418 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 511.0 Travel Time (hr) 24.8 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 15.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.0 HC Emissions (g) 158 CO Emissions (g) 4826 NOx Emissions (g) 568 Vehicles Entered 2917 Vehicles Exited 2914 Hourly Exit Rate 2914 Input Volume 2913 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 528 Occupancy (veh) 24 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.6 6.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.1 4.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 Total Stops 56 40 1 0 1 98 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 15.0 2.6 55.7 96.5 1.8 171.6 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.2 1.7 3.1 0.1 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 24 11 33 31 23 30 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 1.7 4.9 0.1 7.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 37.0 32.2 32.5 19.7 30.1 24.0 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 24 73 0 102 CO Emissions (g) 81 13 887 3385 26 4392 NOx Emissions (g) 11 2 83 256 2 354 Vehicles Entered 56 64 1384 1106 21 2631 Vehicles Exited 56 63 1383 1111 21 2634 Hourly Exit Rate 56 63 1383 1111 21 2634 Input Volume 58 67 1374 1108 22 2629 % of Volume 97 94 101 100 95 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)631 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 3.9 1.9 2.0 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 44 0 0 0 44 Stop/Veh 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 Travel Dist (mi) 6.3 105.9 7.7 46.9 166.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.4 3.6 0.4 1.3 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 16 30 21 35 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 5.7 0.3 1.4 7.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.3 18.5 24.9 32.5 21.8 HC Emissions (g) 1 82 4 21 108 CO Emissions (g) 42 3898 158 701 4799 NOx Emissions (g) 4 294 16 74 388 Vehicles Entered 94 1358 98 1165 2715 Vehicles Exited 94 1359 99 1165 2717 Hourly Exit Rate 94 1359 99 1165 2717 Input Volume 95 1350 96 1165 2706 % of Volume 99 101 103 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)450 Occupancy (veh) 0 4 0 1 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.4 0.3 3.8 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 4.3 0.3 0.7 1.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.7 25.7 5.6 27.7 25.1 9.7 28.9 11.7 10.8 32.2 4.0 2.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.1 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.3 20.4 5.0 24.9 21.4 8.5 24.6 5.8 5.9 30.1 2.2 1.6 Total Stops 67 1 41 77 12 63 29 424 35 78 185 22 Stop/Veh 0.87 1.00 0.80 0.83 0.80 0.80 0.97 0.32 0.41 0.95 0.19 0.23 Travel Dist (mi) 12.1 0.2 7.9 11.8 1.9 10.1 5.9 259.5 17.0 6.1 74.8 7.1 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.2 0.6 0.4 11.1 0.8 1.0 3.0 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 11 15 21 10 11 17 14 23 21 6 25 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 11.5 0.7 0.3 2.3 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.6 30.0 35.1 21.4 25.2 30.0 22.4 22.6 25.7 21.0 33.1 55.2 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 2 5 0 5 4 152 11 2 27 1 CO Emissions (g) 108 1 53 156 15 124 135 6503 412 69 929 33 NOx Emissions (g) 11 0 6 15 1 13 12 546 37 6 99 3 Vehicles Entered 77 1 50 92 15 78 30 1301 85 82 988 94 Vehicles Exited 75 1 50 91 15 78 29 1303 85 81 988 94 Hourly Exit Rate 75 1 50 91 15 78 29 1303 85 81 988 94 Input Volume 79 2 47 88 14 75 30 1292 87 93 981 91 % of Volume 95 50 106 103 107 104 97 101 98 87 101 103 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 11 1 1 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 8.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.4 Stop Delay (hr) 5.4 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.6 Total Stops 1034 Stop/Veh 0.36 Travel Dist (mi) 414.3 Travel Time (hr) 20.2 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 16.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.7 HC Emissions (g) 214 CO Emissions (g) 8539 NOx Emissions (g) 750 Vehicles Entered 2893 Vehicles Exited 2890 Hourly Exit Rate 2890 Input Volume 2879 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 434 Occupancy (veh) 20 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.8 4.7 0.0 1.2 3.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.0 30.4 7.4 25.9 29.1 8.7 34.4 13.8 2.9 27.0 12.6 8.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.7 2.7 0.0 1.0 2.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.9 28.1 6.6 23.7 26.1 8.7 30.1 8.1 2.6 23.0 8.0 5.3 Total Stops 67 21 102 74 38 115 76 555 25 136 403 18 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.88 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.85 0.88 0.46 0.47 0.88 0.43 0.46 Travel Dist (mi) 9.9 3.1 15.6 5.6 2.9 8.8 31.2 438.9 19.0 30.1 185.2 7.6 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.7 15.8 0.6 2.1 8.1 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 6 6 12 19 28 33 14 23 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 1.0 12.0 0.5 1.2 6.7 0.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.5 24.5 33.0 19.9 21.4 38.4 32.8 36.6 38.3 25.7 27.5 28.4 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 3 2 1 1 5 128 8 10 89 4 CO Emissions (g) 62 10 71 46 23 33 184 3696 206 456 3429 163 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 10 5 2 4 22 494 28 36 308 14 Vehicles Entered 76 24 121 87 46 136 85 1200 52 153 939 38 Vehicles Exited 77 24 120 88 45 136 84 1204 52 150 935 38 Hourly Exit Rate 77 24 120 88 45 136 84 1204 52 150 935 38 Input Volume 77 23 126 97 49 129 88 1203 52 157 918 42 % of Volume 100 104 95 91 92 105 95 100 100 96 102 90 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 16 1 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 12.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 15.0 Stop Delay (hr) 8.8 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.6 Total Stops 1630 Stop/Veh 0.55 Travel Dist (mi) 758.1 Travel Time (hr) 33.0 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 23.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.6 HC Emissions (g) 254 CO Emissions (g) 8380 NOx Emissions (g) 933 Vehicles Entered 2957 Vehicles Exited 2953 Hourly Exit Rate 2953 Input Volume 2961 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 505 Occupancy (veh) 33 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.8 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 35.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 32.5 Stop Delay (hr) 22.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 20.0 Total Stops 4224 Stop/Veh 1.07 Travel Dist (mi) 3217.2 Travel Time (hr) 127.3 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 114.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.2 HC Emissions (g) 1372 CO Emissions (g) 49725 NOx Emissions (g) 4960 Vehicles Entered 3831 Vehicles Exited 3814 Hourly Exit Rate 3814 Input Volume 19273 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 389 Occupancy (veh) 127 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 42 57 142 36 111 43 168 201 206 77 181 150 Average Queue (ft) 12 17 70 10 51 13 108 129 134 33 84 68 95th Queue (ft) 37 48 125 31 93 37 159 185 192 63 145 124 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 116 94 Average Queue (ft) 37 25 95th Queue (ft) 84 65 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 62 61 24 Average Queue (ft) 26 26 1 95th Queue (ft) 50 55 10 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 67 Average Queue (ft) 21 95th Queue (ft) 46 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 100 59 121 117 80 152 164 196 127 99 108 103 Average Queue (ft) 49 26 53 43 25 74 88 110 54 47 48 42 95th Queue (ft) 91 53 97 85 62 131 146 186 101 85 89 84 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 Existing PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 95 57 104 93 102 102 119 181 174 183 50 166 Average Queue (ft) 45 21 44 45 26 37 52 117 105 92 13 83 95th Queue (ft) 83 51 76 86 72 75 95 169 164 156 36 144 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 1 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 128 141 158 Average Queue (ft) 68 85 86 95th Queue (ft) 115 133 137 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 6 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 2482 2550 2553 2457 2471 2502 Vehs Exited 2483 2517 2540 2436 2469 2490 Starting Vehs 66 74 71 63 78 63 Ending Vehs 65 107 84 84 80 85 Denied Entry Before 0 2 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2130 2188 2196 2106 2128 2149 Travel Time (hr) 75.9 77.8 78.9 76.2 76.7 77.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.6 16.0 16.4 16.5 16.2 16.1 Total Stops 2189 2132 2257 2190 2172 2185 Fuel Used (gal) 70.3 72.5 72.9 69.9 70.2 71.2 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 2482 2550 2553 2457 2471 2502 Vehs Exited 2483 2517 2540 2436 2469 2490 Starting Vehs 66 74 71 63 78 63 Ending Vehs 65 107 84 84 80 85 Denied Entry Before 0 2 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2130 2188 2196 2106 2128 2149 Travel Time (hr) 75.9 77.8 78.9 76.2 76.7 77.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.6 16.0 16.4 16.5 16.2 16.1 Total Stops 2189 2132 2257 2190 2172 2185 Fuel Used (gal) 70.3 72.5 72.9 69.9 70.2 71.2 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.8 0.2 0.1 3.2 0.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.6 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 23.0 24.4 3.9 31.0 29.8 5.3 37.4 6.9 2.7 28.4 3.0 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 21.1 21.6 3.7 28.8 26.3 5.0 35.4 4.1 2.3 25.5 1.0 0.6 Total Stops 3 5 2 55 6 72 16 236 29 96 99 0 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.86 0.87 0.94 0.34 0.38 0.85 0.13 0.00 Travel Dist (mi) 0.5 0.8 0.3 12.5 1.6 17.5 1.4 56.8 6.3 30.9 211.0 1.1 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.2 2.8 0.3 1.8 6.0 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 14 12 21 13 14 22 6 21 21 17 35 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.1 1.6 0.1 1.0 5.8 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.3 29.9 37.8 26.8 29.5 33.5 22.2 35.1 47.0 31.1 36.7 41.3 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 2 0 8 0 18 1 9 59 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 2 1 66 6 160 7 559 56 293 1886 4 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 1 21 1 64 4 34 248 1 Vehicles Entered 3 5 2 59 7 83 17 683 76 112 761 4 Vehicles Exited 3 6 2 58 7 83 17 687 76 111 762 4 Hourly Exit Rate 3 6 2 58 7 83 17 687 76 111 762 4 Input Volume 4 8 1 62 7 79 15 691 82 109 765 5 % of Volume 75 75 200 94 100 105 113 99 93 102 100 80 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 2 6 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 3.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.6 Stop Delay (hr) 2.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.4 Total Stops 619 Stop/Veh 0.34 Travel Dist (mi) 340.8 Travel Time (hr) 13.3 Avg Speed (mph) 26 Fuel Used (gal) 9.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.2 HC Emissions (g) 99 CO Emissions (g) 3040 NOx Emissions (g) 381 Vehicles Entered 1812 Vehicles Exited 1816 Hourly Exit Rate 1816 Input Volume 1828 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 986 Occupancy (veh) 13 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.5 5.2 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.8 3.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 93 15 0 0 0 108 Stop/Veh 0.98 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 25.0 1.0 31.3 70.3 1.4 129.0 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.1 0.9 2.1 0.1 4.1 Avg Speed (mph) 24 12 35 34 25 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.7 0.0 0.9 2.9 0.0 4.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.9 37.8 33.6 24.2 39.5 28.1 HC Emissions (g) 5 0 12 38 0 56 CO Emissions (g) 119 6 374 1713 14 2225 NOx Emissions (g) 15 1 46 140 1 202 Vehicles Entered 94 25 779 806 16 1720 Vehicles Exited 93 25 778 808 16 1720 Hourly Exit Rate 93 25 778 808 16 1720 Input Volume 96 25 790 814 14 1739 % of Volume 97 100 98 99 114 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)871 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 2 0 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.7 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Stops 16 0 0 0 16 Stop/Veh 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 3.6 58.7 3.3 36.1 101.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 1.8 0.1 1.1 3.2 Avg Speed (mph) 19 33 23 33 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 2.5 0.1 1.2 3.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 42.3 23.3 33.5 29.5 25.9 HC Emissions (g) 1 33 1 15 50 CO Emissions (g) 18 1534 47 556 2154 NOx Emissions (g) 2 122 4 56 184 Vehicles Entered 54 749 42 901 1746 Vehicles Exited 54 748 43 901 1746 Hourly Exit Rate 54 748 43 901 1746 Input Volume 56 758 44 910 1768 % of Volume 96 99 98 99 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)805 Occupancy (veh) 0 2 0 1 3 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.1 0.4 0.2 4.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 30.9 14.6 5.4 28.0 18.9 5.3 28.5 4.6 3.6 32.4 3.5 1.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 28.7 11.9 4.9 26.0 16.7 5.1 24.9 1.6 1.6 30.9 1.8 1.1 Total Stops 48 0 26 35 2 6 43 114 8 17 139 13 Stop/Veh 0.91 0.00 0.84 0.85 0.67 0.86 0.91 0.15 0.24 0.94 0.17 0.18 Travel Dist (mi) 8.3 0.1 4.9 5.2 0.4 0.9 9.2 146.1 6.6 1.4 61.3 5.4 Travel Time (hr) 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.7 4.8 0.2 0.2 2.3 0.2 Avg Speed (mph) 11 15 21 10 13 20 14 30 27 7 26 22 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 5.8 0.2 0.1 1.9 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 28.0 35.8 23.8 25.8 36.7 22.7 25.1 27.5 22.7 32.8 54.2 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 2 3 0 0 3 80 5 0 20 1 CO Emissions (g) 51 1 41 58 3 3 173 3374 172 10 793 31 NOx Emissions (g) 5 0 5 7 0 0 13 289 15 1 75 2 Vehicles Entered 52 1 31 41 3 7 46 735 33 18 812 71 Vehicles Exited 53 1 30 41 3 7 46 732 33 18 811 71 Hourly Exit Rate 53 1 30 41 3 7 46 732 33 18 811 71 Input Volume 52 1 27 41 3 9 51 741 29 21 819 70 % of Volume 102 100 111 100 100 78 90 99 114 86 99 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 3.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.2 Stop Delay (hr) 2.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.0 Total Stops 451 Stop/Veh 0.24 Travel Dist (mi) 249.6 Travel Time (hr) 10.2 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 9.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.1 HC Emissions (g) 115 CO Emissions (g) 4709 NOx Emissions (g) 413 Vehicles Entered 1850 Vehicles Exited 1846 Hourly Exit Rate 1846 Input Volume 1864 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 862 Occupancy (veh) 10 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.6 0.1 0.8 1.8 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 25.4 31.1 5.5 27.8 28.7 4.2 32.3 8.6 2.6 26.5 9.2 5.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.5 28.9 5.0 25.8 25.9 4.5 28.9 5.0 2.1 22.8 5.5 3.6 Total Stops 44 19 67 59 21 66 73 235 37 94 245 31 Stop/Veh 0.85 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.81 0.85 0.89 0.34 0.41 0.86 0.35 0.40 Travel Dist (mi) 6.7 2.8 9.9 4.3 1.7 5.1 29.6 249.9 33.2 21.1 136.9 15.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 1.6 8.0 1.0 1.4 5.3 0.6 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 18 6 6 15 19 31 33 15 26 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.9 6.8 0.8 0.8 4.7 0.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.0 25.0 34.3 19.6 21.4 45.7 33.2 36.6 39.6 25.8 29.4 31.1 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 2 1 0 1 10 79 9 6 56 5 CO Emissions (g) 34 12 43 33 7 16 266 2237 273 303 2219 232 NOx Emissions (g) 4 1 6 4 1 2 37 309 37 24 205 18 Vehicles Entered 51 21 76 68 26 78 81 685 91 108 697 77 Vehicles Exited 51 21 76 67 25 78 81 685 91 108 698 77 Hourly Exit Rate 51 21 76 67 25 78 81 685 91 108 698 77 Input Volume 51 25 79 65 24 82 87 688 90 111 705 71 % of Volume 100 84 96 103 104 95 93 100 101 97 99 108 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 8 1 1 5 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 6.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Stop Delay (hr) 4.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 8.5 Total Stops 991 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 516.4 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 15.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.1 HC Emissions (g) 170 CO Emissions (g) 5675 NOx Emissions (g) 647 Vehicles Entered 2059 Vehicles Exited 2058 Hourly Exit Rate 2058 Input Volume 2078 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 802 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 22.0 Stop Delay (hr) 10.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Total Stops 2185 Stop/Veh 0.85 Travel Dist (mi) 2149.4 Travel Time (hr) 77.1 Avg Speed (mph) 28 Fuel Used (gal) 71.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.2 HC Emissions (g) 826 CO Emissions (g) 29153 NOx Emissions (g) 3064 Vehicles Entered 2502 Vehicles Exited 2490 Hourly Exit Rate 2490 Input Volume 12922 % of Volume 19 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 642 Occupancy (veh) 77 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 30 36 93 40 63 50 100 114 118 64 141 90 Average Queue (ft) 3 6 38 5 26 16 50 59 52 19 60 34 95th Queue (ft) 17 27 77 23 53 41 89 104 103 50 112 74 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 64 49 Average Queue (ft) 16 11 95th Queue (ft) 45 34 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 76 55 8 Average Queue (ft) 35 14 0 95th Queue (ft) 59 42 5 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 48 Average Queue (ft) 10 95th Queue (ft) 33 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 90 64 80 35 80 68 88 106 54 93 89 92 Average Queue (ft) 39 20 30 7 34 27 32 33 15 38 32 34 95th Queue (ft) 73 50 65 28 73 58 71 79 41 77 74 74 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 85 58 63 94 48 66 117 126 129 85 57 122 Average Queue (ft) 35 18 33 38 14 20 52 65 44 33 19 58 95th Queue (ft) 73 50 57 76 38 43 92 109 90 74 46 106 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 104 126 127 Average Queue (ft) 48 60 56 95th Queue (ft) 90 110 107 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3935 3914 3845 3827 3863 3878 Vehs Exited 3901 3900 3841 3830 3823 3858 Starting Vehs 117 91 120 127 105 106 Ending Vehs 151 105 124 124 145 126 Denied Entry Before 1 3 1 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3304 3282 3233 3228 3245 3258 Travel Time (hr) 133.2 131.9 130.7 129.3 127.6 130.5 Total Delay (hr) 39.7 39.0 39.2 37.8 35.8 38.3 Total Stops 4484 4401 4388 4358 4149 4360 Fuel Used (gal) 118.4 118.3 115.0 114.7 114.3 116.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3935 3914 3845 3827 3863 3878 Vehs Exited 3901 3900 3841 3830 3823 3858 Starting Vehs 117 91 120 127 105 106 Ending Vehs 151 105 124 124 145 126 Denied Entry Before 1 3 1 1 0 0 Denied Entry After 1 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3304 3282 3233 3228 3245 3258 Travel Time (hr) 133.2 131.9 130.7 129.3 127.6 130.5 Total Delay (hr) 39.7 39.0 39.2 37.8 35.8 38.3 Total Stops 4484 4401 4388 4358 4149 4360 Fuel Used (gal) 118.4 118.3 115.0 114.7 114.3 116.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.1 0.2 3.0 0.6 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 5.3 0.2 1.6 1.5 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.6 25.0 6.2 30.5 23.8 8.9 34.8 14.9 5.1 30.0 5.3 1.4 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 3.6 0.1 1.4 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.5 22.1 5.5 27.4 20.3 8.0 32.5 10.3 3.9 25.7 2.2 0.9 Total Stops 15 9 11 127 10 140 9 676 67 164 213 1 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.82 0.92 0.88 0.77 0.77 1.00 0.53 0.58 0.85 0.21 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 2.6 1.7 1.9 30.1 2.7 37.9 0.7 102.5 9.6 52.6 274.2 1.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.4 0.2 2.0 0.1 7.9 0.5 3.2 8.5 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 11 13 20 13 15 20 6 13 18 17 33 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.2 0.0 3.5 0.2 1.7 7.7 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.1 29.9 32.8 25.6 29.3 31.7 21.6 29.5 40.2 30.5 35.8 38.0 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 8 0 11 0 26 2 15 101 0 CO Emissions (g) 14 7 9 224 15 283 4 838 99 499 2994 8 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 25 1 33 0 93 7 56 376 1 Vehicles Entered 17 11 12 143 13 179 9 1265 116 190 990 5 Vehicles Exited 17 11 12 143 13 181 9 1266 115 189 990 5 Hourly Exit Rate 17 11 12 143 13 181 9 1266 115 189 990 5 Input Volume 14 14 11 139 15 186 11 1266 118 184 997 4 % of Volume 121 79 109 103 87 97 82 100 97 103 99 125 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 8 1 3 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 10.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.9 Stop Delay (hr) 7.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.3 Total Stops 1442 Stop/Veh 0.49 Travel Dist (mi) 517.9 Travel Time (hr) 25.4 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 15.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.7 HC Emissions (g) 166 CO Emissions (g) 4996 NOx Emissions (g) 595 Vehicles Entered 2950 Vehicles Exited 2951 Hourly Exit Rate 2951 Input Volume 2959 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 516 Occupancy (veh) 25 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.0 6.7 0.4 1.4 1.0 1.1 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 4.5 5.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 59 43 0 0 0 102 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 15.8 2.6 56.0 98.0 1.9 174.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.7 0.2 1.7 3.1 0.1 5.8 Avg Speed (mph) 24 11 33 31 23 30 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 1.7 4.9 0.1 7.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 36.5 32.2 32.6 19.8 29.5 24.1 HC Emissions (g) 5 0 23 76 0 104 CO Emissions (g) 87 14 851 3461 31 4444 NOx Emissions (g) 13 2 80 263 2 359 Vehicles Entered 59 64 1392 1123 22 2660 Vehicles Exited 59 63 1390 1123 22 2657 Hourly Exit Rate 59 63 1390 1123 22 2657 Input Volume 59 68 1396 1125 22 2670 % of Volume 100 93 100 100 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)622 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 1.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.4 1.9 1.9 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 3.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 40 0 0 1 41 Stop/Veh 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 6.2 106.7 7.8 47.7 168.4 Travel Time (hr) 0.4 3.6 0.4 1.4 5.7 Avg Speed (mph) 15 30 21 35 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.2 5.8 0.3 1.4 7.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 33.8 18.3 25.3 32.9 21.7 HC Emissions (g) 2 81 4 23 109 CO Emissions (g) 49 3940 149 730 4869 NOx Emissions (g) 5 292 14 79 390 Vehicles Entered 93 1370 100 1183 2746 Vehicles Exited 93 1368 99 1183 2743 Hourly Exit Rate 93 1368 99 1183 2743 Input Volume 97 1371 98 1185 2751 % of Volume 96 100 101 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)444 Occupancy (veh) 0 4 0 1 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.5 0.3 3.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 4.6 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.4 33.9 5.8 27.7 26.9 9.4 28.6 12.5 10.9 31.3 4.1 2.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.0 30.5 5.0 25.0 23.5 8.2 23.8 6.4 6.1 29.0 2.2 1.4 Total Stops 69 3 40 78 12 56 30 449 40 85 182 21 Stop/Veh 0.86 1.00 0.80 0.86 0.80 0.80 0.97 0.34 0.45 0.91 0.18 0.23 Travel Dist (mi) 12.4 0.5 7.8 11.7 1.9 8.9 6.2 264.2 17.4 7.0 75.7 7.0 Travel Time (hr) 1.2 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.2 0.5 0.4 11.6 0.8 1.1 3.0 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 11 12 21 10 11 17 14 23 21 7 25 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 11.8 0.7 0.3 2.4 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.7 24.6 34.8 21.5 25.0 31.2 21.1 22.4 25.3 21.5 32.1 57.2 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 2 6 0 4 5 145 9 2 30 2 CO Emissions (g) 107 4 58 166 16 103 163 6492 376 72 1048 39 NOx Emissions (g) 11 0 7 16 1 11 15 535 33 6 107 4 Vehicles Entered 79 3 50 91 15 69 31 1326 87 92 999 92 Vehicles Exited 77 3 49 89 15 69 30 1323 87 91 1000 92 Hourly Exit Rate 77 3 49 89 15 69 30 1323 87 91 1000 92 Input Volume 80 2 48 89 14 76 31 1313 88 95 997 93 % of Volume 96 150 102 100 107 91 97 101 99 96 100 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 12 1 1 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 8.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.9 Stop Delay (hr) 5.7 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.9 Total Stops 1065 Stop/Veh 0.36 Travel Dist (mi) 420.6 Travel Time (hr) 20.8 Avg Speed (mph) 20 Fuel Used (gal) 17.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 HC Emissions (g) 209 CO Emissions (g) 8643 NOx Emissions (g) 746 Vehicles Entered 2934 Vehicles Exited 2925 Hourly Exit Rate 2925 Input Volume 2926 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 421 Occupancy (veh) 21 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.8 5.2 0.0 1.4 3.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 28.4 33.6 7.5 26.8 30.3 8.1 34.2 15.1 3.4 28.7 13.0 8.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.7 3.2 0.0 1.2 2.1 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 26.2 30.8 6.6 24.7 27.2 8.3 30.0 9.2 3.0 24.4 8.3 6.3 Total Stops 74 25 107 76 38 111 76 598 27 149 405 24 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.93 0.87 0.85 0.83 0.85 0.90 0.48 0.53 0.86 0.44 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 10.8 3.5 15.9 5.6 3.0 8.4 30.2 449.1 18.4 33.7 181.4 9.5 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.4 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.7 16.6 0.6 2.4 8.1 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 10 9 17 6 6 12 19 27 33 14 22 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.9 12.4 0.5 1.4 6.6 0.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.7 23.5 32.6 19.8 20.8 39.0 32.7 36.2 39.4 24.7 27.4 27.8 HC Emissions (g) 2 0 3 1 1 1 7 124 9 18 86 8 CO Emissions (g) 58 12 67 42 17 28 236 3674 222 638 3315 264 NOx Emissions (g) 8 1 10 5 2 3 28 489 32 56 296 24 Vehicles Entered 83 27 123 88 46 130 83 1227 50 172 919 48 Vehicles Exited 82 27 123 88 46 130 83 1232 50 169 917 48 Hourly Exit Rate 82 27 123 88 46 130 83 1232 50 169 917 48 Input Volume 78 23 128 99 50 131 89 1222 53 160 932 43 % of Volume 105 117 96 89 92 99 93 101 94 106 98 112 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 17 1 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 13.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 16.0 Stop Delay (hr) 9.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 11.5 Total Stops 1710 Stop/Veh 0.57 Travel Dist (mi) 769.5 Travel Time (hr) 34.3 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 23.8 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 32.3 HC Emissions (g) 261 CO Emissions (g) 8575 NOx Emissions (g) 953 Vehicles Entered 2996 Vehicles Exited 2995 Hourly Exit Rate 2995 Input Volume 3008 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 485 Occupancy (veh) 34 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.8 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 37.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 33.9 Stop Delay (hr) 23.5 Stop Del/Veh (s) 21.2 Total Stops 4360 Stop/Veh 1.09 Travel Dist (mi) 3258.4 Travel Time (hr) 130.5 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 116.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.1 HC Emissions (g) 1400 CO Emissions (g) 50601 NOx Emissions (g) 5055 Vehicles Entered 3878 Vehicles Exited 3858 Hourly Exit Rate 3858 Input Volume 19585 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 379 Occupancy (veh) 130 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 43 52 144 95 117 71 206 225 246 72 188 155 Average Queue (ft) 14 16 78 10 47 10 115 132 137 35 94 65 95th Queue (ft) 41 44 127 49 89 44 176 192 206 65 157 124 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 101 72 Average Queue (ft) 39 23 95th Queue (ft) 84 57 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 62 63 4 Average Queue (ft) 30 28 0 95th Queue (ft) 50 57 3 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 57 Average Queue (ft) 21 95th Queue (ft) 48 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 114 76 108 99 75 166 179 235 123 96 91 98 Average Queue (ft) 49 26 55 40 25 77 93 121 58 46 45 40 95th Queue (ft) 91 58 97 75 57 139 157 197 106 86 80 82 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 No-Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 106 79 77 104 152 85 116 218 223 188 50 168 Average Queue (ft) 53 23 43 45 29 34 53 124 110 97 13 92 95th Queue (ft) 98 61 70 87 86 65 95 189 181 162 36 150 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 0 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0 0 1 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 170 168 166 Average Queue (ft) 71 88 88 95th Queue (ft) 125 144 152 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3142 3169 3174 3079 3112 3134 Vehs Exited 3145 3152 3181 3055 3117 3132 Starting Vehs 104 80 95 93 91 92 Ending Vehs 101 97 88 117 86 95 Denied Entry Before 0 1 1 1 2 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 1 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2571 2596 2591 2501 2538 2559 Travel Time (hr) 101.7 101.7 101.6 99.9 100.6 101.1 Total Delay (hr) 27.6 27.0 26.9 27.3 27.1 27.2 Total Stops 3371 3432 3397 3389 3340 3385 Fuel Used (gal) 90.9 91.3 90.8 88.2 89.3 90.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3142 3169 3174 3079 3112 3134 Vehs Exited 3145 3152 3181 3055 3117 3132 Starting Vehs 104 80 95 93 91 92 Ending Vehs 101 97 88 117 86 95 Denied Entry Before 0 1 1 1 2 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 1 1 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2571 2596 2591 2501 2538 2559 Travel Time (hr) 101.7 101.7 101.6 99.9 100.6 101.1 Total Delay (hr) 27.6 27.0 26.9 27.3 27.1 27.2 Total Stops 3371 3432 3397 3389 3340 3385 Fuel Used (gal) 90.9 91.3 90.8 88.2 89.3 90.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.2 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.9 0.1 0.9 1.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 34.4 22.4 4.8 29.6 21.8 5.5 33.4 8.8 3.2 30.6 4.4 0.8 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.8 0.4 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 32.7 19.7 4.7 27.0 18.4 5.1 31.8 6.0 2.6 27.4 1.6 0.6 Total Stops 3 7 1 86 5 63 14 302 39 94 162 1 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.78 0.50 0.89 0.71 0.84 1.00 0.39 0.43 0.89 0.17 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 0.5 1.3 0.2 20.5 1.4 15.7 1.2 63.5 7.5 29.1 255.9 1.5 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.8 0.2 3.5 0.4 1.8 7.7 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 10 13 20 13 16 22 7 18 20 17 34 34 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.5 0.1 2.0 0.2 0.9 7.0 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.0 29.9 41.7 26.5 30.4 33.9 22.5 32.1 42.6 31.3 36.4 40.2 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 8 0 6 0 21 2 11 80 0 CO Emissions (g) 1 5 0 187 6 125 10 723 85 309 2438 8 NOx Emissions (g) 0 1 0 23 1 16 1 72 5 35 315 1 Vehicles Entered 3 8 2 97 7 74 14 763 90 105 922 5 Vehicles Exited 3 8 2 97 7 73 14 766 90 104 927 5 Hourly Exit Rate 3 8 2 97 7 73 14 766 90 104 927 5 Input Volume 4 8 1 97 7 79 15 760 97 109 928 5 % of Volume 75 100 200 100 100 92 93 101 93 95 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 0 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.3 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 5.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 8.8 Stop Delay (hr) 3.6 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.2 Total Stops 777 Stop/Veh 0.37 Travel Dist (mi) 398.1 Travel Time (hr) 16.2 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 11.5 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.5 HC Emissions (g) 128 CO Emissions (g) 3899 NOx Emissions (g) 469 Vehicles Entered 2090 Vehicles Exited 2096 Hourly Exit Rate 2096 Input Volume 2110 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 809 Occupancy (veh) 16 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.0 5.8 0.2 1.4 0.8 1.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.2 4.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 Total Stops 112 14 0 0 0 126 Stop/Veh 0.99 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 30.0 1.0 34.8 88.2 1.1 155.1 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.1 1.1 2.7 0.0 5.3 Avg Speed (mph) 23 12 31 32 25 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.8 0.0 1.4 4.1 0.0 6.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.6 31.6 25.5 21.8 33.5 24.5 HC Emissions (g) 8 0 19 62 0 90 CO Emissions (g) 165 7 732 2715 12 3631 NOx Emissions (g) 22 1 71 217 1 312 Vehicles Entered 112 25 871 1013 12 2033 Vehicles Exited 112 25 869 1014 12 2032 Hourly Exit Rate 112 25 869 1014 12 2032 Input Volume 105 29 873 1012 14 2033 % of Volume 107 86 100 100 86 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)684 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 3 0 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 2.2 2.4 2.7 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 32 0 0 0 32 Stop/Veh 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Travel Dist (mi) 9.1 59.8 10.1 45.1 124.0 Travel Time (hr) 0.5 2.1 0.5 1.4 4.5 Avg Speed (mph) 18 29 20 33 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 3.8 0.5 1.5 6.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.5 15.8 21.2 29.3 20.5 HC Emissions (g) 3 54 7 22 87 CO Emissions (g) 95 2771 271 807 3945 NOx Emissions (g) 10 192 25 79 306 Vehicles Entered 135 764 130 1126 2155 Vehicles Exited 135 761 128 1125 2149 Hourly Exit Rate 135 761 128 1125 2149 Input Volume 140 762 137 1116 2155 % of Volume 96 100 93 101 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)570 Occupancy (veh) 1 2 1 1 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.3 3.9 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.1 0.8 1.6 1.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 22.9 24.0 4.6 26.3 20.1 6.3 27.2 17.4 17.1 25.1 5.4 2.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.6 0.6 1.4 0.7 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 20.8 22.6 4.2 23.5 16.9 5.6 22.7 11.0 11.6 21.9 3.1 1.9 Total Stops 39 1 19 122 4 11 47 423 118 199 210 20 Stop/Veh 0.80 1.00 0.79 0.84 0.80 0.85 0.92 0.50 0.66 0.86 0.25 0.27 Travel Dist (mi) 7.7 0.1 3.8 18.8 0.6 1.7 10.0 164.5 35.0 17.3 62.1 5.7 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.2 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.7 8.4 2.0 2.2 2.8 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 13 7 21 11 12 19 14 19 18 8 22 20 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.5 7.1 1.4 0.8 2.0 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 26.4 23.8 36.8 22.1 25.4 33.8 21.1 23.1 25.3 21.9 30.3 53.5 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 1 6 0 0 6 93 21 5 25 1 CO Emissions (g) 47 1 23 194 4 10 263 4018 786 192 1014 32 NOx Emissions (g) 5 0 3 19 0 1 20 317 66 15 86 3 Vehicles Entered 49 0 24 146 4 13 50 829 176 230 820 75 Vehicles Exited 48 1 24 145 5 13 51 832 176 230 822 75 Hourly Exit Rate 48 1 24 145 5 13 51 832 176 230 822 75 Input Volume 52 1 27 140 3 13 51 834 170 228 818 70 % of Volume 92 100 89 104 167 100 100 100 104 101 100 107 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 8 2 2 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Delay (hr) 9.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 14.3 Stop Delay (hr) 6.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.2 Total Stops 1213 Stop/Veh 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 327.1 Travel Time (hr) 19.3 Avg Speed (mph) 17 Fuel Used (gal) 13.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.7 HC Emissions (g) 160 CO Emissions (g) 6582 NOx Emissions (g) 535 Vehicles Entered 2416 Vehicles Exited 2422 Hourly Exit Rate 2422 Input Volume 2407 % of Volume 101 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 454 Occupancy (veh) 19 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.8 2.6 0.1 1.0 2.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.6 29.0 6.4 24.1 30.9 6.5 32.5 10.8 2.6 28.3 9.8 7.4 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7 1.5 0.1 0.9 1.2 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.5 26.5 5.7 22.3 27.9 6.7 29.0 6.5 2.1 24.5 5.7 5.0 Total Stops 73 23 68 52 21 113 83 346 37 114 270 37 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.84 0.88 0.89 0.92 0.41 0.41 0.88 0.34 0.46 Travel Dist (mi) 10.8 3.5 10.1 3.9 1.6 8.2 32.6 308.1 32.6 25.1 154.6 15.7 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.6 1.7 10.4 1.0 1.8 6.2 0.7 Avg Speed (mph) 10 10 17 7 6 13 19 30 33 14 25 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.0 8.5 0.9 1.1 5.9 0.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.3 25.0 33.9 21.5 20.8 41.7 32.8 36.2 38.2 23.6 26.4 28.1 HC Emissions (g) 1 1 3 0 0 1 9 102 13 11 77 8 CO Emissions (g) 49 24 67 20 7 25 254 2905 370 502 3228 332 NOx Emissions (g) 6 3 10 2 1 3 34 391 47 38 272 25 Vehicles Entered 84 27 78 62 24 127 89 843 89 128 783 80 Vehicles Exited 83 27 78 62 24 127 89 846 89 128 783 79 Hourly Exit Rate 83 27 78 62 24 127 89 846 89 128 783 79 Input Volume 82 25 79 65 24 122 87 851 90 128 773 84 % of Volume 101 108 99 95 100 104 102 99 99 100 101 94 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 10 1 2 6 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 8.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.7 Stop Delay (hr) 6.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.3 Total Stops 1237 Stop/Veh 0.51 Travel Dist (mi) 607.0 Travel Time (hr) 25.3 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 19.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.6 HC Emissions (g) 228 CO Emissions (g) 7783 NOx Emissions (g) 832 Vehicles Entered 2414 Vehicles Exited 2415 Hourly Exit Rate 2415 Input Volume 2410 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 658 Occupancy (veh) 25 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.6 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 26.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 29.7 Stop Delay (hr) 17.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 19.3 Total Stops 3385 Stop/Veh 1.05 Travel Dist (mi) 2559.2 Travel Time (hr) 101.1 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 90.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.4 HC Emissions (g) 1116 CO Emissions (g) 39808 NOx Emissions (g) 3981 Vehicles Entered 3134 Vehicles Exited 3132 Hourly Exit Rate 3132 Input Volume 15546 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 490 Occupancy (veh) 101 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 34 39 116 28 68 47 122 153 154 65 122 146 Average Queue (ft) 3 8 55 4 23 14 56 70 70 26 60 58 95th Queue (ft) 18 31 99 19 48 40 106 126 125 56 107 114 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 129 62 Average Queue (ft) 25 15 95th Queue (ft) 69 44 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 79 48 Average Queue (ft) 41 13 95th Queue (ft) 67 39 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB NB Directions Served R T Maximum Queue (ft) 56 4 Average Queue (ft) 17 0 95th Queue (ft) 41 3 Link Distance (ft) 344 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 84 51 131 79 102 129 150 268 218 96 104 109 Average Queue (ft) 31 16 74 16 36 71 88 139 113 49 50 48 95th Queue (ft) 69 42 123 62 78 119 140 232 187 87 89 93 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 94 78 92 80 56 69 110 140 138 164 54 149 Average Queue (ft) 50 23 36 33 13 31 55 74 61 73 19 69 95th Queue (ft) 88 60 66 67 38 58 98 126 115 129 42 124 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 107 119 127 Average Queue (ft) 46 59 62 95th Queue (ft) 88 101 111 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 4600 4677 4619 4678 4523 4620 Vehs Exited 4584 4662 4595 4686 4501 4604 Starting Vehs 138 142 136 136 135 137 Ending Vehs 154 157 160 128 157 150 Denied Entry Before 1 1 1 0 1 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3643 3699 3674 3691 3575 3656 Travel Time (hr) 158.8 161.4 157.0 161.4 153.8 158.5 Total Delay (hr) 54.1 55.2 51.9 55.4 50.9 53.5 Total Stops 5468 5578 5328 5621 5291 5455 Fuel Used (gal) 135.0 138.0 135.2 137.1 131.9 135.4 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 4600 4677 4619 4678 4523 4620 Vehs Exited 4584 4662 4595 4686 4501 4604 Starting Vehs 138 142 136 136 135 137 Ending Vehs 154 157 160 128 157 150 Denied Entry Before 1 1 1 0 1 0 Denied Entry After 0 1 0 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3643 3699 3674 3691 3575 3656 Travel Time (hr) 158.8 161.4 157.0 161.4 153.8 158.5 Total Delay (hr) 54.1 55.2 51.9 55.4 50.9 53.5 Total Stops 5468 5578 5328 5621 5291 5455 Fuel Used (gal) 135.0 138.0 135.2 137.1 131.9 135.4 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.1 0.2 0.1 3.3 1.2 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.2 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.6 0.1 6.5 0.2 1.6 1.8 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 27.0 25.0 7.5 32.5 24.6 10.9 37.0 16.3 6.0 32.6 6.0 1.6 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.5 0.1 4.6 0.2 1.4 0.8 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.9 21.9 7.1 29.3 20.5 9.7 34.1 11.6 4.5 28.1 2.5 1.1 Total Stops 12 11 8 139 10 147 11 771 83 152 251 1 Stop/Veh 0.71 0.73 0.80 0.87 0.71 0.75 1.00 0.53 0.57 0.85 0.23 0.25 Travel Dist (mi) 2.6 2.3 1.5 32.9 3.0 40.7 0.9 116.9 12.1 48.5 295.4 1.0 Travel Time (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.8 0.2 2.3 0.1 9.5 0.7 3.1 9.3 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 12 13 19 13 15 19 6 12 17 16 32 32 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 4.3 0.3 1.6 8.3 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.2 29.4 34.0 24.8 28.3 31.4 21.2 27.2 35.7 29.6 35.6 41.7 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 10 0 15 0 37 4 13 99 0 CO Emissions (g) 15 11 5 264 18 336 8 1238 155 470 3069 6 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 29 1 40 1 126 13 50 377 1 Vehicles Entered 17 15 10 157 14 193 11 1437 145 176 1066 4 Vehicles Exited 17 15 10 157 14 192 11 1428 145 176 1066 4 Hourly Exit Rate 17 15 10 157 14 192 11 1428 145 176 1066 4 Input Volume 14 14 11 154 15 186 11 1425 152 184 1064 4 % of Volume 121 107 91 102 93 103 100 100 95 96 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 10 1 3 9 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 12.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Stop Delay (hr) 9.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.1 Total Stops 1596 Stop/Veh 0.49 Travel Dist (mi) 557.9 Travel Time (hr) 28.6 Avg Speed (mph) 20 Fuel Used (gal) 17.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.7 HC Emissions (g) 180 CO Emissions (g) 5595 NOx Emissions (g) 639 Vehicles Entered 3245 Vehicles Exited 3235 Hourly Exit Rate 3235 Input Volume 3234 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 458 Occupancy (veh) 28 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 1.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 5.4 6.8 0.6 1.6 0.9 1.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.1 5.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Stops 58 54 1 0 0 113 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 15.5 3.2 63.6 105.5 2.2 189.9 Travel Time (hr) 0.7 0.3 2.2 3.4 0.1 6.7 Avg Speed (mph) 24 11 29 31 24 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.1 2.7 5.4 0.1 8.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 36.0 28.4 23.4 19.5 29.6 21.7 HC Emissions (g) 4 1 40 81 1 127 CO Emissions (g) 79 31 1572 3771 33 5486 NOx Emissions (g) 11 4 143 285 2 445 Vehicles Entered 58 79 1594 1208 25 2964 Vehicles Exited 58 79 1593 1209 24 2963 Hourly Exit Rate 58 79 1593 1209 24 2963 Input Volume 63 77 1588 1207 22 2957 % of Volume 92 103 100 100 109 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)540 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 3 0 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.1 2.7 2.9 0.3 2.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 Total Stops 150 1 0 0 151 Stop/Veh 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 Travel Dist (mi) 19.6 108.1 10.4 50.0 188.2 Travel Time (hr) 1.5 4.0 0.5 1.5 7.5 Avg Speed (mph) 13 27 19 34 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.7 6.6 0.5 1.5 9.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.3 16.3 21.7 33.1 20.2 HC Emissions (g) 7 95 8 22 133 CO Emissions (g) 248 4542 265 788 5843 NOx Emissions (g) 23 349 29 76 477 Vehicles Entered 292 1390 135 1266 3083 Vehicles Exited 292 1389 134 1266 3081 Hourly Exit Rate 292 1389 134 1266 3081 Input Volume 290 1380 137 1270 3077 % of Volume 101 101 98 100 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)342 Occupancy (veh) 1 4 1 1 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.1 0.4 3.5 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 3.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 8.7 0.9 2.0 2.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 25.1 1.1 5.7 32.3 27.3 13.2 34.8 22.8 22.5 38.8 7.0 3.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.0 0.1 2.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 5.4 0.6 1.8 1.2 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 22.7 0.0 5.0 27.4 22.1 10.0 29.1 14.2 14.9 35.5 4.3 2.7 Total Stops 64 0 36 290 9 71 29 666 89 176 276 30 Stop/Veh 0.79 0.00 0.72 0.87 0.82 0.81 0.97 0.49 0.62 0.96 0.28 0.33 Travel Dist (mi) 12.7 0.1 7.9 42.3 1.4 11.2 5.9 270.6 28.3 13.2 73.2 6.6 Travel Time (hr) 1.1 0.0 0.4 4.9 0.1 0.8 0.5 15.8 1.8 2.5 3.8 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 12 26 21 9 11 15 13 17 16 5 19 18 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.0 0.2 2.1 0.1 0.4 0.3 12.6 1.2 0.8 2.5 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.8 31.6 34.6 19.8 23.1 28.6 20.4 21.4 23.4 17.1 28.8 49.9 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 3 17 0 6 5 161 16 5 28 2 CO Emissions (g) 102 1 70 571 12 152 171 6700 597 162 1129 43 NOx Emissions (g) 10 0 8 53 1 16 15 564 53 14 99 5 Vehicles Entered 80 1 50 329 11 87 30 1362 143 181 998 91 Vehicles Exited 81 1 50 329 11 87 30 1358 142 182 999 91 Hourly Exit Rate 81 1 50 329 11 87 30 1358 142 182 999 91 Input Volume 80 2 48 317 14 85 31 1352 145 181 997 93 % of Volume 101 50 104 104 79 102 97 100 98 101 100 98 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 5 0 1 0 16 2 2 4 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 17.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 19.0 Stop Delay (hr) 12.8 Stop Del/Veh (s) 13.6 Total Stops 1736 Stop/Veh 0.51 Travel Dist (mi) 473.6 Travel Time (hr) 32.0 Avg Speed (mph) 15 Fuel Used (gal) 20.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 22.7 HC Emissions (g) 246 CO Emissions (g) 9711 NOx Emissions (g) 838 Vehicles Entered 3363 Vehicles Exited 3361 Hourly Exit Rate 3361 Input Volume 3345 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 275 Occupancy (veh) 32 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.9 5.9 0.1 1.9 3.7 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 33.0 33.3 8.8 27.9 33.5 8.7 34.3 16.3 3.4 32.7 12.0 9.5 Stop Delay (hr) 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.8 3.7 0.0 1.6 2.2 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 30.7 30.9 7.9 25.6 30.3 8.7 29.8 10.0 3.1 27.9 7.2 6.5 Total Stops 87 21 108 78 44 125 87 658 28 180 405 38 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.84 0.86 0.80 0.90 0.84 0.89 0.50 0.49 0.87 0.37 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 12.6 3.2 16.3 6.1 3.1 9.5 34.9 472.1 20.9 40.2 217.4 15.6 Travel Time (hr) 1.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.9 17.9 0.6 3.1 9.6 0.7 Avg Speed (mph) 9 9 16 6 6 12 18 26 33 13 23 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.1 13.0 0.5 1.9 8.9 0.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 22.3 23.0 31.9 19.2 19.3 38.6 32.7 36.2 38.3 21.7 24.3 25.9 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 5 1 0 2 8 146 6 24 114 10 CO Emissions (g) 91 11 103 38 15 36 249 4089 183 955 5111 386 NOx Emissions (g) 12 1 15 4 1 4 32 547 24 74 396 30 Vehicles Entered 97 25 125 95 48 148 96 1289 57 205 1095 78 Vehicles Exited 97 25 126 96 48 146 95 1291 57 204 1097 78 Hourly Exit Rate 97 25 126 96 48 146 95 1291 57 204 1097 78 Input Volume 91 23 128 99 50 147 89 1289 53 199 1091 73 % of Volume 107 109 98 97 96 99 107 100 108 103 101 107 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 18 1 3 10 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 15.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 16.6 Stop Delay (hr) 11.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 11.9 Total Stops 1859 Stop/Veh 0.55 Travel Dist (mi) 851.9 Travel Time (hr) 39.1 Avg Speed (mph) 22 Fuel Used (gal) 28.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.4 HC Emissions (g) 319 CO Emissions (g) 11267 NOx Emissions (g) 1141 Vehicles Entered 3358 Vehicles Exited 3360 Hourly Exit Rate 3360 Input Volume 3332 % of Volume 101 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 425 Occupancy (veh) 39 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 1.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.9 Total Delay (hr) 52.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 39.7 Stop Delay (hr) 34.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 25.8 Total Stops 5455 Stop/Veh 1.15 Travel Dist (mi) 3656.4 Travel Time (hr) 158.5 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 135.4 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.0 HC Emissions (g) 1634 CO Emissions (g) 59340 NOx Emissions (g) 5852 Vehicles Entered 4620 Vehicles Exited 4604 Hourly Exit Rate 4604 Input Volume 21981 % of Volume 21 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 313 Occupancy (veh) 157 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 50 56 152 194 138 50 222 239 247 102 192 179 Average Queue (ft) 12 17 84 17 55 11 129 150 163 42 94 79 95th Queue (ft) 39 46 144 85 102 38 188 214 227 80 164 146 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 3 0 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 6 0 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 121 102 Average Queue (ft) 42 28 95th Queue (ft) 92 71 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 57 91 4 Average Queue (ft) 29 33 0 95th Queue (ft) 50 68 3 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB NB Directions Served R T Maximum Queue (ft) 163 5 Average Queue (ft) 60 0 95th Queue (ft) 119 3 Link Distance (ft) 344 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 112 62 145 332 81 220 242 295 212 135 116 125 Average Queue (ft) 46 26 127 123 26 118 139 178 111 66 60 58 95th Queue (ft) 92 55 163 293 65 188 216 268 178 113 100 103 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 23 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 22 0 0 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 118 114 97 103 128 101 134 218 205 201 51 222 Average Queue (ft) 60 23 46 49 32 38 60 130 122 122 16 110 95th Queue (ft) 105 78 80 92 83 78 110 186 189 192 37 180 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 3 0 3 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 0 1 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 131 144 179 Average Queue (ft) 69 88 90 95th Queue (ft) 118 134 152 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 37 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 3282 3248 3350 3177 3261 3265 Vehs Exited 3281 3212 3330 3177 3237 3245 Starting Vehs 97 94 84 109 87 88 Ending Vehs 98 130 104 109 111 114 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2681 2636 2742 2593 2663 2663 Travel Time (hr) 106.6 103.7 109.3 102.4 105.0 105.4 Total Delay (hr) 29.4 27.6 30.6 27.5 28.3 28.7 Total Stops 3563 3455 3722 3379 3532 3531 Fuel Used (gal) 94.5 93.0 97.4 91.0 94.1 94.0 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 3282 3248 3350 3177 3261 3265 Vehs Exited 3281 3212 3330 3177 3237 3245 Starting Vehs 97 94 84 109 87 88 Ending Vehs 98 130 104 109 111 114 Denied Entry Before 0 1 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 2681 2636 2742 2593 2663 2663 Travel Time (hr) 106.6 103.7 109.3 102.4 105.0 105.4 Total Delay (hr) 29.4 27.6 30.6 27.5 28.3 28.7 Total Stops 3563 3455 3722 3379 3532 3531 Fuel Used (gal) 94.5 93.0 97.4 91.0 94.1 94.0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.5 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.0 0.1 0.9 1.3 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 24.2 23.1 1.6 29.9 26.3 5.6 31.5 9.1 3.6 31.1 4.7 0.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.8 0.5 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 22.2 20.5 1.5 27.4 22.9 5.2 29.4 6.1 2.8 27.7 1.8 0.3 Total Stops 2 5 0 91 6 67 16 316 52 95 182 1 Stop/Veh 0.67 0.83 0.00 0.91 0.86 0.83 0.94 0.40 0.50 0.87 0.19 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 0.5 0.9 0.1 20.9 1.5 17.0 1.4 66.1 8.6 29.6 270.0 1.2 Travel Time (hr) 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.8 0.2 3.7 0.4 1.8 8.1 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 13 13 25 13 15 22 7 18 20 17 33 33 Fuel Used (gal) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.1 2.1 0.2 1.0 7.5 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.4 27.8 38.5 25.9 30.1 33.8 23.8 32.0 42.3 30.1 36.2 36.0 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 7 0 6 0 20 2 6 88 0 CO Emissions (g) 2 4 0 167 8 131 8 709 91 245 2673 10 NOx Emissions (g) 0 0 0 19 1 17 1 70 6 24 344 1 Vehicles Entered 3 6 1 99 7 81 17 795 104 107 976 4 Vehicles Exited 3 6 1 98 7 80 16 796 104 108 976 5 Hourly Exit Rate 3 6 1 98 7 80 16 796 104 108 976 5 Input Volume 4 8 1 99 7 82 16 789 101 113 959 5 % of Volume 75 75 100 99 100 98 100 101 103 96 102 100 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 0 2 8 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.3 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Delay (hr) 5.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 9.0 Stop Delay (hr) 3.9 Stop Del/Veh (s) 6.3 Total Stops 833 Stop/Veh 0.38 Travel Dist (mi) 418.0 Travel Time (hr) 17.1 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 12.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 34.2 HC Emissions (g) 129 CO Emissions (g) 4048 NOx Emissions (g) 483 Vehicles Entered 2200 Vehicles Exited 2200 Hourly Exit Rate 2200 Input Volume 2184 % of Volume 101 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 764 Occupancy (veh) 17 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.7 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.7 5.7 0.3 1.4 0.7 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.9 4.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 Total Stops 108 17 1 0 0 126 Stop/Veh 0.99 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 Travel Dist (mi) 29.0 1.2 36.7 92.1 1.6 160.4 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.1 1.2 2.9 0.1 5.5 Avg Speed (mph) 23 11 31 32 25 29 Fuel Used (gal) 0.8 0.0 1.4 4.3 0.0 6.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.4 28.9 25.7 21.2 35.8 24.0 HC Emissions (g) 8 0 19 63 0 90 CO Emissions (g) 170 8 751 2891 18 3839 NOx Emissions (g) 21 1 70 225 1 319 Vehicles Entered 109 29 916 1056 18 2128 Vehicles Exited 108 29 915 1055 18 2125 Hourly Exit Rate 108 29 915 1055 18 2125 Input Volume 108 30 905 1045 14 2102 % of Volume 100 97 101 101 129 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)659 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 3 0 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 2.4 2.3 2.8 0.3 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 1.5 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 Total Stops 37 0 0 0 37 Stop/Veh 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 Travel Dist (mi) 9.7 62.9 10.5 46.8 129.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.6 2.2 0.5 1.4 4.7 Avg Speed (mph) 18 29 20 33 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 3.9 0.5 1.6 6.2 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.0 16.2 21.8 29.8 20.9 HC Emissions (g) 2 55 7 23 86 CO Emissions (g) 76 2803 272 815 3965 NOx Emissions (g) 7 197 25 81 310 Vehicles Entered 145 806 134 1163 2248 Vehicles Exited 145 803 134 1164 2246 Hourly Exit Rate 145 803 134 1164 2246 Input Volume 142 795 138 1153 2228 % of Volume 102 101 97 101 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)545 Occupancy (veh) 1 2 1 1 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.1 0.1 0.2 3.9 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.1 0.7 1.7 1.3 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 25.3 20.4 5.7 26.1 24.0 6.2 27.3 16.8 15.6 26.8 5.2 3.0 Stop Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.6 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.2 18.5 5.2 23.4 21.2 5.1 23.1 10.4 10.2 23.5 3.0 2.2 Total Stops 43 1 24 116 4 10 47 430 108 202 206 24 Stop/Veh 0.84 1.00 0.80 0.83 1.00 0.77 0.92 0.49 0.63 0.88 0.24 0.30 Travel Dist (mi) 7.9 0.1 4.7 17.7 0.5 1.7 10.1 172.5 33.6 17.1 64.9 6.0 Travel Time (hr) 0.7 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.0 0.1 0.7 8.7 1.8 2.3 2.9 0.3 Avg Speed (mph) 12 13 21 11 12 19 14 20 18 7 22 20 Fuel Used (gal) 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.5 7.5 1.3 0.8 2.1 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 25.5 26.6 35.8 22.2 27.8 34.4 21.8 22.9 25.3 21.2 30.3 52.7 HC Emissions (g) 1 0 3 7 0 0 4 97 12 6 26 1 CO Emissions (g) 48 1 53 216 2 10 214 4266 636 210 1048 36 NOx Emissions (g) 5 0 7 22 0 1 15 338 46 18 91 3 Vehicles Entered 50 1 30 138 4 13 51 873 170 228 857 79 Vehicles Exited 50 1 30 136 4 13 51 878 170 228 857 79 Hourly Exit Rate 50 1 30 136 4 13 51 878 170 228 857 79 Input Volume 54 1 29 141 3 14 53 865 179 229 851 73 % of Volume 93 100 103 96 133 93 96 102 95 100 101 108 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 9 2 2 3 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.2 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Delay (hr) 9.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 14.0 Stop Delay (hr) 7.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.9 Total Stops 1215 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 336.7 Travel Time (hr) 19.6 Avg Speed (mph) 17 Fuel Used (gal) 13.7 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.6 HC Emissions (g) 159 CO Emissions (g) 6741 NOx Emissions (g) 546 Vehicles Entered 2494 Vehicles Exited 2497 Hourly Exit Rate 2497 Input Volume 2492 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 446 Occupancy (veh) 19 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.8 2.9 0.1 1.1 2.4 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.2 29.2 5.8 25.9 29.7 7.1 31.0 11.7 2.9 28.6 10.8 7.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.8 0.1 0.9 1.5 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.3 26.8 5.1 24.1 26.9 7.2 27.3 7.1 2.3 24.7 6.4 4.8 Total Stops 69 26 69 60 17 110 84 376 42 120 306 41 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.90 0.83 0.85 0.77 0.87 0.88 0.42 0.43 0.89 0.38 0.49 Travel Dist (mi) 10.3 3.8 10.8 4.5 1.4 8.1 34.3 322.7 34.7 26.3 159.8 16.5 Travel Time (hr) 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.6 1.8 11.1 1.1 1.9 6.6 0.7 Avg Speed (mph) 10 10 18 6 6 13 19 29 33 14 24 23 Fuel Used (gal) 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.0 8.9 0.9 1.1 6.0 0.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.4 24.9 34.4 20.2 21.2 40.6 33.0 36.2 38.6 23.9 26.5 27.8 HC Emissions (g) 2 2 3 1 0 1 10 97 13 15 77 10 CO Emissions (g) 50 30 58 26 10 27 276 2889 372 564 3273 375 NOx Emissions (g) 7 4 9 3 1 3 37 383 48 48 273 31 Vehicles Entered 79 29 83 71 22 126 94 882 95 133 807 83 Vehicles Exited 78 29 82 70 22 126 93 883 95 133 808 83 Hourly Exit Rate 78 29 82 70 22 126 93 883 95 133 808 83 Input Volume 84 26 82 68 25 126 91 879 94 132 802 87 % of Volume 93 112 100 103 88 100 102 100 101 101 101 95 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 11 1 2 7 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 9.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 13.3 Stop Delay (hr) 6.8 Stop Del/Veh (s) 9.7 Total Stops 1320 Stop/Veh 0.52 Travel Dist (mi) 633.1 Travel Time (hr) 26.7 Avg Speed (mph) 24 Fuel Used (gal) 20.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.7 HC Emissions (g) 231 CO Emissions (g) 7951 NOx Emissions (g) 846 Vehicles Entered 2504 Vehicles Exited 2502 Hourly Exit Rate 2502 Input Volume 2496 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 623 Occupancy (veh) 27 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 0.6 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 Total Delay (hr) 28.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 30.1 Stop Delay (hr) 18.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 19.5 Total Stops 3531 Stop/Veh 1.05 Travel Dist (mi) 2663.0 Travel Time (hr) 105.4 Avg Speed (mph) 25 Fuel Used (gal) 94.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 28.3 HC Emissions (g) 1129 CO Emissions (g) 41019 NOx Emissions (g) 4078 Vehicles Entered 3265 Vehicles Exited 3245 Hourly Exit Rate 3245 Input Volume 16091 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 470 Occupancy (veh) 105 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 33 35 116 31 56 59 139 146 148 74 138 150 Average Queue (ft) 2 6 58 4 25 14 62 71 72 30 59 63 95th Queue (ft) 15 25 104 20 48 42 115 125 131 63 108 124 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 99 77 Average Queue (ft) 26 19 95th Queue (ft) 64 53 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB Directions Served R L Maximum Queue (ft) 82 61 Average Queue (ft) 41 15 95th Queue (ft) 68 44 Link Distance (ft) 1411 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 68 Average Queue (ft) 20 95th Queue (ft) 50 Link Distance (ft) 344 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 73 58 134 92 85 154 183 275 220 158 99 115 Average Queue (ft) 33 19 72 14 35 70 83 145 118 48 47 49 95th Queue (ft) 68 50 122 54 70 124 145 235 190 102 86 97 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build AM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 106 76 72 83 45 86 123 165 138 162 64 162 Average Queue (ft) 46 26 33 37 12 32 55 79 62 81 20 75 95th Queue (ft) 86 63 60 71 34 64 102 132 110 145 45 135 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 0 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 112 131 142 Average Queue (ft) 53 68 73 95th Queue (ft) 95 114 124 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 SimTraffic Simulation Summary 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 1 Summary of All Intervals Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Start Time 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 6:57 End Time 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 Total Time (min) 63 63 63 63 63 63 Time Recorded (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60 # of Intervals 2 2 2 2 2 2 # of Recorded Intervals 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehs Entered 4651 4790 4647 4658 4651 4678 Vehs Exited 4636 4753 4613 4659 4621 4656 Starting Vehs 141 158 127 162 131 140 Ending Vehs 156 195 161 161 161 162 Denied Entry Before 1 0 1 0 2 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 2 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3750 3845 3717 3756 3733 3760 Travel Time (hr) 163.0 169.6 160.1 166.1 162.8 164.3 Total Delay (hr) 55.5 59.2 53.6 58.2 55.4 56.4 Total Stops 5458 5746 5347 5544 5441 5507 Fuel Used (gal) 138.5 143.2 137.0 139.8 137.2 139.1 Interval #0 Information Seeding Start Time 6:57 End Time 7:00 Total Time (min) 3 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. No data recorded this interval. Interval #1 Information Recording Start Time 7:00 End Time 8:00 Total Time (min) 60 Volumes adjusted by Growth Factors. Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Vehs Entered 4651 4790 4647 4658 4651 4678 Vehs Exited 4636 4753 4613 4659 4621 4656 Starting Vehs 141 158 127 162 131 140 Ending Vehs 156 195 161 161 161 162 Denied Entry Before 1 0 1 0 2 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 2 2 0 0 Travel Distance (mi) 3750 3845 3717 3756 3733 3760 Travel Time (hr) 163.0 169.6 160.1 166.1 162.8 164.3 Total Delay (hr) 55.5 59.2 53.6 58.2 55.4 56.4 Total Stops 5458 5746 5347 5544 5441 5507 Fuel Used (gal) 138.5 143.2 137.0 139.8 137.2 139.1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 2 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.1 0.1 0.2 3.4 1.1 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.6 0.1 6.7 0.3 1.9 1.8 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 33.9 28.3 5.5 34.6 27.3 11.7 31.3 16.6 6.7 34.6 6.0 2.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.6 0.1 4.9 0.2 1.6 0.8 0.0 Stop Del/Veh (s) 31.9 25.2 5.0 31.2 22.9 10.5 28.9 12.1 5.2 29.8 2.5 1.8 Total Stops 15 11 8 153 12 149 9 747 95 164 251 1 Stop/Veh 0.88 0.69 0.73 0.87 0.80 0.76 0.90 0.51 0.59 0.84 0.23 0.20 Travel Dist (mi) 2.6 2.4 1.7 36.7 3.1 40.8 0.8 117.9 13.2 53.2 304.3 1.3 Travel Time (hr) 0.3 0.2 0.1 3.2 0.2 2.4 0.1 9.8 0.8 3.5 9.6 0.0 Avg Speed (mph) 10 12 21 12 14 19 7 12 16 16 32 31 Fuel Used (gal) 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.1 1.3 0.0 4.4 0.4 1.8 8.5 0.0 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 23.6 25.2 35.9 24.8 29.0 31.2 21.8 26.7 35.8 29.4 35.8 40.6 HC Emissions (g) 0 0 0 13 0 11 0 36 4 15 98 0 CO Emissions (g) 14 18 6 333 14 289 7 1227 160 497 3102 6 NOx Emissions (g) 1 1 1 38 1 32 0 124 12 54 378 1 Vehicles Entered 17 16 11 174 14 192 10 1456 159 193 1098 5 Vehicles Exited 16 16 11 175 14 193 10 1442 159 192 1096 5 Hourly Exit Rate 16 16 11 175 14 193 10 1442 159 192 1096 5 Input Volume 15 15 12 160 16 193 12 1475 157 191 1098 4 % of Volume 107 107 92 109 88 100 83 98 101 101 100 125 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 10 1 3 10 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 3 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6 Total Delay (hr) 13.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 14.5 Stop Delay (hr) 10.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 10.8 Total Stops 1615 Stop/Veh 0.48 Travel Dist (mi) 577.9 Travel Time (hr) 30.1 Avg Speed (mph) 20 Fuel Used (gal) 18.3 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 31.6 HC Emissions (g) 179 CO Emissions (g) 5673 NOx Emissions (g) 644 Vehicles Entered 3345 Vehicles Exited 3329 Hourly Exit Rate 3329 Input Volume 3348 % of Volume 99 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 435 Occupancy (veh) 30 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 4 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Performance by movement Movement EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.0 1.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.2 7.2 0.6 1.6 1.2 1.3 Stop Delay (hr) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.7 5.6 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Total Stops 64 53 0 0 0 117 Stop/Veh 1.00 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Dist (mi) 16.9 3.1 64.9 110.0 1.8 196.8 Travel Time (hr) 0.7 0.3 2.2 3.6 0.1 6.9 Avg Speed (mph) 23 10 29 31 23 28 Fuel Used (gal) 0.5 0.1 2.7 5.5 0.1 8.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 35.6 26.9 24.0 19.8 29.2 22.1 HC Emissions (g) 3 1 40 82 0 125 CO Emissions (g) 63 21 1570 3841 32 5526 NOx Emissions (g) 8 3 142 288 2 442 Vehicles Entered 63 77 1624 1264 21 3049 Vehicles Exited 64 77 1625 1260 21 3047 Hourly Exit Rate 64 77 1625 1260 21 3047 Input Volume 65 80 1644 1252 22 3063 % of Volume 98 96 99 101 95 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)520 Occupancy (veh) 1 0 2 4 0 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 5 3: France Ave & Business Access Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 Total Del/Veh (s) 7.1 2.8 3.0 0.4 2.2 Stop Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 Stop Del/Veh (s) 5.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 Total Stops 143 1 0 2 146 Stop/Veh 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 Travel Dist (mi) 19.1 111.0 10.9 53.4 194.4 Travel Time (hr) 1.5 4.1 0.6 1.6 7.7 Avg Speed (mph) 13 27 19 34 25 Fuel Used (gal) 0.7 6.8 0.5 1.6 9.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.5 16.3 21.5 33.2 20.2 HC Emissions (g) 6 96 9 22 133 CO Emissions (g) 228 4586 286 813 5914 NOx Emissions (g) 21 352 30 77 481 Vehicles Entered 284 1424 141 1323 3172 Vehicles Exited 285 1422 140 1324 3171 Hourly Exit Rate 285 1422 140 1324 3171 Input Volume 293 1437 140 1317 3187 % of Volume 97 99 100 101 99 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh)332 Occupancy (veh) 1 4 1 2 8 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 6 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.1 0.4 3.6 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 0.7 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.1 0.3 0.3 9.1 1.1 2.2 2.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 26.5 31.1 6.4 31.1 22.6 12.0 34.5 23.4 24.8 42.3 7.1 3.7 Stop Delay (hr) 0.6 0.0 0.1 2.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 5.6 0.7 2.0 1.3 0.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 24.1 27.2 5.6 26.7 18.6 9.4 28.3 14.5 16.4 38.9 4.4 2.7 Total Stops 72 1 43 248 12 65 31 681 97 172 273 30 Stop/Veh 0.78 1.00 0.75 0.82 0.63 0.76 0.94 0.48 0.63 0.93 0.26 0.31 Travel Dist (mi) 14.3 0.2 8.9 38.6 2.3 10.8 6.4 276.8 30.6 13.7 79.2 7.3 Travel Time (hr) 1.3 0.0 0.5 4.3 0.2 0.7 0.5 16.4 2.1 2.7 4.1 0.4 Avg Speed (mph) 12 13 20 10 12 15 13 17 15 5 19 19 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.0 0.3 1.9 0.1 0.4 0.3 13.1 1.3 0.8 2.7 0.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 24.1 28.5 34.0 19.9 23.8 29.8 20.0 21.2 23.3 16.6 29.7 50.4 HC Emissions (g) 4 0 3 16 0 3 4 157 16 4 30 2 CO Emissions (g) 129 2 78 547 25 111 155 6656 601 145 1151 42 NOx Emissions (g) 12 0 10 51 2 11 13 560 55 12 106 4 Vehicles Entered 90 1 57 300 18 84 32 1395 153 182 1046 96 Vehicles Exited 90 1 57 300 18 84 32 1394 154 183 1047 97 Hourly Exit Rate 90 1 57 300 18 84 32 1394 154 183 1047 97 Input Volume 84 2 50 321 15 88 31 1410 149 184 1038 96 % of Volume 107 50 114 93 120 95 103 99 103 99 101 101 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 1 0 0 4 0 1 1 16 2 3 4 0 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 7 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.4 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Delay (hr) 18.6 Total Del/Veh (s) 19.3 Stop Delay (hr) 13.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 13.7 Total Stops 1725 Stop/Veh 0.50 Travel Dist (mi) 489.1 Travel Time (hr) 33.1 Avg Speed (mph) 15 Fuel Used (gal) 21.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 22.6 HC Emissions (g) 240 CO Emissions (g) 9642 NOx Emissions (g) 836 Vehicles Entered 3454 Vehicles Exited 3457 Hourly Exit Rate 3457 Input Volume 3468 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 265 Occupancy (veh) 33 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 8 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (hr) 1.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.4 1.0 6.6 0.0 2.1 3.6 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 33.2 33.5 10.0 27.1 33.8 10.1 39.2 17.5 3.3 35.9 11.4 9.9 Stop Delay (hr) 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.9 4.1 0.0 1.8 2.1 0.2 Stop Del/Veh (s) 30.9 31.0 9.0 24.8 30.4 10.2 34.4 10.9 3.0 30.9 6.7 6.6 Total Stops 90 21 121 86 43 123 82 701 28 186 383 40 Stop/Veh 0.87 0.84 0.86 0.83 0.86 0.83 0.91 0.51 0.52 0.88 0.34 0.47 Travel Dist (mi) 13.1 3.3 18.1 6.5 3.2 9.5 32.6 489.5 19.7 41.1 221.0 16.6 Travel Time (hr) 1.5 0.4 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.9 1.9 19.0 0.6 3.4 9.5 0.8 Avg Speed (mph) 9 9 15 6 6 11 17 26 33 12 23 21 Fuel Used (gal) 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.3 1.0 13.7 0.5 1.9 9.0 0.6 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 22.1 23.5 31.1 19.2 19.3 36.2 31.8 35.7 37.9 21.3 24.6 26.1 HC Emissions (g) 3 0 4 2 1 1 7 154 6 18 127 11 CO Emissions (g) 88 12 91 52 23 32 243 4353 174 870 5309 419 NOx Emissions (g) 11 1 13 6 2 3 30 574 22 62 432 34 Vehicles Entered 102 25 140 103 50 146 89 1340 54 208 1116 83 Vehicles Exited 100 25 139 103 50 147 89 1333 54 209 1119 84 Hourly Exit Rate 100 25 139 103 50 147 89 1333 54 209 1119 84 Input Volume 99 24 134 103 52 152 93 1339 55 205 1128 80 % of Volume 101 104 104 100 96 97 96 100 98 102 99 105 Denied Entry Before 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Denied Entry After 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Density (ft/veh) Occupancy (veh) 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 19 1 3 10 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 9 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Performance by movement Movement All Denied Delay (hr) 0.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 Total Delay (hr) 16.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 17.3 Stop Delay (hr) 12.1 Stop Del/Veh (s) 12.5 Total Stops 1904 Stop/Veh 0.54 Travel Dist (mi) 874.3 Travel Time (hr) 40.8 Avg Speed (mph) 21 Fuel Used (gal) 28.9 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 30.3 HC Emissions (g) 335 CO Emissions (g) 11666 NOx Emissions (g) 1192 Vehicles Entered 3456 Vehicles Exited 3452 Hourly Exit Rate 3452 Input Volume 3464 % of Volume 100 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 408 Occupancy (veh) 41 SimTraffic Performance Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 10 Total Network Performance Denied Delay (hr) 1.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.9 Total Delay (hr) 55.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 41.3 Stop Delay (hr) 36.4 Stop Del/Veh (s) 27.2 Total Stops 5507 Stop/Veh 1.14 Travel Dist (mi) 3760.1 Travel Time (hr) 164.3 Avg Speed (mph) 23 Fuel Used (gal) 139.1 Fuel Eff. (mpg) 27.0 HC Emissions (g) 1635 CO Emissions (g) 59762 NOx Emissions (g) 5900 Vehicles Entered 4678 Vehicles Exited 4656 Hourly Exit Rate 4656 Input Volume 22791 % of Volume 20 Denied Entry Before 0 Denied Entry After 0 Density (ft/veh) 302 Occupancy (veh) 163 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 11 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 62 57 153 163 131 46 196 224 266 109 205 162 Average Queue (ft) 16 16 91 15 57 9 128 148 166 45 102 75 95th Queue (ft) 46 46 141 75 111 33 188 212 237 87 173 136 Link Distance (ft) 817 1108 385 385 385 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 80 130 130 170 300 300 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 3 0 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 7 1 0 0 Intersection: 1: France Ave & Hazelton Rd Movement SB SB Directions Served T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 132 104 Average Queue (ft) 42 31 95th Queue (ft) 93 72 Link Distance (ft) 1451 1451 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: France Ave & W 72nd St Movement EB NB SB Directions Served R L TR Maximum Queue (ft) 61 72 4 Average Queue (ft) 32 31 0 95th Queue (ft) 50 62 3 Link Distance (ft) 1411 385 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 220 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 12 Intersection: 3: France Ave & Business Access Movement WB NB SB Directions Served R T T Maximum Queue (ft) 142 10 19 Average Queue (ft) 60 0 1 95th Queue (ft) 115 6 19 Link Distance (ft) 344 343 159 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: France Ave & Gallagher Dr Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L TR L T T TR L T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 107 58 144 315 76 219 248 326 207 166 168 137 Average Queue (ft) 51 27 126 108 26 124 146 195 112 69 63 64 95th Queue (ft) 98 55 163 263 59 197 222 288 191 149 120 112 Link Distance (ft) 834 678 967 967 967 343 343 343 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh)2 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 120 270 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 19 0 2 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 19 0 5 Queuing and Blocking Report 05/10/2023 2030 Build PM SimTraffic Report Page 13 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T R L T R L T T T R L Maximum Queue (ft) 112 162 105 102 136 102 130 217 211 235 42 192 Average Queue (ft) 60 31 49 50 34 40 59 143 136 139 15 117 95th Queue (ft) 105 119 85 92 83 79 108 205 207 216 34 176 Link Distance (ft) 632 277 277 1925 1925 1925 1925 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 80 320 400 Storage Blk Time (%) 4 0 1 3 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 0 1 2 1 Intersection: 5: France Ave & Parklawn Ave Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 128 153 168 Average Queue (ft) 65 84 95 95th Queue (ft) 116 137 160 Link Distance (ft) 967 967 967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 44 DATE: 5/16/2024 TO: Enclave Mixed-Use Development on France, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Ben Jore, PE, Senior Project Engineer RE: 7235 France Ave South – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, flood risk, and storm water. Plans reviewed included civil and landscape plans dated 4/26/2024. Review Comment Required For General 1. Deliver as-build records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. Certificate of Occupancy 2. Maintenance of sidewalks within the property is the responsibility of the property owner. A. Sidewalks accessing a potential underpass of France Ave or adjacent to France Ave will require more discussion if the project is approved. General Comment Survey 3. An existing and proposed site condition survey is required. Grading/Building Permit 3.1 Show all existing and proposed public and private easements. Grading/Building Permit 3.2 Vacation of existing sanitary easement is required after Site Improvement Performance Agreement for sanitary trunk realignment and expansion. Grading/Building Permit Living Streets 4. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 5. Show the sidewalk crossings on the plans. Grading/Building Permit 6. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit 7. Public sidewalk along France Avenue to be minimum 8-ft wide with 8-ft wide boulevard. A. Sidewalks to access a potential underpass of France Ave will require more discussion if the project is approved. General Comment 8. A potential underpass of France Ave is being considered and designed by the City. This would connect the east and west sides General Comment of France Ave at this location. Staff continues to investigate the opportunity for an underpass. The current application does provide space for this idea. More coordination and discussion is required if the project is approved regarding ownership, maintenance, easements, etc. Traffic and Street 9. Review fire access requirements with Fire Department. Fire truck turning template attached. Grading/Building Permit 10. Provide traffic study and implement City-approved recommendations. Grading/Building Permit 11. Driveway Entrance permit required for entrance construction/ relocation/ removal. Comply with standard plate 415. Indicate the radii; must be 15’. Note maximum width for 2-way entrance is 30’. Close up existing entrances, standard plate 500. Building Permit 12. All proposed trees, vegetation, signage and other items adjacent to the intersections and driveway accesses should maintain a clear view as defined in Section 26-190 of City Code. Grading/Building Permit Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations. Grading/Building Permit 14. Review comments posted in 240516_utilityplanredlines.pdf Grading/Building Permit 15. Current sewer and building floor elevations invite backflow of sewer from trunk sewer alignment. All buildings floors below grade must be served only by pumps to gravity lines overhead. Discuss elevation requirements with City Engineer for overhead sanitary sewer connections. Building services must have inverts 1’ above future sewer trunk top of pipe. Private sewer connection point to SSMH01 must be at or above 0.8 d/D point of future trunk sewer Grading/Building Permit 16. Confirm that the construction of the sewer pipe will not adversely affect the building foundation. Grading/Building Permit 17. Pipe capacity and minimum velocity of realigned sanitary trunk must be maintained. Edina Engineering will confirm with Sewer model. Grading/Building Permit 18. Pipe type for trunk sewer shall be Reinforced Polymer Mortar Pipe (FRPMP). Grading/Building Permit 19. Public improvement for sanitary trunk realignment and upsize requires Site Improvement Performance Agreement. Grading/Building Permit 20. Provide a utility easement over the proposed public sanitary sewer between SSMH 09 to SSMH 01. Grading/Building Permit 21. Provide a utility easement for the proposed public water loop and hydrant lead. Grading/Building Permit 22. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 23. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 24. Public sanitary sewer is proposed along the north portion of lot 2. The current easement is 20’ centered on the existing pipe. Ensure that there is a minimum easement of 10’ on each side of the proposed pipe. Grading/Building Permit 25. Multiple sanitary services are shown for the proposed building. Engineer to review and determine if all these services are necessary. Grading/Building Permit 25.1 Meter required for building service line and combined lines. No meter required for fire only service line. Grading/Building Permit 25.2 Public Works to determine acceptable installation methods. Grading/Building Permit 26. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. Grading/Building Permit 27. 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 28. Single connection from main for fire and domestic, split after main connection. Grading/Building Permit Storm Water Utility 29. Provide final, signed geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 30. Provide 5’ drainage and utilities easement on the east property line for potential promenade pumping feature improvements. Grading/Building Permit 31. Detail the plantings and landscaping above the underground system. Grading/Building Permit 32. Hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and state construction site permit requirements has been submitted. Full review at permit application. Grading/Building Permit 33. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading/Building Permit Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 34. A SWPPP consistent with the State General Construction Site Stormwater Permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Constructability and Safety 35. Construction staging, traffic control, and pedestrian access plans will be required. Construction staging or construction fencing shall not impede the City’s ability to snowplow the adjacent streets. If construction fencing removes storage space for snow, developer shall be responsible for snow removal in the street adjacent to any impacts to City operations. Any short-term road or lanes closures shall be approved by the City Engineer and/or Hennepin County. Grading/Building Permit Other Agency Coordination 36. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. Grading/Building Permit 37. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit is required. Grading/Building Permit 38. Any impacts to the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail must be approved by Three Rivers Park District. Grading/Building Permit 39. Any connections to the Promenade trail or grading on City property must be approved by the Parks department. Grading/Building Permit Sustainability 40. This project is required to comply with the City of Edina’s Sustainable Building Policy. Please contact Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager, to schedule a policy review and discuss a compliance pathway. NGBS Silver certification has been approved for the NE, NW and SE Buildings; and LEED Silver certification has been approved for the SW Building. All four buildings, regardless of certification system, must comply with the Edina Overlay requirements. Staff recommend the development team contact the Center for Sustainable Building Research (CSBR) early in the design process to adhere to the SB2030 Energy Standard. Financial Assistance and Planned Unit Development Approval 41. Staff recommend providing a minimum of one bike parking stall for every 10 residential units. These parking stalls should be in General Comment convenient, well-lit locations within 50’ of a public entrance to the building. Rack style and spacing should follow the recommendations of the Association for Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP). 42. Staff encourages implementing additional Travel Demand Management strategies: Provide directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and ride-sharing services. Provide a bike repair station on-site, located adjacent to bike parking/storage or the bicycle access points. Subsidize Metro Transit passes for tenants and employees. General Comment FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►857IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII8" GV8" PVC8" PVC8" PVCWET TAP AND CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERMAINPER CITY STANDARDSVERIFY INVERT, LOCATION,SIZE, AND MATERIALIN FIELDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIWET TAP AND CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERMAINPER CITY STANDARDSVERIFY INVERT, LOCATION,SIZE, AND MATERIALIN FIELD8" PVC6" PVC6" PVC6" HYDRANT6" GV8" GV8"X6" TEE8" PVC855860 86 5 865 853854856857858859861862863864855853854856857858852856857 855852 853854 855855 854 8568 5 7 858860859859859860 861 862 863 86 4861862863860856857858859861862863 864853854855853854856858858859860857858859858857860858859 855854856856856855854856857860 858 859 858859855860858 861862863855854 860857857 8608 6 0859858856857858 56 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%358 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%85 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%89 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%36 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%15 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%45 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%55 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%17 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%248 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%43 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%27 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%49 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%74 L F O F 8 " P V C @ 2 . 0 0 %5 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%18 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%SSMH 05RIM=861.67PR. 8" INV IN=846.00 (SW)EX. 33" INV IN=844.08 (NW)PR. 42" INV OUT=844.08 (E)SSMH 04RIM=861.2342" INV IN=844.06 (W)42" INV OUT=844.06 (E)SSMH 08RIM=860.168" INV IN=851.81 (W)8" INV IN=851.81 (S)8" INV IN=855.20 (N)8" INV OUT=851.71 (E)SSMH 03RIM=858.6542" INV IN=843.93 (W)42" INV OUT=843.83 (S)SSMH 01RIM=857.78EX. 33" INV OUT=843.70 (SE)42" INV IN=843.77 (N)8" INV IN=844.10 (SW)SSMH 02RIM=857.2242" INV IN=843.80 (N)8" INV IN=845.50 (W)42" INV OUT=843.80 (S)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=856.10 (S)SAN CO 10RIM=863.318" INV IN=846.36 (S)8" INV OUT=846.36 (NE)SSMH 07RIM=860.328" INV IN=846.75 (S)8" INV IN=846.75 (W)8" INV OUT=846.65 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=846.46 (N)SSMH 09RIM=860.148" INV IN=855.20 (W)8" INV IN=855.20 (N)8" INV OUT=852.68 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=847.09 (N)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=852.11 (N)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=855.92 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=846.60 (E)SSMH 06RIM=856.498" INV IN=845.68 (W)8" INV OUT=845.58 (NE)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANSPROPOSED PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENTPROPOSED PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENT8" 45° BEND8" PVC8" PVC8" GV8" 45° BEND8" PVC21.7'20.6'30'►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ►INSTALL 8' WIDE, 4" THICK EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENEINSULATION CENTERED OVER SANITARY SERVICEINSTALL 8' WIDE, 4" THICKEXTRUDED POLYSTYRENEINSULATION CENTEREDOVER SANITARY SERVICEEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-401 UTILITY PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:13:56 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, INVERT, ANDMATERIAL OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS TO UTILITY MAIN,STUBS, AND BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.3. MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION AT ALL UTILITYCROSSINGS.NOTESC-401UTILITY PLANLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING SANITARY MANHOLEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING WATER VALVEWVDYHEXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAIN►►►►STORM SEWER►►SANITARY SEWERIIWATERMAINSTORM MANHOLESTORM CATCH BASINSANITARY MANHOLECLEANOUTHYDRANTGATE VALVEPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900CONSTRUCTION LIMITSSEE INSET A/C-402:FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION - SEEPLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACTLOCATIONSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Departmentlowest invert for local above 0.8Point of future outgoing 42" = 846.5, include internal drop structureAll buildings, pumped overhead sanitary sewer connections only for lower levelsall buildings, minimum connection elevation top of nearby sanitary trunk +1'Sweeping bend with manhole on end, adjust easement accordingly. City consulting engineer to confirm lay length and capacity.confirm size and angle of flow change, this might need a sweeping bend as well. That might extend into the promenade.all buildings, minimum connection elevation top of nearby sanitary trunk +1'All buildings, pumped overhead sanitary sewer connections only for lower levelsPipe type change by recommendation of MCES - Reinforced Polymer Mortar Pipe (FRPMP). May 16, 2024 Cary Teague, Community Development Director Nate Borwege, Chief Building Official & Dave Ehmiller, Fire Marshal Proposed Macy’s furniture site redevelopment Information / Background: 4 new buildings, SW to be 11 story mixed use high rise, NW 7 story mixed use, NE 7 story residential, SE 7 story residential. - Applicable codes include the 2020 Minnesota State Building Code & Fire Code and adopted appendices along with associated Edina City policies. - Provide a complete Building/ Fire Code analysis with plans when submitting for the building permit. - An NFPA 13 Fire Sprinkler System is required in all buildings. - Provide Ordinary Hazard Group 2 sprinkler coverage in all parking garages. - EV chargers shall be located on the exterior or nearest the exit if in the structure. - Fire department access roads are to be installed and maintained per 2020 MSFC and per AHJ approval. - Knox key access shall be provided at the main entrances, parking entrances and other points of entry aiding in emergency response. - Ensure adequate Emergency Responder Radio Coverage per policy number SP-022-F2. - See Fire Permits and Policies page on the city website for additional information. (https://www.edinamn.gov/717/Fire-Permits-Policies) - Verify there is adequate assessable parking. This has been an issue in some of the older buildings. - Verify noise ordinance will be complied with and that it’s understood. - Working Hours: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed - Verify Address prior to submitting application for the building permit. - 30, 60, 90 percent meeting required with staff prior to submitting application for building permit. Architecture Field Office 2200 Zane Ave N | Minneapolis, MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.com Cary: At your request, we reviewed the revised Sketch Plan submission for the proposed redevelopment of the Macy’s Furniture Store site 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. Upon our review of the initial sketch plan concept in March 2023, we were optimistic for the potential of the development and the spirit of its alignment with the community’s vision for the District— especially notable given the prominence of the site and its connectivity to important existing public realm assets. We felt the proposed four block concept was working in important ways to meet the Design Experience Guidelines, demonstrating positive attributes as it relates the creation of an active public realm, and general consideration for the neighborhood. However, we are less enthusiastic about the current iteration of the proposal. While we recognize that the primary ask from the development team is related to infrastructure improvements such as accommodations made to connect the development and Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail across France Avenue, we also note there have been significant changes made to the massing of proposed buildings that warrant consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. The revised proposal is only presented in plan format with very limited detail—including no references to proposed building stepbacks at any location other than along France Avenue. The form of three of the four buildings has changed, in particular that of the southeast building and its relationship to the Promenade.The proposed mixed-use buildings on the east side of the site are far less integrated into the public realm asset that bisects the site from east to west, eliminating the interior public plaza in favor of a road realignment to accommodate a possible bridge across France. Locating the taller mixed-use building at the southwest corner will also cast a larger shadow over the northwest building. To City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date January 19, 2024 Architecture Field Office Following is a graphic comparison between the first submittal of March 2023, illustrating characteristics as outlined in our comments from that project review memo, and the current plan of January 2024, showing the same four block, four building layout without the same detailed exploration of the qualities of the building shapes and stepped facades that was illustrated in the first submission. March 2023 January 2024 Note the shape of the residential buildings along the Promenade in the March 2023 proposal, where a rich variety of human-scaled spaces were folded into the landscape of the Promenade, creating an integrated building and landscape experience. The configuration of the southeast building from the March 2023 proposal can accommodate a park or a retail pad, or any number of things yet to be determined. It fits well in that it is on the Southeast corner of the site where it opens to great light, which is essential to providing a high-quality experience, particularly in a northern climate. There was porosity between the public realm and public spaces within the residential community, shaping a more integrated experience. There is no longer an accommodation in adjusting adjacent spatial relationships that can determine the characteristic qualities of varied facades, with low-scale building walls along pedestrian corridors that enhance human experience. It appears that the character and shape of each building has been reduced to the bare minimum. And lastly, the statement made by the development team that identifies specific infrastructure or public realm items for review at this stage in the process is somewhat disingenuous based on the current concept’s lack of detail on design attributes that would enhance the pedestrian experience. To Architecture Field Office suggest the community provide feedback on relatively inconsequential elements such as the location of a retail pad when the rest of the project needs further refinement seems premature. Based on the original scheme and further articulation of that scheme, we suggest the upcoming conversations should revolve more around how the buildings could receive amenities into them, such as a park or retail, rather than pick locations that could be anything at any time. The buildings’ massing, their relationship to one another, and material qualities that provide continuity while still providing individual expression are all important considerations in expressing the character of what these places might become. The issue of a bridge over France Avenue should not be a force that impacts these four buildings. It is infrastructure that should be addressed as a larger question affecting the whole city and the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail corridor. A study is warranted that should look at the whole of France Avenue to determine whether a bridge is even necessary and if so, identify the right location along France. This is an important, large scale site—one of the most pivotal within the district in terms of its overall impact on shaping the characteristics of a future Greater Southdale District, the focus should be on articulation of a scheme that has strong characteristics that would accommodate all the things that have been mentioned by the developer to move the scheme forward (with the exception of a bridge) and bring it into alignment with the design goals of the Greater Southdale District. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mic April 26, 2024 Cary Teague, Community Development Director Members of the Edina City Council & Planning Commission City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: MACY’S FURNITURE STORE MIXED -USE REDEVELOPMENT - LAND USE APPLICATIONS Mr. Teague, Members of the Edina Planning Commission, and the Edina City Council: This correspondence is in relation to Enclave’s proposed mixed-use redevelopment project located at 7235 France Avenue South. The subject property is approximately 7.97-acres in gross size and is currently operating as a Macy’s Furniture Store. Enclave is pleased to submit the following three (3) land use applications: 1.Rezoning Application 2.Subdivision/ Plat Application 3.PUD/ Development Plan Application This redevelopment proposal will require the demolition/ clearing of all existing improvements, and relocation of the existing Macy’s Furniture store. Enclave is proposing to break the subject property into four (4) development projects/ blocks, as generally outlined below, and further described within the encl osed supplemental project narrative and project plans. •NE Block: Apartments, 7-story •SE Block: Apartments w/commercial pad on promenade, 7-story •NW Block: Mixed Use Building, 7-story •SW Block: Mixed Use Building, 11-story On behalf of our development team, Enclave is honored to submit this proposal. We are grateful for the opportunity to partner with the City of Edina on what we believe will be a transformational redevelopment project . Respectfully, Patrick E. Brama Developer Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 2 Supplemental Project Narrative following pages Introduction Page 3 Specifications & Description of Four Proposed Buildings Page 4 Schedule Page 5 Team Page 5 Public Engagement/ Public Process Log Page 5 Change Log Page 6 France Ave Pedestrian Connection Page 6 First Floor Commercial/ Restaurants Page 7 Parking Page 7 Parking Stall Conversion Strategy Page 8 Sustainability Page 9 Affordable Housing Page 10 Tax Increment Financing Page 10 Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water Page 10 NW Building – Updated Proposed Use Strategy Page 11 Branding Page 12 Signage Page 12 Restaurant Odor and Smoke Management Page 12 Circulation Plan for Service Vehicles Page 13 Greater Southdale Design Experience Guidelines – Developer’s Interpretation & Strategy Page 14 Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 3 Introduction Enclave Companies is proposing a mixed-use, multi-building development on the current Macy’s Homestore site located at 7235 France Ave, at the corner of France Ave. and Gallagher Dr. in Edina Minnesota. The site is approximately 7.95 acres in gross size and is currently zoned PCD-3 Planned Commercial. The proposed program consists of 2 multi-family residential buildings on the East side of the site, with 2 mixed-use buildings on the west side of the site. This building composition would require a re-zoning to a PUD in order to accommodate the mixture of uses contemplated. The general layout of the 4 buildings proposed on the site is consistent with the Design Experience Guidelines direction for organization into a smaller block pattern, with a North-South internal private drive dividing the site East and West, while an East-West running pedestrian spine divides the site North and South. This project will also provide an extension to the Edina Promenade park system by allocating significant open space along the South and West sides of the property to accommodate additional bike and walking trails, as well as public infrastructure such as parks, seating, potential water features, or other public realm improvements. Also under consideration is a connection across France Ave. to the 7200/7250 site which would be anchored mid-block on the West side of the 7235 parcel. The proposed site plan provides space for further development of this considered infrastructure improvement in a way that will not impact the overall development timeline for the buildings and associated sitework. The 2 buildings located along the East side of the property will be developed as multi-family residential use, consisting of 7 total levels of above grade structure and 2 levels of below grade parking. Each building will contain between 175 and 225 dwelling units of various composition and size, organized around a central open space and amenity area. The first level of each building will be 15’ 4” to accommodate a potential retail user as well as providing heightened entry and amenity experience for users. Floor to floor above the first level will be typical at 10’-8”, with additional height considered for upper-level units. The majority of units will be provided an exterior balcony above the first level, while units at the grade level will be treated in a walk-up condition where a stoop, stairs, and entry elements will help provide pedestrian scale articulation at the base of the building. All parking elements above grade will be screened either by liner units, or in conditions where parking is located along a building edge, by architectural screening or enclosure. The materiality of these buildings will be consistent with the Design Experience Guidelines for lower levels, including ample glass and transparency. Upper levels will be articulated to complement the Edina Promenade system, with a material palette consisting of a mixture of punched windows, masonry style materials, metal panel, as well as composite materials. Along the West side of the site the 2 buildings will be developed as mixed-use projects and will include a variety of uses including ground level active uses, architecturally screened structured parking, office space, and residential units. The Northwest structure will be approximately 7 levels above grade, with 2 levels of below grade parking, while the Southwest structure will be approximately 11 levels above grade, also with 2 levels of below grade parking. The first level of each of these buildings will be at least 15’ 4” to accommodate active uses and enhanced lobby and amenity spaces. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 4 1. Specs & Description of Four (4) Proposed Projects/ Bocks SW Parcel – Mixed Use NW Parcel – Mixed Use NE Parcel – Apartments SE Parcel – Apartments w/commercial Pad Lifestyle Communities + Partner Enclave + Partner Enclave + Partner Enclave + Partner approximately 97,000 sf gross parcel size approximately 78,000 sf gross parcel size approximately 86,000 sf gross parcel size approximately 92,500 sf gross parcel size approximately 36,000 sf bldg footprint (FF) /buildable area after public ROW/ setbacks/ public realm approximately 28,900 sf bldg footprint (FF) /buildable area after public ROW/ setbacks/ public realm approximately 53,000 sf bldg footprint (FF) /buildable area after public ROW/ setbacks/ public realm approximately 55,000 sf bldg footprint (FF) /buildable area after public ROW/ setbacks/ public realm 11 Floors Above Gound B2 – garage parking (74 stalls) B1 – garage parking (63 stalls) L1 – garage parking (45 stalls), 9,549 sf commercial/ restaurant, small lobby L2 – garage parking (48 stalls), 8427 sf office L3 – garage parking (50 stalls), 10,040 sf office L4 – 28,769 sf office L5 – Condo amenities and units L6 – Condo units L7 – Condo units L8 to L11 -- Condo units 7 Floors Above Gound B2 – garage parking (143 stalls) B1 – garage parking (140 stalls) L1 – garage parking (25 stalls), approx. 7,683 commercial, lobby, co-work/ conference, surface parking (10 stalls) L2 –15,891 sf office and apartment units L3 – apartments and office amenity L4 – apartments and amenity L5 – apartments L6 – apartments L7 – apartments and sky lounge 7 Floors Above Gound B2 – garage parking (144 stalls) B1 – garage parking (142 stalls) L1 – garage parking (60 stalls), lobby, amenities, apt Units L2 – apartments and amenity L3 – apartments L4 – apartments L5 – apartments L6 – apartments L7 – apartments and sky lounge 7 Floors Above Gound B2 – garage parking (122 stalls) B1 – garage parking (120 stalls) L1 – garage parking (62 stalls), lobby, approx. 4,141 +/- sf restaurant, apt units L2 – garage parking (76 stalls) L3 – apartments and amenity L4 – apartments L5 – apartments L6 – apartments L7 – apartments and sky lounge Totals*** 49 senior condo units 47,236 sf office 9,549 sf commercial/ restaurants Totals*** 124 apartment units 7,594 sf commercial 15,025 office 5,800 sf lobby/ co-work office and conference Totals*** 223 apartment units Totals*** 176 apartment units approx. 4,141 +/- sf commercial/ restaurant ***Minor changes will occur from the above specifications to final specifications. For example, unit counts could go up/ down 0-10 units per building; parking stall counts could go up or down 0-15 units per building; and commercial square footage could go up/ down 10%. Factors include: feedback from this public process, finalized market analysis/ market strategy/ market demand, and refined design. The developer expects to provide finalized specifications within the next formal submittal package (Summer 2024). Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 5 2. Schedule Enclave assumes the following major project timing milestones: • Final Approval of Land Use/ TIF Applications – Late Summer 2024 • Record Plat & Land Purchase Closing – December 2024 • Certify TIF District – June 1, 2025 • Commence Demolition & Construction – September 1, 2025 • Complete Construction – 2028 3. Team • Architectural – ESG Architecture & Design for NW, NE and SE blocks. Pope Design Group for SW block. • Landscaping/ Public Realm – Confluence for all four blocks. • Civil Engineering, Plat, Survey – Stantec for all four blocks. • Environmental, Geotechnical, Bldg. Inspection – Braun Intertec for all four blocks. 4. Public Engagement/ Public Process Log Fall 2022 Enclave developed initial project proposal based review of Southdale District Guidelines. Enclave meets with City staff to obtain feedback prior to finalizing initial concept plan proposal. February 2023 Neighborhood Meeting #1 -- Concept Plan March 2023 Neighborhood Meeting #2 -- Concept Plan April 2023 Planning Commission -- Concept Plan April 2023 City Council -- Concept Plan April 2023 France Avenue Pedestrian Connection Discussion – Begin August 2023 Environmental Assessment Worksheet and Traffic Study, approved by City Council October 2023 France Avenue Pedestrian Connection Discussion – Better Together public engagement January 2024 France Avenue Pedestrian Connection Discussion – direction provided by Planning Commission February 2024 France Avenue Pedestrian Connection Discussion – direction provided by City Council June 2024 Land Use Applications – Round #1 June 2024 TIF Application – Round #1 Aug 2024 Land Use Applications – Round #2 Aug 2024 TIF Application – Round #2 Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 6 5. Change Log Changes to proposed project based on feedback from public and City of Edina to-date Original Concept Plan Current Plan 1) East side of site, buildings setback 15’ 35’ 2) South side of site, buildings setback 15’ - 35’ 50’ - 65’ 3) West side of site, along France 50’ to property line 50 - 65’ to property line 4) NE side of site, greenspace appeared private/ exclusive public/ Cent. Promenade amenity 5) Restaurant adjacent to promenade non-included included 6) 9-Mile Creek Trail, along S side leave as-is (10’w) upgrade per city (approx. 15’w) 7) NW building, height/ use 10-11 stories/ 100% office only 7-stories/ mixed use 8) NW building, above ground garage 4-5 stories 1-floor, partial garage 9) General Public Parking not included (was user specific) Included: 1st floor of all four bldgs 10) Convertible parking not included included 11) Green coverage on building walls not included included 12) Public art not included included 13) Promenade Placemaking Signage not included included 14) E-W center ped plaza, alignment straight line realigned, per next section #6 15) E-W center plaza, design hard surface/ linear/ formal/ private feeling Centennial Promenade inspired (smaller limited green areas) (curves, larger green areas, public feeling, larger trees) 6. France Avenue Pedestrian Connection From spring 2023 to February 2024 Enclave worked with the City of Edina to explore strategies for a potential pedestrian connection across France Avenue. As a result of said process, Enclave updated its site plan/ proposed project scheme to provide flexibility for the City of Edina to deploy multiple different pedestrian connection strategies across France Avenue, in the future—example changes to project below. A. Realignment of east-to-west center plaza corridor of this proposed development (7235 France) with the east-to- west center plaza corridor of the proposed redevelopment projects located directly across France Avenue (7200 / 7250 France). • This will allow for a straight/ linear east-to-west center plaza corridor between the two proposed developments, for pedestrians, should a connection across France be made in the future. • This also creates a greater distance between Gallegher Drive and the potential pedestrian connection point. A greater distance allows for more room to gradually change grades, if the City decided to pursue a pedestrian underpass across France. • This was accomplished by shifting/ shrinking the west two building pads of this proposed development (7235 France). B. Expansion of east-to-west 9-mile Creek Trail Corridor, on south side of site • Spanning from east-to-west, a 50’- 90’ setback corridor will be memorialized/ created. • Primary purpose of this corridor is to move pedestrians along the existing/ already established 9 -mile creek trail system path, located on the south side of this site (parallel with Gallagher). • This also creates flexibility for the City, to use this corridor for an “ADA accessible” route, to the future potential France Avenue pedestrian crossing mentioned in 6(A) above. • This was accomplished by shifting/ shrinking building pads of this proposed development (7235 France). C. Adjustment to design/ programming of two western buildings of this proposed development • Re-design of underground parking structures to allow for potential excavation/ change of grading in the future, along France Avenue. • Re-design/ adjust programming of first floor commercial pads flanking France Avenue to accommodate a potential grade change in the future. NOTE: the developer understands the City may, or may not, make a France Avenue pedestrian connection, at this site, in the future. Further, the developer understands the City’s preferred method (example methods: underpass, bridge, bigger- picture France Avenue redesign, etc.), City’s timing of implementation, and City’s funding source for said potential pedestrian connection is still being investigated by the City; and has yet to be determined by the City. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 7 7. First-Floor Commercial/ Restaurants Through the public process outlined in Section 4 of this document, the developer was requested to update their design/ project strategy to incorporate as much commercial/ retail space on the first floor as possible. Example specific requests included: A. Add a restaurant pad against the promenade. B. Add as much first-floor activity to the east-to-west center pedestrian plaza as possible. Enclave has discussed this project with various brokers and prospective tenants. Consistent feedback provided to Enclave included: • Because of the required blocking (splitting site into four urban blocks) and the density/ complexity of the development plan—this site will have limited ability to successfully attract first floor commercial/ restaurants. Success will likely be limited to prime locations/ corners. This isn’t necessarily a negative —this site is special. However, interest will be specialized and limited. • Visibility from France Avenue is critical. Ideally, users would front France. If they don’t, a false façade facing France would be important. • Signage on France Avenue is critical. This development must have major/ prominent signage opportunities on both the SW side of the side and the NW side of the site. • Public parking, located on the first floor, that is visible, is critical. • All/ vast majority of parking needed by each first floor commercial/ restaurant user needs to also be located on the first floor. As a result, there is a mathematical limitation on how much square feet of commercial/ restaurant space that can be expected to be successful on this project. The proposed development plans submitted by the developer directly reflect s the above-mentioned feedback from both the public and the market. 8. Parking Section #1 outlines specific parking counts per block/ building. Below outlines the demand/ rationalization for parking, based on uses. First Floor Commercial/ Restaurants Per Section 7, any building that includes a first floor commercial/ retail component needs to also include first floor public parking with some component of visibility. First floor commercial/ retail parking will also double as general public parking. End user tenants will establish the demand/ requirement for parking. If restaurant/ food users are secured, approximately 9-10 stalls per 1,000 square feet is required. Non restaurant/ food users typically need 4-5 stalls per 1,000 square feet is required. Apartments 1.65 to 1.75 stalls per residential unit (blended), for apartment resident parking. 0.07 to 0.10 stalls per residential unit, for staff/ visitor parking (35-45 stalls) Office 3 to 5 stalls per 1,000 square feet Condominium 1.45 to 1.60 stalls per residential unit, for condo owner parking. 0.25 to 0.35 per residential unit, for staff/ visitor parking (13-18 stalls) Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 8 9. Parking Stall Conversion Strategy Through the public process outlined in Section 4 of this document, the developer was requested to update their design/ project strategy to allow for the conversion of structured parking stalls to usable space in the future. In order to accommodate this strategy, the developer pursued the following two strategies (A and B): A. Generally the design team deployed flat levels of internal parking structure w/ speed ramps. If the design team didn’t utilize said “flat-level” method, and rather utilized traditional mass ramped parking levels, it would be very difficult to convert structured parking spaces in the future—as each floor would be at an incline (vs flat). B. Generally, the developer pulled as much buried parking out of the east -to-west center pedestrian plaza as possible. • Note: developer previously utilized entire east-to-west center pedestrian plaza area for two floors of below ground parking. • Buried parking is very difficult to convert to market-relevant reuses—especially when located under a public plaza. • This strategy required more above-ground parking to meet current market parking demand/ requirements (essentially shifting stalls from below ground to above ground). • Above-ground parking provides the most market-realistic ability to convert parking stalls in the future (example, walk-out residential units, walk-out live work units, or small office spaces). The developer estimates the following future parking conversions are possible: Reduction of Stalls Creation of Small Offices and/or Residential Units NW Building -20 +5 NE Building -29 +9 SE Building -31 +11 SW Building -20 +5 -100 +30 Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 9 10. Sustainability: Building Certification, GHG Modeling, SB20230 Modeling, Bird Safe Worksheet, Solar, EV Charging, EDA, Green Walls Building Certification The developer intents to obtain the below sustainability building certifications. NOTE: the certification scope for apartments will include the entire building and the full interior buildout of individual apartments. The certification scope for office/ first floor commercial, and condos will be specific to core/ shell (including garages); and will not include full interior buildout. NW Building NGBS Silver or approved Edina Sustainable Building Rating System NE Building NGBS Silver or approved Edina Sustainable Building Rating System SE Building NGBS Silver or approved Edina Sustainable Building Rating System SW Building LEED Silver or approved Edina Sustainable Building Rating System GHG Modeling, SB2030 Modeling, and Bird Safe Worksheet The developer acknowledges these three modeling exercises are required by the City of Edina. The developer intends to incorporate said modeling efforts within the project scope/ budget. The developer understands said three modeling exercises do not trigger construction/ project scope requirements from the City—but, will result in the following benefits: (1) inform developer of options/ encourage the developer to pursue sustainable alternatives; and (2) allow the City to establish better real-world data to inform future sustainability policy discussions. EV Charging The developer acknowledges the city’s policy for EV charging. • The developer will install electric vehicle charging stations for 5% of the parking stalls per building. • The developer intends to run electrical conduit to parking stalls, totaling an additional 10% of the parking stalls. Power supply to the building will be sized appropriately to allow for upgrading said additional 10% of stalls with EV charging stations in the future. Solar The developer intends to include a rooftop solar panel system on each of the two east buildings. Each system (two total) will be approximately 120kW AC, per system. Green Walls Through the public process outlined in Section 4 of this document, the developer was requested to update their design/ project strategy to incorporate “green walls” / vines where reasonably possible. As a result, the design team has incorporated space that would be ideal for green walls located on the southeast building (due to sunlight). Specifically, the southeast corner, south side, and southwest corner--of the southeast building. This green wall strategy couples well with the parking stall conversion strategy outlined in Section 9 of this document. Similarly, portions of the southeast corner of the southwest building also incorporate the green wall strategy. Energy Design Assistance (EDA) The developer intends to utilize Willdan professional services, in partnership with Xcel Energy, to explore and quantify alternative materials and HVAC/ electrical/ plumbing systems for this project, from the perspective of being both sustainable and cost effective. This process is known by Willdan, and Xcel, as the Energy Design Assistance (EDA) program. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 10 11. Affordable Housing This project will generally comply with the City of Edina’s New Multi-Family Affordable Housing Policy. Specific examples: • This project will include approximately 5 23+/- new market rental apartment units. 10% of rental units will be priced at 50% affordable rental rates. • This project will include approximately 49 for-sale senior condos/condominiums. 10% of for-sale condos will be sold to persons whose income is at or below 80% of Area median Income. 12. Tax Increment Financing But for the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF), the developer anticipates a financial gap will exist on this project. The developer anticipates submitting a separate formal TIF application to the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for this project. 13. Sanitary Sewer, Water, Storm Water Sanitary Sewer A regional 33” sanitary sewer line runs across the northeast side of the site. Said line currently serves this site today — and is proposed to service this site moving forward. It should be noted, the developer has submitted a separate memo/ request letter to the City regarding said existing 33” sanitary sewer line, dated April 8, 2024, made to Ross Bintner. The existing line is undersized, overcapacity, and was constructed between 1953-1972. The developer is proposing to collaborate with the City to upgrade and relocate this sanitary sewer line. Storm Water No stormwater treatment occurring on subject property today. This proposed redevelopment will comply with City and Watershed standards, resulting in a material net improvement to stormwater treatment. Stormwater will generally flow to southern portion of the site, where it will be treated, stored, and infiltrated within an underground chamber system. Any excess stormwater would flow to an existing 30” RCP located on the southeast side of the site. Stormwater design on this site requires the use of a storm water lift station. Water This project is proposing to pull water service from an existing 12” CIP line located within France Avenue. The civil team has incorporated a duel fed water service design, providing water supply redundancy onsite. Sidenote: the developer understands the City may have a desire to run a City water line (for park use) along the east side of the subject property; and may need an easement within the private Subject Property accordingly. The developer acknowledges this potential need and is willing to reasonably work with the city to provide said easement. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 11 14. NW Building – Updated Proposed Use Strategy When this project was originally presented to the City in early 2023, the proposed use for the NW building was purely office. Said NW building was originally proposed to be 10-11 stories and total approximately 125,000-150,000 square feet of pure office space. For the following reasons, the strategy for the northwest building has been updated. • Desire conveyed through public process for first floor retail • Desire conveyed through public process for some sort of co-working/ rentable conference space on first floor • Concern about compliance of a 10-11 story building with City height setback requirements; from single family neighborhood located NW of the NW building (across France). • Desire conveyed through public process for increased public realm/ greenway corridor along the south side of the Subject Property. Resulted in a material compression/ reduction of buildable area, for the NW parcel. Said reduced buildable area resulted in reduced ability to park a large office building on the NW parcel. • Concern raised through public process about risk related to office space —and a desire for as much certainty of deal execution from developer as reasonably practical. As a result of the above feedback, the developer is now proposing the NW building be mixed-use. The composition of the NW building is detailed within Section 1 of this document. Generally, the building includes: • below ground parking • mix of retail, parking, and amenities on the first floor • second floor office • apartments above The building height is now 7-stories. Amenities on the first floor will include a publicly rentable conference room. An important component of the developer’s updated strategy for the NW building is flexibility—specifically regarding the proposed amount of office space. The developer is proposing a building mix now (this submittal/ this application) that will materially increase the certainty of execution on this proposed project and avoid putting too much weight upfront into speculative leases/ uses. With that being said, in the event pre-leasing for office space goes well, the developer would anticipate swapping out a floor(s) of apartments for office—which would require the developer to come back to the City for a PUD amendment later. The developer does think there is an opportunity on this site to potentially have success with more office and/or unique users (for example: during public process it was requested the developer consider unique users such as a comedy club or specialty entertainment venues). 15. Branding Branding of the overall development, and the four individual blocks/ buildings, has not been completed. The developer anticipates sharing the proposed branding of the overall project during the Site Plan Review process. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 12 16. Signage The current submittal package does not include a resolved or finalized signage plan. The current submittal package includes preliminary placeholders. The developer anticipates including a resolved and detailed sign plan during the Site Plan Review process. That said, the developer would like to make the following notes: A. General Signage Although not included in this application, signs for this development are intended to meet the requirements of the existing PCD-3 district. B. Promenade Wayfinding Included in submitted plans is a large vertical wall sign that says “Public Park Sign” located at the terminus of Gallegher. The intent of that sign is to be utilized as a public/ landmark wayfinding. The intent of that sign is not to be the name of our overall private project, our private buildings, or for any other private use. The reason the developer included this public/ landmark wayfinding was in response to feedback received through public processes to-date (Section #4 of this document). The developer understood a desire exists to make identification of the promenade obvious to the public; and help pull the Promenade to France Ave; and pull/ welcome the public from France into the Promenade. The developer is comfortable with removing this sign if desired by the City. If the City does desire to keep the sign, the developer would be open to feedback/ enhancements. C. Restaurant Pad, located on Promenade The developer added a restaurant pad against the promenade due to that use and location requested/ encouraged by the City. In doing so, the developer met with prospect users and restaurant brokers to understand what it will take successfully attract a good tenant to invest in said pad. Based on feedback received, the developer understands its essential to the success of this restaurant pad that signage can occur along the promenade. D. Monument Signs not shown on current plans, but will be needed The developer anticipates the need for multi-tenant, ground-level, monument signs located on the NW and SW side of this project—against France. The developer anticipates including a resolved and detailed sign plan during the Site Plan Review process. 17. Restaurant Odor and Smoke Management The developer was asked to identify how odors/smoke from restaurant users will be mitigated. Generally speaking, first floor restaurant pads will be designed to provide access shafts; allowing for mechanical, electrical, and venting systems to run to the uppermost rooftop of each building. 18. Circulation Plan for Service Vehicles A. Fire Apparatus Please reference civil plan sheet C-EX-1. B. Trash Haulers Please reference architectural plan sheet A002. C. Moving and Delivery Trucks Please reference civil plan sheet A002. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 13 19. Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines – Developers Interpretation and Strategy Of foremost importance, this development seeks to conform with the building block framework of the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines by breaking up an existing eight acre “super block” into a mixed -use development of gridded “street rooms”. Although much of the development is on privately held land, effort has been taken to integrate connectivity to the public Nine-Mile Creek Regional Trail and Promenade, reinforcing the Guideline goal of Supporting the Public Realm. The Developer’s intent is to follow the Guidelines’ recommendations as closely as possible, while prioritizing the most public-facing conditions around the site. Because the Guidelines focus on an entire district and were not authored specifically for this site, the following highlighted methodologies and interpretations are noted: Primary New Local “Street” – East-West Pedestrian-Focused Streetscape in the Center of the Development o Multi-story units line this street room in an engaging fashion, with direct access to the public way. Slightly elevated patios add contextual interest and create a transition between public and private areas. o The buildings flanking this street room step away significantly from the street room for the majority of the facades, in excess of the Guidelines. o Conforming with transparency goals are focused at building entrances, indoor amenities and retail areas. Where apartments line the street room, large amounts of transparency, but appropriate to that occupancy, are utilized. o Resilient, stone-like materials are utilized at the ground level. At the NE and SE buildings, this material is extended to the roof of the multi-story units. At the NW building, the material similarly extends up to the Level 3 floor line, which is the top of the podium of the building. o Building articulation is utilized to avoid unbroken facades of 200’. Secondary New Local Street – North-South Vehicular Traffic Route in the Center of the Development o This is the service corridor for the project, where deliveries, access to residential move-ins, and garbage collection occur. o Approximately 60’ building separation between buildings. o Through the use of material continuity over two-stories, the ground floor-to-floor height is amplified. o Conformance with transparency goals is focused on building pedestrian and vehicular entrances. Cornelia Overlay - France Ave o Buildings are held back from France Ave creating a coordinated easement with the City to allow the flexibility for a future pedestrian connection across France Ave. o Heavily transparent facades are utilized, with glazing areas in excess of the Guidelines. o Use of resilient masonry and stone-like materials on the most forward reaching building faces. o Setbacks that are in line with the intent of the Guidelines. o Gound floor retail/restaurant uses have been arranged to face France Ave. o Building articulation is utilized to avoid unbroken facades of 200’. Central Promenade Spine – East Side of Site o Activation of this street room is achieved through residential walk-up units that engage the Promenade and location of retail/restaurant feature, including outdoor patio space. o Additional enhancement of the Promenade is created by allowing public access to a privately managed pet park. o Building setback extended to 35’ from the property line. o Setbacks at Level 7 of the buildings is similar to the goals of the Guidelines. o Building articulation is utilized to avoid unbroken facades of 200’. Primary East-West Streets – Gallagher and W 72nd Street o These streets extend for half of the site in the East-West direction and support vehicular and pedestrian traffic. o The south street (Gallagher) connects to France at an intersection with stoplights and is envisioned as the primary public access to the site. Along this street, the setback is increased between 50’ and 65’ from Gallagher to building faces. o Consistency with the Guidelines is particularly focused on the Western ends of these buildings, as these areas are most visible from France Ave. (continued on next page) Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 14 General Comments o Various facades of buildings within this project exceed Southdale Design Guidelines. o The first two floors of all four buildings, on all four sides, have been enhanced to add as much transparency, high- quality materials, and pedestrian level interest as reasonably possible, based on the use/occupancy of the spaces behind the facade . Developer is open to suggestions for further enhancement. o As outlined in Section #4 and #5 of this document, the developer has worked diligently with the community to adjust this proposed project based on unique, site-specific, vision/ guidance not written within the Southdale Design Guidelines. The developer is attempting to balance vision/ guidance received from both arenas. o The City has expressed general concern/ desire to verify this project will actually proceed forward, through a closing, and be constructed. The developer understands the City wants to avoid this project being approved and then sit idle. The developer shares the same concern as the City. The developer believes this concern is directly tied to real estate market conditions and capital market limitations on project costs. The City will be able to verify the feasibility of this project via the developer’s forthcoming TIF application. With that being said, the developer is attempting to balance the highest quality project possible, and accepting the majority of requests made by the community to-date (Section #5), while also making sure the project will be feasible. Strict black/ white application of every Greater Southdale District Guideline, on all four facades of all four buildings, will result in a project that will become infeasible. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department April 8, 2024 Cary Teague Community Development Director Chad Millner Director of Engineering City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: MACY’S FURNITURE STORE MIXED -USE REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY TITLE CLEAN UP REQUESTS Mr. Teague & Mr. Millner: This correspondence is in relation to Enclave’s proposed mixed-use redevelopment project located at 7235 France Avenue South. The subject property is approximately 7.97-acres in gross size and is currently operating as a Macy’s Furniture Store. This redevelopment proposal will require the demolition/clearing of all improvements on the existing site. In order for this proposed redevelopment to successfully close, various title cleanup items will be required by various parties. Listed on the next page are tittle items cleanup items that require assistance from the City of Edina. Attached to this correspondence is the most recent title commitment and corresponding ALTA survey. If possible, we would like to request a meeting with the appropriate City of Edina staff team to walk through these title items in detail; and identify the City’s position/ preferred strategy for addressing. Your feedback and consideration are appreciated. Respectfully, Patrick E. Brama Developer Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 2 EXHIBIT A Title items cleanup items that require assistance from the City of Edina Generally speaking, Enclave believes this proposed project, and the corresponding new plat/ PUD agreement/ easements, should replace the below list of City related encumbrances. • Exception #9. Utility easements and sanitary sewer and storm sewer easements as shown on the recorded plat of Yorktown. • Exception #10. Subject to the sanitary trunk sewer easement in favor of the Village of Edina as contained in Easement for Utilities dated November 24, 1953, filed December 4, 1953, in Book 1983 of Deeds, Page 8, over that part of the above described premises lying within a 20 foot easement. (now as to part of above land). (Shown by recital on the Certificate of Title.) • Exception #13. Easement for scenic and open space purposes, in favor of the Village of Edina, contained and described in Grant of Easement dated May 3, 1972, filed June 8, 1972, as Document No. 1033728. • Exception #14. Terms and conditions of and easements contained in Easement for Public Road Purposes, in favor of the Village of Edina, dated July 5, 1972, filed July 6, 1972, as Document No. 1036934. • Exception #18. Terms and conditions of and easements contained in Transit System Easement Agreement, in favor of the City of Edina, dated September 16, 1999, filed September 27, 1999, as Document No. 3208196. • Exception #20. Permanent easement for public sidewalk, retaining wall, and drainage and utility purposes, in favor of the City of Edina, contained and described within Grant of Permanent and Temporary Easements dated July 8, 2013, filed July 23, 2013, as Document No. T05099766. Temporary easements contained in this document have expired. • Exception #22. Resolution No. 2013-45 adopted June 4, 2013, filed October 14, 2013, as Document No. T05125981. • Exception #23. Easement for public walkway purposes, in favor of the City of Edina, contained and described in Grant of Permanent Easement dated October 17, 2014, filed November 14, 2014, as Document No. T05215595. NOTE: the developer is reaching out to Hennepin County regarding Exceptions #15 and #17. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department April 8, 2024 Ross Bintner, PE Engineering Services Manager City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: MACY’S FURNITURE STORE MIXED -USE REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR UPSIZE AND RELOCATION OF SANITARY SEWER LINE Mr. Bintner: This correspondence is in relation to Enclave’s proposed mixed-use redevelopment project located at 7235 France Avenue South. The subject property is approximately 7.97-acres in gross size and is currently operating as a Macy’s Furniture Store. This redevelopment proposal will require the demolition/clearing of all improvements on the existing site. More specifically, Enclave’s proposed redevelopment project requires realignment of an existing regional sanitary sewer line; which, currently runs diagonally across the northeast portion of the subject property. Said sanitary sewer relocation is required by Enclave as the existing sanitary sewer location conflicts the location of a proposed new building footprint. In addition to Enclave’s above-mentioned need to relocate said sanitary sewer line, Enclave understands the City desires to upgrade said existing sanitary sewer line. Based on conversations with the City’s civil consultant, BARR engineering, and informal discussions with City staff, Enclave has learned: •This pipe is a regional line, which benefits a larger geographic area. •The existing pipe was constructed between 1953 and 1972 (will be 57 – 76 years old when our project is completed). •Today, the pipe diameter is 33”, and is currently at 167% capacity. •Based on the 2040 Comprehensive plan, and our proposed project, demand on this pipe will significantly increase. •To meet both current and future demand, the pipe diameter will need to increase to either 42” or 48”. Included within this correspondence are preliminary plans from our civil engineer, Stantec . Listed below are initial responses to preliminary comments provided by City staff. Resident access, building foundation design •No residential units will be located on the first floor of the building along the majority of this corridor (northeast building, north side). •Building foundation will run two stories below ground; which, will act as permanent shoring along the south side of the relocated and upsized sanitary sewer line. Building foundation along this area will be designed to allow for exposure in the future for repairs and maintenance by the City. Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DEVELOP CONSTRUCT MANAGE 2 Emergency access during construction • Construction of the proposed relocated sanitary sewer line will occur before our proposed vertical improvements. • Our proposed sanitary sewer improvement area and our proposed emergency fire access area generally in the same location. Constructability • We have reviewed the proposed relocated and upsized sanitary sewer line with our structural engineer, civil engineer, and architect. All are comfortable designing accordingly. • The alignment of the proposed sewer relocation has been designed so that the installation does not impact the adjacent neighboring property to the north. The requested adjacency to the proposed buildings allows 11’ of separation from outer edge of the proposed sewer to the property line. Shoring will be required on the north side of the project for the installation. Operability and emergency access for repair • Enclave assumes the City will receive a 20’ DU easement on our property (north side of northeast building). • We understand the adjacent property immediately north of said improvement has an 11’ DU easement in place today. • Our foundation will be designed to act as permanent shoring, and will be able to be exposed, during any future maintenance/ repairs by City. • Our proposed sanitary sewer improvement area and our proposed emergency fire access are generally in the same location. o Should fire access to the north side of the building be needed during repair of said sewer line in the future, the property to the north could be used by the fire department temporarily (they have a similar dive lane/ length that runs parallel to our property). Rights, risks and responsibilities, who pays • RE relocation/ new construction costs. Enclave assumes responsibility for all costs: except: o Upsizing required for offsite/ regional capacity. Enclave assumes said cost would be the responsibility of the City. • RE future repairs and maintenance costs. Enclave assumes the city would be responsible. • Enclave assumes it would provide the City rights/ access via an easement via the forthcoming plat. If a different instrument is requested/ required by the City, Enclave is available to work with City Staff and the City Attorney to draft. • NOTE: all construction costs, and repair/ maintenance, for private sewer lines internal to this project (i.e. connecting to the regional line discussed within this document) are the responsibility of Enclave. Your feedback and consideration are appreciated. Respectfully, Patrick E. Brama Developer Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 8:00:31 PMT100 OVERALL TITLE SHEET223701.00ESG ESG ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024PROJECT TEAMPROJECT LOCATIONDRAWING INDEX Enclave Mixed-Use Development on France P.U.D.Edina, MN 55435VicinitySite LocationPUD DRAWING INDEX DRAWINGNUMBER DRAWING NAMEPUD (4/26/24)1 - GENERAL INFORMATIONT100 OVERALL TITLE SHEET●2 - SURVEYV000 SURVEY●3 - CIVILC-001COVER SHEET●C-002GENERAL NOTES●C-003GENERAL NOTES●C-004EXISTING CONDITIONS●C-005TREE SURVEY●C-006REMOVALS AND PRECONSTRUCTION EROSION CONTROL PLAN ●C-101SITE PLAN●C-201POST CONSTRUCTION STABILIZATION PLAN●C-202SWPPP●C-301GRADING PLAN●C-401UTILITY PLAN●C-402WATERMAIN INSERT●C-501STORM SEWER PLAN●C-801DETAILS●C-802DETAILS●C-803DETAILS●C-804DETAILS●C-805DETAILS●C-806DETAILS●C-807DETAILS●C-808DETAILS●C-809DETAILS●C-810DETAILS●EX-1FIRE TURNING MOVEMENTS●EX-2TRUCK TURNING MOVEMENTS●4 - LANDSCAPEL110DEMO PLAN●LS200OVERALL PLAN INTENT RENDERING●LS210 SITE LAYOUT PLAN●LS211LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN●LS212LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN●LS213LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN●LS214LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN●LP410PLANTING PLAN●LP411PLANTING SCHEDULE●L511DESIGN INTENT●L512SITE DETAILS●L513SITE DETAILS●OWNER/DEVELOPER:Enclave Companies Lifestyle Communities1660 S Hwy 100, Suite 5304938 Lincoln DriveSt. Louis Park, MN 55416 Edina, MN 55416ARCHITECT:ESG Architecture & Design Pope Design Group 500 Washington Ave. South, Suite 1080 767 N. Eustis Street, Suite 190 Minneapolis, MN 55415 St. Paul, MN 55114CIVIL ENGINEER:Stantec 733 Marquette Ave Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:Confluence 901 N 3rd Street #225 Minneapolis, MN 55401PROJECT OVERVIEWSITE LOCATIONFRANCE AVETHE PROMENADESITE LOCATION HWY 62FRANCE AVEI-494HWY 100SOUTHDALE CENTERPUD DRAWING INDEX DRAWINGNUMBER DRAWING NAMEPUD (4/26/24)7 - ARCHITECTURALA001 EXISTING SITE PHOTOS●A002ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN●A003SITE SECTIONS●A004SITE SECTIONS●A100-SE LEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A101-SE LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A102-SE LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A103-SE LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A104-SE LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A105-SE LEVELS 4-6 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A106-SE LEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDING●A100-NELEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A101-NELEVEL P1 PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A102-NELEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A103-NELEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A104-NELEVELS 3-6 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A105-NELEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDING●A100-NWLEVEL P2 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A101-NWLEVEL P1 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A102-NWLEVEL 1 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A103-NWLEVEL 2 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A104-NWLEVEL 3 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A105-NWLEVELS 4-6 PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A106-NWLEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDING●A101-SW UNDERGROUND PARKING FLOOR PLANS●A102-SW LEVELS 1 & 2 FLOOR PLANS●A103-SW LEVELS 3 & 4 FLOOR PLANS●A104-SW LEVELS 5-10 FLOOR PLANS●A105-SW LEVEL 11 FLOOR PLAN●A106-SWELEVATIONS●A107-SWELEVATIONS●A300-SE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - EAST AND WEST●A301-SE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - NORTH AND SOUTH●A300-NEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - EAST AND WEST●A301-NEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - NORTH AND SOUTH●A300-NWEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS●A301-NWEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS●A400EXTERIOR MATERIALS (SE/NE/NW BUILDINGS)●A401BUILDING MATERIALS (SW BUILDING)●A500AERIAL VIEWS●A501RENDERINGS●A502RENDERINGS●A503RENDERINGS●12 - ELECTRICALE1.1PHOTOMETRIC LIGHTING PLAN●No. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:30 PMA001EXISTING SITE PHOTOS223701.00ESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20247235 FRANCE AVENUE - EXISTING SITE IMAGES7235 FRANCE AVENUE - EXISTING SITE AERIALSNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NORTHWEST BUILDING1st Floor Garage Accessible to : A,BNORTHEAST BUILDING1st Floor Garage Accessible to: A,B,CSOUTHEAST BUILDING1st Floor Garage Accessible to: A,B,C,DSOUTHWEST BUILDING1st Floor Garage Accessible to: A,B,C,DFRANCE AVECENTRAL PROMENADE(PEDESTRIAN ONLY)CENTRAL PROMENADE(PEDESTRIAN AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY)1A0032A0031A0042A004THE PROMENADE(CITY OF EDINA)GALLAGHER DRIVEDROPOFF / PICKUPNEW LOCAL STREETPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEGREEN SIGNAGE WALLOPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC ARTRETAIL PATIORETAIL ENTRANCEAPARTMENT ENTRANCEAPARTMENT ENTRANCEPUBLIC AND APARTMENT PARKING ENTRANCEAPARTMENT PARKING ENTRANCEPUBLIC AND APARTMENT PARKING ENTRANCEFIRE ACCESS LANEPARKING ENTRANCEWALK-OUT UNITSWALK-OUT UNITSWALK-OUT UNITSOFFICE AND APARTMENT ENTRANCERETAIL ENTRANCERETAIL ENTRANCEAMENITY ENTRANCERETAIL ENTRANCERETAIL ENTRANCEOFFICE AND HOUSING ENTRANCERETAIL PATIOSERVICE ACCESS TO SOUTH PROPERTYFIRE ACCESS LANEWALK-OUT UNITSPUBLIC DOG PARKDROP OFF/DELIVERY/TRASH PICKUP/MOVE-IN ZONEGGGA0022DEVELOPMENT SIGANGE NOTESGENERAL STATEMENT:SITE-WIDE SIGNAGE DESIGN WILL BE DEVELOPED FOR THE FUTURE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS. THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE SIGNAGE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S ORDINANCES. THE ELEVATIONS AND RENDERINGS ILLUSTRATE SOME AREAS WHERE SIGNS ARE BEING PLANNED FOR THE PROJECT INCLUDING:1. PROMENADE VERTICAL GREEN SIGNAGE WALL LOCATED AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHEAST BUILDING WITH VISIBILITY FROM FRANCE AVE.2. CLEAR AND IDENTIFYABLE PARKING SIGNAGE LOCATED AT ALL GARAGE ENTRANCES.3. COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL TENANT SIGNS.NORTHWEST BUILDINGPUBLIC AND APARTMENT PARKING ENTRANCEOFFICE AND APARTMENT ENTRANCETRASH PICKUP AREADUMPSTERS36' - 0"6' - 0"4' - 6"PLAN NORTHPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:32 PMA002ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN223701.00ESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20241" = 30'-0"A0021ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANNo. DescriptionDatePickupsCargo Vans10' Truck15' Truck17' Truck20' Truck26' TruckABCDEFG1/16" = 1'-0"A0022TRASH PICKUP EXHIBITMOVING TRUCK LEGENDSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"1A0042A004LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"LOWER LEVEL P1 (NE)89' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P2 (NE)78' - 0"LEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NW)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NW)130' - 8"LEVEL 4 (NW)141' - 4"LEVEL 5 (NW)152' - 0"LEVEL 6 (NW)162' - 8"ROOF LEVEL (NW)184' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P1 (NW)86' - 4"LOWER LEVEL P2 (NW)76' - 6"LEVEL 7 (NW)173' - 4"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"15' - 4"15' - 4"13' - 8"9' - 10"NORTHWEST BUILDINGNORTHEAST BUILDINGPROPERTY LINEAPPROX EDGE OF FRANCE AVE27' - 6"AVERAGE GRADE PLANE NE BUILDINGAVERAGE GRADE PLANE NW BUILDING35' - 0"60' - 4"81' - 2"84' - 0"15' - 4"11' - 2"70' - 0"81' - 2"84' - 0"5' - 2"50' - 6"53' - 4"30' - 8"3' - 0"860' - 6"860' - 6"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"1A0042A004LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"LOWER LEVEL P1 (SE)89' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P2 (SE)78' - 0"LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"11' - 0"11' - 0"SOUTHEAST BUILDINGSOUTHWEST BUILDINGAPPROX EDGE OF FRANCE AVEPROPERTY LINE53' - 7"34' - 9"AVERAGE GRADE PLANE SE BUILDINGAVERAGE GRADE PLANE SW BUILDINGLOWER LEVEL 2 (SW)76' - 0"LOWER LEVEL 1 (SW)88' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SW)120' - 0"LEVEL 3 (SW)133' - 6"LEVEL 4 (SW)147' - 0"LEVEL 5 (SW)160' - 6"LEVEL 6 (SW)174' - 0"LEVEL 7 (SW)187' - 6"LEVEL 8 (SW)201' - 0"LEVEL 9 (SW)214' - 6"LEVEL 10 (SW)228' - 0"LEVEL 11 (SW)241' - 6"ROOF (SW)255' - 0"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"20' - 0"12' - 0"12' - 0"60' - 1"108' - 7"47' - 0"13' - 6"81' - 0"60' - 6"155' - 7"81' - 2"56' - 2"13' - 4"70' - 0"8' - 8"83' - 4"134' - 10"58' - 4"35' - 0"65' - 5"28' - 8"4' - 10"53' - 7"860' - 6"860' - 6"NESENWSWTYPOLOGY 3: NEW LOCAL STREETSTYPOLOGY 2: CORNELIA OVERLAYTYPOLOGY 4: PRIMARY EAST-WEST STREETSTYPOLOGY 6: CENTRAL PROMENADE SPINEPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:49 PMA003SITE SECTIONS223701.00ESG ESG04/01/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/64" = 1'-0"A0031EAST / WEST SITE SECTION 13/64" = 1'-0"A0032EAST / WEST SITE SECTION 2No. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"1A0032A003LEVEL 2 (NW)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NW)130' - 8"LEVEL 4 (NW)141' - 4"LEVEL 5 (NW)152' - 0"LEVEL 6 (NW)162' - 8"ROOF LEVEL (NW)184' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P1 (NW)86' - 4"LOWER LEVEL P2 (NW)76' - 6"LEVEL 7 (NW)173' - 4"NORTHWEST BUILDINGSOUTHWEST BUILDINGAPPROX EDGE OF EAST/WEST STREETAPPROX EDGE OF GALLAGHER DRIVE15' - 5"1' - 8"41' - 0"15' - 6"27' - 0"40' - 11"AVERAGE GRADE PLANE SW BUILDINGAVERAGE GRADE PLANE NW BUILDING10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"15' - 4"15' - 4"13' - 8"9' - 10"LOWER LEVEL 2 (SW)76' - 0"LOWER LEVEL 1 (SW)88' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SW)120' - 0"LEVEL 3 (SW)133' - 6"LEVEL 4 (SW)147' - 0"LEVEL 5 (SW)160' - 6"LEVEL 6 (SW)174' - 0"LEVEL 7 (SW)187' - 6"LEVEL 8 (SW)201' - 0"LEVEL 9 (SW)214' - 6"LEVEL 10 (SW)228' - 0"LEVEL 11 (SW)241' - 6"ROOF (SW)255' - 0"12' - 0"12' - 0"20' - 0"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"53' - 4"30' - 8"84' - 0"53' - 4"30' - 8"47' - 0"13' - 6"95' - 1"17' - 1"95' - 1"13' - 6"47' - 0"155' - 7"4' - 6"25' - 2"50' - 0" 60'-0"860' - 6"860' - 6"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"1A0032A003LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"LOWER LEVEL P1 (NE)89' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P2 (NE)78' - 0"LEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"LOWER LEVEL P1 (SE)89' - 0"LOWER LEVEL P2 (SE)78' - 0"LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"NORTHEAST BUILDINGSOUTHEAST BUILDINGAVERAGE GRADE PLANE NE BUILDINGAVERAGE GRADE PLANE SE BUILDING11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"11' - 0"11' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"11' - 0"11' - 0"PROPERTY LINE50' - 0"72' - 0"22' - 0"25' - 0"81' - 2"81' - 2"65' - 10"123' - 0"110' - 0"65' - 10"860' - 6"860' - 6"NESENWSWTYPOLOGY 3: NEW LOCAL STREETSTYPOLOGY 2: CORNELIA OVERLAYTYPOLOGY 4: PRIMARY EAST-WEST STREETSTYPOLOGY 6: CENTRAL PROMENADE SPINEPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:55 PMA004SITE SECTIONS223701.00ESG ESG04/01/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/64" = 1'-0"A0041NORTH / SOUTH SITE SECTION 13/64" = 1'-0"A0042NORTH / SOUTH SITE SECTION 2No. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.151' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"277' - 0"5' - 4"193' - 6"232' - 11"194' - 0"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"25' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"9' - 8"UP8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"16' - 0"8' - 6"50,511 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:21 PMA100-SELEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEAST BUILDING221701.00ESG ESG04/05/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A100-SE1LEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.15UPDN1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"277' - 0"194' - 0"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"232' - 11"193' - 6"9' - 8"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 6"16' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"50,511 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:22 PMA101-SELEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEAST BUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A101-SE1LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.15UPDNTRASH / REC1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"194' - 0"275' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 0"8' - 6"18' - 0"23' - 0"24' - 0"23' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"THE PROMENADE31,156 SFPARKING2,149 SFRES LOBBY4,141 SFRETAIL4,065 SFRESIDENTIAL7,293 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:23 PMA102-SELEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEASTBUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A102-SE1LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.15DN1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"77' - 2"124' - 6"75' - 4"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"194' - 0"9' - 8"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"23' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"23' - 0"13,469 SFRESIDENTIAL31,840 SFPARKING4,064 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:24 PMA103-SELEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEASTBUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A103-SE1LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.151' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"77' - 2"124' - 6"75' - 4"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"194' - 0"164' - 10"36' - 0"24' - 6"177' - 0"15' - 7"9' - 8"1,433 SFAMENITY550 SFAMENITY32,136 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:25 PMA104-SELEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEASTBUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A104-SE1LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.151' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"57' - 8"136' - 4"77' - 2"124' - 6"75' - 4"177' - 0"15' - 7"107' - 0"61' - 10"36' - 0"24' - 6"34,119 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:25 PMA105-SELEVELS 4-6 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEAST BUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A105-SE1LEVELS 4-6 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.12SE.ESE.GSE.2SE.BW.14W.15AMENITYTERRACE1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"77' - 2"124' - 6"75' - 4"50' - 6"85' - 10"57' - 8"15' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"28' - 0"15' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"106' - 11"62' - 0"36' - 0"22' - 8"177' - 5"30,415 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:26 PMA106-SELEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN -SOUTHEASTBUILDING221701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A106-SE1LEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - SOUTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.H1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"305' - 0"183' - 0"UP16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"305' - 9"89' - 8"42' - 6"52' - 8"16' - 8"56,877 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:16 PMA100-NELEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHEAST BUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A100-NE1LEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.H1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"DNUP305' - 0"16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"183' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"7' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"305' - 9"89' - 8"16' - 8"42' - 6"52' - 8"56,877 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:17 PMA101-NELEVEL P1 PLAN -NORTHEASTBUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A101-NE1LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.HDN16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"TRASH / RECYCLINGSTORAGETHE PROMENADE860.5863.0860.59' - 0"8' - 0"9' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"18' - 0"305' - 0"183' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"17,144 SFRESIDENTIAL31,123 SFPARKING6,786 SFAMENITYPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:18 PMA102-NELEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHEASTBUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A102-NE1LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.H+2'-0"+0'-0"+2'-0"+0'-0"+0'-0"+0'-0"TERRACE1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"305' - 0"183' - 0"68' - 0"20' - 6"126' - 0"20' - 6"70' - 9"89' - 8"90' - 6"16' - 8"OPEN TO BELOWPOOL4,694 SFAMENITY31,954 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:19 PMA103-NELEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHEASTBUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A103-NE1LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.H1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"25' - 0"253' - 0"27' - 0"16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"177' - 6"5' - 6"70' - 0"167' - 0"70' - 9"89' - 8"16' - 8"48' - 0"40' - 6"36,928 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:20 PMA104-NELEVELS 3-6 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHEAST BUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A104-NE1LEVELS 3-6 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.AE.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12NE.CE.1NE.GNE.HTERRACE1' - 6"15' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"15' - 0"25' - 0"253' - 0"27' - 0"16' - 0"30' - 0"12' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"18' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"177' - 6"5' - 6"70' - 0"167' - 0"51' - 1"2' - 0"40' - 6"48' - 0"36' - 6"1,929 SFAmenity32,870 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:20 PMA105-NELEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHEASTBUILDINGProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A105-NE1LEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHEAST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.7W.8W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.9W.GW.LW.KW.6W.MW.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"16' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"DN183' - 0"286' - 6"52,067 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:51 PMA100-NWLEVEL P2 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A100-NW1LEVEL P2 FLOOR PLAN - NW BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.7W.8W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.9W.GW.LW.KW.6W.MW.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"15' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"16' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"UPDN0"24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 6"8' - 6"24' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 0"18' - 0"8' - 6"8' - 0"18' - 0"183' - 0"286' - 6"52,067 SFPARKINGPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:52 PMA101-NWLEVEL P1 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A101-NW1LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN - NW BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.7W.8W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.9W.GW.LW.KW.6W.2W.5RESIDENTIAL TRASH / RECYCLINGEXIT PASSAGEWAYFRANCE AVERETAIL DROPOFFDN30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"16' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"+863.0+860.5+860.5+860.5THE PROMENADE243' - 6"43' - 0"16' - 0"62' - 0"58' - 0"64' - 6"123' - 0"DN123' - 0"1,267 SFACTIVE USE/TBD4,545 SFLOBBY/AMENITY13,975 SFPARKING7,594 SFCOMMERCIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:53 PMA102-NWLEVEL 1 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A102-NW1LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN - NW BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.GW.KW.6W.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"243' - 6"69' - 0"110' - 0"64' - 6"39' - 4"29' - 8"54' - 0"TERRACE15,025 SFOFFICE11,714 SFRESIDENTIAL123' - 0"PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:54 PMA103-NWLEVEL 2 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A103-NW1LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN - NW BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.GW.KW.6W.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"AMENITY TERRACE / ROOF50' - 0"16' - 0"103' - 0"7' - 0"64' - 6"39' - 4"29' - 8"54' - 0"81' - 2"98' - 0"67' - 4"580 SFAMENITY22,717 SFRESIDENTIAL77' - 2"45' - 10"PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:54 PMA104-NWLEVEL 3 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A104-NW1LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.GW.KW.6W.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"39' - 4"29' - 8"54' - 0"81' - 2"98' - 0"67' - 4"50' - 0"16' - 0"103' - 0"7' - 0"64' - 6"77' - 2"45' - 10"23,297 SFRESIDENTIALPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:55 PMA105-NWLEVELS 4-6 PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A105-NW1LEVELS 4-6 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department W.3W.4W.BW.CW.DW.EW.FW.HW.JW.1W.GW.KW.6W.2W.530' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"14' - 0"30' - 0"29' - 0"29' - 0"16' - 0"81' - 2"98' - 0"59' - 4"77' - 2"24' - 2"21' - 8"50' - 0"16' - 0"103' - 0"7' - 0"56' - 6"123' - 0"TERRACE21,127 SFRESIDENTIAL769 SFAMENITYPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:55 PMA106-NWLEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN -NORTHWESTBUILDING223701.00ESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A106-NW1LEVEL 7 FLOOR PLAN - NORTHWEST BUILDINGNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A101-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A102-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A103-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A104-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A105-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A106-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A107-SWSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"2' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.ESE.GSE.BW.14W.15LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (SE)183' - 2"83' - 2"81' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUESTOREFRONTFIBER CEMENT PANEL: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"SE.DSE.FSE.JSE.CSE.ASE.ESE.GSE.BW.14W.15LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (SE)183' - 2"2' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"81' - 2"83' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESSTOREFRONTFIBER CEMENT PANEL: DARK GREYCORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYPARKING ENTRYGREEN WALL LATTICEPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:27 PMA300-SEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -EAST ANDWEST221701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A300-SE1EAST ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"A300-SE2WEST ELEVATIONNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.2LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (SE)183' - 2"15' - 4"11' - 6"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 2"11' - 2"2' - 0"83' - 2"81' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITECORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESSTOREFRONTMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEFIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITEFIBER CEMENT PANEL: DARK GREYWALK-UP TWO-STORY UNITSSTOREFRONTRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUECORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (SE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (SE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (SE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (SE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (SE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (SE)181' - 2"SE.3SE.1SE.4SE.5SE.6SE.7SE.8SE.9SE.10SE.11SE.2LEVEL 7 (SE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (SE)183' - 2"2' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"83' - 2"81' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITEFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESGREEN WALL LATTICEFIBER CEMENT PANEL: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:56:27 PMA301-SEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -NORTHAND SOUTH221701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A301-SE1NORTH ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"A301-SE2SOUTH ELEVATIONNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1 (NE)100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.ANE.CNE.GNE.HLEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (NE)183' - 2"WALK UP LEVEL 2 (NE)112' - 0"WU ROOF LEVEL (NE)122' - 0"81' - 2"83' - 2"2' - 0"10' - 0"12' - 0"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYCORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESLEVEL 1 (NE)100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"NE.DNE.ENE.FNE.JNE.BNE.ANE.CNE.GNE.HLEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (NE)183' - 2"WALK UP LEVEL 2 (NE)112' - 0"WU ROOF LEVEL (NE)122' - 0"2' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"81' - 2"83' - 2"10' - 0"12' - 0"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYCORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWSMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITESTOREFRONTPARKING ENTRYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYALUMINUM BALCONIESPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:21 PMA300-NEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -EAST ANDWESTProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A300-NE1EAST ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"A300-NE2WEST ELEVATIONNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1 (NE)100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"E.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12E.1LEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"PRIMARY PARAPET (NE)183' - 2"WALK UP LEVEL 2 (NE)112' - 0"WU ROOF LEVEL (NE)122' - 0"15' - 4"11' - 6"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 2"11' - 2"2' - 0"12' - 0"10' - 0"83' - 2"81' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYCORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWSMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYPOTENTIAL MURAL LOCATIONALUMINUM BALCONIESLEVEL 1 (NE)100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NE)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NE)126' - 10"LEVEL 4 (NE)137' - 6"LEVEL 5 (NE)148' - 2"LEVEL 6 (NE)158' - 10"ROOF LEVEL (NE)181' - 2"E.2E.0E.3E.4E.5E.6E.7E.8E.9E.10E.11E.12E.1LEVEL 7 (NE)170' - 0"2' - 0"11' - 2"11' - 2"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 6"15' - 4"81' - 2"PRIMARY PARAPET (NE)183' - 2"WALK UP LEVEL 2 (NE)112' - 0"WU ROOF LEVEL (NE)122' - 0"10' - 0"12' - 0"83' - 2"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUECORRUGATED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWSALUMINUM BALCONIESSTOREFRONTMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEFIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITEFIBER CEMENT PANEL: LIGHT GREYWALK-UP TWO-STORY UNITSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:50:21 PMA301-NEEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -NORTHAND SOUTHProject NumberESG ESG03/28/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A301-NE1NORTH ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"A301-NE2SOUTH ELEVATIONNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NW)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NW)130' - 8"LEVEL 4 (NW)141' - 4"LEVEL 5 (NW)152' - 0"LEVEL 6 (NW)162' - 8"ROOF LEVEL (NW)184' - 0"2' - 0"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"15' - 4"15' - 4"LEVEL 7 (NW)173' - 4"W.3W.4W.1W.6W.2W.584' - 0"TOP OF PARAPET186' - 0"86' - 0"FIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITERIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEFIBERGLASS WINDOWALUMINUM BALCONIESMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYFIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYSTOREFRONTLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2 (NW)115' - 4"LEVEL 3 (NW)130' - 8"LEVEL 4 (NW)141' - 4"LEVEL 5 (NW)152' - 0"LEVEL 6 (NW)162' - 8"ROOF LEVEL (NW)184' - 0"LEVEL 7 (NW)173' - 4"W.3W.4W.1W.6W.2W.52' - 0"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"10' - 8"15' - 4"15' - 4"TOP OF PARAPET186' - 0"84' - 0"86' - 0"BRICK: LIGHT GREYALUMINUM WINDOWSALUMINUM BALCONIESSTOREFRONTRIBBED METAL PANEL: BLUEMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:52:56 PMA300-NWEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS223701.00ESG ESG03/22/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/20243/32" = 1'-0"A300-NW1EAST ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"A300-NW2WEST ELEVATIONNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department EXTERIOR MATERIALSMANUFACTURED STONE: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: DARK GREYWOOD LOOK PLANKS AT WALK OUT TERRACESFIBER CEMENT PANEL: DARK GREYFIBER CEMENT PANEL: LIGHT GREYFIBER CEMENT PANEL: WHITEPROFILED METAL PANEL: DARK GREYFLAT METAL PANEL: DARK GREYPROFILED METAL PANEL: BLUEPROFILED METAL PANEL: WHITEMANUFACTURED STONE: LIGHT GREYGREEN WALL AT PARKING GARAGE(NW, NE, SE BUILDINGS)PATTERNED PRECAST AT PARKING GARAGE: WHITEPATTERNED PRECAST AT PARKING GARAGE: DARK GREYPATTERNED PRECAST AT PARKING GARAGE: LIGHT GREYBRICK: LIGHT GREYPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:55 PMA400EXTERIOR MATERIALS (SE/NE/NWBUILDINGS)223701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department A401Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:57 PMA500AERIAL VIEWS223701.00ESG ESG04/05/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024AERIAL - NW CORNERAERIAL - SW CORNERAERIAL - NE CORNERAERIAL - SE CORNERNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:58 PMA501RENDERINGS223701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024OVERALL VIEW - EASTNE CORNER - NE BUILDINGCENTRAL PROMENADE CENTRAL PROMENADENo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:42:59 PMA502RENDERINGS223701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024OVERALL VIEW - SOUTHGALLAGHER DRIVEINNER NORTH/SOUTH STREET - NORTHINNER NORTH/SOUTH STREET - SOUTHNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN4/25/2024 3:43:00 PMA503RENDERINGS223701.00ESG ESG03/29/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024OVERALL VIEW - WESTFRANCE AVE AND GALLAGHER DRIVEFRANCE AVEFRANCE AVE - NW CORNERNo. DescriptionDateSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 3PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGGSF : 57,000FFE: 860.5PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 31,000FFE: 860.5PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 38,000FFE: 860.5PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGGSF : 51,000FFE: 860.50.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.20.30.30.30.30.20.20.10.10.10.10.20.30.40.50.40.40.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.30.50.70.70.70.60.40.20.10.10.20.30.20.10.20.60.10.10.30.71.01.21.20.90.60.30.22.11.40.40.20.52.30.10.20.40.91.41.91.91.40.80.40.310.73.20.60.20.52.60.10.20.51.01.92.73.02.01.00.50.32.61.60.40.20.30.80.20.10.10.20.51.12.13.23.52.31.10.50.30.30.40.20.10.20.21.60.30.10.20.51.11.92.62.81.90.90.50.30.20.30.20.10.20.35.50.60.10.10.20.40.91.41.71.71.20.70.50.51.41.00.40.20.41.32.21.60.50.10.10.20.40.70.91.01.00.70.60.82.09.62.90.60.20.62.910.42.10.70.20.10.10.20.30.50.60.60.60.50.51.25.83.71.90.50.20.41.52.74.90.90.20.10.10.20.30.40.40.40.40.30.40.82.60.40.40.20.10.20.82.07.81.90.60.10.10.10.10.20.30.30.30.20.20.20.30.40.10.10.10.10.20.62.30.30.20.10.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.10.62.17.90.10.10.10.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.41.22.90.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.41.43.90.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.41.67.30.10.10.20.20.30.30.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.20.70.10.10.20.30.40.40.30.30.20.10.10.20.20.10.10.10.30.40.50.60.50.40.30.20.20.51.20.10.20.30.60.80.90.80.70.40.30.31.15.20.10.20.40.71.11.41.41.10.70.40.41.03.60.10.20.40.91.52.22.41.70.90.40.30.40.70.10.20.41.01.92.93.42.41.20.50.30.20.20.10.10.41.01.92.93.42.41.20.50.20.20.20.10.10.40.91.62.22.41.70.90.40.20.10.10.10.10.10.10.30.71.11.41.41.10.60.30.20.10.10.30.20.10.10.20.50.50.10.10.30.50.70.80.80.70.40.20.10.10.12.10.40.10.10.52.24.20.10.10.20.40.50.50.50.40.30.20.10.10.16.62.20.50.10.10.63.39.60.10.20.30.30.40.30.30.20.10.10.20.85.18.82.00.30.10.10.10.10.31.57.96.41.00.61.20.70.20.10.10.31.00.10.32.88.62.00.10.10.64.39.12.40.40.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.20.72.43.11.40.40.10.10.10.10.31.12.92.60.90.30.30.20.10.10.10.20.10.31.12.00.90.30.20.62.13.21.60.40.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.20.40.70.80.60.30.20.10.10.10.20.50.80.70.40.20.10.10.10.10.10.20.40.50.40.20.20.30.70.80.60.30.20.10.10.10.20.40.40.40.30.20.20.20.40.50.50.40.30.30.40.40.30.20.20.30.40.30.20.10.10.10.10.20.20.10.10.10.10.30.40.40.30.20.20.30.40.50.50.30.20.10.10.10.30.81.41.00.40.20.20.41.01.40.90.40.30.61.21.40.70.40.40.80.80.40.20.10.10.20.50.80.80.40.10.10.20.51.31.40.70.30.20.20.41.01.50.90.30.10.10.52.35.03.00.70.20.20.72.94.92.30.50.31.04.04.71.60.40.83.43.81.10.40.20.20.51.53.73.80.80.20.10.21.14.14.91.60.30.10.20.73.05.32.40.50.12.21.10.30.20.93.89.42.30.50.30.94.32.61.40.50.20.40.92.81.20.40.10.10.28.01.60.40.10.10.90.30.10.20.10.10.10.10.51.20.11.413.80.10.83.10.20.20.20.11.30.20.13.40.30.30.10.90.23.51.10.30.20.10.10.42.26.92.47.11.50.30.10.50.10.10.20.81.40.81.50.80.32.60.30.10.20.30.20.10.10.67.68.71.80.60.22.30.30.10.31.32.24.96.88.10.410.13.00.60.10.40.10.10.30.71.11.00.32.11.20.40.10.10.10.10.10.30.30.10.10.10.10.70.10.73.62.00.20.10.30.30.1PRELIMINARY SET Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department S89°54'37"W 610.00S0°11'54"E1.60S89°54'37"W14.25S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 N89°48'06"E 770.66N0°11'54"W 506.70 FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 3 RIM=859.54 INV=RIM=857.78INV=RIM=854.02INV=RIM=859.15 INV= RIM=859.05 INV= RIM=853.92INV=RIM=854.29INV=RIM=856.32INV=RIM=853.50INV=RIM=854.87INV=RIM=861.81INV=536870955859.54MHST536870991857.78MHS536871557859.15CBE536871576859.05CBE536871694854.29CBE536872008856.32MHST536872018853.50MHST536872019854.87MHST536872022861.81MHS60056852.83CBC STM E60228851.45CBC60316857.10CBC60326857.17MHST72282852.45MHST72283851.50CBE72284851.61CBE72285851.60CBE72295851.91MHST72296852.02MHST72312852.53MHST72348853.75CBE72357854.69CBE72441851.75CBE72476852.72CBC72478851.87CBE72563858.90MHST72564858.45CBE72574857.81CBE72871855.05MHSLEGENDREMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ASPHALT. SCRAPE GRAVEL BASEIF PRESENT AND EVALUATE FOR SALVAGE AND RE-USE.PROTECT EXISTING PAVEMENTPROTECT TREE IN PLACE, SEE DETAIL ONSHEET L504REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING ASPHALT TRAIL. SCRAPEGRAVEL BASE AND EVALUATE FOR SALVAGE AND RE-USEREMOVE AND DISPOSE EXISTING TREE, CUT STUMPFLUSH TO GROUNDSCRAPE GRAVEL BASE AND EVALUATE FORSALVAGE AND RE-USESELECT TREE TRIMMING AND GRUBBING WITHIN TRAILALIGNMENT. PROTECT & PRESERVE MATURE TREES.CONTRACTOR MUST CONFIRM FINAL TRAIL ALIGNMENTAND CLEARING EXTENTS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.File Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L110 Demo Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/8/2024 11:58 AM BY: ahanson / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:00 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDDEMO PLANL11030'60'15'0'DEMO PLAN1L110Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department File Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:00 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDOVERALL PLANINTENT RENDERINGLS200OVERALL PLAN INTENT RENDERING 1LS200Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)RIM=859.54 INV=RIM=857.78INV=RIM=854.02INV=RIM=859.15 INV= RIM=859.05 INV= RIM=853.92INV=RIM=854.29INV=RIM=856.32INV=RIM=853.50INV=RIM=854.87INV=S89°54'37"W 610.00S0°11'54"E1.60S89°54'37"W14.25S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 N89°48'06"E 770.66N0°11'54"W 506.70 60056852.83CBC STM ELOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAX XXXNORTHWEST BUILDINGNORTHEAST BUILDINGSOUTHEAST BUILDINGSOUTHWEST BUILDINGFRANCE AVE 01LS21201LS21301LS21101LS214File Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:00 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDSITE LAYOUT PLANLS21030'60'15'0'SITE LAYOUT PLAN1LS210Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)RIM=856.32INV=RIM=854.87INV=S89°54'37"W 610.00N0°11'54"W 506.70 LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKINGSOUTHWEST BUILDINGFRANCE AVESHEET LS211SHEET LS214SHEET LS212 SHEET LS211 SHEET LS213 SHEET LS21101LS2111132333333 555555555555566667A7B86KEYNOTE / REFERENCE NOTECONCRETE PAVEMENTDECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENTLAWN (IRRIGATED)ARTIFICIAL LAWNPLANT BED (IRRIGATED)SEAT WALL FEATUREPRIVACY WALLLANDSCAPE WALL (RETAINING)STAIRS W/HANDRAILSART MOMENTTERRACE FEATURE W/SEATINGDOG PARK W/FENCE ENCLOSUREFLEXIBLE SEATING AREA1234567A891011127BFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:00 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDLAYOUTENLARGEMENTPLANLS211GENERAL NOTESA. SOME OF OUR PROJECTS MIGHT HAVE GENERAL NOTES ON THESHEETS, OTHER PROJECTS MIGHT HAVE A SEPARATE GENERALNOTES PAGE. COORDINATE WITH THE PROJECT MANAGER.B. GENERAL NOTES SHOULD BE LETTERED. KEYNOTES HAVENUMBERS.20'40'10'0'LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN1LS211Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department RIM=854.02INV=S89°54'37"W 610.00S0°11'54"E1.60S89°54'37"W14.25S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 60056852.83CBC STM ELOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS AREASOUTHEAST BUILDINGSHEET LS212SHEET LS213SHEET LS212SHEET LS211 SHEET LS213SHEET LS211 LS21211223355555555555557B121238KEYNOTE / REFERENCE NOTECONCRETE PAVEMENTDECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENTLAWN (IRRIGATED)ARTIFICIAL LAWNPLANT BED (IRRIGATED)SEAT WALL FEATUREPRIVACY WALLLANDSCAPE WALL (RETAINING)STAIRS W/HANDRAILSART MOMENTTERRACE FEATURE W/SEATINGDOG PARK W/FENCE ENCLOSUREFLEXIBLE SEATING AREA1234567A891011127BFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDLAYOUTENLARGEMENTPLANLS21220'40'10'0'LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN1LS212RESTAURANT PATIOPLANT BED DESIGN /PROGRAM TO BECOORDINATED WITHCENTENNIAL LAKESNATIVE PLANTINGADJACENT TO PROPERTYRESIDENTIAL PATIOSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department RIM=859.54 INV=RIM=857.78INV=RIM=859.15INV=RIM=859.05INV= S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 N89°48'06"E 770.66LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKINGLARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANENORTHEAST BUILDINGSHEET LS212SHEET LS213SHEET LS213SHEET LS211 SHEET LS213SHEET LS214 11122222455555555555555555555555555555555666666616551144412121167B7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A56367B5558KEYNOTE / REFERENCE NOTECONCRETE PAVEMENTDECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENTLAWN (IRRIGATED)ARTIFICIAL LAWNPLANT BED (IRRIGATED)SEAT WALL FEATUREPRIVACY WALLLANDSCAPE WALL (RETAINING)STAIRS W/HANDRAILSART MOMENTTERRACE FEATURE W/SEATINGDOG PARK W/FENCE ENCLOSUREFLEXIBLE SEATING AREA1234567A891011127BFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDLAYOUTENLARGEMENTPLANLS21320'40'10'0'LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN1LS213RESTAURANT PATIOPLANT BED DESIGN /PROGRAM TO BECOORDINATED WITHCENTENNIAL LAKESNATIVE PLANTINGADJACENT TO PROPERTYRESIDENTIAL PATIOSPLANT BED DESIGN /PROGRAM TO BECOORDINATED WITHCENTENNIAL LAKESNATIVE PLANTINGADJACENT TO PROPERTYRESIDENTIAL PATIOSRESIDENTIAL PATIOSRESIDENTIAL PATIOSRESIDENTIAL PATIOSRESIDENTIAL PATIOSRESIDENTIAL PATIOSEXISTING PROMENADETRAILSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)RIM=853.92INV=RIM=854.29INV=RIM=853.50INV=N89°48'06"E 770.66LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING X XXXXXNORTHWEST BUILDINGFRANCE AVESHEET LS211SHEET LS214SHEET LS213 SHEET LS211 SHEET LS213 SHEET LS21401LS21411112245555555555556667B10981121 11337B855558121212121232DNDNKEYNOTE / REFERENCE NOTECONCRETE PAVEMENTDECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENTLAWN (IRRIGATED)ARTIFICIAL LAWNPLANT BED (IRRIGATED)SEAT WALL FEATUREPRIVACY WALLLANDSCAPE WALL (RETAINING)STAIRS W/HANDRAILSART MOMENTTERRACE FEATURE W/SEATINGDOG PARK W/FENCE ENCLOSUREFLEXIBLE SEATING AREA1234567A891011127BFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L100 Layout Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 4:30 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDLAYOUTENLARGEMENTPLANLS21420'40'10'0'LAYOUT ENLARGEMENT PLAN1LS214RESTAURANT PATIORESTAURANT PATIOSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning DepartmentEXISTING MACY'SSCULPTURERELOCATION TOPLANTING AREA. FINALLOCATION, TBD LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAX XXXFRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 301LP40201LP40301LP40101LP404LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAX XXXFRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 3(2) Tc(1) Gi(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Gi(1) Ag(4) Qr(1) Gi(3) Ag(1) Ag(1) Ag(3) Tc(4) Qr(4) Ag(1) Gd(1) Gd(2) Bp(2) Bp(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(2) Ca(1) Tc2(2) Ca(2) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(4) Ca(2) Ag(2) Bp(2) Gd(3) Qr(1) Gi(3) Pa(1) Tc2(2) Ag(1) Co(1) Bp(2) Ag(1) Ca(1) Co(1) Ag(2) Tc2(1) Ca(1) Co(2) Gi(3) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ag(2) Ag(1) Ca(2) Gd(1) Ca(1) Pa(1) Tc2(1) Ag(1) Ca(2) Tc2(1) Ag(2) Ag(1) Gd(1) Pa(1) Gd(1) Ag(1) Ca(1) Ag(3) Bp(2) Ag(1) Gi(1) Ag(1) Ag(1) Gi(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ca(1) Ag(6) Bp(2) Co(2) Gd(3) Tc(2) Ca(3) AgFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L400 Planting Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 5:14 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDPLANTING PLANLP41030'60'15'0'PLANTING PLAN1LP410Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department SYMBOLCODEQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONT CALDECIDUOUS TREESBp16Paper Birch / Betula papyriferaB & B 2.5"CalCo5Common Hackberry / Celtis occidentalisB & B 5.5"CalGi8Thornless Honey Locust / Gleditsia triacanthos inermisB & B 4.5"CalGd10Kentucky Coffeetree / Gymnocladus dioicus 'Espresso'B & B 5.5"CalPa 5London Plane Tree / Platanus x acerifoliaB & B 2"CalQr11Northern Red Oak / Quercus rubraB & B 3.5"CalTc8 Littleleaf Linden / Tilia cordataB & B 3.5"CalEVERGREEN TREESTc27Eastern Hemlock / Tsuga canadensisB & B 10`ORNAMENTALAg34Autumn Brilliance Apple Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance'B & B2.5"CalCa38Pagoda Dogwood / Cornus alternifoliaB & B2.5"CalPLANT SCHEDULENATIVE UNDERSTORY PLANTINGSSHADE PLANTINGSPROMENADE PLANTINGS,COORDINATE WITH CENTENNIAL LAKES VOLUNTEER GROUPLEGENDNATIVE UNDERSTORY PLANTINGSSHADE PLANTINGSPROMENADE PLANTINGS,COORDINATE WITH CENTENNIAL LAKES VOLUNTEER GROUPLEGENDFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L400 Planting Plan / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 5:14 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDPLANTINGSCHEDULELP411TREE CALCULATIONSFINAL TREE SELECTIONS AND SIZES TO BE COORDINATED WITH AVAILABILITY.PERIMETER OF THE LOT: 2430.27 FT.MINIMUM NO. OF OVERSTORY TREESREQUIRED PER CODE:PERIMETER OF LOT/402430.27/40 = 60.75 = 61 TREESPROVIDED IN DESIGN: 70 OVERSTORY TREESNO. OF ORNAMENTAL TREE TYPES (2" CAL DECIDUOUS)REQUIRED: 3PROVIDED: 5NO. OF COMPLIMENTARY TREE TYPES (2.5" CAL DECIDUOUS)REQUIRED:16PROVIDED: 16NO. OF ACCENT TREE TYPES (3.5" CAL DECIDUOUS)REQUIRED:16PROVIDED: 19NO. OF PRIMARY TREE TYPES (4.5" CAL DECIDUOUS)REQUIRED: 13PROVIDED: 15NO. OF FULL TREE TYPES (5.5" CAL DECIDUOUS)REQUIRED: 13PROVIDED: 15PLANTING GENERAL NOTESA. PLANT QUANTITIES IN PLANT SCHEDULE ARE FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY AND ARE NOTGUARANTEED. QUANTITIES ON PLAN WILL PREVAIL IF DISCREPANCIES OCCUR.B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SHOW PROOF OF PROCUREMENT, SOURCES, QUANTITIES ANDVARIETIES FOR ALL SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES, AND ANNUALS WITHIN 21DAYS FOLLOWING THE AWARD OF CONTRACT. TIMELY PROCUREMENT OF ALL PLANTMATERIAL IS ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THEPROJECT.C. SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL ONLY BE ALLOWED WHEN THE CONTRACTOR HAS EXHAUSTED ALLSOURCES FOR THE SPECIFIED MATERIAL, AND HAS PROVEN THAT THE SPECIFIED MATERIALIS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROVIDE NAME AND VARIETY OF SUBSTITUTIONTO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO TAGGING OR PLANTING.SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE NEAREST EQUIVALENT SIZE OF VARIETY OF PLANT HAVING SAMEESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS.D. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE NURSERY GROWN, SOUND, HEALTHY, VIGOROUS AND FREEFROM INSECTS, DISEASE AND INJURIES, WITH HABIT OF GROWTH THAT IS NORMAL FOR THESPECIES. SIZES SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR EXCEEDING SIZES INDICATED ON THE PLANT LIST.KIND, SIZE AND QUALITY OF PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE AMERICANSTANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1), MOST RECENT EDITION.E. STAKE OR PLACE ALL PLANTS IN FIELD AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS DIRECTEDBY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO PLANTING.F. PLANT FIVE TREES FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT APPROVAL PRIOR TO PLANTING THEREMAINING TREES ON SITE. DEMONSTRATION SHOULD ILLUSTRATE A COMPREHENSIVEUNDERSTANDING OF INFORMATION INCLUDED IN PLANTING DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS.G. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS NOTICE FOR APPROVAL OF PLANT LAYOUT AND SAMPLETREE PLANTINGS.H. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT SUBSURFACE SOIL OR DRAINAGE PROBLEMS TO THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PLANTING.I. SOD/SEED ALL AREAS WITHIN CONTRACT LIMITS, NOT COVERED BY PAVING, BUILDINGS, ORPLANTING BEDS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.J. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE SHREDDED BARK MULCH AROUND ALL TREES AND IN ALLPLANTING BEDS TO A DEPTH OF 3".K. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLANT MAINTENANCE AND WARRANTY REQUIREMENTS.Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DESIGN INTENT - PROMENADE EXTENSION1L512N.T.SDESIGN INTENT - EMBRACING THE PROMENADE 2L512N.T.SDESIGN INTENT - LANDSCAPE STATEMENT ALONG FRANCE3L512N.T.SDESIGN INTENT - INVITATION FROM FRANCE4L512N.T.SFile Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L510 Details / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 5:05 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDL511DESIGN INTENTSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department CONCRETE WALK1L512N.T.S1"4"4"SEE PLAN FOR JOINT PLACEMENT.ALIGN WITH BUILDING/COLUMNCORNERS OR WINDOW MULLIONSWHERE POSSIBLE. CONTROL JOINTSSPACED EQUAL TO THE WIDTH OF THEWALK UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEVARIESSEE PLAN1.5% TYP. CROSS SLOPENOT TO EXCEED 2%COMPACTED AGGREGATEBASE COURSECOMPACTED SUBGRADESECTIONPLANCONCRETE WALKFINISHEDGRADEEXPANSION JOINT WHEREADJACENT TO CONCRETEWALK OR FIXED OBJECTEXPANSION JOINT SPACINGNOT TO EXCEED 35'File Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L510 Details / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 5:05 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDL512SITE DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department CRITICAL ROOT RADIUSD" X 1.5'1.5' PER 1" DIAMETEROF TREE TRUNK MEASURED4.5' ABOVE ORIGINAL GRADEPROTECTED ROOT ZONEEXISTING TREE4'-0" HIGH FENCEEXISTING TREEORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE2X4 CONTINUOUS TOP AND BOTTOM RAIL. ATTACH CONSTRUCTION FENCE TORAILS6' STEEL POSTDIAMETER IN INCHESTREE PROTECTION DETAIL06L513N.T.S2'-0"4'-0"6'-0"D5' MINNOTE:1. FOR A CONTINUOUS LINE OF TREES WITH OVERLAPPING FENCINGREQUIREMENTS, A CONTINUOUS FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED IN LIEUOF INDIVIDUAL SQUARE FENCING.2. IF USING CONTINUOUS FENCING, FENCING IS ONLY REQUIRED ONSIDES ABUTTING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.3. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT A TREE PROTECTION PLAN IDENTIFYINGPLANNED TREE PROTECTION EXTENTS AND METHODS TO LANDSCAPEARCHITECT AND CITY OWNER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO THEBEGINNING OF WORK. THIS PLAN SHOULD ALSO IDENTIFY ALL TREESSELECTED FOR REMOVAL.SCALE 3/8COMPACTED SOIL BESIDE & UNDERROOT PACKAGEUNDISTURBED SOILPLANTING SOIL MIXSCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OFPLANTING PITGUYING POST3" DEPTH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH,PLACE MULCH AWAY FROM TREE TRUNKTREE WRAPSTAKING WIREARBOR TIEPRUNE DEAD OR DAMAGED BRANCHESOF EXISTING TREERE: 01/ L2012 STAKES - 3" CALIPER OR LESS3 STAKES - GREATER THAT 3" CALIPERSTAKING ORIENTATIONNORTHNOTE: PLANTING DEPTH SHOULD BELOCATED SO THAT THE TUNK FLAREIS LEVEL WITH FINISHED GRADE.REMOVE ANY EXCESS SOIL FROMROOT BALL TO ACHIEVE CORRECTDEPTH.6"3X ROOTBALL DIA., MIN.NORTHTRUNK FLARE, RE 02/ L201 FORROOTBALL PLANTING DEPTHCUT AND REMOVE ALL CORDS & BURLAPCOVERING FROM ROOT BALL PRIOR TOINSTALLATIONSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TITLE:5L51311NOTE:CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLEFOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMBPOSITION THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTYPERIOD. STAKING AND GUYING ISMANDATORY FOR TREES 4" CAL ORGREATER, AND ALL BARE ROOT TREES.WRAP TREE TRUNKS ONLY UPON APPROVALBY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION 32 93 00.3 x AMIN.30"RADIUS MIN.4"AEACH TREE SHALL BE PLANTED SUCHTHAT THE ROOT FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THETOP OF THE ROOT BALL. IF THE ROOTFLARE IS NOT VISIBLE, THE SOIL SHALL BEREMOVED IN A LEVEL MANNER FROM THEROOT BALL TO WHERE THE FIRST MAINORDER ROOT (12" DIA. OR LARGER)EMERGES FROM THE TRUNK. SET MAINORDER ROOT 1" HIGHER THAN ADJACENTGRADE. DO NOT COVER TOP OF ROOTBALL WITH SOIL.SCARIFY SIDES OF TREE PIT WITH SPADEBY HAND TO BIND WITH PREPARED SOIL.PLANTING PIT TO BE TWO TO FIVE TIMESTHE DIAMETER OF ROOT ALL, SLOPEDTAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASEFIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THATROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT.DRAINAGE TRENCH AS REQUIRED PERPERCOLATION TEST IN SPEC. AUGER A 4"DIA. HOLE & FILL W/ 34" GRAVEL.PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED ORCOMPACTED SOIL.DIG PLANTING PIT 4-6" DEEPER THANROOTBALL.UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE.REMOVE BURLAP, WINE, ROPE ANDWIRE FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL.COMPACT PLANTING SOIL TO85% OF MAXIMUM DRY UNITWEIGHT PER ASTM D 698.EDGE CONDITION VARIES, SEEPLAN.4" BUILT-UP EARTH SAUCERBEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL.3" SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH. DO NOT PLACE MULCHIN CONTACT WITH ROOT FLARE.RODENT TRUNK PROTECTIONFOR DECIDUOUS TREES: 12"HARDWIRE-CLOTH MESHCYLINDER. DIMENSIONS: 8"DIAMETER (OR GREATER) X 36"HEIGHT. STAKE IN PLACE,AVOIDING ROOTS. SEE SPEC.TREE PLANTING DETAIL, TYP.01L513N.T.S.SEE PLAN12"MIN.PREPARE SOIL FORTHE ENTIRE BED4"3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. DONOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITHSHRUB STEM.NOTE: SEE SPECIFICATION SECTIONRELATED TO EXTERIOR PLANTING.CONTAINER GROWN MATERIAL SHALLHAVE ROOTS HAND LOOSENED.MIN.4" DEEPER THAN ROOT BALL.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF ENTIREBED WITH SPADE BY HAND TO BIND WITHPLANTING SOIL.UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE.SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL, TYP.02L513N.T.S.5' DIAMETER MULCH RING, TYP.SEE PLAN SEE PLAN SEEPLANS E E PL A N PLANSECTION A'-AA'A18"18"SECTION ASUBGRADEPLANTING SOIL MIX, SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEPTH,3" HARDWOOD MULCHPLUG, SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SPECIESPERENNIAL AND NATIVE GRASS PLUG LAYOUT03L513N.T.SPERENNIAL PLANT AND NATIVE GRASS SPACING04L513N.T.SS SSD D 2/3D EDGE OF PLANTING AREAPLANT ROW - TYP.PLANT CENTER - TYP.TRIANGULARSPACING - 'S'DISTANCE BETWEENROWS - 'D'TOTAL AREA PERPLANT (SF)18"15-1/2"1.94File Location: N:\2023\23192_7235 France Avenue South\_WORKING\AUTOCAD\SHEETS\23192 L510 Details / SAVE DATE: 4/24/2024 5:05 PM BY: mguragain / PLOT DATE: 4/25/2024 10:01 AM BY: Mamata Guragain LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCEwww.thinkconfluence.com901 North Third Street, Suite 225Minneapolis, MN 55401612.333.3702CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONNo. DateDescription01 04/26/2024PUD SUBMISSIONRevision ScheduleProject NumberIssueDate23192000002024-04-26COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY CONFLUENCEENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE EDINA, MN 55435 CONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXCONSULTANT ROLECONSULTANT FIRM NAMECONSULTANT ADDRESSCONSULTANT ADDRESSXXX.XXX.XXXXMC Y K THE LINE SHOWN ABOVE ISEXACTLY ONE INCH LONG AT THISSHEET'S ORIGINAL PAGE SIZETHE SQUARES ABOVE ARE COLOR,WITH BLACK AND WHITE LETTERS,IF PRINTED CORRECTLY1 234ABCDL513SITE DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department APPROXIMATEPROJECTLOCATIONFRANCE AVE SW 72ND STHAZELTON RDPARKLAWN AVEGALLAGHER DRENGINEERSTANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.733 MARQUETTE AVENUESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402(E) - JACK.AMMERMAN@STANTEC.COMCONTACT: JACK AMMERMAN, P.E.VICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALEPRELIMINARY CIVIL CONSTRUCTION PLANSFORENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEHENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55435APRIL 2024PROJECT LOCATIONCITY: EDINACOUNTY: HENNEPINWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-001 COVER SHEET 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:06:09 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-001COVER SHEETARCHITECTESG ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN500 WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTHSUITE 1080MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415(P) - 612-373-4680CONTACT: CHRISTOPHER WILLETTE, AIACLIENTENCLAVE COMPANIES1660 S HWY 100SUITE 530ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416(P) - 763-412-7609CONTACT: PATRICK BRAMATHIS PLANSET CONTAINS 23 SHEETSARCHITECTPOPE DESIGN GROUP767 N. EUSTIS STREETSUITE 190ST.PAUL, MN 55114(E) - WISAACSON@POPEDESIGN.COMCONTACT: WARD ISAACSON, AIA, NCARB, LEED APLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCONFLUENCE901 N 3RD STREETSUITE 225MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401(P) - 952-451-0144CONTACT: TERRY MINARIK, PLA, ASLASHEET LIST TABLESHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC-001COVER SHEETC-002GENERAL NOTESC-003GENERAL NOTESC-004EXISTING CONDITIONSC-005TREE SURVEYC-006 REMOVALS AND PRECONSTRUCTION EROSION CONTROL PLANC-101SITE PLANC-201POST CONSTRUCTION STABILIZATION PLANC-202SWPPPC-301GRADING PLANC-401UTILITY PLANC-402WATERMAIN INSETC-501STORM SEWER PLANC-801DETAILSC-802DETAILSC-803DETAILSC-804DETAILSC-805DETAILSC-806DETAILSC-807DETAILSC-808DETAILSC-809DETAILSC-810DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-002 GENERAL NOTES 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:06:27 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS1. CITY OF EDINA (CITY) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.2. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MN/DOT) “STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION”LATEST EDITION AND SUPPLEMENTS.3. MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE4. APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS AND ORDINANCESC-002GENERAL NOTESGENERAL NOTES1. UNTIL REVISION BLOCK STATES "ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION", THE PLAN SET IS NOT CERTIFIED FORCONSTRUCTION AND CONTRACTOR IS BUILDING AT THEIR OWN RISK.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ARE FROM A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY COMPLETED BY STANTEC CONSULTINGSERVICES INC., DATED MAY 2023. EXISTING FEATURES MAY NOT BE EXACT TO THEIR LOCATION. CONTRACTORRESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF THE SITE AND MUST IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER INWRITING OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE DRAWINGS.3. SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL C. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WASDETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-2 ENTITLED “STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THECOLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA”. EXACT LOCATION/DEPTH OF SUBSURFACEUTILITIES SUCH AS GAS, TELEPHONE, FIBER OPTIC, SEWER, WATER, PIPELINES, ELECTRICAL, AND CABLE TV AREUNKNOWN AND THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE.4. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (811 OR 1-800-252-1166) A MINIMUM OF 48HOURS IN ADVANCE (EXCLUDING HOLIDAYS AND WEEKENDS) BEFORE STARTING WORK FOR LOCATIONS OFUNDERGROUND UTILITIES.5. QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE, AND MAY VARY TO ALLOW COMPLETION OF WORK.6. WORK AND MATERIALS MUST COMPLY WITH CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL (INCLUDING OSHA) REGULATIONSAND CODES.7. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND MAINTAIN ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES THROUGHOUTCONSTRUCTION.8. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND MAINTAIN MAIL, GARBAGE, AND RECYCLING SERVICES TO PROPERTIESTHROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE WITH LOCAL POSTMASTER, GARBAGE AND RECYCLING SERVICES.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND MAINTAIN STORMWATER DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE THROUGHOUTCONSTRUCTION (BOTH PIPED AND OVERLAND FLOW).10. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND MAINTAIN WATER AND SANITARY FLOW TO AND FROM PROPERTIES.PROVIDE BYPASS AND TEMPORARY SYSTEMS, AS NECESSARY.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND MAINTAIN UTILITY SERVICES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AT ALL TIMES.UTILITY SERVICE MUST NOT BE INTERRUPTED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM OWNER, CITY, AND ADJACENTPROPERTIES.12. CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE TO PROPERTY LINE UNLESS SHOWN OR NOTED OTHERWISE. CONTRACTOR SHALLRESTRICT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO AREAS DESIGNATED ON PLANS WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS.13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE AND PROTECT EXISTING PAVEMENT, SITE FEATURES, UTILITIES, TREES, ETC.,UNLESS NOTED OR SHOWN OTHERWISE.14. CONTRACTOR SHALL PHOTO OR VIDEO DOCUMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS OF TREES AND PLANTINGS, ADJOININGCONSTRUCTION, SURFACES, AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS, ETC. TO REMAIN THAT MIGHT BE MISCONSTRUED ASDAMAGE CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. SUBMIT TO ENGINEER AND OWNER BEFORE CONSTRUCTIONBEGINS. USE ADEQUATELY DETAILED PHOTOGRAPHS OR VIDEO RECORDINGS. INCLUDE PLANS AND NOTATIONS TOINDICATE SPECIFIC EXISTING DAMAGE CONDITIONS OF ITEMS DESIGNATED TO REMAIN. ANY DAMAGE TO THEEXISTING PAVEMENT, CURBING, STRIPING, OR OTHER SITE FEATURE TO REMAIN MUST BE REPLACED BY THECONTRACTOR, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.15. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENTPROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES.16. CONTRACTOR MUST IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE OWNER AND ENGINEER IN WRITING OF DISCREPANCIES ORCONFLICTS IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. NO FIELD CHANGES OR DEVIATIONSARE TO BE MADE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE ENGINEER. FAILURE TO NOTIFY OWNER ANDENGINEER OF AN IDENTIFIABLE CONFLICT BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH INSTALLATION RELIEVES OWNER ANDENGINEER OF ANY OBLIGATION TO PAY FOR A RELATED CHANGE ORDER.17. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE ONE COPY OF EACH REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND ONE COPY OF THE MOSTCURRENT AND COMPLETE SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (INCLUDING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS, ETC.) AVAILABLE AT THE PROJECT SITE AT ALLTIMES.18. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SAFE WORKPRACTICES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PERSONNEL MONITORING, USE OF TRENCHING, SHEETING, ANDSHORING, SCAFFOLDING; MATERIALS HANDLING AND DRILLING; OPERATION OF EQUIPMENT; AND SAFETY OFPUBLIC DURING PROGRESS OF WORK.19. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLAN FOR AND ENSURE PERSONNEL COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS OF OSHA SAFETY ANDHEALTH STANDARDS (29 CFR 1910) AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (29 CFR 1926) AS APPROPRIATE.20. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INITIATING, MAINTAINING, AND SUPERVISING SAFETY PRECAUTIONSAND PROGRAMS IN CONNECTION WITH WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS FOR SAFETYOF EMPLOYEES ON PROJECT SITE AND OTHER PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY THEPROJECT. CONTRACTOR'S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR SAFETY IN CONNECTION WITH WORK SHALLCONTINUE UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ALL WORK IS COMPLETED, AND ENGINEER HAS ISSUED NOTICE TO CONTRACTORTHAT WORK IS COMPLETE.21. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT AND OTHER HAZARDOUSSUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED, BY THE CONTRACTOR, INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENTS, TOPREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TOPREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITHLOCAL/STATE/FEDERAL REGULATIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SPILL OF FUELS, OILS, OR OTHERCHEMICALS IMMEDIATELY UPON DETECTION.22. IF CONSTRUCTION IS ANTICIPATED TO OCCUR DURING COLD WEATHER, IN THE EVENT THAT SNOW/ICE REMOVAL ISREQUIRED FOR SITE ACCESS AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SNOW/ICE ANDCOORDINATE WITH OWNER FOR ACCEPTABLE SNOW/ICE STORAGE AREAS ONSITE. SNOW/ICE REMOVAL ANDSTORAGE IS INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL DOCUMENT AND MAINTAIN AS-BUILT INFORMATION AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES AND ISRESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AS-BUILT DRAWINGS TO THE OWNER AS REQUIRED BY JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIESFOR CERTIFICATION. ALL AS-BUILT DATA MUST BE COLLECTED BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORREGISTERED IN THE PROJECT'S STATE WHOSE SERVICES ARE ENGAGED AND PAID FOR BY THE CONTRACTOR.TRAFFIC CONTROL NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONSTRUCTION STAGING, ON OR OFFSITE, AS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THEWORK. IF OFFSITE STAGING AREA IS REQUIRED, CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO FIND, OBTAIN, AND PAY FORNECESSARY STAGING AREA AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. SUBMIT A STAGING PLAN TO THE ENGINEERFOR REVIEW BEFORE STARTING WORK.3. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL . TRAFFIC CONTROL MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THELATEST EDITION OF THE STATE'S MUTCD, INCLUDING THE LATEST FIELD MANUAL FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFICCONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS. SUBMIT TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN TO CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, AND MN/DOTAND ENGINEER FOR REVIEW BEFORE CONSTRUCTION RELATED ACTIVITIES. PLANS MUST COMPLY WITHAPPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. TRAFFIC CONTROL ALSO INCLUDES NECESSARY SIGNAGE AND MARKINGSFOR SIDEWALKS, TRAILS, BOARDWALKS, ETC. CLOSURE. THIS MUST INCLUDE ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS ANDNECESSARY FENCING AND SIGNAGE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIANS FROM ACCESSING THE PROPOSED AREA.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TWO-WAY TRAFFIC ON ALL ADJAVENT ROADWAYS AT ALL TIMES, UNLESSOTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE ROAD AUTHORITY.REMOVAL/DEMOLITION NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN PERMITS REQUIRED FOR DEMOLITION, REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW FEATURES NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED ON PLAN FOR SALVAGE OR REMOVALTHAT CONFLICT WITH CONSTRUCTION WITH THE ENGINEER.4. MATERIALS REMOVED/DEMOLISHED BY CONTRACTOR BECOME PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR, UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOAD AND HAUL MATERIAL OFF-SITE AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OFMATERIALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. CONTRACTOR MUST LEAVE THE SITE IN ACONDITION TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER AND ENGINEER.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL SAWCUT FULL DEPTH AT PAVEMENT REMOVAL LIMITS AND AS NECESSARY TO CREATE ASMOOTH FIT/TRANSITION ALONG MATCHING PAVEMENT AREAS.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE UTILITY REMOVAL WORK WITH APPROPRIATE UTILITY OWNER.7. CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE AND REINSTALL STREET AND TRAFFIC SIGNS IN CONFLICT WITH CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES AS NOTED OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. IF SIGNS ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION,CONTRACTOR REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NEW SIGNS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.8. CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE AND REINSTALL FENCE IN CONFLICT WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AS NOTEDOR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. IF FENCE IS DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION, CONTRACTOR REQUIRED TOPROVIDE NEW FENCE, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.9. IN THE EVENT THAT UNKNOWN CONTAINERS OR TANKS ARE ENCOUNTERED, THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACTTHE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY. ALL CONTAINERS OR TANKS MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AT AREGULATED/PERMITTED FACILITY.10. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW ALL TREE REMOVALS WITH THE OWNER AND ENGINEER PRIOR TO REMOVALOPERATIONS.11. REMOVAL OF ANY EXISTING BUILDING REQUIRES COMPLETION OF A HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SURVEY INACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL RULES AND REGULATIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE SURVEYAT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.12. CLEARING AND GRUBBING OPERATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING: PROTECT ALL TREES AND PLANTSNOT DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL; CONDUCT OPERATIONS IN SUCH A MANNER THAT DOES NOT DAMAGEPROTECTED TREES AND VEGETATION; CUT, REMOVE, AND DISPOSE OF TREES, BRUSH, SHRUBS, WINDFALLS,LOGS, STUMPS, ROOTS, FALLEN TIMBER, AND OTHER VEGETATION; BACKFILL DEPRESSIONS WITH NATIVE SOILSOR SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL AS REQUIRED BY DESIGN OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AND COMPACTBACKFILL AS DIRECTED; DISPOSE OF DEBRIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS; CONSIDERBENEFICIAL USE DESIGNATIONS FOR UNADULTERATED WOOD, WOOD CHIPS, BARK AND SAWDUST; NO BURYING OFCLEARED AND GRUBBED WASTE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS.13. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL/DEMOLITION WITHIN ALL AREAS OFPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. REMOVAL LIMITS ARE IDENTIFIED ON THE DRAWINGS IN ANTICIPATED LOCATIONS.CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVALS AS NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT NEW IMPROVEMENTS AND CONFORMTO DESIGN REQUIREMENTS. ALL FACILITIES TO BE REMOVED MUST BE UNDERCUT TO SUITABLE MATERIAL ANDBROUGHT TO GRADE WITH SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS AND ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.PAVING, PAVEMENT MARKING, AND SIGNAGE NOTES CONT.G. CONCRETE ISOLATION/EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL: MN/DOT SPEC 3702, TYPE D-1 OR D-2 FROM MN/DOT'SAPPROVED PRODUCT LIST. PROVIDE SINGLE COMPONENT, GUN GRADE POLYURETHANE JOINT SEALANT INACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C920, LIGHT GRAY COLOR TO MATCH CONCRETE COLOR. PROVIDE BACKER ROD ASRECOMMENDED BY JOINT MANUFACTURER.H. CONCRETE CURING MATERIALS: MN/DOT SPEC 3754 (POLY-AMS MEMBRANE)I. SILANE/SILOXANE CONCRETE SEALER: SILOXA-TEK 8500, OKON S40, ARMOR SX5000, OR APPROVED EQUAL.SHALL BE APPLIED PER MANUFACTUER INSTRUCTIONS. SHALL BE APPLIED ON A CLEAN, DRY, AND ABSORBENTSURFACE THAT HAS BEEN CURED FOR AT LEAST 28 DAYS PRIOR TO APPLICATION. SHALL BE APPLIED TO ASURFACE THAT IS ABOVE 40 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AND WILL NOT FREEZE FOR AT LEAST 24 HOURS.APPLICATION RATE SHALL BE MONITORED AND BE GREATER THAN MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS.J. CONCRETE CURING AND SEALER ALTERNATE: TK PRODUCTS ONE-STEP CURING AND SEALING PRODUCT OREQUAL. SHALL BE APPLIED PER MANUFACTUER INSTRUCTIONS. SHALL BE APPLIED TO A SURFACE THAT ISABOVE 40 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AND WILL NOT FREEZE FOR AT LEAST 24 HOURS. APPLICATION RATE SHALL BEMONITORED AND BE GREATER THAN MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS.K. CONCRETE PLACING, FINISHING, CURING, AND PROTECTION: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECS 2461, 2521, AND 2531,AND APPLICABLE ACI STANDARDS.1) FOR HOT WEATHER PLACEMENT, COMPLY WITH ACI 305 HOT WEATHER CONCRETING (LATEST EDITION).2) FOR COLD WEATHER PLACEMENT, COMPLY WITH ACI 306 COLD WEATHER CONCRETING (LATEST EDITION). DONOT PLACE CONCRETE IN AIR TEMPERATURE LESS THAN 40 DEGREES F WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THEENGINEER.3) PRIOR TO POURING ANY EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK/SLAB, CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY THE PREDICTEDCOMBINATION OF AIR TEMPERATURE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, CONCRETE TEMPERATURE AND WIND VELOCITYWILL NOT EXCEED AN EVAPORATION RATE OF 0.20 POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF SURFACE AREA PER HOURIN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 305 (LATEST EDITION). THE WEATHER MUST ALSO BE LESS THAN 30% CHANCE OFPRECIPITATION FOR THE ENTIRE PLACEMENT WINDOW, AND 2 HOURS FOLLOWING EXPECTED COMPLETION. IFEITHER OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT MET, THE POUR MUST BE POSTPONED UNTIL IT CAN MEET THESEREQUIREMENTS.4) INSTALLATION FORM: CONTRACTOR OR INDEPENDENT TESTING AGENCY IS REQUIRED TO FILL OUT ANDSUBMIT THE ENGINEER'S EXTERIOR CONCRETE INSTALLATION FORM AT THE END OF THE DAY OF EACH POUR.CONTACT THE ENGINEER TO OBTAIN THE FORM.5) APPLY CURING COMPOUND AT A MINIMUM RATE OF 1 GALLON PER 150 SQ FT SURFACE CURING AREA ORMANUFACTURER RECOMMENDED APPLICATION RATE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.6) CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY WIND BREAKS AS NECESSARY TO REDUCE WIND VELOCITY/DRYING/EXPOSURE.7) CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SUNSHADES AS NECESSARY TO REDUCE CONCRETE TEMPERATURES/EXPOSURE.8) CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL CONCRETE SLABS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION FROM HEAVYEQUIPMENT, VIBRATIONS, ADJACENT WORK, ETC. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALLCONCRETE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REPLACE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.L. AGGREGATE BASE: MN/DOT SPEC 3138, CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASEM. PAVEMENT MARKINGS: MN/DOT SPEC 25821) PAVEMENT STRIPES: MN/DOT SPEC 3591 (WATER-BASED TRAFFIC PAINT) WITH DROP ON GLASS BEADS INACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC 3592.2) CROSSWALK: MN/DOT SPEC 3591 (WATER-BASED TRAFFIC PAINT) WITH DROP ON GLASS BEADS INACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC 3592.3) INSTALLERS OF THERMOPLASTIC MUST CARRY A CARD CERTIFYING THAT THEY HAVE ATTENDED A TRAININGSESSION THAT ADDRESSES SURFACE PREPARATIONS AND ALL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ANDTECHNIQUES NECESSARY FOR SUCCESSFUL APPLICATIONS.4) PRIOR TO APPLYING PAVEMENT MARKINGS, ALLOW NEW PAVEMENT TO CURE A MINIMUM OF 14 DAYS ORFOLLOW MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATION FOR PAVEMENT CURE TIME, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.N. SIGNAGE: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECS 2564, 3352 (SIGNS, DELINEATORS, AND MARKERS), AND 3402 (SQUARETUBULAR SIGN POSTS). ALL SIGNS/POSTS SHALL MEET CRASHWORTHY REQUIREMENTS OF MASH-16. SIGNSSHALL INCLUDE NUMBER AND SIZE OF POSTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT WIND LOADING CHART FOR SIGNSON SQUARE TUBE POSTS. MOUNT SIGNS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SQUARE TUBE SIGN MOUNTING MN/DOTSTANDARD PLANS AND DETAIL SHEETS. SEE MN/DOT STANDARD SIGNS MANUAL FOR PUNCHING CODE ANDDETAILED DRAWINGS OF TYPE "C" AND TYPE "D" SIGNS PANELS. SEE MN/DOT MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORMTRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES PART II FOR DETAILS OF TRAFFIC SIGN INSTALLATION. MINIMUM VERTICALCLEARANCE IS 7 FOOT. SEE MMUTCD FOR DETAILS.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE CONCRETE JOINTS AS FOLLOWS:A. CONTROL JOINTS - MAINTAIN AN ASPECT RATIO (LENGTH TO WIDTH) BETWEEN CONTROL JOINTS AS CLOSE TO 1:1AS FEASIBLE. DO NOT EXCEED ASPECT RATIO GREATER THAN 1.5:1. MATCH EXISTING PATTERN WHEREAPPLICABLE, VERIFY WITH OWNER. MAXIMUM CONTROL JOINT SPACING SHALL BE 24 TIMES THE SLABTHICKNESS UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 12 FEET (I.E. 4-INCH-THICK SLAB = 96 INCH (8 FOOT) MAXIMUM CONTROL JOINTSPACING IN ANY DIRECTION, 8-INCH-THICK SLAB IS 12 FEET)1) JOINT INTERSECTION ANGLES LESS THAN 60 DEGREES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED2) PANEL WIDTHS LESS THAN 6 INCHES AT ANY POINT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED3) JOINTING MUST ACCOMMODATE IN-PAVEMENT STRUCTURES THROUGH JOINTING AND BOXOUTS4) CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT A JOINTING PLAN FOR ENGINEER ACCEPTANCE.B. EXPANSION/ISOLATION JOINTS - PROVIDE AT THE FOLLOWING:1) JOINT INTERSECTION ANGLES LESS THAN 60 DEGREES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED2) LOCATIONS WHERE CHANGES IN WIDTH OCCUR3) LOCATIONS WHERE ADJOINING EXISTING CONCRETE4) LOCATIONS THAT ABUT THE BUILDING AND OTHER SITE FEATURES INCLUDING RAMPS, STAIRS, LANDINGS,CONCRETE APRONS, ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE FEATURES, ETC.5) LOCATIONS IN CHANGES IN DEPTH (INCLUDING PAVEMENT ADJACENT TO CURB).C. WHEREVER POSSIBLE MATCH JOINTS OF ADJACENT CONCRETE WORK.12. FIELD QUALITY CONTROL:A. AGGREGATE BASE TESTING REQUIREMENTS AND FREQUENCY: TEST ROLL SUBGRADE AND AGGREGATE BASE INACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECS 2211 AGGREGATE BASE AND 2111 TESTING ROLLING. TEST ROLL MUST BEWITNESSED BY THE ENGINEER OR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.B. CONCRETE TESTING REQUIREMENTS AND FREQUENCY: TEST CONCRETE AIR CONTENT (ASTM C231), CONCRETESLUMP (ASTM C143), AIR AND CONCRETE TEMPERATURE, AND 7- AND 28-DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (ASTMC31, C39, AND C172). WHERE APPLICABLE, TEST IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SCHEDULE OF MATERIALSCONTROL.C. BITUMINOUS TESTING REQUIREMENTS AND FREQUENCY: ALL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT DENSITY SHALL CONFORMTO MN/DOT SPEC 2360.3.D.2 - ORDINARY COMPACTION METHOD. CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH A ROLLPATTERN FOR EACH COURSE OF PAVING EACH DAY. TEST EXTRACTION/GRADATION/AIR VOIDS, ONE EACH PERBITUMINOUS PAVING DAY PER MIX DESIGN.13. TOLERANACES:A. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 2360.3.E, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN: DEVIATIONSALONG ADA ACCESSIBLE ROUTES THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM SLOPES WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.HORIZONTAL/LINE DEVIATIONS IN LOCATION GREATER THAN ±1 INCH WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE. ANYSURFACE AREA ALLOWING ENTRAPMENT OF WATER AT A DEPTH OF 1/4 INCH OR GREATER WILL BE CONSIDEREDUNACCEPTABLE. REMOVE AND REPLACE UNACCEPTABLE WORK AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AT NOADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.B. CONCRETE PAVEMENT: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 2521.3.D.3, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN: VERTICALDEVIATIONS IN SURFACE GREATER THAN ±3/16 INCH WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE. DEVIATIONS ALONGADA ACCESSIBLE ROUTES THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM SLOPES WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.HORIZONTAL/LINE DEVIATIONS IN LOCATION GREATER THAN ±1/2 INCH WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.ANY SURFACE AREA ALLOWING ENTRAPMENT OF WATER AT A DEPTH OF 1/8 INCH OR GREATER WILL BECONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE. RANDOM AND UNCONTROLLED CRACKING WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.REPLACE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER AND OWNER. PERFORM PAVEMENT REPLACEMENTAT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. REMOVE AND REPLACE UNACCEPTABLE WORK AS DIRECTED BY THEENGINEER AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.C. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 2531.3. DEVIATIONS ALONG ADA ACCESSIBLEROUTES THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUMS WILL BE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.PAVING, PAVEMENT MARKING, AND SIGNAGE NOTES CONT.D. PAVEMENT MARKINGS: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 2582.3.C, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN: LINE WIDTHDEVIATIONS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO ±1/4 INCH FROM THE SPECIFIED WIDTH WILL BE ALLOWED FOR STRIPINGPROVIDED THE VARIATION IS GRADUAL AND DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE GENERAL APPEARANCE. BROKENLINE SEGMENTS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO ±1/4 FOOT FROM THE SPECIFIED LENGTHS WILL BE ALLOWED FORSTRIPING. ALIGNMENT DEVIATIONS FROM THE CONTROL GUIDE SHALL NOT EXCEED 2 INCHES. MATERIAL SHALLNOT BE APPLIED OVER LONGITUDINAL JOINTS. ESTABLISHMENT OF APPLICATION TOLERANCES SHALL NOTRELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO COMPLY AS CLOSELY AS PRACTICABLE WITH THEPLANNED DIMENSIONS.14. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES AGGREGATE BASE PAST THE BACK OF CURB, SEE DETAILS.SITE NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, LANDSCAPE, AND MEP PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF ANDDIMENSIONS OF BUILDINGS, VESTIBULES, STOOPS, OVERHANGS, COLUMNS, RAMPS, SIDEWALKS, TRASHENCLOSURES, TRAFFIC GATES, MONUMENT SIGNS, LANDSCAPING, PLANTINGS, TREES, SITE LIGHTING, EXTERIORELECTRICAL, BACKFLOW PREVENTORS AND BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS.3. BUILDING LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE OUTSIDE LINES OF BUILDINGS AT GRADE, MAY NOT ACCOUNT FOREXTRUSIONS (I.E. BALCONIES, OVERHANGS, LIGHTING, ETC.) ABOVE GRADE, AND ARE BASED ON INFORMATIONPROVIDED TO STANTEC BY THE ARCHITECT. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY FINAL BUILDING PLANS WITH ARCHITECT.4. CONTRACTOR AND SURVEYOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT/OUTLINE AND OUTER MOSTEXTRUSIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO REVIEW POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WITH ADJACENT WORK, EXISTING SITEFEATURES, PROPERTY LINES, SETBACKS, ETC.5. RETAINING WALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN. RETAINING WALL DESIGNED BY OTHERS. COORDINATEWITH PROJECT PARTNERS6. CONCRETE GUTTER PAN TO TIP IN THE SAME DIRECTION AS THE ADJACENT PAVEMENT.7. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.PAVING, PAVEMENT MARKING, AND SIGNAGE NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN STREET AND TRAFFIC SIGNS AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION.3. SIGNS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND OTHER TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESTATE'S MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD) AND THE APPLICABLE ROAD AUTHORITYSTANDARDS.4. THE PAVEMENT SURFACE SHALL BE CLEANED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE APPLICABLE ROAD AUTHORITY AND THEENGINEER JUST PRIOR TO APPLICATION OF PAVEMENT MARKINGS. PAVEMENT CLEANING SHALL CONSIST OF ATLEAST BRUSHING WITH A ROTARY BROOM (NON-METALLIC) OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MATERIALSMANUFACTURER AND ACCEPTABLE TO THE APPLICABLE ROAD AUTHORITY AND THE ENGINEER.5. THE PAVEMENT MARKING APPLICATION SHALL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THE PAVEMENT CLEANING.6. PAVEMENT MARKING EDGE LINES ARE TO BE BROKEN ONLY AT INTERSECTION WITH PUBLIC ROADS AND PRIVATEENTRANCES IF THEY ARE CONTROLLED BY A YIELD SIGN, STOP SIGN OR TRAFFIC SIGNAL. THE BREAK POINT IS TOBE AT THE START OF THE RADIUS FOR THE INTERSECTION OR AT MARKED STOP LINES.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAVEMENT MARKING RELATED ACTIVITIES, SUCH AS, BUT NOTLIMITED TO, COLLECTING DATA FROM IN PLACE LANE LINES, MARKING PERMANENT MARKING ALIGNMENTS,NECESSARY 'SPOTTING' AT APPROPRIATE POINTS AND TO DETERMINE NECESSARY STARTING AND CUTOFFPOINTS. EXACT LOCATION OF PAVEMENT MARKINGS TO BE FIELD LOCATED BY THE CONTRACTOR.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2 PEOPLE WITH CURRENT ACI CONCRETE FLATWORK TECHNICIANOR FLATWORK FINISHER CERTIFICATION, AND AT LEAST ONE OF THEM MUST BE ONSITE FOR ALL CONCRETEPOURS.9. PROTECT CONCRETE PAVING FROM DAMAGE. EXCLUDE TRAFFIC FROM PAVING FOR A MINIMUM OF 14 DAYS AFTERPLACEMENT. WHEN CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IS PERMITTED, MAINTAIN PAVING AS CLEAN AS POSSIBLE BYREMOVING SURFACE STAINS AND SPILLAGE OF MATERIALS AS THEY OCCUR. MAINTAIN CONCRETE FREE OFSTAINS, DISCOLORATION, DIRT, AND OTHER FOREIGN MATERIALS. SWEEP PAVING NOT MORE THAN TWO DAYSBEFORE DATE SCHEDULED FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION INSPECTIONS. REPAIR OR REPLACESTAINED/DISCOLORED CONCRETE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.10. CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE ROADAUTHORITY'S SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS. DOT SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS APPLY IF NOT COVEREDBY LOCAL OR COUNTY REGULATIONS. PAVING, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND SIGNAGE WITHIN THE SITE SHALL MEETTHE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:A. BITUMINOUS: CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 23601) WEARING COURSE MIX DESIGN: SPWEA340B2) NON-WEARING COURSE MIX DESIGN: SPNWB330B3) WEARING COURSES - 10% MAX RAP, NO RAS ALLOWED. NON-WEARING COURSES - 20% MAX RAP4) TACK COAT: MN/DOT SPEC 2357, EMULSIFIED ASPHALT, CATIONIC, CSS-1 OR CSS-1HB. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BITUMINOUS LIFT THICKNESS SHALL NOT EXCEED 3 INCHES. MINIMUM LIFT THICKNESSSHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING: 1.5 INCHES FOR MIXES WITH 0.5 INCH MAX AGGREGATE SIZE(SP 9.5); 2 INCHES FOR MIXES WITH 0.75 INCH MAX AGGREGATE SIZE (SP 12.5); 0.75 INCHES FOR MIXES WITH0.375 INCH MAX AGGREGATE SIZE (SP 4.75)C. PLACE TACK COAT BETWEEN NEW SURFACE AND EACH NEW LIFT AT A RATE OF 0.05 GALLONS PER SQUAREYARD.D. CONCRETE SIDEWALK/DRIVEWAYS/SLABS MATERIALS: MN/DOT SPEC 24611) MANUAL PLACEMENT MIX DESIGN: MN/DOT MIX 3F52A2) FLY ASH: CLASS FE. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER MATERIALS: MN/DOT SPEC 24611) MANUAL PLACEMENT: MN/DOT 3F522) SLIP FORM PLACEMENT: MN/DOT 3F32F. CONCRETE METAL REINFORCEMENT:1) BAR SUPPORTS: CONFORM TO "BAR SUPPORT SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARD NOMENCLATURE", CRSIMANUAL OF STANDARD PRACTICE.EROSION CONTROL NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFORM TO AND CONDUCT INSPECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NPDES PERMIT ANDSWPPP REQUIREMENTS.3. BEFORE SITE DISTURBANCE AND AS REQUIRED AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL,MAINTAIN, REPAIR, AND REPLACE EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES (INLETPROTECTION, CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, SILT FENCE, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE NDPES PERMIT, THE SWPPP, AND CITY OF EDINA.4. ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY BE REQUIRED DEPENDING ON SITE CONDITIONS DURINGCONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE WITH ENGINEER.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS WITHIN 7 DAYSAFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE THAT HAS TEMPORARILY (WILL NOT RESUMEFOR A PERIOD EXCEEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS) OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATEDPROMPTLY. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR FINAL GROUND COVER MATERIALS.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ANY SEDIMENT THAT HAS TRACKED ONTO PAVED SURFACES BOTH ON AND OFFSITEWITHIN 24 HOURS AND AS DIRECTED BY CITY OF EDINA, ROAD AUTHORITY, OWNER, AND ENGINEER. SWEEPSTREET IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF EDINA, ROAD AUTHORITY, AND NDPES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.7. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE CONCRETE WASH-OUT OFF-SITE OR PROVIDE SELF-CONTAINED CONCRETEREADY MIX TRUCKS.8. CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DUST FROM CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS BY PROVIDING WATER OR OTHERAPPROVED METHOD ON A DAILY BASIS.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL PHASE GRADING WORK TO MINIMIZE THE DURATION THAT DISTURBED SOIL IS EXPOSED.10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE/INSTALL DIVERSION DITCHES, SEDIMENT BASINS, AND OTHER EROSIONPROTECTION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AS NECESSARY DURING INTERIM PROJECT CONDITIONS (NOTSHOWN ON PLANS) TO MANAGE/DIVERT STORM WATER AWAY FROM SITE FEATURES AND CONTROLEROSION/SEDIMENT. CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST MEASURES AS NECESSARY THROUGHOUT PROJECT PHASING.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE SOIL STOCKPILES NO LESS THAN 50 FEET FROM ROADWAYS, STORMWATER INLETS,PONDS, WETLANDS, DRAINAGE CHANNELS, AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS. IF REMAINING FOR MORE THAN 7 DAYSSTABILIZE THE STOCKPILES BY MULCHING, VEGETATED COVER, TARPS, OR OTHER MEANS IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE NPDES PERMIT. PLACE PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS AROUND STOCKPILES TO CONTROL EROSION.COVER TEMPORARY STOCKPILES LOCATED ON PAVED SURFACES IF LEFT FROM MORE THAN 24 HOURS.12. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER SITE HAS BEEN STABILIZED ANDVEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES USED FORCONSTRUCTION MUST NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL AUTHORIZED BY OWNER OR ENGINEER.13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THAT SERVEAN AREA WITH 5 OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME IF IT'S LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF AN IMPAIREDWATER.14. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT INACCORDANCE WITH THE NPDES PERMIT AND SWPPP REQUIREMENTS.15. SOIL PREPARATION: PREPARE SOIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC 2574, PART 3.A.3 SOIL BED PREPARATIONAND PART 3.A.4 SUBSOILING.16. EROSION CONTROL SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:A. SILT FENCE: MN/DOT SPECS 2573 AND 3886, TYPE MS MACHINE SLICEDB. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG (BIOLOG/BIOROLL): MN/DOT SPECS 2573 AND 3897, TYPE STRAW. STRAW BIOROLLS, 8 TO9 INCHES IN DIAMETER, MINIMUM 10 FEET LONG, FILLED WITH GRAIN STRAW, FREE OF SEED-BEARING STALKS OFNOXIOUS GRASSES OR WEEDS WITH NATURAL FIBER OUTER NETTING.C. EROSION CONTROL BLANKET: MN/DOT SPECS 2575 AND 3885, CATEGORY 20 (NATURAL NETTING ONLY).D. TEMPORARY SEED: MN/DOT SPECS 2575 AND 3876, STATE SEED MIX 21-111 OATS COVER CROP.E. PERMANENT SEED: SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN.F. MULCH: MN/DOT SPECS 2575 AND 3882, TYPE 1 FOR 2X-XXX MNDOT MIXES AND TYPE 3 FOR 3X-XXX MIXES, TWOTONS PER ACRE, DISK ANCHORED IN AREAS THAT DO NOT RECEIVE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.17. HYDRAULIC MULCH: MN/DOT SPECS 2575 AND 3884, HYDRAULIC BONDED FIBER MATRIX (BFM). APPLY AT A RATE OF3500 LBS/AC.DEWATERING NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR MAY ENCOUNTER GROUND WATER. DEWATERING WORK NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION WILL BECONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO OTHER WORK.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPLICABLE REQUIRED PERMITS (INCLUDING MN DNR WATER APPROPRIATIONPERMIT) AND SUBMIT DEWATERING PLAN TO CITY AND ENGINEER FOR REVIEW. DEWATERING MUST MEET PERMITREQUIREMENTS AND BE REVIEWED BEFORE STARTING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.4. CONTRACTOR MUST DEWATERING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NPDES PERMIT AND PROJECT SWPPP.5. CONTRACTOR MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASINDRAINING (E.G. PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTSEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. CONTRACTOR MAY DISCHARGE FROM THETEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS TO THE SURFACE WATERS IF THE BASIN WATER HAS BEENVISUALLY CHECKED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED IN THE BASIN AND THAT NUISANCECONDITIONS (SEE MINNESOTA RULES CHAPTER 7050.0210, SUBPART 2) WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. IFTHE WATER CANNOT BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING THE SURFACE WATER, ITMUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMPs (E.G. SILT BAGS), SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOTADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES. IF THE CONTRACTOR MUSTDISCHARGE WATER THAT CONTAINS OIL OR GREASE, THE CONTRACTOR MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR ORSUITABLE FILTRATION DEVICE (E.G. CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TO DISCHARGING THEWATER. THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE THAT DISCHARGE POINTS ARE ADEQUATELY PROTECTED FROMEROSION AND SCOUR. THE DISCHARGE MUST BE DISPERSED OVER NATURAL ROCK RIPRAP, SANDBAGS, PLASTICSHEETING, OR OTHER ACCEPTED ENERGY DISSIPATION MEASURES.6. CONTRACTOR MUST DISCHARGE WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THATDOES NOT CAUSE NUISANCE CONDITIONS, EROSION IN RECEIVING CHANNELS OR ON DOWN SLOPE PROPERTIES,OR INUNDATION IN WETLANDS CAUSING SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.7. IF THE CONTRACTOR IS USING FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THE CONTRACTOR MUST HAUL THE BACKWASHWATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURN THE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS,OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION. THECONTRACTOR MAY DISCHARGE BACKWASH WATER TO THE SANITARY SEWER IF PERMISSION IS GRANTED BY THESANITARY SEWER AUTHORITY. THE CONTRACTOR MUST REPLACE AND CLEAN THE FILTER MEDIA USED INDEWATERING DEVICES WHEN REQUIRED TO RETAIN ADEQUATE FUNCTION.Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-002 GENERAL NOTES 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:06:30 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION GRADING NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.3. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO QUANTIFY SOIL IMPORT OR EXPORT FOR THE SITE AND PERFORMTHEIR OWN QUANTITY TAKEOFFS FROM THE DRAWINGS FOR BIDDING PURPOSES. SUITABLE OFFSITE IMPORTMATERIAL MAY BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE FINAL GRADES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHALLCOORDINATE WITH ENGINEER TO VERIFY IMPORT, FROM CONTRACTOR DETERMINED SOURCE, IS SUITABLE FORUSE. EXCESS MATERIAL, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, IS THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND IS TO BEMOVED AND DISPOSED OF OFFSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND ENSURE NO PONDING IN PAVEDAREAS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IN WRITING IF GRADING DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND IN EXISTINGOR PROPOSED GRADES PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PAVEMENT. OBSERVE PAVEMENT AREAS FOR EVIDENCE OFPONDING BEFORE PLACEMENT OF PAVEMENT TO ENSURE DRAINAGE IS ADEQUATE TO INTENDED AREA.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL BACKFILL SUBGRADE AND TRENCH EXCAVATIONS PROMPTLY AFTER EXCAVATION FORPUBLIC SAFETY OR ACCESS TO DRIVEWAYS.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TOPSOIL, SEED/SOD, MULCH, AND FERTILIZER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THELANDSCAPE PLAN.7. REFERENCE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR MINIMUM TOPSOIL THICKNESS8. EXISTING TOPSOIL ON SITE VARIES IN DEPTH. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SURFACE VEGETATION AND TOPSOILAND OTHER LOOSE, SOFT OR OTHERWISE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL FROM THE IMPERVIOUS AREAS AND OTHERAREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER BEFORE PLACEMENT OF SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE OF UNSUITABLE OR CONTAMINATED SOILS DISCOVERED ONSITE INACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.10. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT/GRADE SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES INCLUDING CROSSINGDRIVEWAYS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT ADA STATE AND NATIONAL STANDARDS. NOTIFY ENGINEER INWRITING IMMEDIATELY IF ADA CRITERIA CANNOT BE MET AT ANY LOCATION.11. EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS AT MATCH POINTS ARE BASED ON INTERPOLATED POINT TO POINT SURVEY DATA.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING CONNECTION POINTS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY OF ANY FIELD DISCREPANCIES. CONTRACTOR ISRESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING NECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS IN THE FIELD FOR CONSTRUCTABILITY, REGULATORYCOMPLIANCE (ADA), POSITIVE DRAINAGE, AND TO ENSURE SMOOTH TRANSITIONS TO FIELD CONDITIONS.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REWORK OF A DISCREPANCY THAT IS NOT COMMUNICATED TO THE ENGINEERIN WRITING AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.12. EXCAVATE, COMPACT EMBANKMENT/SUITABLE FILL AND BACKFILL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GEOTECHNICALREPORT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC 2106 SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD.13. CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET MOISTURE CONTENT/CONTROL REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEGEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND MN/DOT SPEC 2106 AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS.14. ONSITE EMBANKMENT MATERIAL FREE OF ORGANIC SOIL AND DEBRIS MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR REUSE ASSUITABLE FILL MATERIAL IN PERVIOUS AREAS BUT MUST BE ACCEPTED BY THE ENGINEER.15. IMPORTED SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL NEEDED MAY CONSIST OF SAND (SW, SP), SILTY SAND (SM), CLAYEY SAND (SC),SANDY LEAN CLAY OR LEAN CLAY (CL), ACCORDING TO THE USCS CLASSIFICATION WITH A PLASTIC INDEX OFTHESE MATERIALS NOT EXCEEDING 15 AND MUST BE ACCEPTED BY THE ENGINEER BEFORE BRINGING ON THESITE.16. ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES (I.E. MANHOLES, VALVES, ETC.) WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SHALL HAVE RIMSADJUSTED TO MATCH PROPOSED GRADES, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS17. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DEWATERING MEASURES AS REQUIRED OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AT NOADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. SEE DEWATERING NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.18. FIELD QUALITY CONTROL:A. SOILS TESTING WILL BE COMPLETED BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER/INDEPENDENT TESTING AGENCY HIRED BYTHE CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE REQUIRED SOILS TESTSAND INSPECTIONS WITH THE ENGINEER.B. TESTING SHALL FOLLOW THE FREQUENCY OUTLINED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT OR MN/DOT SCHEDULE OFMATERIALS CONTROL. WHERE NO FREQUENCY IS PROVIDED, CONSULT THE ENGINEER FOR MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS.19. TOLERANACES:20. GRADING ELEVATIONS - CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPEC 2106.3.I EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN: FINISHED GRADING OFSUBGRADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF AGGREGATE BASE COURSES SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FEETABOVE OR BELOW THE DESIGN, OR ENGINEER ADJUSTED GRADE.C-003GENERAL NOTESUTILITY NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODEFOR MATERIALS, INSTALLATION, AND TESTING OF WATER AND SANITARY UTILITIES.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 7 FEET 6 INCHES COVER ON ALL WATERLINES, UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED. PROVIDE HYDRANT EXTENSIONS AND GATE VALVE NUT EXTENSIONS IF WATERLINE IS DEEPER THANMINIMUM COVER. PROVIDE INSULATION OVER WATERMAIN AND SERVICES WITH PROPOSED ELEVATIONS LESSTHAN MINIMUM BURY DEPTH PER PROJECT DETAILS AND UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 7 FEET 6 INCHES COVER ON ALL SANITARY SEWER AND SERVICES,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROVIDE INSULATION OVER SANITARY SEWER AND SERVICES WITH PROPOSEDELEVATIONS LESS THAN MINIMUM BURY DEPTH PER PROJECT DETAILS AND UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 10 FEET MINIMUM HORIZONTAL SEPARATION (OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDEEDGE OF PIPE/STRUCTURE) BETWEEN WATER LINES AND SANITARY OR STORM LINES AND STRUCTURES6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 18 INCH MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION (OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDEEDGE OF PIPE) BETWEEN WATER LINES AND OTHER UTILITY LINE CROSSINGS. PROVIDE INSULATION WHEREWATER, SANITARY OR STORM UTILITIES CROSS. OFFSET WATERMAIN AND SERVICES AS NECESSARY.7. PIPE LENGTH INDICATED BETWEEN STRUCTURES IS FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTUREUNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.8. PIPE SIZES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE INTERNAL PIPE DIAMETER.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TRACER WIRE ON ALL SEWER AND WATER MAINS, LATERALS, SERVICE PIPE ANDCONNECTIONS TO RISERS, CURB BOXES, MANHOLES, VALVES, HYDRANTS PER CITY/UTILITY PROVIDERREQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS.10. IN THE EVENT OF A VERTICAL CONFLICT BETWEEN WATER LINES, SANITARY LINES, STORM LINES AND GAS LINES(EXISTING AND PROPOSED), THE WATER LINE MUST INCLUDE ONE FULL LENGTH OF PIPE SO BOTH JOINTS ARE ASFAR FROM THE SEWER/UTILITY AS POSSIBLE AND SHALL HAVE MECHANICAL JOINTS WITH APPROPRIATE THRUSTBLOCKING AS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE MINIMUM CLEARANCE.11. WATER SERVICES SHALL NOT HAVE ANY INTERMITTENT HIGH POINTS, EXCEPT AT HYDRANTS OR AS NOTED ATSPECIFIC LOCATIONS ON THE PLANS.12. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PIPE SIZE, MATERIAL, AND ELEVATION FOR ALL CONNECTIONS. PROVIDEAPPROPRIATE PIPES AND FITTINGS REQUIRED TO MAKE CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ASVERIFIED IN THE FIELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.13. WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICES ARE SHOWN TERMINATING AT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT BUT AREDESIGNED TO WITHIN 5 FEET OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. VERIFY WITH MEP/PLUMBING PLANS/DESIGNER FOREXACT LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, AND DIMENSIONS OF BACKFLOW DEVICES (DDCV AND PRZ ASSEMBLIES),METERS, AND BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS. SERVICE DESIGNS AND INVERTS WITHIN 5 FEET OF THEBUILDING ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE AND REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. SEE MEP/PLUMBING PLANS FORCONTINUATION. VERIFY LOCATIONS AND INVERT ELEVATIONS WITH MEP/PLUMBING PLANS. PROVIDE A RISER PIPEAS NEEDED TO MATCH PLUMBING PIPING.14. WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICE SIZES AND ALIGNMENT ARE PRELIMINARY. CONTRACTOR TO DETERMINEFINAL SIZING AND ALIGNMENT W/ MEP DESIGN. IN THE EVENT THE FINAL SIZE OR ALIGNMENT IS DIFFERENT THANPRELIMINARY, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER AND OWNER IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY.15. LINES UNDERGROUND SHALL BE INSTALLED, INSPECTED, AND APPROVED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING IN ACCORDANCEWITH AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS.16. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE AND COMPACT SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL BEFORE INSTALLATION OF PROPOSEDUTILITIES.17. SANITARY SEWER MAIN, SERVICE PIPES, FITTINGS, AND STRUCTURES SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWINGREQUIREMENTS:A. SANITARY SERVICE PIPE: PVC SCHEDULE 40 PER ASTM D1785B. SANITARY PIPE FITTINGS: ASTM D2665 FOR SDR AND SCH 40 PVC PIPE, INJECTION MOLDED (GRAVITY LINES ONLY)C. SANITARY PIPE JOINTS: ASTM F656 AND D2564 FOR SCHEDULE 40 PIPED. SANITARY SYSTEM TRACER WIRE: CITY REQUIREMENTSE. SANITARY PRECAST STRUCTURE: CONFORM TO THE DETAILS/STANDARD PLATES AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS,INCLUDING INTEGRAL BASE SECTIONS AND RUBBER GASKETED TONGUE AND GROOVE JOINTS, UNLESS SHOWNOTHERWISE. ALL PIPE OPENINGS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL CAST WATERTIGHT SEAL.UTILITY NOTES CONT.F. SANITARY PRECAST STRUCTURE DESIGN: THE STRUCTURE BASE SLAB, PERIMETER WALLS, AND TOP SLAB SHALLBE DESIGNED FOR SHEAR STRENGTH, FLEXURAL STRENGTH, AND OTHER APPLICABLE STRENGTHS DUE TOHYDROSTATIC LOADING. THE DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE SHALL CONFORM TO A MINIMUM FACTOR OF SAFETY OF1.3 FOR BUOYANCY AND FLOTATION. THE HYDROSTATIC LOADING (WATER TABLE ELEVATIONS) SHALL BEASSUMED FROM THE TOP OF THE STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE DESIGNED AND DETAILED PREPAREDBY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, EXPERIENCED IN PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE DESIGN, WHO IS LICENSED INTHE STATE OF MINNNESOTA.G. SANITARY PIPE/STRUCTURE CONNECTION: CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL A FLEXIBLE COMPRESSIONJOINT TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODECHAPTER 7, SECTION 719.6. RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MAY BE USED IF APPROVED BY AGENCY HAVINGJURISDICTION.H. STRUCTURE ADJUSTMENT RINGS: CONCRETE WITH MINIMUM 3,000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH, SINGLE HOOP8-GAUGE STEEL WIRE REINFORCEMENT, AND 2 INCH THICKNESS EACH RINGI. ADHESION MATERIAL: BETWEEN TOP SLAB AND BARREL SECTION - RAM-NEK OR APPROVED EQUAL. FORCONCRETE RINGS, USE AIR ENTRAINED UNDERGROUND UTILITY MORTAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C270, ASTMC387, MN/DOT SPEC 2506.2.B AND MN/DOT SPEC 3107.2.A.1..J. EXTERNAL/INTERNAL SEALS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS18. WATERMAIN, SERVICE PIPES AND FITTINGS TO MEET THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:A. WATER SERVICE PIPING - 4 INCHES AND LARGER: PVC C900 DR 18 PER AWWA C 900B. WATER SERVICE PIPE FITTINGS - 4 INCHES AND LARGER: AWWA C153, 250 PSI WORKING PRESSURE WITHINTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COATING PER AWWA C116C. WATER SYSTEM TRACER WIRE: UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTSD. THRUST BLOCKING: PROVIDE BLOCKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.E. HYDRANTS: PER UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTSF. VALVES: PER UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS19. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND PROVIDE BEDDING FOR PIPING/ STRUCTURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEAM,ASTM D 2321 AND ASTM F 1668 (FOR GRAVITY SEWER), ASTM D 2774 (FOR PRESSURE PIPE), ASTM C 1479 (FOR RCPIPE), AWWA C600 (FOR DIP PIPE), AWWA C605 (FOR PVC), ASTM A 798 (FOR CMP), AND PROJECT/MANUFACTURERDETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS.20. IF MANUFACTURER DETAILS SPECIFY DESIGN COMPONENTS TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER,CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO VERIFY SYSTEM REQUIREMENTSPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION IF NOT NOTED IN THE DRAWINGS.21. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPACT EMBANKMENT/BEDDING/BACKFILL MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC2106 SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET MOISTURE CONTENT/CONTROL REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC2106, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS.23. FIELD QUALITY CONTROL, TESTING, INSPECTIONS, AND CERTIFICATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING:A. ALL NECESSARY INSPECTIONS AND/OR CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY CODES, AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONAND UTILITY PROVIDER COMPANIES.B. SANITARY LINES AND STRUCTURES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:1) SERVICE PIPE AND STRUCTURES TESTING: MEET MN PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 7 SECTIONS 712 AND 723REQUIREMENTS2) LEAKAGE TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS3) DEFLECTION TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS4) TELEVISING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS5) CONDUCTIVITY/TRACING TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONREQUIREMENTSC. WATER LINES AND STRUCTURES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:1) SERVICE PIPE AND STRUCTURES TESTING: MEET MN PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 6 SECTIONS 603 AND 609REQUIREMENTS2) HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONREQUIREMENTS3) DISINFECTION TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION, MN PLUMBING CODECHAPTER 6 SECTION 609.9, AND MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REQUIREMENTS4) CONDUCTIVITY/TRACING TESTING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONREQUIREMENTSD. SERVICE TRENCH COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.E. SANITARY MAIN TRENCH COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.F. SANITARY STRUCTURE COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.G. WATERMAIN TRENCH COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.H. WATER STRUCTURE/VALVE COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS.24. TOLERANCES:A. SANITARY PIPE HORIZONTAL: WITHIN 0.50 FEET OF ALIGNMENTB. SANITARY PIPE VERTICAL: ZERO PLUS AND 0.08 FEET MINUS ELEVATION SHOWN WITH NO INTERMEDIATE HIGHPOINTS, LEVEL SECTION, OR REVERSE INVERT SLOPE.C. SANITARY PIPE JOINT DEFLECTION: NO MORE THAN 75% OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, AS RECOMMENDED BYMANUFACTURERS OF PIPE AND JOINT MATERIALD. SANITARY STRUCTURE RIM ELEVATIONS: ZERO PLUS AND 0.08 FEET MINUS ELEVATION SHOWNE. WATER PIPE HORIZONTAL: WITHIN 0.50 FEET OF ALIGNMENTF. WATER PIPE VERTICAL: 0 FEET PLUS AND 1 FEET MINUS ELEVATION SHOWN, WHILE MEETING THE MINIMUMSEPARATION REQUIREMENTS AT CROSSINGS.G. WATER PIPE JOINT DEFLECTION: NO MORE THAN 75% OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, AS RECOMMENDED BYMANUFACTURERS OF PIPE AND JOINT MATERIALH. HYDRANT/VALVE/CASTING ELEVATION: WITHIN 0.05 FEET OF FINAL ELEVATION. VALVE/TRACER WIRE BOXES, CURBSTOPS, AND CASTINGS SHALL NOT EXTEND ABOVE FINAL PAVED SURFACE ELEVATIONSTORM SEWER NOTES CONT.14. STORM SEWER MAINS, SERVICE PIPES, FITTINGS, AND STRUCTURES TO MEET THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:A. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE: REINFORCED CONCRETE (RC) PIPE CLASS PER ACPA LRFD FILL HEIGHT TABLES,TYPE 3 BEDDING, WALL B PER CEAM SPECIFICATIONS AND ASTM C76B. PIPE JOINTS: JOINTS MUST BE CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER TO BE ABLE TO PASS THE AIR TEST ORINTERNAL HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE REQUIRED BY THE AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION.C. PIPE CONNECTION TO EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE: CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL A FLEXIBLECOMPRESSION JOINT TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTAPLUMBING CODE, SECTION 719.6. RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MEETING ASTM C923 MAY BE USED IF APPROVED BYAGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION, SEE PROJECT DETAILS.D. SUBSOIL DRAINS/DRAINTILE: PERFORATED PVC SCH 40 OR SDR 26 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2729 - ¼ INCHPERFORATIONS AT 3 INCHES ON CENTER, 4 HOLES PER ROW CONFORMING TO ASTM F758E. SUBSOIL DRAIN AGGREGATE: MN/DOT SPEC 3149.2.H.F. SUBSOIL DRAIN GEOTEXTILE WRAP: MN/DOT SPEC 3733, TYPE 1G. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURES GENERAL: ASTM C478 AND DRAWING DETAILS.H. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE JOINTS: RUBBER O-RING GASKET MEETING ASTM C443I. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE STEPS: PER DETAILSJ. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE DESIGN: DETAILED AND PREPARED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER EXPERIENCEDIN PRECAST CONCRETE STRUCTURE DESIGN WHO IS LICENSED IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DESIGN SHALLCONFORM TO A MINIMUM SAFETY FACTOR OF 1.3 FOR BUOYANCY AND FLOTATION WITH THE HYDROSTATICLOADING (WATER TABLE ELEVATIONS) ASSUMED FROM THE TOP OF THE STRUCTURE. THE DESIGN OF THE BASESLAB, WALLS, AND TOP SLAB SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR SHEAR STRENGTH, FLEXURAL STRENGTH, AND OTHERAPPLICABLE STRENGTHS DUE TO HYDROSTATIC LOADING. THE DESIGN SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEMOST CURRENT ACI 318, AASHTO, AND MN/DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, EXCEPT ASNOTED.K. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE MORTAR MATERIALS: MN/DOT SPEC 2506.2B, ASTM C270, AND ASTM C387.L. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE ADJUSTMENT RINGS: SIZE TO MATCH CONE OR OPENING IN TOP SLAB. CONCRETEWITH MINIMUM 3,000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH, SINGLE HOOP 8-GAUGE STEEL WIRE REINFORCEMENT, AND 2INCH THICKNESS EACH RINGM.STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE ADHESION MATERIAL: BETWEEN TOP SLAB AND BARREL SECTION - RAM-NEK ORAPPROVED EQUAL. FOR CONCRETE RINGS, USE MORTAR MATERIALS.N. STORM PRECAST STRUCTURE INTERNAL/EXTERNAL SEAL: IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS15. STORM PIPE BEDDING: CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND PROVIDE BEDDING FOR PIPING/STORMWATERSYSTEMS/VAULTS/CHAMBERS/ STRUCTURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEAM, ASTM D 2321 AND ASTM F 1668 (FORGRAVITY SEWER), ASTM D 2774 (FOR PRESSURE PIPE), ASTM C 1479 (FOR RC PIPE), AWWA C600 (FOR DIP PIPE),AWWA C605 (FOR PVC), ASTM A 798 (FOR CMP), AND PROJECT/MANUFACTURER DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS.16. STORM SYSTEM TRACER WIRE: MEET AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS17. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPACT EMBANKMENT/BEDDING/BACKFILL MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC2106 SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, AND SITE TESTINGREQUIREMENTS.18. CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET MOISTURE CONTENT/CONTROL REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPEC2106, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS.19. FIELD QUALITY CONTROL, TESTING, INSPECTIONS, AND CERTIFICATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING:A. ALL NECESSARY INSPECTIONS AND/OR CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY CODES, AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONAND UTILITY SERVICE COMPANIES.B. STORM LINES AND STRUCTURES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:1) SERVICE PIPE AND ROOF DRAIN LEADERS TESTING TO COMPLY WITH MN PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 7 SECTION712 AND CHAPTER 11 SECTION 11072) ALL PORTIONS OF SYSTEM (PIPE AND STRUCTURES) THAT PASS WITHIN 10 FEET OF A WATER LINE, WITHIN 10FEET OF A BUILDING, WITHIN 50 FEET OF WATER WELLS, OR THAT PASS THROUGH SOIL OR WATER IDENTIFIEDAS BEING CONTAMINATED MUST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 11 SECTION1107.3) STORM PIPE DEFLECTION TESTING: CEAM 2621.3.F AND AS REQUIRED BY THE MN PLUMBING CODE. 5-PERCENTDEFLECTION ALLOWANCE OF PIPE'S INTERNAL DIAMETER.4) STORM PIPE LEAKAGE TESTING: CEAM 2621.3.E AND AS REQUIRED BY THE MN PLUMBING CODE.5) STORM PIPE LAMPING: VERIFY INSTALLATION IS TRUE TO LINE AND GRADE. VERIFY INSTALLED PIPE ISSTRUCTURALLY SOUND. VERIFY THERE ARE NO BROKEN OR DEFLECTIVE PIPES. VERIFY THAT JOINTS ARE ALLPUSHED HOME. VERIFY STRUCTURES CONFORM TO SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS. PROVIDE VERIFICATION OFTHE ABOVE IN WRITING TO THE OWNER AND ENGINEER.6) STORM PIPE CONTINUITY TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEAM 2611.3.F AND THE AUTHORITY HAVINGJURISDICTION.7) TELEVISING: MEET CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS8) STORM PIPE TRENCH COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCYHAVING JURISDICTION9) STORM STRUCTURE COMPACTION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER/AGENCY HAVINGJURISDICTION10) BASIN INFILTRATION TESTING: IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY/AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTIONC. A COPY OF THE TEST RESULTS MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE OWNER, ENGINEER, UTILITY PROVIDER, AND AGENCYHAVING JURISDICTION.20. CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN STRUCTURES AND PIPING OF DEBRIS AND SEDIMENT DURING AND AT THE END OFCONSTRUCTION UNTIL ACCEPTED BY THE OWNER AND ENGINEER.21. TOLERANCES:A. STORM PIPE HORIZONTAL TOLERANCE: WITHIN 0.50 FEET OF ALIGNMENTB. STORM PIPE VERTICAL TOLERANCE: ZERO PLUS AND 0.08 FEET MINUS ELEVATION SHOWN WITH NO INTERMEDIATEHIGH POINTS, LEVEL SECTION, OR REVERSE INVERT SLOPE.C. STORM PIPE JOINT DEFLECTION TOLERANCE: NO MORE THAN 75% OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, AS RECOMMENDEDBY MANUFACTURERS OF PIPE AND JOINT MATERIALD. STORM STRUCTURE RIM ELEVATION TOLERANCE: ZERO PLUS AND 0.08 FEET MINUS ELEVATION SHOWNINFILTRATION SYSTEM NOTES1. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAGE CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATELY AND INSTALL NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL TOPREVENT SEDIMENT WASHING INTO THE INFILTRATION SYSTEM.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAGE CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATELY TO MINIMIZE COMPACTION OF THE SOILS IN THEINFILTRATION AREA. CONTRACTOR SHALL ACCOMPLISH FINAL GRADING OF THE INFILTRATION SYSTEMLOW-IMPACT (WIDE TRACKED) EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE OFF AND MARK THE PROJECT AREA TO KEEP CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC, EQUIPMENTAND MATERIAL STOCKPILES OUT OF THE PROPOSED INFILTRATION SYSTEM AREAS.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAGE CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATELY AND INSTALL NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL TOPREVENT SEDIMENT AND TOPSOIL FROM WASHING INTO THE INFILTRATION AREA. IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT ISINTRODUCED INTO THE INFILTRATION AREA, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE THE MATERIAL BEFOREPROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT EXCAVATE INFILTRATION AREA UNTIL THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS WITHEXPOSED SOIL HAVE BEEN STABILIZED AND BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE INSTALLED ON CONTRIBUTING PAVEMENTAREAS. DIVERT UPLAND DRAINAGE AREAS TO PREVENT RUNOFF FROM ENTERING THE EXCAVATED SYSTEM ORINTO THE WORK AREA. DO NOT USE INFILTRATION SYSTEM AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS OR ALLOWCONSTRUCTION RUNOFF INTO THE CELLS, WHEN ALTERNATE DRAINAGE ROUTES ARE FEASIBLE.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL ACCOMPLISH FINAL GRADING OF THE SYSTEM TO PREVENT COMPACTION. EXCAVATIONSHOULD BE PERFORMED WITH A BACKHOE FROM THE SIDES AND OUTSIDE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE INFILTRATIONAREA. IF REQUIRED TO WORK WITHIN THE FILTRATION FOOTPRINT, ONLY LOW GROUND PRESSURE TRACKEDEQUIPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED. RUBBER TIRE EQUIPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN THE INFILTRATION AREA.7. DE-COMPACT SUBSOIL WITHIN INFILTRATION AREAS WITH BACKHOE RIPPER ATTACHMENT OR OTHER APPROVEDMETHOD TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 18 INCHES BELOW SUBGRADE IN ALL LOCATIONS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGSAND AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.8. CONTRACTOR SHALL GENTLY MIX THE FIRST LIFT OF INFILTRATION SOILS WITH THE LOOSENED UNDERLYING SOILSTO AVOID STRATIFICATION AND PROMOTE PERMEABILITY. USE EXCAVATOR BUCKET TO PLACE MATERIALS.LEVELING AND FINAL GRADING WITHIN THE CELL MUST BE COMPLETED BY HAND OR OTHER METHOD APPROVEDBY THE ENGINEER.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL AVOID CONTAMINATION OF INFILTRATION SYSTEM SOILS WITH SEDIMENT, IN-SITU ORTOPSOIL DURING AND AFTER INSTALLATION. MATERIALS MUST BE SEGREGATED. INSTALLATION WITH DRY SOILCONDITIONS IS CRITICAL TO PREVENT SMEARING AND COMPACTION.10. IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE INFILTRATION SYSTEM, THE CONTRACTOR SHALLREMOVE THE MATERIAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP INFILTRATION SYSTEMS OFF-LINE BY RESTRICTING STORM WATER INFLOW UNTILDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THIS WILL INCLUDE A TEMPORARY BULKHEAD OF THE PIPE LEADING TO THE AREA.CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST MEASURES AS NECESSARY THROUGHOUT PROJECT PHASING. SUBMIT OFF-LINERESTRICTION PLAN TO ENGINEER FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE SYSTEMS. COSTS ASSOCIATEDWITH TEMPORARILY KEEPING THE SYSTEMS OFFLINE IS INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT AND NO ADDITIONAL COSTTO THE OWNER.12. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE INFILTRATION SYSTEM IS FREE AND CLEAR OF SEDIMENT UPON FINAL COMPLETIONOF CONSTRUCTION.STORM SEWER NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CITY/UTILITY PROVIDER, CEAM, AND MINNESOTAPLUMBING CODE (MINNESOTA RULES CHAPTER 4714) FOR MATERIALS, INSTALLATION, AND TESTING OF STORMUTILITIES.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 10 FEET SEPARATION (OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE EDGE OFPIPE/STRUCTURE) BETWEEN WATER LINES AND SANITARY OR STORM LINES AND STRUCTURE.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 18 INCH MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION (OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE EDGEOF PIPE/STRUCTURE) BETWEEN WATER LINES AND OTHER UTILITY LINES. PROVIDE INSULATION WHERE WATER,SANITARY, OR STORM UTILITIES CROSS. OFFSET WATERMAIN AND SERVICES AS NECESSARY.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PIPE SIZE, MATERIAL, AND ELEVATION FOR CONNECTIONS. PROVIDE APPROPRIATEPIPES AND FITTINGS REQUIRED TO MAKE CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AS VERIFIED IN THE FIELD.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE AND COMPACT SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL BEFORE INSTALLATION OF PROPOSEDUTILITIES.7. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPERLY LOCATING AND INSTALLING CATCH BASINS SO THAT THE INLETFRAME AND GRATE PROPERLY ALIGN WITH CURB AND GUTTER.8. DRAINTILE/SUBSOIL DRAIN AROUND BUILDING PERIMETER NOT SHOWN ON CIVIL DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHALLVERIFY IF DRAINTILE REQUIRED WITH ARCHITECT/STRUCTURAL/MEP AND COORDINATE CONNECTION TO STORMSYSTEM WITH ENGINEER.9. INSTALL SUBSOIL DRAINS/DRAINTILE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (LOCATIONS NOT SHOWNON PLANS).10.LINES UNDERGROUND SHALL BE INSTALLED, INSPECTED, AND APPROVED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING IN ACCORDANCEWITH AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS.11.PIPE LENGTH INDICATED BETWEEN STRUCTURES IS FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTUREUNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. PIPE LENGTH INDICATED BETWEEN STRUCTURE AND FLARED END SECTION IS FROMCENTER OF STRUCTURE TO END OF FLARED END SECTION.12.PIPE SIZES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE INTERNAL PIPE DIAMETER.13.IF MANUFACTURER DETAILS SPECIFY DESIGN COMPONENTS TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER,CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO VERIFY SYSTEM REQUIREMENTSPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION IF NOT NOTED IN THE DRAWINGS.TREE PRESERVATION NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING TREES THAT ARE NOT TO BE REMOVED. INSTALL ORANGE MESH FENCING,4 FEET HIGH, WITH STAKES EVERY 10 FEET, 5 FEET OUTSIDE OF THE DRIP LINE OF PRESERVED TREES, OR AT THECONSTRUCTION LIMITS. DO NOT PERFORM ACTIONS WITHIN THE PROTECTED AREA THAT MAY HARM THE TREEAND COMPACT THE SOIL, INCLUDING EXCAVATION, STORING MATERIALS, PARKING AND TRAFFIC DURINGCONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONSTRUCTION REQUIRES DISTURBANCE WITHIN THE PROTECTED AREAS, DISTURB THEROOT ZONE AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.3. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES/FENCING MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION AND MUST BEREVIEWED BY OWNER AND ENGINEER BEFORE STARTING CONSTRUCTION.4. WHEN TREE ROOTS ARE ENCOUNTERED THAT MUST BE REMOVED, CONTRACTOR SHALL CUT ROOTS CLEANLY ASFAR FROM THE TREE AS POSSIBLE AND IMMEDIATELY WATER AND BACKFILL OVER THE ROOTS TO PREVENTDRYING.TEST REPORTS REQUIRED1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. COPIES OF COMPACTION/MOISTURE, CONCRETE, AND OTHER TEST RESULTS ARE TO BE SENT TO THE OWNERDIRECTLY FROM THE INDEPENDENT TESTING LABORATORY.3. ONSITE/INPLACE GEOTECHNICAL/CONCRETE TESTING MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENTTESTING LABORATORY. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED IN-PLACE TESTS ANDINSPECTIONS WITH THE ENGINEER/INDEPENDENT TESTING LABORATORY.4. TEST REPORTS REQUIRED MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO: DENSITY TESTS OF SOIL ANDPAVEMENT COMPACTION, CONCRETE COMPRESSION, AIR, AND SLUMP TESTS, BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTS OFWATER SYSTEM, MANDREL TESTS OF SANITARY AND STORM SYSTEM, PRESSURE/LEAK TESTS OFWATER/SANITARY/STORM SYSTEM, AND OTHER TESTING REQUIRED BY AGENCY/MUNICIPALITY HAVINGJURISDICTION.5. RE-WORK/RE-TESTING DUE TO FIELD TEST FAILURE ARE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL NOTES1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. THE HORIZONTAL CONTROL FOR THIS PLAN IS NAD 83 RAMSEY COUNTY COORDINATES SYSTEM, US SURVEY FOOT3. THE VERTICAL CONTROL FOR THE PLAN IS NAVD88TYPICAL PROJECT OBSERVATIONS1. SEE GENERAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION.2. CONTRACTOR MUST NOTIFY OWNER, ENGINEER, AND CITY IN WRITING A MINIMUM OF 3 BUSINESS DAYS INADVANCE OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES FOR ATTENDENCE AND OBSERVATION: PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING,UNDERGROUND PIPING AND UTILITIES INSTALLATION, UTILITY TESTING, STRUCTURES AND APPURTENANCESINSTALLATION, SUBGRADE PREPARATION, BASE INSTALLATION, CURB INSTALLATION, AND PAVEMENTINSTALLATION.Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 3S89°54'37"W 610.00S0°11'54"E1.60S89°54'37"W14.25S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 N89°48'06"E 770.66N0°11'54"W 506.70 860865859861862863864860 865859861862863864857858859859858857858859859856857858856857858858 85685785585585685785885985 8 85 9 8568578 5 8 855858857860865859861862863864860865859861862863864 855 855 8 5 6 855 852 853854 855855854854 856 85 7 858859 860856 857 857858858 856 856 856 858 85 9 8578588608 5 7 8588598618608608598598618618628628608 5 7 858859860859861861862862855860853854856857858859861862863 864858859857858858858857 858856857 857852853855856 858858859859860WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-003 EXISTING CONDITIONS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:07:21 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.NOTESC-004EXISTING CONDITIONSLEGENDEXISTING GAS METEREXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAINGGEXISTING UNDERGROUND GAS LINEF/OF/OEXISTING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC LINEUEUEEXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINEEXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENTEXISTING TREE LINEEXISTING CONCRETE SURFACEEXISTING ASPHALT SURFACEEXISTING BUILDINGEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOURPROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING CURB AND GUTTEREXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING WATER VALVEWVDYH EXISTING SIGNEXISTING BOLLARD/POSTEXISTING LIGHT POLEEXISTING SHRUB/BUSHXXEXISTING FENCE LINEEXISTING RETAINING WALL LINEGGEXISTING UNDERGROUND GAS LINECOMEXISTING UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATIONLINEEBEXISTING ELECTRICAL PEDESTALEXISTING TRANSFORMEREXISTING ELECTRIC MANHOLEEXISTING SANITARY MANHOLEEXISTING STORM SEWER MANHOLEEXISTING STORM SEWER INLETEXISTING CONIFEROUS TREEEXISTING BENCH( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINESubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)S89°54'37"W 610.00S0°11'54"E1.60S89°54'37"W14.25S15° 5 5 ' 4 8 " W 5 2 7 . 0 3 N89°48'06"E 770.66N0°11'54"W 506.70 LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKINGLARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX855860 853854856857858859861862863864855853854856857858852856857855 852 853854 8558558548 5 6 85 7 858860859859859861864860860861862863864855860856857858859861862863855855855853854854854856857858858857860 855855855856856857857858858859859856 860856857858859 856857860 858 859 860 860859 860 857858859 1DBH:14-HEIGHT:35-Scots Pine2DBH:20-HEIGHT:N/A-Sugar Maple3DBH:19-HEIGHT:31-Scots Pine4DBH:20-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple5DBH:4-HEIGHT:N/A-Northern Red Oak6DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Northern Red Oak7DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Northern Red Oak8DBH:44-HEIGHT:N/A-Silver Maple9DBH:12-HEIGHT:N/A-Little-leaf Linden10DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Norway Maple11DBH:18-HEIGHT:41-Scots Pine12DBH:21-HEIGHT:33-Scots Pine13DBH:29-HEIGHT:N/A-Silver Maple14DBH:13-HEIGHT:57-Colorado Spruce15DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-White Spruce16DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-White Spruce17DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-White Spruce18DBH:9-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple19DBH:6-HEIGHT:N/A-White Spruce20DBH:13-HEIGHT:39-White Spruce21DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple22DBH:12-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple23DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple24DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple25DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple26DBH:11-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple27DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple28DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple29DBH:19-HEIGHT:53-Colorado Spruce30DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple31DBH:9-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple32DBH:9-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple33DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple34DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple35DBH:11-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple36DBH:15-HEIGHT:N/A-Honey Locust37DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Honey Locust38DBH:9-HEIGHT:N/A-Honey Locust39DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Honey Locust40DBH:11-HEIGHT:N/A-Honey Locust41DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Swamp White Oak42DBH:10-HEIGHT:N/A-Scots Pine43DBH:23-HEIGHT:N/A-American Basswood44DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple45DBH:5-HEIGHT:N/A-Little-leaf Linden46DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple47DBH:22-HEIGHT:N/A-American Basswood48DBH:16-HEIGHT:N/A-American Basswood49DBH:5-HEIGHT:N/A-Swamp White Oak50DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Swamp White Oak51DBH:11-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple52DBH:12-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple53DBH:7-HEIGHT:N/A-Swamp White Oak54DBH:13-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple55DBH:8-HEIGHT:N/A-Red Maple56DBH:5-HEIGHT:N/A-White SpruceTPFT P FTPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P F TPFT P FTPFT P F TPFT P F WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-005 TREE SURVEY 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:08:28 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-005TREE SURVEYEASEMENT LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYNOTES1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. TREES SHOWN IN TREE INVENTORY ARE NOT REFLECTIVE OF ALLTREES ON SITE. SEE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN.3. UNTRENCHED SILT FENCE OR ORANGE SNOW FENCE MAY BE USEDFOR TREE PROTECTION - SEE DETAIL 1/C-005TREE PROTECTIONTPFT P FTPF TPFTREE PROTECTIONREMOVE TREEPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900GRADING LIMITSEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING DECIDUOUS TREEEXISTING CONIFEROUS TREETREE INVENTORYTREE #DESCRIPTIONPROTECT REMOVE1Scots Pine - DBH:14 - Height:35X2Sugar Maple - DBH:20 - Height:N/AX3Scots Pine - DBH:19 - Height:31X4Red Maple - DBH:20 - Height:N/AX5Northern Red Oak - DBH:4 - Height:N/AX6Northern Red Oak - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX7Northern Red Oak - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX8Silver Maple - DBH:44 - Height:N/AX9Little-leaf Linden - DBH:12 - Height:N/AX10Norway Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX11Scots Pine - DBH:18 - Height:41X12Scots Pine - DBH:21 - Height:33X13Silver Maple - DBH:29 - Height:N/AX14Colorado Spruce - DBH:13 - Height:57X15White Spruce - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX16White Spruce - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX17White Spruce - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX18Red Maple - DBH:9 - Height:N/AX19White Spruce - DBH:6 - Height:N/AX20White Spruce - DBH:13 - Height:39X21Red Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX22Red Maple - DBH:12 - Height:N/AX23Red Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX24Red Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX25Red Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX26Red Maple - DBH:11 - Height:N/AX27Red Maple - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX28Red Maple - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX29Colorado Spruce - DBH:19 - Height:53X30Red Maple - DBH:19 - Height:N/AX31Red Maple - DBH:9 - Height:N/AX32Red Maple - DBH:9 - Height:N/AX33Red Maple - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX34Red Maple - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX35Red Maple - DBH:11 - Height:N/AX36Honey Locust - DBH:15 - Height:N/AX37Honey Locust - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX38Honey Locust - DBH:9 - Height:N/AX39Honey Locust - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX40Honey Locust - DBH:11 - Height:N/AX41Swamp White Oak - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX42Scots Pine - DBH:10 - Height:N/AX43American Basswood - DBH:23 - Height:N/AX44Red Maple - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX45Little-leaf Linden - DBH:5 - Height:N/AX46Red Maple - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX47American Basswood - DBH:22 - Height:N/AX48American Basswood - DBH:16 - Height:N/AX49Swamp White Oak - DBH:5 - Height:N/AX50Swamp White Oak - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX51Red Maple - DBH:11 - Height:N/AX52Red Maple - DBH:12 - Height:N/AX53Swamp White Oak - DBH:7 - Height:N/AX54Red Maple - DBH:13 - Height:N/AX55Red Maple - DBH:8 - Height:N/AX56White Spruce - DBH:5 - Height:N/AXEXIST. TREE TO REMAINDRIPLINENOTE:4'-0"2'-6"EXIST. GRADEPROTECT EXISTING TREES ALONG ACCESS ROUTE AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. INSTALLORANGE MESH FENCING, 4' HIGH, WITH STAKES EVERY 10 FEET, 5' OUTSIDE THE DRIPLINE ASSHOWN ON THE PLAN. DO NOT PERFORM ACTIONS WITHIN THE PROTECTION AREAS THAT MAYHARM THE TREE OR COMPACT THE SOIL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO EXCAVATION, STORINGMATERIALS, PARKING, AND TRAFFIC DURING CONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONSTRUCTION REQUIRESDISTURBANCE WITHIN THE PROTECTED AREAS, DISTURB THE ROOT ZONE AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.ALL TREE PROTECTION MEASURES SHALL BE DIRECTED AND VERIFIED BY OWNER PRIOR TOSTARTING CONSTRUCTION. ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TOBEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.5'-0"STAKETREE PROTECTION1C-005NOT TO SCALEDO NOT BEGIN TREE CLEARING WORK UNTIL TREE PROTECTION MEASURES ARE IN PLACE AND TO THEAPPROVAL OF THE CITY OF SHOREVIEW AND THE CIVIL ENGINEER.CRITICAL ROOT ZONE:INSTALL HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE SAFETY FENCE, 4 FT. HIGH, INTERNATIONAL ORANGE AT THE DRIP LINEOR AT THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, OF TREES TO BE PRESERVED PER DETAIL, PRIORTO COMMENCEMENT OF EARTHWORK ACTIVITY. FIELD-STAKING OF THE FENCE LOCATION(S) SUBJECT TO CITYOF SHOREVIEW FORESTRY APPROVAL.WHERE SILT FENCE AND PROPOSED TREE PROTECTION FENCE OVERLAP, PLACE THE TREE PROTECTIONFENCE ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE SILT FENCE, DOUBLE-STAKED AT THE BREAK POINT.REFER TO TREE PROTECTION DETAIL FOR ROOT ZONE AND DRIP-LINE PROTECTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRUNE THE CANOPY OF EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN WHERE THE CANOPY IS INJEOPARDY OF DAMAGE TO THE THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THECONTRACTOR HIRE A CERTIFIED ARBORIST TO PERFORM THE PRUNING. ANY BRANCHES BROKEN DURINGCONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY TRIMMED AND WOUNDS PAINTED TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE.PERFORM WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS, ORDINANCES, RULES, REGULATIONS, AND ORDERS OFPUBLIC AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION. SECURE AND PAY FOR PERMITS, GOVERNMENTAL FEES ANDLICENSES NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER EXECUTION OF THE DEMOLITION WORK.PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION, CONTACT THE CITY OF SHOREVIEW FORESTER 651-490-4667. OBTAINPERMITS AS REQUIRED BY LAW.PROVIDE PROTECTIVE COVERINGS AND ENCLOSURES AS NECESSARY TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO EXISTINGWORK THAT IS TO REMAIN. EXISTING WORK TO REMAIN MAY INCLUDE ITEMS SUCH AS TREES, SHRUBS, LAWNS,SIDEWALKS, DRIVES, CURBS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND/OR OTHER STRUCTURES ON OR ADJACENT TO THEDEMOLITION SITE. PROVIDE TEMPORARY FENCES AND BARRICADES AS REQUIRED FOR THE SAFE AND PROPEREXECUTION OF THE WORK AND THE PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY.REMOVE DEBRIS, WASTE, AND RUBBISH PROMPTLY FROM THE SITE. ON-SITE BURIAL OF DEBRIS IS NOTPERMITTED. BURN NO DEBRIS ON THE SITE. SALVAGE MATERIAL NOT OTHERWISE INDICATED TO BE REUSEDSHALL BECOME THE CONTRACTOR'S PROPERTY AND IS TO BE REMOVED PROMPTLY FROM THE SITE ANDDISPOSED OF IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND/OR STATUES.TREES SHOWN AS EXISTING TO REMAIN (PRESERVED) THAT ARE DAMAGED / KILLED AS A RESULT OFCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT PER THE CITY OF SHOREVIEW'S TREEREPLACEMENT PENALTY. REPLACEMENT TREES ARE TO BE PAID FOR AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THEOWNER.TREE TRIMMING: TRIM BRANCHES OF EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN WITH BRANCHES OVERHANGING THE WORKZONE TO A HEIGHT OF NO LESS THAN 15' ABOVE GRADE. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL HIRE A STATECERTIFIED ARBORIST TO TRIM TREES AND SHALL NOT TRIM QUERCUS SP. DURING PRIM OAK WILT SEASON. DONOT DISTURB OAKS BETWEEN APRIL-JULY.TREE PRESERVATION & REMOVAL NOTESLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 ft.5010050Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 3860865859861862863864860 865859861862863864857858859859858857858859859856857858856857858858 85685785585585685785885 8 8598568578 5 8 855858857860865859861862863864860865859861862863864 8 5 5 8 5 6 855 854 855854854856 857 858 859 860856 857 857858858 856 856 856 858 85 9 8578588608 5 7 8588598618608608598598618618628628608 5 7 858859860859861861862862855860853854856857858859861862863 864858859857858858858857 858856857 857852853855856 1.171.11.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.31.31.31.31.31.41.41.41.41.41.41.41.41.41.41.61.61.61.61.61.61.61.51.51.71.31.81.91.101.101.111.121.101.101.101.101.101.101.101.121.121.121.121.131.131.131.161.161.101.101.161.101.161.171.171.171.171.171.171.171.171.171.172.92.82.81.101.101.61.61.61.63.51.61.61.61.61.62.81.61.61.61.121.121.41.173.33.33.31.173.33.33.33.23.43.33.33.23.21.181.181.151.41.41.41.21.21.91.171.173.51.61.133.12.81.61.61.62.81.151.152.32.22.22.42.12.62.71.121.201.172.51.13.21.11.12.52.51.191.191.143.31.21.21.21.21.33.32.101.12.111.63.52.111.182.41.81.42.51.42.52.42.12.82.12.12.122.112.12.132.142.122.11.152.41.152.82.82.83.12.82.82.83.12.82.102.152.152.53.32.112.92.61.141.181.181.181.182.113.12.91.163.31.182.152.122.112.112.112.73.31.61.101.101.62.122.122.32.42.121.62.42.112.112.112.42.32.11.92.132.83.12.122.111.151.42.112.82.122.132.83.12.32.72.82.32.113.52.152.152.152.162.162.122.12.12.92.83.11.71.181.182.142.142.41.101.42.12.12.12.172.171.13.21.11.31.33.21.41.43.21.211.21.21.31.211.222.18WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-004 REMOVALS PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:09:09 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-006REMOVALS ANDPRECONSTRUCTIONEROSION CONTROL PLANLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040PROPERTY BOUNDARYREMOVE RETAINING WALLREMOVE STORM SEWERREMOVE SANITARY SEWERGGREMOVE UNDERGROUND GAS LINECOMREMOVE UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATIONLINEOUREMOVE OVERHEAD UTILITY LINEREMOVE SANITARY MANHOLEREMOVE STORM SEWER MANHOLEREMOVE STORM SEWER INLETREMOVE STORM SEWER INLETREMOVE HYDRANTEBDYHREMOVE AUTO SPRINKLERREMOVE POST INDICATOR VALVEREMOVE ELECTRICAL PEDESTALREMOVE LIGHT POLEREMOVE GAS METERREMOVE TRANSFORMERREMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTREMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENTREMOVE CURB AND GUTTERSAWCUT PAVEMENTCLEAR AND GRUB AREAREMOVE BUILDINGREMOVE TREE1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONSTRUCTION SITE SHALL HAVE STABILIZED EXIT AT ALLTIMES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE TO PROTECTDOWNSTREAM WATERS FROM CONSTRUCTION RUNOFF.3. UNTRENCHED SILT FENCE OR ORANGE SNOW FENCE MAY BEUSED FOR TREE PROTECTION.4. CONSTRUCTION LIMITS AND SILT FENCE ARE SHOWN OFFSETFROM PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY, WHERE APPLICABLE.5. CLEAR AND GRUB AS NEEDED WITHIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.6. EXISTING UTILITY SERVICE LINES MAY NOT BE SHOWN IN THEIRENTIRETY ON PLANS. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OFEXISTING UTILITY SERVICE LINES WITHIN THE LIMITS OFDISTURBANCE AND REMOVE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ASNECESSARY TO INSTALL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.NOTES1. REMOVAL ITEMS1.1. SAWCUT PAVEMENT1.2. REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT1.3. REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK AND PAVEMENT1.4. REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER1.5. CLEAR AND GRUB AREA1.6. REMOVE TREE1.7. REMOVE GAS METER, GAS LINE, AND SERVICE -COORDINATE WITH UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDER1.8. REMOVE ELECTRIC METER AND SERVICE - COORDINATEWITH UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDER1.9. REMOVE TRANSFORMER - COORDINATE WITH UTILITYSERVICE PROVIDER1.10. REMOVE LIGHT POLE1.11. REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING/STRUCTURE ANDFOUNDATIONS1.12. REMOVE RETAINING WALL1.13. REMOVE WATER MAIN, SERVICES, STRUCTURES,AND ALL APPURTENANCES1.14. REMOVE SIGN1.15. REMOVE AND RELOCATE COMMUNICATION SERVICE -COORDINATE WITH UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDER1.16. REMOVE SANITARY PIPE, SERVICES, STRUCTURES,AND ALL APPURTENANCES1.17. REMOVE STORM PIPE, SERVICES, STRUCTURES AND ALLAPPURTENANCES1.18. REMOVE AND REPLACE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC ANDSERVICE - COORDINATE WITH UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDER1.19. REMOVE TRUNCATED DOMES1.20. REMOVE FENCE1.21. REMOVE CONCRETE MEDIAN ON FRANCE AVE1.22. CONTRACTOR TO REPLACE AND SALVAGE STREET SIGNS2. PROTECT ITEMS2.1. PROTECT EXISTING WATER MAIN, SERVICES,STRUCTURES, AND ALL APPURTENANCES2.2. PROTECT TRANSFORMER2.3. PROTECT BENCH2.4. PROTECT UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE ANDAPPURTENANCES2.5. PROTECT EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER2.6. PROTECT EXISTING SIGN2.7. PROTECT EXISTING RETAINING WALL2.8. PROTECT EXISTING STORM PIPE, SERVICES, ANDAPPURTENANCES2.9. PROTECT EXISTING SANITARY PIPE, SERVICES,STRUCTURES, AND APPURTENANCES2.10. PROTECT EXISTING TRUNCATED DOMES2.11. PROTECT EXISTING TREE2.12. PROTECT EXISTING LIGHT POLE2.13. PROTECT EXISTING COMMUNICATION MANHOLE,SERVICES, AND APPURTENANCES2.14. PROTECT EXISTING GAS LINE AND APPURTENANCES2.15. PROTECT EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK AND PAVEMENT2.16. PROTECT EXISTING BITUMINOUS TRAIL2.17. PROTECT EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL2.18. SALVAGE EXISTING STATUE - COORDINATE WITH OWNER3. EROSION CONTROL ITEMS3.1. INLET PROTECTION - SEE DETAIL 4/C-8013.2. BIOROLL - SEE DETAIL 5/C-8013.3. SILT FENCE - SEE DETAIL 1/C-8013.4. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE - SEE DETAIL 3/C-8013.5. TREE PROTECTION - SEE NOTE 3, THIS SHEETKEYNOTES#ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCESILT FENCEINLET PROTECTIONBIOROLLTREE PROTECTIONEASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINECONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOURSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXXR 1 5 'R15'R 1 0 'R10'R10'R10'R5'R5'R5'R5'R5'R5'R5'R5'R10'R1 0 'R1 0 'R10'R64'R38'R10'R10'R2.5'R50'R3.67'R3.67'R10'R10'R5'R5'R50'PROPOSED 20' PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENTPROPOSED 20' PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENT28'5'14'26'26'26'20' 20' 20' 20' 9'18'12'9'20'20'8.5'8'6'6' 6' 6'10'10'1.11.11.11.51.11.141.11.11.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.21.41.31.21.31.41.41.41.41.41.41.81.61.61.61.161.61.61.61.61.71.81.81.101.91.101.91.132.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.12.22.22.22.22.32.32.32.32.32.42.42.42.42.42.42.42.41.11.11.111.121.121.121.122.62.62.72.72.72.72.72.72.11.11.11.1444102.72.72.81.21.21.81.51.141.161.151.161.151.161.61.61.1521.7'34.7'19.4' 42.7'36.8'35.1'49.4'49.9'29'18.4'20.6'17'131.9'66.3'66.2'43'38.7'30.1'66.6'59.6'1.172.1R2.5'R30'R30'1.129'17'8'2.92.41.61.101.21.11.15'26'1.251.3'1.21.11.12.71.410'65.5'50'65.2'2.41.130.1'29'41.5' 5'1.17WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-101 SITE PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:09:38 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED.3. DESIGN BY OTHERS ITEMS SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY.EXACT LOCATION, DETAIL, AND DESIGN BY OTHERS.COORDINATE WITH PROJECT PARTNERS TO OBTAIN RELATEDCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS/DRAWINGS.NOTES1. STANTEC DESIGN ITEMS1.1. MATCH EXISTING1.2. CONCRETE SIDEWALK - SEE STANDARD PLATE 420/C-8011.3. CONCRETE PAVEMENT - SEE DETAIL 7/C-8011.4. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - SEE DETAIL 6/C-8011.5. 2' BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT PATCH - MATCH EXISTINGSECTION1.6. B618 CURB AND GUTTER - SEE STANDARD PLATE 500/C-8011.7. SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER - SEE STANDARDPLATE 500/C-8011.8. 4" WHITE PAINT STRIPE (TYP.) - SEE DETAIL 1/C-8021.9. ADA ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP - SEE SHEETSC-803/C-8041.10. TRUNCATED DOMES - SEE SHEETS C-803/C-8041.11. TRENCH DRAIN - SEE DETAIL 3/C-8021.12. DURA TRENCH RADIUSED TRENCH DRAIN, OR APPROVEDEQUAL - SEE DETAIL 4/C-8021.13. UNDERGROUND STORMWATER SYSTEM - SEE SHEET C-5011.14. CONCRETE PAVEMENT PATCH - MATCH EXISTING SECTION1.15. UNDERGROUND PARKING EXTENTS1.16. RIBBON CURB - SEE DETAIL 5/C-8021.17. ADA ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN RAMP W/ HANDRAIL2. DESIGN BY OTHERS ITEMS - SEE NOTE 32.1. DOOR/STRUCTURAL STOOP (TYP.) - SEEARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL PLANS2.2. UNDERGROUND GARAGE ACCESS - SEEARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL PLANS2.3. STAIRS - SEE ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL PLANS2.4. SEATING WALL (TYP.) - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS2.5. FENCE - SEE ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL PLANS2.6. LIGHTS - SEE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN2.7. RETAINING WALL (TYP.) - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS2.8. RAILING - SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS2.9. PUBLIC DOG PARK - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANKEYNOTESC-101SITE PLAN#LEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEEXISTING PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYCURB AND GUTTERBITUMINOUS PAVEMENTCONCRETE SIDEWALKSEATING WALL [BY OTHERS]CONCRETE PAVEMENT2' BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT PATCHXXFENCESITE LINEWORK SHOWN BEYONDEASTERN PROPERTY LINE ISCONCEPTUAL AND SHOWN FORREFERENCE ONLY. DETAILED DESIGNAND ENGINEERING TO FOLLOWINITIAL CITY COORDINATION ONPUBLIC PARKWAY/TRAILIMPROVEMENTS. SEE LANDSCAPEPLAN FOR ADDITIONAL DESIGNINFORMATION.RETAINING WALL [BY OTHERS]PROPOSED PARKING COUNT#Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII855853854856857858 852856857 855852 853854 855855 854 856857858860859859859860 861 862 863 86 4 8 6 0 8 6 0 861862863864860856857858 859861862863853854855854855853854856858858858860859 8608588598548 5 6857 855854856860858859 857858855860 860855856 8618628638648608 6 085985885685785885586086 5 865 853854856857858859861862863864 857 860 858 859 1.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.11.31.51.31.31.31.31.21.21.41.21.21.21.21.51.51.51.51.51.31.51.71.71.71.71.71.71.71.11.11.11.21.21.21.21.21.11.71.71.71.71.21.28608588591.2859860857858859WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-201 POST CONSTRUCTION STABILIZATION PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:10:46 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONSTRUCTION SHALL HAVE A ROCK CONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE AT ALL TIME THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THEPROJECT. CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE TOPROTECT DOWNSTREAM WATERS FROM CONSTRUCTIONRUNOFF.3. CONSTRUCTION LIMITS AND SILT FENCE ARE SHOWN OFFSETTO THE PROPERTY LINE FOR CLARITY, WHERE APPLICABLE.4. CLEAR AND GRUB AS NEEDED WITHIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.5. EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALLSLOPES 4H:1V OR STEEPER.6. UNTRENCHED SILT FENCE OR ORANGE SNOW FENCE MAY BEUSED FOR TREE PROTECTION.NOTES1.1. INLET PROTECTION - SEE DETAIL 4/C-8011.2. BIOROLL - SEE DETAIL 5/C-8011.3. SILT FENCE - SEE DETAIL 1/C-8011.4. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE - SEE DETAIL 3/C-8011.5. TREE PROTECTION - SEE NOTE 3, THIS SHEET1.6. EROSION CONTROL BLANKET - SEE DETAIL 2/C-8011.7. PERMANENT STABILIZATION (TYP.) - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANKEYNOTES#C-201POST CONSTRUCTIONSTABILIZATION PLANLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITSILT FENCEINLET PROTECTIONBIOROLLEROSION CONTROL BLANKETPERMANENT STABILIZATIONTREE PROTECTIONEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOURPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900CONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAINSTORM MANHOLESTORM CATCH BASIN►►SANITARY SEWERIIWATERMAINSANITARY MANHOLECLEANOUTHYDRANTGATE VALVE►►►►STORM SEWERSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-202 SWPPP 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:11:13 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-202SWPPPIN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 21 OF THE GENERAL PERMIT AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE STORMWATERASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY UNDER THE NPDES, THE PREPARER OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS TRAINEDUNDER THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL CERTIFICATION PROGRAM. MICHAELHIMMERICH CERTIFICATION IN DESIGN OF SWPPP IS VALID THROUGH MAY 31ST, 2027.THE ADJACENT TABLE INDICATES THE ESTIMATED MATERIAL QUANTITIES NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE TEMPORARY ANDPERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THIS SWPPP AND ON THE CONSTRUCTIONDRAWINGS. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS WILL BE INSTALLED/CONSTRUCTEDWHEN NECESSARY AS CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES PROGRESS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.MAINTAIN AND REPLACE BMPs DURING THE EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT AS REQUIRED TO CONTINUE SWPPP COVERAGE DURINGCONSTRUCTIONNOTE: QUANTITIES ON PLAN SUPERCEDES LISTQUANTITIES IN A DISCREPANCYSWPPP DOCUMENTSINSPECTIONSIMPAIRED WATERS, SPECIAL WATERS, AND WETLANDSESTIMATED BMP QUANTITIES AND INSTALLATION SCHEDULECERTIFICATIONPROJECT NAME: EDINA MACY'S IMPROVEMENTSPROJECT LOCATION: 7235 FRANCE AVE S, EDINA MINNESOTA 55435PROJECT TYPE: RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WITH STORM AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTSTOTAL AREA DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION: APPROXIMATELY 7.93 ACRES. THE TOTAL SITE AREA ISAPPROXIMATELY 8.12 ACRES.ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION DATES: FALLS 2024 - FALL 2025CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE/PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS:THE PROPOSED PROJECT RESULTS IN A ±0.90 ACRE NET INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WITHIN THE LIMITS OFDISTURBANCE.THE SITE ULTIMATELY DRAINS TO, AND IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF, LAKE EDINA, NORTH CORNELIA LAKE, AND SOUTHCORNELIA LAKE, WHICH ARE ALL LISTED AS IMPAIRED WATERS FOR NUTRIENTS. THERE ARE CURRENT APPROVEDTMDLS FOR THE LISTED BODIES OF WATER FOR NUTRIENTS.A PRIVATE ONSITE STORM SEWER SYSTEM THAT CONVEYS RUNOFF TO AN UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEMTHAT IS SIZED TO MEET CITY AND WATERSHED STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS. A STORM LIFT STATION IS UTILIZEDFOR DISCHARGE TO THE PUBLIC STORM INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE EAST OF THE SITE.PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SITE (OWNER): ENCLAVE COMPANIESCONTACT: PATRICK BRAMACONTACT PHONE: 763-412-7609CONTACT EMAIL: PATRICK.BRAMA@ENCLAVECOMPANIES.COMPARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP (CONTRACTOR): TBDCONTRACTOR: TBDCONTRACTOR PHONE: TBDCONTRACTOR EMAIL: TBDCONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A CHAIN OF RESPONSIBILITY WITH ALL OPERATORS ON THE SITE FORINCORPORATION INTO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT TO ENSURE THAT THE SWPPP WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AND STAY INEFFECT UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IS COMPLETE (THROUGH FINAL STABILIZATION AND NOT SUBMITTAL).CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF PERSONNEL TRAINING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERMITFOR INCORPORATION INTO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEENDETERMINED. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING A FINAL SWPPP DOCUMENT, CONTAINING THEINFORMATION REQUIRED ABOVE, AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.THE SWPPP IS COMPOSED OF, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE BELOW PROJECT DOCUMENTS. THESE DOCUMENTS SHALLBE KEPT ON THE PROJECT SITE AT ALL TIMES THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. THE SWPPP SHALL BE AMENDED BYTHE PERSON RESPONSIBLE TO INCLUDE ANY DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO ENSURE ADHERENCE TO THE GENERALPERMIT.EDINA MACY'S IMPROVEMENTS CIVIL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS BY STANTEC DATED APRIL, 2024EDINA MACY'S IMPROVEMENTS STORMWATER MANAGMENT PLAN BY STANTEC DATED APRIL, 2024RECORD RETENTION - THE SWPPP, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BEKEPT ON-SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION; THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BYREFERENCE, AND A COPY OF THE PLAN SET SHOULD BE KEPT ON-SITE WITH THE SWPPP RECORDS. THE OWNERMUST RETAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING RECORDS FOR THREE (3) YEARS AFTERSUBMITTAL OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION:1. ANY OTHER PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;2. RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION;3. ALL PERMANENT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDINGALL RIGHT OF WAY, CONTRACT, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUALMAINTENANCE; AND4. ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATERMANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.THE INSPECTION LOG WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.INSPECTOR(S): TBD - TRAINING DOCUMENTATION (PER SECTION 21.2 OF THE PERMIT) WILL BE INCORPORATED INTOTHIS SWPPP AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED. THE CONTRACTOR WILLMAKE CORRECTIONS OR REPAIRS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE PERMIT.INSPECTIONS AT THE SITE WILL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERMIT AS FOLLOWS: ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND, WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS.1. THE INDIVIDUAL PERFORMING INSPECTIONS MUST BE TRAINED AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 21.3 OF THE PERMIT.TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE SWPPP.INSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS, ANDINFILTRATION AREAS. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS MUST BE IDENTIFIED AND DATE OF CORRECTION MUST BE NOTEDAS IDENTIFIED IN SECTION 11.11 OF THE PERMIT. ANY OFFSITE DISCHARGE MUST BE DOCUMENTED ASIDENTIFIED IN SECTION 11.11 OF THE PERMIT. ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OFTHE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS. AN INSPECTION LOG IS ALSOATTACHED; THE INSPECTION LOG AND SWPPP MUST BE KEPT ON-SITE FOR THE DURATION OF THECONSTRUCTION PROJECT.AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE COMPLETED DURING EACH INSPECTION:-RECORD DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTION.-RECORD RAINFALL RECORDS SINCE THE MOST RECENT INSPECTION.-INSPECT THE SITE FOR EXCESS EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION.-INSPECT THE SITE FOR DEBRIS, TRASH, AND SPILLS.-INSPECT TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DEVICES.-INSPECT CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES FOR SEDIMENT TRACKING ONTO PUBLIC STREETS.-RECORD RECOMMENDED REPAIRS AND MODIFICATIONS TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS.-RECOMMEND ANY NECESSARY CHANGES TO THIS SWPPP.-RECORD REPAIRS AND MODIFICATIONS IMPLEMENTED SINCE PREVIOUS INSPECTIONS.-INSPECT THE ADJACENT STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER FOR SEDIMENT, LITTER, AND CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR MUST UPDATE THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE JOBSITE BINDER AND SITE MAPS, TOREFLECT THE PROGRESS OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND GENERAL CHANGES TO THE PROJECT SITE. UPDATESSHALL BE MADE DAILY TO TRACK PROGRESS WHEN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES OCCUR: BMP INSTALLATION,MODIFICATION OR REMOVAL, CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES (E.G. PAVING, SEWER INSTALLATION, ETC), CLEARING,GRUBBING, GRADING, OR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STABILIZATION.THE CONTRACTOR MAY UPDATE OR MODIFY THE SWPPP WITHOUT ENGINEER APPROVAL IN AN EMERGENCYSITUATION TO PREVENT SEDIMENT DISCHARGE OR PROTECT WATER QUALITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELYRESPONSIBLE TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PERMIT AND PROTECTION OF DOWNSTREAM WATER QUALITY.PRIOR TO ANY SITE DISTURBANCE, AND AS REQUIRED AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, ANY PERMIT REQUIREDEROSION PREVENTION MEASURES AND THE SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES (INLET PROTECTION, CONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE, SILT FENCE, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, BIOROLL) SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS WILLBE INSTALLED AT THE SITE.ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS WILL BE STABILIZED WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER THECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY (WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIODEXCEEDING 7 CALENDAR DAYS) OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. STABILIZATION WILL BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY.EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST HAVE TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION (SLASH MULCH, EROSION CONTROL BLANKET,SEED) OR PERMANENT COVER YEAR ROUND.CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS,HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES THAT MINIMIZE EROSION WHEN PRACTICAL.THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH THAT DRAINS WATERFROM A CONSTRUCTION SITE, OR DIVERTS WATER AROUND A SITE, MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEETFROM THE PROPERTY EDGE, OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE TO ANY SURFACE WATER. STABILIZATION MUSTBE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS OF CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER. PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITHTEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION, PHASING, AND SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION:BMP AND EROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION SEQUENCE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS:1. CONSTRUCT STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, CONCRETE WASHOUT PIT, AND INSTALL SILT FENCE.2. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AT EXISTING STORMWATER CULVERTS AND INLETS.3. PREPARE TEMPORARY STORAGE, PARKING, AND PHASING AREAS.4. CONSTRUCT AND STABILIZE DIVERSIONS AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS/BASINS.5. PERFORM CLEARING AND GRUBBING OF THE SITE, IF APPLICABLE.6. PERFORM MASS GRADING, ROUGH GRADE TO ESTABLISH PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERNS.7. BEGIN EXCAVATION OF PERMANENT STORMWATER BASIN AREAS. SEE SEQUENCING BELOW FOR ADDITIONALINFORMATION.8. START CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING PAD AND STRUCTURES.9. INSTALL SMALL UTILITIES (GAS, ELECTRIC, PHONE, CABLE, ETC.).10. PAVE CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALK, AND PARKING LOT/ DRIVEWAYS.11. TEMPORARILY SEED WITH PURE LIVE SEED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. DISTURBED AREAS THAT WILL BEINACTIVE FOR 14 DAYS OR MORE AS REQUIRED BY NPDES OR PERMIT.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST MINIMIZE SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURBAND GUTTER SYSTEMS AND STORM SEWER INLETS. THE FOLLOWING MEASURES WILL BE TAKEN AS SEDIMENTCONTROL PRACTICES IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENTS FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS:1. INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS PRIOR TO LANDDISTURBING ACTIVITIES.2. SILT FENCING, BIOLOGS, OR OTHER SEDIMENT CONTROL SURROUNDING TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES.3. VEHICLE TRACKING BMP AT CONSTRUCTION SITE ENTRANCE/EXIT. STREET SWEEPING SHALL BE PERFORMEDIF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT TRACKING. TRACKED SEDIMENTMUST BE REMOVED FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES BOTH ON AND OFFSITE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY PERTHE PERMIT.4. STREET SWEEPING IS NOT TO BE USED AS A PRIMARY BMP FOR SEDIMENT TRACKING. IF SEDIMENT IS TRACKEDOFFSITE, WORK WILL CEASE UNTIL PROPER EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES AREINSTALLED AND/OR BEING MAINTAINED TO PREVENT TRACKING BEYOND THE SITE'S PERIMETER (CONTAINMENTAREA). ALL STREET SWEEPING MUST BE PERFORMED UTILIZING A PICK-UP SWEEPER. IF NECESSARY WATERWILL ALSO BE USED TO CLEAN UP THE STREETS PRIOR TO BEING SWEPT TO ENSURE THEY ARE FULLYCLEANED.THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE IF POLLUTION CONTROL DEVICES REQUIREMAINTENANCE, REPAIR, OR REPLACEMENT:-IF SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS SILT FENCE ARE FILLED TO 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, REMOVE ALLSEDIMENT WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DETECTION OR NOTIFICATION.-IF INLET PROTECTION DEVICES APPEAR PLUGGED WITH SEDIMENT, ARE FILLED TO 1/3 CAPACITY, OR HAVESTANDING WATER AROUND THEM, REMOVE THE SEDIMENT AND CLEAN OR REPLACE THE FILTER WITHIN 24 HOURSOF DETECTION OR NOTIFICATION.-IF THE GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE(S) ARE FILLED WITH SEDIMENT EITHER REPLACE THE ENTRANCE ORADD ADDITIONAL GRAVEL WITH 24 HOURS OF DETECTION OR NOTIFICATION.-IF SEDIMENT FROM THE SITE IS OBSERVED ON ADJACENT STREETS OR OTHER PROPERTIES, THE INSPECTOR SHALLIDENTIFY THE SOURCE AND DISCHARGE LOCATION OF THE SEDIMENT AND INSTRUCT TO IMPLEMENT ADDITIONALEROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THOSE LOCATIONS TO PREVENT FUTURE DISCHARGES.-IF BUILDING MATERIALS, CHEMICALS, OR GENERAL REFUSE IS BEING USED, STORED, DISPOSED OF, OR OTHERWISEMANAGED INAPPROPRIATELY, CORRECT SUCH DEFECTS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DETECTION OR NOTIFICATION.-IF EXCESSIVE SEDIMENTS OR DEBRIS ARE OBSERVED AT THE FLARED END SECTION OUTFALLS, THE INSPECTORSHALL DETERMINE THE SOURCE AND DISCHARGE LOCATIONS OF SUCH MATERIALS. IF THE DISCHARGE HASOCCURRED ON THE PROPERTY, REMOVE THE SEDIMENTS AND DEBRIS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION ANDCORRECT THE SOURCE OF SUCH MATERIALS AS DIRECTED BY THE INSPECTORSOLID WASTE:SOLID WASTE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COLLECTED ASPHALT AND CONCRETE MILLINGS, FLOATING DEBRIS,PAPER, PLASTIC, FABRIC, CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS AND OTHER WASTE, INCLUDING ALL TRASHONSITE, MUST BE REGULARLY DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT AND ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCEMUST BE PROPERLY STORED INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENTS, TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHERDISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGE ANDDISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MCPA REGULATIONS.CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT/VEHICLES:EXTERNAL WASHING OF TRUCKS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OFTHE SITE. RUNOFF MUST BE CONTAINED AND WASTE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF. NO ENGINE DEGREASING ISALLOWED ON SITE. REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS SHALL BETAKEN. ADEQUATE SUPPLIES MUST BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS; CONDUCTFUELING IN A CONTAINED AREA UNLESS INFEASIBLE.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA:CONCRETE WASHOUT WILL BE PERMITTED ON-SITE; CONTRACTOR SHALL FOLLOW ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FORCONCRETE WASHOUT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLIDWASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUT OPERATIONS. LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUT WASTES MUST NOT CONTACT THEGROUND AND THE CONTAINMENT MUST BE DESIGNED TO PROHIBIT RUNOFF FROM THE WASHOUTOPERATIONS/AREAS. LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITHMPCA RULES. A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY THAT REQUIRES SITEPERSONNEL TO UTILIZE THE PROPER FACILITIES FOR CONCRETE WASHOUT AND DISPOSAL OF WASHOUT WASTES.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVISE SWPPP TO INDICATE WASHOUT LOCATION ONCE THE LOCATION HAS BEENDETERMINED.FERTILIZERS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS MUST BE UNDER COVER TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTSOR PROTECTED BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.PORTABLE TOILETS MUST BE POSITIONED SO THAT THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT BE TIPPED OR KNOCKED OVER.SANITARY WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY.POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURESPROJECT INFORMATIONEROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLGENERAL SWPPP NOTESDEWATERING IS ANTICIPATED TO BE REQUIRED DURING TRENCHING FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTORSHALL COMPLY WITH PERMIT SECTION 10.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR DEWATERING.THIS SWPPP SHALL BE AMENDED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERMIT AS NECESSARY TOINCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED, OR TO ADDRESS SITUATIONS PERSECTION 6.1 OF THE PERMIT.THIS SWPPP SHALL BE AMENDED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERAL PERMIT TO INCLUDETEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS, IF THEY BECOME NECESSARY. BASINS, IF DESIGNED BY THE CONTRACTOR,SHALL ACCOMMODATE NO LESS THAN 3,600 CUBIC FEET OF LIVE STORAGE PER ACRE OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGEAREA. BASIN OUTLETS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO WITHDRAW WATER FROM THE SURFACE OF THE BASIN, PREVENTSHORT-CIRCUITING AND THE DISCHARGE OF FLOATING DEBRIS. BASINS SHALL HAVE A STABILIZED EMERGENCYOVERFLOW LOCATION AND BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO THE EXTENTPRACTICAL.FINAL STABILIZATION:ALL PERVIOUS AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION AS DESIGNATED WILL RECEIVE VEGETATIVE COVERACCORDING TO THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED VEGETATIVE TIME SCHEDULE. FINALSTABILIZATION WILL OCCUR WHEN THE SITE HAS A UNIFORM VEGETATIVE COVER WITH A DENSITY OF 70% OVER THERESTORED PERVIOUS AREAS. ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS(SUCH AS SILT FENCE) MUST BE REMOVED AS PART OF THE SITE FINAL STABILIZATION. ALL SEDIMENT MUST BECLEANED OUT OF CONVEYANCES AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS IF APPLICABLE. NOTICE OFTERMINATION (NOT) MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF FINAL STABILIZATION.THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF, AND ULTIMATELY DISCHARGES TO, LAKE EDINA, NORTH CORNELIALAKE, AND SOUTH CORNELIA LAKE, IMPAIRED BODIES OF WATER. LAKE EDINA IS LOCATED WEST OF THE PROJECTLOCATION AND IS LISTED AS IMPAIRED FOR NUTRIENTS. NORTH AND SOUTH CORNELIA LAKE IS LOCATED NORTHWESTOF THE PROJECT LOCATION AND IS LISTED AS IMPAIRED FOR NUTRIENTS. DISCHARGE TO AN IMPAIRED WATERREQUIRES IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 23.1 OF THE PERMIT AS INCORPORATED INTO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT.THE PROJECT SITE DISCHARGES TO AN INFILTRATION BASIN FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRIOR TO THE ULTIMATEDISCHARGE POINT ONSITE. THE PROJECT WILL NOT IMPACT WETLANDS.SITE SOILS - SITE SOILS ARE SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. THIS PROJECT IS NOT LOCATED IN A KARST AREA.SOIL MAPIMPAIRED WATERS MAPSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII►►► ►IIIIIIIIIII►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII855860 865 86 5 853854856857858859861862863864855853854856857858852856857 855852 853854 855855 854 856857858860859859859860 861 862 863 86 4 8 6 0 8 6 0 861862863864860856857858859861862863853854855853854856858857857857858857858 860857 858859855854856 855854856857855856855854856857860 860 858 858 859 859859 857858859855860860859 860860 857858859 8618628638648608 6 0859858856857858FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:63.39FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:58.01FG:57.39FG:56.84FG:64.27FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:57.88FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:60.50FL:55.63FL:56.07FL:56.24FL:56.88FL:57.03FL:57.94FL:58.30FL:62.77FL:62.68FL:62.65FL:63.42FL:63.49FL:62.87FL:62.91FL:64.76FL:64.38FL:63.40FL:63.00FL:62.84FL:62.36FL:62.64FL:62.00FL:62.13FL:62.19FL:61.00FL:60.42FL:60.34FL:60.33FL:60.27FL:60.41FL:60.33FL:60.22FL:60.00FL:59.89FL:59.89FL:59.85FL:59.75FL:59.70FL:59.73FL:60.22FL:60.40FL:60.13FL:60.28FL:59.56FL:59.50FL:58.18FL:58.08FL:57.37FL:57.33FL:57.75FL:57.46FL:57.98FL:59.33FL:56.86FL:57.06FL:57.26FL:57.39FL:57.43FL:57.35FL:57.28FL:56.39FL:56.28FL:56.33FL:57.32FL:57.32FL:56.43FL:55.96FL:58.22FL:57.71FL:57.25FL:57.39FL:57.21FL:57.21860857 858859 857 858 859 857857858858859FG:57.98FG:60.84FG:58.00FG:58.01FL:60.40FG:60.48FG:54.11FG:60.42FG:60.50ME:64.86ME:64.81ME:63.32ME (FL):64.80ME (FL):58.241.8%3.6%3.7% 4.5 % 1 .5%3.1%2.3% 2.2%1.0%1.2%1.9%4.1%1.5%2.0%2.2%2. 3% 2. 3% 1.5% 1. 9 %1.7%1. 1 % 4.4% 1.4 % 1.8%1.2%1.4%1.5%1.1%3.9 %1.5%1.5%2.1%1.2%2.7%2.8%1.9%2.0%2.9%1.9%1.7%3.0%1.6%1.8% 4.7%3.6%1.6%1.0%1.0%1.8%1.8%1.7%2.2%1.5%5.3%2.1%1.7%6.8%3.7%3.5%1.2%2.0%2.9%1.1%1.2% 3. 3% 2. 8 %1.2%2.3%4.4%1.5%1.5%1.5%1.5%3.5% 1.6% 1.7% 1.9%1.6%1.3%1.6%1.6%1.5%1.5%1.6%1.7%4.9%4.3% 3.8% 1.6%1.7%1.2%1.1% 1.3% 1.5%3.0%1.5%FG:60.50FG:60.50FG:52.56FG:52.56FG:56.62FG:55.45FG:53.93FG:54.80FG:56.16FG:56.62FG:56.34FG:56.43FG:60.50FG:59.79FG:52.71FG:53.69FG:56.62FG:53.08FG:53.91FG:56.62FG:56.62FG:54.11FG:53.97WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-301 GRADING PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:12:30 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS AT MATCH POINTS ARE BASED ONINTERPOLATED POINT TO POINT SURVEY DATA. CONTRACTOR ISRESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING CONNECTION POINTS PRIOR TOINSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY ENGINEER IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY OF ANY FIELDDISCREPANCIES. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKINGNECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS IN THE FIELD FORCONSTRUCTIBILITY, REGULATORY COMPLIANCE (ADA), POSITIVEDRAINAGE, AND TO ENSURE SMOOTH TRANSITIONS TO FIELDCONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REWORK OFA DISCREPANCY THAT IS NOT COMMUNICATED TO THEENGINEER IN WRITING.3. CONTRACTOR MUST IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE OWNER ANDENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR CONFLICTS IN THECONTRACT DOCUMENTS BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. NOFIELD CHANGES OR DEVIATIONS ARE TO BE MADE WITHOUTPRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER. FAILURE TONOTIFY OWNER AND ENGINEER OF AN IDENTIFIABLE CONFLICTBEFORE PROCEEDING WITH INSTALLATION RELIEVES OWNERAND ENGINEER OF ANY OBLIGATION TO PAY FOR A RELATEDCHANGE ORDER.NOTESC-301GRADING PLANLOT LINEEASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEEXISTING EASEMENT LINEEXISTING PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYLEGENDPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900EXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOURSURFACE GRADE & FLOW DIRECTIONSURFACE SLOPE (H:V) & FLOW DIRECTION3.0:11.00%( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040GRADING LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSFLOW LINE ELEVATIONFINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONFL=9XX.XXFG=9XX.XXSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►857IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII8" GV8" PVC8" PVC8" PVCWET TAP AND CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERMAINPER CITY STANDARDSVERIFY INVERT, LOCATION,SIZE, AND MATERIALIN FIELDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIWET TAP AND CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERMAINPER CITY STANDARDSVERIFY INVERT, LOCATION,SIZE, AND MATERIALIN FIELD8" PVC6" PVC6" PVC6" HYDRANT6" GV8" GV8"X6" TEE8" PVC855860 86 5 865 853854856857858859861862863864855853854856857858852856857 855852 853854 855855 854 8568 5 7 858860859859859860 861 862 863 86 4861862863860856857858859861862863 864853854855853854856858858859860857858859858857860858859 855854856856856855854856857860 858 859 858859855860858 861862863855854 860857857 8608 6 0859858856857858 56 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%358 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%85 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%89 LF OF 42" RCP @ 0.04%36 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%15 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%45 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%55 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%17 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%248 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%43 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%27 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%49 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%74 L F O F 8 " P V C @ 2 . 0 0 %5 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%18 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%SSMH 05RIM=861.67PR. 8" INV IN=846.00 (SW)EX. 33" INV IN=844.08 (NW)PR. 42" INV OUT=844.08 (E)SSMH 04RIM=861.2342" INV IN=844.06 (W)42" INV OUT=844.06 (E)SSMH 08RIM=860.168" INV IN=851.81 (W)8" INV IN=851.81 (S)8" INV IN=855.20 (N)8" INV OUT=851.71 (E)SSMH 03RIM=858.6542" INV IN=843.93 (W)42" INV OUT=843.83 (S)SSMH 01RIM=857.78EX. 33" INV OUT=843.70 (SE)42" INV IN=843.77 (N)8" INV IN=844.10 (SW)SSMH 02RIM=857.2242" INV IN=843.80 (N)8" INV IN=845.50 (W)42" INV OUT=843.80 (S)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=856.10 (S)SAN CO 10RIM=863.318" INV IN=846.36 (S)8" INV OUT=846.36 (NE)SSMH 07RIM=860.328" INV IN=846.75 (S)8" INV IN=846.75 (W)8" INV OUT=846.65 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=846.46 (N)SSMH 09RIM=860.148" INV IN=855.20 (W)8" INV IN=855.20 (N)8" INV OUT=852.68 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=847.09 (N)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=852.11 (N)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=855.92 (E)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" INV OUT=846.60 (E)SSMH 06RIM=856.498" INV IN=845.68 (W)8" INV OUT=845.58 (NE)8" SANITARY SEWER SERVICEVERIFY LOCATION, INVERT, MATERIAL,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANSPROPOSED PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENTPROPOSED PUBLIC SANITARY EASEMENT8" 45° BEND8" PVC8" PVC8" GV8" 45° BEND8" PVC21.7'20.6'30'►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ►INSTALL 8' WIDE, 4" THICK EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENEINSULATION CENTERED OVER SANITARY SERVICEINSTALL 8' WIDE, 4" THICKEXTRUDED POLYSTYRENEINSULATION CENTEREDOVER SANITARY SERVICEEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-401 UTILITY PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:13:56 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, INVERT, ANDMATERIAL OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS TO UTILITY MAIN,STUBS, AND BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.3. MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION AT ALL UTILITYCROSSINGS.NOTESC-401UTILITY PLANLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING SANITARY MANHOLEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING WATER VALVEWVDYHEXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAIN►►►►STORM SEWER►►SANITARY SEWERIIWATERMAINSTORM MANHOLESTORM CATCH BASINSANITARY MANHOLECLEANOUTHYDRANTGATE VALVEPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900CONSTRUCTION LIMITSSEE INSET A/C-402:FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION - SEEPLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACTLOCATIONSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKINGLARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANE►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►857IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII6" HYDRANT4" GV4" GV4" GV4" GV4" GV4" GV4" GV4" GV8" PVC8" PVC8" PVC8" PVC8" PVC 8" PVC6" PVC6" PVC8" PVC8" PVC4" PVC4" PVC8" PVC4" PVC4" PVC8" PVC8" PVC8" PVC8" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC4" PVC6" PVC6" PVC4" DOMESTIC WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS4" FIRE WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS4" DOMESTIC WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS4" FIRE WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS4" FIRE WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS4" DOMESTIC WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS6" GV8" 45° BEND8" 45° BEND8" 45° BEND8" 45° BEND8" 45° BEND8" 45° BEND8"X6" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE8"X4" TEE6" 45° BEND6" 45° BENDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII8" PVC 8" GV6" PVC6" PVC6" GV6" HYDRANT8"X6" TEE8" PVC8" GV8" PVC4" FIRE WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS8" GV8" PVC6" GV6" PVC8" GV8" GV855855 854 8568 5 7 861862863861862863864860859 855856857860 858 859 85885986186286386013.5'14'20.8'4" DOMESTIC WATER SERVICEVERIFY INVERT, MATERIAL, LOCATION,AND SIZE WITH MEP PLANS10.8'►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ► ► ► ► ► ►17'17'6" PVC6" GV6" HYDRANT8"X6" TEEFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONSEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACT LOCATIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONSEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACT LOCATIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONSEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACT LOCATIONFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONSEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACT LOCATIONWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-401 UTILITY PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:14:02 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, INVERT, ANDMATERIAL OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS TO UTILITY MAIN,STUBS, AND BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.3. MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION AT ALL UTILITYCROSSINGS.NOTESC-402WATERMAIN INSETLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 20 ft.204020EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING SANITARY MANHOLEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING WATER VALVEWVDYHEXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAIN►►►►STORM SEWER►►SANITARY SEWERIIWATERMAINSTORM MANHOLESTORM CATCH BASINSANITARY MANHOLECLEANOUTHYDRANTGATE VALVEPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900CONSTRUCTION LIMITSFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION - SEEPLUMBING PLANS FOR DESIGN AND EXACTLOCATIONSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIFRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLETEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAXXXX►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►855860 86 5 865 853854856857858859861862863864855853854856857858852856857 855852 853854 855855 854 856857858860859859859860 861 862 863 86 4 8608 6 0859858856857858►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►861862863860856857858859861862863 864 853 854855 853854856858857860859858 857860858859854856855854856857860 858 859 858857855860 860861862863864860865STMH 109RIM=859.8412" INV IN=856.85 (NW)8" INV IN=854.53 (W)10" INV IN=854.29 (E)30" INV IN=850.07 (N)30" INV OUT=850.07 (S)STMH 100CONNECT TO AND INSTALLSTRUCTURE OVER EXISTINGSTORM SEWER PIPERIM=854.57PR. 12" INV IN=850.06 (W)EX. 30" INV OUT=849.92 (E)STMH 111RIM=858.8012" INV IN=854.32 (N)10" INV IN=854.24 (S)21" INV IN=852.13 (E)24" INV OUT=852.13 (W)STMH 110RIM=860.1912" INV IN=856.48 (NW)24" INV IN=850.89 (E)12" INV IN=850.89 (N)30" INV OUT=850.89 (S)STMH 102RIM=853.7312" INV IN=850.33 (W)12" INV OUT=850.33 (N)STMH 101RIM=854.5712" INV IN=850.11 (S)12" INV OUT=850.11 (E)CBMH 115RIM=856.9012" INV IN=854.38 (N)12" INV IN=854.38 (W)18" INV OUT=854.38 (S)CBMH 117RIM=858.5412" INV OUT=855.11 (S)RD 06RIM=855.7210" INV OUT=855.00 (N)RD 07RIM=856.2312" INV OUT=855.00 (S)RD 04RIM=855.7210" INV OUT=855.00 (W)RD 03RIM=855.728" INV OUT=855.00 (E)RD 02RIM=855.728" INV OUT=855.00 (S)RD 01RIM=855.728" INV OUT=855.00 (S)RD 5RIM=856.2310" INV OUT=855.00 (W)SYSTEM INLET 210" INV IN=854.80 (E)SYSTEM INLET 68" INV IN=854.63 (N)SYSTEM INLET 78" INV IN=854.63 (N)TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTION 2RIM=858.2312" INV OUT=857.00 (SE)SYSTEM INLET 830" INV IN=849.68 (N)CBMH 107RIM=856.8012" INV IN=852.45 (W)12" INV OUT=852.45 (N)CBMH 108RIM=856.8012" INV OUT=853.00 (E)CBMH 106RIM=856.2812" INV OUT=853.00 (N)CBMH 105RIM=856.50LIFT STATIONSEE SHEET C-810RIM=857.5812" INV IN=842.27 (N)8" INV OUT=836.00 (E)SYSTEM OUTLET 112" INV OUT=842.30 (S)SYSTEM INLET 412" INV IN=852.87 (S)SYSTEM INLET 512" INV IN=852.10 (S)TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTION 1RIM=858.2312" INV OUT=857.00 (SE)26 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%52 LF OF 30" RCP @ 0.75%10 LF OF 10" PVC @ 2.00%19 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%19 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%23 LF OF 8" PVC @ 2.00%36 LF OF 10" PVC @ 2.00%10 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.50%34 LF OF 12" PVC @ 2.00%7 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%38 LF OF 10" PVC @ 2.00%166 LF OF 24" RCP @ 0.75%44 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.50%100 LF OF 18" RCP @ 0.75%44 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.75%27 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%18 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%6 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%6 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.50%254 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.50%21 LF OF 18" RCP @ 0.75%109 LF OF 30" RCP @ 0.75%►►►►PROPOSED STORMTRAP ST2DOUBLETRAP 10-0 (ST-101)SYSTEM INVERT = 840.0100-YR HWL = 847.1FOOTPRINT = 16,466 SFSEE SHEETS C-807-C-809►►►►►►►►►►CBMH 104RIM=857.75156 LF OF 21" RCP @ 0.75%10 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTION 3RIM=854.7412" INV OUT=853.51 (N)STMH 112RIM=856.8318" INV IN=853.30 (E)12" INV IN=853.30 (S)21" INV OUT=853.30 (W)59 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.75%CBMH 118RIM=855.6012" INV OUT=853.90 (N)STMH 113RIM=856.8312" INV IN=853.46 (S)18" INV IN=853.46 (NE)18" INV OUT=853.46 (W)23 LF OF 18" RCP @ 0.75%STMH 114RIM=857.2518" INV IN=853.63 (N)18" INV OUT=853.63 (SW)53 LF OF 12" RCP @ 0.75%CBHM 116RIM=858.3612" INV IN=854.78 (N)12" INV OUT=854.78 (S)CBMH 119CONNECT TO BUILDING PLUMBINGVERIFY LOCATION ANDSIZE WITH MEP PLANSRIM=859.96STMH 103RIM=857.378" INV IN=851.60 (W)12" INV OUT=851.60 (E)21 LF OF 12" PVC @ 2.00%TRENCH DRAINDURA TRENCH OR APPROVED EQUALSEE DETAIL 4/C-802TRENCH DRAINSEE DETAIL 3/C-802TRENCH DRAINDURA TRENCH ORAPPROVED EQUALSEE DETAIL 4/C-802CBMH 120RIM=856.4312" INV OUT=852.00 (E)23 LF OF 12" RCP @ 2.00%SYSTEM INLET 912" INV IN=851.55 (W)WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-501 STORM SEWER PLAN 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:15:20 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION 1. SEE SHEET C-002 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES.2. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 6" PERFORATED DRAINTILE 1.5'BELOW BASE STONE INVERT FOR ALL UNDERGROUNDSYSTEMS. DRAINTILE TO BE SPACED AT 10' O.C..NOTESC-501STORM SEWER PLANLEGEND( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.408040EASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERIGHT OF WAY LINESECTION LINEQUARTER LINEPROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING STORM SEWER MANHOLEEXISTING STORM SEWER INLETEXISTING STORM SEWER INLET►►►►STORM SEWER►►SANITARY SEWERIIWATERMAINSTORM MANHOLESTORM CATCH BASINSANITARY MANHOLECLEANOUTHYDRANTGATE VALVEEXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING WATERMAINPROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR901PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR900GRADING LIMITSUNDERGROUND STORMWATER SYSTEMSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department 1C-801SILT FENCE MACHINE SLICEDNOT TO SCALE2C-801EROSION CONTROL BLANKET INSTALLATIONNOT TO SCALE4C-801INLET PROTECTION CATCH BASIN INSERTNOT TO SCALE3C-801ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITNOT TO SCALEDIRECTION OFSURFACE FLOWANCHOR TRENCH INSTALLATION:1. DIG 6" X 6" TRENCH2. LAY BLANKET IN TRENCH3. STAPLE AT 1.5' INTERVALS4. BACKFILL WITH NATURAL SOIL ANDCOMPACTOVERLAP END JOINTS MINIMUMOF 6" AND STAPLE OVERLAPAT 18" INTERVALSOVERLAP LONGITUDINALJOINTS MINIMUM OF 6"STAPLE DENSITY SHALL BE AMINIMUM OF 3 U-SHAPED 8",11 GAUGE METAL STAPLES PERSQUARE YARD (THIS MAY VARY ASDIRECTED BY THE CITY)ANCHOR TRENCH (SEE DETAILAND NOTES BELOW)ISOMETRICSEE GENERAL NOTESFOR BLANKET TYPESTAPLEBACKFILLEROSIONCONTROLBLANKETANCHOR TRENCH DETAIL6"6"12" TO 36"DIRECTION OF RUNOFFSTEEL FENCE (T-POST) MINIMUM 5'LONG, MAX6' SPACINGATTACH FABRIC TO POST WITH MINIMUM 3 ZIP TIES (50 LB TENSILE) PER POST IN TOP 8" OF FABRICGEOTEXTILE FABRIC OVERLAP FABRIC 6" ANDFASTEN AT 2' INTERVALSLAY FABRIC IN TRENCHFABRIC ANCHORAGE TRENCH BACKFILLTRENCH WITH TAMPED NATURAL SOILSUPPORT POST ANCHORAGE WITHTAMPED NATURAL SOILSECTION6"MIN.24" MIN.POSTEMBEDMENT8"MIN.NOTES:1. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED UNDER ROCK TO STOP MUD MIGRATIONTHROUGH ROCK.2. ENTRANCE MUST BE MAINTAINED TO PREVENT SEDIMENTATION ON PUBLICROADWAYS.3. FUGITIVE ROCKS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ADJACENT ROADWAYS DAILY ORMORE FREQUENTLY AS NECESSARY.ROAD1" - 2" WASHED ROCK18" MIN. CUT OFF BERM TOMINIMIZE RUNOFF FROM SITEISOMETRICISOMETRICCURB AND GUTTEROVERFLOW IS 1/2 OF THECURB BOX HEIGHTDEFLECTOR PLATEOVERFLOW IS 1/2 OF THECURB BOX HEIGHTOVERFLOW AT THE TOP OF THEFILTER ASSEMBLYCURB10" FILTER ASSEMBLYHIGH-FLOW FABRICWIMCO ROAD DRAIN CG-3067 HIGH FLOWINLET PROTECTION CURB AND GUTTERMODEL OR APPROVED EQUAL.7C-801CONCRETE PAVEMENTNOT TO SCALECOMPACTED SUBGRADE6" CONCRETE PAVEMENT (TYPE 3F52A)6" MNDOT CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE(100% CRUSHED)6C-801BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTNOT TO SCALECOMPACTED SUBGRADE1.5" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE(SPWEA340B) PER MNDOT 23608" MNDOT CLASS 5 AGGREGATEBASE (100% CRUSHED)BITUMINOUS TACK COATPER MNDOT 23572" BITUMINOUS NON-WEAR COURSE(SPNWB330B) PER MNDOT 23605C-801BIOROLLNOT TO SCALE1" X 2" X 18" LONG WOODEN STAKES AT1' 0" SPACING MAXIMUM.FLOWBIOROLL45°8" - 10"SECTIONNOTE: IF PLACED ON PAVED SURFACE, DO NOT STAKE INTO SURFACE.CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE BIOROLL IS PROPERLY FUNCTIONING ATLEAST DAILY AND AS REQUIRED BY THE SWPPP/NPDES PERMIT, IFAPPLICABLE.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:24 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-801DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department 1C-802TYPICAL PAVEMENT MARKINGSNOT TO SCALESEE PLAN4"15"2'-8"2'-8"9"15"4"4"15"28"8"TYPICALPAVEMENT STRIPINGTRAFFIC ARROWTYPICAL LETTERNOTES:1. PAINT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A THICKNESS OF 22 WET MILS AND 15 DRY MILS.2. PAINT SHALL BE NON-REFLECTIVE WHITE PAINT FOR ALL TYPICAL PAVEMENTMARKINGSTYPICALCROSSWALK PANELSEE PLAN2'2'-8"2C-802STANDARD PARKING LOT SIGNSNOT TO SCALESTOPDO NOTENTERPARKINGVEHICLE IDREQUIREDUP TO $200 FINE FORVIOLATIONVANACCESSIBLER5-130"X30"W11A-224"X24"R1-130"X30"R7-8m ACCESSIBLE PARKING - 12"x18"R7-8bP VAN ACCESSIBLE - 12"x6"ORR1-5C18"X24"NOR7-1 MODIFIED NO PARKING ANY TIMEEXCLUDE ARROW - 12"x18"PARKINGANYTIME3C-802CONCRETE TRENCH DRAINNOT TO SCALE6" MNDOT CLASS 5AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHEDSUBGRADE PREPARATIONNEENAH R-4990-CX TRENCHDRAIN W/ TYPE P GRATE#4 EPOXY COATED DEFORMED BARPROVIDE 3" CLEAR COVERCONCRETE TRENCHSLOPE BOTTOM OF TRENCH TOWARDDISCHARGE POINT AT 1% (TYP.)FLOWFLOWSLOPE 1%SECTIONPROFILEDRAIN45° PVC BENDOUTFLOW4C-802DURA TRENCH TRENCH DRAINNOT TO SCALE5C-802RIBBON CURBNOT TO SCALE6" CLASS 5AGGREGATE BASE(100% CRUSHED)BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTSECTION14" DROP ACROSSWIDTH OF CURBSIDEWALK26"7"CONCRETEDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:29 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-802DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:34 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-803DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:38 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-804DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department 1C-805STORM SEWER MANHOLENOT TO SCALE7"VARIES 12"36" - 48"5" MIN.27"VARIES48" TYP.3"GROUT BOTTOM OF MANHOLE TO A MINIMUM OF 1/2DIAMETER AT PIPE AND SLOPE GROUT 2" TOWARD INVERT.MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE PLACED SO THATOFFSET VERTICAL PORTION OF CONE IS FACINGDOWNSTREAM FOR ALL PIPES UP TO 24''. PLACESTEPS ON RIGHT HAND SIDE WHEN FACING DOWNSTREAM FOR ALL PIPES 24'' AND OVERNEENAH R1642 FRAME AND COVER OR EQUALLETTERED, "STORM SEWER", WITH 2 CONCEALEDPICK HOLESMINIMUM OF 2 MAXIMUM OF 5 CONCRETEADJUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL BED OF MORTARBETWEEN EACH RING. 1 RING WITH MORTAR = 0.2'.INSTALL INTERNAL I&I BARRIER EULL'S ORAPPROVED EQUAL. ONLY PLASTIC SHIMS SHALL BEALLOWED IF NEEDED. MORTAR SHALL BE AIRENTRAINED UNDERGROUND UTILITY MORTARWHICH MEETS OR EXCEEDS ASTM C270 AND ASTMC387.MANHOLE STEPS, COPOLYMER POLYPROPYLENEPLASTIC, WITH 1/2" GRADE 60 STEELREINFORCEMENT OR EQUAL, 16" ON CENTER. (NOSTEPS ALLOWED IN UPPER 27" BARREL.)ALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE PROFILEGASKETS PER ASTM C443PIPE SHALL BE CUT OUT 2" FROM INSIDE FACE OFWALL.MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS 6" FOR STRUCTURES 14'IN DEPTH OR LESS. INCREASE THICKNESS 1" FOREACH ADDITIONAL 4' OF DEPTH, AND REINFORCE INACCORDANCE OF MNDOT STANDARD PLATE 4011E.DOG HOUSES MUST BE GROUTED BOTH INSIDE ANDOUTSIDE OF STRUCTURE. WASTERSTOP GROUTRING (RCP) OR WATERTIGHT BOOT (PVC) REQUIREDGROUTFLOWPLANSECTION2C-805CATCH BASIN MANHOLENOT TO SCALEAC2VARIES48" TYP.5" MIN.3"VARIES 12"PIPEDIA.BA MINIMUM OF 2 MAXIMUM OF 5 CONCRETEADJUSTMENT RINGS WITH FULL BED OF MORTARBETWEEN EACH RING. 1 RING WITH MORTAR = 0.2'.INSTALL INTERNAL I&I BARRIER EULL'S ORAPPROVED EQUAL. ONLY PLASTIC SHIMS SHALL BEALLOWED IF NEEDED. MORTAR SHALL BE AIRENTRAINED UNDERGROUND UTILITY MORTARWHICH MEETS OR EXCEEDS ASTM C270 AND ASTMC387.6" MIN. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLESLAB, REINFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOTPLATE 4020.TOP OF BARREL SECTION UNDER TOP SLAB TOHAVE FLAT TOP EDGE SEALED WITH 2 BEADS OFRAMNEK OR APPROVED EQUAL. EXTERNAL WRAP(GATOR WRAP OR APPROVED EQUAL) REQUIREDALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE PROFILEGASKETS PER ASTM C4434" PVC DRAINTILE CONNECTION (IF IDENTIFIEDON THE PLANS). PIPE SHALL BE CUT OFF 2"FROM INSIDE FACE OF WALL.MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS 6" FOR STRUCTURES 14' INDEPTH OR LESS. INCREASE THICKNESS 1" FOR EACHADDITIONAL 4' OF DEPTH, AND REINFORCE INACCORDANCE OF MNDOT STANDARD PLATE 4011E.GROUTDOG HOUSES MUST BE GROUTED BOTH INSIDE ANDOUTSIDE OF STRUCTURE. WASTERSTOP GROUTRING (RCP) OR WATERTIGHT BOOT (PVC) REQUIRED4" PVC DRAINTILE (IF IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANS). NOBENDS GREATER THAN 45° SHALL BE ALLOWEDPLANSECTIONCLDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:43 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-805DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:48 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-806DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:54 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-807DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:16:59 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-808DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:17:01 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-809DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department INFLUENT PIPE12" RCPELEV. 842.27NOTE:1. REFER TO PLAN VIEW FOR TRUE ORIENTATION OF PIPING.2. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING PENETRATIONS THROUGHSTRUCTURES TO ACCOMMODATE ELECTRICAL AND CONTROLS WIRING ASNEEDED. LOCATE AND SIZE PENETRATIONS AS DIRECTED BY OWNER AND INACCORDANCE WITH PUMP AND INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURERRECOMMENDATIONS.BOTTOM OF MANHOLE ELEV. 835.00GROUND ELEV. 857.33INFLUENTPIPE4" DIPPIPE CL ELEV. 851.938" C900 PVC84" INSIDE DIAMETERCONCRETE MANHOLE W/MONOLITHIC BASE4" CHECK VALVE W/ WEEPHOLE (IN VERTICALPOSITION)PUMP AND MOTORTOP OF SLABELEV. 857.58FROGSMOUTHALUMINUM ACCESSDOOR W/SAFETYGRATE FOR FALLPROTECTIONRUBBER BOOT (TYP.ALL OPENINGS)STAINLESS STEEL LIFTINGCHAINPUMP CABLESCONCRETE FILLET SLOPED TOWARDS PUMP.PLACE CONCRETE FILLET IN ACCORDANCEWITH PUMP SUPPLIER RECOMMENDATIONS.4" FLANGED DIPDISCHARGE PIPE2" GALV. STEEL PUMPGUIDE RAILS4" DIP BASE ELBOW4" DIP(FL x PE)8" C900 PVC12" MIN GRANULARBEDDING MATERIAL1111GROUT PAD UNDER BASE ELBOW, INACCORDANCE WITH PUMPSUPPLIER RECOMMENDATIONS1C-810STORMWATER LIFT STATIONNOT TO SCALEACCESS DOOR4" CHECK VALVE W/ WEEPHOLEHIGH LEVEL FLOATRADAR LEVEL TRANSMITTERPUMP CONTROL ELEVATIONSELEV.FUNCTION842.30 PUMP START837.00 PUMP STOP836.00 LOW LEVEL ALARM FLOATBOAT ANCHOR WITHSTAINLESS STEEL CABLEFOR FLOAT MOUNTING.RAISE WEIGHT CLEAR OFPUMP SUCTION.ALUMINUM TRASH BASKET WITHGUIDE RAIL AND LIFTING CHAIN3"4" X 6" DIP MJREDUCER12"MINLOW LEVEL FLOATB1A TRASH BASKETDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\C-801 DETAILS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 2:17:06 PM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241DATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONC-810DETAILSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAX XXXEdina Cobra Fire TruckEdina Cobra Fire TruckEdina Cobra Fire Truck 47.6611.27521.5Edina Cobra Fire TruckOverall Length47.660ftOverall Width8.697ftOverall Body Height10.417ftMin Body Ground Clearance0.848ftTrack Width7.918ftLock-to-lock time4.00sWall to Wall Turning Radius42.300ftWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\2 EXHIBITS\VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENTS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 11:53:32 AM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION ( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 30 ft.306030EX-1FIRE TURNING MOVEMENTSSubmitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FRANCE AVE. S (COUNTY RD. NO. 17)LOT 2PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 60,000FFE: 860.5LOT 1PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 28,910FFE: 860.5LOT 4PROPOSED BUILDINGGSF : 37,204FFE: 860.5LOT 3PROPOSED BUILDING GSF : 49,102FFE: 860.5LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING LARGE VEHICLE TEMPORARY PARKING FIRE ACCESS LANE (20'x150')FIR E A C C E S S R O A D T U R N A R O U N DFIRE ACCESS LANEFIRE ACCESS AREAX XXXWB-67 - Interstate Semi-TrailerWB-67 - Interstate Semi-Trailer 5327.9Max 68.5° HorizMax 10° Vert343.5445.52.523.5417.44.219.5WB-67 - Interstate Semi-TrailerOverall Length73.501ftOverall Width8.500ftOverall Body Height13.500ftMin Body Ground Clearance1.334ftMax Track Width8.500ftLock-to-lock time6.00sMax Steering Angle (Virtual)28.40°EX-2TRUCK TURNINGMOVEMENTSWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALLCOOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FORTHE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:U:\193806086\LDev\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\2 EXHIBITS\VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENTS 06086.dwg 4/25/2024 HIMMERICH, MICHAEL DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/25/2024 11:53:36 AM PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY: APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:733 MARQUETTE AVESUITE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ON FRANCE 7235 FRANCE AVE S. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435193806086MDH JRA JRA04/26/20241GOPHER STATE ONE CALLTWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGDATE: DESCRIPTION:ISSUE NO.: 04/26/2024 CITY SUBMITTAL 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION ( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 30 ft.306030Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department Submitted 4/26/2024 Planning Department FIRST LEVEL100'-0"SECOND LEVEL120'-0"THIRD LEVEL133'-6"ROOF LEVEL255'-0"FOURTH LEVEL147'-0"FIFTH LEVEL160'-6"SIXTH LEVEL174'-0"SEVENTH LEVEL187'-6"EIGHTH LEVEL201'-0"NINTH LEVEL214'-6"TENTH LEVEL228'-0"ELEVENTH LEVEL241'-6"BRICK AND STONE 38% OF SOUTH FACADEFIRST LEVEL100'-0"SECOND LEVEL120'-0"THIRD LEVEL133'-6"ROOF LEVEL255'-0"FOURTH LEVEL147'-0"FIFTH LEVEL160'-6"SIXTH LEVEL174'-0"SEVENTH LEVEL187'-6"EIGHTH LEVEL201'-0"NINTH LEVEL214'-6"TENTH LEVEL228'-0"ELEVENTH LEVEL241'-6"BRICK 30% OF WEST FACADEFIRST LEVEL100'-0"SECOND LEVEL120'-0"THIRD LEVEL133'-6"ROOF LEVEL255'-0"FOURTH LEVEL147'-0"FIFTH LEVEL160'-6"SIXTH LEVEL174'-0"SEVENTH LEVEL187'-6"EIGHTH LEVEL201'-0"NINTH LEVEL214'-6"TENTH LEVEL228'-0"ELEVENTH LEVEL241'-6"BRICK AND STONE 26% OF NORTH FACADEFIRST LEVEL100'-0"SECOND LEVEL120'-0"THIRD LEVEL133'-6"ROOF LEVEL255'-0"FOURTH LEVEL147'-0"FIFTH LEVEL160'-6"SIXTH LEVEL174'-0"SEVENTH LEVEL187'-6"EIGHTH LEVEL201'-0"NINTH LEVEL214'-6"TENTH LEVEL228'-0"ELEVENTH LEVEL241'-6"BRICK 27% OF EAST FACADED E S I G NG R O U P767 N. EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 190ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114651.642.9200WWW.POPEDESIGN.COMPOPE DESIGN GROUP5/3/2024 1:08:29 PMA112BRICK AND STONEMATERIAL CALC43230-24043ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MN05/03/241/16" = 1'-0"A1121SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION1/16" = 1'-0"A1122WEST BUILDING ELEVATION1/16" = 1'-0"A1123NORTH BUILDING ELEVATION1/16" = 1'-0"A1124EAST BUILDING ELEVATION GLASSMETALMETALMETALMETALMETALFIBER CEMENT60' - 0"MANF. STONE/BRICKMATERIAL CALCS - NORTH ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING30%27%FIBER CEMENTGLASSMETALMETALMANF. STONE/BRICK60' - 0"MATERIAL CALCS - SOUTH ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING30%42%METALMANF. STONE/BRICKPROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:27:53 AMA302-NEEXTERIOR ELEVATION MATERIALCALCS223701.00ESG ESG05/01/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A302-NE1NORTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A302-NE2SOUTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS 60' - 0"MANF. STONE/BRICKGLASSMETALMETALMATERIAL CALCS - WEST ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING22%37%GLASSMANF. STONE/BRICKMETAL60' - 0"MATERIAL CALCS - EAST ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING20%34%PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:27:53 AMA303-NEEXTERIOR MATERIAL CALCS223701.00ESG ESG05/01/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A303-NE1WEST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A303-NE2EAST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS 60' - 0"MANF. STONE/BRICKGLASSMETALGLASSMATERIAL CALCS - NORTH ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING59%32%MANF. STONE/BRICKMETALFIBER CEMENTGLASSMANF. STONE/BRICKGLASSMETALGLASSMATERIAL CALCS - NORTH ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING45%48%60' - 0"PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:32:46 AMA302-NWMATERIAL CALCS223701.00ESG ESG05/02/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A302-NW1NORTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A302-NW2SOUTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS 60' - 0"MANF. STONE/BRICKMETALFIBER CEMENTGLASSMETALMATERIAL CALCS - EAST ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING31%35%60' - 0"GLASSMANF. STONE/BRICKMANF. STONE/BRICKMETALMETALMATERIAL CALCS - WEST ELEVATIONMANF. STONE/BRICKGLAZING72%56%PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:32:47 AMA303-NWMATERIAL CALCS223701.00ESG ESG05/03/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A303-NW1EAST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A303-NW2WEST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS MANF. STONE/BRICKMETALGLASSMETAL60' - 0"MATERIAL CALCS - NORTH ELEVATIONGLASS35%MANF. STONE/BRICK27%METALMANF. STONE/BRICKFIBER CEMENTGLASS60' - 0"MATERIAL CALCS - SOUTH ELEVATIONGLASS20%MANF. STONE/BRICK45%PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BYCHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:39:02 AMA302-SEMATERIAL CALCS221701.00ESG ESG05/06/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A302-SE1NORTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A302-SE2SOUTH ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS 60' - 0"MANF. STONE/BRICKMETALFIBER CEMENTGLASSMATERIAL CALCS - EAST ELEVATIONGLASS 36%MANF. STONE/BRICK 28%60' - 0"GLASSMANF. STONE/BRICKCONCRETEMETALFIBER CEMENTMATERIAL CALCS - WEST ELEVATIONGLASS 25%MANF. STONE/BRICK 25%PROJECT NUMBERDRAWN BY CHECKED BYORIGINAL ISSUE:REVISIONS:KEY PLAN5/8/2024 11:39:02 AMA303-SEMATERIAL CALCS221701.00ESG ESG05/07/24ENCLAVE MIXED-USEDEVELOPMENT ON FRANCEENCLAVEMIXED-USEDEVELOPMENTON FRANCEEDINA, MNPUD SUBMISSION4/26/2024No. Description Date3/32" = 1'-0"A303-SE1EAST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS3/32" = 1'-0"A303-SE2WEST ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCS Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 Table of Contents A. Preface What are Design Experience Guidelines? 1. Introduction page 1 Placemaking Through the Lens of Experience 2. The Vision pages 3-5 The Greater Southdale District Experience 3. The Framework pages 7-11 The 200’ x 200’ Grid Street Rooms and Seams 4. The Guidance pages 13-35 Public Realm Experience Transitions and Connections Street Room Typologies 5. Implementing and Measuring Experience page 37 Ten Things to Remember Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page c APreface What are Design Experience Guidelines? Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page A1 For nearly four years, a Work Group comprised of Edina residents and business leaders contemplated the future evolution of the Greater Southdale District, using the notion of “experience” as the foundational element from which to shape the district over the next 50 years. The first phase of the Work Group’s efforts consisted of developing Working Principles that would guide the group’s efforts into subsequent stages as well as suggest a dialog for considering new introductions within the district. Phase Two translated these principles into an urban design framework plan that proposed enhanced connections across existing major streets, introduced a new block framework to encourage walkability, and posed design strategies to create an improved public realm and promote higher quality, pedestrian-oriented development. The broader experience the urban design framework strives to achieve is the creation of a Greater Southdale District that connects seamlessly between the existing urban and residential fabric, maximizes the development potential of each site, enhances walkability and livability, and encourages interaction among current and future residents, businesses, and institutions. The urban design framework is the foundation to the Greater Southdale District Plan, a part of the City of Edina 2018 Comprehensive Plan. The Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines is a companion to those documents, outlining high-level planning and design strategies for public realm, site, and building design supporting the desired experience outcomes. The Design Experience Guidelines sets baseline guidance for developers, designers, City of Edina staff, Planning Commissioners and members of the City Council when proposing, designing or evaluating proposed introductions within the Greater Southdale District. Use of the Design Experience Guidelines The Design Experience Guidelines apply to proposed development within the Greater Southdale District and former Pentagon Park, and should be referred to when embarking on new development or redevelopment. The Design Experience Guidelines also offer direction for new public realm features and the reimagining of existing public infrastructure. The document does not stand alone; it must be considered as part of a larger set of district goals, urban design framework and patterns, and policy guidance outlined in the Greater Southdale District Plan and the 2018 City of Edina Comprehensive Plan. Together, these documents set forth A. Preface What are Design Experience Guidelines? Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page A2 City expectations for the future form of the Greater Southdale District, and inform all potential projects within the district. The Design Experience Guidelines are not a substitute for City of Edina zoning codes and ordinances, but instead provide substantial background for developers and design teams and a framework from which to approach proposed projects within the district. The Design Experience Guidelines clarify the dimensional characteristics of eight different Street Room typologies that together form the experience within the district. The physical qualities of each street room’s height and width, and shaped by the architecture of the district, informs the design of the public realm on streets that connect and bind the human experience of the district. These physical characteristics also shape the experience of transition – transitions from existing single-family neighborhoods and transitions into and out of the district, outlining gradual changes in building scale within these critical transition areas to bridge between one- and two-story residences and the greater intensity of the Greater Southdale District. In conjunction with the Urban Design chapter of the Greater Southdale District Plan, this document provides both a philosophical and practical framework to facilitate discussion among the City, development teams, and the community when considering proposals for change within the district. During the recommended Sketch Plan review process (described on page 70 of the Greater Southdale District Plan), the Design Experience Guidelines are intended to facilitate dialog about broader district goals, patterns and connections, building massing, programmatic opportunities and shared public realm connectivity. Dialog at this point in the review of a proposal requires imagination, looking beyond the immediate site to imagine the creation of a consistently positive human experience, requiring a proposal to recognize the ways in which it influences that experience on adjacent and nearby sites. Once a proposal progresses beyond the Sketch Plan, the document is used as a test of outcomes and touchstone to measure how every proposal meets the desired district experience. Further specific design details related to landscaping, curb and intersection design, stormwater management and daylighting, lighting standards, street furniture, and a host of other factors related to the experience of the district will be described in future versions of this or a similar document as the need for direction related to those features becomes better understood. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page A3 1 Introduction Placemaking Through the Lens of Experience Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 1 Places link our past to the future. Within every community there exists a context of memory and identity. That context is made up of the choices/ decisions of the past and is inseparable from the physical identity of place; how buildings and streets look, and what parks and open space feel like. These choices are integral to what a place will become. By describing the evolving Greater Southdale District through experience criteria shaped by the physical context, a framework emerges for how streets will be structured, the relationship of open space to buildings, and how together the designed environment will support the desired experience outcome. To expand this basic idea into contemporary design is to be both democratic and innovative. What it means to be democratic is to encourage everyone to contribute to the possibilities of a new experience within the notion that its comes from what is unique about living in Edina. To be innovative is to reach beyond current conditions to create an extraordinary place and experience. Placemaking is not an act of invention... it is the study of how a unique place in world works, in combination with bringing contemporary design into alignment with the existing characteristics. The tools created via a collaborative process of engagement with the Greater Southdale Area Work Group takes this approach to the planning of the overall district, with the intent of providing the community, civic leaders, developers and designers the inspiration to think about the possibilities of this place in new and enterprising ways. 1. Introduction Placemaking Through the Lens of Experience In the making of the Greater Southdale District we must: • Support the public realm • Create equity throughout • Respect the larger context • Express the collective nature of community • Attend to all street rooms equally • Represent the whole in all actions • Put the collective before individual expression • Act to support the next 200 years of the Edina community — Architecture Field Office, 2018 Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 2 2 The Vision Aspirations for the Greater Southdale District Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 3 Background and Context Collectively, for nearly four years, the Greater Southdale Area Work Group has focused on building upon our community’s history of innovation, engagement and community commitment to create a vision for the possibilities of the Greater Southdale District. This work has culminated in the Greater Southdale District Plan (adopted December 2018) and the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. Change is inevitable within the district. In the past five years alone, over 1,500 new housing units have been constructed or are underway, along with myriad other commercial projects. This is a tremendous opportunity in time, and in the broader evolution of our community. We can transform the physical environment of the Greater Southdale District from a traditional car-oriented suburban commercial district with its sea of surface parking lots and ‘superblocks,’ into a vibrant place whose character is neither urban nor suburban, but blends the best characteristics of both to create a place that is uniquely of Edina. This new model will support all modes of transportation (cars, buses, bikes, scooters, and pedestrians) and serve future generations of Edina residents, employers, and visitors. It will complement, not compete with, the single family neighborhoods that have historically defined much of the community’s fabric. Within the broader 750+ acre Greater Southdale District, and the former Pentagon Park, there exist a remarkable variety of assets. This plan connects those assets with a new street grid that overlays a human scale and allows access via a variety of transportation options. The plan sets forth a strategy to bridge between adjacent single family neighborhoods and the more commercially focused areas of the district. And, it uses public realm infrastructure— including parks, plazas, green streets, woonerfs, and waterways that manage stormwater—as the connective tissue that gives the district its unique identity. Together, these attributes will set the stage for a remarkable daily experience for those who live, work and play within the Greater Southdale District. Aspirations for the Future Greater Southdale District The Greater Southdale Work Group summarized the overall districtwide vision and land use strategies as part of the District Plan. These aspirations, which follow, are at the foundation of design policy parameters and the overall experience we are striving to shape as the Greater Southdale Area evolves over the next 50 years. 1. Imagine Greater Southdale District evolution organized around human activity, with vibrant pedestrian-focused streets, beautiful parks and public spaces, and endearing and enduring buildings where: • A sense of invention is expected from new introductions, both public and private, that build on the district’s spirit of innovation. • Its role as regional and local center for living, shopping, working, learning, entertainment, hospitality, and medical services is enhanced. • Other Edina neighborhoods, near and distant, benefit from investment in the district and the evolution of each parcel. • Investment in the public realm is reflected by a commensurate investment as private parcels evolve. • Public and civic services accommodate a growing and diverse district and community population. • Transitions at the district’s edges recognize compatible use and scale and neighboring uses are perpetuated on their terms. 2. The Vision The Greater Southdale District Experience Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 4 2. Make the Greater Southdale District the model of healthy urban living where: • The district’s form encourages healthy living habits, particularly through walking. • The design of buildings and spaces, both public and private, attract the widest possible range of the district’s population. • Storm water is a valued resource by making it part of the experience of the district. • Emissions and pollutants are mitigated through the introduction of significant tree canopy and limiting idling vehicles on streets, creating a more inviting walking experience along the district’s streets. • Sustainable solutions result in a stock of healthy buildings that compel healthy activity for their occupants. • Public features mitigate impacts of non-local infrastructure, especially to contain the ill effects of adjacent highways. 3. Invent sustainable infrastructure matching the district’s sense of innovation where: • Mutually-supportive and forward-looking infrastructure is the norm, looking beyond baseline utilitarian functions of a single site to create a broadly supportive district infrastructure. • Infrastructure aligns with the creation of public space in the district, sharing space and resources that result in compelling, attractive and high-functioning civic spaces. • Care for and perpetuation of public infrastructure anticipates daily human activity in all seasons. 4. Create neighborhoods of activity within the broader mixed-use patterns of the district where: • Logical boundaries based on reasonable walking distances are established, with major streets as seams binding the activity of each side into an inviting and accessible public space. • Focal points of public activity are found within each neighborhood. • Key community services and facilities are present and help define the fabric of the District. • Core services are delivered within each neighborhood or in an adjacent neighborhood. • Neighborhoods are linked along street and park corridors highlighted by visible human activity. 5. Offer a spectrum of living opportunities integrated through the district where: • Housing orients to a variety of income levels and household types. • Ownership options constitute a significant portion of the living opportunities in the area. • “Missing Middle” living opportunities (duplexes, triplexes, side-by-side or stacked townhouses, rowhouses with multiple units, and small buildings with four to six apartments) allow a broader range of Edina residents, workforce members and others to consider relocating to the District. • Buildings for living strongly orient to the public spaces of each neighborhood within the District. 6. Expand significantly the number and extent of parks and public spaces where: • Opportunities for the introduction of another large signature public space complement the programming and activities available at Centennial Lakes. • An extension of the Promenade to Strachauer Park links neighbors and activity to the district. • New promenades on the East and West edges of the District create movement corridors for pedestrians and bicyclists and serve as vital places for a transition between neighborhoods and the District. • Parks and publicly accessible spaces are clearly visible and directly accessible from the public realm. • Spaces for visible human activity and occupation, either public or publicly accessible, occur on every block. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 5 7. Encourage district evolution based on incremental change and the creation of a great pedestrian experience where: • A basic framework of streets and blocks encourages pedestrian activity and well-considered buildings. • A rich variety of public or publicly accessible spaces are woven into the experience of the district. • Sites and buildings support a pedestrian experience first, with storage of cars not a focus. • Development on each site links to adjacent streets and to neighboring sites to create continuous, safe, and inviting pedestrian experiences. 8. Build (or plan for) a street network encouraging pedestrian movement across and through the district where: • Walkable block lengths (200 feet) 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. 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 within 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 10. Expect the delivery of high quality, well-designed buildings and sites where: • Spaces on sites are considered for people first, including connections between sites; then the ways structures are placed; and then places to store cars are found. • Visible human activity is prominent and integrated at every site. • People are brought to the streets via major building entries oriented to major streets. • Storm water remains visible as an amenity, allowing it to become a central part of the experience of each site. 11. Frame development guidance for evolution where: • Development review includes the desired experience, not solely quantitative thresholds. • Accommodation of adjacent and near parcels are considered in the evolution of a single parcel. • Early reviews focus on ideas, patterns and relationships, not specific and engineered plans, with that part of the review process based in dialog, not presentation and reaction. • Demonstrations of quality and especially quality from a long-term perspective are baseline considerations. • Collaboration leads to a superior result, with the community’s expectations clearly framed as part of the deliberation. • Flexibility is not a right, but rather the natural by-product of a fair exchange for benefits, collaboration, and quality in development. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 6 3 The Framework Building Blocks to Support the Vision Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 7 3. The Framework Building Blocks to Support the Vision THE 200’x200’ GRID There is an expectation of the street grid: it is democratic, it is uniform, it is connective. The uniform grid and the buildings that line the grid give the city its form. The space between buildings is used for access for pedestrians and vehicles; for entrance into both public and private buildings; and to provide light, air, and common green or social spaces. To break down the scale of the ‘superblocks’ that currently characterize the district’s overall land use framework, three distinct street grid patterns were considered, to inform what how the Greater Southdale District might transform into a more uniform and connected community. Small Portland blocks (200’ x 200’) were compared to the long blocks of New York City (200’x600’) and the larger square blocks of Minneapolis (350’ x350’). The Work Group focused on Portland as a model because of its walkability, and the scale of its buildings resulting from the 200 foot restriction on the length of building elevations fronting the public realm. Further studies analyzed land ownership patterns, size of property and generally how connections could made through the superblocks. It was concluded that the 200’ x200’ foot system was more adaptable to variety of site conditions supporting a more engaging public realm and opportunities for a better community experience. Considerations Width of street Sunlight in public spaces View corridors Building scale – height, length and footprint Transparency at street level Landscape, lighting and street furniture Streets and public realm paving Courtyards and pocket parks Cultural context – pride of place, historical framework Framework Vision: Block Organization Based on the Portland 200’ x 200’ square block layout This diagram overlays the general dimensions of the Portland block model on our primary test sites. Based on existing conditions, variations can occur in the nominal 200 by 200 square grid. N Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 8 c 180,000 200,000 180,000 200,000 Existing Sites: The criteria for buildings sites: Large parking area serving 1 story building Sites that are critical to the overall success of development in the district Important connections that would extend the public realm assets such as the Promenade Under utilized land that can be repurposed to serve the public realm goals of the district : Potential Building Sites This diagram illustrates those parcels within the Greater Southdale Area and adjacent Pentagon Park that are potential redevelopment opportunities. Criteria to measure the opportunity inherent in these sites include: • Sites that currently have large, dominating surface parking lots. • Sites that are critical to the overall success of development in the district. • Important connections that would extend existing public realm assets such as the Promenade. • Underutilized land that can be repurposed to serve the public realm goals of the district. NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 9 Potential Building Sites The diagram at right illustrates how the basic principle of a 200’ x 200’ grid can be applied nominally on potential redevelopment sites throughout the district without consideration of property line. It is recognized that land ownership will influence the ultimate form of the grid. Other considerations influencing block pattern: • Building scale • Public realm connections • Connections through blocks • Pedestrian-oriented street intersections The Space Between Buildings As a result of the 200’ x 200’ block pattern, the space between buildings becomes an important asset in shaping the overall sense of landscape and continuity of public realm throughout the district. Because the superblocks have primary responsibility for serving the vehicular traffic needs of the district, access to the smaller blocks for drop-off, service and parking can be planned to stay at the perimeter of a block, allowing for the spaces between the remaining block to be used for a network of green spaces that support the health and wellbeing of the community. c 180,000 200,000 180,000 200,000 v The Space between Buildings: As a result of the 200x200 foot block pattern is the space between building that becomes an important asset to the overall sense of landscape throughout the district. Because the super blocks have primary responsibility for the larger traffic needs of the district, access to the smaller blocks for drop off, service and parking can be planned to stay at the perimeter allowing the spaces between the remaining block to used for pocket parks, gardens, play areas and many other activities that support the health and well being of the community. The “space between” Buildings –as places and connections to larger community pathways ParksPocket parksRecreationPlay areasGardensStorm water managementWet landsWater ways : Opportunities for the “Space Between” buildings to become places and connections to larger community pathways: • Parks • Pocket Parks • Recreation • Play Areas • Gardens • Stormwater Management • Wetlands • Waterways c 180,000 200,000 180,000 200,000 v Block Pattern: The basic principal of a 200’X200’ grid was applied nominally throughout the district without consideration of property line. It is recognized that land owner ship will influence the ultimate form of the grid. Considerations: building scale public realm connections through block connections Pedestrian oriented street intersections (see intersection diagram) : N N Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 10 STREET ROOMS AND SEAMS With changes in the way people are living in cities and suburban environments, it is important to seek new ways in which our communities can be experienced without sacrificing the spatial and architectural values of existing neighborhoods. Defining the way in which transitions are seen and developed, and the way each street can have a different character, use and form, puts the emphasis on the public qualities of the public realm rather than on the buildings themselves. In this way buildings can develop based on highest and best use without compromising characteristics of existing community life. Respect of context can bring about a degree of commonality where every building is not required to mirror its context but rather, support a connected and meaningful community experience. The intention in the design visioning process for the Greater Southdale District was to create a new paradigm for suburban mixed use districts, in which individual buildings respect their context and each other. The ensembles created as part of this process are Street Rooms. In this approach, the geometry of the city plays an important part in the definition of the street room, by width of street, length of block, solar orientation and axis as it relates to other grids defining other public rooms of the city like courtyard, plazas and parks. The real identity of the city is closely related to how the city is seen up close, making it possible to understand the true character of a place. It is these up close characteristics that make a city unique. This holistic approach depends on an attitude of relational subjectivity in articulating the components of each street room. This means that each wall of a building is studied as a part of the street that it faces and in conjunction with the building directly across the street. Scale, color, material and construction details are considerations in the whole composition of the street room—allowing the street to communicate a sense of place and completeness. A district full of street rooms promotes activity and social discourse while signifying the possibility of new functions. The street room is a source of sense of community even when it is not in use, thereby stabilizing the overall fabric of the public realm. Street Rooms within the Greater Southdale District Throughout the Greater Southdale District, the public realm is defined by a series of street rooms. These rooms are further defined by edges, referred to as the “seam” between the volume of the street and the form of the building—which together, create the experience at a pedestrian scale. Seams dictate the basic height of the defining street room wall (i.e. the building podium) but not necessarily the rest of the building form, allowing buildings to respond to their context on all four sides of the building and creating a form that is appropriate for each street room surrounding it. This creates variety throughout the district, and supports the notion that there are transitions between characteristics of neighborhoods that are different in scale, program and building type. As an example, transitions from single family houses to 36-foot-tall or 60-foot-tall buildings will not have the same criteria as transitions from a podium base to taller structures sitting on the podium. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 11 The following considerations all factor into the development of public realm and street rooms. These ideas should be utilized and considered by decision-making bodies when reviewing proposed development projects. • Transparency of building walls in the public realm can be both private and public. When the ground plane is connected along and through the building wall, it creates a link to experience the richness of activities in the public realm • Buildings could be sited perpendicular to streets, allowing vistas and pathways through the new street grid. • Buildings can create a very consistent form and a clear sense of place within the public realm. Each building is part of the next – both internally and externally. Regardless of building age, the continuity of scale, rhythm and materials of each building that lines the street creates a sense of room. • Continuity of building material quality is contained within each stone, brick, window pattern and cornice to define the edges of the public realm and the street room • Continuity of architectural language in the edges of shapes and rhythm of openings define a street room into horizontal and vertical forms that frame the experience of being in room – whether interior or exterior. The architectural language of the street should not be replicated but rather understood and transformed in each new building within the context of its particular location within the Greater Southdale District. • Buildings frame the public rooms of the district (parks, pocket parks, playgrounds, etc.) and should represent the scale required to meet the needs of the community. Moving through these spaces, one should easily see choices for other desired destinations. • Good street rooms provoke a culture’s spatial imagination, social discourse and creative energy. The street typologies and corresponding guidelines on building form define experience and spatial form that connects the district together. • The structure of the street rooms is organized to support residents, defining a particular place within a neighborhood and the overall district. The memory of experiences in each of these rooms provides the experience of sense of place and connects to other places within the Greater Southdale District. • Walking is a shared experience. An engaging walk can be short, long, slow, quick, or meandering – in weather that is wet, calm, windy, sunny, bright, cold, hot, or snowing – in places that appear open, closed, low, tall, long, narrow, wide or expansive. The experience of walking through the street rooms must be full of events connecting to a broader set of experiences. • The materials of the walls that make up the street room define the characteristics of the public realm. A certain part of this will depend on the age of the street, the program of the building and the design style in which they were constructed. All of these factors, in whatever form, are read and experienced in different ways and need to be delineated clearly. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 12 4 The Guidance Shaping the Greater Southdale District Experience Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 13 4. The Guidance Shaping the Greater Southdale District Experience Overlaying a new street network and street grid is a fundamental strategy in breaking down the scale of the existing massive ‘superblocks’ within the Greater Southdale District and improving the public realm experience. All new development should begin with the premise of the 200-foot-square block as the measure by which a building footprint is determined. The space between buildings are streets—which could be for cars, bikes, pedestrians only, or transformed into parks and open space. By connecting the design of streets with the concept of street rooms, the district will transform to one that is human-scaled, comfortable, green, and flexible for change and evolution over the next 50 years. While each street room and neighborhood will provide a distinctive experience, there are certain characteristics that are common to streets throughout the Greater Southdale District, helping to creating a holistic experience for pedestrians and bicyclists, transit-riders, and drivers alike. Buildings lining the public realm/street room will incorporate a mix of uses, including housing, workplace/office, cultural, community, and commercial/retail space— setting the stage for a rich variety of experiences. The overall public realm experience within the Greater Southdale District is supported by: • Consistent building setbacks that create the opportunity for an expansive public realm within the district and sub-district. • More frequent intersections to promote pedestrian connections within the district and to neighboring districts. • Distinctive sidewalks that support the pedestrian experience, separate and dedicated bikeways, and appropriate number lanes of vehicular traffic. • Wide sidewalks with places for gathering, play areas, gardens, outdoor cafes, etc. • Publicly-accessible pocket parks and courtyards along the street and sidewalk extend the public realm of the sidewalk in between buildings. • Separate and dedicated bikeways, and an appropriate number of lanes of vehicular traffic. • Integrated signage and lighting systems that offer safety, interest and diversity to the pedestrian. • Consistent signage that reflects sub-district identity to promote wayfinding within the larger Southdale District, identifying characteristics of the street and public amenities. • Pedestrian and vehicular paving (permeable) that is unique to a sub-districts streets and sidewalks. • Trees that vary in species, installed in rows or clumps, and spaced to create visual interest and promote a range of experiences such as shaded groves with benches, or a sun-dappled outdoor cafe, along the street. • Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access routes through larger blocks. • Safe, comfortable places where people can stop, view, socialize and rest. These may incorporate “landing zones” for ride sharing services such as Uber and Lyft — particularly near primary gathering places and public rooms along the Promenade, connector streets and future East and West Promenades. These places of respite should not conflict with other sidewalk uses. • Different, and defined, zones on all sidewalk: building frontage zone, street furniture zone, movement zone, and the curb. Cafes and outdoor seating can be located in the building frontage zone, extending the activity of a building to include the sidewalk. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 14 • Transit stops that are designed to provide districtwide continuity, reinforcing the qualities of the Greater Southdale District. • Integrated plantings, water features and/or art to enhance public open space. • Stormwater that is daylighted and used as a water feature or amenity, integrated into the overall experience of the street and the district. • Street parking provided at the curb to support a mix of activities for both residential and commercial activities. • Varied landscaping and street trees that create a canopy over the street. Consider the changing climate when selecting plant species with the understanding that indigenous plant materials may not always be the most appropriate choice. • Building equipment, mechanical exhaust systems and/or service areas concealed in a manner that does not detract from the pedestrian environment. • The public realm is for both summer and winter conditions and as such must be planned to be easily maintained in all conditions. Building owners and city stakeholders should plan for maintenance, operations and upkeep within the public realm. This includes prompt and thorough snow removal on every reach of the sidewalks, care and feeding of trees, landscape and decorative planters (which should be changed on a seasonal basis). Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 15 PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF THE PUBLIC REALM EXPERIENCE The following guidance is provided to assist the community, civic leaders, designers and developers in understanding the vision and baseline parameters related to both building and public realm within the Greater Southdale District. Connections • The overall strategy is to connect intersections, incorporate street typologies, and incorporate green systems to add value to the experience of the district. • The public realm is to be connected continuously north-south from Centennial Lakes, the Promenade, the Galleria, Southdale Center, Fairview Southdale, to Strachauer Park. All new development shall support that goal. • The public realm should be connected east-west from Edinborough Park to Centennial Lakes, west of France to Pentagon Park and Fred Richards Park to Highway 100 on the west. This will set up future connections to districts to the west—such as 70th and Cahill—supporting an overall vision of a more connected and integrated Edina community. • The district must be connected continuously east-west from the Cornelia neighborhood to Yorktown Park. • New north-south promenades should be created on the west side of France and east side of Xerxes as part of the broader strategy to sensitively transition to single family residential neighborhoods. • Expand Centennial Lakes Park to France Avenue… celebrate this important public amenity by making it more visible as a gateway into the district. • Create a dynamic landscape that includes water, especially stormwater expressed as part of landscape, to create public amenity spaces. • Streets within the superblocks, East and West Promenades, and extension of the Promenade north to Strachauer Park should be surfaced with pavers to promote a dominance of pedestrians and bikes over vehicles. • New parks and plazas shall be either public or publicly-accessible, not private, in nature. • Increase number of sidewalks, pathways, and smaller parks/gardens to better address mobility. Incorporate places to sit throughout the district. • New trees should provide continuity of the street room experience with canopies that are consistent with the Street Room Typology to enhance the continuity of pedestrian experience. Intersections • Street Room Typologies overlay each other, unifying the overall district experience through the recognition of unique conditions that evoke unique design responses based upon location. • Street Room Typologies connect intersections throughout the district, linking experiences together from one neighborhood to the next. • Street Room Typologies with lower façade heights take president over those with higher façade heights at these points of intersection. • The architecture of a façade of one block making up an intersection should be conceived as part of all corners of the intersection. • Crosswalks at intersections need to be an integral part of the public realm and continue the overall street room experience from one block to another. • The hierarchy of intersections will change based on an evolving context and investment in the intersection experience. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 16 Street Room Form • Building setbacks are to be considered as a part of the overall landscape and public amenities, and should be designed to create a continuous pedestrian experience along major corridors to support “pools of human activity.” • Every new development should connect all publicly-accessible spaces such as pocket parks, courtyards and plazas to the street room typology. • 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.’ • All new building façades in the district must have seventy five percent (75%) transparency at the ground level. • All building façades are prime (including parking) and must be designed accordingly. There is no back side of a building. • All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use natural materials facing the public realm. • Above 50-60 feet, glass, precast panels with brick/tile are the preferred material palette. Metal panel can be used as a secondary part of a wall system. • No building façade can be longer than 200’ without changing direction by a minimum of 90 degrees. Building Form • Ground floors should have a minimum ceiling height of 20’ for flexibility. This floor-to-floor height will allow the space to accommodate commercial, two floors of parking, or two-story townhouses. • Above-grade parking structures should be designed with flat floorplates to allow for future conversion and lined with programmable public realm space to minimize the visual impact of car storage. • Within 50-60 feet of the ground, it is preferred that rooftops be programmed to accommodate residential or public user activities (e.g. a restaurant or terrace). • Rooftops facing the Promenades must be functional and programmed to provide interest and variety along these important pedestrian spines. • All development services, including rooftop mechanical systems, should be located within buildings and should not be visible from the public realm, or semi-private and private areas of the development. The exception are rooftop-mounted solar panels, which should be located on the highest point of the buildings. • Building footprints above 60 feet should be no greater than 12,000 SF for residential use and 24,000 SF for commercial space. • Design buildings for flexibility and adaptability in the future, including use of structural systems that will allow a building’s function to fundamentally change. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 17 TRANSITION AND CONNECTIONS Within the Greater Southdale District, a new network of streets will provide both commercial and resident access to new mixed- use buildings along France and York Avenues, keeping traffic out of the adjacent single family neighborhoods. These new streets offer the opportunity for new development to more gradually transition from the scale of the existing single family neighborhoods and the commercial heart of the Southdale District. New development within transition zones is expected to balance scale and building use between these single family neighborhoods and the higher density, more commercially focused Greater Southdale District. West and East Promenades The character of the West and East Promenades, new north-south streets that run to the west of France Avenue and the east of York Avenue, to are envisioned as woonerfs—shared streets for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles. This typology creates opportunities for multiple access to buildings for both below grade parking and service, as well as temporary/short-term parking for retail and building drop offs. Within the woonerf concept, pedestrians have priority over cars, and as a shared street, cars are forced to slow down and travel with caution. Because of their organization, these streets also can support a variety of uses, with building types catered to residential uses such as townhomes, with considerations for retail space that support less intensive commercial needs of adjacent neighborhoods. The sense of scale by way of width of street to height of building is maintained by creating a street form that is no less than 60 feet high at its edges, with developments potentially increasing in height as buildings reach the edge of the boulevards, and descending in height as they move to the single family neighborhoods, providing an edge to the east and west transition zones. Primary East-West Streets East-west streets through the Greater Southdale District connect existing single family neighborhoods to the heart of the district. The design of these streets is intended to respect the neighborhood scale and context in a meaningful way, with an ample tree canopy, extensive setbacks and consistently-scaled buildings at the face of the public realm. By employing these characteristics, the landscape experience serves as a bridge, knitting together the single family residential neighborhoods and the greater intensity of the district. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6 Central Promenade Spine 66TH STREETVALLEY VIEW RD.66TH STREET69TH STREET70TH STREETHAZELTON RD.GALLAGHER DRPARKLAWN AVE76TH STREET77TH STREETMINNESOTA DR72ND STREETEDINBOROUGH WAY YORK AVENUE FRANCE AVENUE XERXES AVENUE BARRIE RD78TH STREETN Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 18 STREET ROOM TYPOLOGIES A hierarchy of streets and pathways within the district is the framework for public realm development and related building form. Each street across the district has a role in how it serves pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles in connecting sub-districts, adjacent single family neighborhoods, and the overall Greater Southdale District and creating a unified sense of place. It is the intent that street typologies define the public realm experience: the space between buildings, dimensions of building setbacks from the street, heights of facades at the building face at the street and building step backs, where the façade of the building steps back from the volume of the street room. Street Room Typology 1: Promenades and Transition Zones Promenades are new woonerf-type streets on the west side of France Avenue and on the east side of York Avenue. Within this typology, there are several different variations for new building development in these important transition zones, responding to and respecting the context of adjacent single family neighborhoods. Street Room Typology 2: Cornelia Overlay Zone With the understanding that there is special sensitivity related to new building development near the Cornelia neighborhood, this is a special zone governing the design of the public realm/street room on the east side of France Avenue between the north side of 69th Street and Gallagher Drive. Buildings within this zone will be expected to maintain the east side of the France Avenue street room, but will be of a lower overall scale than new Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6 Central Promenade Spine 66TH STREETVALLEY VIEW RD.66TH STREET69TH STREET70TH STREETHAZELTON RD.GALLAGHER DRPARKLAWN AVE76TH STREET77TH STREETMINNESOTA DR72ND STREETEDINBOROUGH WAY YORK AVENUE FRANCE AVENUE XERXES AVENUE BARRIE RD78TH STREETN Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 19 buildings at the north or south ends of France. Street Room Typology 3: New Local Streets These are new 60’ wide streets internal to existing superblocks. These streets will be constructed as new buildings are added to the district, and will help create the new network of streets and pedestrian pathways throughout the Greater Southdale District. Some of these spaces between buildings may become parks or plazas, extending the public realm. Others will become primary vehicular access for drop off and pick up, as well as access to parking and primary building services. Street Room Typology 4: Primary East-West Streets The existing 69th Street, 70th Street, Hazelton Road, Parklawn Avenue and West 76th Street are important connections through the district from east to west. This typology is intended to respect the neighborhood scale and context in a meaningful way, with an ample tree canopy, extensive setbacks and lower scale buildings at the face of the public realm. By employing these characteristics, the landscape experience of the single family residential neighborhoods is extended through the Greater Southdale District. Street Room Typology 5: The Boulevards France Avenue, York Avenue, West 66th Street and West 77th Street are the district’s gateway streets. They carry the highest traffic volumes and are intended to have higher transit volumes than any other streets within the district. These streets will have the greatest impact in conveying the overall identity of the district: a consistent 50 foot setback with a double row of trees will extend the length of these streets, while consistency in building heights along the street edge will form the edge of the street room—bridging between the lower intensity and transitional areas and the higher intensity zones within the Greater Southdale District. Street Room Typology 6: Central Spine The Central Spine comprises the existing Promenade, its potential expansion northward, and future connections to the west to Fred Richards Park. This important pedestrian network is an attractive destination for both residents and visitors alike. New development along the spine must respond to and respect this important public amenity. Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 20 The sub-district to the west side of France between 69th and Parklawn is a unique transition zone within the Greater Southdale District. Any proposed developments within this zone should be approached with special sensitivity. This means that the street experience within that zone should be perceived as connected to the Cornelia neighborhood through landscaping and trees, and buildings that gradually transition in both height and function and use between lower intensity neighborhoods to the more commercially-focused district on the east side of France Avenue. The West Promenade, a new north-south pedestrian, bike and vehicle street/woonerf that accommodates service access, is envisioned between France Avenue and the Cornelia neighborhood. This new shared street is intended to provide service access to new developments along France (keeping vehicular traffic out of single family neighborhoods), and providing a new framework to support the transition from townhouses and lower-scale residential buildings on the west side of the West Promenade, to slightly taller buildings on the east side of the West Promenade. Street Room Typology 1A West Promenade / Transition to Cornelia Neighborhood Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 21 Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 1A West Promenade / Transition to Cornelia Neighborhood As illustrated in the section above, within this transition zone, building heights will step up incrementally, from those that are adjacent to single family homes to those that are facing France Avenue to provide a more gradual transition from the residential neighborhood to the more commercially-oriented Southdale District. The street room experience within Typology 1A will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • New buildings that are adjacent to single family residential properties, on the west side of the West Promenade, should not exceed 36 feet in height. Townhomes are the preferred residential typology in this area of the transition zone. • All ground level space east of the West Promenade should have 20-foot floor-to-floor height. This dimension allows for flexibility to accommodate one level of retail space along the street, or two-story townhomes facing the West Promenade. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. • On the east side of the West Promenade, building faces should not exceed 50’ in height. Any height above that limit should step back 20 feet from the facade of the building. • On France Avenue, a 50 foot setback is required from curb to face of building with a maximum building height of 60 feet. • On individual developments, should the City choose to permit height above the 60-foot height limit, it is recommended that additional height above 60 feet step back from the face of the building by a minimum of 10 feet in depth and 12 feet in height. Street Typologies West Promenade Transition to the Cornelia Neighborhood A “Woonerf” reallocates the public right-of-way to create a place for people and plantings while accommodating slow-moving vehicles. The street is elevated so it is flush with the sidewalk, allowing for a continuous walking surface. When the street is closed for public events such as a fes tival, the area becomes a public plaza. The proposed building setbacks and building step-backs are intended to create a gradual transition in use and scale from the existing Cornelia Neighborhood on the west to France Avenue to the east. Between a transitional Street “Woonerf” is used as both a collector for neighborhood needs and a barrier against additional vehicular traffic flowing into the neighborhood. This street-park hybrid is considered as public open space and needs to be programmed. With a perpetual festival permit in place, the street becomes a venue for community events such as salsa dancing, a wine crush or a pop-up playground. Within the district it is the intention to define a series of street rooms each having their own characteristics and connections to the existing neighborhoods and other parts of the district to enhance the experience of the pedestrian creating both a sense of place and safe environment to be in. The West Promenade is intended to be a pedestrian and bicycle collector between the existing residential neighborhood. A1 Traffic Lanes 50 Foot Setback France Avenue 50 Feet West Promenade “Woonerf” (60’ wide Street) Single Family ResidenceTownhouses 36 Feet maximum 20 Foot Step Back Mixed Use Buildings 60 Feet Maximum Neighborhood Street 15 Foot Front Yard Setback60 Feet Maximum Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 22 Street Room Typology 1B West Promenade Between Parklawn and Minnesota Drive South of the zone designated as Street Room Typology 1A (where the Cornelia transition area immediately abuts single family neighborhoods), the Street Room experience shifts to respond to its changing context. It becomes one that is more commercial in nature and in concert with the expected higher intensity in the southwest quadrant the Greater Southdale District. As the West Promenade extends south into Typology 1B, it continues to serve pedestrian, vehicular and service access. Uniform building heights on each side of the West Promenade are intended to support the transition from existing multi-family housing to taller buildings at the south end of France Avenue near the gateway from 494. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 23 Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 1B West Side of France Between Parklawn and Minnesota Drive Within this zone, existing buildings are more commercial in nature and do not immediately abut single family neighborhoods. This unique condition lends itself to new development along the West Promenade that is still lower in scale, without the preference for townhomes or smaller scale buildings along one edge, as in Typology 1A. The street room experience within Typology 1B will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • Building faces at the West Promenade within Typology 1B shall not exceed 50 feet in height. Any height above that limit should step back 20 feet from the facade of the building. • All street level space shall be 20 feet, floor-to-floor in height. This dimension allows for flexibility for retail space (on France) and two-story townhomes facing the West Promenade. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. • Building faces on the east side of the West Promenade are intended to provide continuity in scale and experience from Street Room Typology 1A and from one side of the street to another. West Promenade “Woonerf” (60’ wide Street) 20 Foot Step Back 50 Feet 20 Foot Step Back Street TypologiesWest Promenade A2 A “Woonerf” reallocates the public right-of-way to create a place for people and plantings while accommodating slow- moving vehicles. The street is elevated so it is flush with the sidewalk, allowing for a continuous walking surface. When the street is closed for public events such as a festival, the area becomes a public plaza. This street-park hybrid is considered as public open space and needs to be programmed. With a perpetual festival permit in place, the street becomes a venue for community events such as salsa dancing, a wine crush or a pop-up playground. 60 Feet 105 Feet 20 Foot Step Back 2 Foot Step Back Traffic Lanes 50 Foot Setback France Avenue 60 Feet Maximum Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 24 Street Room Typology 1C East Promenade and Xerxes Avenue: Transition to Richfield Similar to the transition strategy on the west side of France Avenue, on the east side of the district, the existing Xerxes Avenue South is recast as the East Promenade to transition between the single family Richfield neighborhood to the east and the more commercially focused Greater Southdale District on the west. The general character of Xerxes is single family housing on the Richfield side and multi-family residential backed up to commercial on York Avenue. The intent of this typology is to have townhouses along the street, set back to a taller building above, creating an scale appropriate to the existing character of the street. Xerxes is bisected by Yorktown Park and Adams Hill Park, near the Southdale YMCA. When Xerxes transitions through Yorktown Park and Adams Hill Park, the street becomes more woonerf-like, without vehicular traffic. This street-park hybrid is considered as public open space and needs to be programmed. This typology extends along the north end of Xerxes between 65th and Highway 62 without the woonerf designation. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 25 The street room experience within Typology 1C will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • On both Xerxes Avenue north of 65th and on the East Promenade, a 15-foot “front yard” setback is required from curb to face of building. • Building faces at the East Promenade across the street from single-family homes shall not exceed 36 feet in height. Height above that limit shall step back 20 feet from the facade of the building, and shall not exceed 60 feet in height. Any further height shall step back an additional 20 feet, to a maximum height of 84 feet. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. • See Street Room Typology 5 for description of dimensional characteristics of new development facing York Avenue. Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 1C East Promenade and Xerxes Avenue: Transition to Richfield Street TypologiesEast Promenade Transition to the Richfield Neighborhood The East Promenade Transition on Xerxes Avenue South is between the Richfield neighborhood to the east and the Southdale District on the west. The character of the street is bisected buy Adams Place Park that is east York Avenue and the Southdale YMCA. The general character of the Xerxes is single family housing on the Richfield side and multi-family residential backed up to commercial on York Avenue. The intent of the building step back with townhouses transition to taller building creating an scale appropriate to the existing character of the street. When Xerxes transitions to Adams Place Park the character of the street becomes more Woonerf like in without vehicular traffic. This street-park hybrid is considered as public open space and needs to be programmed. With a perpetual festival permit in place, the street becomes a venue for community events such as salsa dancing, a wine crush or a pop-up playground. A3 50’ height limit East Promenade Existing Neighborhood Street Single Family Residence 36 Feet 60 Feet 20 Foot Step Back 20 Foot Step Back 15 Foot Front Yard Setback 84 Feet Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 26 Street Room Typology 2 Cornelia Overlay at France Avenue As a reflection of the scale of buildings east of the West Promenade in Street Room Typology 1A, Typology 2 extends the scale of this potential new development to the east side of France Avenue from Gallagher Drive to south of 68th Street. This strategy is intended to frame the street room experience along this corridor with similarly scaled buildings that are respectful of the nearby single family neighborhoods. The goal is to establish this zone along France as a more commercially-focused corridor (rather than residential) while employing similar height buildings as on the west side of France within the Cornelia transition zone. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 27 The street room experience within Typology 2 will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • On France Avenue, a 50-foot setback is required from curb to face of building with a building podium height of 60 feet. Above the 60-foot height limit, additional height should step back 10 feet from the face of the building, to a maximum height of 84 feet. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 2 Cornelia Overlay at France Avenue 84 Feet France Avenue 60 Feet Traffic Lanes50 Foot Setback 10 Foot Step Back Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 28 Street Room Typology 3 New Local Streets These new local streets, created as part of the strategy of breaking down the scale of the existing superblocks, will augment the current street network, providing new circulation options that can connect residents and visitors across the district, and support community life. Creating internal pedestrian walkways, with accommodation for bicycles and potentially cars, combined with existing public and private infrastructure, supports connections within and outside the block. The width of these new local streets, and the corresponding building form is based on the nature of the uses within the larger superblock structure. Streets can be lined with a mix of uses, including residential, commercial, or retail. They contain shady places to walk the dog or sit and have a coffee connecting to neighborhood parks, places of worship, and schools. Unique to the Greater Southdale District, some of these local streets may become linear parks between buildings, with vehicular access limited only to emergency responders. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 29 Street Typologies60’ Wide Connector Street Typical 60’ Wide Local Street (within super-blocks) 105 Feet 20 Foot Step Back 60 Feet 2 Foot Step Back 2 Way Traffic Plus Parking 12’ Sidewalk 12’ Sidewalk It is recommended that buildings above 60 feet step back a minimum of 20 feet when there is an opposing building at the street edge Podium Heights can vary The intent is to create a street that provides a access from roads that are bordered by France and York and are connected by east /west streets such as ParklawnAve, ParklawnCourt, Hazelton Road, W 70th, W 69th, W 65th. Internal street within the supper block provide interconnections between supper block connecting residents across the district north and south supporting potential for community space. By creating pedestrians walkways with existing public and private infrastructure thereby supporting connections within and outside the block. The street width is based on the nature of the uses within the larger super block structure. They can be lined with a mix of uses, including residential and retailwhile providing connectivity within a neighborhood. They contain shady places to walk the dog or sit and have a coffee connecting to neighborhood parks, places of worship, and schools. Unique to the Greater Southdale District, many of the Connector Streets may become entirely devoted to landscaping. B The street room experience within Typology 3 will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • New local streets should be 60 feet in width. Those streets which carry vehicular traffic should comprise two traffic lanes with two lanes of parking or pick-up/drop-off. Sidewalks should be located on each side of these vehicular streets as illustrated in the diagram above. • Minimizing vehicular access to provide drop off, service and parking can be planned to share the vehicular needs of blocks allowing the remaining spaces between the remaining blocks to be used in a variety of ways for the benefit of the community. This “space between” buildings can be transformed into pocket parks, gardens, play areas, plazas, wetlands, and many other activities that support the health and wellbeing of the community. • Building podium heights can vary, from 36 feet up to 60 feet. • Above the 60 foot height limit, the long sides of a rectangular or “L” shaped building need to step back 20 feet from the street room facade (as illustrated in the building at left in the diagram above), and the narrow ends need to step back 2 feet from the street room facade (building at right in diagram above). This minimizes the impact of the taller building form on sunlight at the street, and provides a lower-scale building at the street, resulting in a more cohesive and comfortable pedestrian experience. The footprint on taller residential buildings should not exceed 12,000 SF, while taller commercial buildings are permitted larger footprints of up to 24,000 SF for efficient space utilization. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. Vehicular access to the buildings should be as close as possible to primary superblock streets (e.g. Typology 4 or 5). Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 3 New Local Streets Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 30 Street Room Typology 4 Primary East-West Streets These streets, including 69th Street, 70th Street, Hazelton Road, Parklawn Avenue, and West 76th Street, serve an important role within the district. These are unique streets in that they form the district’s superblocks with France and York Avenues, keeping traffic out of adjacent single family neighborhoods while connecting to the neighborhoods through the 30 foot setbacks that are landscaped to provide a pedestrian focused experience. This typology is intended to respect the neighborhood scale and context in a meaningful way, with an ample tree canopy, extensive setbacks and consistently-scaled buildings at the face of the public realm. By employing these characteristics, the landscape experience of the single family residential neighborhoods is extended through the Greater Southdale District. Street Room Typology 4 consists of streets that are between 110 and 125 feet wide, with two lanes of traffic in each direction, a center median and no parking. Several of these existing streets feature roundabouts. These streets provide access to parking and building services for buildings in Typology 3, as described previously. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 31 The street room experience within Typology 4 will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • Within this typology, a 30 foot setback is required from curb to face of building with a building podium height of 60 feet. Above the 60-foot height limit, additional height should step back 30 feet from the face of the building, to a maximum height of 105 feet. Any height about 105 feet should step back and additional 10 feet from the face of the building. • 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. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 4 Primary East-West Streets Existing East West Streets 60 Feet 20 Foot Step Back 30 Foot Step Back Traffic Lanes30 Foot Setback 30 Foot Setback 69thStreet, 70thStreet, Hazelton Road, ParklawnAvenue and 76th Street are unique streets to the Greater Southdale District. They form a super grid with France Avenue and York Avenue, keeping traffic out of adjacent single family neighborhoods while connecting to the neighborhoods through the 30 foot setback that are landscaped to provide a pedestrian focused experience. The streets act as collectors that provide a balance between pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Local streets and Woonerfs perpendicular to these streets will provide access to shops, galleries, restaurants, hotels, offices, and residential uses. Tree shaded benches in the streetscape will provide a place for pedestrians to rest, storm water management and bicyclists can use these streets to connect from home to small outdoor cafés and other amenities. Street TypologiesPrimary East-West Streets C Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 32 Street Room Typology 5 The Boulevards Streets that are included in this typology include the primary district boulevards such as France Avenue, York Avenue, W 66th Street and W 77th Street. In addition to being the widest streets in the district, they also currently carry a high volume of vehicular traffic. The intent of this typology is to create streets that connect the Greater Southdale District to the larger Edina community. These commercially-focused streets will reinforce the district’s unique role in serving Edina’s neighborhoods, while at the same time, recognizing that the district has a role in the broader metropolitan region—providing employment, health, retail, entertainment, and a wide range of housing options. The streets that fall into Typology 5 will have the greatest impact in conveying the overall identity of the district, with wide, multi-use streetscapes lined with a double row of trees within a consistent 50-foot setback. Medians may also be present in the boulevard streetscape to accommodate plantings and/or mass transit lines and stations. In many cases, boulevards will be adjacent to the tallest buildings in the district and will be the locations for transit stops. Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 33 Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 5 The Boulevards On these wide streets, a sense of scale is maintained by creating a uniform street wall of 60 feet, with taller structures stepping back from this 60-foot datum. This consistency in building heights along the street will form the edge of the street room—bridging between lower intensity and transitional areas, and the higher intensity zones within the Greater Southdale District. The street room experience within Typology 5 will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • On France Avenue, a 50 foot setback is required from curb to face of building with a minimum building height of 60 feet (diagram at left). Above that 60 foot height, the building face should step back two feet to create a cornice line, and can then extend to 105 feet. Above 105 feet, building faces must step back an additional 10 feet (as illustrated in diagram at right, above.) • 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. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. • Parking and building services should not be accessed via these streets. • Incorporate 10- to 12-foot wide sidewalks that create opportunities for gathering, outdoor cafes, pavilions, etc. • Within the 50-foot setback, trees should be planted in a double row to add a strong canopy for pedestrian activity. Street Typologies Boulevards France Avenue, York Avenue, W 66th Streetand W 76th and W 77th: multi- modal thoroughfares within the Greater Southdale District. They have wide, multi- use streetscapes lined with a double row of trees. Medians may also be present in the Boulevard streetscape to accommodate plantings as well as mass transit lines and stations. In many cases, Boulevards will be adjacent to the tallest buildings in the district and will be the locations for transit stops. D A 50 feet setback is required from curb to face of building with minimum building height of 60 feet with a maximum building height of 105 feet. Any part of the building above 105 feet requires a 20 foot step back. Preferred building materials: Concrete, steel or heavy timber structural frame. 60 Feet 105 Feet 10 Foot Step Back 2 Foot Step Back Traffic Lanes50 Foot Setback France AvenueFrance Avenue 60 Feet Traffic Lanes50 Foot Setback Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 34 Street Room Typology 6 Central Promenade Spine The Central Promenade Spine is intended to connect the Greater Southdale District from the west at Highway 100, extending east to the heart of Centennial Lakes and beyond to Edinborough Park. This Central Spine also extends the existing Promenade north through the Galleria and Southdale Center, and north across a future green lid over Highway 62 to Strachauer Park. The Central Promenade Spine traverses through a variety of building types, ranging from townhouses to multi-family housing, to low scale commercial/retail buildings, to mid-rise office buildings. As the physical form of buildings along this spine evolves, natural sunlight light and limited shadow will determine the experiential use of the space. Creating maximum height of 36 feet at its edges will support a mix of uses fronting the spine. Height above this 36 foot limit will step back from the building face, maximizing the program of new buildings rising along its edges without compromising the experience of walking and biking through a park- like environment Transition Zones 1A West Promenade 1B West Promenade (South) 1C East Promenade 2 Cornelia Overlay 3 New Local Streets 4 Primary East-West Streets 5 Boulevards 6Central Promenade Spine NPARKLAWN AVE.76TH STREETMINNESOTA DR.GALLAGHER DR.72ND STREETHAZELTON RD.70TH STREET69TH STREET66TH STREET65TH STREETFRANCE AVE. YORK AVE. VALLEY VIEW RD. BARRIE RD. XERXES AVE. EDINBOROUGH WAY77TH STREET78TH STREET Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 35 The street room experience within Typology 6 will be shaped by the following experience guidelines: • The 36 foot height along the Central Spine encourages a mix of uses focused on entertainment venues such as restaurants, gathering places or community-oriented facilities that provide destinations to come to and stay at. These lower-scale buildings that line the Promenade should reflect its stature as a special community amenity, with a rich variety of architectural experiences that front this park-like environment. • Above 36 feet, buildings shall step back 20 feet to the 60 foot podium height. Above 60 feet, buildings shall step back an additional 20 feet. • Buildings above the 60 foot height limit should be oriented to maximize the amount of sun on the Promenade. • Locations where Typology 6 intersects Typology 4 and 5 are critical to reinforce the idea of the linear public spine that connects this entire district. These intersections are the gateway to the Spine and should have a unique architectural response. • All parking, other than short-term retail or guest parking, and building services need to be located below grade or hidden within the building. If on ground level or above, parking and/or building services must be surrounded on all sides by program space such as commercial or housing. Dimensional Characteristics of Street Room Typology 6 Central Promenade Spine Street TypologiesCentral Promenade Spine The Central Promenade Spine is intended to connect the Greater Southdale District from the west at Highway 100, east to the heart of Centennial Lakes, along the existing Promenade north through The Galleria and Southdale Mall and north to Strachauer Park. The Central Promenade Spine transverses through different building types from 2 and 3 story Townhouses to 1 and 2 story commercial/retail buildings to 6 story office buildings. In imagining the future of the spine natural sunlight light and limited shadow will determine the experiential use of the space. Creating maximum height of 36 feet at its edges support a mix of uses fronting the spine while not limiting additional height to maximize the program of new building rising along its edges will not compromise the experience of walking and biking through a park like environment 50’ height limit Central Promenade Spine 36 Feet 60 Feet 20 Foot Step Back 20 Foot Step Back 105 Foot Maximum 15 Foot Front Yard Setback E Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 36 5 Implementing and Measuring the Guidance Ten Things to Remember Greater Southdale District | Design Experience Guidelines March 5, 2019 page 37 1. Every new development begins with the 200’ x 200’ block, or some variation based on context. 2. Every block or building in a development will need streets to connect between buildings. Not all of these streets will need to accommodate vehicles, providing the opportunity for parks, plazas or courtyards—important parts of the public realm. 3. Buildings will not be greater than 200 feet in length, thereby minimizing the negative impact continuous walls can have on a comfortable pedestrian experience. 4. All streets are not equal. The plan outlines a hierarchy that is driven by the kind of experiences that are expected on these streets and how they facilitate an enlivened public realm. 5. Designated transition zones are about maintaining the quality of life in these areas without restricting growth in other parts of the district. 6. Promenades and East-West Streets are the bridge between single family neighborhoods, such as the Cornelia neighborhood of Edina and the west side of Richfield, to more intense parts of the district. 7. Street Rooms will intersect and overlap each other in many circumstances. At these intersections, lower building heights should prevail, giving the smaller scaled building precedence over larger scale buildings. 8. Building footprints above 60 feet in height are limited to 12,000 SF for residential uses, and 24,000 SF for commercial. 9. Within the first 60 vertical feet of a building, primary materials systems that are more traditional like brick, stone, glass wall systems are preferred. Above 60 feet, other materials such as metal wall systems within a larger curtainwall system, can be introduced. These baseline parameters should not be a deterrent to architectural innovation but rather are intended to serve as a measure of quality and continuity throughout the district 10. Transparency at the ground level facing the public realm is key to the individual experience and is a catalyst for how to activate and maintain a community-based approach to daily life and experience. 5. Implementing and Measuring the Guidance Ten Things to Remember Enclave Mixed-Use Development at France Ave Preliminary PUD & Plat Submission | City of Edina | May 16, 2024 EDINA, MINNESOTA ESG Architecture & Design 500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1080, Minneapolis, MN 55415 Presentation Outline PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 2 Feedback Received To-Date / Informed PUD Request Architect 3D Presentation Supplemental Information for Q & A PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 3DeveloperArchitectCivil/Pub. Realm Feedback / Guidance - 2022 to 2024 • Neighborhood meetings/ neighboring property owners • France Ave Business Alliance • Edina Chamber of Commerce • Planning Commission • City Council • Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) • Breakout meetings with various city departments/ staff (examples: fire, parks, ED, CD, engineering, etc.) • Three Rivers Park District • Nine Mile Creek Watershed District • Hennepin County • France Ave Pedestrian Crossing Public Engagement Process • EAW Process (TIS) • City Land Use Guidance: Greater Southdale District Guidelines, Comprehensive Plan PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 4 Site layout / buildings adjusted to accommodate various potential future France Ave Public Crossing Strategies Revised Proposal - Based on Feedback 1 NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeSE - Residential NE - Residential 9-Mile Creek Trail PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 5 Expansion of public realm across entire site (generally increased setbacks; promenade example: 71 France 15’, Bower 20’, Bank Forward 15’, Pinstripes 0’; France Ave 50’, south side 9-mile creek trail green corridor, mid-block 60-corridor. Revised Proposal - Based on Feedback 2 NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeSE - Residential NE - Residential PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 6 E-W Center Public Plaza: Redesigned to look/ feel like an extension of the Centennial Promenade & to include intense pedestrian level interaction (green/ trees, curves, most intense pedestrian level uses/ entrances, updated below ground parking strategy, orientation of east two apartment buildings for sunlight) Revised Proposal - Based on Feedback 3 NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeSE - Residential NE - Residential PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 7 Centennial Promenade Engagement (public parking, public dog park, restaurant, new major connections, placemaking signage) Revised Proposal - Based on Feedback 4 NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeSE - Residential NE - Residential PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 8 Green Walls, Convertible Parking & Art (south side of south buildings targeted, 1st floor parking realistic for conversions) Revised Proposal - Based on Feedback 5 NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeSE - Residential NE - Residential PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 9 Design Overview NW - Mixed Use SW - Mixed Use France AveEdina PromenadeNE - Residential SE - Residential 10 N PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN Aspirations from an Experience-Based Set of Guidelines • Instill a Grid of Walkable blocks • Develop Human-Scaled Street Rooms • Neighborhood Connectivity through corridors that focus on activity • Organize around pedestrian-focused activity • Infrastructure that results in functioning civic spaces • Transportation is not car focused • Variety of Use and Architectural Design • Healthy Green Design • Expand the Park and Public Space Understanding the Vision of the Greater Southdale District Design Guidelines PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 11 •green node •pedestrian node •pedestrian/plaza connectivity NW Block SW Block NE Block SE Block •connectivity•engage and further activate Promenade•expand east/west connectivity•connectivity•connectivity •connectivity •connectivity•connectivity•pedestrian node Understanding the Vision of the Greater Southdale District Design Guidelines Aspirations from an Experience-Based Set of Guidelines • Instill a Grid of Walkable blocks • Develop Human-Scaled Street Rooms • Neighborhood Connectivity through corridors that focus on activity • Organize around pedestrian-focused activity • Infrastructure that results in functioning civic spaces • Transportation is not car focused • Variety of Use and Architectural Design • Healthy Green Design • Expand the Park and Public Space PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 12 Supplemental Information Available for Q & A SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR Q & A • Metrics • Signage & Branding • NW Building Strategy • Improved Sanitary Sewer • Improved Storm Water Treatment • Affordable Housing • Site Sustainability • Restaurant Odor/ Smoke • Parking Strategy/ Ratios • Change Log – detailed version • Balance of various stakeholders, guidance, and opinions; vs ability to execute/ current market conditions • Project Schedule • Government Fees • Transparency & Materials • Floor plate sizes • Additional Images • Existing Site Conditions • Street Room Typologies • Shadow Studies • Fire Access • Service Access • Building Plans and Sections • Landscape & Planting Narrative & Diagrams PUD SUBMISSION | CITY OF EDINA ENCLAVE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT FRANCE AVE, EDINA, MN 13 Thank You EdinaMN.gov Preliminary Rezoning, Overall Development Plan, Site Plan and Subdivision 7235 France Avenue Site EdinaMN.gov3 Site 4 Site EdinaMN.gov5 2023 SKETCH PLAN EdinaMN.gov 6 2024 SKETCH PLAN Revisions from Sketch Plan ➢Increased building setbacks. East side from the Promenade increased from 15 to 35 feet. The south side setbacks increased from 50-100 feet to 50 to 130 feet. ➢Added a restaurant adjacent to the Promenade in the SE building. ➢Widened the 9-mile Creek Trail along the south lot line from 10 feet to 15 feet. (Subject formal approval from the watershed district.) ➢Shifted the 11-story building from the NW lot to the SW lot. The height still does not meet the setback requirement from R-1 zoned property. ➢The above ground garage in the NW building has been reduced from 4 levels to 1 level. ➢“Green” coverage has been added on building walls. ➢Public Art has been added. ➢Plans now can accommodate either an underpass or bridge across France Avenue. ➢Enhanced and increased landscaping and green space. ➢Project will meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy. ➢5% of the parking stalls will have EV charging stations; 10% will include electrical conduit for 10% of the stalls to have EV charging stations. ➢Rooftop solar panels will be installed on the two eastern buildings. ➢Affordable housing (10% of the units) will be included within the project, including 10% of the condominiums. ➢Reduced the amount of office space and increased the retail and housing. This Request Requires: ➢Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD-25, which would include an overall development plan. The PUD would ensure that affordable housing is included within the project, that the Sustainable Buildings Policy is met, and land is dedicated for public use. In return, the applicant is requesting flexibility to the underlying PCD -3 standards including building height, building material, building transparency, first floor ceiling height, building setbacks, building setback from single-family homes, floor area ratio and building coverage. ➢Preliminary Site Plan and Subdivision/Preliminary Plat. Review of Site Plan: City Standard (PCD-3) (Setback measured from the front building line to the curb) Proposed (Setback measured from the front building line to the curb) Building Setbacks Front – France Avenue Side – North Side – South Rear – Promenade Setback to R-1 Property 50 feet 50 feet or building height (85’ NW) & 82 feet NE) 50 feet or building height (155’ SW) & 82 feet SE) 50 feet or building height (82 feet) 7-story building – 328 feet 11 story building – 930 feet 50 feet 36 feet (NW building)* 20 feet (NE building)* 131 feet (SW building)* 49 feet (SE building)* 34 feet (NE building)* 35 feet (SE building)* 685 feet 798 feet* Building Height 8 stories & 96 feet 7-11 stories and 155 feet* Density Up to 150 units per acre (mixed use) 572 total units = 72 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) .50% 2.2%* Parking Office – 68,061 s.f. = 234 spaces Retail/Restaurant – 21,281 s.f. = 164 spaces Residential – 572 units = 719 enclosed spaces 1,117 spaces total required 1,324 spaces total proposed First Floor Building Height 20 feet 15 feet* Transparency at Ground Level 75% 60%* (excluding parking structures) 20’ 34’ 36’ 40’ 60’ 50’ 60’ 65’ 49’ 131’ Setback to Promenade Pathway Proposed Setbacks Primary Issue • Is the proposal reasonable to justify PUD rezoning for this site? Yes. Staff does support the revised rezoning of the site, and believes the PUD criteria is met for the following reasons: 1. The proposed project would meet the City’s sustainable buildings policy, which would require the building to exceed typical building code requirements. 2. The project would provide 10% of the units (14 units) within the building for affordable housing for families earning 50% area median income (AMI) for the Twin Cities. These units would help the City of Edina achieve its goal with the Met Council of creating 1,804 units by the year 2030. 3. The project improves pedestrian movement around and through the site. Staff has provided the Commission with alternatives to consider for approval and denial of the request. An argument can be made for and against the proposed development. The City has complete discretion to approve or deny. Primary Issue Per Section 36-253 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; The site is located within the CAC land use category in the Comprehensive Plan. This is the area that is anticipated for the most intense development within the City. The area in between France and York Avenues is seen as the area that would support the most building density. The Work Group for the Greater Southdale District prepared a Vision Statement as well as their Aspirations for transforming the Greater Southdale District with expanded public parks and publicly-accessible gathering opportunities, community services and facilities, cultural and entertainment venues, a well-designed mix of housing types and affordability-choices, and expanded employment and shopping opportunities. Site The Work Group’s over-arching objective is to maximize pedestrian activity throughout the District, with the public realm as the connective tissue that gives the District its unique identity and sets the stage for a remarkable daily experience for those who live, work, play within the Greater Southdale District.” Primary Issue The Vision Statement and Aspirations state: “This is what we want.” The key organizing statements of the Work Group’s Vision Statement are: •We envision a vibrant, forward-looking and people-filled Greater Southdale District, organized around dynamic streets, engaging parks and public spaces, and well- conceived and enduring buildings. •We welcome change on our terms. •We envision innovation leading to extraordinary places and experiences. •We’re embarking on 50 years of well-paced steps, with each one more clearly blazing the path toward the future of the district. Increased density would help create a “people-filled” Greater Southdale District. The focus of the development is moving pedestrians and bicycles through the site to connect to the Promenade; forty-five percent (45%) of the development would be dedicated as public realm. Additionally, this project could enable a future much safer crossing of France Avenue opening up a better bicycle and pedestrian connection for the Cornelia area into the Promenade and Centennial Lakes. The project also maintains and enhances the vehicular connections between the properties to the north and south. Primary Issue 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; The proposal would create a much more efficient and creative use of the property than existing on the site. There would be no surface parking on the site, pedestrian movement around the site would be significantly improved, providing additional connections to the Promenade from France Avenue, enable the possibility for connection across France. The Three Rivers Park bike trail can be upgraded (subject to their approval). As mentioned, adding more residents in the area could enhance the economic viability in the district. Primary Issue 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; Variations to land use regulations are requested to offset the significant costs for the provision of the following city goals within the project: • Provision of affordable housing within the project, including 53 rental units available to those at 50% AMI and 5 for sale condos available to those persons at 80% AMI. • Project would meet the City’s sustainable building policy. (See page 9 in the applicant’s narrative) • Parking would be underground/structured (no surface parking included) • Addition of a significant amount public realm on all sides of the development. The total land area with public access easements over them would be 3.57 acres of the site, or 45% of the entire site area. • Landscaping. The proposed plans show that 39 trees would be removed, and 11 trees would remain. The applicant is proposing to plant 142 new trees that would equate to 414 new caliper inches of trees. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. Primary Issue d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; The proposed building would be stone/brick, glass, metal panel and fiber cement. The building would be constructed to meet the Sustainable Buildings Policy which increases the quality (and cost) of the design. e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; The project would maintain and improve the efficiency of public streets. A clearer vehicular connection would be made from the property to the south to the property to the north. f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; The existing site is primarily paved parking with the retail building. There would be trees removed from the site (39), however, they would be replaced with many more (142 new trees totaling 414 new caliper inches of trees), and higher quality trees, including trees and landscaping around the entire site which would enhance the pedestrian experience. Primary Issue g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; The project provides a mixture of uses on the site, including housing, retail, restaurants, office and public realm. h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and As mentioned, the project would provide 10% (58) of the units for affordable housing to help the City achieve its affordable housing goals. i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. As mentioned, this site is located in an area anticipated for high density development. It would create an enhanced and more welcoming connection from the Promenade to the west. Staff Recommendation